Democrats: Please Don Not Nominate Hillary!!

And that is a big part of the problem. Some people in this thread (and others) have said something along the lines of “that group of people who wouldn’t vote for a black or a woman probably weren’t going to vote Democrat anyway so it doesn’t matter.”

What they forget is all of the union, Joe-Sixpack types who would generally be counted on for their Democratic support but can’t stand the idea of pulling the lever for a female or a black. Some of them would hold their nose and do it anyway, but in a close election, enough votes could be lost among this group to pooch the whole thing.

Up to a year ago, I believed that the first woman or black president would be very conservative.

I’ve changed my mind.

I lean to the conservative side myself (just a lean, not a full tilt :slight_smile: ) and, to be honest, I will most likely vote for Hillary.

Despite what talk radio and the like says…Hillary is a very moderate candidate. When she talks, I tend to think “This is how I’d probably act/think if I was in that position”. She seems like she has a good head on her shoulders.

So…count me in for Hillary in '08. She looks much better to me then the current crop of ‘Republican’ candidates…who don’t look very Repub to me.

Maybe you should have previewed this one, so that you could have deleted before posting?

I hope you realize that if you say that a black or woman could win, but just not this black or this woman, it makes no sense whatsoever to say “part of the reason” this black or woman can’t win “is the race/sex issue” which would apply to all blacks and all women.

My WAG is that he’s running for Secretary of State, not veep. But same idea.

You’re flailing around, here. Senator Clinton hardly “wields power” in any sense other than as a prospective candidate for the presidency. She is not a “power” in the Senate any more than Libby Dole was. (I will acknowledge that I had forgotten Senator Murkowski, although I tend to see the Deputy Whip as little more than an administrative position. I cannot recall a Deputy Whip of either party or any race or either sex scheduling votes or arranging the passage of bills except as carrying out the will of the Whip.)
As to your irrelevant statement that no woman Democrat has wielded power, Congressman Pelosi certainly wields it now. I also made no claim that the person wielding power had to have been elected by popular vote to the position that provided the power, only that they had to have gotten to a place where they could wield power as the result of a popular vote–unlike Secretaries Rice and Powell who were appointed to their positions of authority.

You are simply carping while ignoring the context of my statements as a response to Sam Stone.

That seems to be the prevailing sentiment among the punditerati. I have to wonder if Hillary would be so generous, or if Obama would even want him in that position. Chances are more than 50/50 that we’ll see!

I’m an Independent and I’ll repeat what I’ve said in other threads – I’ll vote for any Democrat over any Republican candidate except Hillary. And the biggest reason is that she usually shows the same contempt for people she disagrees with (i.e. Republicans) that a lot of the posters on this thread do. I’m almost ready to vote for any candidate who doesn’t demonize the other party.

FWIW, I plan on voting for Obama in the primaries. A Hillary/Obama ticket would break my heart, because I’d have to let go of Obama and vote for a third-party, or, as a remote possibility, the republican.

ETA: My point is that there are a lot of Independents like me, and if the Dems want to win, you should be trying to get our votes, not Republican votes.

I agree with AHunter3. The Republican party is weaker now than it has been in a generation. The field of Republican presidential candidates is particularly weak. I honestly can’t imagine any of those guys getting the nomination, except for the fact that someone has to, so logic demands that one of them will.

If you can’t take a chance and run a woman or a black this year, you might as well give up and declare the presidency a woman and minority free zone for all time. If the Democrats fail to win this presidential race no matter who their nominee, they might as well give up their major-party pretensions and move aside to make room for the Green party.

This is the PERFECT time to nominate an otherwise acceptable black, or woman, or other nontraditional candidate, because under Bush the Republican party has destroyed itself. The Democratic party nomination is the real battle.

Could you give some for-instances of this? As Senator, she has had a very good record of working with Senate Republicans.

Are you male or female? If male, then you have lots of company. Link.

You can bet your bippy that Hillary is aware of this and is working hard on it. She wants to be their girl, too!! :slight_smile:

You won’t get the chance. Both nominees will do so.

Exactly right. People will probably never love her the way they did Bill - although who knows what future generations will think about the First Female President - but she’s good at what she does. She’s a calculating student instead of a natural, maybe, but she’s a good student.

By the way, an awful lot of the people who hate Hillary really like George W. Bush. 30 percent of the population is not enough to stop her from winning the election.

Well, I’ll admit that a lot of it comes from her “vast right-wing conspiracy” days. I haven’t followed her Senate career closely; most recently I’ve only seen her on televised debates and news snippets. If a bunch of Republicans came out and said how wonderful she was to work with, my attitude would probably soften.

I’m male, btw, but I don’t think it has anything to do with her being female. I liked Liz Dole (who dropped out before I could vote for her) and I would probably like Condi Rice if there was some way she could radically separate herself from the current administration (and if she were running, of course).

I also agree with the poster above who said they are tired of legacy candidates. Do we need 28 straight years of Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton? A whole generation led by two families?

Analogy doesn’t hold for the Bush’s, GeeDub is nothing like his father, more’s the pity.

I know it’s not fair to her, but I think this may be a problem for her. Isn’t it only 3rd world countries that have these family dynasties…? Fortunately, I think W put an end to one of the family’s presidential aspirations. I wouldn’t be crazy about a Hillary presidency, but I wouldn’t mind it, either. I think she’d be “OK”. It’s just that… isn’t there someone from the Democratic party who can be president other than the person who just so happened to be married to Bill? But I guess that’s not for me to decide-- I’m not registered with any party.

Oh, I get it. You just want the Democrats to play nice, while the Republicans play dirty so that the Republicans will roll right over them.

The “extreme left” is not in charge of the Democratic party, nor do they have much political power at all, nor are they even numerous. The extreme right, on the other hand, permeates the Republican party and has huge influence over it. And they number in the millions.

I have no idea what you mean by your weird rant against knowledge. And you are not going to find “character” on the right.

As for the right and left being morally equivalent, wrong. The left can be wrong and often is, but the right is almost universally in the wrong.

I had Biden pegged as running for the TV exposure and ego gratification. But he gets no love any time he runs outside Delaware because he’s basically an empty suit. Not that that’s stopping Romney on the other side.

One thing Dubya’s accomplished is to make his old man look good, gotta give him that.

Oh yeah, Hillary … There are several posters thinking it’s over, no question, others giving odds on the nomination that heavily favor her … but come on, it’s way too damn early. Bloggers and message board posters are tuned in by definition, but most of America, including those will decide the matter, is NOT paying that much attention yet. Relax, enjoy your summer, and we’ll talk when the actual voting is upon is, when the actual voters are making their choices, m’kay? At least wait until we know if we’ll still have our people getting killed uselessly in Iraq or not, please!

A pretty impressive feat. Bush Sr. pardoned a whole slew of Iran-Contra figures on his way out the door. Bush Jr. just pardoned Scooter Libby - so far.

I think the odds heavily favor her, but it’s not too early at all. This thing’s likely to be all but over by Feb. 5, which is almost before most people start paying attention. We’ve got a screwed-up nominating process.

You mean you don’t think our current primary system allows The People[sup]TM[/sup] to choose the best possible candidate? Say it ain’t so!

I don’t really claim that the old method of having candidates worked out in backrooms, outside of the spotlight was better, but I really don’t think that the current situation is any better - instead of actually choosing a candidate based on issues, it seems to be a contest for which candidate can best get money for campaigning. Which often involves those same deal brokers in their same backrooms, that the primary elections were supposed to eliminate.

Which was real enough.