0
   

HILLARY IN 2008

 
 
Larry434
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Nov, 2004 05:51 pm
Eva wrote:
Larry434 wrote:
Here's an idea.

The Dems would have a chance at winning an election IF they stop insulting the beliefs of the majority of voters and craft a campaign advocating what the majority believe.

Slick Willy knew how to do that. Perhaps he can convince Hillary. But it will be tougher for the DNC to accept.


I agree with everything you said except the last sentence, Larry. I think the DNC will be itching to win by then, and I think they'll compromise to get there.


I thought they would have wised up after 2000. I am not sure that under the current DNC leadership they are capable of admitting they have been pursuing a losing strategy. They will blame it on the messenger, not the message.
0 Replies
 
DERBYCITYSNOTSLINGER
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Nov, 2004 10:16 pm
I THINK WE NEED A WOMAN AS PRESIDENT TO MAKE THINGS RIGHT WOMEN ARE VERY VINDICTIVE. AND JUST THINK ABOUT THIS LET THE TERRORIST HIT WHEN ITS THAT TIME OF THE MONTH WE WILL GET REVENGE QUICK.
0 Replies
 
Larry434
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Nov, 2004 06:09 am
DERBYCITYSNOTSLINGER wrote:
I THINK WE NEED A WOMAN AS PRESIDENT TO MAKE THINGS RIGHT WOMEN ARE VERY VINDICTIVE. AND JUST THINK ABOUT THIS LET THE TERRORIST HIT WHEN ITS THAT TIME OF THE MONTH WE WILL GET REVENGE QUICK.


Reminds me of the old joke going around when women were first allowed into the combat arms of the military.

Form an all female brigade and commit only those to battle who were approaching their period. It was to be called the PMS Brigade.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Nov, 2004 09:59 am
No doubt about it, a woman angry or determined enough to do violence is every bit as dangerous, if not more dangerous, than a man.
0 Replies
 
cannistershot
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Nov, 2004 10:05 am
I would vote for my ex-wife. Just tell her that I became a terrorist and she would drain all of their money in a matter of weeks.
0 Replies
 
shewolfnm
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Nov, 2004 10:06 am
There is few as powerful as a woman scorned. hahah

Funny.. hilary is not even running for anything, yet she is always nominated?
Maybe she should see this thread.
To some she is a Knight'ess' in shining armor.
And is always looked for when things go wrong.
:-)
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Nov, 2004 10:43 am
It was her own that nominated her though Shewolf. It was a NY Times article that started this thread. Though I would prefer someone like Obama as the Democrat candidate the next time around--I want to feel okay no matter who wins next time--Hilllary seems to be the front runner so far as the Democrat machine is concerned at this time. You can bet the next campaign has already started however subtlely.
0 Replies
 
Steppenwolf
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Nov, 2004 10:49 am
Hmmm... People keep talking about Obama in 2008, but he won't be a realistic candidate in four years--he's presently too young and inexperienced. Yes, Hillary may be a (not the only) likely candidate, but I wonder if she would win the primaries...
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Nov, 2004 10:50 am
I'd be just as happy to see Hillary get nominated as I was when I saw Kerry get nominated Smile
0 Replies
 
cannistershot
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Nov, 2004 10:52 am
JustWonders wrote:
I'd be just as happy to see Hillary get nominated as I was when I saw Kerry get nominated Smile


:wink:
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Nov, 2004 01:37 pm
David Letterman said last night that they knew Hillary was planning to run in 2008 because she'd been spotted in camo duck hunting in Ohio.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Nov, 2004 12:45 pm
Isn't this goose season in Ohio?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Jun, 2005 11:51 am
Seems that the radio and TV talk shows, op-ed pages, and various pundits are all declaring Hillary the Democrat front runner now. And the election is only three years and five months away.

Boston Globe
Why Hillary?
By Robert Kuttner | June 8, 2005

THE 2008 election is three years off, and the jockeying is already intense. Most insiders have concluded that the Democratic finalists are likely to come down to Hillary Rodham Clinton and one or two anti-Hillarys. The Atlantic Monthly recently reported a confidential poll of leading Democratic and Republican insiders indicating that 49 of 63 Democrats and 48 of 56 Republicans expected Clinton to be the nominee.

Why Hillary?

First, the potent Clinton political apparatus enables her to raise prodigious sums. Second, she has proven in places like upstate New York that she can attract independent support. Third, she is a real charmer, having worked with Republican senators on legislation of joint interest -- people who initially viewed her as the arch-fiend.

She also has an uncanny ability to charm reporters. New York magazine recently ran an adoring cover piece illustrated by Hillary taking the presidential oath as Bill lovingly looked on. The writer confessed to initial skepticism, but after following her around for a few weeks was totally won over. Last week, the left-wing Nation magazine (The Nation!) ran a story almost as worshipful.

This does not mean, however, that Hillary is a lefty. On the contrary, she is consciously positioned in the political center, deftly fine-tuning her rhetoric on abortion, casting some pro-business votes, and sounding tough on defense. Like Bill.

Even if she gets the nomination, can Senator Clinton possibly be elected? She is very much a polarizer who will energize every right-winger in America. She has told associates, however, that being a polarizer can actually be a plus, as George W. Bush has demonstrated: It doesn't matter if you rally the other side's base as long as you rally your own base plus enough moderates.

In 2004, women's support for John Kerry lagged Al Gore's in 2000. Presumably, America's women will flock to Hillary.

But Senator Clinton's own complex political identity may be a problem. Many Democratic progressives, female and male, just don't trust her because she has trimmed on too many issues too many times. And they're not at all sure she can be elected. The aroused Democratic base may not, in fact, offset the antagonistic Republican base.

Also, though Clinton's issues are moderate, her persona isn't. For traditionalists, she is tainted, unfairly, in two contradictory ways. She is irrevocably seen as a pushy woman, but also a wronged woman -- which makes her seem weak at a time when Americans need someone strong. If she can overcome all these hurdles, maybe she deserves to be president.

The anti-Hillary contenders are every bit as interesting, each also with assets and liabilities. Delaware Senator Joe Biden, one of the few senior Democrats with heft on defense and foreign policy, has given some terrific speeches offering real gravitas. Enough time has elapsed since his famous hair transplant and infamous plagiarism of then British Labor leader Neil Kinnock that Biden can probably rise above the digs. He's a serious leader at a time when Americans desperately need one.

John Edwards, out from under John Kerry's shadow, has been sounding more cogently populist than ever. He is not in office, and hence has three years to make speeches and alliances and acquire some foreign policy credentials. He also has commendable gumption. For instance, he is working with the grass-roots group ACORN to put living-wage initiatives on state ballots. In November 2004, an ACORN-sponsored initiative to raise the minimum wage carried every single Florida county, winning with 71 percent of the vote, or a million votes more than Bush.

John Kerry may well give it another shot, as the candidate who came up just one state short in 2004, perhaps due to deliberately contrived long lines that held down Democratic turnout in Ohio. Kerry, older and wiser, will be armed with his formidable list of 2004 donors.

Any of these three, and possible dark horses like Gore (who gives inspired speeches except when he's running), General Wesley Clark, or moderate Indiana Governor Evan Bayh, could emerge as the non-Hillary. For all the talk of a thin Democratic bench, it's a promising field: the breakthrough-but-reassuring woman, the foreign policy eminence, the credible populist, the seasoned veterans, the general, and the red-state moderate.

Sadly, more than anything else, money will determine the finalists. ''In 2008," says Steve Grossman, former Democratic national chairman and treasurer, ''50 million dollars is the table stakes to play." That may initially favor Hillary, but it does not favor our democracy. And Republicans have millions more.

Robert Kuttner is co-editor of The American Prospect. His column appears regularly in the Globe.

© Copyright 2005 Globe Newspaper Company.
http://members.boston.com/reg/login.do
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 11:38 am
Of note, AOL is doing a head to head straw poll of Hillary Clinton vs Condi Rice. As of this morning it was fairly close with Hillary a few points ahead.

Thu, Jun. 16, 2005
Clinton wins S.C. straw poll
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 02:01 pm
The only way she's going to be the first female president is if she's castrated first.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Aug, 2005 09:05 am
You may be right, but I think the snowball is gaining momentum for Hillary:

The strange metamorphosis of Sen. ClintonLINK
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Aug, 2005 09:16 am
She will say ANYTHING to get elected.
0 Replies
 
Chrissee
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Aug, 2005 10:28 pm
McCain would beat her. No one else.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Aug, 2005 12:16 pm
I sincerely hope the Dems come up with someone other than Hillary. I might have to eat these words, depending on who the Republicans throw out there, but I could never see myself voting for her. I think I'll go back to voting straight Libertarian, which I did until 2000 and 2004 when I voted Democratic for the first time ever in order to vote against GWB. If Cheney decides to run and gets the nod, I'll end of voting for Hillary but otherwise I don't see it. I have too many memories of her interviews during Bill's presidency when she was convinced all the accusations were a conspiracy and a fabrication of 'their enemies'. She's got too many boogie-men in her closet for my taste.

Re the poll between HC and CR in South Carolina. I'm not surprised a bit that a black woman is trailing a white woman in SC. If they threw a white man in the mix the vote would probably be 90-6-4.
0 Replies
 
thethinkfactory
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Aug, 2005 07:06 pm
Larry434 wrote:
Here's an idea.

The Dems would have a chance at winning an election IF they stop insulting the beliefs of the majority of voters and craft a campaign advocating what the majority believe.

Slick Willy knew how to do that. Perhaps he can convince Hillary. But it will be tougher for the DNC to accept.


I think what you mean is that they have to become very clear on thier beliefs. Democrats have not done this well - while Republicans not only do that well - but have historically closed ranks around these ideals.

Be clear though - Bush and his plummeting approval rating will tear apart these republican alliances (e.g. Frist recent decisions et al). I don't think Hillary will run in 08 (or be allowed to be the Dem's choice - I don't think she is electable) but I think the republican's have a tough row to hoe to find a electable person who is "conservative enough" for them.

I like McCain but do not think the republican's think he is conservative enough... so we will see.

TTF
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » HILLARY IN 2008
  3. » Page 3
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/21/2024 at 07:34:31