Out of right field, conservatives gush over Clinton

[struggle4progress]

By Matt Stearns
McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — Since when is Hillary Clinton the idol of conservative pundits?

~snip~ <post-debate examples> ~snip~

All this from a crowd that has spent the better part of two decades demonizing Clinton and her husband, former President Clinton. ~snip~

"Absolutely," said one Democrat, citing Clinton's high unfavorable ratings (42 percent in a recent New York Times/CBS News poll, twice Obama's 21 percent). "Look at Fox News. They play her up all the time. Imagewise, they think she's the one Democrat they can beat right now."

"A plausible theory," said a Republican strategist with a top-tier GOP candidate. "Hillary Clinton is our best shot to win the White House. That's pretty much consensus by Republican insiders. It's a really environment for us right now. What she does, and what Obama doesn't do yet, is single-handedly solve our base problems. Because of who she is." ~snip~

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003809860_hillary28.html

[Canuckistanian]

1. I think this is a dangerous situation

I think the whole media empire is setting up Clinton for a fall.

They're scared of Edward's message and downright terrified at the thought of Kucinich.

They're up to something. And it has NOTHING to do with good governance.

[liberalnurse]

3. I think the media

longs for the days of the Clinton Administration .They too fear the wrath of bush and
company. We all want our coountry back.

[Greyhound]

17. I don't think you've considered what role the media is playing in this

grand illusion. There is no independent media left in this country to speak of, aside from the local free weekly in your town, all of the various companies are profit centers within much larger organizations.

So for example, you will never hear any earth-shattering revelations about corporate malfeasance on the part of GE from any CBS affiliate, even though it would be a great story for CBS and make it a bunch of money, it would cost GE much more than CBS would gain, so the story is spiked. Just as ABCNews is regularly used to run advertisements disguised as "human interest" pieces for Disney products, and USAToday always has wonderful things to say about Viacom assets.

It's not that they fear arbusto_®, they're just maximizing profits for the larger interest.

[snowbear]

5. UR 100% correct. The MSM is working overtime to get Hillary nominated.. NOT elected, NOMINATED

And why not?

Can you imagine being a reporter and being able to cover such a controversial campaign once it hits the genera; election !?!?!? It's a wet dream for ANYONE in every source of available media.

The sad thing is. Some here fall right into their traps by copying and pasting their piddly articles about bickering on the trail, or who (for whatever reason) get a rise out of the polls that the MSM are going to keep cranking out as they hope every voter and their brother are buying them.

Good grief, they are making Rove's life easy..

[Clintonista2]

8. Don't worry, I wore my tinfoil hat while reading your post

I love the logic of your position; "The MSM is bad, therefore, whatever the MSM "likes" must be bad aswell." It reminds me of the Hitler fallacy in philosophy, which states that things aren't bad because Hitler does it, rather, Hitler is bad because of what HE does.

[AntiFascist]

13. Exactly...

the fear is that a lot of Republicans will stay away from the polls for the next election, but having Hillary nominated could bring them out in droves at the thought of seeing Bill Clinton back in the White House.

[bvar22]

28. The Media is working overtime to get Hillary nominated because

if DLC Hillary is nominated, it is WIN/WIN for the Global Corporations no matter who wins the General.

[LibDemAlways]

10. The corporate whores have been way too enthusiastic

in their praise of Hillary. Even CNN this week ran a piece declaring that she had the best "body language" in the last debate.

Anyone who thinks all this making nice is going to continue if and when she get the nom is in for a rude awakening. She's going to be hit hard and repeatedly by these same pundits, and it's going to get very ugly.

[avrdream]

15. What's new?

"She's going to be hit hard and repeatedly by these same pundits, and it's going to get very ugly."

She has been hit hard and repeatedly for YEARS and still came out above it all.

Give me a break on the "corporate whores" front as well. No one has offered great proof about how she is corporation friendly any more than any other candidates. This phrase is put up over and over and over again by the anti-Hillary crowd and it is getting old. GDP is toxic these days.

[LibDemAlways]

27. By "corporate whores" I was referring only to the

republican shill press that we're stuck with today and the lack of honest, impartial reporting. I'm not one of those who believes Hillary is more beholden to corporations than any other candidate.

I simply don't believe that the glowing praise being heaped on her right now is remotely sincere. It's a set-up to help win her the nomination because the r's believe she'll be the easiest candidate to beat. Whether or not they're correct remains to be seen.

[Agnostic_Jihad]

19. lets be realistic

Kucinich would get less than forty percent of the popular vote if he ran against Guliani. I'm pretty confident in that. Edwards wouldn't do much better.

Let's get real. Many Republicans are level headed realists and that's why they like Hillary, because they see that aspect of her chaaracter and feel more confident in her as an administrator and policy-maker. The're afraid ( and rightfully so) that an Edwards presidency may mean seeing a stock market crash.

[struggle4progress]

22. In all the polling I've seen, Edwards beats Giuliani

[aquart]

2. Republicans continue to be delusional.

[tblue]

12. And I hope she kicks their butt in '08.

She is not my choice but I'm not ruling her out.

[killbotfactory]

4. Maybe they realize the republicans have no hope

And most likely the next president will be decided in this Democratic primary, so they are throwing their hats into the ring on the side they like the most.

[WCGreen]

7. I think that is a very viable theory...

They look back and see that hey, the Clinton years weren't so bad when compared to the nut case in the White House now...

And what another poster said above, Edwards populism frightens them to death...

[Nay]

21. Heck, I've always said Bill Clinton was the best Republican prez

we've had in a long time.

But personally, I think the media loves the Hillary nomination idea because of all the dirt they can fling, the fights they can start, the swiftboating possibilities, etc., not because they will actually vote for her.

[Greyhound]

18. She is a win-win for them.

Even if she gets in, she will ensure an energized base and a divided congress, and what she would likely do in office is pretty much what they want anyway.

From the corporate viewpoint she has no down-side.

[sandnsea]

6. Ooooh, I thought

they meant she was the best shot to really get a Republican in the White House, kind of a win-win. If they beat her they win, and if they don't they win too. A Republican either way. Ooops. I better read more carefully in the future. :)

[Usrename]

11. Hmmm...

Heads we win, tails you lose. :)

[opihimoimoi]

9. The Pubs will do anything to keep the White House...even denigrate her with BS CRAP

They truly are afraid of her.

[Alexander]

14. Nobody will bring the RW to the polls like Hillary Clinton.

Against Fred freaking Thompson, she barely wins.

I want to blow the Republicans out of the water. I don't want a squeaker the right wing can steal again.

[Perry Logan]

16. They know they can't win. A crude "psych" is all they've got.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

23. Which leading Democratic is most like a Republican candidate? IMO Rs are 'thinking

the unthinkable' -- that Republicans will lose the WH and both houses of Congress in a landslide in 16 months. Not only do they worry they can't win, deep down they know they don't by any measure DESERVE to win.

In such a situation, it's of utmost importance to them to minimize their maximum loss of what they really care about--

--low taxes for the wealthiest;

--continued trillions for their Federal contracts for "war on terra", the "prison profit monster", fee-for-service healthcare funneling taxpayer trillions through health insurance companies, and other government largesse;

--continuation of the power of lobbying firms whith whom Republicans have forged strong ties over many years;

and so on.

Their answer well may be Hilary. Certainly it's not John Edwards, who is touting his experienced amd big can of whup-ass for huge corporations, and who already has advocated DOUBLING capital gains taxes for those with more than $250,000 a year in income.

And it well may not be Obama, who has dozens of proposals to further the interest of small-business competitive capitalism at the expense of big-business government-corruption cronyism.

Who's left for corporate Republicans to consider the least of three "evils"?

[Rock_Garden]

20. This exact same spin was posted on Daily Kos yesterday.

And I still don't see any validity in it. Hillary's run an intelligently planned campaign, and it's brought her to the front. Even Republicans can appreciate that. She's certainly not the idol of Republican pundits, but they compliment the way she's played the game. They have very little to compliment regarding their own candidates. Remember that a strategist said, "Hillary Clinton is our best shot to win". It's a strategy to say that, which doesn't make it true.

[struggle4progress]

30. The campaigns Republicans actually run tells me what kind of campaigns they admire:

they like nasty crap like Saxby's foul attacks, and they like brazen cheating as in Florida 00 or Ohio 04. They like using prosecution as a campaign stunt, the sort that produced the groundless conviction of Georgia Thompson in the course of the race for Wisconsin governor.

These SOBs aren't gushing about Senator Clinton because they "admire her campaign" -- she's running far too clean a campaign for them to admire.

[cobalt1999]

24. They are dramatically underestimating Hillary.

She knows how to run a campaign, they've already unloaded everything they've got against her, the country has warmed up to her since her beginning first lady days, and she is less of factor in energizing the far right to go to the polls as, say, gay marriage amendments.

Underestimating her will be the flaw in the republicans strategy.

[illinoisprogressive]

25. the neocons are especially gushy over her.

[Agnostic_Jihad]

26. well

shes kind of cute..

[zulchzulu]

29. Does Rupert Murdoch have fundraisers for Senator Clinton? I haven't heard about it...

Do they know each other? Huh...

[struggle4progress]

32. Murdoch donated to her and so did a bunch of his employees:

He backs Clinton so her backers help him
Ex-Iowa Gov. Vilsack endorses senator, then receives $87,000 from her supporters to help pay off his own presidential campaign debt.
By Dan Morain, Times Staff Writer
July 17, 2007

... Among her notable donors, she received $2,300 .. from News Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch ... Altogether, Clinton took in $51,000 from employees of Murdoch's empire ...

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-hillary17jul17,0,1785721.story?coll=la-politics-campaign

[BornagainDUer]

31. Cause they are all Neoliberals.