Why I can't get behind Hillary.

[Dawgs]

Last nights debate showed me that we have three great front runner candidates. They are all good Democrats, and they would all be great Presidents.

But here's why I can't pull for Hillary over the other two - electability.

Here are my reasons-->

1) I know of at least four Republicans that have said they could vote for Barack Obama. All four hate Hillary.
2) I know two Indys that would vote for Obama or Gore. One would not for Hillary, the other one might.
3) I know two Democrats that would not for Hillary in the general.

So, that's 7 people who would NOT vote for Hillary but might vote for another Democrat. Yes, I know many Democrats that would vote for Hillary if she won the nom, but I also haven't heard anyone (other than Republicans) that said they would not vote for another Democrat.

Until someone can show me that she is electable (by appealing to Independants and all Democrats) I can not support her.

[churchofreality]

1. BS. Thats like me saying I'd vote for Mitt Romney

Any democrat who wouldnt vote for the nominee is an asshole.

[Cornus]

8. Not BS at all

It does come down to electability. She's divisive...most repubs despise her, as do many dems. Although I do not fall into that category, I would prefer any of the other candidates over her. However, if she is the nominee, I will vote for her.

[Dawgs]

15. "Any democrat who wouldnt vote for the nominee is an asshole."

You may be right, but that doesn't change the fact that ALL Republicans will come out in droves to vote against her and some Democrats will stay home. I just don't see that being the case with other candidates.

[wyldwolf]

17. your reply is without any evidence to support it.

that doesn't change the fact that ALL Republicans will come out in droves to vote against her

Just like they did in 2004...

some Democrats will stay home.

The same thing was said here in 2004 about Kerry and he got the largest vote count of any Dem presidential candidate in history.

[Dawgs]

20. Okay, it's not a fact.

I'm going but what I've read, heard, and seen.

I've never heard any Democrat say they would stay home and not vote for Kerry. I've heard many say that about Hillary.

[mod mom]

40. Um did you hear the quick response from the Republicans on Clinton in the WH

during a recent Republican debate? The Clinton name is a sure way to fire up the Republican base, and they know it.

[wyldwolf]

41. um... did you know the term "democrat" is a sure way to fire up the Republican base?

[William769]

30. What Democratic Nominee won't they come out in droves to vote against?

[William769]

26. Welcome to DU.

Get use to these kind of posts on DU, the hate for Hillary Clinton is alive & well here. This is one time I am thankful DU is not representative of the U.S. in general.

[Gman]

33. Thank You!

For once, a post promoting party solidarity. DU is probably more appropriately called progressive-underground these days with so much bashing of the Democratic candidates and the vote on the war appropriations in general.

[RaleighNCDUer]

44. So you're saying that Hillary is NOT a progressive?

She tells progressives that she's progressive. Speaking to progressive groups she trots out her progressive credentials.

Is she fooling the progressives? Or is she fooling you?

[durrrty libby]

2. So what. I know 10 people who would vote for Hillary

[ccpup]

3. I find it odd that all of your reasons

are based on what other people say they may or may not do. Me? I just think for myself and make my decisions based on what is best for me. And I'll vote for the Nominee.

[wyldwolf]

4. Anecdotal. I know folks who voted for Nader in 2000 and said he would cancel out Gore and Bush

Believe it or not, Obama and Edwards do not appeal to all Democrats.

Last month's Marist Poll found 35% of Democrats and Democratic leaning independents nationwide support Senator Hillary Clinton for the party’s 2008 presidential nomination. Senator Barack Obama receives 17%, former Senator John Edwards garners 15%, and former Vice President Al Gore has 9%.

http://www.maristpoll.marist.edu/

[Captain Hilts]

5. Suburban republican women will vote for her in good percentages.

Her polling numbers are lower than her voting totals.

I was in polling.

[ddeclue]

7. No they won't - she's the poster child for why Republicans hate liberals

and GOP women hate her too. They view her as antithetical to their lifestyle and as attacking their belief structure - religious, moral, what have you.

Her negatives are very high and she is the Democratic Newt Gingrich, in that she is very polarizing - people either love her or hate her.

She will NOT win outside of the the Northeast and California and maybe Illinois, especially if she goes against Thompson or Romney. Her best bet would be a "subway series" against Giuliani but even then, a lot of Americans like him and a lot less dislike (in spite of his skeletons in the closet) on account of the events of 9/11.

Doug D.

[Captain Hilts]

13. I was in political polling for eight years and did focus groups...

and married suburban women will vote for her, and that includes some tepid Republican women. They crossover in a way the men do not.

[ddeclue]

57. in NEW YORK I take it...

Do some in Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama, Missippi, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Nebraska and see if they are the same as the "Republicans" in NJ/NY/CT....

My brother lives in Northern Jersey (and he does market research for Big Pharma by the way) and it's two different worlds between the Deep South and Soprano-land.

These deep South and mid West Republican women will NOT cross over and view her with a great deal of contempt.

Sorry, I've lived there and know.

Doug D.

[bread_and_roses]

22. He is correct about R women

or so I believe from her NY runs. There are plenty of pro-choice R women; perhaps her being a woman, and they being being the beneficiaries of the "Second Wave" of feminism gives them the tipping point they need to pull a D lever. I can't fathom their rationale, for sure, that's just a guess. Why any sane person would vote for an R in these times mystifies me, but I give her R women.

And I say that being a hearty critic of HRC, as a multitude of my other posts will attest.

[RaleighNCDUer]

45. Northeastern repub women, maybe,

but to repub women around these parts she is evil incarnate. With NC teetering between red and blue, Hillary could guarantee a solid red shift. Obama or Edwards or Clark could take NC blue.

[ddeclue]

58. My exact point!

Having lived in GA, AL, TN, FL, and near to SC for many years you are right, they are wrong. There's a huge difference between George Pataki and Trent Lott Republicans...

Doug D.
Orlando, FL

[ddeclue]

56. New York doesn't have REAL Republicans...

just Patakis and Giulianis...in the South or the midWest they'd be moderate Democrats.

As a long time resident of the Deep South, I can tell you she has no chance in either the Deep South or the MidWest (Kansas, OK, Nebraska, etc.)

As I said she has no chance outside of the Northeast and the West Coast.


Doug D.

[durrrty libby]

61. "I can tell you she has no chance in either the Deep South or the MidWest'

You are so full of it that I can smell you from here

[ddeclue]

62. You're smelling yourself...not me... n/t..

[durrrty libby]

65. No, it is absolutely the stench of your verbal diarrhea you

spewed all over this page.

[ddeclue]

67. Nope It's you...sorry you smell so bad...

[glitch]

49. Not just Republican women, non-Fundie Republicans in general.

My cousins who are sane, if ill-informed, life-long Republicans do like her but they would drop her in a minute if the Republicans came up with a moderate (or could pass as moderate), competent candidate to run.

[StudentsMustUniteNow]

55. No they won't

Women down here seem to dislike her more than men do.

[illinoisprogressive]

6. i'm one who will never give her my vote. i have many reasons but, the most are

1. i beleive she will move us to the right again and make the party the dlc party again. She will crush the progressive movement and howard Dean. and her 'people' are still trying to go after Dean.

2. She will not get republican moderates or indies and half her own party. she is the establishment candidate that turns too many off. obama has strong support in the indies and mod. repubs like his message and dems like him.

3. her poltics are just so 90s. that partisan nasty politics of blaming and not doing. Not my fault it's everyone elses.

4. She is more a follower and not a leader. If you look at her moves you usually find she has lifted it. No original thinking or leadership.

5. I am just soooooooooooo sick of the clintons. After allllllll these years they are exhausting and tiresome.

[liberal renegade]

9. oh brother.....

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

some of you peeps are beginning to sound like repukes....

[durrrty libby]

12. Well at least you can laugh at them. That one makes me nauseous

[William769]

25. Yea you think shes old.

[rinsd]

52. So Republicans like Obama but Hillary is DLC and will move us to the right?

[RaleighNCDUer]

63. Like the good little authoritarians they are, a major part of the

repubs still believe what they have been taught about Hillary, and they will never vote for her and, by proxy, Bill. She IS DLC, and that will lose significant numbers of progressives, and all the Greens. That does not leave her enough to carry the general election. If the repubs run anyone who can make a believable claim to be a moderate, they will win.

EDIT addition: As for Obama, they've not been told much of anything about him, so yes, he could draw much more crossover than Hillary.

[elocs]

10. I do not support Senator Clinton in the primaries,

but will vote for her in a heartbeat in the general election. I am a Democrat and I vote for Democrats. I will not run to a third party just because the Democrats did not do things my way. I, too, have a Republican friend who said he would vote for somebody like McCain only if Senator Clinton was the Democratic candidate. He would not vote for Romney. Senator Clinton's negatives are not everything, but they do merit consideration. That being said, I think there may be women, both independents and Republicans, who when they get into the secrecy of the voting booth may vote for another woman and say nothing about it.

[mod mom]

11. Of all the Dem candidates, Hillary is the only one that neither my husband nor I would

lift a finger to support let alone vote for. Her ties to corporate interest is the main issues I have of her. She is the only Dem candidate that receives protests from members of her own party when she comes to Central Ohio (Get a Backbone Campaign).

I agree, she is way TOO DEVISIVE! She has alienated the anti-war left and the Clinton name alone makes many independents wince in pain. We need a leader, especially after 8 years of total incompetence and corruption who will unite the country to work on the many huge issues that face not only our nation but planet. A devisive DLCer is certainly not the way to go. Just look how the corporate media, who have backed * at every turn and already annoiting her-it's because she is their best hope for a win for the Republicans.

[Captain Hilts]

16. The RNC is counting on people like you! nt

[mod mom]

32. The RNC is counting on Hillary because they know her devisiveness is the only

chance they have at a possible win.

Sorry if you disagree, but after living through '04 in Ohio (and I was very involved in organizing and GOTV) I worked for change within the party to get corporate influence out and see my party return to the people. I will not take part in helping it go off the cliff by towing the corporate line. (Which I believe is devastating the country).

I will continue to work for Dems in other races but I can't work/vote in good conscience for a candiate I believe is BAD for the nation.

[Captain Hilts]

36. HRC's not among my top choices, but the RNC counts on Dems staying home or straying...nt

[mod mom]

39. We call Republicans "brown shirts" for following the party to disaster.

I believe we must hold ourselves to the same standard. I am working for progressive change within the Democratic Party. I DO NOT support the policies of the DLC and again find them disasterous for the country. I am a good Dem (I organized a 300 member Kerry/Edwards group in '04 that not only handled the GOTV for my inner ring suburb but worked in near east low income precincts in Franklin County Ohio-election hot spot). I consider myself very well informed and feel I must put our nation ahead of party. Corporatism is destroying this country and the planet-I will not be a part of it, or their chosen candidate, who btw has already been annoited by the bush loving talking heads. Ask yourself-why do they want Hillary?

[underpants]

14. You might want to revisit that subject line choice

I'm not saying I'm just saying

[durrrty libby]

18. Well , he is a "dawg"

[Justyce]

19. Of the people I've talked to,

none of them want Obama, very few want HRC (which really surprised me knowing the people I was talking to), and they are somewhat reserved about Edwards as well -- they like the fact that he's against free trade and pro-union, etc., but some say he doesn't have enough experience and some bought into the haircut/rich crap. They all basically agreed on why they didn't want Obama -- unelectable, not enough experience, that he's not against free trade, etc. None could really give me any concrete reasons why they didn't want HRC -- struck me as more media-induced "she's a b*tch" than anything to do with issues. My point is, depends on who you talk to -- very subjective. But I do wish people would quit buying into the media hype and research the individual issues more. This election is starting to really worry me -- God help us all if we end up with freakin Romney.

[earthlover]

21. Hillary is worst of both worlds....

In terms of policies, Hillary is way too conservative and afraid to stand up for progressive causes.

In terms of perceptions, Hillary is viewed as a radical liberal elitist establishment power grabber.

With Hillary we have the one candidate who can most galvanize the Republican vote, yet, what do we get if she wins? Republican-Lite.

Yes, I would vote for her in the general election. I am getting tired, however, of voting for people who don't win. I am also getting tired of voting for candidates who are so naturally unelectable that they have to be handled and packaged as Vanilla to avoid anyone else not supporting them.

Of all the candidates, Hillary is the most Vanilla yet she is the most divisive.

[durrrty libby]

23. and I'm getting tired of so-called dems regurgitating stupid repuke talking points

[RaleighNCDUer]

46. Huh? It is a republican talking point that Hillary is too conservative

and afraid to stand up for progressive causes?

I've NEVER heard a repub say that - rather, they say that she is a closet socialist and if she is elected we will see a threat to democracy like we've never seen before.

Of course, with her DLC support and her corporate backing, we know she's no socialist. So what is she?

[Tellurian]

31. I agree, Repuke talking points..

even the media is blown away by her calm demeanor...and there hasn't been a whiff of the talking points you mentioned for 4 or 5 months now because it always was nothing more than rumor. She's handily dispelled the rumors, she's unelectable, polarizing, divisive and all the rest of the negatives the Republicans attached to her as first lady...your talking points are old and as seen last night, have been dispelled as memes. If you have legitimate criticism, lets hear it.

[earthlover]

54. Are you implying my criticism is not legitimate and that I am not a good Democrat ...

...if I don't think Hillary is a good selection but I would work my ass off for her in Fall if she were to be the nominee?

Oh my God, you are amazing!

You totally turned me off by your demeaning attitude. Calling what I said Repuke talking points. Thanks a bunch.

I am amazed that wanting Hillary to be more progressive would be a Republican talking point. So are you saying that it is the Republicans who are progressive? I don't think so, but if you do I would strongly recommend thinking that through.

Maybe you don't think Hillary is perceived as much more liberal than she is. But perception is everything. And if you come out of the Hillary bubble of reality for awhile you will see that in the eyes of the average Joe and Jane, Hillary is a liberal. Period. I wish she would be a liberal. That would be a welcome change.

Yes, she did well last night. But that does not change the uphill battle she will face in the general election. The conservative press is drooling for Hillary to get the nomination. I don't think they will give her such an easy go of it if it is apparent that she has the nomination sewed up.

As to Repuke talking points....isn't it one of them that it is "my way or the highway" or that "if you aren't for us you are against us?" Well, the irony is that in saying I am using Repuke talking points you are actually demonstrating some of your own.

I am a true Democrat. And I would support Hillary in the general. I would suggest that you be careful. You have that attitude of yours towards others and you might piss them off enough to vote a third party or something. For someone supporting a candidate who is supposed to be inevitable, you sure are defensive to criticism. Wouldn't it be more effective to try to welcome others into the fold?

[donheld]

24. Sweety, a lot can and will happen between now and election time

Your 4 repuglican's may change their minds if they have one by then.

[Dawgs]

28. You are right, but do you really believe the hatred for Hillary will ever go away?

I don't, and that's why her winning the nomination scares me.

[Tellurian]

27. She looked fabulous last night...

Later on, I watched the replay. This time listening to her, but looking at the other candidates while she spoke. Their appearance then was students looking and listening to the master anticipating where she was going next with her answer. Hillary was absolutely stellar. She's learned to modulate her voice, refrained from bobbing her head on every word, less waving of the hands and animated faces. Hillary looked the picture of a knowledgeable, level headed representative, I would be proud to call my president.

[Sonicmedusa]

34. It is far more interesting to watch Hillary's face

while the other candidates are talking.

Her handlers should coach her on her smug smirks and grins.

Sorry, but I have witnessed that all TOO much in the current resident of the Whitehouse, and I have learned not to trust it. It is very revealing of underlying personality traits.

But you are correct that she is definately more polished and professional when the cameras are trained on her.

[Tellurian]

37. It's good to be flexible

and try not to generalize too much, falling into the preconceived notions trap. Where we paint everyone with the same brush no matter who they are because we are a little too rigid and structured from past experience.

An example not necessarily comparing Hillary to Bush but whatever:

"would the faces made by a person with a 220 IQ be made for the same reasons by another with a 85 IQ?" Anyway, maybe not the greatest example but the most logical one I could think of for now..

[Hawaii Hiker]

29. I guess there's an obvious answer to this but I don't know it:

but why is Hillary so feared & hated?...She's NOT far left, she isn't by any stretch...Howard Dean (my choice in 2004) is a liberal...She's more to the center than he was...I'm not sure why she's so polorizing, as James Carville said, "Bill Clinton is the most popular man on earth", so can't figure out why Hilalry is so dispised..

[Tellurian]

35. I guess it's you..

you've been duped into staying away from Hillary because you've believed for so long what Republican's have wanted you to believe. Get back in the game and find out for yourself.

[RaleighNCDUer]

66. What is it that Republicans want Democrats to believe about Hillary?

That she is the wile-eyed radical that they keep saying she is?

We know better.

That she is our strongest candidate, who represents the grassroots of democrats?

Prove it - with all her stances, where has she taken a leadership stance that the Democratic constituency agrees with? She didn't speak of Iraq as a mistake until after Republican leaders began speaking against it. The Democratic grassroots have been ahead of her for years, years when she dismissed them saying "we have to win in Iraq". She is still unwilling to face the entire issue of electoral fraud, rigged DREs, and the theft of the past 4 elections (and yes, our margin of victory in 06 should have been significantly higher, and would have been but for massive electoral fraud - yet another reason why she will never win the general election).

That she is unelectable? That is NOT what they are saying. They are choosing her as our candidate in the media because they know she is the candidate that they are sure to win against. They know they can rally their base against her.

So what is it that Republicans want Democrats to believe about Hillary?

[Tellurian]

76. Why would I care what Republicans want..

and secondly, why would I concern myself with their opinion concerning the candidate I support?

[RaleighNCDUer]

78. You're the one that brought it up.

"...you've been duped into staying away from Hillary because you've believed for so long what Republican's have wanted you to believe."

I'm just asking for clarification of what you think the republican brainwashing is.

[RaleighNCDUer]

47. Actually, Dean is a moderate to conservative Dem. He's just not

a corporatist. She is solidly to the right of him. When you go to the right of a moderate, where are you?

Once a Goldwater Girl, always a Goldwater Girl.

[Tellurian]

82. It's really a bad idea to propagate false information..

"Actually, Dean is a moderate to conservative Dem.

He's just not a corporatist. She is solidly to the right of him. When you go to the right of a moderate, where are you?

Once a Goldwater Girl, always a Goldwater Girl."


According to Hillary's voting record she is considered a


Moderate Liberal standing just Left of Center.

http://www.issues2002.org/Hillary_Clinton.htm





So, I guess that blows your "theory" to bits!

[RaleighNCDUer]

91. I offered no theory -

and will maybe reconsider my stance when you show me VOTES instead of QUOTES.

You like quotes so much, howabout her statement the other night saying that * has made us safer?

[PATRICK]

38. Something beyond logical here

The better point would have been there is evidence, that anyone can try among their own acquaintances so long as there is a decent mix, that Clinton evokes stronger opposition and creates doubt and that her electability has to be studied and defended strongly so that doubt and apathy does not become self fulfilling.

Some of her strongest attributes may contribute to things that don't erase but slip past doubts and antagonism. This is all part of a picture to my preference for Edwards or Obama. Part of it has been the Clintons dealings with the RW in all its unfairness. The monstrous unfairness and crossing of the line has truly victimized the Clintons, if not also testing and forming their executive pose and response. But they have not been impoverished, murdered, poisoned and sent to endless war for crony profit. The world will not sustain their measured response, as civilized and as effective(she CAN win) as it is. Nor are they the only Dems falling far short on directly forcing back and holding to account the renegade loons running the nation into the ground- who will sneak off into the might temporarily, safe and enriched and secure in the lasting damage they caused in the infections they intend to revisit soon.

It depends though on how most people figure and feel. If they truly want Clinton and bury the doubts, then she not only will be the candidate but likely the winner. We've had two previous winners with not too much wild enthusiasm. I would just like more insurance this time that our probable winner is the biggest probable winner and the most likely to reverse and change the disastrous turn this country has taken because the last two Dems(at least) were taken to the cleaners like a couple of chumps, no lesson learned, no complaint registered. I would like to have more Dems also overcome the margin of fraud and gain back more seats, and a larger progressive representation and more blatant progressive agenda than simply taking a turn or natural transition from our actual first failed dictator. As they campaign so they will mostly campaign in the general election, the traditional move to the center or whatever or no. So too will they choose to govern thinking their style of campaign- the best or not- is the style mandated by the electorate. Simply, openness to strong leadership and change, indicates how they likely will perform in office. I mean, if all the horrific crises and criminality of these past dangerous years have not reformed how a decent Dem will operate in office except as a courteous changing of the guard, there is not likely to be any surprises except the horrors crafted by the Bushes and the GOP to heap upon the next bewildered sucker who gets in their way to the next step.

Part of this doubt in no small part arises from the fact that every time a election comes up to the horizon up to the bloody aftermath of post election failures, nothing changes about the march of fraud- and the DOJ election fixers are still in office. The DRE's are still being sold. The election reforms are still spotty and key states are realistically those where reforms may or may not take place before 2008. The MSM has not changed an iota in its crooning bias for the GOP. The big money licks the same hand and tries to castrate the Dems into a polite whipping boys for the corporate dictators they install to loot the general treasury.

Even a good president can face calamity under these present circumstances. A pretense that the first this or that presidency is a pleasant checkmark on the national resume I hope does not last even until the first primary. There is not an ounce of leadership or spark of hope or a simple grasping for the large majority that is out there desiring the simplest, clearest and most essential things. That maudlin insufficiency, that weak tea, is how the media portrays it, in the same fantasy vacuum where Bush is somehow a real president and reality is what the Fraud decides it is so he can evade jail.

It is not important how I have made up my mind but how the party voters, the last vestige of democracy in a poisoned information well, get to decide and get their votes counted. I spent a ot of time last time defending Kerry- not my first choice- last time, even when certain staunch supporters gave up on his chances. Admittedly I am less enthusiastic this time about springing to Hillary's just cause. I think mainly it is the result of the past outcomes. The most I can say this time is that indeed she has been unfairly treated and it another cause of deep national shame and anger that anything like that has entered into the free and fair choice of qualified candidates. If I was to match the fervor of the Hillary haters and nut cases it would be to blot out this injustice. It is also a shame what has happened to both Kucinich and his on-target stands. Some think the awarding of the presidency to these wronged individuals is symbolically the best way to accomplish this, but I personally think winning bigger and less divisively would get us further to their goal. But I certainly wouldn't go beyond that opinion to preaching defeatism or despair at Clinton being a corporate regressive. How does that induced fear compare to the continuance of GOP despotism which that unjustified fear guarantees? This is still good versus evil, good not being perfect but headed in the right direction and evil being revealed in its deadly impetus toward ruin and death. All our candidates have points of just disagreement, etc. but require our support.

There are already too many discouraged people who falter at the obstacles and the imperfections and think of us as the lesser of two evils. In Bush we have THE evil and the "lesser" is one tending toward a greater good. There is essentially a vast difference in the two clays. Supporting the good in our candidates is a step toward the greater task of continuing, ourselves, to build the whole party- to produce better and more timely leaders and progress to match at least the rushing progress of the real world and veer it toward better days.

[Arugula Latte]

42. I was totally shocked yesterday when the very liberal husband of a friend told me

he would consider voting for Giuliani over Hillary. I mean, this guy is LEFTWING and gets heat for it at his conservative workplace. I don't like Hillary, and she's way down on my list of candidates, but I would never consider pulling the lever for a repuke over her.

[LeFleur1]

48. Good Grief

He would vote for Guiliani over Hillary?
I guess that means he would vote for any man over any woman because there is no way in hell a Democrat would vote for Guiliani over Hillary for any other reason.

[Nedsdag]

51. He's not the only one.

My mother who has voted for the Democrats for as long as she has been eligible to said she'd vote for Fred Thompson over Hillary. That shocked the hell out of me. I tried to reason with her but I couldn't change her mind.

[durrrty libby]

60. So maybe he is just a sexist

[alkaline9]

43. Hillary could turn out to be the "better" president clinton...

...I have not supported Hillary in the past, and I probably will not support her until she wins the Dem primary. As far as the Dem front-runners go, I like Edwards by a small margin over Obama and Clinton, but Kucinich is my fav.


What I fear about Hillary:
- Another 4 - 8 years of a Clinton/Bush name in the WH
...I think 20 straight years of Clinton/Bush families is enough

- Moving the Dems to the center
...not so much of a problem as young voters will continue
to support more progressive dem candidates as time progresses.

- Corporate Interests.
...well, almost no way to fight this off. Kucinich anyone?


What the repukes fear about Hillary:
- All it would take would be a strong female rights campaign to push Dem, Repub, Indy women to vote for someone like Hillary... especially after the threat to roe v wade that the bush appointed supreme court has slapped women in the face with.

- If one (not so likable) woman can become president, the men's chances at president may forever be lost. I'm SURE that even 4 years of a female as commander in chief would be plenty of time to prove that age old saying that women are more reasonable.

- Even spinning hate toward Hillary, there are slightly more women in this country than men. Nuff Said!

- The name recognition means more than anyone can ever imagine. After Iraq/Katrina/Guantanamo/Plame/etc etc etc, all anyone wants is Bush to leave and Clinton to come back.

- Money Money Money. Hillary got it, Bill can help raise it.


So, while I'm not in support of Hillary during the primaries, I have no doubt that a fully financed campaign (with the advice and experience of Bill's administration and elections) would pull more female voters to the polls than America has ever seen. I would almost say that female votes in a general election for Hillary alone would be enough to defeat the weak cast of repuke candidates.

just my $0.02

[durrrty libby]

53. "Another 4 - 8 years of a Clinton/Bush name in the WH"

This has got to be one of the most tired ragged, eye-roll inducing talking points


People say Bush/Clinton Wh like it is one in the same.

What a load of crap

16 years of competent Clintons would be nothing like 12 years of horrid booshes

Why are there so many ignoramuses?

[jcrew2001]

81. I just don't think any couple/president should get 16 years in the WH

but thats just because I believe that 8 years enough for one person, and that if a couple really wants more time, they're more interested in Power and thats a bad road for us to travel down. Even though hillary would be better than bush, we live in a democracy and we shouldn't be beholden to one power couple; or a bush dynasty.

[acmavm]

50. Hey, Hils doesn't float my boat (thanks Rachel Ray) either.

But as sick and tired as I am of the democratic party right now, I'm sure that if push came to shove and she was the democratic candidate, I'd 'hold my nose' and vote for her. Because the alternative would be oh so much worse.

[Dawgs]

74. I would as well - just like I said.

[LBJDemocrat]

59. I could vote for Hillary. I hate Barack Obama,

I used to hate Hillary Clinton, but I'm warming up to her. As for Barack Obama

1. His economic policies are vague, suggesting that he's secretly a DLC-type.
2. He can hardly finish a sentence without saying "uh."
3. The people on this board who've met him say he's a jerk in person.
4. He's unelectable. People are racist, and when the media will tell them it's OK to be against a certain black man, they'll displace all their economic frustrations onto him.

I'm tired of the hatred against Hillary Clinton partly because any accusation that's thrown against her could easily be thrown against Obama as well.

[earthlover]

64. could you send me more info on Obama being a jerk in person?

I'm not trying to be difficult. This is the first time I have heard this. If this is true, that might influence my vote. Any links?

[LBJDemocrat]

70. I'll look for them

I'm having difficulty, but they must be there somewhere.

[CTLawGuy]

89. having difficulty

wow, shocked.

[ElizabethDC]

71. He was rather rude when I met him

and I recall at least one other person saying that he was rude to them as well.

I don't mention my experience much because I think, "well, maybe he was just having an off day when I met him," but I've gotten the sense that others have had similar encounters with him.

[LBJDemocrat]

73. Thank you.

I was feeling guilty there for a moment and tried deleting my post because I didn't find any sources (but the editing period expired).

[elizm]

69. Hate is a pretty strong word, don't you think?

I can't see anything in your list that should illicit hate. I'm guessing you must have some real anger issues?? Also, I have met Barack Obama in person, talked with him, had my picture taken with him, and have also heard him speak 3 times. He was NEVER a jerk. Quite the opposite actually. Perhaps you could spew your hate somewhere else. It really makes you sound a little stupid.

[LBJDemocrat]

72. Yeah. Sorry.

I was using it for rhetorical purposes because the original poster talked about people who hate Hillary.

I don't hate Obama.

He's just my last choice, partly because he seems like a business Democrat (judging from his book) and because he won't win the personality contest against people like Mitt Romney or Fred Thompson. All of the smears, both open and subliminal, that were thrown against Kerry would be even more effective against Obama. Hillary Clinton's already faced the worst, and it seems she can think on her own better. Despite the stereotypes of these candidates, I get the feeling that Obama is a lot less independent than Hillary Clinton.

[Dawgs]

75. "I get the feeling that Obama is a lot less independent than Hillary Clinton."

Who was more independant when deciding whether the Iraq war was right or wrong? I'll go with Obama's way of 'thinking on his own'. Hillary thinks Bush is keeping us safer - Obama does not.

Do you agree with Obama or Hillary?

[LBJDemocrat]

88. Obama wasn't a senator then

It was a much easier decision for him.

I agree more with Obama on the issue of foreign policy.

I've asked again and again for DUers to describe the differences between the two on economic policy, but I haven't seen jack. Given that, Obama has less political influence and would be less effective at reversing Bush's policies.

[RaleighNCDUer]

79. OK

1) I tend to agree.
2) 'Uh' just indicates that he is thinking as he speaks - he's not just spewing out soundbites. OTOH, when he is making a prepared speach there aren't a half-dozen people in congress who can match him - a very polished orator.
3) I've only met two major politicians in person - one was a jerk and one wasn't. Neither was Obama.
4) Far from being unelectable because of race, he has a proven track record of reaching out across race and party through his career.

And I would like to remind you that it is only fucking June 07. We have a loooong time before the primaries, and it is way to early to talk about 'hating' this or that candidate. I think most those who say 'hate' are just trying to stir shit up.

[karynnj]

92. I know 2 people who have met Obama

because their daughter attends a dance class with one of his kids. They both said he was nice. This was before he was running.

[lojasmo]

68. Sen. Clinton would get walked in the generals.

If she wins the nomination, we lose the WH.

Any other democrat in the race wins the generals.

[Tellurian]

77. "Any other democrat in the race wins the generals."

[lojasmo]

90. Meh...Called it Re. Kerry in May 2003.

Just ask my county DFL chair. I'm sure she's still fuming about when I said: "If Kerry gets the nod, we lose to Bush"

Wait and see.

[jcrew2001]

80. If Hillary loses NH - she is done

I would quit iowa and spend the 15 mil in NH asap.

[Tellurian]

83. glad it's not your worry..

she's a skilled competitor with the best campaign mgr on the planet..

why would you suppose to second guess Bill Clinton?

[jcrew2001]

84. Fine, go and spend 15 million in Iowa - hahaha

leave some for NH though, cuz you won't win without it.

[Tellurian]

85. They have ATMs in NH, don't they?

Then we're set!

[jcrew2001]

86. it'll be too late - all the money would have gone to Obama

there won't be any left

[ElizabethDC]

87. Yeah, somehow I don't think HRC is going to have a money problem. n/t