Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Finally figured out the "Hilary Hype"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
elfin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:21 PM
Original message
Finally figured out the "Hilary Hype"
As usual - it's Rove. At the moment Clark scares them more than any other - how best to derail him - hook him to Hilary. Counting on her polarizing effect to rub off onto him, thereby bringing any wayward "moderate" Repugs back onto the ranch.

Predictably, the media bit, loving any chance to rev up conflict for conflict's sake.

If it works, and Dean or someone else surges to win the nom. - they will do the same thing if the polls show swing votes leaning to Dems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
pearl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. Thanks for the insight
They sure are a slimmy bunch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unity Donating Member (108 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:28 PM
Response to Original message
2. Makes sense. But why did Bill Clinton help fuel the rumors...
saying there were "2 stars" in the Dem. Party, etc.?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elfin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Because he likes to toy with them.
And he would also LOVE to see Hilary go for it -- someday.

Raises her profile even more - and draws attention to
Clark (apparently his fave right now) at the same time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unity Donating Member (108 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. I think you're right again, but it does help the right wing raise $$$ when
they mention her. I'm hoping the Dems. are playing some high strategy rope -a dope here. Having all these 10 candidates all firing at Chimpy might be part of it too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radfringe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 05:22 AM
Response to Reply #7
18. hit the nail on the head
GOPers are scared to death of Hillary. They just mention her name and the money rolls in - she's the "boogey-woman" to GOPers

It's not really any different from a terra-lert being issued everytime the whistleass's numbers drop...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
diplomats Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. It's not a surprise he thinks his wife is a star
but that has absolutely nothing to do with 2004. She may never run for president, for all I know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raenelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:34 PM
Response to Original message
5. That must be it. This Hillary obsession really has me confused.
Why were they falling for it? It was just ol' crazy Safire, saying stupid really crazy stuff. But everyone picked up on it, and I couldn't figure it out.

They have a real Dem race. Three incredibly viable candidates in Clark, Dean and Kerry; some pretty good challengers--Gephardt, Edwards, Graham; old spoil sport for the Zell Miller Dems in Lieberman. Two of these, according to polls today, could beat Bush right now, today. And they're talking about Hillary and stalking horses and Machiavelli!???!

We get attacked by Osama's organization, and next thing you know our big enemy is Saddam--a secular Muslim nation. We insist Saddam has WMD, probably even nukes, then nada, null set, zilch, zip. They assume, really assume, that Iraqis will greet a foreign attack and occupation with cheers, candy, and rosewater. Well, grenades and candy ARE both smaller than bread boxes, I guess. And the Dems are fielding a bunch of respectable, knowledgable candidates, most of whom present a real challenge to Chimpy, and all they can see is Hillary and Machiavelli. I seriously question people's touch with reality sometimes.

I just wanted to shake some of these pundits today. You know, why don't you deal with the race that is actually in front of you. Say Hillary does get in--there will be plenty of time to deal with that then. Speculation is OK, I guess, if you have real reasons behind your speculation and you don't ignore what's really going on, breeze over what's right in front of your face, so you can talk about your imaginings about what might happen. These people, these pundits, most of them should move over to the sci-fi channel or something. I'm no hard nosed zen realist, totally attached to the here and now, but this is really ridiculous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennellist Donating Member (72 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:37 PM
Response to Original message
6. The tie is a bit more than a media conspiracy
Bill Clinton himself tied Hillary and Clark together by calling them the 'two stars' of the Democratic Party. Clark's team is filled with Clinton staffers as well. The connection is not a media invention here. My feeling is that Dean is getting a bit too close for comfort for the Clintons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raenelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Well you certainly picked up on what is fueling the tinfoil hat theories
But, using Occam's Razor here, the best explanation is that Bill, Hillary, and everyone else in the DLC--as they have said from the beginning BTW--don't think Dean can win, and Clark is being pushed forward to stop him. The DLC has been looking for a viable non-Dean, everyone knew it, they said it, the press kept wondering why a viable non-Dean candidate hadn't appeared, then one did, and everyone assumes the Clintons are pulling something, well, "machiavellian." Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EagleEye Donating Member (278 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. ANd those who have the power want to keep it.
THe DLC and CLintons have the power in the Dem party and are scared to death that Dean will win the election and they will be out. He owes them nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
diplomats Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Well
Edited on Mon Sep-22-03 10:50 PM by diplomats
There are Clinton people working for other candidates, too. Hasn't Dean said his foreign policy advisers are veterans from the Clinton administration?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HalfManHalfBiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:52 PM
Response to Original message
10. I think it is just getting people used to Hillary as a candidate
Start now, and the concept won't seem that radical in 2008.

Bill and Hillary are the best politicians alive. Probably two of the best ever. They know what they are doing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
linazelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 11:33 PM
Response to Original message
12. Ahhhhh . . . I wondered why Hannity has been talking about Clark and
Hillary daily for the past two weeks. He was at it again tonight for as much as I could bear to listen. He said something to the effect that "sources close to" Bill and Hil report that Bill is urging her to run.

He's frightening he hell out of his idiot listeners by painting a picture of Hillary spending "12 years" in the White House if she were to run and win office with Clark.

Then he went on to smear Clark calling him an "empty bag" since Clark has done nothing that Hannity can carp about.

Remember how Seinfeld was called the "show about nothing?" So is Hannity. How can these people who listen to him fail to see through this idiocy? Oh and his guest tonight was Kelsey Grammer. Damn. I used to like Frazier. Now I'm gonna have to wean myself away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Festivito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 02:20 AM
Response to Original message
13. Or, RW needs to be rid of Clinton name running for office.
Hillary said she wasn't to run for pres, not vp. Rove needs to test her new NY sen armor.

In a Clark/Clinton ticket, name recognition would be an important factor.

Also, it takes blame away from RW * problems to mention a Clinton and rekindle RW hatred for her. I think they will fail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Don_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 02:49 AM
Response to Original message
14. Or It Could Be Perfect Timing
With Dimbo's $87 Billion speech going over like a lead balloon, even the right-wing nuts are waking up and starting to question the village idiot. The right-wing media went rabid when they heard the news and I can't think of a better way to defuse those idiots than let them rant themselves out of a job.

People are starting to wake up to whats going on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 02:55 AM
Response to Original message
15. Hillary running is a FReeper's wet dream
It should be their nightmare because she would kick the shit out of any candidate they could offer.

But it is their wet dream. They are fueled by hatred (look at how hatred of muslims and liberals has united them), and FReepers love to hate Hillary and Bill. Therefore, they can use their rabid hatred in a shameful campaign of lies against her. And, if she were to win (which she would), they get eight years of bitching and moaning, despite surpluses and a strong economy.

As much as FReepers love what is going on right now (fascism, perpetual war), I don't think they were ever happier than those eight years when Clinton was in office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adjoran Donating Member (650 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 04:07 AM
Response to Original message
16. the right is obsessed with Hillary
They see her behind every door, around every corner, under every bed.

I think WJC, knowing this only too well, is tweaking them a bit. He's having fun with them. Probably sitting back and laughing his butt off right now watching them scramble to decipher the "signals" he sent them. As a bonus, he's proving to Hillary just how easily the media attention can be diverted when her name is mentioned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VolcanoJen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 04:28 AM
Response to Original message
17. It's going to backfire on their asses.
The over-reaching, naked arrogance of this administration and their surrogates is wearing thin on the American people. They can throw Clinton-hate at us all they want, but Chimpy's approval will continue to sink.

"Clinton Nostalgia" is rampant among the real-worlders. It's not much of a stretch to get a "well, yeh" answer from your friends by asking them if they were better off when Clinton was president. It really is one of those benchmark pollster questions come general election time.

The winger media parrots can tie Hillary to Clark all they want, but that doesn't make it so. It's great for fundraising, sure, I mean, paranoia is their game, and they're masterful at it. But I for one wouldn't fall into the trap that associating Clark with the Clintons is a necessarily bad thing, even if they never intended the association to begin with. I've always felt that Gore shouldn't have distanced himself so much from his luminous eight-year record with Clinton, for example.

Here's the poll I'd like to see: Bill Clinton vs. Smirky McWhistleAss. The results of that poll would speak volumes...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Nov 22nd 2014, 05:58 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC