Not another anti-Hillary Clinton thread...

[Virginia Dare]

Senator Clinton is not my top choice for the Democratic nomination. She probably doesn't even make my top ten. She's too much of a corporate shill for my taste.

Having said that, once her political machine starts up, it is going to be an awesome sight to behold.

Being a realist, I'm preparing myself for that probability, as I will support her 100% over any repuke out there Therefore, I've been looking for some silver linings in an H. Clinton Presidency.

1) She's a woman

2) She's extremely intelligent

3) She will attract some of the best and the brightest liberals out there to work in her administration, and I think she will accomodate them, as her husband did

3) I think she'll be more liberal on social issues than her husband was

4) I hope she will give her husband a very prominent role within the administration in terms of rebuilding international relations, which have been left in tattered heaps by the side of the train wreck which is the Bush Administration.

I'm still thinking on this, feel free to add to the list.

[MADem]

1. Her husband will be a great First Gentleman

White House parties will be worth televising again.

The wine steward will have work again!

Of course, I'm waiting and seeing. I want to hear what she has to say, along with the rest of the field.

[Virginia Dare]

2. That's the spirit!!...n/t

[MannyGoldstein]

3. Extremely Intelligent?

She seems "extremely intelligent" only like Karl Rove is "extremely intelligent" - they were both good at getting a President elected during a certain point in time, and both good at getting tons of money. Other than that - what has she done that's indicates intelligence? Hillarycare? The AUMF in Iraq?

[Virginia Dare]

7. Relative to what we have now, yes, she is...n/t

[YOY]

4. She's a hawk

Supported the patriot act and the invasion of Iraq. Once you can do something about those little discrepancies. We'll talk about just how great she is.

Ahhh...the kryptonite question that none dare touch...

"Didn't she support the invasion of Iraq and the patriot act?"

[blm]

5. Those are positive things. We know for certain that positive acts are EASILY wiped out

when we allow the continuing coverup of the criminal covert actions of BushInc. So what is the longterm good and goal we should be looking towards?

When will Americans allow TRUTH to guide them and lead them as a stronger and more moral nation that can actually LEAD the world?

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

[Virginia Dare]

6. When we are no longer controlled by greed and money...

do you see that happening in the next two years?

Not saying it won't, but what will it take to get us there?

:shrug:

[blm]

11. A WH that believes in American people being informed and respecting them with TRUTH

and open books.

[Virginia Dare]

17. How do you get that White House?

How do you get a President that is not forcefully crammed down our throats by the corporate overlords a complicit media? Remember, most of the voting public is not as enlightened and informed as we at this forum are.

[blm]

18. We'll see. Voters will side with the coverup Dems or the open government Dems.

And I do believe that issue of opening the books to American people WILL come up a year from now.

[andykef]

8. Forget Clinton She Cannot WIn

Whilst I agree with the points made and would of course support her if she were to be nominated I don't think Rodham-Clinton can win a Presidential election.
1. She creates too much division.
2. She is a sitting Senator from a 'liberal' State.
3. The GOP will tear her down, especially over her health plan failure.
4. The GOP will use her Iraq votes to hightlight Democratic division.
5. The media want her to run to see a McCain vs Clinton election
6. I don't think she can beat McCain in the Mid-West and therefore win this 'media dream' election.

Al Gore needs to run IMO. Why? Because he can beat McCain. Ok there are those who say 'losers' don't get a second chance, but Gore did not lose in 2000, he beat W. Gore has a credible position on Iraq and I think with Bayh, Obama, or Richardson as running mate can win the 2008 election.

Never forget it is about winning, and in 2008 winning in the Mid-West, so whilst Clinton, Clark, and Edwards have good strengths they will not win in terms of Presidential politics.

[Virginia Dare]

9. If that is indeed the case,

then it will fall to whomever she chooses to back, as she will have the lion's share of the money when the time comes. I don't think Gore will run for that reason, they would basically be competing against each other for the same political donors. I'm with you though, I wish he would.

[SaveElmer]

10. A few more..

She has been a lifelong advocate for childrens issues...

Has been dealing with healthcare issues for 15 years...would be in an excellent position to make that a priority..

Unwavering advocate for a women's right to choose

Unwavering friend of civil rights...

Excellent on environmental issues...

btw: The cw that she is some kind of corporate shill just doesn't hold water. She achieves a very low rating from the Chamber of Commerce, opposed CAFTA and is in favor of repealing the Bush tax cust on the wealthy...among other things...

[andykef]

12. President Rodham-Clinton '09?

Sorry but these points will not stop her being destoyed by the Corporate Media and her Iraq War votes and support for Iraq will stop her in her tracks if Democrats have any sense. 2008 will still be about Iraq and Rodham-Clinton has nowhere to go on that issue. I would be interested in hearing how others think she can win the 2008 Presidential Election as I cannot see how this can be done.
What is the point of selling the nomination to the highest bidder?, only to give the prize to the GOP.

[SaveElmer]

13. How did a vote for the IWR...

Stop Lieberman in his tracks? How did that work out?...the man is more powerful now than before the election.

And how did opposition from the corporate media do in stopping her election as Senator, or reelection...?

When will people realize that Bill and Hillary Clinton are the most politically gifted politicians in the Democratic Party...I can think of no one I would rather have going up against the corporate media and the Republican slime machine...

[andykef]

14. Get real

Lieberman was not as you know a Democra candidate, he did not win as a Democrat in fact he was rejected by the grassroots and the GOP rolled over to allow him to win. Does his victory cause a problem for the Democrats, yes, because it highlights division on Iraq.

Senator Clinton was given a pass in New York because the GOP wants her to run and know they can tear her down. Rupert Murdoch and the others do not need her out of the race, they need her in it. Get it? Roadham-Clinton is annointed by the GOP and Corperate Media, because they WANT to run against her.

Agree Bill Clinton is the best of his generation. The best President of modern times. Rodham-Clinton failed when she was given health care in the 1990s. She will fail in 2008.

This is not a soap opera, this is cold hard politics. Yes it would be nice if GOP were defeated by Clinton. It will not happen. Why? Rodham-Clinton cannot win.

[SaveElmer]

15. "Rodham-Clinton cannot win..."

Your evidence?

btw: Joe Lieberman got 36% of the Democratic vote, and nearly 60% of the independent vote, in a true blue, anti-war state...

[andykef]

16. How do you get Rodham-Clinton Elected?

1984 SENATOR Mondale - Defeated
2004 SENATOR Kerry - Defeated

Senators from blue states do not win Presidential elections, Kennedy was the last at that was in 1960.

Why do you think she will win? I am interested in finding out what the plus points are. Personally would support Rodham-Clinton if $ buys her nomination but it is the Mid-West and Middle Americans who need to put her in the White House and that is not going to happen.

GORE can win.

[MADem]

19. Gore can't win if Gore does not run. And he's not running.

He'd be dieting by now if he were.

[WildEyedLiberal]

21. ........

:spank:

:rofl: :rofl:

[MADem]

22. I know, I know....but dammit, he WOULD!!!

Bill Richardson has clothes in five sizes...he always gets lean (for him) when he's ready to hit the campaign trail.

I think Al would be on the treadmill if he was gonna go for it...but I think he's got other priorities now. He knows he won, we know he won, he knows he was robbed, and so do we. And he probably enjoys a good meal at this stage of his life!

If I'm wrong about his plans, I won't be unhappy. I think he'd be a helluva candidate, again. A fatter one, this time around, but what do they say--all the more to love?

[WildEyedLiberal]

23. Oh God

:rofl:

I agree Gore's not running. He's said nothing to indicate that he's running and made no moves towards running and honestly WHY would he want to be in politics at this point? He's found his niche, and I think it makes him happy. I'm sure he's just as happy not being under the microscope like he was when he was in politics.

He also needs to lose the slicked-back hair look. :scared: Al, what are you thinking?

[MADem]

26. Well, you DO know what that slicked back hair thing is about, ya?

You know how our boy had the "Franciscan Monk" crown working? He's been HAIRPLUGGING that baby...so "they" say!!!

In order to mask the 'blackhead-ish' effect of the plugs, that slicked back pile of hair simply covers the offending area while the plugs take root! I guess it's not accurate to call them 'plugs' anymore, they're individually transplanted hairs....

Anyway, that's what 'ye olde rumour mill' sez...not having asked Al or Tipper about it myself, I can't vouch with any certainty that that theory is truth!

[politicasista]

25. He would

I noticed he has blown up the last couple of months. Truth is doing really well right now. Hope he is taking care of himself. I am glad he is bringing awarness about global warming.

[sniffa]

27. for civiL rights huh?

hopefuLLy you're not incLuding the rights of the GLBT community in there.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

28. Duh! GLBT Americans don't deserve any civil rights.

[RiverStone]

20. Hillary would make an excellent Secretary of State, but

Alas, she is way too polarizing among DEMS alone, even greater still in middle America, to become President. All the contentious debates here on DU of Hillary's non-electibility remind me of arguing about religion. Fun though not very productive. No need to repeat the talking points. BTW, the DU moderators created a group for Hillary supporters - its here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=334

This takes nothing away from your complementary observations; yes, she is extremely intelligent. She represents a select wing of the big BLUE tent that houses our party. Here on DU and among my DEM friends, she never has placed even close to first in any straw poll. I do fear the rants and mind numbing debates we will have if indeed she does throw her hat in. Gawd, we ARE ON THE SAME SIDE afterall in defeating this horrible, criminal BushCo regime. Oh well, democracy eh?

In my humble view, she would serve our country best by staying in the Senate, then I could anticipate a DEM President recommending her for a cabinet post. That would rock!

[karynnj]

24. I think that Hillary might fit many positions better than Secretary of State

Unless I've missed something, I don't think that foreign Relations and diplomacy are her main interest ares. Even with the ISR out, she has said very little on Iraq. The last speech she gave on Iraq was pretty vague.

If she took the job, I'm sure she would rise to it - she did a great job meeting foreign leaders as first lady and is intelligent enough. It just seems she has been more interested in domestic issues.

[MADem]

29. If she doesn't go for it, I'd like to see her on the SUPREMES

It would SO piss off the right! And she'd probably be confirmed, despite the shrillness and teeth-gnashing of the right, with a voice or damned near unanimous vote--the Senate, as I often point out, is VERY collegial (see Ashcroft, John).