What Democrats will be running against Hillary? (1 Viewer)

[NCCommish]

I'm amazed that anybody really wants Hillary Clinton to be President. Forget the Republicans. Surely the Democrats can find somebody better like in 2008.

 

[NCCommish]

I think things are biding just fine for Hillary. Just as in 2008, all she has to do is win the nomination. But this time around there's no Obama, and I have the feeling that the party faithful think she's owed it, so I believe she will have less trouble.

Once she wins the nomination, she'll win the Presidency. She'll get the gender gap, and all the people who supported Obama, but the most important reason is 2 words: immigration reform. The refusal by the GOP to enact a Path to Citizenship has stirred a sleeping giant. The numbers are devastating for future Republican national chances.

Not this part of it. No one is "owed" it. She is going to get challenged from the left. And she has already started screwing the pooch. She and Bill are worth over 100 million but she wants to play the "I got no money" card? Not very smart. She isn't likable and Clinton Fatigue is a real thing. This is not in the bag for her, not even close.

 

[Hang 10]

I'm amazed that anybody really wants Hillary Clinton to be President. Forget the Republicans. Surely the Democrats can find somebody better like in 2008.

I think the same thing when I hear Jeb Bush being a republican front runner. If we get to 2016 in it's a choice between Clinton and Bush, what's the point?

 

[NCCommish]

I'm amazed that anybody really wants Hillary Clinton to be President. Forget the Republicans. Surely the Democrats can find somebody better like in 2008.

I think the same thing when I hear Jeb Bush being a republican front runner. If we get to 2016 in it's a choice between Clinton and Bush, what's the point?

Don't blame me I voted Kodos.

 

[timschochet]

I think things are biding just fine for Hillary. Just as in 2008, all she has to do is win the nomination. But this time around there's no Obama, and I have the feeling that the party faithful think she's owed it, so I believe she will have less trouble.

Once she wins the nomination, she'll win the Presidency. She'll get the gender gap, and all the people who supported Obama, but the most important reason is 2 words: immigration reform. The refusal by the GOP to enact a Path to Citizenship has stirred a sleeping giant. The numbers are devastating for future Republican national chances.

Not this part of it. No one is "owed" it. She is going to get challenged from the left. And she has already started screwing the pooch. She and Bill are worth over 100 million but she wants to play the "I got no money" card? Not very smart. She isn't likable and Clinton Fatigue is a real thing. This is not in the bag for her, not even close.

I like her. But I also think this whole likability thing is overrated. Nixon got elected twice and nobody liked him, not even his buddies. You keep saying she's going to be challenged from the left. I think that's wishful thinking on your part.

 

[NCCommish]

I think things are biding just fine for Hillary. Just as in 2008, all she has to do is win the nomination. But this time around there's no Obama, and I have the feeling that the party faithful think she's owed it, so I believe she will have less trouble.

Once she wins the nomination, she'll win the Presidency. She'll get the gender gap, and all the people who supported Obama, but the most important reason is 2 words: immigration reform. The refusal by the GOP to enact a Path to Citizenship has stirred a sleeping giant. The numbers are devastating for future Republican national chances.

Not this part of it. No one is "owed" it. She is going to get challenged from the left. And she has already started screwing the pooch. She and Bill are worth over 100 million but she wants to play the "I got no money" card? Not very smart. She isn't likable and Clinton Fatigue is a real thing. This is not in the bag for her, not even close.

I like her. But I also think this whole likability thing is overrated. Nixon got elected twice and nobody liked him, not even his buddies.You keep saying she's going to be challenged from the left. I think that's wishful thinking on your part.

She is not going to run unopposed. The only people who aren't already bought and paid for third wayers are on her left. She is going to get a challenge. She may even get a woman challenger. But whoever it is will be from her left. It's a simple political calculation really not wishful thinking. And I do think that after 30 years of moving to the right the pendulum swing is in motion.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I think things are biding just fine for Hillary. Just as in 2008, all she has to do is win the nomination. But this time around there's no Obama, and I have the feeling that the party faithful think she's owed it, so I believe she will have less trouble.

Once she wins the nomination, she'll win the Presidency. She'll get the gender gap, and all the people who supported Obama, but the most important reason is 2 words: immigration reform. The refusal by the GOP to enact a Path to Citizenship has stirred a sleeping giant. The numbers are devastating for future Republican national chances.

Not this part of it. No one is "owed" it. She is going to get challenged from the left. And she has already started screwing the pooch. She and Bill are worth over 100 million but she wants to play the "I got no money" card? Not very smart. She isn't likable and Clinton Fatigue is a real thing. This is not in the bag for her, not even close.

I like her. But I also think this whole likability thing is overrated. Nixon got elected twice and nobody liked him, not even his buddies.You keep saying she's going to be challenged from the left. I think that's wishful thinking on your part.

This isn't 1968 anymore. Likability, in this day and age of social media, means a ton. In every presidential election since the 1990s, the more likable guy has won:

Clinton over Bush Sr.

Clinton over Dole

W. over Gore (even though he sucked, W. did have a somewhat likable personality, while Gore was too stuffy)

W. over Kerry

Obama over McCain

Obama over Romney

Granted, I think she is much more of a favorite than NCC does, but likability could be a problem for her. She simply doesn't have the charm or personality of Bill.

 

[NCCommish]

I think things are biding just fine for Hillary. Just as in 2008, all she has to do is win the nomination. But this time around there's no Obama, and I have the feeling that the party faithful think she's owed it, so I believe she will have less trouble.

Once she wins the nomination, she'll win the Presidency. She'll get the gender gap, and all the people who supported Obama, but the most important reason is 2 words: immigration reform. The refusal by the GOP to enact a Path to Citizenship has stirred a sleeping giant. The numbers are devastating for future Republican national chances.

Not this part of it. No one is "owed" it. She is going to get challenged from the left. And she has already started screwing the pooch. She and Bill are worth over 100 million but she wants to play the "I got no money" card? Not very smart. She isn't likable and Clinton Fatigue is a real thing. This is not in the bag for her, not even close.

I like her. But I also think this whole likability thing is overrated. Nixon got elected twice and nobody liked him, not even his buddies.You keep saying she's going to be challenged from the left. I think that's wishful thinking on your part.

This isn't 1968 anymore. Likability, in this day and age of social media, means a ton. In every presidential election since the 1990s, the more likable guy has won:

Clinton over Bush Sr.

Clinton over Dole

W. over Gore (even though he sucked, W. did have a somewhat likable personality, while Gore was too stuffy)

W. over Kerry

Obama over McCain

Obama over Romney

Granted, I think she is much more of a favorite than NCC does, but likability could be a problem for her. She simply doesn't have the charm or personality of Bill.

Don't get me wrong I understand that everything is in her favor. I understand she is the odds on favorite today. I also understood all that in 2006. How'd that go for Mrs. Inevitable again?

 

[Ghost Rider]

Haha, not well. Like then, I'll be surprised if she doesn't get the nomination. It's easy to say that there is no Obama this time around, but there is still two years to go, and besides, who the hell knew who Obama was in 2006? A lot can happen in two years. It looks like Clinton/Christie is the inevitable battle in November of 2016, but you never know.

 

[humpback]

I think things are biding just fine for Hillary. Just as in 2008, all she has to do is win the nomination. But this time around there's no Obama, and I have the feeling that the party faithful think she's owed it, so I believe she will have less trouble.

Once she wins the nomination, she'll win the Presidency. She'll get the gender gap, and all the people who supported Obama, but the most important reason is 2 words: immigration reform. The refusal by the GOP to enact a Path to Citizenship has stirred a sleeping giant. The numbers are devastating for future Republican national chances.

Not this part of it. No one is "owed" it. She is going to get challenged from the left. And she has already started screwing the pooch. She and Bill are worth over 100 million but she wants to play the "I got no money" card? Not very smart. She isn't likable and Clinton Fatigue is a real thing. This is not in the bag for her, not even close.

She has plenty of warts, but none of that will matter when it comes down to it. I know you like to think the left is different, but they're really not.

 

[NCCommish]

I think things are biding just fine for Hillary. Just as in 2008, all she has to do is win the nomination. But this time around there's no Obama, and I have the feeling that the party faithful think she's owed it, so I believe she will have less trouble.

Once she wins the nomination, she'll win the Presidency. She'll get the gender gap, and all the people who supported Obama, but the most important reason is 2 words: immigration reform. The refusal by the GOP to enact a Path to Citizenship has stirred a sleeping giant. The numbers are devastating for future Republican national chances.

Not this part of it. No one is "owed" it. She is going to get challenged from the left. And she has already started screwing the pooch. She and Bill are worth over 100 million but she wants to play the "I got no money" card? Not very smart. She isn't likable and Clinton Fatigue is a real thing. This is not in the bag for her, not even close.

She has plenty of warts, but none of that will matter when it comes down to it. I know you like to think the left is different, but they're really not.

And I know a lot of people think Democrat means left but it really doesn't. Especially when it comes to Clinton Democrats. And again for the record I am not saying she can't win the nom. I am saying I hope she gets a challenger from the left who I can support and I am saying I won't support her nor will I vote for her.

 

[timschochet]

NC is there a specific policy position that you disagree with Hillary about? (Apart from the Iraq War; I'm talking about moving forward).

 

[RCon]

I think things are biding just fine for Hillary. Just as in 2008, all she has to do is win the nomination. But this time around there's no Obama, and I have the feeling that the party faithful think she's owed it, so I believe she will have less trouble.

Once she wins the nomination, she'll win the Presidency. She'll get the gender gap, and all the people who supported Obama, but the most important reason is 2 words: immigration reform. The refusal by the GOP to enact a Path to Citizenship has stirred a sleeping giant. The numbers are devastating for future Republican national chances.

Not this part of it. No one is "owed" it. She is going to get challenged from the left. And she has already started screwing the pooch. She and Bill are worth over 100 million but she wants to play the "I got no money" card? Not very smart. She isn't likable and Clinton Fatigue is a real thing. This is not in the bag for her, not even close.

To be fair, timschochet didn't say "Clinton is owed the nomination", he said "the party faithful think she's owed it". Those are two very different things, especially given your opinion of the party faithful.

 

[humpback]

I think things are biding just fine for Hillary. Just as in 2008, all she has to do is win the nomination. But this time around there's no Obama, and I have the feeling that the party faithful think she's owed it, so I believe she will have less trouble.

Once she wins the nomination, she'll win the Presidency. She'll get the gender gap, and all the people who supported Obama, but the most important reason is 2 words: immigration reform. The refusal by the GOP to enact a Path to Citizenship has stirred a sleeping giant. The numbers are devastating for future Republican national chances.

Not this part of it. No one is "owed" it. She is going to get challenged from the left. And she has already started screwing the pooch. She and Bill are worth over 100 million but she wants to play the "I got no money" card? Not very smart. She isn't likable and Clinton Fatigue is a real thing. This is not in the bag for her, not even close.

She has plenty of warts, but none of that will matter when it comes down to it. I know you like to think the left is different, but they're really not.

And I know a lot of people think Democrat means left but it really doesn't. Especially when it comes to Clinton Democrats. And again for the record I am not saying she can't win the nom. I am saying I hope she gets a challenger from the left who I can support and I am saying I won't support her nor will I vote for her.

You'll support someone else knowing full well that it won't matter. If you thought for a second that there was even the slightest possibility of an R winning, I'm pretty sure you'd get in line with everyone else.

FWIW, I wasn't speaking about you specifically, just in general. Those comments about money aren't going to matter, they'll be excused by the Dems just like they are by the R's.

 

[skol asylum]

I think Ted Cruz could seriously contend for the nomination and I think Hillary would destroy him.

 

[Riversco]

I'm amazed that anybody really wants Hillary Clinton to be President. Forget the Republicans. Surely the Democrats can find somebody better like in 2008.

It doesn't matter which democrat wins in 2016. The republicans aren't gonna lose the House, so whoever it is can't do ####.

 

[NCCommish]

NC is there a specific policy position that you disagree with Hillary about? (Apart from the Iraq War; I'm talking about moving forward).

She is a third wayer. I don't support very many of her economic positions and the positions I kind of agree with her on I don't trust her to follow through on for one minute. She is Bill in drag. She would sell her mother for one more poll point.

 

[NCCommish]

I think things are biding just fine for Hillary. Just as in 2008, all she has to do is win the nomination. But this time around there's no Obama, and I have the feeling that the party faithful think she's owed it, so I believe she will have less trouble.

Once she wins the nomination, she'll win the Presidency. She'll get the gender gap, and all the people who supported Obama, but the most important reason is 2 words: immigration reform. The refusal by the GOP to enact a Path to Citizenship has stirred a sleeping giant. The numbers are devastating for future Republican national chances.

Not this part of it. No one is "owed" it. She is going to get challenged from the left. And she has already started screwing the pooch. She and Bill are worth over 100 million but she wants to play the "I got no money" card? Not very smart. She isn't likable and Clinton Fatigue is a real thing. This is not in the bag for her, not even close.

She has plenty of warts, but none of that will matter when it comes down to it. I know you like to think the left is different, but they're really not.

And I know a lot of people think Democrat means left but it really doesn't. Especially when it comes to Clinton Democrats. And again for the record I am not saying she can't win the nom. I am saying I hope she gets a challenger from the left who I can support and I am saying I won't support her nor will I vote for her.

You'll support someone else knowing full well that it won't matter. If you thought for a second that there was even the slightest possibility of an R winning, I'm pretty sure you'd get in line with everyone else.

FWIW, I wasn't speaking about you specifically, just in general. Those comments about money aren't going to matter, they'll be excused by the Dems just like they are by the R's.

If Hillary is at the top of the ticket I will not give her my vote. End of story.

 

[NCCommish]

I'm amazed that anybody really wants Hillary Clinton to be President. Forget the Republicans. Surely the Democrats can find somebody better like in 2008.

It doesn't matter which democrat wins in 2016. The republicans aren't gonna lose the House, so whoever it is can't do ####.

This is true. Instead of concentrating on the White House we need to be concentrating on state houses.

 

[RCon]

NC is there a specific policy position that you disagree with Hillary about? (Apart from the Iraq War; I'm talking about moving forward).

She is a third wayer. I don't support very many of her economic positions and the positions I kind of agree with her on I don't trust her to follow through on for one minute. She is Bill in drag. She would sell her mother for one more poll point.

This isn't really a criticism when you're comparing to Obama, Romney, Boehner, Pelosi, et. al. It's more standard operating procedure, no?

 

[NCCommish]

NC is there a specific policy position that you disagree with Hillary about? (Apart from the Iraq War; I'm talking about moving forward).

She is a third wayer. I don't support very many of her economic positions and the positions I kind of agree with her on I don't trust her to follow through on for one minute. She is Bill in drag. She would sell her mother for one more poll point.

This isn't really a criticism when you're comparing to Obama, Romney, Boehner, Pelosi, et. al. It's more standard operating procedure, no?

Actually it is. The Clinton's made it an art form. Let her run as the moderate Republican she is that at least would be somewhat honest.

 

[humpback]

I think things are biding just fine for Hillary. Just as in 2008, all she has to do is win the nomination. But this time around there's no Obama, and I have the feeling that the party faithful think she's owed it, so I believe she will have less trouble.

Once she wins the nomination, she'll win the Presidency. She'll get the gender gap, and all the people who supported Obama, but the most important reason is 2 words: immigration reform. The refusal by the GOP to enact a Path to Citizenship has stirred a sleeping giant. The numbers are devastating for future Republican national chances.

Not this part of it. No one is "owed" it. She is going to get challenged from the left. And she has already started screwing the pooch. She and Bill are worth over 100 million but she wants to play the "I got no money" card? Not very smart. She isn't likable and Clinton Fatigue is a real thing. This is not in the bag for her, not even close.

She has plenty of warts, but none of that will matter when it comes down to it. I know you like to think the left is different, but they're really not.

And I know a lot of people think Democrat means left but it really doesn't. Especially when it comes to Clinton Democrats. And again for the record I am not saying she can't win the nom. I am saying I hope she gets a challenger from the left who I can support and I am saying I won't support her nor will I vote for her.

You'll support someone else knowing full well that it won't matter. If you thought for a second that there was even the slightest possibility of an R winning, I'm pretty sure you'd get in line with everyone else.

FWIW, I wasn't speaking about you specifically, just in general. Those comments about money aren't going to matter, they'll be excused by the Dems just like they are by the R's.

If Hillary is at the top of the ticket I will not give her my vote. End of story.

Going to have to check with Nate to see how big of a shift the odds just took...

 

[NCCommish]

I think things are biding just fine for Hillary. Just as in 2008, all she has to do is win the nomination. But this time around there's no Obama, and I have the feeling that the party faithful think she's owed it, so I believe she will have less trouble.

Once she wins the nomination, she'll win the Presidency. She'll get the gender gap, and all the people who supported Obama, but the most important reason is 2 words: immigration reform. The refusal by the GOP to enact a Path to Citizenship has stirred a sleeping giant. The numbers are devastating for future Republican national chances.

Not this part of it. No one is "owed" it. She is going to get challenged from the left. And she has already started screwing the pooch. She and Bill are worth over 100 million but she wants to play the "I got no money" card? Not very smart. She isn't likable and Clinton Fatigue is a real thing. This is not in the bag for her, not even close.

She has plenty of warts, but none of that will matter when it comes down to it. I know you like to think the left is different, but they're really not.

And I know a lot of people think Democrat means left but it really doesn't. Especially when it comes to Clinton Democrats. And again for the record I am not saying she can't win the nom. I am saying I hope she gets a challenger from the left who I can support and I am saying I won't support her nor will I vote for her.

You'll support someone else knowing full well that it won't matter. If you thought for a second that there was even the slightest possibility of an R winning, I'm pretty sure you'd get in line with everyone else.

FWIW, I wasn't speaking about you specifically, just in general. Those comments about money aren't going to matter, they'll be excused by the Dems just like they are by the R's.

If Hillary is at the top of the ticket I will not give her my vote. End of story.

Going to have to check with Nate to see how big of a shift the odds just took...

I can handle that. Not one bit.

 

[17seconds]

I agree that Hillary is vulnerable.

Being the default choice everyone already knows extremely well is never good. It's almost pointless for her to campaign. Can only hurt her.

 

[Trey]

Wake me up in March 2016 when this nonsense is over and we can start focusing on Clinton's general campaign.

 

[timschochet]

I'm amazed that anybody really wants Hillary Clinton to be President. Forget the Republicans. Surely the Democrats can find somebody better like in 2008.

It doesn't matter which democrat wins in 2016. The republicans aren't gonna lose the House, so whoever it is can't do ####.

This is true until 2022, when there will be redistricting based on population increases. At that point, if things continue the way they are now, all 3 branches of government will be controlled by the Democratic party for years, probably decades to come.

The Republican party has the next 8 years to get its act together. It has to find ways to compromise with the Democratic President on revenue and spending. It has to show the American people that it is not dominated by extremists and nativist xenophobes. If it is unable to do these things, it will go the way of the Whigs, we will become a one party democracy, and future political battles will be between moderate Democrats and leftist Democrats.

 

[skol asylum]

The modern whig party is looking better and better.

 

[RCon]

I'm amazed that anybody really wants Hillary Clinton to be President. Forget the Republicans. Surely the Democrats can find somebody better like in 2008.

It doesn't matter which democrat wins in 2016. The republicans aren't gonna lose the House, so whoever it is can't do ####.

This is true until 2022, when there will be redistricting based on population increases. At that point, if things continue the way they are now, all 3 branches of government will be controlled by the Democratic party for years, probably decades to come.The Republican party has the next 8 years to get its act together. It has to find ways to compromise with the Democratic President on revenue and spending. It has to show the American people that it is not dominated by extremists and nativist xenophobes. If it is unable to do these things, it will go the way of the Whigs, we will become a one party democracy, and future political battles will be between moderate Democrats and leftist Democrats.

This is incorrect. The Census will happen in 2020, and gerrymandering will be performed by state legislatures prior to the 2022 elections. The party that wins the 2020 state houses will control the House through 2032.

I would say the GOP has 6 years to get its #### together, but I'm not convinced their current schtick won't continue to play well in state legislature elections.

 

[timschochet]

I'm amazed that anybody really wants Hillary Clinton to be President. Forget the Republicans. Surely the Democrats can find somebody better like in 2008.

It doesn't matter which democrat wins in 2016. The republicans aren't gonna lose the House, so whoever it is can't do ####.

This is true until 2022, when there will be redistricting based on population increases. At that point, if things continue the way they are now, all 3 branches of government will be controlled by the Democratic party for years, probably decades to come.The Republican party has the next 8 years to get its act together. It has to find ways to compromise with the Democratic President on revenue and spending. It has to show the American people that it is not dominated by extremists and nativist xenophobes. If it is unable to do these things, it will go the way of the Whigs, we will become a one party democracy, and future political battles will be between moderate Democrats and leftist Democrats.

This is incorrect. The Census will happen in 2020, and gerrymandering will be performed by state legislatures prior to the 2022 elections. The party that wins the 2020 state houses will control the House through 2032.I would say the GOP has 6 years to get its #### together, but I'm not convinced their current schtick won't continue to play well in state legislature elections.

You're right about 2020 thanks. But even if the GOP is still in power in 2020 they wond be able to gerrymander the same way they have been doing given the way population demographics are changing.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

NC is there a specific policy position that you disagree with Hillary about? (Apart from the Iraq War; I'm talking about moving forward).

She is a third wayer. I don't support very many of her economic positions and the positions I kind of agree with her on I don't trust her to follow through on for one minute. She is Bill in drag. She would sell her mother for one more poll point.

The ironic thing is that from a policy standpoint, I should prefer Hillary to most of the other Dem candidates. (Granted, she's horrible on civil liberties, but what are you going to do). That said, I despise her as a human being and I'd rather have a more progressive President who I can respect, like Obama, than somebody reptilian like Hillary.

 

[Gopher State]

EVERYONE wants Hillary to run, she will destroy any GOP GUPPIE

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I think things are biding just fine for Hillary. Just as in 2008, all she has to do is win the nomination. But this time around there's no Obama, and I have the feeling that the party faithful think she's owed it, so I believe she will have less trouble.

Once she wins the nomination, she'll win the Presidency. She'll get the gender gap, and all the people who supported Obama, but the most important reason is 2 words: immigration reform. The refusal by the GOP to enact a Path to Citizenship has stirred a sleeping giant. The numbers are devastating for future Republican national chances.

Not this part of it. No one is "owed" it. She is going to get challenged from the left. And she has already started screwing the pooch. She and Bill are worth over 100 million but she wants to play the "I got no money" card? Not very smart. She isn't likable and Clinton Fatigue is a real thing. This is not in the bag for her, not even close.

I like her. But I also think this whole likability thing is overrated. Nixon got elected twice and nobody liked him, not even his buddies.You keep saying she's going to be challenged from the left. I think that's wishful thinking on your part.

I think things are biding just fine for Hillary. Just as in 2008, all she has to do is win the nomination. But this time around there's no Obama, and I have the feeling that the party faithful think she's owed it, so I believe she will have less trouble.

Once she wins the nomination, she'll win the Presidency. She'll get the gender gap, and all the people who supported Obama, but the most important reason is 2 words: immigration reform. The refusal by the GOP to enact a Path to Citizenship has stirred a sleeping giant. The numbers are devastating for future Republican national chances.

Not this part of it. No one is "owed" it. She is going to get challenged from the left. And she has already started screwing the pooch. She and Bill are worth over 100 million but she wants to play the "I got no money" card? Not very smart. She isn't likable and Clinton Fatigue is a real thing. This is not in the bag for her, not even close.

I like her. But I also think this whole likability thing is overrated. Nixon got elected twice and nobody liked him, not even his buddies.You keep saying she's going to be challenged from the left. I think that's wishful thinking on your part.

You might want to read up on some old threads:

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=397129&p=8643711

Pettifogger did an excellent summary of what went wrong last time, I don't know why it can't happen again. The only obstacle is the Demos finding someone charismatic and a good campaigner on the left.

Besides that one there are 2007-08 threads about Hillary being tone-deaf, about the Clintons' dirty tricks, about their leaks and aspersions on Obama. Even if they restrain themselves this time, and if she somehow becomes more "human" (early results are not good on the ol' book tour, which only seems to be encouraging possible opponents), many in the Demo party have not forgotten 08. I think the argument that they will feel they owe it to her is actually quite the opposite for many.

 

[culdeus]

Wake me up in March 2016 when this nonsense is over and we can start focusing on Clinton's general campaign.

Weren't you the #1fan of hrc back in the primaries? Name sounds familiar.

 

[joffer]

I'm amazed that anybody really wants Hillary Clinton to be President. Forget the Republicans. Surely the Democrats can find somebody better like in 2008.

Not a matter of whether I want her. I don't. What's the alternative?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I realize that a lot of Americans may not understand the difference but this is/was our SOS:

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has taken her book tour abroad. But in an interview with the BBC, when answering a question about how specialness of the special relationship between the U.S. and UK, the nation's former top diplomat gets the names of the political parties in the UK wrong.

The BBC host asked, "So how special is the special relationship?"

"It is so special to me, personally, and I think it is very special between our countries," Clinton said. "There's just a -- not just a common language -- but a common set of values that we can fall back on. It doesn't matter in our country whether it's a Republican or Democrat, or frankly in your country whether it's a Conservative or a Tory. There is a level of trust and understanding. It doesn't mean we always agree because of course we don't."

It would seem Hillary Clinton meant to refer to the Conservative and Labour parties.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/hillary-gaffes-london-gets-uk-political-parties-wrong_796033.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUaAZ9U_Uuk

That is really pathetic.

 

[FlapJacks]

NC is there a specific policy position that you disagree with Hillary about? (Apart from the Iraq War; I'm talking about moving forward).

She is a third wayer. I don't support very many of her economic positions and the positions I kind of agree with her on I don't trust her to follow through on for one minute. She is Bill in drag. She would sell her mother for one more poll point.

The ironic thing is that from a policy standpoint, I should prefer Hillary to most of the other Dem candidates. (Granted, she's horrible on civil liberties, but what are you going to do). That said, I despise her as a human being and I'd rather have a more progressive President who I can respect, like Obama, than somebody reptilian like Hillary.

Policy wise is one aspect, competence is another.

Hillary's career is littered with big failures and very few successes other than the ability to get selected for things

 

[tommyGunZ]

Joffer nails it - even us proud liberals aren't big Hillary fans, but even with her warts she's light years ahead of anyone who the right will nominate.

Rick Santorum? Herman Cain? It's a ####### clown show.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Joffer nails it - even us proud liberals aren't big Hillary fans, but even with her warts she's light years ahead of anyone who the right will nominate.

Rick Santorum? Herman Cain? It's a ####### clown show.

Yes, Santorum and Cain were embarrassing candidates. Is that really the bar you set for your own party?

 

[tommyGunZ]

Joffer nails it - even us proud liberals aren't big Hillary fans, but even with her warts she's light years ahead of anyone who the right will nominate.

Rick Santorum? Herman Cain? It's a ####### clown show.

Yes, Santorum and Cain were embarrassing candidates. Is that really the bar you set for your own party?

Not at all. I'll gladly support Warren or Dean or O'Malley or Booker or Cuomo over Hillary. But if she's the nominee, she'll get my vote. The Republican Party is an absolute wreck right now.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Joffer nails it - even us proud liberals aren't big Hillary fans, but even with her warts she's light years ahead of anyone who the right will nominate.

Rick Santorum? Herman Cain? It's a ####### clown show.

Just out of curiosity who do you think would be equivalent candidates on the left?

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Joffer nails it - even us proud liberals aren't big Hillary fans, but even with her warts she's light years ahead of anyone who the right will nominate.

Rick Santorum? Herman Cain? It's a ####### clown show.

Just out of curiosity who do you think would be equivalent candidates on the left?

Al Sharpton was worse than either of those guys.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Jim Webb is feeling out a run, too. I like him a lot.

I am going to make some very early predictions: Clinton will run with Webb, Tester or Schweitzer as VP in 2016.

I still don't think she can win the nom. She had it all last time money, momentum and name recognition. A relative rookie took her out despite those advantages including the dirty tricks they pulled. She is not as loved on the left as she is hated on the right which isn't helpful. She is just another 3rd way moderate republican and lots of us are done with that crap.

She crushes any likely opponent in the polls. If you're into that kind of thing. Only a little more than a year away from the nomination. Someone will have to make a move in a hurry. Personally I'd be FAR more committed to a Warren candidacy. Clinton I'll mail in the check. Warren I would help hide bodies for.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton continues to lead the pack of Democratic presidential hopefuls, according to a new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll released Wednesday.

Clinton has a lead of about 15 percent, followed by Sen. Barack Obama in second place and former Vice President Al Gore and John Edwards tied for third.

If Gore sticks to his decision not to run, Clinton's lead would grow even larger, poll results show.

That was march of 2007. How did that end up working out for her?

Anybody paying attention knew Obama was a star. I don't see that type of charisma or potential for a movement with any of these potential candidates.

Clinton gave the keynote.

Obama gave the keynote. Clinton had a major record, Obama in 2004 was just running for US Senator against a tomato can (Keyes, after the real candidate bowed out after an unfortunate divorcing accident...) in a blue district in a blue state, had never won a statewide election, had lost his only prior federal race, and had just been a state senator before then and at that time.

Castro gave the keynote. At least he's been a big city mayor.

Demos who give keynotes get lined up as the next "star" apparently. And they just bumped Castro to the cabinet in HUD.

He is certainly being groomed. His keynote wasn't like Obama's though. That was one of the best speeches I've ever heard.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Jim Webb is feeling out a run, too. I like him a lot.

I am going to make some very early predictions: Clinton will run with Webb, Tester or Schweitzer as VP in 2016.

I still don't think she can win the nom. She had it all last time money, momentum and name recognition. A relative rookie took her out despite those advantages including the dirty tricks they pulled. She is not as loved on the left as she is hated on the right which isn't helpful. She is just another 3rd way moderate republican and lots of us are done with that crap.

She crushes any likely opponent in the polls. If you're into that kind of thing. Only a little more than a year away from the nomination. Someone will have to make a move in a hurry. Personally I'd be FAR more committed to a Warren candidacy. Clinton I'll mail in the check. Warren I would help hide bodies for.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton continues to lead the pack of Democratic presidential hopefuls, according to a new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll released Wednesday.

Clinton has a lead of about 15 percent, followed by Sen. Barack Obama in second place and former Vice President Al Gore and John Edwards tied for third.

If Gore sticks to his decision not to run, Clinton's lead would grow even larger, poll results show.

That was march of 2007. How did that end up working out for her?

Anybody paying attention knew Obama was a star. I don't see that type of charisma or potential for a movement with any of these potential candidates.

Clinton gave the keynote.

Obama gave the keynote. Clinton had a major record, Obama in 2004 was just running for US Senator against a tomato can (Keyes, after the real candidate bowed out after an unfortunate divorcing accident...) in a blue district in a blue state, had never won a statewide election, had lost his only prior federal race, and had just been a state senator before then and at that time.

Castro gave the keynote. At least he's been a big city mayor.

Demos who give keynotes get lined up as the next "star" apparently. And they just bumped Castro to the cabinet in HUD.

He is certainly being groomed. His keynote wasn't like Obama's though. That was one of the best speeches I've ever heard.

Yep and they just bumped him up to the administration to strengthen the resume.

Also they need to counter Rubio, I think Castro is a lock to run.

 

[timschochet]

I realize that a lot of Americans may not understand the difference but this is/was our SOS:

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has taken her book tour abroad. But in an interview with the BBC, when answering a question about how specialness of the special relationship between the U.S. and UK, the nation's former top diplomat gets the names of the political parties in the UK wrong.

The BBC host asked, "So how special is the special relationship?"

"It is so special to me, personally, and I think it is very special between our countries," Clinton said. "There's just a -- not just a common language -- but a common set of values that we can fall back on. It doesn't matter in our country whether it's a Republican or Democrat, or frankly in your country whether it's a Conservative or a Tory. There is a level of trust and understanding. It doesn't mean we always agree because of course we don't."

It would seem Hillary Clinton meant to refer to the Conservative and Labour parties.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/hillary-gaffes-london-gets-uk-political-parties-wrong_796033.html

No offense Saints but I think this post is pathetic. Are you truly suggesting that she doesn't know what the two British political parties are, and this was not a simple mispeak? Give me a break.

 

[timschochet]

I don't get the dislike. It's not fair to say that you dislike her personally, because none of us know her personally. That leaves her political record: 8 years as a Senator, 4 years as SOS. I think she was a competent Senator, and an excellent SOS. You can disagree with the last part, but is there anyone here who denies her competence?

I get that some progressives would prefer a more progressive candidate; Hillary is a centrist. I get that conservatives don't like her politics or any Democrat's politics. But even beyond those factors I sense in this thread, from people like Ivan and others, this strong disdain for her, and I don't understand it.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I realize that a lot of Americans may not understand the difference but this is/was our SOS:

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has taken her book tour abroad. But in an interview with the BBC, when answering a question about how specialness of the special relationship between the U.S. and UK, the nation's former top diplomat gets the names of the political parties in the UK wrong.

The BBC host asked, "So how special is the special relationship?"

"It is so special to me, personally, and I think it is very special between our countries," Clinton said. "There's just a -- not just a common language -- but a common set of values that we can fall back on. It doesn't matter in our country whether it's a Republican or Democrat, or frankly in your country whether it's a Conservative or a Tory. There is a level of trust and understanding. It doesn't mean we always agree because of course we don't."

It would seem Hillary Clinton meant to refer to the Conservative and Labour parties.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/hillary-gaffes-london-gets-uk-political-parties-wrong_796033.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/03/06/us-eu-clinton-gaffes-idUSTRE5253XS20090306

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Joffer nails it - even us proud liberals aren't big Hillary fans, but even with her warts she's light years ahead of anyone who the right will nominate.

Rick Santorum? Herman Cain? It's a ####### clown show.

Just out of curiosity who do you think would be equivalent candidates on the left?

Al Sharpton was worse than either of those guys.

Yes, he was. And is.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Joffer nails it - even us proud liberals aren't big Hillary fans, but even with her warts she's light years ahead of anyone who the right will nominate.

Rick Santorum? Herman Cain? It's a ####### clown show.

Just out of curiosity who do you think would be equivalent candidates on the left?

Al Sharpton was worse than either of those guys.

I wouldn't say worse - but definitely on the Santorum/Cain level. We can agree that he's a clown.

 

[PIK95]

I would love to vote for Elizabeth Warren for Prez.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Right now I think we can count on:

Mrs. Clinton

Biden

Castro

Plus 1-2 wildcards from the progressive wing a la Obama.

Booker - sounds like he won't run, which is too bad, but I think we can expect one black candidate

Webb - would love to see it

Warren - just watch