Stop Hillary

POSTED BY: ModerateDem
UPDATED: Monday, November 21, 2005 21:07
VIEWED: 4505
PAGE 1 of 3

1 2 3 NEXT PAGE

MODERATEDEM

Saturday, November 19, 2005 8:24 AM

Hillary Clinton must be stopped so us moderate and centrist Democrats can save the party from the kooks and wack-jobs who have hijacked the party of Franklin Roosevelt and Jack Kennedy and turned it into the party of Bill Maher and Michael Moore.

http://www.stophillarypac.com/

http://www.blogsagainsthillary.com/

http://hillarywatch.blogspot.com/

http://www.hilldabeast.com/index.php

http://www.stophillarynow.net/

MARK WARNER IN 2008

FLETCH2

Saturday, November 19, 2005 9:02 AM

Assuming you are a moderate Democrat as you claim then you are lost, completely screwed beyond all imaginings. Clue here, Republicans are better organised than you are, better funded than you are and have a single consistant message. You've become the "me too" party --- read doesnt have the balls to come up with any new ideas of your own. Al Gore and John Kerry? What the f*** were you people thinking?

Your one shot at taking back anything is to put some blue sky between you and the Republicans, go left, go right just go somewhere and make a stand about something. Throw out an idea or two with merit rather than whine all the time. You get no respect because you earn no respect. Let Hillary run in 2008 and if your guy is smarter and has a better platform he'll show her up to be a gorgon in the primary. If he cant manage to win on ideas he has no right to be President anyway.

You want power? Prove you have a vision that people want. Otherwise stop whining.

BELACGOD

Saturday, November 19, 2005 9:42 AM

What Fletch said. The Democratic Party is a disgrace, with no coherent platform, no leadership, and no plans. It's completely reactive and set up for any kind of caricature its enemies want to paint. This is Bill Clinton's fault, for being competent enough to paper over the above problems for 8 years--if Bush Senior or Dole had won, the Dems would have had the conversation they're having now 8 or 4 years earlier, and have solved it already.

A cynical leftist would say, "Yeah, the right wing are all sheep, it's easy to keep them on message." At least they have a gorram message.

FLETCH2

Saturday, November 19, 2005 10:33 AM

You see, more than anything this stop Hillary campaign shows that your guy isn't a player. The DLC really wants Hillary to be their canidate, you can bet that come primary season their attack dogs are going to be out there looking to cut the legs out from under anyone that challenges their girl.

There's this trend in US politics I've noticed, these days so much smearing goes on both in the primary and the general election that any failed cannidate is too badly soiled to run again any time soon. If you are a failed primary contender you might need to sit out a couple of election cycles, a failed Presidential canidate can probably never run again. If he starts out against a fresh new runner the next time then he comes into the race with any charges that may have stuck from his last run.

The smart thing for your guy to do is drop out and let Hillary run. If she fails to be elected she will be out of the running for 2012 and who knows the DLC may decide to back your guy that time. At least he enters that race "clean." In addition if Hillary loses it will mean a Republican will have to clean up the various wars and the budget crisis. Getting things back in shape will probably mean cutting sacred cow programs on both sides AND some tax rises. The poor schmuck that has to do that won't be liked by anyone, why not let the other guys have that dubious "honour?"

VALDRON

Saturday, November 19, 2005 3:06 PM

Tinfoil hats! Step right up and get yer tinfoil hats here! $29.99, limited supplies only, one to a customer and no waiting. Get yer tinfoil hats!

DREAMTROVE

Saturday, November 19, 2005 3:51 PM

What fletch said.

Also this:

If a democrat wants to fight Hillary '08, more power to them. Hillary is the Dems neo-con friendly candidate, so the communist reference is not off base.

But the Dems need to really organize their opposition. The problem for me with the democrats is that they have a platform full of old tried and failed ideas, and a large number of special interest riders. Let me take a moment to define those, because I think dems are really missing the point here. Anything that helps <10% of the population at the expense of the rest of the population, qualifies as a special interest platform point. Bush has some too, like his tax cuts for the rich mean that we run up deficits that ultimately everyone else is going to have to pay for.

I do think that the person who cleans up the mess actually gets a lot of respect. Vlad Putin and FDR were both far more popular than their policies meritted because there was a certain 'thank god' element to their support.

JFK was a war monger, much like Clinton. I have to again agree with Fletch here that the Dems need to put a little sky between you and the GOP. Bush is a warmongner, Clinton was a warmonger, Kerry was a warmonger. Would be interesting to see how a non-warmonger would do.

BTW, I like Bill Maher. I think sometimes he's way off base, but he doesn't create the reaction in me that Hillary does. He doesn't strike me as a left wing extremist either.

I don't know jack about Mark Warner except that he's a junior Governor. I think Governors in general have a better shot at the gold than Senators, though I think Senators may make better presidents if they can get elected.

Maybe you could start out by telling people why Mark Warner, rather than why not Hillary. I would hope everyone already knew why 'not Hillary.'

I guess that's one more piece of advise I have for the dems. Stop with the negative campaigning. You can make the other guy look awful, but if your constituents don't know jack about your guy, they won't be motivated to go out and vote for him.

The reason W. won against McCain and Forbes in '00 was that his voters thought that if they didn't vote for little Bush in the primary, they'd lose their immortal souls. It's an amazingly dumb way to vote, but it's a hell of a motivation.

VALDRON

Saturday, November 19, 2005 3:57 PM

One of the reasons Bush won over McCain in the 00 primaries was that Bush had something like ten times the money McCain had.

One of the other reasons Bush won over McCain was that Bush put about the rumour that McCain had a little black illegitimate daughter from sleeping around on his wife.

In terms of the larger issue, I don't see any potential Republican or Democratic candidate with the will or ability to address America's problems, nor is there any reflection of such will in the Senate or House. This is unfortunate, since all signs indicate that America is hurtling past the point of no return and will likely experience major contractions and dislocations over the next decade or so. Think Germany in the 1920's, or Russia in the 1990's.

Given the increasingly imminent crises, and the lunatic commitment of the current administration to doing the worst possible things, I really can't see the obsessive hatred of Hillary Clinton shown by the lunatic fringe as anything but a silly sideshow.

The captain has decided to play chicken with glaciers, icebergs have torn huge holes in the side of the ship, his response is to charge full speed at more icebergs, and and the tinfoil hat crowd is obsessed over the fact that Hillary Clinton's deck chair might be at the front of the circle.

Charming.

DIEGO

Saturday, November 19, 2005 5:08 PM

I have never had a strong opinion on Hillary. Sometimes she has said/done things I agree with, and other times I thought she was being too political. But I have never experienced or even understood the kind of knee-jerk visceral response that so many people seem to have.

And I was completely turned-off by the petty villanization of Hillary on the links you provided. The common theme of photoshopping Hillary to look like a devil is extremely trite and smacks of paraoid misogynism. What the heck? I mean, I am a stong opponent of the Bush administration but I would not take any website seriously that tried photomanipulations at the top to make him look like Beezlebub. I'd keep looking until I found a site which stood upon the strength of legitimate criticisms of him.

FLETCH2

Saturday, November 19, 2005 9:47 PM

I suspect whoever cleans up the mess will get a lot of respect too, but probably not until he's out of office. Also FDR implemented the Swedish third way model which spent money on public works to get people working. Somebody that creates programs to put people to work will get some support even if it's just from the folks working. The guy that fixes this mess though will have to take things away from people, cutting benefits will piss off the left, axing military spending will piss off the right so the poor sod will be hated by everyone.

DREAMTROVE

Saturday, November 19, 2005 9:56 PM

Wake up everyone.

Hillary is Bush. This is why I oppose her. She is the prop candidate of exactly the same people who supported Bush, who supported Bill Clinton.

This is a perpetual nightmare. They've got a brilliant strategy and they have all of you following them like puppydogs.

Check this out. This is the strategy, I posted it before, here it is again. A group of neocons who form groups such as PNAC are and have been running the campaigns since '80, with the single exception of Bush Sr. They own him too, now, but they didn't then. The started to win him over when he was in office. Okay, here's the strategy again:

[neocons] advise a republican president down a road of unpopular action, his popularity suffers.

[neocons] Support a democratic candidate, Bill Clinton, to office, aided by the unpopularity of a republican president. They support him and advise him in a course of action which the people oppose. His popularity sinks.

[neocons] Support a republican candidate, George W. Bush, to office, aided by the unpopularity of the democratic president, Bill Clinton. They support him and advise him in a course of action which the people oppose. His popularity plummets.

[neocons] Support a democratic candidate, Hillary Clinton, to office, aided by the extreme unpopularity of the republican president, George W. Bush. They support her and advise her in a course of action which the people oppose. Her popularity plummets.

[neocons] Support a republican candidate, Jeb Bush, to office, aided by the unpopularity of the democratic president, Hillary Clinton. They support him and advise him in a course of action which the people oppose. His popularity plummets.

[neocons] Support a ... you get the picture.

I hope.

If you support Hillary bait and switch Clinton, you are pushing for the re-election of the policies of George W. Bush.

This political process needs a strong principled organization on each side to support honest candidates which will not be bought by this neocon set which has more or less been in power since 1980. Are Clinton and Bush different people? Sure. Do they have a different circle of advisers? Absolutely not.

If we get an independent democrat and an independent republican, chances are i'll vote for the republican. But if the democrats can get an independent, sane and reasonable democratic candidate like Russ Feingold, and the republicans put up a neocon stooge like Jeb Bush, then I would vote for the democrat. But I already know hillary is a neocon stooge, because a) she's been one as a senator, b) she's married to someone who was one as a president, and c) she was mixed up in crooked dealings with them way back when.

Hillary Clinton is Bush is Clinton.

Please, give us something new. I'm actually glad that there are some democrats with brains trying to find themselves a non-stooge for '08. I wish them luck. Meanwhile I have my own work cut out for me getting the GOP to nominate a non-stooge.

And people, final word:

The real election is the primary. If the primary is not fought and won, then the general election becomes a stooge-off.

1 2 3 NEXT PAGE