For All Those People Who Said Hillary was TOAST — Page 4

"The Republican party has admitted that it has no clue how to go after Obama. They don't take Edwards seriously. These guys are salivating over the prospect of Clinton getting the nom."

There are quite a number of Republicans who would love for Obama to be the nominee. They say they would have an easier time going after him on lack of experience and being too liberal. With her votes on the war and her experience the only thing they feel they go after Hillary on is that she is married to Bill and they don't want a repeat of the Clintons in the White House. These are not points that I've made up they come from Republicans.

---

"There are quite a number of Republicans who would love for Obama to be the nominee. They say they would have an easier time going after him on lack of experience and being too liberal. With her votes on the war and her experience the only thing they feel they go after Hillary on is that she is married to Bill and they don't want a repeat of the Clintons in the White House. These are not points that I've made up they come from Republicans. "

If you think that's the only dirt these people have on Hillary Clinton then you haven't been paying attention to the last few decades :P Bill is certainly a serious liability too.

Obama is a social liberal but in his temperament and his fiscal policy he tends to be more moderate. If the election has proven anything so far it's that voters aren't concerned about who's been in the white house for more years. Actual judgement and displayed and accomplishment seem to matter more.

---

To the working-class and middle-class women who came out for her in New Hampshire, all that dirt they fling at Hillary doesn't matter.

Those women feel MORE strongly about Hillary when she is battered, just as they bond with each other in times of stress.

---

Yeah...and Romney and Edwards both have had such hard lives.

---

absolute control over the democratic party, complete fixation from the media

Roninj--the former of those two accusations is patently untrue and the 2nd is true only when you define that as "complete NEGATIVE fixation"--see the article from Daily Kos below (and Kos does NOT support Hillary for president).

Memo to the anti-Clinton brigades

---

as the resident republican, i'll repeat what i've said all along: i would love, love, love an obama candidacy. he hasn't been vetted at all. the extent of the digging on him was that a few people in the media read his book.

now i don't think that the swifties sunk kerry's campaign. i think he did that pretty much on his own as he has the charisma of the frankenstein monster on thorazine. they didn't help him, but they alone didn't sink him.

that said, even clinton staffers were making the "dude, that black candidate went to a madrassa and used to deal drugs" argument. sure they got fired for it, but the perception was already there. not that it hurt him in iowa or that it'll damage him in the primaries much, but think about the general election when it's him vs. mccain or huckabee. what percentage of those that voted against him were supporting clinton and what percentage were hearkening back to the party's jacksonian roots and saying "not in my lifetime!"

i know, i'm a racist, right? but how many times a day does this board catalog how racist this country is? maybe he can be the one to buck the trend. maybe.

hillary's troubles have been played out on national television for the last 15 years. what new charge can be leveled against her? none. the gop is depending existing antipathy to sink her because let's face it, there's nothing new. i was pointing out to people over the past few years how well she's positioned herself with her votes in the senate for a general election. granted over the last year or so she's gotten a lot more partisan with the promary coming up, but that's to be expected.

the problem the gop is going to have is if they don't nominate huck or at least put him on the ticket, the so-cons are gonna walk like they did in '06. they are depending on hillary hatred to get them in the fold, but it's not gonna be enough this time. the so-cons like pretty muich everyone else in the country regardless of party wants to see something different. or at least the appearance of something different.

---

And, papa, Huckabee will NOT be the Republican nominee. He will NOT be the nominee of the current Republican party. He will NOT be the face of the new GOP. Maybe in 2012, after the current Republican party disintegrates and remakes itself, but no way, no how will be lead the Republican party in 2008.

I have been assured of that by people who make bad things happen to good people.

[Cue ominous thunderclaps.]

---

huck's got double digit leads in delegate rich south carolina and florida and he's in a stitistical tie with mutt in michigan. it's too late to stop him from being a force in this process. if he can get enough delegates to take this to the convention, he wins it. no other person in the gop can win a room like him. he might just win it straight out.

---

Hey, Rose WON Jeopardy!

papa, believe it or not, I mostly agree with you, except I think McCain would be the biggest threat to Clinton. He'd do the best among independents and moderates, and the Malkin/Limbaugh wing who hate him over immigration and campaign finance reform would still begrudgingly turn out for him because they hate Hillary more.

Huckabee will quickly lose his appeal with independents and moderates, once they learn more about him.

Rose won Jeopardy cause she was right ONCE!

PJ...why do you listen, then??

It's cause you're a breathless gossip, drinking a gibson whilst fixing her snood!

I'm calling you Louella Hopper from now on.

---

"Dontcha think they could have found something BY NOW??? "

They've found PLENTY of things, and there are a lot of people who don't like her out there. It's just a question of whether or not those things bother you.

Her vote for Iraq, her initial failed health care plan, the state and reputation of the Democratic party post Clinton and during Bush, not to mention other offenses as old as the hills (such as Whitewater). But Repubs have long memories.

"Roninj--the former of those two accusations is patently untrue and the 2nd is true only when you define that as "complete NEGATIVE fixation"--see the article from Daily Kos below (and Kos does NOT support Hillary for president). "

Hillary Clinton is the wife of an extremely popular former Democratic president. She's a capable and successful politician. She's admired by many people in the country and her potential presidency has been in the air for ages. She's probably the only woman in the country who, right now, could win the presidency. She's a feminist icon. She's practically heir apparent to the nomination. A novelist couldn't make a more ideal candidate up (makes you wonder who invented Obama too!).

As I said before, there's no such thing as a negative fixation. Constant press is constant press. People don't read full articles, they don't read between the lines. They hear a name again and again for years and years, it's practically hypnotism.

I'd also argue that Clinton has hardly received anything near negative publicity...

---

I don't always agree with PalJoey...especially when it comes to absolutes (right or wrong)...but I'm with him on this one. The press was vicious to her the five days between Iowa and NH.

Whitewater is not an 'offense.' No wrong doing could be proved...or even found, really.

Her vote on Iraq? Which Republicans are going to hate that again? Health Care disaster? The country is in an entirely different place now than they were in '93 when it comes to healthcare.

People hate her, surely. But she's vetted. No poop stuck to her. Do you REALLY think there's going to be some new revelation?

---

Updated On: 1/9/08 at 04:46 PM