Hillary will win because of debates...Hillary will win because she is a great debater.

[cloud75]

  Hillary is very smart and will surround herself with great
people to give her the information she needs for debates. 
Also the only way a person can win a debate these days is to
make the other person look foolish.  For example dick cheney
ran circles around Edwards during the VP debate he bullied
him.  Have you ever tried to bully a woman during a debate
like with you wife you never win.  Hillary will be off limits
to bullying and swift boating it will be an issues based
election and she wins on issues.

[aceman2373]

1. yup, she is a master debater

[Bucky]

19. My, but aren't you the cunning linguist?

Enough of this punishment!

[Matariki]

2. Hmmm, if I recall Kerry wiped the stage with georgie-boy all three debates

:shrug:

[LibDemAlways]

11. And chimp was getting help through an earpiece.

Yet the media refused to declare Kerry the winner. Back in 2000 Gore clearly won, but the media honed in on a sigh he had let escape - probably over some egregious Bush falsehood - and came to the conclusion that Gore was stiff and wooden while chimp did "better than expected" and was therefore the "winner." Chimp could have stood up there and drooled and the media would have found a way to turn it into a positive.

The public's perception of who "wins" the debates will be largely determined by who the media tells them did better - and will have little, if any, basis in reality.

[Matariki]

16. sad, isn't it?

I get sad at the state of the nation around election time :-(

[SanCristobal]

29. I disagree about the debate results.

Gore made himself look BAD the first and second time around, and I'll only give Kerry the first two debates. Cheney's daughter and Bush's wood company managed to give Bush the slight edge the last time around.

Other then that, you are spot on. Debates are 90% style over substance.

[mod mom]

15. exactly.

[AtomicKitten]

3. I look forward to the debates.

Our field is shaping up to be formidable.

[davidwparker]

8. And, that's going to be a problem ... picking just ONE!

[AtomicKitten]

13. Isn't that effin brilliant?!!

Something Dems really need after the last six years in a ditch, upside-down, on fire.

[illinoisprogressive]

4. Uh-huh. She is such an excellent speaker....

[David Dunham]

5. McCain stinks as a debater. Even W beat him soundly in 2000 primary debates

Hillary could whip McCain in any debate.

[oasis]

6. Obama , Hillary and Edwards in a three way debate would be a delight.

All three have plenty of class and would keep it civil.

[Freddie Stubbs]

7. Winning debates does not guarantee moving into the White House

Just ask Al Gore about that.

[davidwparker]

10. Perot was certainly right about NAFTA. He lost support when he exited,

then re-entered, the race.

[TankLV]

21. winning a majority of the votes doesn't either, aparently...

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

9. Not so much. First of all, the primary "debates" are a joke.

The candidates (maybe as many as ten of them, as in 2004) stand on a stage and are asked bogus questions with maybe 30 seconds to answer and no meaningful rebuttal. Then a bunch of talking head MSM pundits decide who "won," based on criteria like who they think is the most interesting candidate that week, or who was wearing the snappiest outfit.

Second, Hillary is by no means the best debater of the bunch. Clark (if he runs) is very good, as are Biden and Obama. Any of them could hold his own quite capably against Hillary, and without putting her down or seeming to bully her. And any of them could take on any of the likely Republickers, especially a mental midget like Brownback.

Furthermore, Hillary has a rather annoying, preachy-sounding oratory style. It sometimes sounds like she is lecturing her audience.

And nobody -- I mean NOBODY -- is immune from swiftboating. She's already been on the receiving end of a lot of it, in case you don't remember what happened when she was First Lady. She was accused of all sorts of terrible things, including the murder of Vince Foster. The Republickers will swiftboat any Dem candidate. That's what they do.

Finally, she doesn't win on issues. Especially Iraq.

[Dinger]

12. Yeah, I Agree. What Are We Gonna Have? 21 People In A Debate?

Yeah, that might be extreme, but what thay had 10 in a primary debate last time, it was a joke.

[Hardrada]

38. This stuff is going to involve the entire staff of Saturday Night Live

and then a few former cast members called up again!

[countmyvote4real]

23. Ditto.

Thank you for the rundown. You saved me so much time and said it better than I could have. However, I must quote your big finish.

"Finally, she doesn't win on issues. Especially Iraq."

[aquart]

14. Off limits? Republicans would swiftboat their grandmothers.

[NNN0LHI]

18. I am wondering how well that swiftboating business will work on her?

I hope the Republicans try it on her and she kicks their ass good.

Don

[WinkyDink]

17. Debates, schmebates. Amy P. on SNL tonight had HRC dead-on.

Mirthless, war flip-flopper, pedantic.

[G Hawes]

20. It would be a big mistake to put Hillary forward as the Democratic

presidential candidate and doing so would only ensure a Republican win in 2008. And God knows, that's the last thing we want or need. We need a strong candidate who is actually electable, and Hillary isn't it.

Edit - I meant to post this in response to the OP but messed it up. oh well, i'll leave it here anyway.

[countmyvote4real]

24. Tonight's SNL open nailed HRC. I'm surprised there's no dedicated thread.

The "I'm half black." bit had many levels.

[dailykoff]

22. Who has she ever debated?

That guy she ran against in NY after Rudy dropped out? Can anybody even remember his name?

[wisteria]

26. Good point! She never had a tough Senate race in either of her

two runs, so who has she debated who has been worth anything?

[MonkeyFunk]

31. Where do people get there ideas?

She had a VERY tight race against Ric Lazio in 2000.

It was a statistical dead heat from the summer right up until the election.

[dailykoff]

33. Yeah that Ric Lazio is a real force to be reckoned with.

Not.

[MonkeyFunk]

34. which has nothing to do

with what I said, which is that the contest was a statistical tie leading right up to the election.

[Orangepeel]

36. The Lazio debate provides an example of what the OP is talking about

IIRC, Lazio tried to intimidate her during the debate by walking over and waving papers in her face and he came off looking like a jerk.

As a poster above pointed out, republicans would swiftboat their own grandmothers, and I don't think Clinton will have an easy time in the debates (I don't think anybody will).

But, although Clinton's not my candidate, I think she'll do fine. She's not the most charismatic person running, but nobody will be better prepared than she is.

[MonkeyFunk]

37. Yes

I think that was what did Lazio in. But to claim that Sen. Clinton had some sort of walk-away victory in 2000 is mis-remembering history.

[earthlover]

25. Hillary would be Pillaried

"Hillary is very smart and will surround herself with great people to give her the information she needs for debates....
Have you ever tried to bully a woman during a debate like with you wife you never win. Hillary will be off limits to bullying and swift boating it will be an issues based election and she wins on issues".

Well, wouldn't we assume that no matter who is the Democratic nominee they are gonna have great people there to give them information they need to debate? Be real!

Secondly, Hillary is the MOST likely candidate of any we can possibly dream of to be PILLARIED by the Republicans.

[kath]

27. pilloried.

As in pillory.

[Hardrada]

39. I want a new word; "Hillaried!"

Pilloried out of office. Hillaried into office.
vis a vis
Mustered out of the militia. Custered out of the Cavalry

[kath]

28. "issues based election" - when was the last time we had such a thing in this country?

Sadly, the Murkan sheeple (by and large) seem to be way too stoopid and shallow to try to understand issues to any depth. They tend to vote on looks, "charisma", how the candidates spouse looks, "who they'd rather have a beer with" and other stupid shit. Add in the "fear card" and anti-intellectualism and real issues don't come in to play at all.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

30. 1860 was a good year for substantive debates on issues.

Alas, Lincoln and Douglas both would be considered "unelectable" because they were "too intellectual".

[kath]

35. LOL, it may well have been that long ago,

or nearly so. Not only were they both WAY "too intellectual", but no fokkin' way in hell would Americans, with their microscopic attention spans (and poor command of the language) be able to listen to a real debate that went on for hours.
And what we call a "debate" today (in the context of those televised, artificial Q&A sessions that are broadcast before elections) is actually no such thing.

[Imagevision]

32. Hillary will win? - I believe Hillary will cause Obama & Edwards to simply tweek!!