Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Looming Hillary Debacle

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: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Parisle Donating Member (849 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 06:35 PM
Original message
The Looming Hillary Debacle
----The Democrats appear poised to do it yet again,... blow an election by forgetting against whom they are running. Nominating Hillary Clinton for the 2008 presidential election will accomplish that. Not that I have anything against Sen. Clinton,.. in fact, I kind of like her. But the 2008 election is going to be one of the most important in the nation's history,... too important to gamble on the political/sociological experiment of running the first woman presidential candidate in the nation's history. Save that for a time when the first woman candidate can be bidding to succeed a 2-term president from the same party. Why, it would even be nice to see about 25 years' experience in government in the first female nominee,... you know,... Congess,.. governorship,..that sort of thing. And less baggage. Hillary? Uh-uh.

----Hillary's "frontrunner" status in the Democratic party means absolutely nothing in the general election. There is a vast difference between a nominating process which turns on party mechanics and intra-party "pull," .... and one which more closely resembles a shrewd marketing strategy. And while at this stage of the process, name recognition and intra-party machinations may be the key to the nomination, they won't win the election. The democrats first need to come up with a couple of countervailing ideas with which to do more than merely "rebut," but also to undermine the republican playbook... Ideas with some "bite" to them,... which can be stated simply,.. and which directly address traditional Democratic weaknesses at the polls. Once this is done, then a ticket consisting of some combination of Edwards, Clark, Warner, possibly Gore, etc., can be picked to carry the ball. But you have to have "the ball" first.

----The ideas needed by the democrats may be strategically thought of as initiatives which put the republicans in their own weakest positions. For example,... shut the hell up about gun control. In fact, do this: In the 2007 Congress, launch a legislative initiative which stipulates that UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES may an administration do anything to undercut or suspend 2nd amendment firearm rights. If there is any substance to those "martial law" stories, then this will be a difficult one for the Bush administration to agree to. Fine. Put them in the position of having to vote against it. The NRA oughta find that interesting.

----Here's one which will truly capture the public imagination and sentiment, but it will take some guts (and other organs) to do it. How about a bill proposing an across-the-board 10% reduction in all federal pensions, and a "stay" on federal salary increases? Hell,.. we already know that the electorate doesn't think congress or the government in general is doing its job. Who knows if it will pass? PROPOSE IT! Make the republicans look bad. That's the whole point. Catching on, yet? This may be a drop in the bucket,.... but it plays well on Mainstreet.

----Come down hard on "offshoring" of tax liabilities. I know you get your money from the same people as the republicans, but the people hate this, so you've got to hate it, too? Is that so hard to grasp?

----Security, terrorism, all that crap: You can't win by saying you won't be any worse than the republicans. You've got to show that you are better. (pay attention here) And you will be "better" because the US will once again have "allies" after the neocons are pushed out. Friends. International cooperation AGAINST terrorism,.. Go with it.

----There are a few more I'd like to add to this list,... but this post is getting rather long,.. and its point was really to say that a party popularity contest was the quickest way to lose the election,..... and by extension, that an analysis of the GOP record makes it fairly easy to offer America what it's been missing. But please,... no mealy-mouthed generalities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 06:41 PM
Response to Original message
1. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. What the heck are you talking about?
Considering that the OP's post makes a lot of sense, your weird cheap shot is even more cheap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
3. Kicked and recommended
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Speck Tater Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 06:48 PM
Response to Original message
5. Your ideas have a great deal of merit.
Therefore, it will be attacked and belittled by many other members of the "party that eats it's own." Heaven forbid we should all pull in the same direction! That would be positively Rovian.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 06:48 PM
Response to Original message
6. K&R
and welcome to DU

:bounce: :toast: :bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ninja Jordan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 06:53 PM
Response to Original message
7. Agreed
We need Edwards, Warner, or Clark. Not Hillary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OwnedByFerrets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 06:57 PM
Response to Original message
8. Welcome to DU
and I agree!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
p12psicop Donating Member (43 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. this chap makes a lot of sense
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sweetheart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 06:57 PM
Response to Original message
9. don't like yankees?
I'm sorry, you've put your foot in to "Hillary". Its right up there with "I/P" for the hell
of angry flaming threads where everyone is wrong. I will vote the "D" ticket, and if Hillary runs
then we can make her win... i don't buy this fatalist crap, people are able to change and adapt,
and i can't prejudge, as you do, however much the hil-haters on DU love to repeat this POV,
there are others here who, like myself, believe she will make a fine president one day, and really
i've not a bad thing to say about her. As far as i know, she's not running, and given this is a
year to win the congress, your topic is distracting from the real issue between now and november.

I do agree that your thoughts are well considered, but i'm not considering that topic until after
this november, just as a peace offering inside the democratic party, consensus to win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. ditto
And unfortunately the 24/7 exposure to the HRC-haters here at DU instills an element of pessimism that is as opportunistic as it is artificial. She's not my choice in the primary, but if she gets the nod by virtue of a consensus of Dem voters in the primary, I will lend her my full support in the general as I will any other Democrat going up against the GOP.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. HRC "haters"?
There are people who don't like Hillary because they consider her DINOish (ie. DLC). And then there are people who like her, but don't like the idea of her running for the White House. The latter are not Hillary "haters", just pragmatists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. no, there is a distinct
Edited on Sun Aug-20-06 07:45 PM by AtomicKitten
faction of HRC-haters here that you don't include in your spectrum analysis. There are many people that BS/distort her record and spew venom gratuitously.

And don't confuse pragmatism with (1) preference and the intent to manipulate and dissuade, (2) crystal ball analysis, or (3)simply a difference of opinion which is often confused here for being uninformed.

I think most of us agree we simply want an honest debate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Speck Tater Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. What you say is true... within the Democratic party
But outside the party there are those who hate Hillary because they believe the negative propoganda piled on by the right wing. To win, a presidential candidate needs votes from more than just the registered, active Democrats.

It's not what the Democrats think of her that matters, it's what the nation as a whole thinks of her, and in that arena she is too divisive a figure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 09:35 PM
Response to Reply #21
35. Who says she's divisive?
A bunch of rightwing republicans? And you adopt their rhetoric because..... ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sweetheart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #17
22. Yes, haters
People are cursing her opportunity to win for our cause, and however the curse leaves their
lips, it is not of benefit to dems to stand around cursing their own potential candidates,
yes? Can't we all accept that we ALL know the pros and cons of history, DLC'ism, third wayism,...
and that the hill issue is really a trojan horse for the real issue, that civil war for the
heart and soul of the democratic party , and power after the republcan fumble of 06.

And that heart and soul, DLC, or progressive, "war" or "negotiation", patriarchy or matriarchy,
and all of these issues are trojan horsed in to this "hillary" concern...

I'm all for a fair discussion *WHEN* she runs in that year when that happens, and until then, its
tiresome, monotonous repitition of divisive memes that get dems killing each other, get people
angry and not being realistic about our current objectives to focus and win for our people in
this november time, to spread goodwill and trust in our message, that we are ready to take the
reigns of this global bucking bronco and settle' 'er down.

To bring the issue up before it actually comes up, if it ever does in the way people postulate,
is a baited bear trap, awaiting the average media=saturated person to verify whether they need
another does of MSM indoctrination, and which demographic needs that re-absorption, so that the
money is then injected in to the MSM to correct this misperception amongst the demograpic segment
your DU moniker belongs to.

Then DU is a focus group for those who're refining arguments and campagin slogans to destroy our own
people, and what kind of thinktank is that? I almost wish the repukes who read this site had logins
and wrote just so people would realize who they're really discussing with in the larger sense here.
Every action is not decipherable of intent, only you know your intent, and some of us suspect,
and let the games begin, its lookin' ta be a real season for the hill haters, as she's lined up against
some tough teams this year.... dallas, and then against the broncos and that fast offense... timewaste
NFL talkabull, and are we to become the same timewaste trash-your-cause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Speck Tater Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-21-06 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #22
44. Read the replies to THIS post and tell me she's not divisive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Parisle Donating Member (849 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #9
18. I Don't Have Any Favorites
-----Thank you for being as gentle as you were, Sweetheart,.... If Hillary's on the ballot, she will get my vote, too, and I will not lose any sleep over how she would be apt to perform in the presidency. My post wasn't about "ability," but about electability. And I am certainly not a "hil-hater." For 40 years, I have been a journalist, and then a marketing consultant,... including political. I was on the Board of Directors of the '92 Perot campaign in my home state,... and I have written speeches for a few Democrats. And I despise and fear the PNAC junta that has manipulated its way into the executive branch. Good enough?

-----I'm looking at this upcoming campaign as a marketing problem,... and I am not hearing Hillary, or any other potential demo candidate saying any of the things that I'd like to hear. Traditional democratic issues and constituencies are fine,.. but election campaigns are more analogous to a chess game than to a town square meeting. All the pieces are on the board for taking back Congress in 2006, and winning the presidency in 2008. The trick is to control the town square aspect with chess game style moves,... Passion, ego and personal preference have little to offer that process unless they are in line with the plan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sweetheart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #18
23. That marketing mix
Edited on Sun Aug-20-06 07:59 PM by sweetheart
Skinner nailed it with "Name one thing the republicans have done right." as the elevator pitch opener for
this November. Clearly you are very aware and deep in the subject, indeed, and welcome to the DU.

This *is* that propaganda chess game, and when you move your bishop and check hillary clinton, i, as
a knight, must take bushop. ;-) I won't take your peice if you check bush, or if you check any
republican, or if you offer yourself for candidacy, but when you ride in an shoot a flaming arrow.
The republicans have moved their queen out early in the game for a check, risking all for a quick
win .. and when the war don't gel with the electorate this fall, it won't be about names, but a
referendum on what has been reaped.

welcome to the DU :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-21-06 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #9
43. You will never "MAKE" Hillary win.
She's too inflamatory to our opponents and too
divisive to our partisans.

I gave her a bunch of money when she was running
for the Senate, but her performance has been so
apalling to me that, were she our candidate in
the general election, I wouldn't vote for her.

Tesha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tanyev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 07:00 PM
Response to Original message
10. Why in the sam hill do you assume that she will be the nominee?
I don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waveof1 Donating Member (7 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 07:01 PM
Response to Original message
11. How did Hilliary become the
Edited on Sun Aug-20-06 07:53 PM by waveof1
front runner anyway? I don't know what she has ever really accomplished, other than winning one term of a D seat in the Senate from a heavily red blue state.

Something else to consider with Hilliary--Senators almost never win presidential elections.

:dilemma:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
p12psicop Donating Member (43 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. New York is heavily red?
I didn't know that, so hehe oh well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waveof1 Donating Member (7 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Did I say red?
I meant Blue.

:silly:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. Her last name is Clinton..
... that's her only qualification. She's unexceptional in every way IMHO, and if we nominate her we will lose and deserve to.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sallyseven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #15
24. It never fails to amaze me how much hatred there is
Edited on Sun Aug-20-06 08:00 PM by sallyseven
for Hillary. She is a strong, capable woman is that the problem? She has more brains than most politicians. Better than any repuke. I for one wonder how much chauvinism there is out there. Thats why the right wingers hate her. Too bad we have so many chauvinists here on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. What the EFF..
... has Hillary ever actually DONE? Other than support the war, deliver sanctimonious sermons about video games, etc. Brains my fucking ass. If she had either brains or integrity she'd have never supported the Iraq war.

I agree that the wingers hate her for no good reason, but so what? There is nothing we can do about that.

Seriously, the fact she is a female doesn't matter one shit to me. The fact that her policies suck and that she is absolutely unelectable does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobalu Donating Member (177 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #26
30. Sorry, but she is very bright...She and Bill worked for my ex-
brother-in-law (an attorney) in their Yale days...My ex-BIL was was fairly chauvinistic but even HE said that she was smarter than Bill...

As for "what has she done"...What, in his much-longer senate career did John KERRY do?...He didn't have one piece of legislation with his name on it, and yet I imagine you supported him, reluctantly or not.

As for her supporting the war...Do you question the intelligence of all the MALE senators who voted for it as well?....Somehow, I doubt it...I'm sure you didn't like it, but I feel almost as sure that you wouldn't have blamed it on a lack of intelligence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 09:14 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. I resent...
... you pitiful attempts to sidestep HRC's vast failures of policy and blame my opposition on the fact that she is a woman. My wife would make a better president than HRC, she's just as smart and she has integrity also.

I did support Kerry, but I'm one of his biggest detractors now. He had a chance to stand up, and he sat down.

I'm still waiting to hear exactly what great things HRC has done. Other than to allow lobbyist to stick a shiv in our last best chance for health care reform.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobalu Donating Member (177 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-21-06 04:31 AM
Response to Reply #33
40. Actually, I don't support HRC's possible bid in 2008 because of her
Edited on Mon Aug-21-06 04:31 AM by bobalu
support for the war as well as the other reasons stated by the OP...but I see a particular bitterness towards her that I don't see towards the others who took the the same, or similar positions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spearman87 Donating Member (252 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-21-06 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #30
47. I bet she's quite "book smart", and probably has
a high IQ to boot. However I think she has below average political IQ. After the year 2000, she walked into the game with numerous advantages over other players. Instead of performing strongly she has lost ground.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #24
28. I'm female - and, obviously not chauvistic - as a result and I
don't think she can win because I don't think she'll be able to flip a single red state and may lose us one to two blue ones.

I also don't hate her. I think she's politically smart, but I also know that many mushy middle voters won't turn to a female while we're fighting a war somewhere. It sucks - but it's the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laurab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #15
39. I agree with you.
"unexceptional in every way". If her last name wasn't Clinton, no one would even know who she was. I am not a "Hillary hater" - she's my senator, and an unexceptional one. NOT unacceptable, for those who think I don't like her - I do like her, she just hasn't done a single thing that would make her stand out.

She is the republican's favorite candidate, I believe, and there's a reason for that. She is as hated by the RW as * is to us. He deserves it, she doesn't, but that doesn't matter - it's still the truth. She would bring out the republican voters like nothing else would.

Personally, I don't think we will nominate her, but I agree that we will lose if we do. I don't like to attack any dem candidate, and I have nothing bad to say about Hillary personally, but the next election is too important to have the democratic politician most hated by the republicans running.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waveof1 Donating Member (7 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #11
20. SITTING Senators almost never win presidential elections.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevedeshazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 08:01 PM
Response to Original message
25. 2006. Period.
Get real.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tinrobot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. Exactly
Let's control Congress first and discuss 2008 later.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #25
31. You said it.
Reclaim Congress first.

The period between 2006 and 2008 will determine EVERYTHING about the future.

We'll see how much HRC impresses everyone in that time period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enid602 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 08:26 PM
Response to Original message
29. Hillary
I think Hillary would make a great VP candidate. It might ultimately raise her chances for the Presidency.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iowa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 09:12 PM
Response to Original message
32. You really lost me here...
"Here's one which will truly capture the public imagination... How about a bill proposing an across-the-board 10% reduction in all federal pensions, and a "stay" on federal salary increases? Hell,.. we already know that the electorate doesn't think congress or the government in general is doing its job."

I'm damned sick and tired of the repuke tactic of demonizing public employees, and I reject such dishonest and manipulative tactics outright. It's also outrageous to suggest that any employer renege on pension commitments. I don't work for the federal government, but I know that there are a great many honorable, competent, dedicated, hard-working, Democrats who do. They are our allies. Many are watching our backs (like the public-health physician who posted here just the other day about the battle he's waging on our behalf within the FDA). I have no interest in holding such people up for ridicule and blame.

I find this type of tactic to be revolting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bridget Burke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-21-06 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #32
45. I agree with you....
All government workers should NOT pay for the sins of Bush. I thought "government is bad" was a Republican talking point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 09:26 PM
Response to Original message
34. If the Dems are smart
they'll keep Hillary as "front-runner" and let the Repubs focus their fire on her as long as possible before drafting Gore as our candidate.

I think Hillary's great but I don't think she's got a snowball's chance in hell to win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FogerRox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 09:38 PM
Response to Original message
36. Drop the bit on Hillary and you have an excellent post.
Edited on Sun Aug-20-06 09:39 PM by FogerRox


Oh gee.. who was walking the dog.....

This part here...

In fact, do this: In the 2007 Congress, launch a legislative initiative which stipulates that UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES may an administration do anything to undercut or suspend 2nd amendment firearm rights. If there is any substance to those "martial law" stories, then this will be a difficult one for the Bush administration to agree to. Fine. Put them in the position of having to vote against it. The NRA oughta find that interesting.


...looks to be some damn fine thinking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Parisle Donating Member (849 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-21-06 08:59 AM
Response to Reply #36
41. Thank You, Foger,.....
....And of course, the same type of thinking may be applied to other, similar "potential" pitfalls for the Bush administration. I'm particularly hot on the issue of reining in corporate excesses and abuses - offshoring, outsourcing, corporate welfare, the "revolving door," etc., and with prying the news media away from the combined influence of gov't and partisan corporatist control. Sadly, there seem to be significant numbers of democratic office-holders for whom these goals represent a double-edged sword.... if you get my drift. I'm STILL livid over how SUV's got classified as "trucks" to escape EPA mileage goals,..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 09:41 PM
Response to Original message
37. You forgot stem cells
and a law prohibiting Congress from intervening in private, family, medical life support decisions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blue cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 09:45 PM
Response to Original message
38. Relax
Edited on Sun Aug-20-06 09:48 PM by blue cat
It's just a media scam. Hillary will never win the primary since the people will decide. The repugs love to bring her name up because it helps them raise money. We have too many great candidates in our party. Noone wants a dynasty. I have faith that the people will pick someone else. It seems like the dems that aren't very involved in politics and who don't know anyone else who is running will bring up her name as a possibility, also Joe Biden. I see Kerry/Edwards/Gore/Feingold/Clark/Warner/Kucinich winning before her. I like Hillary as a senator, but we have too great guys running.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
4_TN_TITANS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-21-06 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
42. No way will Hillary get the nomination
Dems know that putting her on the ticket would be the surest way bring out every last Repuke voter. She does make a very nice lightning rod, however, to draw fire away from other candidates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-21-06 03:54 PM
Response to Original message
46. The Great DU Presidential Primary Gang Wars v. 2.0 are already underway
and the 06 General Elections are still 2.5 months away.
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 Apr 19th 2014, 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) 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