HILLARY IS NOT A DINO!

[justy329]

I am sick to my stomach of this board being turned into a Hillary bashing site. I expect stuff like this from FR or Hannity.
But, thanks to some of you, in order to get my fix of what the silly Dem-bashers say about various issues including the Clintons I DON'T HAVE TO LEAVE THE DEMOCRATICUNDERGROUND.COM
Thanks for the conveience.

But, seriously she is a liberal-populist. http://www.issues2000.org/Senate/Hillary_Clinton.htm
Hillary has spent her whole life fighting for the issues that we care about: the environment, healthcare, education, the right to choose, etc. The vicious RW smears her by saying stuff like she is anti-family and anti-woman. The site for the Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee gets its money by saying, STOP HILLARY.

Hillary will be known as our most active and respected 1st lady since Elanor Roosevelt. This Hillary dissing is without merit and shows our weakness as a party. We cannot abandon support for a candidate just because of ONE, TWO, or THREE issues that we disagree with them on!!

Who do you prefer? Rummys and Condoleezas and Cheneys and Ashcrofts running this nation. Or, sensible Democrats in positions of power like Robert Reich, Donna Shalala, Gephardt (Kerry would have given him labor or something, Clark (I could have seen him as defense secretary), etc.

Let's get Democrats elected. Let's defeat Bush. Let us by united.

[elshiva]

1. Hillary is a great Democrat,

I think she was one of the best first ladies up there with Eleanor Roosevelt and Jackie Kennedy. I think liberal populist is dead on.
Anyone want to start a DU Hillary Clinton group.
(I also have a crush on Hillary!)

[Township75]

2. Let's get real Dems elected...

maybe like Boxer, seeing how she voted against the war, hasnt recently started a racist war against immigrants, voted against rice, and stood-up for us by contesting the election when other members of the senate didn't give a shit....she also has been in the senate longer.

[justy329]

29. Hillary was one of only a handful of senators that actually

stood up to talk about voting reform during the debate.

[Township75]

55. Plenty of people "talked" about voter reform...what has she done?

If only thing she has done is talk, then why is she a better candidate than the other talkers...why is she better than Boxer who actually did something. I bet if Boxer hadn't contested the election, Clinton would have never bothered to speak on the matter.

[Gyre]

3. She might be "the chosen one" for you

but to call those of us who have differing opinions, "show the weakness of the party", is lame. The "party" has done that all by itself, despite our best efforts to reform it.

You are also somewhat disingenuous when you suggest that our only choice is either Rummy et nauseum, or the DLC group you want in power that you refer to as "sensible Democrats" (weak meme alert!) There's a lot of philosophical room between the democratic appeasers who've managed to hold onto their jobs by "getting along" and the neo-facists that are in control now.

Gyre

[liberalhistorian]

4. One of the main reasons that

the Republicans and the right have succeeded as well as they have is that they have been UNITED, no matter what. There's very little infighting and backbiting and division within the party. They were united in their goals and determined to achieve them, and that solid unification was what helped them to the position they have today.

The Dems/progressives, OTOH, can't get past constant infighting and backbiting and divisions caused by such infighting and backbiting. There's no real unity because every group insists that another group and every single candidate must agree with EVERY SINGLE POSITION before they'll get any support. This is not only absolutely ridiculous, it's totally unrealistic. We simply are not united and, what's worse, we don't even see that we aren't united and we don't see the importance of being united, and the unrealistic lunacy of demanding that candidates support every single position and that if they're off by even one issue, they're toast. That just doesn't work, it never has and it never will. We need to become united like the right.

[ClarkUSA]

20. AMEN. AMEN. AMEN. But there are none so blind as those...

who cannot see.

[liberalhistorian]

28. Ain't that

the truth!

[justy329]

30. EXCELLENT REPLY

The Republicans disagree on so many issues. Look at Arnold and Pataki and Giuliani. They disagree on virtually every social issue with the national GOP, but they still are welcome within the party.

Ultra-Liberals, GET REAL, unless you unite with the more moderate wing of our party YOU WILL GET REPUBLICANS RUNNING OUR NATION FOR THE NEXT FIFTY YEARS.

[Hoping4Change]

80. Hmm. Kerry is a moderate why wasn't he being sworn in as Prez?

[Name removed]

88. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[justy329]

104. I am not a DLC intern.

You try to spread outlandish rumors because you want to take away from my thoughtful and truthful responses.

[Brian_Expat]

39. Utter silliness. The Republicans are CONSTANTLY infighting.

Witness the primary challenge to Arlen Specter, the ads run against Olympia Snowe in Maine, the attacks by the AFA against Ken Mehlman and his #2, etc.

This fake insistence on "unity" behind untrustworthy candidates didn't win us the 2000, 2002 or 2004 elections and it won't win 2006 or 2008 either. Regular people are starting to wake up to that fact. . . the question is whether the DNC leadership will as well.

[liveoaktx]

60. Spot on... In a nutshell, that's my realization this year

For the sake of *unity* I got behind Kerry even though I had qualms about him as a candidate... but because he was a Dem. I only admired and respected the ones that voted AGAINST the Iraq War... didn't include Kerry. One reason I believe he came out as somewhat untrustworthy was because he didn't come right out and put that vote to rest one way or the other (ie, a lot of idiots voted for Bush for no other reason that they trusted him BECAUSE he was so clearly standing up for what he believed in -even if dangerous). Not having a firm stand creates an undercurrent of distrust that is hard to shake.

And yeah, I think there's plenty of unrest and disagreements with the Republicans. The difference is they had and have strong leaders and a strong media presence with determined spokesmen to pretend it's otherwise.

[CWebster]

66. It isn't that difficult

Why should we be on the same side with those who would like to not include us while walking in lock-step with the other side?

[Guaranteed]

67. You're contradicting yourself.

What you're saying doesn't make any sense.

We have to be united (and that's how the neo-cons have won)- but we don't have to agree on everything?

[fujiyama]

86. I agree that the left is not united

but that unity must mean something.

Usually what happens is when it's time to vote on some major policy, a quarter of the Dems end up crossing over and vote for the republican and Bush agenda.

The pukes OTOH can actually maintain a party line loyalty, usually in support of the agenda.

That's why I'm tired of people saying "republicans have moderates". No they don't. All their "moderates" end up voting for the puke agenda. They make noise once in a while, but they'll still vote party line.

Dems need to OPPOSE the Bush agenda. Why do we have blue state senators crossing over to back the Bush agenda like on the budget? It makes no sense.

[newsguyatl]

5. sorry, but hillary is a TOTAL dino

a total moderate, just like her husband, but without the charisma.

[Celeborn Skywalker]

13. Moderate does not equal DINO. n/t

[newsguyatl]

14. when you're a supposed democrat, it does.

[Celeborn Skywalker]

15. I don't agree

I think Dean is a moderate democrat but nobody calls him a DINO. I think of DINO as more of a spineless, pro corporate Democrat like Lieberman, Bayh, etc.

[ClarkUSA]

21. Bingo. Bingo. Bingo.

[newsguyatl]

26. see post 19

[inslee08]

6. Culture issues

The thing is, Hillary is further to the right on some cultural issues than the average Dem, or at least Bill is; I remember hearing that Bill said something along the lines of "if Kerry reminded people of his 'opposition' to gay marriage, he would score well with rural voters." Of course, that is a true statement, but it would defeat the purpose of being a liberal.

Whether or not that translates into Hillary's ideology, I couldn't tell you for sure.

[Pastiche423]

7. YES SHE IS A DINO!

[LostInAnomie]

8. She is a lightening rod though.

She has become a symbol (unjustly) for liberalism despite her record.

It is sad to say it but this country probably isn't ready for a strong, smart, woman. She's 50 years ahead of her time.

[jonnyblitz]

9. She is a pro-war, faith based intiative supporting DINO!!! n/t

[Seabiscuit]

18. Ditto. Look at her voting record. She's a DINO.

[Rowdyboy]

10. Rethugs win...Why? Because they don't cannibalize their moderates

Republicans use their moderates to keep power; Democrats try to run theirs off.

[tishaLA]

11. What'd they do to Specter? Jeffords?

And they'd do it to McCain, too, if he weren't so popular with the press corps.

I think what the republicans don't do is cannibalize their extremists. That's the real lesson we have to learn.

[Rowdyboy]

17. Specter still votes party line to keep Frist in office...

Yeah, Jeffords told them to f**k themselves so he's an exception, but he's the only one. Chafee, Collins, Snow, Specter, and McCain are all welcome in the Rethug tent.

[justy329]

34. As is

Arnold, Pataki, Hagel, Giuliani, Bloomberg, and more.

When our most conservative senator (Zell) voiced oppisiton to our nominee, he went and gave the speech at their convention.
When their most liberal senator (Linc Chafee) voiced oppistion to their nominee, he did so very quietly.

It shows that EVERYONE in the Republican party is welcome and more loyal.

[flpoljunkie]

50. Because for ALL of them, the bottom line is money and power.

[Guaranteed]

68. No, they win because they take STRONG STANDS, and the

moderates in their party are a minority, not a majority. That gives them a STRONG MESSAGE.

[leesa]

12. OK. She's a warmonger, just like Bush.

[idlisambar]

16. Liberal, OK. Populist?

That's a little bit of a stretch.

[Tinoire]

19. Lol. It's a lot more than 2 or 3 issues.

We're talking about the same Hillary Clinton right? The one who has now TWICE failed to stand up for our votes? The Hillary who voted for both the Patriot Act & giving that PNAC cabal unlimited power in invading Iraq? The same one in love with the Defense of Marriage Act? The same Hillary Clinton who supported Bush's revamping of the nation's welfare laws and voted with conservatives FOR making it more difficult for ordinary people to declare personal bankruptcy because she was taking contributions from MBNA? The Hillary Clinton who said NOTHING about the GOP screwing with the African-Americans' votes? The same one who says not a peep about the oppression of the Palestinians and signed the "we stand behind and love Sharon" letter. The same one who just came out with that swill about Bush-like "faith-based initiatives" now that the DLC & PPI have signed Ralph Reed's right hand PNAC-signing, Christian Coalition neo-con Mashall Wittman on as a high-level spokesman/advisor? THAT Hillary Clinton right?

For sentimental reasons & because she's a bright woman, she's more acceptable to me than someone like Landrieu but let's not kid ourselves about Hillary.

Hillary's a feisty lady sho speaks extremely well but in no way do her policies represent me and I see no reason for anyone to shut up about their distaste for her as a Democratic politican. The whole point of this exercise is to express ourselves and find politicians who represent us- now why on earth would you want to shut people up?

You either represent the people or you don't. If more people felt Hillary represented them, there wouldn't be so much bashing- obviously she doesn't. That's something you're going to have to live with in this pseudo democratic Republic where, despite the fascist Patriot Act that Hillary voted for, people are still allowed to speak their mind.

By the way, this is not a DNC site. This is a discussion board where people are free to express substantiated opinions about party officials. We can't very well expect the party to hear us and address our concerns if we shut up can we?

Barbara Boxer thanked people for speaking up like this and giving her the support to do what she did. People should never shut up lest someone get confused and think we're ok with all these Centrists who value corporations over people.

It's very funny to constantly see these impassioned cries for everyone to rally around & be united but always around Centrists :shrug: And always around Moderates who are as disliked by the Left as they are by the Right & leave so many people cold. That's not a winning strategy imo.

[PassingFair]

23. Yea, what...

she said....

Well done, Tinoire!

[Me.]

24. Hilary Is My Senator

but I haven't been happy with her for a while now for the very reasons you stated. I've written, but don't see her changing her positions. She has it in her to go the BB route, if she'd just stop playing politics. And while I'd love to see a female prez, I think she is too polarizing to get in, though I have heard that she's been building a hugely strong network, very quietly, mostly women's groups.

[justy329]

31. You are wrong.

Hillary did stand up with Boxer to speak about voting fraud. Although, like 99% of the senate, she did not actually vote for the resolution to reject Ohio's electoral votes.

As a first termer who is the #1 target of the national GOP, she cannot be an outspoken liberal critic like Boxer has been. Boxer has been in the senate longer and won by a much wider margin. As someone very unlikely to ever run for president, she can say and do what she wants. Californians love Boxer. In the coming years, as NY'ers become more familar with their senator and when she no longer has presidential ambitions, she will be more outspoken.

[liveoaktx]

32. We should have people who don't give a hang about the presidency

AND are outspoken. Otherwise, if these people, including Hillary, speak up about why something is the wrong thing to vote for BUT THEN THEY DO, it's only hot air.

Yes, she's a DINO and if she runs for President, she will NOT get my vote.

[justy329]

37. OK fine.

So when Jeb or Condi or Gingrich or Frist is president and people like Rummy and Alberto and Ashcroft are in the cabinet and justices like Scalia and Thomas are on the supreme court, I will know to blame liveoaktx and other extreme libs like yourself.

[liveoaktx]

44. Extreme libs? I'll accept that... I'm proud to be someone who stands up

for certain beliefs. What you're suggesting is that Democratic principles be sacrificed just to get someone with the *title* of Democrat in, even if he or she is only a paler version of a war-mongering Republican.

I expected better of Hillary...

[Brian_Expat]

51. "Extreme libs" -- heh

And then people wonder why people cannot stand Hillary's shifting sands and her loud, shrill, uncompromising supporters -- they all sound like Rush Limbaugh when they drop their guard and let what they really think spill out.

[wyldwolf]

58. "...It's very funny to constantly see these impassioned cries ..."

It's very funny to constantly see these impassioned cries for everyone to rally around & be united but always around Centrists :shrug: And always around Moderates who are as disliked by the Left as they are by the Right & leave so many people cold. That's not a winning strategy imo.

When someone from the far left wing of the party reaches the level that moderates have, I'll rally around that person.

[CWebster]

72. The rallying cry was "anybody but Bush"

What does that say about candidate, Kerry?

As long as the corporate wing dictates the power structure of all politics, Right and Left, there will be no other doors open.

[wyldwolf]

74. So?

Is there any Democrat you WOULDN'T vote for over Bush?

Then, it's anybody but Bush.

As long as the corporate wing dictates the power structure of all politics, Right and Left, there will be no other doors open.

So the ideology of the left and the will of the voting left isn't enough?

[CWebster]

103. So? So what?

A vote against Bush is an endorsement of Kerry? I don't think so.

When the New Democrats put more focus into demonizing and marginalizing true Left, while buddying up with the Right, well hey, why worry about Republicans?

[wyldwolf]

106. never said that

When the New Democrats put more focus into demonizing and marginalizing true Left

When and who?

[AntiCoup2K4]

89. And what "level" is that?

When the DLC defines what the "level" is, then no Liberal will ever reach it. But of course, you knew that already ;)

[wyldwolf]

95. do you really have to ask that question?

ok, answer:

When someone from the far left wing of the party reaches a level to where they have a legitimate chance of becoming president or even the governor or Senator from my state.

The voters decide that, not the DLC.

But it's easier for you to hide behind you DLC red herring.

But of course, you knew that already ;)

[bread_and_roses]

59. oh, well said!

I, along with other grass-roots activists worked hard to get Hillary votes here in Republican upstate NY...and for what? She sells out working people, minorities, peace, the Constitution. Her office has never responded to a single email or phone call I've made.

I'm Working Families Party and part of my fury at the Democratic Party is that that when time for Hillary to run again she'll come to us for endorsement and grass-roots support, like Democrats do every four years to all the Progressives, the Unions, the minorities - and we'll be expected to support her because the alternative is so much worse. This time, I don't think I'll buy in. In my low moments, I feel like I do about health care...bandaids only prolong the agony. Let the rotten system come crashing down on us, maybe then people will wake up.

Then, the election rolls around, and between a rock and a hard place...again...

[sunnystarr]

69. While I've always personally liked Hillary, I have to agree.

It's hard to even call her centrist. There has to be another word for a politician who uses a Republican barometer when casting votes. I'm afraid that word won't be complimentary. While I know that those who represent us in Congress have to compromise, there is a line they shouldn't cross - like the Patriot Act.

The vote that gave Bush the power to invade Iraq was a cowardly one. Maybe I'm way off base on this since I'm not as knowledgeable as many here are. As I remember our Constitution states that it's Congress who declares war. It appeared to me that Congress didn't have any courage and passed the buck to Bush. In spite of all the rationale, coming most vocally from Kerry, that it was done to give Bush clout when dealing with the UN, to me it was extraordinarily incompetent. If anyone in Congress hadn't heard of PNAC then they should have gone home for their education. So assuming they knew, to give Bush that power was plainly shirking their duty to the American people.

The reason we're so busy jumping on so many Dem leaders is that so few of them have stood up and vocalized not only what we believe and stand for, it's also because so few of them have any backbone and courage to call a spade a spade and expose the neocon agenda for what it is.

So when Boxer, the Black Coalition, and Kerry stand up for us as we've seen over this past few weeks, we all cheer for the good guys, much like in a movie when the good guy fights back. We know injustice when we see it and cheer those who champion the truth.

Our leaders in Washington have to be put on notice that this time in our history calls for a firm stand of our democratic principles. Those who continue to try marginalize these principles will be swallowed up and fall by the wayside of voter retribution. This includes those like Biden, who talk the talk and don't walk the walk.

[liveoaktx]

71. Here's one example of why Biden is a fake

Biden on Gonzales

Why bring up Alberto *Torture Pimp*'s pathetic incompetent record if you plan to vote him in anyway? Biden does no service to the public. And it was obvious from the Condi hearings that Biden, although paying lip service to Condi's lack of fitness for the job, enjoyed his status on the committee enough to, as you said, talk but not walk.

[CWebster]

70. "... lady who speaks extremely well "

Not to nitpick, Tin, but she doesn't speak well at all. She is a horrible public speaker since she hasn't mastered the "ah" impulse. That's public speaking 101 and you would think someone would advise her about her tendency. It drives me nuts.

[Elidor]

94. Thank you!

Well said. All this "Oh, I can't believe you savages would pick on HILLARY!" crap really gets old. She's a DINO and she will never be president. Next candidate, please.

[muse]

22. Count me in as one who is sick to death of the Hillary bashing also.

[elshiva]

25. Amen.

Just say no to Hillary Bashing.
Oh and DEAN FOR CHAIR 2005, Representing MD!

[Kimber Scott]

27. I love Hillary. nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

33. I Love Bill And Hillary...

Contributed to their campaigns, bought their books, display prominently an autographed picture of Bill in my home but I don't think HRC can win a national election...

That's all...

[Brian_Expat]

35. Hillary re-invented herself as a Christian fundamentalist. . .

. . . supported the anti-gay constitutional Amendments in various states, endorsed and supported DOMA, voted to confirm Condoleeza Rice, voted for the Iraq War, supports the implementation of PATRIOT Act II and most recently endorsed George W. Bush's "faith based funding" initiative.

She might as well go over to the Republicans while they're still in charge.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

36. Hillary Wasn't In Congress For The DOMA Vote...

To call HRC anti-gay is silly....

[Brian_Expat]

38. Hillary and Bill Clinton are both anti-gay

Hillary endorsed DOMA in debates for her Senate race, and also backed Bill's decision to sign it.

Both encouraged John Kerry to support the state anti-gay constitutional amendments in 2004, and Hillary campaigned tirelessly against Howard Dean due to his support of civil unions in Vermont.

Hillary also supports "faith based funding" which would give government money to anti-gay organizations.

If Hillary's the Democratic candidate in 2008, the third party candidates are going to get lots of gay money and support. I don't think people realize just how pissed off the gay community was over how Democrats abandoned us to the wolves in 2004.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

45. If Bill And Hill ary Are Anti-Gay...

God help us from the true homophobes...



There is a big difference between one's positions on glbt issues and what's politically achievable...


Pugs are using gay rights as the new wedge issue... Some folks are trying to coming up with a viable strategy to counter it....

[Brian_Expat]

48. This sort of argument reminds me of Log Cabin Republicans

"At least Bush is not as bad as Fred Phelps."

[DemocratSinceBirth]

54. I Don't Know How We Get From HRC To Fred Phelps

and I doubt Ms. Clinton's glbt constituents know either...

[Brian_Expat]

61. Your arguments are identical to Log Cabin Republicans

They insist that Bush isn't so bad because there are people who are worse.

You're making the same argument with Hillary.

In both circumstances, neither politician has anything to be proud about on gay issues.

[GreenArrow]

40. she's not even a DINO

She's a CORPRO.

[Brian_Expat]

41. lol

That's awesome and SO friggin' true.

I mean, I think I lost my lunch when I read her speech in Boston a couple days ago where she invoked God eight times and talked about how she was a born again Christian who "regularly prays for strength" and sees no problem with religion in government and political debate. What bullshit. Even the STUPIDEST right-wing troll wouldn't buy that argument, and it demonstrates a complete and utter contempt for the intelligence of all of us.

Of course, her defenders will rush in to blast one as a sexist or right-wing extremist (or left-wing extremist) for simply noting the obvious. Their arguments these days sound identical to the Log Cabin Republicans' arguments about how pro-gay Bush is "in private". . .

[GreenArrow]

47. you hit on something

that has been pissing me off increasingly lately -- the absolute and utter contempt for people's intelligence. That faith-based inititve BS is so transparent. Can't any of these people just say what they mean?

[Brian_Expat]

49. Saying what you mean is bad!

You cannot win elections by campaigning honestly, didn't you know?

No, we've got to convince the red staters that Hillary is really a fundamentalist Christian like they are, and convince everyone else that she's a liberal who favors the separation of church and state! :eyes:

[zulchzulu]

42. Dino or not, she would guarantee a Democratic loss in 08 if she ran

She's too divisive within the Democratic party as well as would be a wet dream for the Repugs to run against. Imagine them mocking Bill as possible First Husband, Gazzoinks!

I like her in some respects, but she is all over the map with her votes.

[justy329]

43. She is only divisive in here for crying out loud!!

She is well-respected by virtually all Democrats as a woman who has the smarts, toughness, and ability to be a great president.

You are missing the bigger point. Isn't a terrible fault that ONLY WHITE MEN have been president? In a country filled with women and blacks and Jews and muslims and others, ONLY WHITE MEN have held the presidency and the vice presidency.

[liveoaktx]

46. That's the same type argument Bushies are using with Gonzales

"You're RACIST if you're not for Alberto Torture Pimp" (or Condi, for that matter

Your version: "You're SEXIST if you don't want to see a woman in office to replace the WHITE MEN"

Baloney! I don't have a problem with having a woman in office. But I'd far rather see someone principled like Barbara Boxer run for president than Hillary.

[justy329]

53. You misread my post.

I didn't say you are sexist if you oppose Hillary.

I said think of what having a woman in the White House will do to change the way women are looked at in this country.

In Boxer's first term, she was not outspoken at all! She just went along with the national Democratic Party. She Voted YES on restricting violent videos to minors (she would have been flamed for being a censor), Voted NO on expanding trade to the third world, Voted NO on banning more types of Congressional gifts (would have been flamed as a typical politician brought by big corporations)...
This is the one that will get you angry: Voted YES on deploying National Missile Defense ASAP.
She favors more spending on armed forces and she voted for the patriot Act.

She waited until she finished two terms before she turned into the outspoken lady she is today.

[liveoaktx]

57. Extrapolation-heard of it? Your argument is specious because you

are saying that a WOMAN should run to take out some of the WHITE MEN in office. You could just as easily substitute "LATINO", "BLACK" "CHINESE" etc. That type of argument says nothing about whether a particular person of whatever race or sex is actually qualified.

Maybe Hillary should take some lessons from Barbara B. Better late then never.

[Hoping4Change]

83. Exactly the reason why she a seasoned Senator should run for

President in 08 not HRC.

[justy329]

90. stop dreaming....

Boxer has no presidential ambitions.

[Hoping4Change]

98. Perhaps but she has set the bar high. Too high for HRC.

[Brian_Expat]

52. And people who support Hillary are HOMOPHOBES and RACISTS!

Because no lesbian or gay president has ever been president so supporting Hillary who is white and straight is racist and homophobic!

Or so goes the O'Reilly-style logic being employed in the message I'm responding to. :eyes:

[zulchzulu]

64. Polls show her as divisive and negatively nationally

OK, I'll do some homework for you.

Here's some polling info on her that I'm sure is about the same:

June 7— Nearly 2½ years after her husband left the White House, Sen. Hillary Clinton is poorly positioned to take it back: Most Americans don't want her ever to run for president, and her presence on the national stage is a deeply polarizing one.

Sampling, data collection and tabulation for this poll were done by TNS Intersearch.

While 44 percent of Americans express a favorable opinion of Mrs. Clinton, 48 percent view her unfavorably — an unusually high negative rating, and an unusually strong one. More than twice as many people view her "strongly" negatively as strongly positively. And she's no more popular among women than among men.

Mrs. Clinton's popularity largely is limited to Democrats, and is countered, and exceeded in intensity, by her unpopularity among Republicans. Sixty percent of all Republicans, and 71 percent of conservative Republicans, view her strongly unfavorably.

By contrast, just 32 percent of all Democrats, and 42 percent of liberal Democrats, view her strongly favorably. (Moreover, conservative Republicans outnumber liberal Democrats by 2-1.)

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/2020/hillary030607_poll.html

Two main points would come from a Hillary nomination.

First, she would get lukewarm support from Democrats if she could get past the primaries...which I know she wouldn't in the first place. She would have to change a lot in the next few years out of her "moderate" to slightly Bush-appeasing record to fire up anything more than tepid support.

Secondly, if the miracle occurred, the seas parted and the sky glistened wide open and she actually got the nomination, her candidacy would be the biggest mobilizer for Repugs and others to vote against her.

She could get a cabinet position in the 2009 Democratic cabinet, but she ain't going to be playin' First Violin. I like her and have seen her speak and she is great, but I fear it would be too much of a risk to have her as the Democratic nominee in 2008.

[justy329]

76. You are wrong.

It is LAUGHABLE TO CALL HER A BUSH-APPEASER. She did not vote for the war, she voted for authorization to go to war AS A LAST RESORT IN ORDER TO CONVINCE SADDAM TO LET THE WEAPONS INSPECTORS IN. Don't let the RW tell you that the senators whom voted for the war resolution actually voted for the war itself. They were misled by the president who said he only issued the resolution in order to show Saddam that he was serious about him listening to the UN.

Also, Hillary did not know that they would wage such an incompetent war filled with torture and high US casualities. She probably thought that they would use the Powell doctrine and wait for wide support of the American people and use a big, big build-up to overwhelm the enemy. She didn't realize that Bush would listen to the neocons who rushed us into a war without preparing for the aftermath of the invasion.

I know many, many rank-and-file Dems (many of whom are liberal) who initially supported the war. They felt that because Saddam was not listening to the UN, he needed to be stopped. Many thought the invasion would go well as it did under Bush I because Bush I planned for the war and knew where to draw the line. In hindsight, knowing that the Bush Administration would screw up the war and torture prisoners in the process, we now would not have supported the war.

Why do you think Lieberman led in the polls very early on? It was because, at first, there was wide support for the war as it appeared to be quick and effective. And, Democrats were not yet opposed to his foreign policy. It was only after it became obvious how badly Bush and company handled the war that Lieberman's candidacy based on support for Bush's foreign policy and oppistion to his domestic and fiscal policy sunk in the polls.

[zulchzulu]

77. Whatever...you refuse to see how unpopular she is, even with Democrats

I don't give a rat's ass about Lieberman. I don't even think he led in the polls early on. Yes, he had name recognition, but I don't think it was "support". Find me a link to prove your point.

Like I said, Hillary is a good politician...I've seen her speak. I don't like her votes or how she has been trying to play a right-leaning moderate on issues like the Patriot Act II, voting for Condi, etc.

That said, she is absolutely divisive within the Democratic party and would be the ultimate unifier for Repugs and others...

If it wasn't for Bill, she would be a yawner as a Senator and probably would have never gotten elected. She is additionally linked with Bill, which is not necessarily a good thing politically.

But hey, if you want to put your head in the clouds and do whatever you want to get Hillary nominated, go for it.

I just wouldn't be convinced that she is the best choice.

[justy329]

78. She would have been elected.

She ran in NY, THE definition of a Blue State.
Your premise that she would not have been elected is therefore wrong.
Your notion that a lady only got elected because of her husband's stature is insulting to working women everywhere.

[zulchzulu]

81. If Hillary didn't have "Clinton" as a last name, she would not have been..

Granted, it's speculative. But if you think Hillary would have been elected in NY as a senator after actually not having had the name recognition and had been known as a person who moved there from Illinois, you are a bit naive.

Whatever. And please, lay off on the pathetic "working women" card crap. That's making you out to be a cliche.

[robbedvoter]

82. Not sure about that. Name recognition helped (and hindered)

But she ran a brilliant canpaign - mostly by taking it directly to the voters, under the media radar. She earned her victory in NY. That coming from someone who won't be voting for her anymore. For anything.

[charlie]

84. And a pinch of luck

She couldn't break past even until Lazio decided to act like a dickweed in the first debate. It was her Clayton Williams moment, an unexpected gift.

[fujiyama]

92. She won by 10 points

in a state Al Gore beat Bush by over 20 points.

DINO or not, there's little reason to be impressed with her record. She would make a terrible candidate and lose big.

[robbedvoter]

56. I had voted for her and greatly admired her. I have defended her votes

until IWR. The way I feel, financial lefislation can be fixed, but people who are killed in unjustified wars stay dead. Now lately she supports the faith based thingy. Separation of church and state is one of my most important issues - the one I accept no compromise on.
Now for those of you where strategery is all, and what we stand on lost, please explain this to me: the faith based thingy is a gimmick whereby taxpayer money is funneled to fundies so they vote/support W.
How is her pandering to this helpful?

[eg101]

62. Hilary is as DINO as they come

fair trade
low taxes
bogus Hilarycare

all she does is triangulate.

hilary==DINO

[Cell Whitman]

63. Hillary has shown she believes moving right is the way to "win"

like many dems do. It might help win but what does it do to the "issues"? The "debate" over issues? This does nothing but help to give credibility to the fascist and theocrats views which they move closer to....

They seem to want to 'slow' our drive to theofascist hell, not correct the course of the nation.

Most democrats have no idea what has happened to our great nation, they think this is normal operating procedure. sheeesh, After the 2002 elections, Malloy and some liberal talk show hosts were in DC and they interviewed one dem after another that "thought" their message got out. They thought they were going to win bigtime in 2002.

They are blind.

Bush and these freaks would not be in power if Moon hadn't PAID for it and guided it. He molded the new right. Take non-citizen Moon's billions, guidance and paper away from our political system the last 20 years and Bush would NEVER be a nominee, let alone president. The paper has lost BILLIONS alone. People talk about Scaife, Scaife couldn't carry Moon's jock strap when it comes to promoting theocracy and fascism in America. No Moon and we would still be dealing with Republicans, who do NOT exist anymore, instead of these theocratic fascist war loving killers.

Democrats who don't face this fact are living in a dream world. imho.

What has happened to our nation is NOT the product of democracy nor the "free market of ideas."

read some of that here:

http://cellwhitman.blogspot.com/

It's like this, in 2002 the Moon propaganda rag had its 20th birthday. Moon spoke. Daschle and Kennedy sent them notes of congratulations.

Do you understand that they congratulated the paper that has been kicking them in the nuts for 20 years?

[CWebster]

65. By the time you have 1072 posts maybe you'll know better

What a scam. Paint Hillary as a liberal and have liberals defend and rally around her, when all the while she, if you study her votes and attitudes, she is reinforcing the Neo-cons-rather than opposing them. Why don't you question who Hillary prefers since she echoes Lieberman more than Wellstone, and by that measure, the board reflects respect for Wellstone as opposed to Lieberman.

[Vidar]

73. I've admired Hillary greatly, but am disturbed by her recent record.

[DireStrike]

75. Didn't we Already try this "coming together" thing with Kerry?

It didn't work too well. We couldn't beat Bush. BUSH!

I found myself squirming to rationalize Kerry's positions in arguments. I knew that overall he was better than Bush.

The right doesn't kill their moderates, they just ignore them and put pressure on them. You know what they DON'T do? Marginalize their radicals. The DLC was quick to piss all over Mike Moore, yet junior gave Rush Limbaugh a hug after he won.

But yeah, you're right about single issues. Nobody should focus on single issues. It hasn't worked for the Republicans, right? Oh, except for abortion. And gay marriage. And guns. Single issue voters are powerful and not to be discounted, be it anti-war or environmentalist.

[AntiCoup2K4]

91. junior gave Rush Limbaugh a hug after he won.

He was probably asking Rush where he could score some coke for the innaugural parties.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

79. She's not? When did she change? Must've been in the last few hours.

She's DLC through and through.

[Jacobin]

85. that's a hilarious post

But you forgot your sarcasm tag

She's for faith based funding by taxpayers an absolute and complete and utter non-starter.

She's an Iraq war hound and PNACer warmonger.

She's a neocon wolf in sheeps clothing and she is absolutely disgusting

[AntiCoup2K4]

87. Anyone who sways to Asscrotch's fascist anthem like a 14 year old girl....

...at a Journey concert, with a glazed over Stepford robot look in her eyes, does NOT represent the Democratic Party. Shit, I'm surprised she wasn't holding up a fucking lighter during the "song"

[DaveinMD]

93. if she were a DINO

the right wing surely wouldn't hate her as much as they do. This is so silly. No passes a 100 percent purity test. Hillary is a good Dem.

[high density]

96. She's not a DINO, but she's not the left-winger that the media/RNC paints

her as. I think it makes no sense to run a moderate Democrat who is seen by most of the country as a far left Democrat.

[Walt Starr]

97. Sorry, but Hillary is a DINO

Scream all you like, she's a sellout DINO and you won't convince me otherwise.

[IndianaGreen]

99. Hillary supports the US occupation of Iraq and Israel's occupation of...

Hillary supports the US occupation of Iraq and Israel's occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, Arab Jerusalem, the Golan.

That makes Hillary to be something that is far worse than a DINO, that makes Hillary an enabler to war crimes and to human rights abuses.

Let's get Democrats elected.

Not if they are prowar!

[Sparkly]

100. I agree she's not a DINO.

I think it's a very narrow definition of the Democratic party that considers her not to be a Democrat.

Unfortunately, she's been blasted in the media, I think because she's an icon of a movement in the baby-boomer generation (a reason they hate President Clinton, too) -- liberated women who are smart and ambitious. She became a punching bag for the rightwing as a symbol of what they fear and want to put down.

The unfortunate thing is that they've successfully portrayed her as a Radical Liberal, even though she's far from it; so if she were to become a presidential candidate she'd have to go pretty far to the right to move past that stereotype. Instead, it's preferable imho to have a candidate whose biography allows them to go pretty far to the left and remain acceptable to moderates.

But I agree that she's a Democrat.

[AntiCoup2K4]

101. So why do you try to hype Clark's liberalism then?

I'm not arguing whether he is or isn't in reality, just the perception. You seem to be justifying Hillary - or by extension Kerry or anybody else taking a hard right turn (as both of them have) in order to get past right wing labels of "radical liberal" on the grounds of viability of a candidate.

Yet on the other hand, you have a 4 star general who onced praised the PNAC'ers as the team "we need in Washington", and you're trying to promote him as a liberal. If what you say about Hillary pandering to the right wing is true, as far as neccessity for a candidate, then shouldn't the General be playing up his right wing ties as well?

[Sparkly]

102. Oh, give it a freaking REST already!!!

Stay on topic. Don't jump into an unrelated discussion and introduce a barely-relevant tangent in order to bring up your pet issue.

You want to bring up four words Clark said once several years ago taken out of context and call them "right wing ties." This has been discussed here ad nauseum as it is, but if you must rev up the Clark attacks once again, I suggest you do it in a new thread. I'm not going to get baited into discussing this for the millionth time in this one.

[robbedvoter]

105. This is a Hillary thread. Keep your pet issue for the appropriate topic

Da rules.