Surely the lefties love them both and the evil Pubs hate them both but that’s not what is important.
It’s the Mods in the MIddle!!
So I ask you…
Is Ms Pelosi performing in such a way as to encourage the swing voters to put a woman in the White House?
I can’t see any evidence of that. Do you simply mean that a if a woman does well as Speaker of the House it would make the public more likely to accept a female president?
I suppose that’s correct but I don’t think Pelosi is trying to be competent just to help Clinton out.
I think I’d be considered a leftist, at least in my current state, and I can tell you that a lot of lefties don’t like Mrs. Clinton at all. If she’s elected it looks possible she’ll continue Bush’s strategies, plus she’s always crying about Iran. There are many other issues too…
Leftists have no more love for HRC than we had for Bill. They’re both pro-NAFTA DLC DINOs. And now HRC is pro-war. Pelosi, thank Og, is none of the above.
“Lefties” do not like Hillary, nor were we fond of her husband.
What exactly do you mean by “in such a way”? Her trip to Syria?
Well that’s remarkable, isn’t it? Mrs. Clinton has united both the hardcore leftists and the righties in their dislike of her! Surely a rare event in politics…
But she can still get elected. Put both sets together and you’ve still got a minority.
I am a leftist, and HRC is the last person I want as the Democratic nominee in 2008. IMO she would have the best chance of losing, being such a polarizing figure.
Perhaps the OP was speaking of the Human Rights Campaign? 
What other issues? As a liberal she’s a little right of my politics too, but so was her husband. Political views aside, I’m trying to figure out why people dislike her. I know that republicans can think of a hundred reason why they dislike her but I’m curious about why a democrat doesn’t like her.
I’m not trying to put you on the spot because I feel the same way that you do and I have no idea why I feel that way. I think she panders, but so do all politicians. She’s competent and gets along well with people from both sides of the party in Washington. I’ve rarely heard even republicans that work with her criticize her.
Do you think she’s abrasive? I often wonder if women dislike or don’t respect her because of Clinton’s cheating? She rarely does well in the straw polls at Daily Kos. I think the only way she’ll stand much of a chance is if Bill campaigns with her. I think she’d be great as a vice presidential candidate first.
Sorry if this is too much OT, I was just curious.
Personally, I don’t like her because she’s far too much of a hawk: she still refuses to say she was wrong to vote for the war, and would vote the same way today*! She’s done a lot of crap about ‘violent video games’; let me tell you, I’ve played Super Smash Brothers Melee and Soul Calibur II many times, and still never gotten in a fight.
*-She said something to that effect, IIRC.
Not exactly the best chance of losing. Read some of the Imus threads and tell me that Obama has a shot.
Okay, maybe. My real point is that Jillary is already well-known and well-hated by millions. She has baggage.
But if she is the nominee, I hope you’ll vote for her. I will, without hesitation. Even if Nader’s on the ballot again.
She’s soft on free speech, which is a really big hurdle for me to overcome when voting for a political candidate.
In what respect?
Video games and flag burning.
I think that just by being an effective leader, Pelosi helps Hillary. Over time, people are noticing that the House of Representatives, with a woman Speaker, is the exact opposite of a train wreck. It’s not exactly a big jump from there to thinking a woman President might be tolerable.
I don’t like Hillary for a few reasons:
the aforementioned hawkishness internationally. I’ve yet to hear her say something that suggests she thinks the Bush foreign policy was misguided rather than badly executed.
Iraq in particular. She’s fuzzy on how big a ‘residual force’ she might leave there, but informed analysts have worked from the missions she thinks it should have, and come up with a figure somewhere around 70,000 troops, IIRC.
Her fuzziness, hypercaution, and general unwillingness to take strong stands on major issues.
Her substitution of ‘smallball’ - taking strong stands on trivial shit like violent video games - for taking real stands on substantive issues.
It’s as if she’s trapped in a time warp. It’s as if she’s still flinching from the defeat of HillaryCare and the loss of the 1994 midterms, and getting ready to run Bill’s 1996 Presidential campaign. The rest of us have moved on - we’re aware that the tide’s running our way, that it’s a time for taking strong stands on universal health care, global warming, and getting out of Iraq. (Hell, even Rahm Emmanuel has figured this out, which is surely a sign of the impending Apocalypse, so what’s Hillary’s excuse?) A Democratic Party with Hillary as its de facto leader beginning next year would be a Democratic Party that would waste as good an opportunity as it’s likely to get for awhile to make things better for average Americans, and clearly define itself as a party in the process.
Perfectly stated.