Hillary/Clark would be an awesome ticket

I'm a Dean guy and like Barbara Boxer also but think the Hillary/Clark
ticket would be hard for the Republicans to beat. What do you think?

:thumbsup:

:-)

I think that's what you meant...?

I love Hillary.

It amazes me that so many people here think she can't win because she's controversial or divisive. That has never stopped a single Republican from winning.

swing voters who, out of stupidity mostly, would run screaming for the GOP ticket. It's not the way I want it. We've got to work for change, but I don't see that happening in the next two and a half pre primary years. :hi:

about Hillary. A lot of women are swayed by the attitudes of men in this country. Just not enough...sorry. Besides the fact that I'd have a really hard time stumping for her. She lost me at the Convention.

I would not vote for DOLE for President, just because she is a woman. No way. Hillary would not win. This country will NOT put a woman in the most powerful position in the world, especially during wartime. War is considered a man's game. How many higher ups are women in the military?

the local news had a poll for women and voters and Kerry won by a couple points. I told my Mom about the rumor of Hillary running and she said she'd vote for her. My Mom is a registered republican who this year voted for Kerry/Edwards. My grandparents are the same way. So I think Hillary could attract voters. I probably wouldn't be as a Hillary fan if she voted for Gonazlez so since she voted "no" I have more hope for her. I don't think she should go against her own policies and religious views (as long as everything with abortion is okay). As long as she has a VP who is more left-leaning then her it could be a good ticket. It wouldn't be bad ticket with Clinton and Clark. Clark would be great on all the war issues and Clinton on the other issues. She did well with the pro-choice thing that happened not long ago.

I could name a few that Kerry won that HC might not be able to hold. Unfortunately, this is not about who would make the best president but who can actually win the election.

are possibilities.

It's about getting rid of their corrupt machines and the corrupt Repukes who program them.

mind. I think she would bring a lot to the primary process. Win or lose, she'd make it interesting and help up to REALLY get our message out.

OR how about Clinton/Clinton (hillary/bill) OR Clinton/Gore (hillary/tipper)just kidding!

A Clinton/Gore type thing. (Hillary and Al). Or Gore/Clinton. :)

a lot of women, including Democrat women who won't vote for Hillary, and certainly Rethug men and their Stepford wives won't, so who is left.

Maybe reverse the order CLARK/CLINTON '08
Or CLARK/??

I like Hillary but there is NO WAY she could win.

is the only person who could win in 2008 for the Democrats..

Hell, I don't even trust democratic operatives.

Get real....That is what they would like for the Democrats to think!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Edwards has the charisma to get the message across. He is well versed in Domestic issues. Clark has the war/foreign affairs experience.

Edwards/Clark ticket, and let me tell you why:
Remember General Shelton who smeared Clark early in the primaries by raising doubts about Clark's character and integrity? Well Shelton was advising Edwards at the time that he made those statements.

Now, it is understood that politics is a blood sport, and that many things are said and done in the name of winning. The problem with that particular attack, however, was that Shelton was sliming Clark's personal assets as a person; Character and integrity. That's the kind of insult smear that really cannot be forgiven. This was the type of character assasination, politics of personal destruction that was unjustified and pretty desperate. Gen. Shelton later had to admit that what he said was "just politics" (because Shelton received a call from a Hague procecutor because Milosovic was using this Shelton line to inpugne Clark's testimony), but not after he had done damage to Clark's standings as a man (and as a politico). Edwards, the positive campaigner was asked about this, and all that he could say was that it wasn't him talking.

So although some in the campaign called Clark a Republican, or a lobbyist, those types of attacks were expected.

But when one attacks the character and integrity of a man who has devoted 35 years to public service......that's going over the edge. Edwards blessed that comment, and didn't try to get Shelton, his friend, to explain the statement.

Bottomline: Clark and Edwards are not exactly bossom buddies, to this day.

There. I said it. And it felt good.

So I don't think he'll be running for President in 2008. He needs more experience to gain voters trust I think.

But then, John Edwards was a one-term senator. So was JFK.

Hillary is Republican lite, DLC all the way . . . I want a true progressive/populist as our candidate, someone who will take on the corporations, not be beholding to them . . . don't know who that might be just yet, but I certainly don't want Ms. Clinton . . .

Even if she was under Gore.

She has moved way too much to the right. I like Boxer much better.

in 2008 especially after what happened in Nov.
The DEMS need to run a safer choice, a candidate that can win in all regions of the country, and not a candidate that has a love/hate relationship with the American people.
I love Hillary. I love watching and hearing her on the Senate floor but I don't think the country is ready for her yet.

Also, please this is not to offend anyone because I do feel there should be a woman prez or VP, but if half the nation had such a big problem with gays and gay marriage in the past election that I don't feel like this country is ready for a women as president.

We need to break down the barriers even more before, at least imo, we can elect a woman to the White House. It's sad but true.

much if we don't back it up with action. Inclusive is great...now let's do it. The Republicans know they can never do it because they prey upon the votes of the backwards racist hicks in rural America and they can't win without them.

I will start saying it now...Kathleen Sebelius needs to be on the ticket. Democratic Gov of a (very) Red state (KS).

If this is our first chance to get back the WH, should we really assume that there won't be a chauvinist vote out there cutting out of our already slim margin?

If we really want the WH back, we have to consider that very unfair reality.

Not to mention she'll mobilize every GOP voter in the country.

I'm not drinking the Hillary for Prez koolaid. We would get our ass kicked worse than Mondale in 1984. As for Clark for VP, I doubt he would play second fiddle to a woman...that's just my take...

the distance?

I'm in the category who have moved on from Hillary..speaking as a New Yorker.

I don't care if they run Jeb, Frist, Dogfucker, or whomever. No appeaser gets my vote next time, and none better get the nomination.

If Hillary were to win the nomination I think Clark would be an excellent pick. Do you think they would win AR given that the 2 of them lived much of their life there? That one might be tough.

Clinton really shouldn't be at the top of the ticket. Historically speaking, Senators make lousy Presidential candidates. I would support Senator Clinton as Vice President, though, for these reasons:

1. It would take the war off the table as an issue making the election solely about the economy. (which works to our advantage)

2. She can raise a lot of money for Democratic candidates. (and has)

3. She draws large crowds of support whenever she appears.

4. She knows how the "system" works which would enable her to make a lot of changes to it. Remember, real, significant change in the "system" can only come from within because it's too big to change from without.

5. She knows where all the Republican (and DINO) bodies are buried and can threaten to dig them up unless they go along with her.

6. The rest of the world respects her. Having her on the ticket would show the rest of the world that we really do want to regain their respect and are serious about working with them to solve the world's problems.

7. She's already been through one election and therefore knows what's involved and anything Republicans could throw at her would be "old" news and, accordingly, be dismissed as "been there, done that."

I could see a ticket with her as VP possibly. She is very well respected in other places in the world and can help us with getting allies back. 2008 though is a very crucial year just like this year and who knows who the republicans will have in 2008. If she made it through the primaries I would support her though. I haven't heard anything official though myself.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

accomplishments and abilities.

I think he'd be a great VP. It'd be ideal to see him as president, but short of that I'd be thrilled if he were VP or SoS. His skills and experience would be great in those positions, too.

the General's capabilities to be in a position where he had to answer to somebody with less foreign policy experience being Commander-in-Chief.

Puhleeeze! She's verging on DINO status. I love the Big Dog but she blew health care reform and, aside from not dumping the Dog at a critical time, she's been nothing to write home about on policy. Voted for Iraq! Doesn't that say it all. She knew better.

look what happened with the Bushistas.
I would consider it a sad commentary on American politics if it goes Bush Clinton Bush Clinton... where does it end then?

Gore looks like he lost some weight. I remember for a while he gained some (especially in the face) but now he looks nice. :)

Because with her at the top, he would.

and everyone except the most idealistic of Dems get that. Only dickhead mouthpieces like Faux parade "Hilary '08" as if we're mentally disabled and can't see through their game.

PLEASE stop foisting hope for this DLC, pro-offshoring-jobs, pro-corporation, pro-Condosleeza, package-laden anchor. She would win not ONE red state, would convert Wisconsin and would never turn Ah-HIGH-ah or Fla-duh. It's not going to happen in a million years.