Can we stop Hillary from being nominated by the corporate media...??

[truebrit71]

..I liked her as the First Lady, she's a fairly solid Dem vote in the Senate, but if she gets crammed down our throats as the nominee in '08 we are so completely fucked it won't be funny....

She is the right-wing's wet-dream of a nominee, they'll be able to dredge up all of the made-up bullshit they slung at her when her husband was in office, and she'll NEVER be able to go on the offensive without appearing brash or "bitchy" and painted as thus by the lap-dog media...

I know this has been said time and time again, but I just read an article on cbsnews.com about her cozying up to Satan (Rupert Murdoch) and the words "Democratic front-runner" were scattered hither and yon, and it just filled my heart with dread...

We will NEVER get this country back unless we take the House in '06 and the WH in '08 and Hillary ain't the one to do it...

Here endeth the rant...

[kegler14]

1. I couldn't agree more.

[nancyr]

58. A nightmare.

It's not like the average person has any say in who is the nominee! Big money makes that decision and they decide who the parties will be running in any election. The only time the "average voter" is called upon to perform is when the ones in control have done all the preliminary work..and then we get to vote and pretend that we are having a voice in the entire fiasco called democracy. I feel like we're all little puppets being manipulated by evil puppetmasters. I'm sorry to be a downer, but I think the whole system is screwed. I feel that the people in control all march to the same drummer and we're the only ones who still think there is a difference between the parties. How they must enjoy watching us squirm. All they have to do is throw out an occasional catch-phrase to set us off while they are stealthily going about the common destruction of our country. Words like: Abortion! Religion! Illegal alien! Terror!! Gas Prices!! etc, etc. In the meantime, let's all read 1984.

[rhett o rick]

61. Bravo. Good post and welcome to DU. What good is a vote when

the big money decides who you get to vote for. Hillary is the front runner only because of big money and republican support. Polls show that grass roots democrats don't want her. But big money and the MSM will keep pushing her.

[xultar]

2. Well this is DU and we love to campaign against our own here so

you gotta plan?

[truebrit71]

7. Yup. I'm a solid Clarkie, and he's earning his bones and building..

..his street cred through his PAC by supporting all manner of Democratic candidates. He is my first choice in '08 as he was in '04. Meanwhile, Hillary is so busy running from the label of "liberal" and distancing herself from anyone that is remotely associated with "liberal" ideas that it would be funny if it weren't so sad...

Gimme General Clark, John Edwards or Howard Dean and I'm all ears. If Hillary gets annointed there'll be bugger-all point watching the election because there isn't a snowball's chance in hell she'll win...

[bullimiami]

11. i couldnt agree.

personally, even though I dislike some of her positions, i think she would make a formidable democratic candidate, and a very respectable president.

[cyberpj]

16. Me too. But we're fighting the DLC and the money. nt

[MADem]

28. Heh, well said

I find it astounding that so many don't even want to hear the debates, and actually listen to the ideas of the candidates from a national platform perspective!!!

It's grab the frying pan, and whack the disfavored across the back of the head! Charming!!!

[rusty_parts2001]

3. What more proof do you need

Rupert Murdoch, of all people, is putting on a fundraiser for her. Talk about McCain groveling to the right, this one trumps that.

[still_one]

4. It is the old story about the man trying to get the mule to move

He tried everything he could, then someone passing by came up to help. He grabbed a 2 X 4 and clubed the mule. The man asked why he did that. The passerby said first you have to get its attention.

Nothing is going to change unless that happens. If the war in Iraq, the outting of a CIA agent, the Patriot act, the illegal spying on Americans has NOT gotten their attention, then unfortunately things are going to have to get a lot worse before it does

[Speck Tater]

5. If she gets the nomination...

It would be proof positive that the inmates are running the asylum, and that the Democratic party, along with the whole grand experiment that is American government is doomed to extinction.

[TheWraith]

12. Oh, please.

God, with the level of Hillary paranoia around here, you'd think it was RepublicanUnderground.com. According to the people around here, she's been fellating Bush for six years--ask the righties and she's just to the left of Mao.

I swear, there's ten times more talk about Hillary right here than I've ever seen out of the media. Yeah, they love to speculate--shock of shocks. And, despite any small amount of speculation the media is doing, we don't even know if she's going to run in 2008, let alone the slim chance of her getting the nomination.

[AJH032]

57. Thank you

Finally, a sane post.

[MADem]

30. If she gets the nomination, all it means is that she won the most primary

races. That would mean that more Democrats voted for her than any other candidate.

Good grief. The woman hasn't even ANNOUNCED yet. And the DOOM and GLOOM is a bit much, eh???

If you have a favored candidate, spend your time supporting that person. Be productive, not destructive.

[skipos]

32. EXACTLY! Democrats get to vote her in or vote her out. It is up to us.

If you want to do something about it, convince your fellow democrats to vote for the person you like.

[riona]

6. Oh, but she would provide

the msm with countless hours of juicy "news" with not too much effort on their part. What other candidate could possibly be so perfect for their purposes?

[Trouser Trout]

9. Gore vs Hillary would be great irony

Provided Gore wins the nomination.Please God........

[Liberal Dose]

8. I'm sick of settling for whatever the MSM or the DLC or DCCC or any other

acronym tries to force on me. If the pukes decide to play fair and not to steal the next election (fantasizing here), all we have to do is make sure we get out the vote. We still have more registered voters than they do, right?
It would be nice to have a Democratic candidate who played to the base instead of WASTING TIME trying to get THEM to vote Dem.
:hi:

[papau]

10. I worked the Insurance lobby side in 93 and Hill wantedSingle payer

National health, fought hard, but was told her task force would not even be allowed to look at single payer national health.

I liked her then, and I like her now.

I will not decide on who is my choice in the Pres primary 2 years from now - until 18 months from now.

But If you want to commit today to "anybody but Clinton" you have that right. I do not understand the reasoning that makes one reject the candidate who, in my opinion has the best chance of election AND gives us a Pres that has progressive/liberal values - but then I do not have to understand.

As to a fundraising hosted by a media head - I like the idea of Dem's not fighting the media - because the media is not fighting them. I am tired of Dems not fighting the media because they do not know how to win that fight.

The key of course is my belief that she would win. Any evidence that this was not true, and I will join you in kicking her to the curb! :-)

[Clark2008]

13. With this statement:

I do not understand the reasoning that makes one reject the candidate who, in my opinion has the best chance of election AND gives us a Pres that has progressive/liberal values - but then I do not have to understand.

I can assume you live in a blue state....

Yep... Massachusetts.

That statement is laughable to those of us in red/purple states who know that Hillary has absolutely no chance of flipping any of these states blue - mainly because we live here and know what people say about her.

And, I'm sure there are several on DU who'll remind you of the reasons why they don't consider her progessive or liberal anymore.

[papau]

19. You may well have a point :-) But as yet I do not see it - should be an

interesting primary, and if I am correct about the wave that's coming, you may be surprised by how many red states turn blue!

Meanwhile her evil comments on abortion sound like a sensible liberal position to me.

Likewise her defering to our Military and the information/intel she is given, although both were proven wrong over time, also seems reasonable (I do wish she would say that if she had the correct info she would have voted against the Iraw war - but I guess she sees that as a given).

Other than the above two talking points, I really do not know what the "why/reason" DU folks don't consider her progessive or liberal anymore.

[still_one]

15. one word, IRAQ

[Critters2]

22. Yep, that vote on the Iraq War Resolution was mighty damned progressive

:eyes:

[papau]

38. If there really was a threat, & Pres wanted negotiate & need war option

I would expect any progressive to give him that power - unless you thought the Pres was a liar.

Some of the left - like those on DU - knew he was a liar.

Most folks were not ready at that point to risk the situation on the chance he was a liar.

[Critters2]

63. I believed him to be a liar. There was plenty of evidence,

the UN inspectors were not finding WMD and wanted more time to look.

If a lowly, nobody pastor in rural Iowa could figure this out, Sen Clinton has no excuse. She should have voted "no".

[Donna Zen]

35. Hillary voted for war because it was a "better position"

While there was disagreement among her inner circle of advisors, her head pollster won out. Thus it was decided that voting for war was a better "position" for Hillary and her upcoming 08 run.

Know this: supporting this craven attitude on the part of profession politics is the problem. So when you watch the evening news, don't whine as America whimpers to a crawl. Because if you really believe what you've written then you are part of the problem.

As for the original OP. The answer's "no." The only thing that matters is money. That's all. Oh, and Hillary wrote a higgly-piggly program that was not single-payer at all.

Hillary will not win. Good grief, since when did America's WHouse bear the sign: only dynasties need apply? She will buy the nomination.

[papau]

42. Yes Hill's Health Bill via the Committee was not single payer - and I said

exactly that.

MY POINT WAS IN THE DISCUSSION BEFORE THE COMMITTEE WAS FORMED, HILL was pushing single payer, and the insurance lobbyists convinced Bill to not let her go in that direction - the idea being that the HMO plan the ins folks were pushing would pass because the ins companies would be behind it.

The ins co's were liars - as they talked to Bill the Harry and Louise swift boating was being put in the can.

I guess I am part of the problem, since I do not write what I do not know -

And I do not say I believe something if I don't - but as you may have caught in my post - as to belief - I am leaving open kicking Hill to the curb if she appears/I believe that she is less electable than some other progressive Dem.

[rhett o rick]

62. Well they figure that her pro-war vote will get her some votes from the

right and of course many democrats will "lock-step" vote for who ever the democrat candidate is. I side with Molly Ivans. Will not ever support Hillary. We have to break the chain. Let the powers to be know we will not just follow whomever they put forward.

[tatertop]

14. They will beat Hillary even without swift boating or vote stealing

[CJCRANE]

27. True, McCain (for example) is more popular..nt

[papau]

43. If the Dem base feels that is true, Hillary will not win the primary

:toast:

[tatertop]

59. trix are for kids!

Hillary is the GOP's number one answer because they know
she has zero chance of winning. ZERO.
The pukes will push hard for Hill.
Has nothing to do with fair politics.

[onehandle]

17. Could we wait until after November to do that...?? nt

[Patiod]

18. I've been saying that for a long time Truebrit

Every single talking head I see on TV discusses her as if she is the 100% shoe-in nominee. Not a week goes by that I don't hear her mentioned a few times as "the Democrats' nominee". Considering that this is the Democratic Underground, it surprises me how LITTLE we bring this up.

Whether I like her or not (I do) or whether I think she can win or not (I don't), I do not want the media to have pre-decided this before there's even a primary.

[The Magistrate]

25. There Are Three Reasons They Do That, Ma'am

None of them has anything to do with pre-determined media selection, or the D.L.C., or any of the usual items groused about here so often.

First, she has far and away the best cadre of political operatives available within the Democratic Party in her camp.

Second, she has by far the most money, and the best prospects of raising more, of any person who may contend for the nomination.

Third, she has national stature and recognition already: love her or hate her, everybody knows her name.

These three things add up to being an odds on favorite in the prospective horse-race. The chatterers on the tube like to display their knowledge of the field by making predictions that come true, for there really is no better way to display an understanding of a complex thing than that. But it is worth knowing, too, what any hard-core horse-player knows: the favorite in the field does not win in even a majority of races....

[Patiod]

26. All excellent points

And a reassuring ending to your post, as well. Thank you for that!

[AtomicKitten]

20. IF she is nominated, it will be by a consensus of Dems in the primary

Her PRESUMPTIVE nomination is based on polling, nothing more. The gaggle of talking heads need to wag their tongues about something.

What can you do to prevent it? Stump for your candidate of choice and try to convince others to do the same. I'm not into assisting the Republicans by trashing Hillary for them. That's their job, not ours.

I will vote for a candidate that did not enable this administration by voting yes on the IWR -- specifically Gore, Clark, and Feingold. But that's me. I will, however, support in the general election whichever Dem is nominated by a consensus in the primary.

I wouldn't get your knickers in a twist over something that is meaningless. As if the media ever had any positive contribution to make before, eh?

[rniel]

21. She's in

I think she'll run and win. I don't want her, but honestly anything could be better than bush. The media will have a lot of fun beating her up for 4 or 8 years.

She's making all the necessary connections and she will stoop as low as John McCain to get what she wants.

[Solo_in_MD]

52. Agree about her stooping low

But nominating her will cost us the White House. Way too many negatives about her. Remember that the repukes will have to run a fresh candidate who can run against Bush as well

[LittleClarkie]

23. Um, gee, I dunno. Maybe we could vote for someone else?

Something like that?

[Greyhound]

24. Don't worry about '08, without a total reversal of power distribution

this year, '08 is irrelevant.

[politicasista]

29. Amen n/t

[zulchzulu]

31. Support your candidate of choice with grassroots efforts...

...and the rest of the story will be revealed.

As much as I agree with you that Hillary has too much baggage to win in 2008, I don't want to trash her either. I fully see that she won't make it that far in the primaries...voters will know that she is not the one to win.

Support your candidate and see what happens.

[Virginia Dare]

33. How do you stop a runaway train?

She is blowing the others away as far as raising money. This is essentially what happened to McCain back in 2000, it wasn't that Bush was the most popular candidate, he just blew everybody away as far as money raised. Unless and until we get corporate money out of our politics, we're screwed no matter who wins.

[seriousstan]

34. No, Murdoch is now backing her...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2273140

[partylessinOhio]

36. Whether you like her or not, Senator Clinton IS the candidate

the Republicans will fear most.

Two things that would get my vote:

-stop supporting war,

-stop supporting Israel.

Senator Clinton has a good image and appearance and she can speak well and think on her feet. Those are very important characteristics and abilities.

[AtomicKitten]

37. AL GORE IS THE ONE!!!!!!!!!

I will not surrender.

[partylessinOhio]

40. OK, fine, all I am saying - is - Republicans will fear Senator Clinton.

They have already beat Gore, by not counting all the votes, but they beat him.

Is Gore running?

[AtomicKitten]

48. I don't consider Gore any less formidable.

We all have opinions, n'est-ce pas?

[partylessinOhio]

50. Well, I wish Gore had won. We wouldn't be in this fine mess today.

:hi: :toast:

[AtomicKitten]

51. you said a mouthful.

His election in 2008 IMO would be a righteous reckoning and an in-your-face to the felonious GOP that orchestrated the judicial coup d'etat in 2000. I just have such a heart for his candidacy. From all I've read, it seems it is a real possibility.

[Patchuli]

64. We're with you AKitty!!!!!!

He's STILL MY PRESIDENT!

[Hell Hath No Fury]

45. "Hitlery Klintoon" is a GOP wetdream....

Fear her????? :rofl:

They cream their tidey-whities at the thought of her as the Democratic presidential nominee.

Sadly, Hillary is a one-way ticket to a GOP President in '08.

[SaveElmer]

39. Wow...are you wrong...

Hillary is the only candidate who has successfully dealt with the Republican sleaze machine. Everytime she is attacked, she comes out stronger!!!

I can't think of anyone else I would rather have at the top of the ticket...though I would gladly support ANY of the candidates mentioned as possibilities!!!

[papau]

44. I agree :-)

:-)

[napi21]

41. I don't have anything against Hillary, but I wouldn't worry about Media!

If you think back a few years, you'll remember they did the same thing to Howard Dean! Remember all the "Is it possible for ANYONE ELSE to catch Dean?" comments? I do! I must admit, I'm still disappointed that Dean isn't President Dean, but the Media cannot MAKE Hillary our candidate!!!!!

[Dinger]

46. It's Early. Don't Let This Divide Us. Hillary Isn't Annointed Till She's

annointed, period. All I want is an honest & fair election process. I guess it's pretty obvious who my candidate for '08 is, but 2006 is WAY more important right now. It won't matter if our '08 candidate is my dog Zippy. If we fuck up in '06, it won't matter.

[Mz Pip]

47. We don't have to vote for her

Rupert Murdoch isn't fundraising for Hillary because he wants her to be President. He's fundraising for her because he wants her to be the Dem candidate.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[lastknowngood]

49. NO we are only the voters. we are only allowed to vote for the medias

pick.

[paulk]

53. let's have the 2008 elections

in 2008.

[0007]

54. The ideal person for the presidency is Feingold, bar none!

The person I fear to be nominated will be Hillary Clinton. If she is, so be it. I'll support her.

[partylessinOhio]

55. Very good idea! Vote Democratic! Whomever it is - for Prez.

I will not vote for gov of Ohio though, I will be partylessinOhio.

[PaDem]

67. I like Feingold an awful lot..........

but how many times has he been divorced? Forget it.

[alfredo]

56. This is about 2006, not 2008. It's about NY not the US.

Rupert is a businessman. He must be ready to buy something in NY so he is making sure he makes nice with anyone with power in NY.

[Clarkie1]

60. She's been bought. n/t

[JNelson6563]

65. Yeah we can stop it but

we will accomplish nothing on the internet.

[Canuckistanian]

66. Absolutely - she's looking worse and worse each passing day

Think the Swiftscum for Truthiness episode was bad? Just wait for what they've got planned for Hillary.

They're literally slobbering all over themselves waiting for that chance.

Strong women make their penises shrink even further.