Something everyone is missing about Hillary

[underpants]

Everyone us, them, everyone

This might be why the headlines all say "Hillary..."

psst :hide: Her last name is Clinton. :hide: pass it on

I am not a huge supporter or detractor of hers, that is not what this is about this is about her being a CLINTON

That s**t means a lot to people. The middle ground independents especially. Sure people have had their wigs scared off them repeatedly by Rove (via W) and it is effective but almost everyone looks back on the Clinton years as the GOOD OLD DAYS. The good old days that are fresh in everyone's mind. Sure we all worry about security but we also remember when we didn't have to or should I say when others did the worrying for us ;-)

Listen this isn't Earth shattering but it could be a factor. Just like people joked about W getting votes because their fellow citizens were so bone stupid that they would be thinking they were voting for the old man well the same works in the other direction.

I just wanted to throw that out there. Now you all can resume ripping each other apart over how horrible she would be as President I'll just be over here.

[NYCGirl]

1. My biggest problem with her is

that her name is CLINTON.

Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, Clinton II — political dynasties are for banana republics, not the United States.

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

17. Bush is not the only name that appears more than once in the list

of American Presidents down through history.


.......President.........................Vice President

George Washington (1789-1797)..John Adams (1789-1797)
John Adams (1797-1801).........Thomas Jefferson (1797-1801)
Thomas Jefferson (1801-1809)...Aaron Burr (1801-1805)
Thomas Jefferson...............George Clinton (1805-1809)
James Madison (1809-1817)......George Clinton (1809-1812)

James Madison..................none (1812-1813)
James Madison..................Elbridge Gerry (1813-1814)
James Madison .................none (1814-1817)
James Monroe (1817-1825).......Daniel D. Tompkins (1817-1825)
John Quincy Adams (1825-1829)..John C. Calhoun (1825-1829)

Andrew Jackson (1829-1837).....John C. Calhoun (1829-1832)
Andrew Jackson ...............none (1832-1833)
Andrew Jackson ...............Martin Van Buren (1833-1837)
Martin Van Buren (1837-1841)...Richard M. Johnson (1837-1841)
William Henry Harrison (1841)..John Tyler (1841)

John Tyler (1841-1845).........none (1841-1845)
James K. Polk (1845-1849)......George M. Dallas (1845-1849)
Zachary Taylor (1849-1850).....Millard Fillmore (1849-1850)
Millard Fillmore (1850-1853)...none (1850-1853)
Franklin Pierce (1853-1857)....William King (1853)

Franklin Pierce ...............none (1853-1857)
James Buchanan (1857-1861).....John C. Breckinridge (1857-1861)
Abraham Lincoln (1861-1865)....Hannibal Hamlin (1861-1865)
Abraham Lincoln ..............Andrew Johnson (1865)
Andrew Johnson (1865-1869).....none (1865-1869)

Ulysses S. Grant (1869-1877)...Schuyler Colfax (1869-1873)
Henry Wilson (1873-1875).......none (1875-1877)
Rutherford B. Hayes(1877-1881).William Wheeler (1877-1881)
James A. Garfield (1881).......Chester Arthur (1881)
Chester Arthur (1881-1885).....none (1881-1885)

Grover Cleveland (1885-1889)...Thomas Hendricks (1885)
Grover Cleveland .............none (1885-1889)
Benjamin Harrison (1889-1893)..Levi P. Morton (1889-1893)
Grover Cleveland (1893-1897)...Adlai E. Stevenson (1893-1897)

[NYCGirl]

18. It's been a long time

since John Adams and John Quincy Adams.

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

27. A little later there was also

William Henry Harrison

and

Benjamin Harrison

[NYCGirl]

28. Sorry, forgot about them. WHH served only a month, right? NT

[MaryBear]

2. All of the above.

Hillary Rodham Clinton is opposed for being a strong powerful woman.

She is opposed for being a Clinton.

She is opposed for her values.

All the money and all the effort goes against all the above.

[AtomicKitten]

3. true --- and the Republicans will annihilate ANYONE the Dems put up

Hillary isn't special in that regard. People seem to think she will attract the most violent opposition. Hardly. The Republicans are already excavating dirt on any possible Democratic candidate. They fight dirty. At least trashing Hillary has become so mundane, most people tune out.

[chaumont58]

15. You are right. And it is a strong point.

Repukes are not going to be nice to any candidate. They don't know how. If they can't win at the ballot box, they then try to steal the ballot box. How many people would have though war veteran John Kerry would be 'swift-boated,' in the cruel, mendacious way that he was?
Hillary's campaign would possibly be run by Carville and Begela. They won't run it like Bob Shrum. Reach out of Carville and Begala with a hand full of shit, and you'll pull back a stub.
A thought: how does Carville handle the wife questions?

[AtomicKitten]

19. better question: How does Carville handle the wife?

[Coastie for Truth]

4. The GOP Big Money (Who Bankrolled Santrum and Frist)

and who bought Pennsylvania for Santorum - can't stand her for her stand on Universal Health Care.

Well, I am for Universal Health Care (Go Hillary)

I was for Harris Wofford.

I hate Santorum.

And I hate the Scaifes.

PS - I'm from Pennsylvania and was an Ivan Itkin funder and volunteer.

[papau]

5. A toast to an excellent thought!

:toast:

[spag68]

23. pa. pols

I am also from Pa. and I wonder if everyone knows that the scaife money is tied to the mellons and all the way back to andrew carnegie. One of the most brutal money grubing union busting thief's that that rivaled any of the old robber barens< J gould, jp morgan, rockefelleret al'>

[wisteria]

12. I mostly object to her not being a true leader and more of a panderer

and poll watcher.

[abbiehoff]

6. My biggest problem with Hillary

is that Karl Rove wants her so much.

He is a snake in the grass, but he knows how to win, and he seems pretty sure that she will not.

[lyonn]

9. I dunno, he hasn't been too great lately

Wishful thinking maybe, but, bushco is being seen for what it is, Bullies. Even Rove is under Fitzpatrick's microscope. This crowd has acted so arrogant that even the: gun tottin; bush can do no wrong with gods guidance behind him; bush can protect us with his Tough military and security talk, are beginning to wonder if he knows what he is talking about. Fun isn't it?

[juajen]

10. Why in the world would you trust a damn thing Rove says?

Just askin'. I will support the dem nominee, but I hope it's Clinton, Kerry, Clark of Edwards, or a combination thereof.

[abbiehoff]

21. I haven't actually heard him say this.

But it is apparent that MSM has pretty much counted everyone but Hillary out, so I assume that they have gotten the word from on high.

[spag68]

24. Hilary

I still think that a Gore- Clinton ticket would be my fav. Gore is a smart guy who had this oil-enviro thing pegged 30 years ago and Hilary could do health care

[lyonn]

7. Yup, the Clinton years were good ones

Sure he didn't do everything right but FAR more rights than wrong. People felt good, confident, can do attitude, America is Great. Nafta didn't turn out good. Someone like Clinton could have tooled on it and made it better, not Bush!!

Hillary screwed up when she voted to let doofus take us to war. To this day I would love to know what was she thinking. Granted, bush had troops surrounding Iraq. We knew he was either threatening Saddam to allow the inspectors back in (made lots of sense) or, he was just playing a game of gotcha with Saddam and would invade no matter. The "no matter" worried many of us. Sure enough, that was the big plan for bushco. How did Hillary see it?

She is smart and has White House experience via Bill. That has to be a plus. Dems have some good candidates and we have the policies to back up what we say if only our candidates don't chicken out and listen to their advisors instead of what they know is right in their head.

We are so wadded up in corporate America it is truly frightening and Only a Democrat can get close to undoing the damage the repubs have done. Anyone see Jeff Faux author of The Global Class War on C-span yesterday. Damn scary stuff. He stated what my mouth and mind couldn't put together about the situation in America now. Hopefully they will show it again and this is a program worth marking on a calendar.

[underpants]

13. That is the big picture I am talking about

Hell there are lots of Clinton kids out there (yeah I know that is a set up for a joke) who didn't really know anything but life with Bill on TV everyday. --I have a theory about the rise in oral sex amongst teenagers here but that is for another thread--

Jeff Faux? I was looking for another book to read. Tell me more tell me more.

[OneBlueSky]

8. if Hillary were the nominee, then the entire campaign . . .

would be about Hillary Clinton . . . rather than about the crucial issues facing our nation and the planet . . .

[juajen]

11. Bullfeathers!!!!

N/T

[VaYallaDawg]

14. Guess what the most crucial problem in our country and planet is??

His first name is George.

[quickesst]

20. Just thinking.....

how utterly incredible, and dumbfounding it is that there are actually people out there who would vote for a Repug, or a third party candidate, no matter who the democratic candidate is. It is my contention that no matter who the nominee for the Democrats turns out to be, democrats need to start showing a little unity. The alternative of four more years of the BFEE should be enough for the most critical of Clinton detracters to hold their noses and push the D button. Going against your party in this circumstance, and preserving what one believes to be a moral duty will not house you, nor will it put food on the table, or family. Matter of simple, logical deduction, and no amount of spin, high-horsing, or for that matter, disagreeing with some of her decisions, will change that. Your choice if she's the nominee. A Democrat with a Democrat White House Staff, or four more years of a Republican with a Republican White House Staff. I am perplexed as to why anyone here is arguing about this. Thanks!

Long time reader, but this is my first post. The Democratic Underground is my primary source for keeping abreast, or ahead of what's happening on the political front. You all are to be commended.

[underpants]

22. Welcome to DU

:hi:

[VaYallaDawg]

31. Welcome from me also, quickesst.

Good logical thinking and good writing too.

I lurked around for ages too, before I got up the nerve to sign on and spill out my $.02 worth. Most of the time, that's all it's worth, but hey, it's my $.02!

[The Magistrate]

32. Well Said, Mr. Quickesst!

My heartiest welcome to the forum, Sir!

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[iconoclastNYC]

26. Excellent point.

And that's exactly how the GOP wants it.

I'll take an unknown with no ties to the DLC and a solid progressive voting record over Hillary anyday.

[tatertop]

16. Why Hillary will not win

1. Every one who voted Bush in '04 will vote
against Hillary in '08.
Every last one. Game over.

2. Anyone who is anti-war will have a VERY hard time
voting Hillary. Many will gag and vote Hillary,
but some will not.
So, she will lose some of the Democratic base
while absolutely solidifying the GOP base:
un-winnable.

When Newt beats her pants off, Bush will gloat this
with a snicker and a grin:

"Newt won because the people realize he's just gosh darn good
for America. A good steward of the people, you might say."

[iconoclastNYC]

25. No DLC member will ever get my primary vote

And if the DLC decides to blackball the people's 2008 front-runner in favor of one of thier blessed candidates like they did with Dean in 2004 then I'm done with the party.

[politicat]

29. No Royalty. No Dynasties.

I admit that I like HRC, but this isn't 1787, and there is no reason to have a the Bush and Clinton dynasties trading the empire back and forth between them for the next fifty years. (Chelsea Clinton will be eligible to hold the office in 2015, giving some Bush relative (Noelle?) time to get a failed single term in after HRC's two terms.) And I liked Bill a lot (there are some things he did a piss poor job at, like space and progressive economics, but I look at the last 50 years in this country, and he's the best president we've had in that time.)

I'm seriously not okay with this name recognition thing. There are better people out there who can take the White House and not be our overlords and masters, part of a dual-family monarchy.

It's time to move on. Living in the past of the wonderful (or at least better than now) Clinton years is not getting us anywhere. HRC would be a great president, but the baggage of both 1992-2000 and the feel of impending monarchy are bad medicine.

Wes Clark and Max Cleland. It's a ticket that would be hard to kill.

[AJH032]

33. should we discriminate against people because a family member was prez?

I'm not in favor of dynasties either, but it's the citizens of the United States who are choosing the leaders, not any kind of natural line of succession (forget the whole election fraud thing for this point, obviously that has to be dealt with though). If someone wants to run for president, and the people of the United States want him/her in the White House, then I don't see a problem with that, regardless of whether a family member of theirs once held that office.

[xkenx]

30. Bill has the heart in that family.

Pretty much all you need to know about HRC vs. WJC is this--- Chelsea was interviewed during Bill's first term. The journalist asked Chelsea whom she would call if she had an emergency at school, or similar situation. Her reply was "I'd call my Dad." As busy as POTUS is, she would call him, not her mother. Hillary just doesn't come across the way Bill did (and does-witness the Coretta Scott King funeral)