The strengths and weaknesses of Hillary Clinton as the 2008 nominee

[bluestateguy]

First the strengths:

She can raise a shitload of money, maybe even more than the Republican nominee. The Clintons' fundraising rolodex is mighty impressive. You need money to get a message out, even if it's a really good message.

She fights back when she's attacked. Any "swift-boating" of Hillary will be met with a big torpedo. The Clintons fight back HARD when attacked. They are seasoned campaign veterans.

As the first possible woman president, she might be cut a little bit of slack by liberals who are irritated by her rightward shift on certain issues.

She's a damn good debater.

She's disciplined as a candidate, even more so than her husband, I think. She knows how to stay on message and articulate what she stands for.

Now the liabilities

The right-wingers HATE her. They think she is Satan's mistress. The Right could not ask for a greater energizing, mobilizing force for them than Hillary Clinton. They will stampede the polls to vote against her.

She is so well known to the American people for so many years, that attitudes about her have hardened. People who hate her have probably hated her for 15 years. It will be hard to change their minds.

She is increasingly alienating the anti-war Left in the Democratic Party. Her continued "tough talk" on the Iraq War, and even on Iran, is angering liberals who may decide to take a hike on election day, or even vote Green. We all know the consequences of that.

She does not expand the electoral college map. She will be a very hard sell in the south and mountain west. The only red states I see her competing in are Ohio, New Mexico and maybe Iowa. If she has to write off a huge swath of states, then she starts off at a big disadvantage.

Old Clinton baggage. All of the Tall Tales from the Clinton Wars of the 90's will come back with a vengeance: Travelgate, Whitewater, Monicagate, Filegate, Asian Funny Money in the '96 campaign. It will all be back.

[wtmusic]

1. Good assessment

IMO only holding onto that slim piece of the center makes her unelectable.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

2. What about Arkansas?

You don't think she'd take it? I realize that they don't live there anymore, so it wouldn't really be her "state". But she was the First Lady of Arkansas for quite some time -- and I believe they were reasonably well-liked there.

[meganmonkey]

3. All of the indy progressives who voted for Kerry last year

who hadn't been part of the 2-party system in the past will once again feel disenfranchised by the Dems and will go back to voting independent/Green/whatever.

[Jacobin]

4. Not a bad list but a couple of quibbles

A lot more than RWers don't like her at all. I'm way left of the dial and don't like her patronizing, smarmy, "burn the flag amendment' send more troops to IraqNam, scumminess. I think most potential voters who have an ok opinion of her but don't pay much attention to politics just think she would be like Bill and long for those days. Once the attack ads start, they'll distinguish her from Bill and that I think will erode the seeming support she has in these early polls

but that's just me.

;-)
(I hesitate to get in these threads because they usually end up as flame wars. I just would prefer a candidate who is not afraid to be a democrat and who won't pander to the RW crazies. We already have plenty of republicans)

[Armstead]

5. Liability -- Too Corporate

She's the brand of Democrat who has become so corporatized that she cannot really stand up against America's Biggest Dirty Little Secret -- the fact that the economy, political power and government policy have become too concentrated and restricted to the corporate elite.

[cascadiance]

13. Her being corporate and DLC IS her fatal flaw in my opinion!

We need someone to win that will constructively reform not only our government but the Democratic Party itself and our campaign finance system to really fix things so that we don't have the constitutional crisises that we are facing now come back to haunt us again. Anyone tied to the DLC and other corporate influence will NOT be that sort of leader. They should all be rejected. Someone like Feingold needs to be the candidate!

[Armstead]

15. I agree -- That's what has blurred the lines too much

We are oddly more polarized as a country than ever at the same time that the actual differnces between the two parties on issues of elth and power are muddier.

IMO that is because in the lack of a real contest of issues, smaller side issues and things like personality get blown out of proportion and make the political process less meaningful.

I believe we need someone who is so clear on the issues that peopel in the "center" reaize that we are on their side in the ways that count.

[Armstead]

16. dupe -- delete

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wiggs]

7. Good president. Flawed candidate

Besides the reasons posters have talked about, there's the issue Lakoff has described: Hillary and Kerry both have trouble reaching meat and potato, mid-America, salt of the earth, purple state folks. They don't speak the language. They don't engage strongly enough to inspire a sure vote, much less volunteerism, donations, loyalty in political discussion among broad swaths of voters. There is a clear disconnect even with some types of moderate dems.

Personally, I would rather have qualifications, thoughtful approach, and intelligence, but the reality of voting is something different. Regretably, northeast progressives who talk in complex, long, thoughtful, nuanced terms may get points from thoughtful dems but, we have to face it, the number of thoughtful voters is declining (results of 2000 and 2004 should make that abundantly clear).

I disagree with one of the strengths on your list: I don't think she'd be a better candidate than Bill was. He was excellent in almost every way and articulated his positions very well. Plus, he related to regular folks.

Having said that, I think she'd be a much better president than a presidential candidate.

[OneBlueSky]

8. worst disadvantage is that the campaign would be all about her . . .

and not the issues . . . the last thing we need in the country engrossed in a debate over the merits and deficiencies of Hillary Clinton while the war, the economy, and the BushCo illegalities get pushed to the back burner . . .

[never_get_over_it]

9. As a woman who has waited all my life

to have a woman President and prays I will see one in my life time I can tell you Hillary Clinton DOES NOT deserve to be the first woman President. Its not just the RWers that hate her I won't go as far as saying I hate her - but I don't like her - if she ever knew what it really meant to be a Democrat she has long since forgotten and I will not vote for her - I voted for Kerry when I didn't want to - but I'm not going to do it again I don't give a shit who is President - once Alito gets in this country is completely lost anyway - I am sick and tired of calling and writing these Dems and literally BEGGING them to stand up for us. Doesn't really matter who I vote for anyway I live in FL and I'm sure someone else decides how my vote is counted

[NYCGirl]

10. Liability: She's a Clinton. Political dynasties are for banana republics,

not the US. (That means no Bushies, either.)

[AtomicKitten]

11. do you seriously think the Rs will be any nicer to any other Democrat?

We've seen their work. They are sending private investigators out now to excavate dirt on every possible contender to use as ammunition. They will annihilate whoever runs. To suggesting Hillary will be more of a target is dismissing all their other work. They've pretty much exhausted their arsenal of Hillary material.

Hillary's not high on my list to say the least, and I really don't want her to run because of all the kvetching and nastiness here at DU concerning her candidacy. It's toxic and I'm sick of it.

[cascadiance]

14. Like you said, EVERY candidate that the Dems put up...

... they will try to swift boat. Some it will be tougher for this to happen than others. Hillary and the Clintons are more of an easy target for them, as there is already so many negative opinions for them to feed upon on her.

But I don't care about that issue. Whether or not they can go negative on a candidate is not an issue. Whether the candidate truly will fix the direction of this country in the right direction ('er perhaps that should be the "left" direction! :) ) is essential at this point. We want somone that will lead us to fix the campaign finance system to be publicly financed, etc. and not beholden to corporate special interests.

That has nothing to do with what the Rethugs want to depict her as, but how SHE wants to proceed. She's way too in bed with the DLC now for me to ever want to support her. The DLC needs to be exorcised from this party for it to be viable again!

[ComerPerro]

12. Weakenss: They have spent 15 years and

probably untold millions of dollars (both campaign dollars and taxpayer dollars) attacking her.

Even moderates don't approve of her.