I didn't used to like the idea of Hillary for President...

[OrlandoGator]

...but the more I think about it, absolutely nothing...NOTHING...would better serve to continually irritate the right wing. It would be such sweet revenge to know that the morans have to spend at least four years with the taste of bile in their mouths over it.

I don't agree with Hillary on a lot of issues, but I am willing to sacrifice that in order to make the Bushbots feel a tenth of what I've had to deal with since 2000.

[AllyCat]

1. Revenge is sweet, but

Hilary will never get elected. They hate her enough to make sure it won't happen. And we can do better for progressive causes. Now THAT would put some bile in their mouths, huh?

[WA98296]

3. That's so right, HRC sides too often with Corporate backers

Whichs is truly at the heart of what the hell is wrong with our country...It's not abortion, it's not guns or gays, its how this system has become all about benefitting corporations and no longer about PEOPLE FIRST.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

6. Not only do they hate her enough, but we don't like her enough.

You're fully energizing one side, while our own side doesn't really care all that much about her. I think it's a surefire way to lose.

[Sterling]

31. I have no interest in seeing her elected.

I wont bother going to the polls if that is the best we have to choose from.

[Perky]

13. Here we go again.....

Why is it that progressives would rather fight tooth and nail for a liberal candidate who has no chance of winning (McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis) then a Moderate who had a better than decent shot.

Do you honestly believe that you can get enough new voters to the polls who have never voted before to replace the moderates you piss off, scare away and push to the GOP?

They have more money then us. THey do better ad campaigns then us. They have always won on the "trust issue". THey are successful continually at scaring the moderate voters about the liberalism of the Democratic candidate.

I understand the argument on the basis of principle and keeping the election out of the hands of the corporate elites, But the approach is simply not pragmatics and it's the progressive's infatuation with 1960s liberalism which poses the greatest risk keeping the Neo-con Cabal in power not a party that appeals to the middle.

I swear some of you would rather let these idiots stay in power than work for electing a democrat who could govern effectively.


If you truly want liberal governance, work for more Liberal members of COngress. The presidency is supposed to represent the entire country.

[drummo]

15. It's all true but Hillary is not even a moderate. She is nothing but

an opportunist. She goes left if that serves her political interest and then she goes right if that serves her political interests.

[Perky]

17. A populist?

I am no huge Fan of Hillary either. I just want some one with a coherant message that can win and election and govern with a mandate.

[drummo]

24. Not populist. Opportunist.

[AllyCat]

20. Perky, if we pick a moderate, it has to be someone other than HC

The Republicans HATE her. Just hate her. They hated Bill. They hate her too. They will come out en masse to vote against her. Too many libs will not vote for her because she isn't liberal enough. Then the same Repubs we want on our side will elect more Repukes to Congress to counter her.

If we're going to run a DLCer or some moderate who wants to be Repub. lite...then we need to pick someone other than Hilary.

It's possible to have someone who is a moderate and also shares progressive views...if they are not a rubber stamp for the corporatocracy. It would be great to have someone who is fiscally conservative and socially liberal. I don't see that with Hilary. She likes her corporations just fine, thank you very much.

You're right about more liberal members of Congress though. They would carry much more weight in the grand scheme of things.

[Perky]

21. I completely agree

ANd I honestly hope she does not run.

[AllyCat]

22. But the media SAYS she will.

so it must be true. Gag....

What is interesting to me is that everytime someone here or elsewhere talks about Hilary running, they always say "Gee, she's just great". When I press them to explain what is so great ("sell her to me", I say), they are unable to do it. To a one, I've yet to get an explanation from any of them why they support her.

It's usually just one sentence: "Well, I think she's the only Dem that can win". I always say, she can win the primary, but not the GE. We need a Dem that can win the GE or this is all pointless.

[Perky]

23. Yep its all hype.

Here is the scary thought:

McCain-Santorum.

Its 'the logival choice for McCain to assuage the RIght wing og theparty. ANd Moderates do not typically care about VP nominees.

ELectorarlly this is a pretty deadly combination.

[shraby]

2. I think she'd be a loser for us because

there is so much animosity toward her from the Republicans, and even some Democrats.

[dogfacedboy]

4. What do you think of

Clinton/Dean or Clinton/Gore?

[Clark2008]

7. I think either would dive-bomb badly in even the more

purplish of the red states.

We have to flip at least two (and preferably more) to beat Diebold - oh - and the Republican.

[drummo]

12. Clinton/Gore???? Hillary is a joke compared to Gore. And he

would never be the second banana in a Clinton administration again.
He did that once and how did it serve him?

[dogfacedboy]

16. I know. I was just throwing out a couple of combos.

I actually wanted Gore for Pres. instead of B Clinton.

[Perky]

19. Hillary would pick one of three folks as of today

Bill Richardson because he is hispanic and has gravitas and a great Resume

Mark Warner to put VIrginia in play

Evan Bayh to put INdia in play and appeal to Moderates. Biden on the same baises but two senators together is risky and perhaps foolish.

Sam Nunn or Bob Graham would make electoral sense,

But the wild card choice would be Harold Ford (Obama is to green and it would look like pandering)

[Ilsa]

5. I understand the sentiment. That would be a hoot.

I think the nation is better served not by revenge, but by having a good liberal Dem president (man or woman) who will do such a great job, that the evil right wingers will have to concede that they were wrong.

Still, it is fun to imagine getting back at them this way. :evilgrin:

I love Hillary, but I think I have Clinton fatigue, and ITA: I don't agree with her on everything either and I sometimes think she too pro-war.

[drummo]

14. A liberal cannot be elected in the US. Look at the map.

[Armstead]

8. Do you want progress or revenge?

Personally, I'd rather see a Wellstone type who could get us beyond the politics of animosity and instead actually make some progress on solving the nation's problems.

[Loonman]

9. I don't want to irritate the right wing

I want to win.

[elehhhhna]

10. Her big $$$ comes from SAUDIBANK (citibank). NO DICE.

[drummo]

11. Actually putting Gore in the White House would irritate them

just as much.

[NNN0LHI]

18. I still don't like the idea but she will grow on me like her old man did nt

[drummo]

25. Hillary is not Bill. They are both political hacks but Hillary has

an irritating speaking style. She is very didactic.

[KoKo]

26. I'm not willing to "sacrifice" all to Hillary after what "I've" been

through." But..to "each his own or her own."

[Snotcicles]

27. Hillary had enough gut to say, VAST RIGHTWING CONSPIRACY.

Oh about six or seven years ago.

[sproutster]

28. ...will she really change anything?

[helderheid]

29. I'm not for corporate candidates but to answer your question, did her

husband change things? Not that they are one and the same (as I'd hoped they wouldn't be).

[Sterling]

30. The country is too important to let it be ruined

bay anyone who could not manage to find the brains and stomach to oppose Bush before he created Iraqnam. especially just to piss ofyour RW freinds. That is the problem with amny Dems, they think this is some sort of fucking game.