http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-...-opinion-center Hillary: the right's choice? By Bruce Bartlett Is hell freezing over? One might think so after reading recent comments from editors at National Review and the Weekly Standard, America's leading conservative magazines. Over the last 15 years, both magazines seldom have passed up an opportunity to excoriate Hillary Rodham Clinton as some kind of crypto-communist. No more. Today, Sen. Clinton is rapidly becoming not merely acceptable to many right-wingers but possibly even their candidate of choice...Lopez wasn't being facetious. She seemed, in fact, disturbed by her unexpected positive feelings toward Clinton. "That's really hard to admit," she wrote. "I still have both 'Clinton Hater' and 'Vast-Right-Wing Conspiracy' cards in my wallet." But at least a few conservative opinion-makers are ratcheting downward their level of resistance. They are coming to terms with the growing likelihood that she will be our next president and concluding that maybe it is something they can live with.
Makes sense. If Clinton gets nominated, more people dislike her than like her. Since people always vote "The lesser of two evils", it pretty much guarantees a Republican victory.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Aug 10 2007, 01:57 PM) [snapback]493665[/snapback]</div> And people with money ALWAYS hedge their bets by supporting both sides so they can have influnce no matter who wins.
I'd vote for her, just to say See We told you so.... Oh yeah there would be an excuse for that one too...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Aug 10 2007, 02:57 PM) [snapback]493665[/snapback]</div> I agree. It is tough to run for President with a 42% negative rating - and this is a person well established in the public forum so there is little chance to move that number significantly downward. that means she would have to carry an almost impossible % of Democrats to come close. Forget the Bible Belt, forget the South, forget the area between both coasts. If bloomberg or rudy or even huckleberry gets the nomination she has problems. could be a dukakis type of defeat for the dems.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 13 2007, 12:06 PM) [snapback]494718[/snapback]</div> I wonder if the Dems would pull the hanging chad greivence again???? :lol:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Aug 10 2007, 02:57 PM) [snapback]493665[/snapback]</div> The flip-side to this equation is that Hillary Clinton as the Democrat presidential candidate will so enrage the RRW that their extreme, vehement, irrational rhetoric against her will cause a backlash that sways the moderate/independent voters who might otherwise have voted Republican to vote for her, instead.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(rudiger @ Aug 13 2007, 12:45 PM) [snapback]494752[/snapback]</div> I would not count on that. Many people know hillary too well, and for too long. i think she has worn out her welcome - its a shame the dems cannot find better presidential timber to choose from all hillary will do is insure a HUGE right wing turnout - not to mention all the other anti-hillary people like me, my wife, my brother and sister-in-law(both strong democrats but very anti-hillary), and most of my other friends in NY who cannot stand her. should be interesting to see if she can even carry NY - 50-50% at best and thats terrible for a state that is about 10:1 democrat to republican. she is so shrill she is so abrasive she is so disingenuous. the best democratic chance is michael bloomberg.
Umm, the republicans have far more to worry about than the dems. The repubs don't like any of their own candidates very much. Hillary would win the national election against any current republican nominee, carrying the dem and independent vote fairly easily.
If it comes down to Rudy vs. Hillary it's a pretty clear choice, and more and more it looks as if those are the two we'll have to choose from. I very much prefer Barak Obama over all other candidates, he comes across as a very real and honest contender, but Hillary has some pretty powerful people behind her (like her husband). I think a lot of people realize that if Hillary wins, she'll get a lot of good advice from Bill.
I want "Bush Light" to win too. Want to see how she becomes Bush and tells how US troops are dying for a reason. And that the US are pulling out, just that not during her term.
Hillary Clinton is political juggernaut that should not be glibly discounted. Just when you thought it was safe. . . Wildkow
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dipper @ Aug 13 2007, 12:50 PM) [snapback]494787[/snapback]</div> Could you explain this "bush light" comment. How is she "bush light"?? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(wiiprii @ Aug 13 2007, 12:48 PM) [snapback]494785[/snapback]</div> I am not so sure Rudy will win the Republican nomination. My gut tells me that the creepy guy from Massachusettes will win. Rudy just doesn't appeal to social conservatives and it is still social conservatives who hold most of the cards in the party.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MarkMN @ Aug 13 2007, 11:00 AM) [snapback]494796[/snapback]</div> This term came out of Obama's mouth.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dipper @ Aug 13 2007, 01:23 PM) [snapback]494817[/snapback]</div> And just like a lot of things that come out of Obama's mouth, it doesn't make sense! Okay, now I probably pissed off a whole bunch of Obama supporters -- I like the guy and think that he does a lot of good in the Senate and understands the problems in the government, and I would be happy to support his campaign if he wins the nomination; but I can't see him being an effective president. He is too idealistic about what can be changed, and not tactful enough to get things done effectively. He would be a fine VP or cabinet member (HHS, HUD, or Labor), but as head honcho he would probably be disappointing. In another 8 years, he will be ready.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(wiiprii @ Aug 13 2007, 01:48 PM) [snapback]494785[/snapback]</div> Advice like: 1. how to select an intern that will keep his or her mouth shut or open [sorry bout that one] 2. how to take care of stained clothing [oops, sorry about that one two]
Why do most discussions about women (or a woman, singular) in politics always degenerate into one where sexual innuendo becomes an acceptable response? [actually, it's okay with men, too, so nevermind...our crassness knows no bounds, apparently] The doctor, in his puerile way, is actually demonstrating why Hillary can not win this time around: she's a woman. The current climate of religious and sexual intolerance is, I believe, even reigniting the embers of sexism; based on that assumption, now is not a good time for a female Democratic presidential candidate.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MarkMN @ Aug 13 2007, 11:36 AM) [snapback]494830[/snapback]</div> You are right about Obama's opinion. But that does not make Clinton ready either. She has only a few years (real experience) under her belt. She just happens to have a lot of years learning how to BS next to her husband. I am worry about our National defense comes down to launching a few cruise missiles and call it a success.... you know, the USS Coles thing with the other Clinton? Maybe I am just tired of both Rep/Demo crap. Any Green Party members looks good compared to these guys now.
Elections should be about ideas, that is when a sea changes occur it's when someone, or some political party articulates an idea, as say, opposed to articlulating fears. That being said by the time the second Tuesday in November 2008rolls around the voting electorate will have seen several tens of million's of dollars of advertising featuring pictures of ___________(fill in the blank) and George W. Bush smiling at one another and by that time . George Bush will be the Willy Horton of the '08 campaign. To the degree a Republican will be able to seperate his candidacy from Bush's will be the degree to which that candidate will be seen stepping out of a Prius Spaceship on his every campaign stop.
