The latest Hillary will run in 2004 scenario

These people will just not give up, but it's amusing to read, anyway.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/994172.asp?0dm=s11Ck

THE SCENARIO, as sketched by this hard-boiled insider, calls for Clinton to make an entrance as healer and unifier at the end of the primary season in May or June in the unlikely—but not impossible—event that none of the existing contenders has amassed a majority of the convention delegates. “You’d have to have Howard Dean not wrapping it up, and being an angry, wounded front runner,” this adviser said. “You’d have to have two of the other challengers tearing each other apart in primary after primary. Then Hillary could come in, well in advance of the convention, and say, ‘Look, somebody has to save the party’.”

The political logistics are doable. Under party rules, delegates are bound to vote at the convention for the candidate under whose banner they were elected in the primaries—but only on the first ballot. Party and elected officials—the so-called superdelegates—are free to shift allegiance, and could form an instant core of Clinton support.

"Hillary is not running in 2004."

And thank Jamba she isn't! The only way Bu$h stands a chance is if he runs against Hillary. Every conservative will crawl out from under the rock they live just to come out & vote against her. (Even if she was only running as VP)

While I feel that Hillary is an over-rated DLC sell-out, I don't understand why the Cons hate her so much.

They sure as heck don't think she's overrated, or they wouldn't have apoplexy every time her name came up. But she's not running, so all of these scenarios are sheer fantasy.

This is NOT an impossible scenario. Further, it's getting talked about just a little too much -- and NOT just on the right -- for my comfort level. Make that way too much. Have you ever heard of "a brokered convention?"

Why do you think Hillary hasn't been VERY explicit that she's not running in 2004? Hasn't CLOSED that door. She could if she wanted to. For a while I was hoping that it was just that she was being coy and hoping demand and interest would build for the next time out.

But by this time I'm not at all sure. The Clintons COULD "CLOSE that door" if they wanted to. They haven't. "Nothing in politics happens by coincidence."

Eloriel

But I think this scenario, should it happen, would more likely lead to Gore than Clinton. I would damn sure wager that the opportunity would at least be offered to Gore first -- and I think he'd accept.

Every week or two media puts Sen. Clinton up on a shelf, invite the pundits in, and they take turns throwing shit at her. It's great entertainment for the dim bulbs

Her popularity rating in the country is high, not just with Democrats.

That's why the RW'ers focus on her. They are terrified of her, and of Bill Clinton. Remember he managed to remain popular no matter what they threw at him. Name another Democratic Politician who has been able to do that?

So, with Hillary they would have their arch nemesis Bill to contend with. After all, Hillary would have to give him a job in the Administration. Who could complain about that given all the nepotism, cronyism Bush has in his administration. The repugs couldn't say a word. She should run with Bill as VP, for gosh sake if it got that bad....it would definitely send the RW'ers into the padded cells. Then she could find nice Cabinet positions in her administration for all the Democratic Candidates who ran.
Wouldn't that be sweet?

(I don't think it will happen, we still have a ways to go before we know if the convention will be "brokered" by no candidate having enough delegates, but it's nice to have that sword hanging over the Repugs, and I think she's using it....I gotta give her credit for that.)

The RW focuses on Dean because he's the one they would most like to run against. But they focus on HC becuase she's the one they most fear.

just now. If that changes they will fear what the new poll numbers say in a month if another candidate comes on strong. They fear any Dem..no matter what.

They see us as "RATS" to EXTERMINATE! What is it you don't see about this? :shrug:

Is how it can be true that the attention from the media means in one instance that the right fears Hillary, but in other instances, DUers use the attention on Dean as proof the the right is setting up Dean to take the nomination because, some DUers say, he is the one the right would most like to run against. It's contradictory. Media attention on Hillary means th RW fears her. Media attention on Dean means he is the most likely to lose to Shrub.

well said

:-)

How many times would they try to make Whitewater, Vince Foster, billing records etc etc etc issues again. It would be deja vu all over again. :puke:
And I think Hillary is great but I can't stand the repugs.

Doesn't matter if there's nothing in any of their backgrounds we don't already know, they will "make it up" to suit their own purposes and the Media will repeat the lies just like with Shrub. There are so many lies out there today, we can't expect it will end and a huge rainbow of peace will suddenly appear over the political landscape when our Dem President is Inaugurated. Won't happen, unfortunately. :-(

When will people learn?

...and the Repugs know it. That's why they're trying to marginalize her by propping her up as a potential candidate (Cuomoing her, so to speak)

That's a fact. Polls even NOW show that she would slap Bush if the election was held today...
That said, Hillary is waiting. She will run when the time is right. And that is not now.
It's either gonna be 2008 (god forbid) or 2012. Those are doable dates.
Hillary, when all is said and done, will be president ...just not next year :)

is to invigorate their base. She has said a million times ahe isn't running, and then the Repugs say... "see, now she's lying again"... when next year rolls around, and she isn't running, watch them say, "sure, she's afraid that she would lose to Bush"... With the Repugs, she can't win for losing...

I agree that in 2012 she'll be a front runner.. but I think she'll tabbed for VP in 2008 first...

thinking ahead here for the "Worst" scenario, where no candidate wins enough delegates and then the "behind the scenes DLC,DNC,DCC go back in the "former smoke filled rooms" and "PICK OUR DEM CANDIDATE!"

That's what I'm thinking ahead to........for planning about "what will we do?"

That would actually be interesting.

Let's say Dean/Clark whoever picks an elder statesman like Graham for VP and the dems win. In 2008, they can replace Graham with Hillary on the ticket. Hillary would then be in excellent position for 2012.

Now, if the dems lose 2004, there's nothing stopping hillary from running for president in 2008.

I think Mrs Clinton would only do it if she absolutely knew she would win and the numbers just don't say that, at least to me and at this time. Even if the polling had the leading Dem losing to Bush I think the numbers would have to be solidly a win were she to take the nomination.

I don't see any of that in the cards now. The Dems are within reach even now and if they can get past sniping each other and focus on Bush (once the winner is known) then the rest of the whittling can occur.

Hillary beating Bush. She's far too divisive on her own, and the Republicans would run such a phenomenally dirty campaign against her that it makes me shudder.

Plus, how many times does she have to say she's not running for you die-hard Hillary fans to believe her?