If Hillary is the nominee we LOOSE in 08 plain and simple

[bigdarryl]

The CORPORATE media is pushing Hillary for president because they want another Republican President in that White house it's all about protecting there money interest that they have gotten from a republican in the White house plain and simple they know damn well this country isn't ready for a female as President.

[Deja Q]

1. We're loose? Or we lose?

Sorry, couldn't resist. :rofl:

And I am compelled to agree; the country may be ready but the populace is not.

Maybe Hillary could say "God called for me to do this". That seems to help get repubs elected.

[Cha]

19. I was just comin' to say

"it's lose". Loose is when you're feelin' fine and chillin'!

[Tellurian]

135. Look, Hillary is the perfect choice for the VP slot..

in tandem with Al (president) Gore, as the presidential nominee!!

[TwilightZone]

2. Well, that's a relief. I was afraid we might lose.

n/t

[AtomicKitten]

25. *

[oasis]

3. First thing WE need to lose is a loser's attitude. (n/t)

[libneo]

5. Right on.

[sandrakae]

50. I dont think he has a loser attitude. He sounds like a realist to me.

[Captain Hilts]

113. Thank you for saying that. Really. Listen up, folks nt

[donheld]

4. Loose, lose it is all the same?

:shrug:

[seabeyond]

6. i am not a hillary fan, but not ready to declare defeat for something

that is two years off.... plain and simple. i do think media pushing hillary as they are is a bit to your point. but i also concede that people are pissed at repugs enough, and hillary knows how to run, has excellent support,.... a loss is far from plain and simple

[libneo]

7. Will the stock market go up tomorrow? You certainly can forecast the future.

[cspanlovr]

8. I agree. She is a polarizing candidate. Repubs HATE her. How is it

a good thing to have so many people despise your candidate? And they've felt this way for a decade! Can't we find someone who isn't deeply hated by half the country?

[libneo]

12. In that case, let's elect a Republican.

[cspanlovr]

34. I sure didn't mean that. If anything, I might say she's democratic-lite.

I want Russ, but that's not going to happen. I can only say how my republican family members and neighbors seem to feel about her. It borders on the insane. They've been brainwashed for years to think of her as the devil incarnate. Its a visceral reaction, and that's not good.

[libneo]

41. No one should deny the fact that Hillary is a democratic heavy-weight.

But she is not far left as portrayed by far right. I don't care how the brain-washed think about her. They wouldn't vote for any Democrat anyway.

[Clark2008]

123. But the hatred isn't limited to Republicans - I know a fair amount

of Democrats AND Independents who can't stand her - for a variety of reason: some because they believe she triangulates too much and others for the opposite reason - that she's too left.

Really - she HAS been vilified to the point of the ridiculous, but it's something we must consider.

[libneo]

126. sure

I understand that. Bottom line is that Hillary is a victim. I don't blame the victim.

[election_2004]

136. How is she a "victim"?

She chose to run for the U.S. Senate, putting herself in a position where every move she made would be interpreted by the media as posturing for a presidential run.

[election_2004]

38. So is it really an either/or, at this point....?

So our choices are Hillary or a Republican, case closed?

That seems to be assuming there are no Left/Center alternatives to Hillary?

[libneo]

42. No, it is not either/or choice. But "Republicans hate her/him" should

not be a concern for us.

[election_2004]

46. You don't believe the presidential ticket...

...affects downticket races?

[libneo]

54. Presidential ticket may affect downticket races, but

how can you tell whether Hillary can help downticket races or not? If she gets elected, she certainly will help downticket races. Her job is to get elected POTUS and let other candidates to worry about their own races.

[election_2004]

Because...

In areas of the country where Democrats might otherwise be competitive, downticket Dems will be associated with the irrational negative stigma of belonging to "the party of Hillary." They will be very vulnerable for defeat, by association.

[libneo]

100. why stop at "the party of Hillary"

How about the party of on-demand abortion? Every democratic candidate has to be pro-choice, right? How about the party of gays and lesbians? Every democratic candidate has to be for equal right for all, right? ...

[election_2004]

104. You're missing the point....

It's much easier for them to demonize Hillary in those ways. Candidates who aren't as well-known also aren't as widely-hated, and thus they have more leeway to define themselves.

[libneo]

109. No, I am not missing the point. Tell me who your guy is

and I can easily find ways to demonize him too. What is different about Hillary is that she wouldn't crack because she is battle-tested.

[election_2004]

112. How?

She's won two easy senatorial races in a blue state where Democrats consistently win.

How is that comparable to preparing for a national presidential campaign?

[libneo]

115. She won over republicans and indepedents in New York.

And she consistently won over republican colleagues in the Senate.

[election_2004]

137. NY is hardly a microcosm of the entire U.S.

Come on now, seriously....Republicans and Independents in New York state are still way more progressive than those in Middle America.

And how many U.S. Senate Republicans do you believe would endorse (or even vote for) Senator Clinton, if she's the Dem nominee for president?

[thingfisher]

134. This seems so obvious to me.

Dems can't afford to throw gasoline on the fire. A lot of religious righters are finally becoming disenchanted with der fuhrer and his party. Dems need to court this group by at least not running a candidate that will result in an automatic negative response.
Be realistic.

[evlbstrd]

9. Can't we learn to spell?

It distracts from your message.

[snowbear]

10. That's a COMMON typo.. just take out one of the "o"'s Darryl...

And to the DU'ers giving you a hard time (in jest of course) ...

..

We ALL have typos on here.. ME more than most! http://eliteleague.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/duh!.gif

[StrictlyRockers]

11. Let's all get loose on Election night '08 when HIllary wins!!

[Liberal Veteran]

13. While I am sure everyone is having a grand time obsessing over spelling....

...instead of important matters, I tend to agree that Hillary Clinton as a candidate for president is simply a bad idea.

Not for the reasons you give, however.

The right hates her like poison.

The far left doesn't much care for her.

The moderates who identify as democrat are probably about 60-40 in favor of Clinton.

The moderates who identify as republican are probably about 80-20 against her.

While she would make a damn fine president, I can't think of anyone more polarizing or someone the right would like us to have as a candidate than Hillary.

Quite honestly, the right wing has spent so much time promoting her as a presidential candidate, that should be enough to give the democratic party pause that she might not be the best choice if we want to win.

[libneo]

15. Your numbers are just your numbers. I can make up my numbers too.

How about 100% of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents voting for Hillary?

[Liberal Veteran]

17. Yawn.....welcome to DU by the way.

:rofl:

[libneo]

20. We will see more and more support for Hillary here.

[Liberal Veteran]

22. Oh....I'm sure "we" will.

Of that I have absolutely no doubt.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see a deluge of newbies all extolling the virtues of Hillary Clinton as our candidate.

[libneo]

23. You are right. Her supporters like myself will change the tone of this board.

[Liberal Veteran]

26. Here's a good place to start....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/donate.html

[election_2004]

39. You mean the Carville Cabal....

Sent into the reaches of cyberspace to do "networking" on behalf of their candidate.

Oooooh, I can hardly wait...

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

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

[election_2004]

45. Hmmm, we'll see, won't we...???

I wonder how many pro-Hillary bungee-posters will suddenly magically appear on DU once she announces her "exploratory committee"?

[libneo]

55. Well the tone of the board is already changing. (nt)

[election_2004]

65. Gee, I wonder why....

And don't tell me it's because people at DU have suddenly "seen the light"....

[libneo]

98. It is the internet(s). People come and go as they please. (nt)

[election_2004]

111. And people can take that for what they will

But if you're here to try to persuade other people to consider your perspective, you might want to reevaluate your technique, buddy.

[libneo]

116. Vice versa. (nt)

[Crunchy Frog]

53. She's sending in loads of paid astroturf? She's certainly got the money.

I like Hillary alright, but she was disastrously wrong about Iraq, and she is so polarizing that I genuinely cannot imagine her winning the presidency.

If I should be proved wrong, no one would be happier than me, but I don't expect I will be.

[elocs]

52. There is a certain irony here...

A new lib (libneo) with 32 posts claiming to know better than an old lib (Liberal Veteran) with over 1000 posts. Maybe a little deference is called for until there is more credibility.

[libneo]

74. suddenly, it is not about the viabilityof Hillary candidacy

but about the number of posts I wrote. Isn't it ironic?

[Liberal Veteran]

78. I think it has something to do with an unwillingness to acknowledge...

....exactly how polarizing Hillary Clinton is. Or it may have something to do with the fact that you instantly poo-poo one poster after another telling you the reaction they have seen among their moderate and liberal friends when it comes to a Hillary Clinton Presidential campaign.

Like it or not, DU isn't the FAR left. We are some of the left and some moderate and a few conservative democrats. We are the people that should be her base and from where I stand, it looks like a great many people have absolutely no intention of supporting her primary bid.

And you know damn well, Hillary Clinton isn't the candidate that is going to cause a watershed of republicans crossing party lines to vote for the democratic candidate.

[libneo]

81. .

Even in that case, the focus still should be why you think Hillary is polarizing, not how many posts I wrote, agree? At this rate, I can get over 1000 post within a week, but that should mean nothing to me or anyone.

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

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

[libneo]

91. I do want to combat anti-Hillary hysteria. (nt)

[election_2004]

96. Ah, and look how successful you've been so far....

By all means, keep it up!

The more people who come to see through your candidate's Carvillian tactics, the better.

[libneo]

101. Care to let us know who is your guy? (nt)

[election_2004]

106. Well....

Based on who will probably end up running, it will most likely be one of the following: Evan Bayh, Wesley Clark, Bill Richardson, or Tom Vilsack.

Once each of them declares (or declines making a run), I'll take a look at their platforms and decide which one I feel has the most resounding message.

[libneo]

114. If that is your list, I can't figure out you are so against Hillary

Evan Bayh is ok, but he lacks name recognition, and can be easily compared to another senator from Indiana, Dan Quayle.
If Wesley Clark decides to run, I will have a hard time picking sides. Clinton/Clark or Clark/Clinton would be my dream ticket.
Bill Richardson is a racist, out of the question.
Tom Vilsack, I don't even know who he is. Well I lied, I know he is the governor of Iowa. Nothing more.

[election_2004]

138. Because....

The four who I named haven't given me any reason to distrust them.

[truedelphi]

130. As a Senator Hillary has already made the wrong choices

That is why I cannot support her.

I couldn't tell you even if you paid me whether I am a left-ie Dem, a centrist or a near Republican Dem.

But as she supported
A) the vote that helped put us in Iraq - without any debate from her
2) the vote that helped the banking industry by legallizing Usury (unless it is mobster Usury - then it is still wrong)
I cannot stomach the thought of voting for her

Every time I pay $ 28 for NSF item at my bank (something that should cost them $ 5 tops - it used to cost $ 3 in Oregon 12 years ago) I curse her name

[elocs]

85. Oh, you are going to do well here. I can't wait. It will be interesting.

Is it your goal to see how many people you can piss off before you get 100 posts? Try reading a little more and responding less just to build up your post count in pissing matches because that will be your reputation. If you are a new lib, you need to read and listen a little more. Until then, I think I will simply X you. It makes life more simple and I don't need to read the noise.

[libneo]

93. .

I believe you are the one that are trying to pissing me off by accusing me of being a "freeper". I will keep fighting the good fight. If I have to piss off supporters of other candidates, so be it.

[Critters2]

97. I guess I missed the "freeper" accusation.

Interesting that a newbie would make that leap. Something smells off to me here.

[election_2004]

102. A Freudian slip, perhaps?

Although I don't think neolib is a "freeper," but neolib certainly seems to be more aware of how he/she is perceived than he/she would have us believe.

[libneo]

107. .

stop this personal attack. Maybe you should let us know who your guy is.

[motocicleta]

127. It's like the posts just write themselves

"stop this personal attack. Maybe you should let us know who your guy is." I'm hearing that in a Ben Stein, I'm actually texting my buddy but I must keep producing these awful posts, kind of way. Which page of the playbook did you get that one from? This must be easy money for you. We'd more likely believe you if you could dredge up a little emotion.

Nobody called you a freeper. You want to explain how you thought someone did? If you can do that, I'll tell you who my 'guy' is.

[election_2004]

139. Well, it's good to see you've mastered the use of the period

And I already responded to your inquiry regarding who I'm leaning toward for the presidential race, in one of my entries above.

[Critters2]

124. What strikes me is that a newbie is so hip to the lingo.

Me, I didn't know what a freeper was until I'd been at DU several weeks, at least. Maybe months.

Neolib is one smart newbie.

[paulk]

131. pissing off Hillary haters

is hardly much of an accomplishment on DU.

[elocs]

133. I don't hate Senator Clinton, I just think we have stronger candidates who

do not motivate and energize the Republicans and I prefer somebody who did not vote for the Iraq War Resolution. Until all other potential candidates are referred to by only their first names, I will refer to her as Senator Clinton. She is, after all, a U.S. Senator and not a Cher or a Bono.

I also put the little newbie on ignore, life is too short and there are tens of thousands of others who actually have something to say.

[Hav]

21. .

Concerning the other poster, your numbers don't have to be exact, the message is still clear.
The left doesn't really love her, the right hates her. I think we all feel that and the poll numbers reinforce that feeling.
She polarizes the country too much. I also think that's the reason she's in the news so often. It's about ratings and not so much about pushing a certain candidate for us.

So, of course I don't know whether nominating her would be a sure loss but apparently there are so many who would never ever vote for her.
She would be a pretty competent President, I'm sure about that though.

[LibertyorDeath]

14. Thanx for the Reality check bigdarryl

The delusion of Hillary as Prez runs deep around here.

Pay no attention to the Spelling police they live bleak lonely lives.....

[Botany]

16. And if my house is gonna get hit by a meteor tuesday .... screw the gas bill

Long way to go before we have to worry about this.

I really hope Hillary stays as senator where she can build real power and get
some real work done for the American people. Besides for Lott and Imhoff must
die inside every time they see her.

[PADemD]

29. Can you just imagine

what could be accomplished with Nancy Pelosi running the House, Hillary in the Senate, and a Democratic President?

[libneo]

33. Now you mentioned Pelosi. She is a major disappointment.

No one is talking about "the most ethical Congress" any more thanks to Pelosi's power play.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

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

[libneo]

56. So Pelosi is a sacred cow that no one can slam? (nt)

[Hav]

60. .

No, but I think she deserves at least a minimum of respect. That means giving her a chance and not slamming her before she even started.

[libneo]

63. And this comes out of someone doesn't give Hillary respect?

I repect Pelosi, but her first moves do not inspire confidence. I do wish her success as Madame Speaker because people would use her failure to knock Hillary, which is unfair.

[Hav]

73. .

Excuse me? What makes you think that I don't have any respect for Hillary Clinton?
I merely stated my personal opinion concerning her chances and I also said that she would be a competent President. That doesn't have to mean good or bad for those who are left to the middle but I'm sure she would get the job done way better than Bush.

I didn't slam her, I didn't call her a disappointment and I'm pretty confident that I never even talked bad about her as a person or her abilities.

[libneo]

76. .

Ok, I accept that you do respect Hillary. I apologize that I mistook you for someone who just talkd bad about Hillary.

[elocs]

57. I don't know about "freeper",

but this newbie is doing a great job of throwing their weight around and does not spell well to boot (That is why that "Check Spelling" button below is handy, but only for those who are prone to typos and cannot remember how to spell every word correctly anymore.).

[libneo]

61. Hey, your guy chickened out. Not my fault. (nt)

[Name removed]

80. Deleted message

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

[libneo]

83. .

The more, the merrier. Isn't it?

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

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

[libneo]

67. This is a not thread about Pelosi

but if you are open-minded, you should know I am not the only one disappointed in her. I guess we should get back talking about Hillary's candidacy.

[NMDemDist2]

18. yup, I'll be hanging loose

no problemo dude. like totally!

:kick:

[kentuck]

28. Yep, we'll be real loose if Hillary is the nominee...

I'm trying not to lose it.. :)

[FormerDittoHead]

24. 2008's a LONG way off. Don't talk about Hillary until she's nominated, blaw, blaw blaw.

Sorry, I see someone already gave the 'official' "don't talk about Hillary yet" reply...

[Old and In the Way]

27. Not really....I think any Democrat who wins the primaries will win

the Presidency. I don't think it will be Hillary, but if she takes the primaries, hello President Clinton!

[partylessinOhio]

30. The Repugs are going to hate ANY Democrat that runs for President.

Many Democrats love Hillary Clinton. She beats ANY Repug hands down.

So whoever gets the nomination,

in this time of crisis for America,

vote DEMOCRATIC!

[mtnsnake]

31. What a load

that the media wants another Republican president, so that's why they're pushing Hillary. The only reason Hillary and Obama are the subjects of so much media is because they know how to make the news, period.

[Kolesar]

35. The media wants Hillary because she is "Loose" (?)

Just kidding. I think you stated the criticism well.

[w4rma]

32. Yes. If Hillary is the nominee it will be as bad as 1994 after Hillary failed at healthcare. (nt)

[bluestateguy]

36. HIllary is a 23 state candidate

Which means she can compete in 23 states, not necessarily win them. Republicans are not very motivated right now, and a lot of party activists don't like John McCain. If Hillary is our nominee, that will change.

[libneo]

43. Democrats were only competive in Northeast in midterms.

Look what happened to the control of House, Senate, and Governorships!!!

[election_2004]

44. But if Democrats want to make big GAINS....

They must expand that reach into red territory. Sorry, that's just how it is.

[libneo]

59. I believe Hillary can reach into red territory.

The assumption that she can't is wrong.

[election_2004]

66. Well, I don't

And a lot of other people don't, either. Why take the risk?

[libneo]

72. If the majority of democrats didn't believe in Hillary,

she would not become the deomcratic candidate. So there is no risk.

[election_2004]

75. What does "a majority of Democrats" have to do with anything?

I'm talking about self-identified Independents, swing voters, split-ticket voters, and people who have traditionally voted Republican but could potentially be persuaded to switch. Those are the ones who will be determining the presidential margin of victory in battleground states, along with the composition of the post-2008 U.S. Congress.

[libneo]

88. everything

You don't think Hillary can get enough cross-over votes and you are entitled to your opinion. But if the majority of democrats think Hillary can do that, she will be our person to get those cross-over votes.

[election_2004]

95. Or, you could argue that Dems thought the same thing about Kerry....

...and look where that got our country.

And I actually like Kerry!

[libneo]

118. but I didn't like Kerry. I liked Clark. (nt)

[election_2004]

140. What does that have to do with anything?

Clark was never the presidential nominee. Kerry was.

[Critters2]

99. I'm one of those who don't. Nominating Hillary will cost us the election. Period.

[bluestateguy]

51. That is false

In the House, Democrats gained 4 seats in the South (Mahoney, Lampson, Shuler and Klein), 1 in the Great Plains (Boyda) and 3 in the Rocky Mountain states (Perlmutter, Giffords and Mitchell.

In the Senate, Webb won in Virginia, Tester in Montana and McCaskill in Missouri.

In governorships, Democrats gained in Arkansas and Colorado. Every Democratic governor up for reelection won.

[libneo]

58. I know that is false. I am trying to point out that saying Hillary is 23-state

candidate is false.

[election_2004]

68. I don't agree she's a "23-state candidate," necessarily....

But it's more likely that she'll bring harm further down the ticket, in many of the areas where Democrats could otherwise make inroads.

[libneo]

69. If Hillary wins the presidency, she will help other races.

If she doesn't, that won't help. The question, then, is whether she can win. I think she can.

[election_2004]

71. Why do you believe Hillary will help candidates....

...in traditionally Republican-leaning or "split" districts?

[libneo]

77. because

People will see that she is not as far left as some on this board want her to be. People will see that she is a moderate and represents the mainstream American values. And they will realize that the brainwash stuff they take from Rush, or DU (no typo here) is false. I believe Hillary can make a convincing case that she is the best person for the presidency and that will help democrats everywhere, including Republican-leaning and split districts.

[election_2004]

89. People who are set in their opinion of her are not going to change their minds

How can she do this any more successfully than Gore or Kerry tried to?

Even if she is able to swing some undecideds her way, don't tell me there won't be ANY seeds of doubt still present in their minds.

[tavalon]

64. Yeah, we made gains in all of them!

What does libneo stand for, liberal neocon?

[libneo]

70. .

does it matter what libneo stand for? What does tavaon stand for?

[tavalon]

103. Teresa Avalon

My name.

Your turn.

[election_2004]

105. *taps foot*

How long do you think before neolib takes you up on that? ;)

[tavalon]

110. Ha ha! I'm not holding my breath

[libneo]

117. .

new liberal, that is.

[Name removed]

119. Deleted message

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

[libneo]

121. You are such a rude

robot. You are on my ignore list from now on.

[tavalon]

122. I'm guessing you aren't going to take my advice then

Not surprised, really.

[zulchzulu]

37. If Hillary is the nominee, it might be close. But there's one thing...

She won't be the nominee. She will drop out of the primary race a day after Super Tuesday with no wins. So let loose!

[still_one]

48. first of all she hasn't announced, second, doesn't it even matter who she runs against?

[we can do it]

62. Is That Better Than Tighten? or Is It Titan?

[Poll_Blind]

79. In a nation with 300+ million citizens it has always disturbed me...

...more than a little that a sort of quasi-dynastic set of candidates gets so much discussion and promotion. It upsets me that either Liberals or Conservatives would consider, for their candidate, someone related, by blood, to a previous president when at every moment in America there are dozens (if not hundreds) of persons more qualified for the job, save the "brand recognition" of their name. In George W Bush's case, he's the living embodiment of Thomas Paine's "The Crisis Papers"' (IIRC) commentary on the dangers of heredetary transfer of power. He's an ignorant ass, and even that is more than charitable.

When it comes to Hillary Clinton I reckon she would probably make a "decent" president. I'm sure I would disagree with her on some big issues, but voting for president means finding someone most of your party can agree with and putting them forward, not always getting the candidate you, specifically, want.

But I have to ask myself, because I still find it a valid question, "Is the best person for the next Democratic bid for president really the wife of the previous Democratic president? In a nation of 300 million, with about half those being Progressives, is it really the one in a quadrillion chance that the best candidate is Bill Clinton's wife?"

Because this nation is so amazingly, stupefyingly, varied and Liberal politics is so rife with people who have given their all- and sometimes more to advance Progressive ideas, it seems bizarre to me that Hillary Clinton's criteria for President wouldn't include a substantial amount of "brand recognition" of the name. And it just seems like we can be more elegant than that as a party.

I recognize this is unfair to her, because there really is that slim chance that she is (if you could see the future) the best candidate for the job. It just seems very, very unlikely.

It's also something I apply to the Kennedys though in retrospect Edward Kennedy has turned out to generally be a fine politician. Giving the odds at a quadrillion-to-one is hyperbole but the sense of unease remains.

Too much political "inbreeding" isn't likely to make a country as strong as picking from a greater set of ideas and personalities.

PB

[election_2004]

82. You're absolutely right

None of the Hillaristas have given any credible evidence as to what makes Senator Clinton the "most qualified" or "most capable" potential candidate.

I honestly believe it's a psychological desire to get "revenge" on the wingnuts, because the Far Right hates the Clinton family so irrationally and intensely.

[Liberal Veteran]

87. To some extent, nothing would please me more than that...

Because I enjoy watching the neocons chew on their own livers, but quite honestly, I suspect some of her new "supporters" come from less than progressive backgrounds and values.

[libneo]

90. I openly acknowledge that I am not as liberal as most here

But aren't people coming from "less than progressive background and values" the ones that are most coveted by democratic presidential candidates in a general election?

[election_2004]

92. Oh, I agree

The ameteurish nature of their "arguments" often seem to demonstrate that.

There are pro-Hillary DUers around here who have been posting for quite some time, and I doubt they are "trolling," even as much as I may passionately disagree with them on who our next president should be.

Personally, I could care less about electing a president who "makes the RW's heads explode."
Silly ole me - - I actually feel the bigger priority should be advancing the lives of Americans.

Candidates such as Hillary thrive and prey on cyclical nature of forcing voters to remain dependent on the Democratic Party.

[The River]

120. Exactly Right

I've seen countless posts here claiming that if *bush
didn't have that "famous" name/ family connections,
he couldn't even be elected as a dog-catcher.
What makes Hillary so extra special then?
Her multiple Senate terms?
Her anti-war votes?
Her "leadership" on important issues?
All her legislative initiatives?
Or is it because she has name recognition and corporate money ?

If she is the nominee, I'll vote Green
No more Bushs or Clintons thank you very much.

[Vektor]

84. Loose our bowels?

That could be messy.

[Critters2]

94. We loose? Seriesly? That's hugh! nt

[enough already]

108. Nobody who voted for the war is getting my support UNLESS

they vote immediately to de-fund it and get us the fuck out of there.

[Critters2]

125. Thank you nt

[BenDavid]

128. I have never heard so much

bullshit coming from so called people on the left. Take a damn good look at what William Jefferson Clinton did and what help he gave corporations and what taxation was given to them. Hell! What you wanna do away with all corporations?

I will tell you really what I think. All of you that say SHE cannot win in 08 have fallen prey to the right wing spin merchants. So what you going to replace HER with? another kerry run? Edwards? Obama? NO! too damn inexperienced and America is going through a man that was not ready for prime time....The only one that is ready if SHE decides to run, is HER!

[Trajan]

129. Hillary isnt perfect ....

BUT, if she wins the nomination: I am voting for her .....

[Infinite Hope]

132. Were you among those insisting we'd lose in 2006 too? n/t