Novak: Hillary has the 2008 nomination sewn up

[quaoar]

Amazing how desperate the right wing has become to make sure Hillary is the nominee. Of course, they might get what they ask for and live to regret it.

http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak/cst-edt-novak09.html

Western Dems not sold on Hillary

BY ROBERT NOVAK SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST

LOS ANGELES -- Back east, well-placed Democrats have agreed that the party's 2008 nomination is all wrapped up better than three years in advance. They say that the prize is Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's for the asking, and that she is sure to ask. But here on the left coast, I found surprising and substantial Democratic opposition to going with the former first lady.

Both the Hollywood glitterati and the more mundane politicians of Los Angeles are looking elsewhere. They have seen plenty of Sen. Clinton over the last dozen years, and they don't particularly like what they've seen. Two far less well-known Democrats -- Virginia Gov. Mark Warner and Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh -- were hits on recent visits to California, mainly because they were not Hillary.

The concern here with Clinton is not borne in fear that she might fail to carry California. Almost any Democrat would be likely to win in the nation's most populous state, where the advent of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is an exotic event that has not changed the GOP's minority status in California. Rather, the fear here is pronounced that Clinton cannot win in Red America, guaranteeing a third straight Republican term in the White House.

Party insiders in Washington and New York, including many who ran the last two losing Democratic presidential campaigns, say they have never before seen anything like the way Clinton has sewn up the nomination. In particular, they say, she has cornered Eastern money in a way nobody else ever has done at such an early date.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Why isn't Novakula in jail yet?

He's, you know...

[election_2004]

2. Wow, there's a shock....

So Novak joins O'Reilly and Hannity as the chorus of right-wing twits attempts to coronate Queen Hillary before any candidate even has the chance to announce his/her campaign.

Of course they want Dems to think a Hillary nomination is "inevitable"...then that guarantees that better candidates would be ignored!

http://www.lincoln2008.com

Lincoln/Warner 2008!!!

[Pepperbelly]

48. why do you guys think Blanche wants to run? nt

[Warpy]

3. Hey, NOFACTS, like we believe ANYTHING you say

Sorry buster, but this party has caucuses and primaries, and my guess is that there enough hard core Hillary haters and people who are very uncomfortable with her CONSERVATISM to get her out of the race.

I know you cream your pants at the thought of a colossal battle between good (whatever crook the GOP puts up, probably Jebbie) and evil (the conservative but more honest Mrs. Clinton), but I fear you're going to be as deprived of that as you have been deprived of many nights' sleep over what is going to happen to you when the Democrats take over Congress and really start to look at where you got your information in the Plame affair.

Can you say LEAVENWORTH? That's the only thing in YOUR future

[iwantmycountryback]

51. On what planet is Senator Clinton conservative?

Did you miss her latest speech saying Republicans have a "God complex" among other things? She has made some great votes of late, opposing all of the fascist judges Bush is nominating, as well as opposing Bolton. Just because she doesn't pass your litmus test doesn't make her a conservative.

[Catch22Dem]

4. Hey Novak, you may not like her, but she's still SENATOR Clinton

Show a little god damned respect, you prick. They all do it. They all refer to her as just "Hillary" in their smarmy articles. Doesn't matter though. Not only is this article the biggest crock of shit to ever touch a sheet of newspaper, but Novak has absolutely no credibility anyway.

[Arkana]

5. And in other news, Robert Novak was hauled off to Bedlam today

screaming at the top of his lungs "IT'S HILLARY! SHE'S HERE TO TAKE YOUR SOUL!"

[whistle]

6. As usual Robert Novak is full of shit.....

...the man is such a total creep. He has no saving graces whatsoever.

[Donna Zen]

7. Is this a scoop?

Oh Novak...get thee to jail.

Although, he is correct in at least some of what he writes: Hillary does have the nomination sewn up. Now if someone would just sew up Novak, maybe undercover agents would be safe.

The other night I caught an interesting little piece of new in the Texas papers. It seems that McCain's toadding for bush had a few strings attached: bush's public relations pr team, a high-value asset, agreed to sign on for McCain. So, it would seem that McCain is running with bush's blessing.

Hillary will lose to McCain.

On the war: not a hair of difference between the two. Unless, which seems to be the case, Hillary moves to the more agressive posture because she is a woman and a Dem.

On the environment: McCain might actually come out in the plus column.

National Security and foreign policy: McCain trumps Hillary

Honesty: McCain again

Women: Hillary but McCain is not seen as threatening as the bushes.

Moderates from both parties: McCain

A change: something which America will be begging for in 2008, McCain. The name "Clinton" doesn't hold for much of a change.

The fundies: McCain might not be trusted, but with Hillary on the ticket, they'll be out in full force. That is not true of several other Dems. And that is the real reason that the right wing wants Hillary on the ticket: they can run someone viewed as a moderate without worrying about losing their base.

And so the insiders in Washington and all the of the right wing must be rejoicing: Hillary has it sewn up.

[election_2004]

8. Is there anyone who could defeat McCain...

I think some of the Democrats who are more moderate than Hillary might have a chance against McCain, but it would be a tough battle.

McCain would be the strongest Republican. This is what ultimately could jeopardize Hillary's shot at running away with the nomination: Democrats will be searching for an "anti-Hillary," hoping to scrounge up an alternative who has at least some chance of defeating McCain in the General Election.

However, I have a hard time seeing the Far Right letting McCain have the nomination. I believe it will be either Frist, Allen, Brownback, or Sanford.

It's going to be difficult for both Senator McCain and Senator Clinton to win their parties' respective nominations, because each of them will have to face a circular firing squad from within their own parties.

[Donna Zen]

11. Who's firing at Hillary?

Novak is full of shit that Hollywood is out to stop Hillary. And aside from the people who understand what this war means, and what is coming down, the party will be behind her. Why else place the head of her PAC as the head of ACT?

The people from the bush campaign do not sign on without knowing what is up. That was a serious move. Robertson etal. will fall in line.

Democrats seaching for the anti-Hillary are divided and it is doubtful that they will unite. Besides, having Bill on the campaign trail will be a circus. Hillary will have all the media, all the air, and of the party endorsements.

The people who have watched the war of lies unfold, who are really pissed, are few compared to what ACT will send into the streets for Hillary.

Since I vote with a #2 pencil and paper which is then hand-counted, my vote will count, but it is only one. I will not vote for anyone who voted for the IWR.

BTW, Clark can beat McCain. Rangel said it the other night: "I am convinced that if we had run Wes Clark we would have won. And if the war continues, which it will, I still believe that."

Well, Rangel will endorse Hillary of course. But he knows.

[Yupster]

23. My thinking too Donna

is that once Hil;lary announces, then it becomes a 24 hour Hillary media cuircus with all the cable stations following her every action 24 hours a day.

Her primary opponents won't get a lick of publiciy which will also mean no fundraising. It will be over before Iowa as hillary wins the media primary.

[Capn Sunshine]

26. re Media Primary

Howard Dean had that sewn up too. But then came Iowa.......

[Tom Rinaldo]

34. An important point, Capn

Of course Dean didn't have the Establishment's blessings in Iowa and Kerry did, which makes 2004 an imperfect analogy, but your point remains none the less. Small states start off the Primary process, where media mega bucks and saturation are not quite as all powerful as they are in later larger states. Winning over individuals personally in Iowa and New Hampshire still matters. There is a possibility to disrupt the script. It will take a lot of work.

[election_2004]

24. IWR

I will not vote for anyone who voted for the IWR.

So I guess that means you won't be voting for Hillary then?

I contend that there will be a great hunger for an attractive "anti-Hillary." While there may be a division initially, whichever "anti-Hillary" candidate gains the most momentum will likely end up with activists and party members coalescing around him/her to prevent Hillary from getting the nomination.

Plus I think people are going to get pretty tired of the MSM telling them that Hillary is "The One."

And why on Earth would Rangel endorse Hillary over Clark if he believes Clark has the best shot at winning the General Election?

[wisteria]

28. Well, you were making some good points until you mentioned

Clark. No way we would have won with Clark. Nice guy, just not much dimension to him other than his war stance. His campaign never even took off. Kerry came very close. We could not have done any better with any other candidate. Its obvious though that you weren't a Kerry supporter so its easy to dismiss him a speculate on someone else.

[Skwmom]

35. I've lost count of the number of people who told me they would

have voted for Clark but there was no way they were voting for Kerry. Why do you think the Republicans worked so hard to knock him out of the race? For the fun of it?

[wisteria]

47. I don't recall the repubs working at all to eliminate Clark.

Clark a threat to repubs. Is that why they are always bashing Clark and never mentioning Kerry? Clark entered the race late and he wasn't taken seriously.I never encountered anyone claiming they would have chosen Clark over Kerry. Kerry has more overall experience and qualifications to become president.

[Donna Zen]

41. Not my crystal ball

I quoted Rangel. In fact, considering Rangel's part of the NY delegation which will by tradition endorse their senator, his entire statement threw me.

Preferring to avoid the "could of, should of" mentality, I am staying out of those waters. Who knows how it would have all come down? Nevertheless, I would object to portraying Clark as one dimensional. First, I'm not a one dimensional thinker and I thought very carefully about many issues including education. As a teacher, early in primary process I was blown away by Clark's understanding of the issues affecting my life.

Because of his first name, Clark changed the Democratic "brand" while espousing hardcore New Deal politics: progressive taxation, a solid safety net, heathcare, jobs through r & d and closing corporate loopholes. Learning that a general knows more than just how to shine shoes was a revelation to me, but I got used to it.

Edit: I just read my post that you were responding to. In it I said that Clark can beat McCain, and I did not mention 04. That is my thinking. Why? Because Clark foreign policy/national security credentials trump McCain's. Yes, McCain was a POW but Clark took four bullets for this country and stayed in uniform when given the opportunity to earn millions of dollars. Also, Clark was correct about Iraq and McCain was dead wrong. Both are considered moderate, but when a country is looking for change and offered two acceptable moderates, the one with the "D" can win. There are many other reasons, but one we must accept, many voters, maybe the majority, could care less about policy and base their decision on the "Q" factor, likability and looks. Clark has that edge--he looks like a president. If Democrats intend to win, they must expand the base. We can do that: America loves its GIs; that may be a politically incorrect statement on DU, but it is the over riding reality.

[quaoar]

14. McCain won't win the nomination

The fundamentalists will back Frist and they'll start another push poll about McCain having an illegitimate black child or they'll make up some new shit about him.

[Skwmom]

32. Only a Dem who could expose McCain for the self-serving

political schmuck he is has a chance at beating McCain. McCain is the ultimate political opportunist who sold out this country for his own political gain. Run a candidate with the moral authority to nail McCain on this issue and the Dems will win. Lucky for the Dems they have such a Democrat (WESLEY CLARK). Now will they be smart enough to run him ? I'm not betting any money on it. In addition, the Republicans can always count on numerous Democratic self-serving presidential wanna bes to put their own desire ahead of what is good for the country.

[WhoWantsToBeOccupied]

57. Totally agree with your diagnosis

You're absolutely right McCain is a sell-out (or a true believer) who is dangerously electable. The press practically drools over the guy. He smiles. He appears smart like Albert Einstein and charismatic like Kennedy after GWB. And he's a war hero. (And we don't have a shameless attack machine with unlimited funds to do to McCain what Swift Boat Veterans for Slander et al. have done to our war heroes.)

Of course, I naively thought keeping Cheney on the ticket would be their kiss of death, but those Reps know how to "win" elections. I sadly wouldn't be at all shocked to see Jeb, though I may electricute myself if he "wins" the presidency.

Clark intrigues me, but I was bothered by his connections with one of the massive private data collection companies. I forget which one, but they're huge, and I believe they have had serious data theft problems. But I've been in the ABB (anyone but Bush) camp for years. We'll never get a President Conyers or President Boxer because our media is a vast right-wing conspiracy.

[Skwmom]

37. Unfortunately, my money is on the anti-Hillary being

a worse candidate than Hillary (but what the heck miracles do occur).

[longship]

10. You ignore the fact

that a snowball has a larger chance in Hell than McCain obtaining the nomination.

The extremists are enboldened. They are not going to stop. They are not going to settle for a moderate. They will eviscerate McCain just like they would eviscerate Hillary. If Hillary gains the nomination she will not be running against McCain. It will be somebody from the same mold as CuckooBananas, another extremist. And it's most likely that Hillary will lose for the very reasons you have written. That's why Hillary is not the path to victory.

We need somebody who will make a strong case against the Repugs. Foreign policy fuck-ups. Letting the 9-11 attack happen (wittingly or otherwise). The illegal war with Iraq. Lying to Congress and the People. Totally ignoring domestic issues. The general incompetence of the whole shebang. All should be on the front burner.

When the lunatics try personal attacks, or try more lies. Attack their veracity and present the Democrat position. Hammer relentlessly at them. Never let a day go by that you don't remind everybody that Republicans lied us into a war.

And never give up.

[Donna Zen]

13. The wingnutz play to win.

[Pepperbelly]

49. are your judgements re: Mc vs Hil colored by your own desires? nt

[Donna Zen]

54. Good question

...and believe or not, one I have asked myself if you are referring to my support of Clark.

When I joined the draft movement for Clark, my judgments were purely an intellectual exercise: "who could win?" Considering the current climate, my thoughts have not changed. On an emotional level, this long journey, first with the draft and now with WesPAC, has introduced me to one of the best and brightest Americans. I like Wes Clark as a person and I would never sign a draft letter again. Sad really. A uniquely qualified American that I would council to stay out of the ugly fray. But he could win.

As for Hillary v McCain. No, my thoughts are intellectually driven. (Disagreeing with Hillary on policy does not equal hating her.) I've been pondering the "why" of all of this, and when the answer hit, all of the pieces fell into place. The republican party knows that the neocon image is quickly catching up to them; I would suspect that the corporate supporters have even been complaining. When the news came down that the bush camp's finest people are making serious deals with McCain, it was a confirmation. Even people on this thread think that the republicans will not nominate McCain, with bush's blessing, I think they will. And, I am not alone.

The religious faction may not like McCain and certain Dems. in opposition would not inspire them to come out in droves. Nevertheless, a Hilary ticket will cause them to froth all the way to the voting booth. This next election will be all about change, and with a new Dem name on the ticket, both parties are on the same start line. I won't repeat everything I've already written on this thread, but I stand by my thoughts.

Today I read a Warner thread although I didn't not comment. I'm watching that governor closely along with Richardson. We must be able to differentiate ourselves on the war and foreign policy or nothing changes. The war has lost the public's support.

The Democratic party has brought their recent power shifts on themselves. More and more policy, including policies formulated under Clinton, have reflected the desires of corporate America. When Dean stood up and said: "You have the power" is resonated because there has been a growing vacuum of leadership devoted to the needs of average American citizens. I'm just one of the average who has been treated by Democratic leadership as person with three heads not worthy of representation. And I remind you, that 95% of the delegates to the convention were against this war, and probably against the Patriot Act along with a host of other objectionable legislation. So who represents us?

Note: I fully expect Hillary to be the nominee. I know that makes you uncomfortable, but I think the deal is too far down the road. I also think that the progressive movement could change that outcome, but probably will splinter as they did in '04. We had no clearly anti-war candidate on the ticket 04 although the party worker bees were against the war. (waiting to be spit on by certain people's supporters. oh god, when will speech ever be free?)

[election_2004]

62. Who says the war is going to be the biggest deciding factor in '08?

A lot of shit is going to happen between now and then.

I'm not saying the war isn't an important factor...it's just not necessarily what will dominate the 2008 primaries as an issue.

[Donna Zen]

65. You are correct: a lot of shit will happen

I read what I posted, and I didn't say that the war would dominate. I agree with you that it will be a factor. My post was trying to make the point that if a Dem. candidate could forcefully point out the failures of the policy, it would be an advantage to have not voted for the war. The country did not respond to "I would have fought it differently."

The war itself may be more intense or less intense, but the dead will still be dead and the bills will be rolling in. IMHO, we will still have troops in Iraq in 2007-8, and thus, it will be an issue. Governors have the luxury of not having voted on the IRW, although some have gone on record one way or another. Nevertheless, they will have more "space" between themselves and what is becoming increasingly an unpopular war. If everything comes up roses in Iraq with democracy blooming everywhere, then the advantage goes to the republicans. Even though I am against this war with every fiber of my being, I do hope that roses are the case--just because those suffering need it to stop.

[election_2004]

67. Based on your reasoning....

IMHO, we will still have troops in Iraq in 2007-8, and thus, it will be an issue.

I definitely agree with you that this could be the reality our country is still faced with, another two years from now.

And if it's true that we still are heavily involved in Iraq at the beginning of 2007, I don't see how it will help Hillary in the Democratic primaries (*IF* she runs as a presidential candidate) to travel the country babbling, "We must stay the course. We must finish things in Iraq..." Yeah, try telling all of that to the people whose sons and daughters and grandchildren are dying in the desert.

And if Hillary suddenly tries to change her tune on Iraq and says we need to pull out, she'll look like an obvious double-talker. She'll be called on it (OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN!!!!) by her opponents in the Democratic primaries, and the media will inevitably have no choice but to cover the controversy, since it will be just too juicy for the Talking Heads to pass up. As much as they want Hillary to be the nominee, they won't be able to resist stirring the pot.

This is what could ultimately cause the Democratic primary voters to take a second look at Hillary, much to the disappointment of the MSM and the Republican Spin Machine.

[iwantmycountryback]

52. McCain's not going to get the Republican nom

It will probably be someone like Sen. George Allen of Virginia, just another right-wing stooge. And Hillary could certainly beat him.

Oh, and let's compare Clinton to McCain on the environment:
Clinton:
2003-2004 92% rating from League of Conservation Voters
2003-2004 100% rating from American Lands Alliance
2003-2004 100% rating from National Parks Conservation Association
2003 89% from League of Conserv.
2003 85% from American Lands Alliance
2001-2002 100% from National Parks Conserv. Assoc.

McCain: (in same order)
56%
0%
60%
53%
0%

I think you should stop lying about Senator Clinton. And who knows how people will think of their honesty and how moderates will vote. They are attraced to both so I would think it's hard to judge who will get most of their vote. Of course, McCain won't be the nominee anyway so this doesn't really matter.

[Skwmom]

55. The only way a "perceived" right wing Republican gets on the

ticket is if a deal was struck between Clinton and Bush to give Hillary a "free" pass (which would most likely violate the Bush/McCain deal but what the heck this is politics).

[Donna Zen]

63. Thanks for the information

about their environmental records. You are correct that Hillary trumps McCain on the environment, although for some reason the book on McCain is that he is fairly good on the environment. Maybe there is a rejoinder that needs to be added: for a republican.

As far as their honesty, well, the LTTE have already started about the Clintons, my paper had a doozie this morning. Yes, they are lies, but they have certainly been told often enough to penetrate the masses. Moderates will see McCain as a straight-shooter moderate. Again, I find McCain as rightwing as the rest of them, but that is only me.

The pieces are moving on this chess board, you and many others writing in this thread believe that the republicans will fail to run McCain. I disagree. That is not how I see the play at this point.

No one has a crystal ball, not you, not me. This is my opinion; however, I am entitled to my opinion--or as a liberal I believe I am.

[election_2004]

66. Donna.....

Tell us about the LTTE-manufactured story on the Clintons that appeared in your local newspaper.

And no one is saying you can't have your own opinion. What I'm saying is that it's more productive to do something to change a supposedly "inevitable" outcome than to sit back and pout about how *powerless* we all are.

I always say, when you don't like what's happening in the political world, be proactive and plant seeds where you can (and encourage others to do the same) because every little bit helps to ultimately influence the greater fabric of history.

[Ikonoklast]

9. The traitor has spoken

and so it shall be. Since his previous gig as Benedict Arnold is up, is this crapslinger now a Democratic consultant?

[LSdemocrat]

12. I like Hillary, but pretty much all political predictions are full of it

In 1991, almost no one thought that Bush I would lose in 1992.
After the 1994 election no one thought that Clinton would win reelection in 1996.
I'd bet in 1999, no one with half a brain would ever think that Dubya would become President.
I'd also venture to guess no one would have predicted the meteoric rise and take down of Howard Dean in the 2004 primary campaign.
Pretty much no one knows what the hell is going to happen in 2006, let alone 2008.

[snowbear]

15. Chris Matthews said "Hillary has it sewn up" on Jay Leno the other night..

And there wasn't a peep from the audience.. nothing.

For the R-party, he said "McCain has it if he wants it" and the place exploded in applause.

Face it.. :shrug: ..the Media want Hillary and they want her baddddddd... :silly:

[Donna Zen]

25. McCain is their guy

They need to present a change candidate to the country or they'll lose. McCain not only saved bush's ass in 2004, he is also viewed by the country as a maverick. But what to do about the base?

If you run with someone who was against the war or didn't vote for the IWR, the Dems will be able to counter McCain's sterling military credentials. After all, knowing that bush let the troops go into battle without armour, he still backed that fucking monkey. But, Hillary can't do that. Do you think military families will vote for Hillary? There are 56,000,000 people in this country somehow related to the military.

Hillary's aids believe that there is a slim possibility of a win. Slim. They need the western states. McCain changes that equation drastically. Now imagine what the outcome will be if there is a woman in the republican vp spot. They can do that without losing their base if Hillary is running against them.

Okay, let's look at the last bogus poll; the one saying that Hillary COULD win. I can't remember the exact numbers but it went something like: 26% said they would vote for Hillary and another 30+% said they might vote for Hillary. The headline read: Hillary can win. Ha! The problem with the entire piece of shit was that no one was running against her in that poll. The other problem was that they didn't ask the same question about any other Democrat. Do you think with bush's numbers in the toilet that another Dem wouldn't have done as well or better?

So why did we get that poll? Because Hillary's people, and she has great, great people, know that they must soften up the base to believe that Hillary can win a hurdle they are desperately trying to overcome.

Now she will have tons and tons of money to the point that the other candidates will have pennies on the dollar. She will also have all of the air time allowed for Dems. She and Bill have been salting the Dem waters for years and the machine will deliver the endorsements.

I sport a Clark avatar so no one has to question what my interest is, but I do believe that Clark or another Democrat can beat McCain. We can win--really. The country wants a change and given a candidate who can make the case for that change it will be possible.

I don't hate Hillary or Bill although I dislike their "third-way" politics. But this usurping of the nomination by insider trading while risking the future of the country all for some pie-in-sky return to the oval office, is wrong.

I'm feeling very powerless.

[election_2004]

29. Have you talked with your fellow Clark supporters?

Surely there are other activists enthusiastic about Clark who feel the same way you do about the MSM handicapping.

Back in 2003, they tried to tell us (the voters) that Lieberman was most likely to win the Democratic nomination and that he would be tough to beat (before that, it was Gore). Dean's supporters refused to let the media determine the nominee, and pushed Dean into the limelight.

Of course, then the media proceeded to build Dean up in order to try to save face - - when Dean's campaign imploded, Kerry scooped up the nomination. The reason the media savaged Dean after his "Iowa scream" was so it wouldn't be so obvious that the pundits had egg on their faces.

I often share your feelings of hopelessness. But as a registered Independent who doesn't want to see Hillary Clinton as the next President of the U.S., consider the following:

How are you going to deal with the cards we're being dealt? Are you going to roll over and allow them to get away with it? I sure as hell am not!

[Tom Rinaldo]

38. I understand Donna, but

We have years to work on this one this time, unlike last time, and we continue to get organized. I'm sure the people in the Ukraine felt powerless also. Entrenched power always seems invulnerable until it unravels, and it is only in hindsight that most people can understand why it never was invulnerable in the first place.

[seabeyond]

16. i am really bothered the republican are so rooting for hillary

i wouldnt touch her with a ten foot pole for different reasons. one of them the way bill is playing his hand. but also, i live with only republicans. she will be the biggest motivator for them to vote whatever repug. we will have nothing but the dissin of all the hillary stuff but the biggest issue i have. not to mention another friggin dynasty

all the republicans are pushing her on us. i am about damn tired of repug telling me what i as a party think, should do, should say

[halobeam]

19. unfortunately, well I find it sad, that I have to agree...

I wanted to feel differently, but I don't. She will lose, IMO...BIG ASS TIME... and the pubs know this, that's why they are pushing it like "she's" the one.

Nope. I don't think she is.

[AntiCoup2K4]

17. The only thing that needs to be sewn up is Novak's mouth.

Hell I don't even like Hillary, but I just needed to say that anyway.

[quaoar]

18. Further down in the column

is this:

At a dinner party in a private room of a Los Angeles restaurant attended by eight Democratic politicians, I was asked to assess the political scene. I concluded with a preview of the distant events of 2008. While there had not been so open a race for the Republican nomination since 1940, I said, Clinton was dominant for the Democrats. For someone who is neither an incumbent president nor vice president to have apparently locked the nomination so early is without precedent.

As I made this analysis, the liberal Democratic functionary across the table from me shook his head in disagreement. He left his seat between courses, and then returned with this announcement: ''There are eight Democrats in this room. I've taken a little poll, and none of them -- none -- are for Hillary for president. They think she is a loser.''


So why would eight Democratic politicians invite Bob Novack in for his assessment?

[Clarkie1]

20. delete.

[Clarkie1]

21. "all wrapped up"...yeah, that's what they said about Dean, too.

Of course, Dean lost the nomination for entirely different reasons.

[tinfoilinfor2005]

22. I'm amazed that anyone in DU would quote a man

who has done a vile act of treason against our country. His name should be blackened forever from this honorable forum.

[wisteria]

27. I really hate these Hillary has it media pushes.

We are almost 31/2 years away from the next election and I can't seem to find any enthusiasm for Hillary outside of the media and the media's connections inside Washington. This eastern democrat has not decided on anyone yet,and chances are it won't be Hillary when I do.
Also, I thought money being raised now was for her senate run in 2006. I'm sure if she was already raising money for a 2008 presidential run the media would have spread it all over by now.
My guess is that Novak is pushing repub talking points just as Hannity is. Hannity seems to fit a Hillary discussion into every show.I for one resent the media and the republicans trying decide who are candidate should be.

[mirandapriestly]

64. Yes, for some reason the Repugs are pushing for her

and that makes me suspicious. It's scary how most people don't notice how this is done. They think it's "magic".

[Piperay]

30. Well then I guess there is no point in holding any primaries

or the candidates campaigning since Novak says it is all over and he should know.:sarcasm:

[election_2004]

31. Yep, let's all go home and hide under the covers

*sarcasm continued*

;)

[OneTwentyoNine]

33. That SOB's trial and jail sentance should be "all sewn up" by now...nt

[HeeBGBz]

36. Why do they keep pushing Hillary at us?

What is the obsession?

[election_2004]

44. They want "excitement"

The media *WANTS* a President Hillary to create a greater standstill in D.C. - - nominating Hillary for president will hurt Democrats further down the ticket in red states, resulting in a GOP net gain in the U.S. Senate.

More front page headlines for the media whores to babble about.

[NoPasaran]

39. Novakula is a vile sack of shit

In any society that actually valued truth and decency his head would be on a stick somewhere.

[JNelson6563]

40. Julie: STFU Novak, you shit for brains

Go have another drink you lush.

[graywarrior]

42. Tweety announced on Leno that Hillary would be nominated but

McCain would beat her. This is how the media controls the vote.

[In Truth We Trust]

43. NOT! She lost me when she went DLC and didn't support us re:

Nov 2nd election fraWd. She is too corporatist and cozy with the establihed powers that be. I want a real progressive!

Btw, fuck you Novak, you goddamn traitor. You should be in front of a firing squad.

[NewJeffCT]

45. And, in 1989, nobody could beat Mario Cuomo for 1992, either

and look how that turned out...

[Blue_In_AK]

46. Anybody but Hillary, please............

I don't trust her.

[Check12]

59. She gets no support from me

Until she turns the corner and starts talking illegal war and troops come home. If I hear one peep about staying there to 'get the job done' She is out!

[Cha]

50. And I should pay attention

to novakula because..?

[Andromeda]

53. Why hasn't Novakula not been ...

indicted yet?

I never pay any attention to what comes out of his mouth because most of it is lies anyway.

[Jane Austin]

56. He hopes!

Novak hopes Hillary is the Dem nominee, I mean.

[geckosfeet]

58. This guy is such a horses ass.

[warrens]

60. Same thing they were saying in 2000 and 2004

She's their personal little hate fetish and makes them tingle with rage just thinking about her as president. And they love to feel hate. Probably the only emotion they can actually feel.

[leesa]

61. The media and the GOP really, really, really want us to run Hillary

Why do you suppose that is? Last time we had Kerry foisted upon us...will it be Hillary this time?

[snowbear]

68. Hillary: Novak has his butt sewn up, next week they start on his mouth..

:rofl:

[autorank]

69. Memo to Bob: Report to Federal Prison Immediately, Do not pass GO...

do not collect $200.

Oh yea, for sure Bob, you fuckwad:rofl:

Contact the DNC and Give 'em Hell About NOT Acting on Election Fraud

NEW LEADERS FOR A NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY