My Change of Heart on Hillary

[mondo joe]

I've always felt quite strongly that Hillary could never win the national election.

But lately I've come to see her as one of the few Dems who could take it and dish it out with the Bush administration. She seems to make them just drooling idiots. I think of how they just fall into her lap, with comments about her being angry, her talk about Rove being obsessed with her.

Another factor in her favor is that the right has already demonized her. We know what we get with Hillary - as opposed to guys like Kerry who ought to be considered heroes but can be smeared into something else.

Lastly, I think the last election really was about national security, and Rove/Bush's reputation as doing ANYTHING including breaking the law to win worked in their favor. We are in a time in which being too honorable counts more as a vice than a virtue. But I don't think Hillary has that problem. If anything, her reputation as a sort of shrew may be a boon in this context.

This isn't a declaration. We're a long way from a nominee. Just sharing a little change in attitude on my part.

[Clarkansas]

1. The problem is, Democrats don't like her very much either

I can't think of a realistic Republican nominee she could defeat in a national election.

[mondo joe]

4. That's what I once thought - my point is that I'm reconsidering.

She may be more electable nationally thhan I once thought - just questioning my own assumptions.

[beingthere]

5. It would be cynical to choose her. n/t

[mondo joe]

6. Why would it be cynical?

[BOSSHOG]

10. I believe she can beat all of them

No doubt out debate all of them, out campaign them and if they choose to throw the mud, she can do that better then they can. And the democratic slate in 2008 is head and shoulders above anything the GOP can chuck out there. I hope they all rally behind the candidate whomever that might. I'm for General Clark from the get go but the nominee will get my unwavering support in the general election. Imagine the nominee being Hillary, bringing General Clark up on the stage and introducing him as her SECDEF. The gop has nothing approaching comparison.

[Kolesar]

11. That's what Michael Kinsley said in www.slate.com a while ago..eom

[mtnsnake]

13. Yeah, that's why she's the favorite of all Dems right now in all the polls

[Clarkansas]

16. Take a look at her disapproval numbers though.

While I agree that she is winning the polls where people vote for the names they recognize the most, (how were Bill Clinton's poll numbers in 1990?) her disapproval numbers are extremely high. And if you like looking at the polls, you have probably noticed that about every republican hopeful slaughters her in a head to head contest. The people I hear talking the most about Hillary 08 are Republicans.

[mtnsnake]

26. Why do you not mention what these same Repugs do to the other candidates?

All I hear you saying is, "that about every republican hopeful slaughters her in a head to head contest", yet I don't hear you making any mention of what these same Republican people would do against some other Democratic candidate.

Unless you can site polls that show results of the same Repukes going against other Dem candidates besides Hillary, there is not much point in singling her out when it comes to going against the repukes...unless you have proof that some other candidate of ours will fare better against the other side than she would. Do you have any references as to such?

Look, I'm not saying Hillary is the best we have to offer. I'm saying she's the "favorite" of all the candidates that we have to offer right NOW, according to the polls. Hopefully soon, someone else will emerge from the ranks of the Democratic Party to knock all our socks off. Who that will be I have no idea.

Peace

[mondo joe]

39. That's what a campaign is for. n/t

[skylarmae]

2. are you saying we can win even with rigged machines?

remember, CA just went to Diebold...

[rox63]

3. I've got some serious issues with Hillary

But I'll admit that she can fight dirty just as effectively as the rethugs. And that's a handy skill to have in a national election.

[BOSSHOG]

7. My philosophy and actions are rather simple

I do not speak ill of any democrat. I may not speak good of them, but I will not be the source of any negativity about an elected democrat. I will support General Clark in the primaries. And I will intensely support whomever the democrats nominate for president in 2008. I want to stay as extremely positive toward the democrats as I am intensely negative towards republicans. I find it extremely easy to do both.

Specifically on Hillary. If I were a republican and wanted to take her on with a smear campaign, I'd exercise, get in shape and pack a lunch because Hillary will get down in the mud with you.

[Libby2]

9. Exactly !! Right again Boss!!

[AlCzervik]

12. well said.

i supported Dean but when Kerry got the nod i voted for him in Nov.

[xultar]

17. DAMN RIGHT! Sho-nuf!

[xchrom]

18. after mccain, swiftboat liars, the media's absence

on bush's military record{and what happened to what's his name for reporting the truth} -- the repukes will be certain to run an exceedingly dirty campaign.

i won't vote for hillary -- but it will be a dirty campaign.

[Pirate Smile]

48. Wonderfully stated, Bosshog.

:yourock:

[MadHound]

8. Sorry, still won't support her.

The last thing we need in this country is a pro-war Democratic candidate, and that is what Hillary will run as. With the majority of Americans wanting the troops to come home now, the spectre of two warhawks running against each other is a sure way to suppress Democratic turnout and lose the election.

[NNN0LHI]

15. Here is the way I look at it

I can support a peace candidate and never win nothing and therefore never change anything.

Or I can support a hawk who will get elected and probably bring an end to this occupation madness.

I would prefer a peace candidate but there isn't enough voters like me out there.

Don

[MadHound]

28. Learn from history

The last time the Democrats tried to out hawk the Republicans was back in '68, when they threw up Humphrey against Nixon. Not only did we get our ass handed to us, but a great many voters were so disgusted by the spectacle that they quit voting altogether, for that election, and for many if not all that followed.

Peace IS a winning strategy. The majority of people in this country want us the hell out of Iraq. If we throw up Hillary in order to try and out hawk the hawks, we're going to fail miserably, and probably spell the doom of the party permanently, as many, many of the left, the base and the anti-war folks will flee out of disgust and never come back.

Sorry, but it just seems to me that running on a platform that the majority of the people, both in the party and in the nation as a whole are against is political suicide:shrug:

[NNN0LHI]

40. Are you suggesting Bill Clinton was a dove?

Seemed like every time I turned around that good old boy was dropping ordinance on top of someones head.

Don

[MadHound]

45. No, he wasn't, but neither was he involved in a conflict like

'Nam or Iraq. Sorry, invalid comparison:shrug:

[NNN0LHI]

46. "Sorry, invalid comparison" So, says you. I say you are wrong

Kosovo is what a Vietnam or Iraq looks like when the operation is run by someone with common sense. The only reason Kosovo didn't turn into an Iraq or Vietnam is because Clinton was smart enough not to listen to the idiots like McCain and Warner who were screaming for boots on the ground after one week of bombing.

You better check your history.

Don

[MadHound]

49. You can say whatever you like

But the fact of the matter is that Clinton didn't run as a pro war candidate during the war in Kosovo. In fact the war in Kosovo was pretty much a non-issue in '00, whereas the Iraq war has dragged on for three years now, and will probably continue through the '08 elections, when, maybe, Hillary will run.

But enough of such diversions, are you really ready to risk the wrath of the American public when both the Democrats and Republicans throw up warhawks as nominees? Are you ready for the kind of backlash the party experienced in '68?

And why is it so difficult for the Democrats to put up a candidate who actually holds the majority opinion to get out of Iraq?

[Talismom]

14. Her prowar stance makes it impossible for me to support her.

She has become a Lieberman-like corporatist, in my opinion, and may have always been for all I know. I don't care what the right thinks or how the media has presented her--none of that gets in the way of my supporting a candidate in whom I believe. But she is not such a candidate. I will be working to get Jonathan Tasini on the ballot to run against her in the primary for the senate this year and have become heavily involved in the nation-wide grassroots organization Progressive Democrats of America. We need to take back the democratic party before it is taken over totally by the same interests that now have a strangle-hold on the Repubs. Please see www.pdamerica.org and get on board--it's really where we need to go!

[xultar]

19. Did you support Kerry?

[Talismom]

25. I sure did! I left two small kids for 5 days to travel to Cleveland

and get out the vote for ACT. After talking about how he "had our backs" the pink-tutu dem. conceded before I could even get back to NYC!

There's no question that most all the dems are better than the repubs, but many of them are now selling out the best interests of their constituents because they see corporate money and control as the way of the future. Russ

Feingold just critisized them for "cowering rather than joining him on trying to censure President Bush over domestic spying."Democrats run and hide" when the administration invokes the war on terrorism, Feingold told reporters."

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Feingold-Censure.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/031506Z.shtml

Many people who are ambivalent about politics say there's no difference between the parties. I believe they're wrong, but I see where they are coming from when I watch the dems vote against the Alito filibuster and for the bankruptcy bill. If we let them get away with this behavior and don't work to replace them with people who have real democratic values, we're little better than those who just stay home and say there's no point. Passively supporting corporatists is not democratic activism, it's just lazy!

[xultar]

27. Didn't Kerry and Clinton have the same stance on the war?

I can't remember so just checking.

[Talismom]

30. I think they did. They may still have the same stance. n/t

[rodeodance]

20. Thank you for having the courage to post your memo. I think the mentality

of-she can not win ----holds back many.

[negativenihil]

21. Bleh

I'm sorry, but personally i dont want to see a Bush or a Clinton in the office for a very very long time. I am really sick and tired of the concept of American political dynasties.

[mondo joe]

22. I'm opposed to ruling anyone out simply because of family. n/t

[oasis]

33. Getting the job done. Roosevelts, Kennedys, Clintons got the job done.

Whether it be tailors, plumbers,cops,military or politicians the question should be "How well can the person do the job?".

Would you want to be disqualified as a commercial airline pilot because your father and uncle were pilots?

[JitterbugPerfume]

23. I will support any Democrat against any Republican

case closed

[awoke_in_2003]

24. Yeah, especially liked her support of Feingold

oh, wait, she ran just like all the other Dems.

on edit: we need a real ticket in 08, how about Feingold/Conyers. There are two that can stand up.

[adigal]

29. Good God, please NO!!

Look at her!! She is more republican than Democrat. John McCain would wipe the floor with her as he is a real republican, and we will lose again!!

Hillary:
War Hawk
Not supporting censure of Bush
Buddy-buddy with Trent Lott and Newt Gingrich

Hillary cares about one person: Hillary. She is a big money candidate. I think Clark, Warner, Edwards, and even Feingold have a better chance than she does. The GOP will LOVE a Hillary nomination.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

31. Ditto! I am not even going to vote for her again for Senator! To do

so would be making myself into a hypocrite.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[adigal]

51. You are being pretty snarky about a person's

moral standing and beliefs, don't you think??

[mondo joe]

38. I know that's the kneejerk reaction. But I am now questioning it.

She can get the money needed to win, she can fight as dirty as she needs to, and she just makes the far right nuts.

[Puzzler]

32. I'm not a fan of Hillary...

... but I think you make a good point about her: the right has already demonized her.


-P

[Little Star]

35. My heart and my head want

My heart and my head want Edwards. However, in the end I support any Dem that gets the nod. Well, maybe not if it was LIEberman, then maybe I'd do a write in or something. Other than a true turncoat, like Joementum, ADWD (Any Dem Will Do)!

[bigtree]

36. she drives them out of their mind

I always use Hillary to get under my conservative friend's skin. That's how Bush makes me feel. I think there's something of great value in her ability to do this.

[mattclearing]

37. I'll give Hillary this: She knows how to fight.

She and Bill have been there and done that.

But Feingold does too, and her stances on several issues just aren't enough for me.

[mondo joe]

41. And that's what I think we need. I always thought her reputation

as a sort of harpy, if you will, counted against her. Now I'm not so sure.

[wordpix2]

42. yes, she knows how to fight & she's got Bill & their machine backing her

Repukes are very afraid of their machine and Bill's record, especially the billions in surplus he managed to create.

[WI_DEM]

43. the problem with Hillary is that someone who starts out with as high

of negatives as she has is at a huge handicap in a national race. I don't think she can win.

[mondo joe]

44. Well I wonder about that. Her negatives are a known quantity.

Others start high and end up being dashed by the Rove smear machine.

[ripple]

47. The right WANTS her to run

I've been noticing that the right practically assumes she'll be the dem candidate whenever they talk about the 2008 race. Hell, Laura Bush just came out and said that she believes this nation is ready for a repug WOMAN president, although the only one remotely on the radar for their side is Rice, who's already said she won't run.

I truly feel that they are preparing both Dems and Repugs alike for a Hillary run and that, my friends, is reason to be alarmed.

As I slap on my tin-foil-hat, I can't help but wonder if there are documents that Bush, Cheney, Rove, et al have access to in the WH archives that might do Hilary some serious damage. Keep in mind, Bush and his minions have the authority to change classification status for documents. They have already used that to their benefit by classifying documents that were previously unclassified. It wouldn't surprise me a bit if in the event of a Hillary run, a number of embarrasing documents were to somehow be declassified in September/October of 2008.

Ok, that was my :tinfoilhat: moment for the day. Carry on.

[mondo joe]

50. There's no knowing what the right wants.

They want Dean, they want Kerry, the want Gore, they want Hillary.

I've heard it all.

The best we can do is run our best candidate - which I think means our best fighter.