How Depressing: I am starting to believe the inevitability of Hillary

[Perky]

It's not that I dislike her.
It's not that I do not believe that she could wind up up being a fine president.
It's not because at the moment I am supporting someone else.

It's depressing that for the yet another election cycle the american voter seem destined to pick in our nominee someone with a huge target on their back. Someone who has not impressed as a campaigner; someone who is destined to at best squeak out a narrow vicotry of something like 280 elecotral votes. Someone who is despised by 45% of the electorate. Someone who's great claim to the White House is that she used to live there.

It's not about her persona or her politics (though both may well prove liabilities in the fall campaign). It is purely about electability.


Why do we continue to shoot ourselves in the foot by choosing candidates who can only get 50% of the vote? Why can't we choose a candidate who can actually have a mandate and political capital to spend. Does anyone think for a minute that Hillary is going to have any kind of honeymoon at all?

[Snarkturian Clone]

1. Well

I DO dislike her.
I DO NOT believe that she would wind up being a fine president.
I AM supporting someone else.

So imagine how I must feel! This scares the bejesus out of me!

[zanne]

2. Don't despair, Perky!

It's only September. I know how you feel, but successful campaigns never become discouraged. Think about your own candidate in the White House.

[MonkeyFunk]

3. who is the mythical candidate

that won't have a target on his back?

ANY candidate will get roughly 50% of the vote, give or take 1 or 2%. That's the nature of politics in America today.

[Perky]

9. I happen to think that against Fred Thompson

that either Barack Obama of John Edwards could get 55%

I think Obama would beat either Guliani or Romney in the some SOuthern States. dude to apathy pon the part of the religious right and and enthusiasm about Obama among black women.

[MonkeyFunk]

17. Is there any polling data to back that up?

or is it just your hunch?

Because my hunch is that Clinton will do as well as or better than any other candidate in the general, and current polling data reflects that.

[sampsonblk]

4. All Dems have a huge target

There wasn't a thing wrong with John Kerry till he ran against Bush. Same for Dukakis. Same for Bill Clinton, who some GOPers loved till he ran for president.

Whoever we nominate is going to get slimed like mad. The thing about Mrs Clinton is that there isn't much more they can say about her.

[zanne]

8. I hope there aren't any more mud targets...

Most of the mud will be flung in January.

[CTyankee]

28. You're wrong on Kerry. His anti war activism essentially negated his war hero status

for lots of people, like me, who are still around to tell about it. The debate swirling around him was furious. Some vets in particular hated his guts and carried that grudge into the 04 campaign. He was right up there with Jane Fonda as their most hated.

[harun]

5. Don't give in to the dark side until we have had a few primaries (n/t)

[zanne]

7. More than a few primaries!

Remember how Kerry was winning on election day until the afternoon? The same thing can happen in reverse, y'know.

[sendero]

6. Americans are stupid..

... not just Republicans, but Democrats as well.

Turn on your tv if you doubt me. MOST Americans are functionally stupid, and intellectually lazy as well. It's no wonder they elected a stupid president TWICE.

[ihelpu2see]

10. True they rarely mention Kucinich, Biden and Edwards gets the occasional

talk... It is always Hillary on the Corp. Media tube and Obama second. But most of the time they talk of a Rudy vs. Hillary match up...

Like Ive been saying if California splits up its electoral votes as purposed... Hillary can not win a General Election.

[Perky]

23. They talk about the top tier because

that is where the donations are going. Now whether the MSM is resposnible for the money going in those directions is an intersting question.

[William769]

11. Another rabbit hole post, how quaint.

[antiimperialist]

12. You cannot prove whe cannot get 50% of the vote

If you are referring to polls asking the question of "are you definitely voting (or not) for X candidate in '08", let me remind many times the numbers of those who think they will "definitely" do something, shrink an increase over time.
In other words, when respondents say "definitely", they are full of it.

[Clintonista2]

33. No, see, they have a magic crystal ball

It tells them who can win a GE and who can't.

[Ethelk2044]

13. Don't have to worry about that, she will not be elected.

I do not take the time to worry about that. We have too much work to do. We have been working on getting some older AA to vote for Obama. So far we have been 3 of the 4 away from the Hillary camp. There is so much work to do before the campaign. Every time someone brings the other camp up. I just make them realize how NAFTA came about and outsourcing. I take every opportunity to push Obama's agenda it is paying off. I even do it at my church and it is working. Therefore, I know she will not be elected if I keep doing my part.

[Apollo11]

14. I admire your self-confidence

If all Obama's supporters have your level of confidence, Hillary has a tough fight on her hands!

Do you do all your campaigning in the context of AA meetings? :eyes:

[Ethelk2044]

15. AA = African Americans

The answer is I talk to anyone who listens or want to talk about politics. A lot of people are upset about the state of America. That gives me the opening door. Once I see someone is willing to talk about the war, economy, education, I go in for the kill.

[Apollo11]

19. I like Obama

But I think he needs more executive experience. Like a cabinet position.

My dream ticket for 2008 would be GORE-OBAMA. Then Obama for President in 2016.

But if Gore stays out, then I am leaning towards supporting John Edwards for 2008.

I like how Edwards has been running his campaign and addressing the issues.

But if Hillary wins the nomination, we should all get behind her.

[Ethelk2044]

20. No thanks on Hillary

Obama has just as much experience as Edwards. He even have more elective experience than Edwards. However, everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

[Apollo11]

22. Edwards has more campaigning experience

just from having been through the 2004 campaign as Kerry's running mate.

"Running a strong campaign. Put out a lot of very thoughtful policy statements and positions. I think you can see the strength that he's gained from having been around the track last time."
Al Gore on John Edwards, CNN, May 22, 2007
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0705/22/lkl.01.html

[Chipper Chat]

16. Don't ch'all remember? Dean was way ahead at this point 4 years ago.

And CNN was talking about "the slumping campaign of John Kerry" (CNN Inside Politics with Judy Woodruff)

[Ethelk2044]

18. I agree with you all the way. MSM just want to pick the candidate. I do not feel Americans`

are stupid enough to allow the MSM pick the candidate. I believe we are all smarter than that.

[Perky]

21. Dean was not ahead in Iowa he was ahead in national polling

That is the problem with both the MSM and the Blogosphere. They are not repsentative of what is going on in Iowas and NH. Ultimately that is all that matters.

[Dawgs]

24. Right, but Hillary is barely ahead in Iowa.

I hardly think that makes her nomination inevitable. You do realize that we are still four months out from the elections?

[zanne]

29. Dean won NH. nt

[rinsd]

32. Dean was far ahead in NH before IA. Kerry won NH quite handily post-scream (nt)

[midnight]

25. Oddly enough when her husband first ran, he was dogged by

his own issues. He went on to be appriciated for leaving office with a surpluss of money and no war. What I can't remember at this time was did Ms. Clinton come out recently calling for the troops to be brought home?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

26. Barring A Major Gaffe Or Scandal She Will Be The Eventual Nominee

Or Edwards or Obama change the dynamic...

How they do that is beyond my pay grade...

[Tom Rinaldo]

27. I have felt that way for about two months now

Edwards hasn't been able to duplicate his high degree of popularity in Iowa anywhere else and he is being pushed hard there also; now it is uncertain he is even winning in his own state. His campaign has provided too many openings to opponents inside and outside our party to attack him as insincere, and Obama's entry into the race deprived Edwards of a big part of his surface appeal to many, that of being the fresh young face of hope. The support Edwards now receives is not as balenced as it was in 2004. He draws heavier from the left but less so from moderates, and I increasingly see him as boxed in there, since Obama also has appeal to some on the left and Kucinich continues to battles Edwards to be the standard bearer of the core anti-war left.

Obama always seemed like a risky proposition to me to bet on to win, but he was a true wild card in the race. Obama certainly has political skills, but he is a heavy weight person saddled with a light weight resume (a description that Edwards also shares to an extent). The fact that Edwards did not bring a great deal of national experience into the race was somewhat masked by the fact that Edwards has already run on a national Democratic ticket, but there is no disguising the fact that Obama does not yet have much national and international seasoning. For Obama to seem credible enough to be our nominee he had to earn his reputation by taking Hillary down, and for a while that seemed possible with him raising as much as or more than she in campaign funds. But Obama's upward movement in the polls stalled out and fell backwards to an extent, and that robbed him of the sense of destiny propelling him forward which I believe fed into his appeal to many voters.

Richardson was never able to capitalize on his resume, he left too many voters cold. And there really doesn't seem to be enough "oxygen", as pundits like to say, to reach below Richardson and give sustaining life to Biden's and Dodd's campaigns. Meanwhile Hillary Clinton has run a very tight campaign that highlights her positives to many voters and conveys a message that she indeed is the most solid and seasoned person with a chance to win the nomination. The longer she pulled that off without also igniting new waves of "Clinton fatigue" the stronger she became, and I think that is a corner she has already safely rounded. The issues that can best be used against Hillary are not new ones, those lines of attack have been attempted and she in my opinion has weathered the worst of that potential storm with an increasing lead in the polls, and her positives in polling begining to creep up slightly rather than falling.

[Netbeavis]

30. Boo-hoo...so we still have a Democrat who will win the White House...

would you rather have 8 more years of GOP running the White House?

THAT is priority #1....getting the White House back from the GOP. The rest is gravy. If your candidate wins...great, if not, stop your belly-aching and help the Dems defeat the GOP.


Look, in a perfect world, everyone gets to win, but its not a perfect world. Even if Obama/Edwards don't win in '08, there will be no doubt that either one will be the front runner in '16, and still young enough to be taken seriously. (I think the age issue is more damning to McCain & F.Thompson than anyone will admit.)


<edit for typo>

[AtomicKitten]

31. The nomination is still in play.

[Netbeavis]

35. it sure is which is why I fail to understand why some people are ready to jump off the ledge n/t

[Stop Cornyn]

34. The depression associated with Hillary's apparent "inevitably" is what fuels buyer's remorse in

candidates who peak too early and what raises expectations so high than an early third place or distant second place finish looks like a huge loss. This is part of what killed Dean.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

36. Don't. Just don't. nt.