Politico's Johnathan Martin at Midwest RLC: 'Nobody but Hillary' is the Hope of the GOP

[flpoljunkie]

'Nobody but Hillary' is hope of GOP
By: Jonathan Martin
August 26, 2007 08:48 AM EST

INDIANAPOLIS — He may be on his way out the door at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. in coming days. But the party Karl Rove has labored to build over the past eight years seems to have picked up his talking points on next year’s presidential race: Hillary Rodham Clinton is going to be the Democratic nominee and that could be the GOP’s saving grace in an otherwise uphill battle.

Conversations with Republicans gathered here for the biennial Midwest Republican Leadership Conference reflect a party unenthused or just plain uncertain about their potential White House nominee. But GOP faithful also seem quite confident and even upbeat about the prospect that the senator from New York is, as Rove put it, the “prohibitive favorite to win the nomination.”

That likelihood, they say, is good news for any hopes of keeping the White House and getting other Republicans on the ballot elected.

Asked if Clinton being the nominee would improve his party’s chances both nationally and in Indiana, Howard County (Ind.) GOP Chair Craig Dunn got excited. “Absolutely, absolutely!” he exclaimed animatedly, grinning widely. “We’ve never elected a president of the United States who started off with 45 percent unfavorable ratings!”

<>Back in the conference room, it was much the same message. “As Hillary Clinton becomes the nominee,” projected GOP pollster B.J. Martino of the Tarrance Group, pointing to charts and graphs, “Republican intensity will simultaneously spike.”

more...

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0807/5515.html

[journalist3072]

1. Good grief. Some people will recommend anything here on DU.

The way I see it: the GOP better be hoping and praying that Sen. Clinton is not the nominee.

She will be a force to be reckoned with. Unlike Sen. John Kerry, she will not allow them to get away with their lies and their swiftboating. If they are thinking that having Sen. Clinton as the nominee will be great news for them, I believe they are sadly mistaking.

[LBJDemocrat]

3. How will she not let them get away with it?

What will she do to make sure they don't get away with it that the other candidates wouldn't do? Could you clarify?

[journalist3072]

5. She will forcely respond and make sure she's on offense, not defense

She will not allow some swift-boat sort of group to attack her with a bunch of lies that are easily debunked, and then wait months to respond.

For example, when the Clintons were in the Governor's Mansion in Arkansas, and Bill Clinton was attacked with a bunch of lies, he often felt like he didn't need to respond. According to one book on Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton felt like the people of Arkansas were smart enough to know these were lies. And he felt he didn't need to dignify those lies with responses.

Hillary Clinton taught him differently. She explained that he did need to respond, or else people would just assume that the things being said about him were true.

The point is that Sen. Clinton will not allow the GOP smear machine to baselessly attack her. If they think they are in for a hayride with her as the nominee, they are mistaking.

[liberaldemocrat7]

37. The Stupid Republican party head games.

I suggest that Democratic pollsters just keep doing their work and don't listen to those Republican head gamers.

[papau]

13. I agree - for 2 years I have been hearing fear of Hillary from the right - this is a cute fake-out

politico is not know as a site that has the best interests of the left as an objective.

[Just-plain-Kathy]

28. Hillary, "a force to be reckoned with"....

I wish the Clintons used some of their forceful influence to stop the Bush regime in '00 and '04.

...In ''04 when we really needed them to step in and use their "Political Rock Star” magic neither really stepped up to the plate. Neither fully supported Kerry. Back then, Bill made television appearances talking about the evils of junk food.

Plus, in the last six+ years what did Hillary do to bring attention to -or to stop electronic voting and voting fraud. ....The ways things are looking...Hillary will be crowned Madame President in ’08.

[journalist3072]

30. Okay...allow me to debunk some of your myths

1. You claim that neither of the Clintons truly stepped up to fully support John Kerry in '04. Nothing could be furhter from the truth. For crying out loud, President Clinton went out and campaigned for John Kerry just weeks after having quadruple bypass, when he probably should have been home, still recuperating.

When President Clinton went to Philadelphia to campaign for Sen. Kerry right after his heart surgery, they mapped out a special way for him to get to the stage so he wouldn't have to climb too many stairs. He was still frail from his heart surgery. Yet, he went out and campaigned for Sen. Kerry. Even Chelsea Clinton campaigned for Kerry/Edwards. She gave her first real political speech in '04, while campaigning for Kerry/Edwards.

It's just not factually correct that the Clintons did not through their full support behind Kerry/Edwards. And this is what Howard Fineman said, when he covered the Clinton/Kerry campaign appearance in Philadelphia, shortly after Clinton's heart surgery:

"Still, in eight minutes in front of a crowd of 80,000 Democrats that stretched from City Hall to 17th Street, the former president summarized the case against George Bush and for John Kerry better than Kerry himself has ever done.."


Okay..on to your next claim, which is that Sen. Clinton has been MIA on electronic voting/voting fraud. Again, FALSE.

Sen. Clinton was the one who introduced the Count Every Vote Act.

Among other things, the Count Every Vote Act called for the following:

Provides a paper trail for every vote cast.
Designates Election Day as a national holiday.
Allows same-day registration.
Minimizes long lines at the polls.
Makes sure that impartial officials administer our elections.
Allows the attorney general to bring suit against anyone using deceptive practices (like distributing flyers with incorrect information about voter eligibility) to keep voters from voting.
Helps states invest in better voting technology.

Read more about the Count Every Vote Act at: http://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/voting/

[Just-plain-Kathy]

31. So tell me, how’s that Count Every Vote Act working out?

Did Hillary make enough noise? Are we guaranteed an honest election in ‘08?

In ‘04 I was glued to the television, like my life depended on it, -like America’s life depended on it. I especially watched C-Span to see some of the rallies. When Clinton got on the stage, the focus was on him, he never gave it to Kerry. His appearances was to help the democratic party in general, -not John Kerry.

I can’t remember any one on one interview where Clinton endorsed Kerry, or (at the time when it mattered) personally attack the Bush administration. ...That only came once Hillary jumped into the race.

In my opinion, they held back in ‘04.

[Bitwit1234]

2. What in the Sam Hill makes people like you and the republicans

think that Hillary Clinton can not win the election. The only thing that will help the republicans is MEN. MEN who are so damn macho they couldn't bring themselves to vote for a woman.

And it just shows just how damn backward this country still is. The USA is the only democratic country in the world who is afraid to elect a woman. With the horrible mess the republican men have made of this country in the last 7 years why in hell would we want a WOMAN to take over and save the men's ass.

[cui bono]

23. You've just made the point of why the Republicans want her as the Dem nominee.

And for those very reasons, she will get out all those apathetic Republicans to vote against her. And many independents as well.

Why can't people see that Edwards will pull more of the independent vote? He's not my first choice, but he's certainly a better candidate based on issues and he is the Dem most likely to win in the GE.

[cobalt1999]

4. A message to the GOP...

"Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it."

[Spiffarino]

25. You're onto something

She's a bulldog. I think she's got even more spine than Bill, and that's saying a lot. Publicans may be energized, but Democrats in general and Clinton supporters in particular are likely to be just as energized, if not more so, by Election Day. Rove may think he's looking at a flashlight and wind up face to face with a train.

I don't particularly like Hillary's politics. She's too connected to the corporatocracy and isn't that good on labor issues. Yet I believe she could do good for the middle class in general. I hope she'll come around closer to the progressive side than she has thus far, but I'm not feeling confident. I still like Edwards far better.

[Maribelle]

6. Ha ha ha

As if we can believe even one word Rove preaches, or the words of the most corrupt republicans this nation has ever endured.

I think their forked tongues reveal they are not only completely terrified of Hillary, but also terrified of the massive coattail syndrome her victory would undoubtedly cause.

Bring it freakin on, Rove. lol

[Colobo]

8. Obama will take us to victory in 08, so don't worry.

[Divine Discontent]

39. hey Obama-Spamma!

lol... you seem to inject Senator Obama into nearly every thread. You dirty rascal you! slick. haha...

By the way, when John Edwards gives his acceptance speech, he will thank Senator Obama for bringing victory, definitely! ;)

:kick:

[MidwestTransplant]

36. Who cares what that loser says. If he can't bring fear he ain't got shit.

[emulatorloo]

7. POLITICO IS A RIGHT WING SOURCE -- check mediamatters.org on them

tiring of hearing it cited continuously on DU>

[flpoljunkie]

9. You mean the "Media Matters" that Hillary Clinton took credit for creating in a recent forum?

The Politico is no different than other main stream media sources. Most of its writers came from the Washington Post.

Please address what you think is inaccurate in this article--rather than attacking the source.

[emulatorloo]

11. Politico has published many anti-dem articles that later turn out not to be true.

For that reason I am quite justified in "attacking the source."

It is a thinly veiled right wing hack site.

[flpoljunkie]

12. Oh, really? Do you have any links with that accusation?

[emulatorloo]

15. Of course!

http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/search_results?qstring=POLITICO

Take your pick from the results --

One highlight that really makes one wonder:

BREAKING: Drudge links to Politico 45 times during its two-month existence
Wednesday, March 28, 2007 8:51PM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A few more highlights:

Politico's Allen uncritically quoted McConnell claiming Democratic Congress has "not been very productive"
Wednesday, July 25, 2007 6:18PM

Politico uncritically quoted McCain aide accusing Dems of voting not to "fund the troops"
Tuesday, July 10, 2007 3:26PM

Politico's Allen gushed over Romney's PowerPoint slides, still can't find space for Giuliani ISG story
Friday, June 22, 2007 4:27PM

According to The Politico, Jefferson is "indicted" while DeLay is merely "under investigation"
Thursday, June 21, 2007 2:35PM

Politico largely ignored Giuliani-ISG story, still flogging Edwards' haircuts
Wednesday, June 20, 2007 1:55PM

Politico's Allen ignored polling data showing Libby pardon to be extremely unpopular
Monday, June 18, 2007 2:00PM

Politico reported Republican's attack on Obama, Edwards without noting his ties to GOP
Thursday, June 14, 2007 3:56PM

Politico noted DeLay's "retirement" from Congress, but not that he resigned after indictment
Friday, June 8, 2007 4:23PM

Politico article baselessly suggested "culture of corruption" is bipartisan
Thursday, June 7, 2007 4:57PM

Politico's Obama coverage marred by inaccuracies, misleading reporting, and baseless allegations
Wednesday, June 6, 2007 5:55PM

Politico article on White House-Senate immigration agreement quoted only Republicans
Friday, May 18, 2007 2:56PM

More spinonymous sourcing: Politico quoted GOP strategist "who declined to be named" attacking Obama
Monday, April 16, 2007 1:18PM

Politico's Smith: Fox News' coverage of Hillary Clinton "has been largely respectful"
Wednesday, April 11, 2007 6:51PM

Politico falsely reported Bush invited Dems to "negotiate" war spending bill
Wednesday, April 11, 2007 4:15PM

Politico's Smith: Fox can now "confirm to its viewers" that Dems are "cowards"
Tuesday, April 10, 2007 10:59AM

etc etc etc ad infinitum

--

[flpoljunkie]

17. Conspicuously absent from your list is any refutation of the contents of the article in the OP.

[emulatorloo]

19. IT DOESN'T MATTER -- Salon.com: "Who funds and runs the Politico"

The source is not to be trusted. I do not trust their motives. I do not trust it any more than I trust Rush Limbaugh or the WSJ editorial page.

The word POLITICO should raise an immediate red flag for any DU'er who knows something about their history of reporting and their funding.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/05/04/politico_funding/index.html
Glenn Greenwald
Friday May 4, 2007 13:08 EST
Who funds and runs the Politico?

--

<snip>

So the President and CEO of The Politico worked in multiple positions in the Reagan White House, and was continuously promoted until he rose to the level of Assistant to the President. And his close connection to the Reagan family and the Reagan presidency continues through today.

<snip>

The Politico's biggest boosters are Matt Drudge and George W. Bush, and it is run by a Reagan loyalist. At the very least, those facts are worth considering. Given that Editor-in-Chief John Harris has repeatedly vowed to be more "transparent" in how they conduct themselves, shouldn't we have some understanding of the role played by Ryan, and what his connection is to "Allbritton Communications," whose "deep pockets" are (partially? fully?) financing The Politico?

<snip>

UPDATE: The Politico's primary (perhaps sole) funding source is the Allbritton Company, of which Frederick Ryan is an employee. The Allbritton family's leader, Joe, was CEO of Riggs Bank when Riggs pleaded guilty to a series of illegal financial transactions with right-wing Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet and his brutal military that took place throughout the 1990s and into 2001.

<snip>

Like most billionaires with diverse business interests, Joe Allbritton had political relationships of all sorts. But the coterie around him -- and those who created the Politico, including the Politico's current CEO -- are plainly firmly entrenched in the right-wing political movement, with overlapping business and other ties to the Bushes, all kinds of international financial interactions with the Saudis and various right-wing governments, and long-standing ties of many kinds to the Reagan circle.

We hear incessantly about how this group or that group is funded by George Soros, as though that fact, by itself, proves the group's political affiliations. But those groups do not purport to be nonpartisan newspapers or sources of news. The Politico claims exactly that. Surely it is notable that those who created The Politico, who are funding it, and who are in charge of its operations, are long-time Republican operatives and those firmly implanted in right-wing circles.

<snip>

much more at link

[flpoljunkie]

20. Again, conspicuously absent from your post is any refutation of anything in the article in the OP

And, yes, it does matter.

[Spiffarino]

26. Sorry, but it doesn't

Politico is the new Fox News of online politics. Its entire infrastructure is toxic with wingnuts and, yes, it REALLY MATTERS in the way they slant (slope? cliff?) their reporting. Any thinking progressive isn't going to take Fox's, WorldNetDaily's, or Drudge's word for anything. Neither should one take the word of any source that is as slimy with Republican operatives as Politico.

Edit: Just so we're clear, I do not support HRC's bid for the presidency. I simply have zero trust for Politico's spin on any subject. I'm content to wait for confirmation from a reputable source.

[flpoljunkie]

42. The article consisted of quotes from Republicans, and taking your argument, who would know best what

Republicans think? You have to use your common sense and knowledge when reading anything from the main stream media.

Aside, from the fact that this is pretty common knowledge the Republican want Hillary as their nominee. Tony Auth illustrated it best back in January.

[creeksneakers2]

32. Gallup debunks the unelectable part

http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=28477

(snip)

Clinton's current unfavorable ratings are in reality not much different from what other past candidates have had in the year they won the election. Second, her image has been more negative than positive several other times during the past 15 years, but often has recovered and could do so again. Last, despite Clinton's high unfavorables, she remains competitive with the Republican candidates in Gallup's presidential test elections.

(snip)

But in order to put Clinton's current image in historical perspective, we reviewed Gallup poll data from previous elections and searched for the highest unfavorable ratings given to major candidates in each. The results show that several other presidential candidates were at some points during their campaigns in essentially the same position as Clinton is today, with an unfavorable rating just below 50%. This includes George W. Bush in 2004 and Bill Clinton in 1992.

Clinton's precise current ratings are 47% favorable and 48% unfavorable. The highest unfavorable ratings of the major candidates from the previous four elections are as follows:

2004 election

George W. Bush
Jan 29-Feb 1
47

John Kerry
Oct 14-16
45

2000 (including post-election vote count controversy period)

George W. Bush
Nov 13-15
43

Al Gore
Dec 2-4
52

2000 (excluding post-election vote count controversy period)

George W. Bush
Sep 15-17
41

Al Gore
Oct 24-26
42

Aug 4-5
42

1996 election

Bill Clinton
Jan 12-15
44

Bob Dole
Oct 26-29 †
47

1992 election

Bill Clinton
Apr 20-22 †
49

George H. W. Bush
Oct 7-9 †
58

Additionally, a careful review of past data shows that there is no reason to assume Hillary Clinton will maintain these high unfavorable ratings as the election draws closer. As the above data suggest, a number of candidates have had relatively high unfavorable ratings at some point in the election campaign but most managed to improve them at least somewhat by Election Day.

But there have also been numerous examples in recent years of more dramatic change -- when well-known politicians' favorable ratings have shifted from being net-negative to net-positive. Sometimes these changes have occurred in a very short time span.

The following table shows a list of politicians whose favorable ratings were net-negative and later became net-positive. This includes two active candidates for the 2007 election -- former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney (who is not that well known) and Arizona Senator John McCain, whose images have become more positive just in the past few weeks.

Politicians Whose Favorable Ratings Went From Net Negative to Net Positive

Bill Clinton
Sept. 1994
47/50
Jan. 1995
56/42

Jesse Jackson
Apr. 1995
38/55
July 1995
47/40

Al Gore
Dec. 2-4, 2000
46/52
Dec. 15-17, 2000
57/40

Hillary Clinton
Mar. 2001
44/53
June 2003
53/43

Ted Kennedy
Mar. 2004
42/47
July 2004
50/39

Hillary Clinton
Apr. 2007
45/52
May 2007
53/45

John McCain
Aug. 3-5 2007
41/42
Aug. 13-16, 2007
45/37

Mitt Romney
Aug. 3-5 2007
22/31
Aug. 13-16, 2007
33/24


What is most relevant is the fact that Hillary Clinton's own favorable ratings have shown dramatic shifts since she entered national public life in 1992. As recently as April of this year, a majority of Americans rated Clinton unfavorably, but a month later, her favorable rating had increased 8 percentage points while her unfavorable rating dropped 7 points.

(snip)

It is true that many Americans have made up their mind about Clinton and will forever more view her negatively, and there are many Americans who will continue to view her positively no matter what. But there is also a non-trivial percentage of Americans whose opinions of Clinton are not seemingly set in stone, enough that her overall rating can shift from being generally positive to generally negative as occurred earlier this year.

(snip)

While favorables are a strong predictor of possible electoral success, they are also an indirect measure. One important direct measure is the assessment of Americans' actual vote intentions. On these, Clinton -- even with her currently high unfavorable ratings -- is competitive with all of the leading Republicans.

For example, the latest Gallup general election trial heat shows 50% of registered voters preferring former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani while 46% prefer Clinton when the two are matched. In the prior poll, Clinton had the slight edge over Giuliani (50%-46%), though in neither case was the lead statistically significant.

It is notable that Giuliani stands as the most positively rated 2008 presidential candidate in terms of favorable ratings at 59% (with a 27% unfavorable rating), but still does not beat Clinton in a trial heat "if the election were held today".

Clinton also was competitive with McCain in a June trial heat matchup, and led Romney. In that June poll, Clinton did no worse against McCain and Giuliani than her chief Democratic competitors (Illinois Senator Barack Obama and former North Carolina Senator John Edwards). She did slightly worse against Romney than either Obama or Edwards, but she still led the former Massachusetts governor by a statistically significant margin in that poll.

[emulatorloo]

44. IT IS A RIGHT WING SOURCE RUN BY RIGHT WINGERS __ I DO NOT NEED TO WASTE MY TIME

REFUTING RUSH LIMBAUGH. WSJ EDITORIAL, NEWSMAX, TALON MEDIA, OR POLITICO/

NONE OF THEM ARE TO BE TRUSTED> ALL OF THEM HAVE ULTERIOR MOTIVES. THEY WANT TO DEMORALIZE AND DIVIDE DEMOCRATS WHILE PROMOTING REPUBLICAN RULE.

ALL OF THEM HAVE LIED ABOUT DEMOCRATS IN THE PAST AND THEY WILL DO SO IN THE FUTURE.,

THEY ARE NOT CREDIBLE AND THEY HAVE NO PLACE BEING USED ON DU TO SUPPORT AN ARGUMENT.

I UNDERSTAND YOUR DESIRE TO SCORE POINTS AGAINST HILLARY BUT YOU WOULD BE BETTER OFF IF YOU DID NOT USE A RIGHT WING SOURCE.

Sorry to yell -- carry on.

[struggle4progress]

22. delete dupe

[Adelante]

10. They're mixed, actually

I don't need to stick to the echo chamber, anyways. I can think for myself.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

14. The evidence shows Obama, not Clinton is the least electable candidate

Tell me, how exactly do we win if we lose PA, FL, OH, and even NY, CA to Ghouliani and flip zero red states? Clinton wins FL, PA, ties in OH, retains all the Kerry states, and flips a few states such as VA, KY, and Arkansas.

[flpoljunkie]

18. Dream on!

[draft_mario_cuomo]

21. Provide evidence to support the myth that Obama is electable than Clinton

Thanks in advance. I look forward to seeing the polling that has Obama winning PA, FL, and OH. If you cannot produce such evidence show us how Obama will cobble together 270 states without PA, FL, OH, and even NY and CA if he faces Ghoul. Or perhaps you have no evidence and Obama being more electable than HRC is another Obama faith-based initiative. ;)

[TeamJordan23]

24. Back that up with Stats! Recent Rasmussen showed Guilani beating HRC, but losing to Obama. nm

[draft_mario_cuomo]

33. Presidential elections are decided in the electoral college

Winning the popular vote 52-48 means nothing for a Democrat if he loses PA, FL, and OH. Here is some evidence. Provide us some evidence on how Obama will cobble together 270 electoral votes without flipping a single red state and losing FL, PA, and OH.

rinsd Donating Member (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 Fri Aug-24-07 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #3
13. Quinnipiac has Obama losing to Rudy in FL, OH & PA

From Aug 8th (all 3) http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x2882.xml?ReleaseID=1089

From Aug 23rd (PA only) http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1327.xml?ReleaseID=1095

RW Philosophy: Build a man a fire, he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Alert Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

draft_mario_cuomo (1000+ posts) Journal 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 Fri Aug-24-07 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. While Clinton wins FL and PA and ties in Ohio

* Florida - Clinton tops Giuliani 46 - 44 percent, flipping a 46 - 44 percent Giuliani lead July 23;
* Ohio - Clinton ties Giuliani 43 - 43 percent, compared to a 44 - 42 percent Clinton lead July 12;
* Pennsylvania - Clinton edges Giuliani 45 - 44 percent, compared to a 45 - 45 percent tie June 27.

Florida: Giuliani tops Obama 44 - 41 percent;
Ohio: Giuliani defeats Obama 42 - 39 percent;
Pennsylvania: Giuliani defeats Obama 45 - 39 percent

[Armstead]

16. Hilary can win....But it would be a 'So What?' win

Hilary is, if nothing else, a skilled politician backed by a ruthlessly effective machine. And the GOP has f'd up so badly that they have to travel a long ways uphill before they can level the playing field.

But what kind of a victory would it be if she makes it to the White House?

Certainly better than a Republican....But that is damning with faint praise.

We're still in the nominating process. Don't let Rove drive the process now, and let him help to short-circuit the real drive for change in this country.

[superkia]

27. There has to be a reason the MSM loves to put on her on the box?

Is it that the Republicans could defeat her or maybe that she would continue the same style of government that would help the corporations like the MSM continue to stuff their pockets full of cash? I refuse to believe that the MSM would cover her the way they do because she is the best candidate. The MSM doesn't care about our best interests, it cares about its own!

[guruoo]

29. That's also what they said about....

Remember?
Do you get it now?



"What they want is Dean to be the Democrat presidential nominee in 2004
because they see him as the 2004 version of Walter Mondale..."

http://caglecartoons.com/column.asp?columnID=%7B368E891B-051A-473A-97E4-E97F55311899%7D

[creeksneakers2]

34. Attempts by well frightened Republicans to keep their courage up

Nothing more. Their candidates suck and their base is ignoring them. They can't talk up their own guys so the only hope they can come up with is a Hillary/unelectable scenario. The GOP should check out the negatives their own candidates have and go back to shuddering.

There are about two stories the media does about Hillary. One is Hillary as the villain. The other is Hillary is despised.

As people see the real Hillary, they realize she is nothing like the way the media portrays her.

[lvx35]

35. Hillary Clinton is the revenge. The Dempire Strikes Back.

She's supposed to be unliked by the right, and we are going shove her and probably Obama into the noses of the GOP. They acted liek cartoonish assholes and now cartoonish revenge will be unleashed upon them all. :)

[proud_Kucitizen]

38. I think the point is more

If Hillary is the candidate, the GOP can live with her presidency more than any of the other candidates. She will just continue pretty much down the same path we are going right now and everything will still be peachy keen for the wealthy, not so much for the middle class or poor but OH WELL.

This is one female who will have trouble pulling that lever on election day if she is the dem candidate just to prove it's not only men especially Republican men who don't like her. My husband whose a libertarian yet loves Bill Clinton finds it hard to believe he may vote for the woman before I would. Not that I wouldn't vote for a woman if she were worthy but I am not fond of the DLC for which she is a big player.

I can live with any of the candidates but her.

[Divine Discontent]

40. I hope we do not choose

her. I will be the least happy if she's our candidate out of the levels of excitement I'll have for each candidate after they are announced as the nominee. But, I do believe, she will bring out the masses against her, AND, I've said in months past, I have SEVERAL friends and relatives already telling me they will vote for Rudy over Hillary.

[Perry Logan]

41. Hope springs eternal in the winger mind.

The poor devils.

[MethuenProgressive]

43. The GOP is counting on DEMOCRATIC HillHaters

And they're are many of them who hate her because they want to hang with the cool kids on DU.