Only candidate that can beat the "Republican attack machine"?

[PollM]

Do you agree with Hillary Clinton that she's the only candidate that can beat the "Republican attack machine"?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=103

.

[Captain Hilts]

1. Not really. But they've yet to be able to drive a stake through her heart. So, the burden of proof

is on the other candidates. She's kind of proven it.

[neutron]

19. Thanks Karl

Nice to know you're gainfully employed again.

[Captain Hilts]

22. Huh? nt

[Cameron27]

34. lol, he must be confusing you with someone else,

because that just didn't make any sense.

[BobRossi]

2. Please,

She sure had a distorted view of herself.

[fenriswolf]

3. not really

she is the one person who has more ammunition for the "republican attack machine" than any other candidate mainly because she has been in the political spotlight the longest.

[Uben]

4. Short any shocking revelations

.....I think any of them can beat them, though the above post has revealed that Hillary already has.

[RichGirl]

21. Right...

We already know everything there is to know about Hillary. She's got the fact that after years of investigation and millions of $$$ she came up clean. Her's is old news...boring. She doesn't even have to address it because "been there, done that". Whatever little thing they can dig up and distort about Obama, Edwards is going to be way more interesting. They will have to deal with it and be diverted from the message. Anyone who has read Obama's book know he dabbled in cocaine. But, it will hit the mainstream as if it's a new discovery.

[Tom Joad]

5. why brilliant. beat the republicans by running a republican.

[autorank]

6. I will now speake in praise of HRC

This is a one time event. She was the one Democrat who called the the right wingers what they are - "the vast right wing CONSPIRACY." She was right. Her willingness to conceptualize conspiracies and deliberate plans of wrong doing (the smears) makes her well suited to anticipate and counter the right wing again. And she's tough. She probably has a workshop putting together counter attacks or preemptive attacks in anticipation of their barrage. She's not the only candidate who could do this. For example, Gore knows this and also he's aware of how they steal elections. But I'll give her just due. She'd make their lives very miserable.

[mrfixit]

23. Considering she was parroting RW talking points even THEN...

How is this a good thing? The RW has been talking about the "vast left-wing conspiracy" for YEARS and YEARS. She turns it around to smear the smearers with IDENTICAL rhetoric and it is brilliant, all of a sudden?

She is not tough. Look at her pathetic voting record. She continually capitulates and makes terrible decisions. She is bought-and-paid-for already by a bevy of corporate lobbyists and special interests.

Even in a class among fellow Republicans, HRC is STILL not the best candidate.

She is pretty much the ONLY candidate that will FAIL to garner the support of the entire Democratic Party if given the nomination. True Progressives will stay away from the polls in droves.

[autorank]

41. I'm with you 100%. She would be a disaster and maybe the end of the party.

But in a slug fest, I think she'd return blows with great skill. The comment was technical praise and my one and only ever positive comment about her political campaign. I think it stinks on ideological grounds and pragmatic ones as well. She's got higher negatives than any candidate, higher than 50% in the past, and they're solid, compared to her positives which are media driven or polling vapor ware.

Of the big three, only one speaks the right words, Edwards, to appeal to the public which is hugely pissed off. But he wavers now and then (like when he wouldn't contradict the other two on US troops being in Iraq in 2013).

Gotta be Gore for a win, imho...and I agree with your disagreement with me (weaseling out on the technical issue of HRC's counter attack crew).

[ilovesunshine]

7. Yes, I agree.

[mark414]

8. she's the only candidate that can energize the "Republican attack machine"

[liberal N proud]

9. 69% of the poll takers disagree with her.

[Imagevision]

10. Oh don't be silly, Obama will run circles around Giuliani or/and Romey with the greatest of ease....

yaaaaawwnnn....!

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

11. No

because she is the one candidate that the Republicans are really gunning for. They've already pumped up their base to vote against her, and they are working to come out with lies, etc, to throw at the general public about her--and, I fear, much of it will be believed.

[blm]

12. Clinton machine folded on Healthcare, were impeached by a trumped up scandal,

and for 8 months after leaving the WH we were treated to "Clintons trashed the WH" lies.

After 9-11, after 8 books had come out blaming Clinton, it took Bill till Sept 2006 to finally knock back at SOME of the charges that he was asleep at the wheel on terror issue.

[neutron]

20. You Repugs are so cute!

Trying to smear the only pres to balance the budget and give the middle class a good life.

[blm]

26. You missed the point entirely. Bill's MACHINE was ineffective against RW smears

on healthcare, the trumped up case for impeachment, and the RW smear that Clintons trashed the WH. Add that it took 5 years for Clinton to even hit back a little on the charges he was to blame for 9-11.

This thread is about fighting the RW smear machine - and the assumption that Clintons are best at it is based on a false premise.

You are calling me a Republican for pointing out the RW lies that weren't fought effectively? That's bizarre of you.

[Armstead]

35. That's really misguided

I'd suggest you read more of BLM's posts, and you'd realize he is no republican.

And if you think Bill Clinton was the only president to "give the middle class a good life" then I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you....First of all, you manage to forget FDR, among others. And, in terms of hard cold reality, the assault on the middle class advanced significantly in the 90's.

[Stop Cornyn]

13. Do you mean "beat" or "feed"?

[neutron]

17. Hey Karl you're not getting older

you're getting better. Not.

[Captain Hilts]

24. Hey, you're new here. Act nice or learn to explain yourself. Don't be a troll. nt

[neutron]

14. Bill did it twice. Why not?

For all the bravado, Edwards has no record.
Obama will be there in another 4 years, but not now.

[blm]

29. Bill was ABLE to because a few senate and congressional Dems pummeled Bush1

with investigations throughout his terms as VP and Pres.

There were constant bad headlines for Poppy every time there were new discoveries on IranContra, Iraqgate, and BCCI. And Poppy EXPECTED to get impeached after the BCCI report was released in Dec 1992.

So - Jackson Stephens, Poppy's longtime ally and a key figure in BCCI, moves his support to Bill Clinton, Poppy runs the worst campaign ever for a sitting president, Dec 1992 report on BCCI comes out and all the outstanding matters are swepyt under a rug in the next administration.

[Beacool]

15. I think that she's right!

The Clintons have been winning campaigns against the Republicans since the 70s. Bill only lost one election in his lifetime in 1980. Hillary has won the two times she ran for elected office. I would say that they have a pretty good record on being able to handle whatever the Republican attack machine throws their way. Proof of that is that she's still way ahead of the polls nationally, despite the incessant attacks of the Repug candidates and now of her fellow Democrats.

[Bitwit1234]

16. Obama has already shown he can't.

Look at the kiddyfied tripping all over himself about the Novak swifty boating.

[Capn Sunshine]

33. that is one lame meme

back to frameshop for a refresher course
You guys have to be more creative in your meetings, I'm disappointed in the quality of your work lately

[MGKrebs]

18. The Manichean worldview of the question is problematic.

"Only"? How about just "best", or even "better"?

In my opinion, the constant framing of everything as "life or death", "all or none", "now or never", devalues discussion.

[FrenchieCat]

25. I don't think that Hillary is the only one that can withstand those attacks.....

But I think that it will take a candidate with deep campaign pockets to get their message through, or else they will be at the mercy of our national media.....and being at the mercy of large corporations is never a good thing.

So at this point, I will only support those candidates who have NOT accepted public financing.....because we don't need additional handicaps than required.

I will say that it is accurate to understand that the Republicans actually don't want Hillary Clinton as the nominee...which is why they are now busy deconstructing the "inevitability" myth they so carefully crafted up to now. That's no accident; of that, I am certain.

[wiley]

45. Agreed.

[rjones2818]

27. Her advantage

is that she's been a target of that machine ever since Bill was President.

[BootinUp]

28. Yes. n/t

[smheart78]

30. Biden is Best suited

to take on the Republicans. He has already made Guliani look bad and is much more time tested and secure than all the other candidates. With 75 senate votes for his Iraq plans, it is a sincere vote that many republicans trust his judgement. Now that is proof!

[kad7777]

31. I agree, BIDEN's the best we have

to take on the GOP machine. He'll never back down or take any of their crap!! As smheart78 said he crushed Rudy in one sentence

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7Y8AFctpjo

imagine what he'll do to the rest of them. AND Joe will pull down Republican votes better than ANY Democratic candidate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtGCaqOdIJ4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUC8LeZ1hM4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HcXkLbRIWw

[Perry Logan]

32. Nah. Any of 'em can beat it.

[applegrove]

36. No. She isn't the only one. But her name recognition and history are so very well

known that she may be the hardest to tar with a smear campaign. Because the has been so public for the last 16 years and all the skeletons are out of the closet. And people know that.

[mtnsnake]

37. Not the only one. I think Biden could, too, as well as Obama

Any of those three are known to strike back without hesitating and do it effectively.

[PatSeg]

48. Biden

His cracks about Rudy really ruffled Rudy's feathers and you know he has more of the same.

[DFW]

38. hardly

Properly prepared, I think any of the Democrats could handle that task.

[avrdream]

42. I wonder what it is going to take to be "properly prepared".

John Kerry didn't seem prepared whatsoever and you would have thought he would have known what was going to come his way.

It was painful and frustrating watching.

Agree that Biden could probably answer back and he doesn't seem to have any skeletons in his closet. I don't think the opponents know any secrets about Clinton either. The question is: will our candidate be ready for any LIES that come forth? That will be the key because those lies are going to fly!

[DFW]

46. Any candidate who isn't aware of that by now............

does not deserve to be the candidate!

[NewHampster]

39. 100% Yes

[mtnsnake]

40. BTW, I saw her commercial & I don't remember her saying she was the "only" one who could beat them

Notice in your article, too, that nothing is in quotes that has her saying that she is the "only" candidate who can beat the Republican attack machine. The author of the article is stretching things. Those are his or her own words.

[Steely_Dan]

43. Biden!

Biden is a straight shooter. He will give it as well as he receives it.

-P

[calteacherguy]

44. Absolutely not. Pure propaganda. nt

[sniffa]

47. no, the claim is laughable at best

and people who believe it are to be laughed at.