Comments on She Who Must Not Be Nominated

So the American voter mandate is either Hilary or Giuliani? It's all so strange...I've never met anyone who likes Hilary or would vote for her...and I sure don't associate with many Republicans.

Hilary got 55 percent of the vote in uber-liberal New York, against a nobody, I'm-not-Hilary opponent.

Keep in mind that in late 2003 Bush was losing to "any Democrat" in the polls.

Point taken, Keshmeshi. My point, though, is that everyone keeps telling us that Hillary is unelectable and loathed. But the poll numbers tell us something us—right now, before the campaign. I can't imagine that we're going to become *more* familiar with Hillary during the campaign; it's not like she's an unknown quantity nationally, like Romney. So I don't think you can argue that the more exposed we are to Hillary the less we'll like her. Well, I you could argue that...

If the Dems are too afraid of nominating someone people might not like, we're going to end up with another Kerry. Give me Hillary any day.

Dan,
I have no current love of Hillary - nor do I dislike her. In truth we've not seen her on the national stage. She might look pretty damn good up against the "business as usual" types in both parties.

We're still in 2006. Wait a bit and see how her personna plays out in the big house. I do believe that American voters are open to a woman now, or an African American.

I'm not too worried about '08. I have a pretty good feeling that we'd have to nominate a multiple rapist to lose in '08. The GOP continues to implode on state and local levels, McCain is morphing into Bush so fast I'm surprised he's still capable of talking, Giuliani is such an abrasive asshole that getting the nomination would be a miracle. Should that miracle occur, he'll utterly alienate all of America with his big mouth. Mitt Romney? Let's see if his '94 pro-gay statements don't keep him out of the running when he has to go to crazy base land. And for all that, W will still be in office and our troops will still be in Iraq. Between all these factors, it doesn't matter if it's Obama, Hillary, or Evan fucking Bayh, we'll have a Dem in the White House in January '09.

That's her whole problem, though. She IS business as usual. She's coming from the exact same school that gave us robo-gore in 2000 and over calculating kerry in 04. She's the standard issue democratic candidate that is representative of the party that has done such a poor job and only managed to get back into power in the congress because the republicans totally blew it.

The FUD that dan is reacting to is a narrative written by her republican detractors, and everybody knows that just because they say she's detested doesn't make it so. this poll proves that. she isn't destested by most people. but that doesn't mean she's a good candidate. at all.

she has very little charisma, and she's vulnerable in all the same ways as kerry in that she supported the war and a lot of her political calculus has been aiming to deflect that. She plays the middle to a faul, making it very easy to say that she doesn't stand strongly on anything because it seems like she'd support damn near anything if she thought it would benefit her politically. like iraq.

but by trying to be the "shrewd" politician she obviously doesn't appear to feel comfortable being her own person in public. This comes across as insincere. this is exactly the same trap that gore and kerry fell into--trying to find the message that "appeals" to voter. anyone watch an inconvenient truth? where the hell was that guy seven years ago? sincerity appeals to the voter. That's why bush did well. Because he really believed what he was saying, even though it's obvious now (and really was at the time) that he wasn't the brightest bulb.

So no, dan. you're wrong: "So I don't think you can argue that the more exposed we are to Hillary the less we'll like her." Two years of watching robo-hillary re-enact the failed campaigns of gore and kerry would absolutely make me like her less. It could possibly drive me to insanity having to watch the democratic party drive over the exact same cliff A THIRD TIME IN A ROW.

Obama has charisma, and he's not the product of a democratic machine that is obviously broken. Is hillary the wrong candidate for all the reasons republican strategists say she is? of course not. they don't know fuck all. but she's still the wrong candidate.

The R's are scared of Hilary. The Clintons (and I don't agree with them on a lot of things) are probably up there with FDR as being the smartest political operators of the 20th century.

I don't discount Hillary- and while I like a lot of what Obama says, both D's and R's will rub the shine off him pretty quickly.

The R's are in a pickle. Giulani on the one hand- fag loving, abortion wanting, multiple divorcee... not good for what used to be called the "base". McCain has credentials but his age will be a big deal. Romney has (and continues) to move to the right- which is not a direction that is stomachable by most R's. Remember, W got elected because he appeared in 2000 to be moderate. He lost in '04 (barely) because Kerry has the charisma of a cow, and when people swung at him (ie Swift Boaties) they showed him having a lack of backbone at a time this country was still frozen in fear.

It's gonna be interesting.

Seriously, all these wags out there in the MSM who are characterizing Ms. Clinton thusly are just scared shitless that, come '08 their GOP "shoo-in" could go down in history as the only (so far) male presidential candidate to get his balls handed back to him by - a woman. And if there's one thing Repubs HATE, it's being made to look like a pussy.

It's a thought so unthinkable to them that they'll do anything - and I mean ANYTHING to prevent it from becoming a reality.

I second Charles. Enough of the robo-Dems. We need someone who sounds (and acts) more like Paul Wellstone than Hillary Clinton. What's that quote from Einstein? Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results...

totally. i actually refrained from using that einstein quote but it was in the forefront of my mind while writing that comment. i think feingold is the closest the democratic party has to a wellstone. i'd follow that guy through the Himalayas. but obama is a pretty close second.

God if there were three parties, people would not have a lot of the ridiculous ideas they have.

All the leftists here seem to think they are liberals, and support liberal candidates like Hillary Clinton. This is what Liberals look like in countries with multiple parties:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Democratic_Party_%28Germany%29
And that's where Hillary belongs.

If you think that party is appealing, 10% of Germans agree with you (making it 3rd place):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_federal_election%2C_2005

Two things:

1. The poll oversampled Democrats, women, and was just people over 18, not registered voters specifically, and certainly not 'likely to vote', so take that into consideration. Also, as pointed out before, polls will change.

2. With all due respect to some of the other comments, Hillary has been getting more grief from the left in the last few years than the right. I think the Republicans would prefer a Hillary run over Obama any day of the week, and considering the reaction Obama has been getting from Democrats lately, more than a few D's prefer him.

I don't want Hillary for one simple reason: health care. We need real health care reform, and Hillary has already used up all her credibility on that issue.

1. I'm really surprised by the polls. I've never been a Hillary hater; more like Hillary neutral. Anecdotally, I hear so many people Hillary bashing that I had long assumed that she was unelectable by the general population. So this poll, flawed though it may be, gives me pause. I'm willing to be open to the idea of Madame President Clinton.

2. I agree with Charles about Robo-candidates. Truly, I believe that both Gore and Kerry were killed by being totally wooden drones, drained of any personality by their behind-the-scenes political strategists. Please, for the love of God, if Hillary runs, I hope she personally strangles every single one of them.

In a huge national election, I'm convinced charisma counts for a lot more than pols will admit. Whether you agree with their politics or not, both Reagan and Bill Clinton had charisma in spades, and both won all their elections by very comfortable margins. Clinton remained strong in the polls all throughout the impeachment travesty largely due to his charisma. And despite his Ivy-league upbringing, Bush 43 has a charisma that broadly appeals to the working class and southerners.

I think that is one reason so many people view Obama as being so promising. He has a very Clinton-esque way of wooing a crowd, regardless of whether or not you agree with details of his political platform. He's a very good public speaker and oozes charisma.

If Hillary can manage to cast off her handlers and display a bit of personality and charisma, she could come across as much more likable, and even electable. If she filters every word and statement through focus groups, and comes across as dry as Gore and Kerry, then I fear we'll see the same results they got.

Her positions on abortion are solid. Her rhetoric, not so much.

absolutely. reagan and clinton are great examples, as is JFK. If anything I think obama is more like a JFK than a bill clinton, but that may be me projecting. Edwards has the clintonian charisma. I need to learn about him and see more from him, but that monday night footbal thing will absolutely slay in the midwest. hillary takes herself too seriously to do something like that. or she's smart enough to know that she'd never come off as genuine.

but the truth of the matter is exactly this: hillary IS the handler wing of the democratic party. she is the wooden mindset personified, and there is NO WAY she'd leave that behind. That's too risky. The handler's are at their core calculators -- trying to find the right equation that will equal an electoral win. So by that stick there is no daylight between the handlers and her. She's a calculator, too. That's why I think she's the wrong candidate. She's not brave enough to tell the army of tea-leaf readers to stick it because she's built her political machine out of it.

The republicans want Hillary to run in the worst way: She would be the best get out the vote candidate the republicans can get for the general election.

Also, as mentioned by others, Hillary doesn't have the charm of her husband, and yes it goes a long way with the voters. She is not only hated by republicans, but she is mistrusted by many independents and you need those voters to win the general election.

Obama has that great charm, but in a close election, a %5 racist anti-Obama vote would mean the difference between victory and defeat.

Edwards-charisma in spades, principles, no race baggage, and name recognition:)

Listening to Obama is a joy. Listening to Hil is hell. Remember how sick everyone was of Kerry's annoying voice? Hil's just as bad.
I'm just fine with Hil in the White House. In fact, I would happily give a couple of didgets to see her in the white house. But boy, I'd rather have someone who could put together a couple of words and convery a concept or two.

I think what all these naysaying chickenshits mean to say is that she's a woman and a woman's place is in the kitchen.

It makes no difference.
After a colossal waste of time, money, and energy,
we will, end up with yet another system-spawn.

Put whomever's name to it, they will, in the end, be just the machine's mouthpiece.

The grind will continue. Goldman Sucks will make scads of money, American soldiers will die somewhere, for something, noble to be sure, and children at home will go unschooled and without health care.

It will make no difference, the system is broken.

As long as Man is running it, the system and any system will ALWAYS be broken. Man is inherently selfish, and many are untrustworthy.

Like most D's, I'm holding out for Gore/Obama 08. End the dynasties.

"I can't imagine that we're going to become *more* familiar with Hillary during the campaign..."

True, but Dan, what you're leaving out is that we *could* and probably will become more familiar with Obama. Aside from political junkies and the people he's managed to reach in person, I think Obama has a lot of room to improve in the polls, whereas I think hypothetical polls this early will give Hillary the biggest numbers she'll ever get. Personally, I think she's a terrible speaker (has nothing to do with her gender), and I'd love to give Obama the chance to ramp up those numbers by hitting the trail, introducing himself to more of the country, etc.