[quote]
So predicts a top Washington insider, who spoke to the DRUDGE REPORT on condition he not be named.
“All the signs point in her direction,” said the insider, one of the most influential and well-placed in the nation’s capital. “It is the solution to every Kerry problem.”
Hmm. Chee. I remember her being vreally ocal about NOT being interested in a VP slot on 60 Minutes biographical piece a few months back – though I suppose she just could’ve been coy.
Is this really likely? Will Hillary hurt or help Kerry? I gotta think conservatives would be salivating at the chops for a shot at retaking the White House and taking down a Clinton, too.
Not a chance. Ralph Nader has a better shot at the VP spot next to Kerry.
Nothin’ against Hillary, she’s OK, pretty much, nothing to get all shook up over. But there are so many people, so very very people who hate her with a passion that blinds all reason, it makes no sense to bring on board someone who will actually hurt your campaign, without some countering advantage. Which would be what?
Edwards, if Kerry’s got the good sense God gave a goose.
Lord, not this again. Remember mid primaries when Drudge et al. where clamoring all over the place saying that if Hillary didn’t enter the primaries she was going to be “drafted” by the DNC at the convention? Yeah, that didn’t happen. Neither is her running for VP.
As a Democrat, I can’t think of a single advantage she would bring the ticket. I doubt she’d be able to carry Arkansas, or help take Florida. She’d hurt Kerry’s chances in Missouri and Ohio, and possibly New Jersey.
The biggest advantage that Edwards would bring to the campaign is the fact that he is a southerner. The thinking goes that he could help Kerry win votes in the south where they don’t like liberals from Massachusetts.
However, Edwards didn’t actually do too well in the south when he was still in the race. If Kerry’s people look at the numbers they might not think it’s worth it to bring him along unless he actually won some southern states against the other democrats, which I don’t think he did.
In any situation that Kerry wins this election she will be forced to wait until at least 2012 for her bid at the oval office. Hillary is praying that Bush wins this election and screws up for another 4 years. Then all she has to do is get her party’s nod in 2008, by which time it will truly be anybody but Bush & friends!
I’ll second the request for more info. I have yet to see any conservative want Edwards on the ticket - the only Dem I’ve seen conservatives want is Hillary. Edwards may not actually swing any southern states, but I think he would definitely make an impact in other swing states like Ohio and Missouri.
:Yawn…: The Beltway bunch is talking to each other again over beers, huh? Should venture out of the Green Zone once in awhile. That’s where the Hillary talk always comes from, and so, I would offer, does the Edwards talk. Kerry was overheard a few months ago contemptuously observing that “He couldn’t even carry his own state!” I think that is not only true, but probably reflects Kerry’s thinking as well.
Look, they know each other well enough from the Senate. Yet Kerry was never more than cordial to him in the primaries, and furthermore Edwards stayed in, costing Kerry effort and money, long after it was obvious he was gone. That tells me there’s some bad blood there. It also wouldn’t help Kerry to pick another Senator - being a Washington insider and a nonexecutive himself, he needs a Governor to balance the ticket, and a moderate non-northeasterner at that.
This is the same crap that Safire keeps flailing away at. Do you have a source for this besides the voices in Bill’s head? Or has this become a talking point?
Honest answer from a conservative-leaning Doper: Because she is a power-grabbing liberal bitch. What was the first thing we heard after Clinton got elected? “Congratulations, you’ve got two for the price of one.” Hill, I hate to break it to you, but America didn’t elect you. Just because Bill got elected doesn’t mean you count for shit. Shut up and disappear. Add to that the Travel Office fiasco, the Health Care debacle, and you have why I hate her with the white-hot heat of a thousand suns.
Oh, yeah. Hill? It doesn’t take a village. It takes two caring parents. So piss off!
BG, does that help? I do understand why a lot of people think the hatred is mindless and without cause. But believe me, to some of us there is great cause.
Which only proves that Democratic primary voters, as a rule, don’t have a clue what will win in November. (Witness Mondale and Dukakis.)
I agree that Kerry won’t pick Edwards, though. I sense some bad blood there.
Besides which, as was obvious early on, Kerry has written off the South (with the exception of Florida and maybe Arkansas). Bush ads play here fairly regularly, but I haven’t seen a single Kerry ad since the primaries.
Oh, for pete’s sake. You can really set your watch by Drudge and the rest of these Republican lackeys. Bush is down in the polls? Time to trot out the big boogeyman, evil Lesbinazi Hillary Rodham “I hate Christianity and the military and apple pie” Clinton.
First, as Bill Clinton recently told Oprah, Hillary promised the good people of New York that she’d be our senator for the full term, and that’s what she’ll do.
Second, John Kerry and his team are nothing if not damn smart. For some reason unbeknownst to any sane individual, Hillary is absolutely hated by a substantial portion of rightwing America with a fervor usually reserved for traitors and serial killers. Not that Kerry cares what wingnuts like them “think” with what they are pleased to call their “minds,” but he doesn’t need to feed into that paranoia, coming from the same sort of people who call Kerry “Hanoi John.”
He’ll likely go with someone who’s a great campaigner like Edwards, someone safe and uncontroversial like Gephardt (ugh), or – if he’s as smart as I think/hope he is – someone who’ll wipe the floor with the competition and makes Republicans quiver in their boots, like Wesley Clark.
In any event, Hillary’s day will come, but it’s not time yet and she knows it. And BTW, Cisco, there’s no fucking way she or anyone on our side who isn’t barking mad or whose name doesn’t rhyme with Galph Fader – but then, I repeat myself – actually wants Bush to win.
silenus, no doubt you wish Laura and Barbara Bush and Nancy Reagan would shut up and disappear too. Right? No, friend, when we elect a President, we know he’s going to depend on people he can trust, and we know that damn well includes his wife. We did elect them both, along with the rest of his inner circle. You voted for Laura Bush and Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld and Colin Powell, not just Dubya, in 2000. Hillary is no damn different, and you have no basis to say she is.
Don’t flatter yourself. When asked for factual reasons to hate Hillary, you came up with the usual adjectives, the widely-popular health care policy effort (which was part of Clinton’s platform and partly why he got elected - what, do you think it was all her doing?), and the discredited Travel"gate" (cute word) crap. Not gonna do it. Might as well have tossed in Vince Foster’s murder. Now get the fuck over it already. choie, you’re right - it’s like watching Pavlov’s dogs at dinner time. Ring the bell, say the magic word “Clinton” or “Hillary”, and watch the slobbering. Ever notice who the most-targeted members of the Clinton Administration were, btw, besides the big guy himself? Hillary, Janet Reno, and Madeleine Albright. They do have something in common, something many men find threatening and therefore hate-inspiring.