Some rank-and-file Democrats fear Clinton bid

[boise1]

Activists express doubts about whether senator should be party’s nominee

By Tom Curry
National affairs writer
MSNBC
Updated: 36 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Public opinion polls, as well as inside-the-Beltway punditry, suggest that Sen. Hillary Clinton is the front-runner for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.

A Gallup Poll in February found that 39 percent of self-described Democrats and Democratic “leaners” would be most likely to support Clinton for the 2008 nomination. The next closest Democrat was 2004 nominee Sen. John Kerry with 15 percent.

But recent interviews with dozens of active Democrats in Iowa and New Hampshire, the states that hold the first caucus and primary of 2008, reveal that many party members who vote in those early contests don’t want Clinton as their nominee.

These politically active Democrats voice a sense of resignation, verging on fatalism, about a Clinton run for the nomination.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13149988/from/RS.3/

[still_one]

1. why don't we wait until we know who is running

this is MSM BS to try and stir the crowd up

[Benhurst]

5. Exactly. To hell with the corporate media. NT

[uppityperson]

19. but waiting is no fun when you can predict and distract and whine

[ContraBass Black]

39. Because if we did that, people might pay attention to this year's

Election, and then we might not fare well.

[bluestateguy]

2. Count me among them

Hillary doesn't pass the "white men in Mississippi" test.

The irony being, of course, that she's not very loyal to the principles of liberalism.

[chaumont58]

3. If Mrs Clinton were to be the nominee,

my guess is that the Clinton people would not sit on their dead asses and let the swift boat liars do what ever dirty deed they wanted. I think the Clinton crew will fight fire with fire.
If Senator Clinton gets the nomination, I will support her in any way that I can. She will have won the nomination the same way that recent Democratic nominees have won, by getting the most votes in the primaries.

[djg21]

10. And she still couldn't win a general election.

There are just too many non-activist and tepid "Democrats" (the kind who are apt to vote in general elections, but not primaries) who immensely dislike Hillary, and the far right's hate for her is palpable. A Hil candidacy likely will cause the tepid Dem voters to cross-over and vote Republican (especially if McCain and/or Rudy run(s)) and it drive out the Republican vote far better than any "wedge" issue.

[chaumont58]

15. 'tepid democrats'?

I think the socalled opposition to her is vastly over-rated, even among the rightwing nutcases. It would be one thing if they really had a valid reason, but they don't. Their biggest grip with her is that she is competant. Its like the beltway whores. I have never been able to figure why the whores hated for Clintons so much. The closest I can get is that the Clinton were outsiders. The Bushies are insiders, period. chimpie's grandfather was a United States Senator. His father was a US President. Clinton had no one clear a path for him. He is truly a self made man.
I think she can win, even in the general election. And, I think she will make a good president. Great Presidents have to have truly awful times to acheive their greatness. Two more years of chimpie might put us right there.

[Pastiche423]

28. Her so called opposition?

You haven't read any of the DU polls about her, have you? The vast majority of DUers DON'T WANT HER.

[jgmiller]

33. You underestimate the irrational nature

of many people. If she ran there would be scores of republicans who have never voted coming out to vote because they have become convinced that she is a christian hating, baby aborting, gay loving liberal who will make them burn their bibles.

That's toally irrational but that's who elected Bush and that's who would defeat her.

[PATRICK]

43. The tepid Dems and crossover GOP

or however you may characterize them are ironically the very base that Hillary seems to try to appeal to most and almost exclusively, by being tepid or crossing over to RW fashions. The Dems solid 3%, the perpetual swing vote undecideds are the exact reverse of the GOP's hardcore two percent. The assumptions are also opposite in that the GOP does not assume that the division of nearly 50-50 is permanent. They KNOW the Dems have the majority by default but that a good temporary stampeded and incumbency lock can swing the balance(plus gerrymandering) way to their side.

Some Dem leaders accept and even like parity and relish the intellectual chess game for the swing voters(who are vastly susceptible to GOP cultural programming against Dems). The GOP rides their zealots in a brutal power game that knows parity is a joke but that it is necessary to keep the Dem leadership mind fixated on a self-fulfilling weakness while it seeks to spread its dominance pheromones all over the airways and electorate.

Smoking Joe thought he could be a righteous choice too, and what he got was a ticket downhill to a primary challenge. Hillary will go much farther but the fall will be all the more steep the more it overcomes the fatal perceptions that served to win her Senate seat but will not carry over even those NY votes to a presidential campaign. Furthermore, the long term strategy, that might appear wise for winning the WH will carry over unnecessary and possibly fatal weakness as both the party's ideals and its vote share are self-suppressed and proudly ignorant.

Take heart. Unless it is painfully obvious, like Eisenhower or FDR's third term, the press is a lousy handicapper. Lieberman, McCain, Bradley, Iaccoca and many others have been failed picks because both the rosy fawning fans in the press or the enemies of the people's choice like Clinton have tried and failed to predict or influence the outcome. To their credit few of them wanted either of the Bushes at first, the drooling tongues came with the lash of the master. How much they wanted a master they could love! Instead they get Nixon and Ford and Bushes with an aging actor they first ridiculed as well.

[liberal N proud]

4. Why don't we wait until after November

Once again, we are distracting ourselves with 2008 when we haven't won anything in 2006.
Once we get through the election in November it is open season on speculation for the 08 election. Until then, FOCUS on the 2006 election.

TAKE BACK CONGRESS!

[pokercat999]

14. Exactly Congress is so much more important than

the presidency at this time.

We should be putting ALL our resources into that (2006) election, 2008 will come in it's own good time.

[madmom]

6. the only reason the repukes so desperately want her to run is so

they can make the election about her and not the issues. Remember there are a lot of people out there who will not vote for a "Clinton" no matter what.

[Bucky]

34. Agreed. But I really don't think she'll win. If she does, so be it.

I think I'll trust the voters. She's coasting entirely on name ID and media hype. Democrats haven't nominated an early front runner since 1984. I doubt we'll buck that trend this cycle.

[Boneman]

37. I agree. Also, I don't believe many voters would vote for her

simply because she was married to an impeached President. Good God, there must be better Democratic choices. I'm going to vote for Gore, if he runs.

[snot]

7. I'm sure conservatives would LOVE Clinton to be the candidate.

I don't know any liberals who agree, although I know they must exist.

Don't get me wrong, I admire Clinton greatly. But I believe Dems have a great shot at the Presidency, UNLESS she's the candidate.

[juajen]

26. Gee, you really sound as if you admire her!

I have close relatives who are Christian right-wingers. My beloved sister told me that she could not understand why we liked Hillary Clinton.

I asked her "What's not to like?" When you put it that way, most just cannot give you an answer. She finally said "Because of her husband." I just laughed.

Truthfully, you can count on most of these right-wingers to not know a lot about politics. They watch Fox News almost exclusively, think Bill O'Reilly is wonderful, etc., etc. They have no idea why they dislike Bill or Hill. That's why they are stumped when you ask them, and usually give ridiculous reasons. The one's who have some intelligence leftover from the brainwashing on Fox will eventually admit that they do not know what they have against the Clintons.

I have lumped them together in the above paragraph, because our opposition always does. Hillary is her own person. She is brilliant, capable and compassionate. We could not ask for more in a candidate. I gladly support her, and ask everyone to search for their minds and hearts to ascertain where those opinions came from.

Dems certainly do not believe she was a murderer; they don't believe she should have divorced Bill; they know she is pro-choice; they know she is smart; in short, they are not believers in the right-wing propaganda.

I just believe we are our own worst enemy. We have a myriad of wonderful Democrats to choose from, people I greatly admire. I can and will support any of them who have a (D) after their names. I will not slander or deprecate any of them. I wish I could say the same for other people on this forum.

[snot]

41. I do admire her.

I am a woman lawyer whose first "boss" was the subject of a significant gender-based discrimation lawsuit; I have survived for two decades in my career while watching a majority of my female classmates -- who outperformed the men in the anonymously-graded setting of lawschool -- burn out and drop out for a variety of reasons, including discrimination by employers, clients, peers and lower-level employees, significantly greater burdens at home, etc. etc.

I feel qualified to admire Hillary as I do, in all sincerety, for her accomplishments: for where she is, for her strength, for her choices, for her skills, for her brilliance, and for many other qualities. And I believe she genuinely wants to do good.

I just honestly do not believe she can win.

[peacetalksforall]

8. Is there anyone here that thinks that GE isn't an operative? Who

really values what GE assigns for commentary if it has anything to do with Democrats?

GE = read anything about elections written by their nbcs with great caution and foreknowledge.

[nealmhughes]

9. Only Mrs. Clinton and the MSM seem to think she is a shoo-in.

I honestly believe that the primaries will show that Clark/Gore would decimate her. I hope they do: remember when "health care" was her main talking point? Where did that go? What was with her "vast rightwing conspiracy" turning into kowtowing to Rupert Murdoch? I won't even touch the Iraq/DHS debacles...

[sallyseven]

11. If you ask the american people today the

health plan would be a god send. We need it. Ins. companies make too much money and steal from the individuals. Don't cover what the people need. Clarke and Gore who said he is not running would not decimate her. Grow up. It was a vast right wing conspiracy. They tried to impeach her husband for a blow job. They hated him. Leave her alone she does not need your advice. Neither do a lot of other people.

[nealmhughes]

32. Learn to read more closely before jumping on me.

Why did she drop health care is what I asked. Why did she drop the VRWC meme for her sudden consiliatory attitude to the VRWM? She would vote for an amendment to outlaw anything a poll told her that 51% of Democrats or Democratic-leaning told her. She is the worst of the DLC. Republicans that go by another name. And as for her not wanting any advice from me, she might be needing some come NH in 2006 after Gen. Clark kicks her back to NY.

[coalition_unwilling]

12. Some rank-and-file Democrats plan to vote

Democratic Socialist if Hillary is the Dem nominee :)

[noonwitch]

13. I guess they're not very loyal democrats, then

I didn't vote for Bill Clinton in the 1992 primary-I voted for Tsongas. I voted for Dukakis, even though I thought he looked stupid in that tank, and I voted for Clinton in the 92 general election.

I didn't like Kerry a lot in 2004. I voted for Clark in the primary. I still voted for Kerry in the general election, because I was not going to vote for Bush.

Democrats who talk like that are not really democrats. They're swing voters, because when they cast their votes for some loony socialist who has no hope whatsoever of winning, they are actually helping to elect the GOP.

[coalition_unwilling]

20. Voting for Jane Harman in the general election

is morally repugnant to me. Hope that explains it -- I swing from left to far left, depending on a candidate's stance on militarism\imperialism.

[noonwitch]

22. Who's Jane Harman and what is she running for?

Does she stand a chance of winning? Yeah, kind of what I figured.

I'm a liberal, but I am not far left, nor am I a socialist. I vote for the most reasonable candidate (imo, of course) who stands a chance to win.

[boise1]

24. Huffpo commentary on Jane Harman --

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-hayden/why-jane-harman-should-be_b_21306.html

[hedda_foil]

25. Jane Harman (D-CA) is the ranking member of the House Intel Committee

She's also a DLCer to the bone.

[coalition_unwilling]

44. Sorry I let others do the lifting for me. Jane "War Pig" Harman

is the Dem rep from 36th Congressional District in California. She's called herself "the best Republican the Democrats have." She voted for Iraq invasion and subsequent supplemental appropriates, Patriot Act and renewal, Bankruptcy Bill. The list goes on and on -- in early February, on NBC's "Meet the Press," she said she approved of the warrantless wiretapping and deplored more the leak from the NSC than the warrantless wirtetapping itself.

She's a DINO. Marcy Winograd got 38.5% of the vote in the primary on June 6, a "moral victory," given Harman outspent Winograd by (depending on whom you consult) 5- or 10-1 and had all the advantages of incumbency.

[grytpype]

16. She has too much baggage! Way too much!

Her negatives are so high, it would be suicide to run her as a candidate. I am beyond shocked that she's the frontrunner.

We need a fresh candidate who hasn't already been smeared for years and years beyond any redemption. Make the Repug smear machine start from scratch on someone.

I like Edwards, and I like Clark.

[Prisonerohio]

17. You know she can't win.

I mean I have nothing personal against Hillary, and I would love to see a woman president, but one thing I can guarantee is it will not be her. Why? Because the moment she runs they will bring up all the bullshit that they used against Bill when he was president. It will become a circus and will insure Jeb or whoever wins.

[truthisfreedom]

18. *yawn* i'll vote for any Democratic Party member runnning for any office.

i'm a Democrat! woohoo!

[reprobate]

21. But Hillary's not. She is DLC, and that's corporatism in a nutshell, no

matter that they have "Democratic" in their name. And as for Bill, his policies were NOT liberal, he just favored the liberal side in social policies. Economic and political policies were strictly conservative. He pushed thru NAFTA and CAFTA.

[Placebo]

30. Hillary is not a Democrat?

Wow, you really have to perform some serious mental acrobatics to wrap your brain around that statement.

[kwolf68]

23. I don't want her to run

This is the choice of the Republican Party and their media lackeys.

She simply does not inspire Democrats in large enough number, has virtually no mainstream appeal with independents, and we already have several candidates in position vaslty superior (Feingold for one, Gore and even kerry).

This idea is just garbage and I get tired of my mother parroting this to me, becuase no way will we nominate her.

[Texifornia]

27. The Problem with Hillary

is that she has almost 100% name recognition, less than 50% approval, and almost no undecideds.

Her polls are almost fixed in concrete.

She can't get 50% and her electorals look even worse. I just don't see that changing.

This is probably why she has no position in Iraq (or much of anything else). She can't help herself, only hurt if she takes any kind of strong position.

So many other fine choices:
Warner, Clark, Gore, Fiengold and others who have the possibility of putting together a majority.

[Zhade]

29. I don't FEAR it, I find it distasteful.

NT!

[Joe Chi Minh]

31. "Some" can mean any number from 2 upwards.

[dysfunctional press]

35. at this point in 1990, how many people had even heard of Bill Clinton?

our eventual nominee has yet to be revealed.

and please don't let it be her.

or any other dlc pos dino.

[alfredo]

36. Is this one of those self fulfilling prophecies? Is this a meme from

the GOP that we have swallowed hook line and sinker?

[expatriot]

38. The only thing that could get the Freepers to unite behind McCain

is if he was running against Mrs. Clenis.

[zara]

40. "Some" Dems can be found that fear anything.

Let her run. She won't win.

[6000eliot]

42. I don't want her

I don't want anyone who voted for the war this time. But I think you underestimate the Clintons at your own risk.

[Biernuts]

45. At this point poll standing reflects name recognition

more than anything else.