elucidator, I may not agree with you on much, but your language is a joy to read.
Hm. Well, the GOP should be very afraid if that’s the case. They really can’t permanently govern on their own; their party’s policy is to let Dems win now & then so the Dems can take the “blame” for raising taxes (aka avoiding bankruptcy). Another GOP President (well, not Romney or Giuliani, whatever they say just now) pretty much guarantees a Scalia-esque majority on SCOTUS, which will give history a chance to prove everything in their platform both unpopular & wrong. The country wants a Dem, & a Dem President saves the GOP from embarrassment.
Which is why it’s time to put down the shovel. Imagine what it’ll look like with another four years under Guiliani or, God forbid, Tancredo.
Untrue. As I said in the “Why do people hate Hillary” thread, I have a strong visceral reaction to Hillary. I don’t like her nor trust her. However, running her is the only thing the Dems can do that will prevent them from getting my vote this time.
I think there are a lot of people (me included. Well, I don’t hate her, she’s just my least favorite of the candidates) who will hate Hillary Clinton right up until the time to pull the lever for her, and then we will.
It’s easy to hate her when there are better alternatives. Once there aren’t better alternatives, the hate becomes something lukewarm.
I’m not going to let my dislike of Clinton turn me into a damned fool.
I have very mixed feelings about Mrs. Clinton. She’s running an impeccably managed campaign, she has a strong personality (i.e. can make clear and consistent decisions with no serious possibility that someone is pulling strings in the background), she is highly qualified in terms of experience and knowledge (possibly the most so of any current candidate), and she is quite capable of governing from a centrist position. Only the most rabid anti-Democrat will probably dispute any of those points. So, I am a potential Clinton voter in 2008. Anyone who says she unequivocally has no chance is … well … pretty stupid. I’m willing to guess that more than 50% of Americans would potentially agree with the line of thinking I just laid out.
However. Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton gives me pause. It really, really, does. So no way will I support Hillary in the primaries. We could be facing 28 years of Clintons and Bushes. I hate that idea. But who she picks for a running-mate could make a big difference. Clinton-Obama would be a powerful ticket against any potential Repub matchup.
I will vote for her against every Republican candidate, except for the possibility of Giuliani. “Hillary with a penis.” Well, perhaps. My feeling is that if a liberal Republican can win the nomination (i.e. no kow-towing to the radical religious right or neo-cons), and run a successful campaign against the Dem nominee, that would bode well for a strong presidency. I wouldn’t be upset if Guiliani won.
Otherwise, it’s Mrs. Clinton all the way.
Since we have a bunch of posters saying how they’ll have to grid their teeth if it comes to voting for Hillary, I’ll just add that I actually like her, and much prefer her to Edwards, Gulliani, Romney or Obama (are we even counting McCain as a front-runner anymore?). I’m a moderate Dem, so she’s close to where I am on a lot of issues, she seems intelligent and well spoken, has handled political attacks on her in the past about as well as can be expected and while she’s certainly ambitious and pandering, I don’t find her more so then any of the other front running candidates.
I hope she wins in 2008.
Oh. So, are you a Reform Satanist or and Orthodox Satanist?
Untrue now but that’s because only Clinton has been the ongoing target of such a prolonged hate campaign. If Obama or Edwards or some other candidate actually wins the nomination, they’ll be the new punching bag. And a year from now many people will be saying, “God, this guy’s a total loser. Worst candidate ever. Why didn’t the Democrats nominate somebody good like Clinton?”
Mosier, you also seem to be ignoring the vast numbers of Americans (myself included) who “don’t like” HRC but will still vote for her over any Republican.
Actually, I feel sorry for the next president: he/she will inherit
-a vast deficit, and rising spending for an unpopular war
-skyrocketing fuel prices
-the decline of the US dollar, leading to big problems with the economy
-hatred for the USA around the world
- a new Russia, which is not inclined to work with US interests
-a decline of us influence in Asia and the ME
We are a LOT like Great Britain, ca. 1945-we have imperial ambitions, but the strength to achieve them is ebbing away. Actually we might be better off relinquishing the superpower role-it is destroying us and making us the target for terrorists
http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08gen.htm
I would bet money that IF Hillary wins the nomination she’ll win it all. In the latest polls she beats EVERY SINGLE REPUBLICAN in a head to head matchup. The Hillary hate is sooooo 1994 dude. Newt Gingrich wants his meme back.
Giuliani will probably win the Republican nomination. Just how many votes do you think he’ll get? He’s been a horrible husband and he’s pro-choice. It won’t cause Republicans to change their votes, but it will certainly keep the Christian Right that luuuurved Bush from coming out to vote. Bush didn’t do all they wanted but he did throw them the occasional bone.
Actually though, Rudy is the only one with any chance of beating Hillary. Any other nominee will seem like a guy fighting his kid brother. Just not fair, really.
I can guarantee you that if we have a “subway election” between two New York politicians, there will be an invigorated third-party movement. (And no, the third-party nominee won’t be Bloomberg.)
Then who?
Newt! Newt! Newt!
(OK. OK, I’ll stop. Well, I’ll try. Really hard, and this time I mean it. Newt! That was a slip, it doesn’t count…)
In all seriousness I think Newt might actually be a decent president after the ridiculous government bloat GWB put in.
Oh. Can I do that too?
Oh good. You’re completely wrong about everything. End of debate, on that issue. 
We had a whole thread about that poll. Bottom line: (a) it was a Zogby poll, and Zogby sucks; and (b) other polls say other things:
The results, in a nutshell: at September’s end, they have 41% who’d definitely not vote for Hillary, down from 45% in April. The comparable September numbers for Edwards and Obama are 43% and 39%, respectively.
And for Rudy, Fred, Mitt, and McCain, they’re 44%, 57%, 54%, and 45%, respectively.
So it’s hard for me to see how Hillary’s doomed in the general election.
Wait: Republicans don’t like Bush because he hasn’t cut government spending, he hasn’t been able to cut taxes even more, he hasn’t been able to privatize Social Security. Guiliani, by your own admission, is going to infuriate conservatives more on those issues.
Conservatives still like Bush because at least he’s a God-fearing Christian who talks strong about pro-life and anti-gay issues. Guiliani, by your own admission, won’t do any of that.
Something like 35 percent of America likes our policy on Iraq and a few more like the way Bush is running the war on terrorism. I concede that if 35% of America likes George Bush, a roughly similar number will like Guiliani.
Seriously, your OP is exactly the reason why conservatives will not support Guiliani. There’s no finer way to suppress Republican turnout in 2008 than to have Guiliani be the nominee. I think Republicans nominating him guarantees Clinton will be elected. It is a lock.
No idea. But there will be plenty of disaffected voters ready to rally behind…someone…
JEB!