Interesting piece about Hillary by A. Sullivan (no Kerry mention)

[beachmom]

Here is the link from the London Times:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2092-2003521_1,00.html

As I said, he doesn't even mention Kerry, which is fine with me -- I like him under the radar at the moment. But the interesting thing he says is that she should be on the Supreme Court. He says she is too cold and doesn't connect with people. Although this is said about many Democrats unfairly, I find this to be true with her. He thinks Warner has a shot and talks about how dKos fawns all over Feingold (he doesn't realize, I guess that Wes Clark wins every poll), and even Gore. But really the point of the article is how Hillary really doesn't have a chance, and that she shouldn't run. That part of it I agree with.

[wisteria]

1. I agree, she shouldn't run. Those who say she can win always

site the same themes, she can raise a lot of money and she has that name recognition. Frankly, I know of one person excited about her running for the very reasons I stated, the other thinks she will get the woman and moderate votes. I cam only be subjective on this, I have no desire to see her as my President,-being a woman myself and I don't care if she is another women. To me that is like saying, a black person will vote for a black candidate simple because they are black. I find that premise-in both cases to be insulting to woman and people of color.Moderates I connect with are already opposed to her.

You know, I would love to see Kerry surprise all those nay sayers. What is the point of running a nationally unknown candidate that can be smeared anew when we could actually go with a smear proof candidate and one with name recognition and known leadership abilities.

[JI7]

2. i just don't find her impressive

i see a lot of what she does these days as being based on her husband's advice. but she does not come across well when giving speeches or in her other appearances i have seen.

[beachmom]

3. One big difference between Kerry and Hillary -- authenticity

I agree with you that she doesn't come across well in speeches, but she could change that -- by remaking herself, just like she changed her hair a kazillion times when Bill was prez. It seems like she's always trying to be somebody, anybody, but herself.

Kerry, on the other hand, is his best when he IS himself. It's only when he tries to be something he's not that he stumbles. I'm sure you Boston folks can corroborate that the John Kerry on This Week was a more genuine portrayal of the man than some of his weaker performances on TV. His only other problem is when he is tired, and falls into the Senatese. I think him getting sufficient rest and exercise (and good nutrition, too!) will have to be a big piece of what an '08 campaign should look like in order for him to be successful, should he indeed decide to run. I know that sounds simple, but he needs to avoid mistakes he made in '04, which usually came down to fatigue. You can't completely avoid fatigue in a presidential campaign, but you can minimize it as much as possible.

[wisteria]

4. I agree with your comments on being genuine.

In regards to the 2004 campaign, I alway felt Kerry was expected to do all his own talking. I don't recall Bush ever saying much at all- all his hench men and women handled the message.

[whometense]

7. Great point.

Kerry had no henchmen - he was out there all by himself. That's why I think so many of the criticisms of his campaign are unfair - sure he made a few mistakes, particularly when he was tired, but where were his dem defenders? Nowhere.

I remember which of them were perfectly happy to go on Hardball and yuck it up at JK's expense. None of them will ever get my vote in a primary. And the list is l-o-n-g.

[whometense]

6. She can NOT convey

genuine emotion in a speech. She just raises the volume to try to convey passion, and it sounds phony. She may actually feel the passion, but she comes across as ice cold.

[JI7]

12. i think it was the Rosa Parks memorial

where Kerry and Hillary spoke right after the other. and you could easily tell the difference.

[whometense]

5. Never thought of her on the Supreme Court,

but, you know, that really fits. I can definitely see her there.

[beachmom]

8. Maybe we should make that OUR talking point.

Hey, I highly respect Senator Clinton both in politics and in her private career before that, but I think she is better suited for the Supreme Court than the executive branch. It's not snarky or mean, but it very nicely says, "hey, I'm not voting for her to be the nominee". I can live with that. That goes with my "I love Mark Warner, but he just doesn't have the national security creds. But he would be a great VP or Treasury Secretary".

[TayTay]

9. I feel bad about Mark Warner

I genuinely like what I see in that man. I just wish he had run for Allen's seat. (And not just because I dislike Allen.) It would have given the man some seasoning in national issues. Sigh!

[whometense]

10. I agree - that could

turn out to have been a HUGE miscalculation on his part.

[beachmom]

11. But he already ran for Senate against J. Warner and lost

I don't think it was a career calculation type of thing. I just think he genuinely does NOT want to run for Senate -- he's done with that. That's just the feeling I get from him. Anyway, he's a multitalented guy; if the politics don't work out for him, something else will. Most likely Kaine will do well in the office, but I already miss not having Warner anymore as my governor.

Allen is actually pretty popular here; his is not considered a vulnerable seat. If Warner had challenged him, it would have been an uphill battle.

[Inuca]

15. Maybe...

... that loss was partially due to name confusion? :-)

[JI7]

13. i have thought of her on the supreme court for some time

as i said in the earlier posts which others agreed with, she doesn't come across well in public. but that is not something that matters if you are going to be on the SC.

it would piss off the right wing which is one of the reasons i would like to see her on there. and she can be who she is without worrying about what others think of her. she is there forever.

[ProSense]

14. That was a good point in the article

Hillary Clinton definitely belongs on the Supreme Court. She received much praise for her legal mind from a lot of people and was cosidered one of the top woman lawyers in the country. The SC makes a lot more sense for her, IMO.

[beachmom]

16. Josh Marshal of TPM also against a Hillary presidency

Hat tip (andrewsullivan.com):

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007519.php

He's against dynasties. I agree. New blood (as in no *'s and no Clintons). THAT'S what this country needs. Maybe blood from a New Englander, a son of both the English aristrocracy and Jewish Eastern European immigrants, say, for example.

[karynnj]

17. I'll vote for that New Englander

A son of the English aristocracy, the colonial leaders of America and the descendant of 2 chief rabbis. That he inherited many good qualities of these illustrius ancestors goes without saying.