Clinton: I have best chance against GOP

Source: CNN

PERRY, Iowa (AP) — Hillary Rodham Clinton maintained Sunday that she's the best candidate to win against Republicans, saying she has more experience battling the GOP than any other candidate in the Democratic field.

"I believe that I have a very good argument that I know more about beating Republicans than anybody else running. They've been after me for 15 years, and much to their dismay, I'm still standing," she said in answer to a woman's question about her electability. "I'm leading in all the polls, I'm beating them in state after state after state."

...

But she says she has support from around the country, including "more Democratic support from the so-called red states than anybody else running." She told the crowd of hundreds gathered at Perry High School that she has more U.S. senators supporting her than her rivals, as well as other lawmakers from states that "Democrats have a hard time winning."

"I think they have looked at the field and figured out who can best beat the Republicans," Clinton said.


Read more: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/11/25/clinton-i-have-best-chance-against-gop/

She was an active participant in two previous national campaigns, both successful. Kucinich has run once before and lost in the primary. Same with Biden, but that was 20 years ago. Edwards ran in '04.

Will 2008 be another "Kerry" election year? Will we again get yet another candidate that we are only voting for strictly because of the alternative? If "Hillary" gets the Presidency, we will get another 4/8 years of "Clinton economics and politics". We can all agree that it's a hell of a lot better than what we had the last 8, but we can do a hell of a lot better than that.

Realistically, I'm not sure we can. I would rather have someone who puts the Constitution first and is committed to the environment, egalitarianism, universal health care and ending our imperial foreign policy. Nevetheless, I really don't think there is any chance of that happening.

Frankly, I don't think you can put Kerry in the same centrist boat as Hillary Clinton.

but as you know all of us that voted in 2004 "held our noses" and voted for Kerry. I WILL vote for Hillary if she is the nominee, but I won't like it.

I was disgusted that his campaign was so badly managed.

But if you thought Kerry in 2004 was the saviour that was going to take us to the promised land of FDR, then you are at the very least naive. Would Kerry have been better than Bush, no fucking doubt in my mind YES. Was he the best "Liberal" candidate in 2004 hell no. Is Hillary the best "Liberal" candidate hell no. In my lowly opinion, Kucinich is the "best" but is un-electable. My choice at this point is Edwards, who I truly believe is electable but will not get the support of the "big money" wing of the party. Sooooo, I will support and vote for the probable nominee at this point; Hillary.

That is simply not true.

woo-woo man :woohoo: (LOL) should be able to beat the GOP after these last 7+ years...

Her nomination would help put back together the ripped apart GOP within seconds of her nomination.

My personal opinion is that we couldn't lose with Bill Richardson at the top of the ticket, but the GOP is so self wounded that anyone but Hillary will be able to pick their bones clean. I'm not willing to throw it all away by supporting her in the primaries. She wins the nom, I'll have no choice but to vote for her, but I will be back to say I told you so when she loses in Nov. '08.

considering the current state of the GOP it really depends in the end who she is up against.
It's funny though because the issues they paraded before the public these past 12 to 20 years which helped them win the majority of elections by getting the so called value voters out are the same issues tearing them apart as they struggle to hold onto what little they have left after the blunders they have managed to create.

The GOP won't stand a chance with her as the nominee.

She and her husband will give the GOP the jump start they need to get their base motivated again.

:shrug:

if there is anyone who is the biggest lightning rod for Republicans, it's Hillary. And, no, it's not because she's the most "BLUE" democrat out there. It's more because:

1) they hated her "activist" First Lady years
2) they associate her with Clinton and with the "free spirit" lifestyle that is antithetical to their "moral values" stands.
3) They frankly don't like her attitude and her shady past (she does have one people...let's be honest).

I'd like to see a Kucinich-Dodd ticket, if I had my way, but a realistic point of view, I'd say an Edwards-Obama, or Obama-Edwards ticket would be a much better bet to win.

She has a shady past? You mean the one the Republicans have been trying to pin on her for over ten years? That shady past?
OR are you talking about the way she conducted herself when her husband betrayed her with another woman? That shady past?
Maybe the way she has represented her constituency in NY State?...that can't be it, most of them like her and the way she works. Hmmm

Jaysus I hate Republican talking points. We are better than that. If you don't like her
at least have the decency to list reasons, not shady inuendos.

Think about what you are writing, people. Stop being educated by the replugnicans.

this is how I feel, as a progressive whose consistently voted for Green Party candidates and also for the lefty wing of the Democrat party.

I'm not convinced she was above corruption in the Whitewater scandal. I also do not like how she seems for sale to the highest contributor to her party. I don't like how she caved from her 1990s Health care position because of the heavy Republican opposition. I don't like how she gives the swagger of inevitability. I don't like how she was for the War in Iraq because "she didn't know then what she knew now" (liar...she went along with everyone else because it was the easiest position to take, rather than take a principled one). I don't like her for her recent Iranian vote. That should be enough for a citizen to take a position against her.

She's a DLC-tied, centrist, elite-branch of the Democrat party candidate, and that's just not my candidate style.

Is it being educated by Republicans to state these things?

Hillary fans never want to admit that she had something to do with the Whitewater scandal. Hillary is a squeaky-clean candidate for them.

You call it what you want, but it is ok to criticize a Democratic candidate based on their background and past.

As for how she handled her husband, one could take the position that she 'stood by her man', and you could also take the position that she's a power-hungry woman who decided it was more important to remain a 'Clinton' for her future aspirations than leave her husband. Or you could take the position that she genuinely loves him and forgave him. Who knows...and who cares. That wasn't the issue for me.

I also do not like her for, dare I use a Republican talking point, Flip-flopping. Democratic candidates are also vulnerable to do that. I don't like how she gives the impression that she's for sale, depending on who funds her coffers more. And that's Republican behavior that I'd rather not see in the Democratic party. I want someone with more principles, which is why i support Kucinich, Dodd, or other candidates within the party.

you go ahead and support Hillary. I'm not going to fall for her act and think that some elite, centrist, DLC-tied Washington-player actually cares about little old me.

Edwards or Obama will stand a better chance than Hillery IMO.

at her agenda, there is not a hell of a lot of difference between her and the GOP is there?

of being overly modest. Be a damned shame if it turns out to be nothing but hubris.

in the Primary, would mop the floor with the gopper in the General.

Being the wife of Bill? Let's face it, if it wasn't for her husband being a former vice president she would be another unknown and wouldn't stand a chance and we wouldn't be having this discussion today. I am tired of her slamming other candidates who've had to make it on their own steam.

and BTW she's not winning in ALL the polls- esp. the informed ones- and she's losing ground.

ALL Repukes and a goodly number of Democrats CANNOT STAND HER. Many voters will turn out at the polls just to vote against her. Clinton is making statementd like this because she knows she is the LEAST of the frontrunners to win with a healthy margin.

Fu*k you, Hillary...and the corporations that are trying to place you in power. It's high time for a populist REVOLUTION and throwing your ass to the curb.

:applause:

GOing by the record, she is someone who would win by playing safe and then who would govern by playing safe. Senator Clinton certainly hasn't been a stand-out in the Senate, although she did take a firm stand against violent video games and flag burning. During the Clinton years, not much got done. Universal health care? Shot down and forgotten. Equal rights for gays? Shhh, don't ask, don't tell. Fair trade? What, fee trade isn't good enough for you? Building the party to gain support in Congress? Doctor Dean did more in two years than the Clintons did in eight.

AS for being able to take a hit, what Senator Clinton's pitch boils down to is that the Republicans were not able to impeach her husband over a blow job.


On the other hand, I think we have a good shot at winning with several of the other candidates, and I think any one of them will really shake things up.


So, do we go for a sure win that gains us nothing, or bet the house on a win that would mean something?

Nominating her will be like choosing a ringer.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071126/pl_nm/usa_politics_poll_dc
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3078013

none of our candidates are going against Repugnants. They are only going against each other.

The media loves polls--each poll tries to be the first to explode blockbusters.

Forget how they go against Repugs...that is the job for the eventual nominee.

so- how they might fare in the general election is DEFINITELY a valid concern when deciding how to vote in a primary election.

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahah