[gkruCRi1]

If Hillary's the best they have, then look for a Republican President in 2008!

I'm not so sure of that. And Clinton woudn't run if she thought she couldn't win--she's too savvy to be that kind of fool.

To date, I'm still looking at who is going to be the Republican candidate for 2008 who can both clear the primary and then gain enough support to win the national election. Who is that person going to be? Anyone have thoughts on that?

Hillary, if she wins the primary, will likely get most of the Dem vote anyway on party lines by default unless the Rep candidate has some major overriding appeal.

Most Reps will likely vote against Clinton also on party lines. She wouldn't be concerned about those voters or their negative remarks because she already knows they are not obtainable votes anyway.

The key are the swing and independent voters.

The majority of those have been tracking left since Bush who is still in office like an albatross over the heads of those who survived the Congressional cleanout. He will not be running, but it sets the tone all the way through the election because he will be the POTUS. I mean, John Kerry--a person who I think Terry McAuliffe described right as having committed some of the biggest political malpractice of all time in wasting gift horse advantages to lose in 2004--got 48% of the vote, and most did that just because he was not Bush. That is how toxic the air has been.

Many of those independent voters are also younger or career single women, a favourable pool for her if the Republican candidate will be a social conservative, something I think the candidate would need to be to clear the primaries and get the base motivated. I'm sure that Hillary also noted that she drew well and/or chipped away noticeably in the traditionally very Republican 'red' areas of rural upstate and western New York in her Senate races through women voters.

Politics can change in a week, and a good scandal or something can change whole pictures rapidly, but she is not a forgone loser by any means. That is why I am really curious as to who will finally be the Rep candidate for 2008--it's a critical choice.

[OpVJokl8]

Hillary is just a dumb fool.

Hardly.....

The woman is an extremely brilliant individual. What she is, is fake and dishonest. She is very clever and very manipulative. Her ambition is to be President and she will do and say whatever it takes to achieve that.

Dumb and foolish are not appropriate words to describe her.

[corolaelwis]

Well, there have been strong rumors about Bloomberg running, but I think he could actually hurt the Dems more than the Reps.

Yeah he was the one person i think could do it and he came to mind as soon as you said it...what worries me is he could actually hurt and harm both parties...see if he gets enough traction going there could be more who do this and more parties will ruin our brilliant 2 party system, it'll mess everything up. When you have close majorities like now in the Senate but then say one independant it completely screws everything up totally like with Committee chairmanships and so on. That could hurt our federalist system more than anything.

[corolaelwis]

How are we safe if the government is the only one with guns?

Heh, Personally its not a heart wrenching dillemma for me! Sorry...really never thought about it. No offence intended, its just something i have to worry about.

Anyway he is often mis quoted on that, he just wants certain areas that are notoriously dangerous and certain people with a reputation to be involved in serious crimes to be Gun free.

[corolaelwis]

lose in 2004--got 48% of the vote, and most did that just because he was not Bush. That is how toxic the air has been.

Precisely, so think how many will vote for the GOP simply because its a vote against Hillary? And the fact that if we nominate a social conservative that will rally the entire GOP base, so we'll have all of the GOP vote and a lot of the Anti-Hillary vote which will be more than enough.

On the other hand if we nominate a Guiliani or even God Forbid McCain then we'll easily carry the independant and swing voters with a slight loss of the base.

Either way we win.

[PypeMaypetasy]

A Hillary candidacy is not a lock for the GOP. She could win if a strong third party candidate enters the race and siphons enough votes from the Republican to allow her to win states she would not have. That's how Bill beat Bush 41. It wouldn't surprise me if that exact scenario would come into play again.

i dont ...........i truly believe hillary will be the best thing for politics if she is the nominee


MOFO's who have never voted will vote just to block that lady

[corolaelwis]

I think Elvis might rise from the dead just to vote against her...

[corolaelwis]

That is why I am really curious as to who will finally be the Rep candidate for 2008--it's a critical choice.

Looking at some of the most accurate pollster's (and even though there's a long way to go) if we get the nomination right we're unbeatable:

2008 Presidential Match-ups

2008 Democratic Presidential Matchups

There isn't gonna be a person who can beat Giuliani or McCain.

[gkruCRi1]

Precisely, so think how many will vote for the GOP simply because its a vote against Hillary? And the fact that if we nominate a social conservative that will rally the entire GOP base, so we'll have all of the GOP vote and a lot of the Anti-Hillary vote which will be more than enough.

On the other hand if we nominate a Guiliani or even God Forbid McCain then we'll easily carry the independant and swing voters with a slight loss of the base.

Either way we win.

The bases for both are already going to be rallied.

True 'Anti-Hillary' voters come from committed Republican circles, IMO. Picking a social conservative will make others, even if they would have rathered Obama or Edwards, etc, to choose Hillary unless they are already social conservatives, who in turn will vote for the Rep anyway.

Guiliani might have crossover appeal (and if he wins NY, will take away a huge number of electoral votes for the Reps that now mostly go to the Dems), but will the GOP base back him in the primary and rally hard to vote him in? He's a social liberal, a hawkish New York Democrat for all intents and purposes. He also has alot of personal baggage, something the base may not also like.

I think McCain already has problems. He is a social conservative, yet social conservatives don't like him at all. He is already getting pidgeonholed as being an Iraq escalator, and this theme will be driven hard and fast, fair and foul, on him. Independents are tracking left on social issue and Iraq. Many like McCain's mavarick style, but not his social conservative views and Iraq hawkishness even this late in the war.

Your thoughts?

[AlexanderDrew]

I love all you guys who say "she has zero chance of being in the White House"
Let me tell you something. This lady has been under estimated for a long time. First: She would not run for the Senate. Than She won't win the Senate. Than "The people of New York can't wait until the next election so they can throw her out. Now, "she can't win the nomination and if she does good, we can plan the next republican presidency." But what I do not see is any of you people saying that you will go to Vegas and put some big money on it. What we will see in the next year or so is garbage, slime, name calling and sexual innuendos. All the things that other candidates do not have to deal with. SNL had the opening skid about her tonight. No other candidate has yet been featured on SNL. That's just the start. Don't worry, she knew all this better than we do. As for me: I wish she had not run. She's too valuable in the Senate. Having said that: Let's just listen what the lady has to say. If she gets beat in the primaries, so be it. If not, compare her to the republican nominee and than let the chips fall where they may. My guess is that two years from now as of today, we will call her Madam President.

[PypeMaypetasy]

how could hillary be good for the country?

bush has been so devisive and look where it has gotten us...

Hillary would be worse .........

[PypeMaypetasy]

I love all you guys who say "she has zero chance of being in the White House"
Let me tell you something. This lady has been under estimated for a long time. First: She would not run for the Senate. Than She won't win the Senate. Than "The people of New York can't wait until the next election so they can throw her out. Now, "she can't win the nomination and if she does good, we can plan the next republican presidency." But what I do not see is any of you people saying that you will go to Vegas and put some big money on it. What we will see in the next year or so is garbage, slime, name calling and sexual innuendos. All the things that other candidates do not have to deal with. SNL had the opening skid about her tonight. No other candidate has yet been featured on SNL. That's just the start. Don't worry, she knew all this better than we do. As for me: I wish she had not run. She's too valuable in the Senate. Having said that: Let's just listen what the lady has to say. If she gets beat in the primaries, so be it. If not, compare her to the republican nominee and than let the chips fall where they may. My guess is that two years from now as of today, we will call her Madam President.

WOW just watched the skit.......(i tape SNL on my DVD recorder every week and then watch sunday morning.)...you know that skit is written by liberals right? i mean SNL is not on FOX and can no way be construed to be a CONSERVATIVE show

everything i have ever read about her, my one time visit with her, that skit though over the top was grounded in truth.........

[PypeMaypetasy]

further to add to the commentary

who wrote the weekend update this week? MOVEON or DEMOUNDERGROUND?

they are usually pretty anti bush / war but damn that was pretty harsh for even SNL

[annouhMus]

Atleast Condi is smart....Hillary is just a dumb fool. Condi would have a way better chance at winning an election among smarter America then Hillary would. The majority of Hillarys votes will be because she's "Hillary" and not because she could actually run this country. Condi has far more credentials to run this country then Hillary does, I dont care what the left says....Put Condi's resume up against Hillarys betty crocker ass, Condi is by far the better choice of the 2.

I wonder what you would say about this if you weren't a rabid Bushnik. Condi would be no better, and when people get off this Repo/Demo Kick, maybe we will finally get a good Presidential Candidate. At the present time, I'm for Hagel.

[JTS_tv]

further to add to the commentary

who wrote the weekend update this week? MOVEON or DEMOUNDERGROUND?

they are usually pretty anti bush / war but damn that was pretty harsh for even SNL

Actually it was the Underground Front for Liberal Politics in Unfunny Television.

[Jjfotqse]

If Hillary's the best they have, then look for a Republican President in 2008!

I think not, I believe Bill Richardson is the best they've got. He looks like a likely candidate now.

[PypeMaypetasy]

Actually it was the Underground Front for Liberal Politics in Unfunny Television.

OH ya the UFLPUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ahagotyou]

The President of the USA holds what is arguably the most important executive position in the world.

Let's take a look at the 5 most recent US presidents' executive experience before they were elected for this important job.

• George W. Bush - Held an executive position for MLB's Texas Rangers baseball team franchise. Governor of Texas for 8 years, another very important executive position.
  .
• Bill Clinton - Held an executive position as Governor of Arkansas for over a decade.
  .
• George H. W. Bush - Held an executive position at Dresser Industries for many years. Was also the Director of the CIA. Another challenging executive position.
  .
• Ronald Reagan - Held an executive position as President of the Screen Actors Guild. Also held an executive position as Governor of California for 8 years.
  .
• Jimmy Carter - Owned an agricultural business. Was Governor of Georgia for 4 years.

Now let's look at the executive experience of 5 potential presidential candidates.

• Hillary Rodham Clinton - Zero experience as an executive. She's just a lawyer from Arkansas that carpetbagged to New York to snag an easy Senate position from a guy that retired.
  .
• John Forbes Kerry - Another lawyer with zero executive experience.
  .
• Barak Hussein Obama - Again, zero executive experience.
  .
• Michael Bloomberg - He ran his own extremely successful company. He is currently the Mayor of New York City. Lots of executive experience there.
  .
• Bill Richardson - Lots of executive experience here too. He was Energy Secretary for the Clinton admin. He is currently the Governor of New Mexico.

Notice that only 2 of the candidates listed can reasonably be considered to be qualified for a job as a chief executive.

Hillary isn't one of them.

[XarokLasa]

Hillary is too polarized.

She has a fan base (mabye 30% of her party) - and she has the media - both will support her no matter what..outside of that support she has nothing.

She is not her husband.
She is a manipulative, malignant creature who would eat her own children if it benefited her political career.

She doesn't have a prayer, despite what the well wishing media dreamers might tell you.

[corolaelwis]

The bases for both are already going to be rallied.

True 'Anti-Hillary' voters come from committed Republican circles, IMO. Picking a social conservative will make others, even if they would have rathered Obama or Edwards, etc, to choose Hillary unless they are already social conservatives, who in turn will vote for the Rep anyway.

Guiliani might have crossover appeal (and if he wins NY, will take away a huge number of electoral votes for the Reps that now mostly go to the Dems), but will the GOP base back him in the primary and rally hard to vote him in? He's a social liberal, a hawkish New York Democrat for all intents and purposes. He also has alot of personal baggage, something the base may not also like.

I think McCain already has problems. He is a social conservative, yet social conservatives don't like him at all. He is already getting pidgeonholed as being an Iraq escalator, and this theme will be driven hard and fast, fair and foul, on him. Independents are tracking left on social issue and Iraq. Many like McCain's mavarick style, but not his social conservative views and Iraq hawkishness even this late in the war.

Your thoughts?

The part above where i strongly disagree is that the notion of the anti-Hillary vote being mainly GOP voters. I think she is villified by the GOP but independants have a stronger unfavorable than favorable opinion of her. Or was it the case in 2004 that the anti-Bush vote was from Dems? If the independant were the ones furious at Bush in 2004 then they'll be furious at Hillary come 2008...or if it was party lined then Hilary might actually win if she actually had a grass roots base to rally, i'll go and refference a point that you made earlier which may have some food for thought.