Hillary is a failure as a Senator -- she does not deserve the nomination

Why are we going to nominate a bad one term senator to be our candidate?

Her Senator tenure has been an embaressment. Schumer is 12x the Senator Hillary will ever be.

PRIMARY 2008 - ANYBODY BUT HILLARY

he get out all over the state.

I don't think that it is anyone but Hillary. I think it would be good to stand with Tasini
:patriot:

I'll probably carry petitions for both.

2008- Anybody but a Republican

Since when do Republicans run in our primaries?

Oh right since the DLC.

HILLARY CLINTON - BOUGHT AND PAID FOR BY WAL STREET AND CORPORATE INTRESTES SINCE 1992

You want to diss her, go ahead.

That she is a bad Senator.

She is too conservative to come from New York State.

She offers no leadership on any issues that matter.

And she's the poster woman for the DLC a group that I regard as traitors to Democratic values.

Oh and she hob-nobs with Fox news which shits on our party 24-7.

Hillary is a democrat only a Republican could love.

What an odd world this is, eh?

But you may rest assured she will win the Democratic primary by a thunping margin. Democratic voters in New York seem to like her....

What's your point.

New Yorkers who know her record agree: she's a failure, an embaressment, and a tratior to our liberal New York values.

New York was hit on 9/11 and we're anti-war and we wish Hillary had opposed this criminal administration.

She's a failure.

Is a mild demure to your hyperbolic statement Sen. Clinton is a Democrat only a Republican could love. Clearly they do not love her, while a great many Democrats do.

When the votes are tallied in the primary, it will be abundantly clear the rank and file Democrats of New York do not agree with you.

A beneveolent force would make a great show of disdaining their Manchurian candidate.

As it is so with the GOP and Hillary.

Are you seriously claiming Sen. Clinton is a Republican operative, actually working as a double agent for that party?

The Republican party.

The corporate/big money ruling elite.

This "hidden hand" controls both parties?

And some other high ranking Democrats.

K-Street isn't a myth. It exists. Wake up.

You refer, of course, to the font of all evil in the universe, comprised of elected Democratic officials, and promoting a line that the Party should adopt positions it feels may appeal to a broad coalition of voters extending well beyond the left-most points of the political spectrum?

For those who don't know.... the DLC is funded by big money.... corporations...defense contractors and right wing foundations

The DLC's aim is to get Corporate and status-quo friendly "Democrats" elected to do thier bidding, to tow the corporate line on taxes, regulation, and other issues.

DLC and Hillary defenders will wax poetic about the miracle of "centrism" but it's all just an operation in polishing the turd which is the DLC.

If you want to know the DLC's motives you only need to know who pays the bills, the Fortune 500, big defense contractors, the right-wing Bradley foundation. And some of the DLC's top officers were recruited directly from the right-wing.

http://www.prospect.org/print/V12/7/dreyfuss-r.html

"We're a party that's going through a transition from one ideology to another," says NDN's Rosenberg. "It was 40 years between the creation of the National Review and Newt Gingrich's takeover of Congress in 1994. We're only 16 years into this. Are we challenging old ways and leaders who've been around for a while? Are we being contentious? Yes."

Of course, it is easier to be contentious when you are well financed. And the DLC message of pro-market moderation is just what organized business wants to hear. From its modest beginnings--with a start-up budget of just $400,000 in its first year, cobbled together at fundraisers starring Robb, former President Jimmy Carter, and K Street Democratic eminence Bob Strauss--the DLC patiently cultivated wealthy individuals and corporate backers. By 1990 the combined DLC-PPI operation boasted revenues of $2.2 million, a big chunk of which came from a single source, New York hedge fund operator Michael Steinhardt, who pledged $500,000 a year for three years. (Steinhardt, whose actual donations came to half that in the end, was named chairman of the newly formed PPI's board of trustees, before falling out with the DLC in the mid-1990s.)

One by one, Fortune 500 corporate backers saw the DLC as a good investment. By 1990 major firms like AT&T and Philip Morris were important donors. Indeed, according to Reinventing Democrats, Kenneth S. Baer's history of the DLC, Al From used the organization's fundraising prowess as blandishment to attract an ambitious young Arkansas governor to replace Senator Sam Nunn of Georgia as DLC chairman. Drawing heavily on internal memos written by From, Bruce Reed, and other DLCers, Baer says that the DLC offered Clinton not only a national platform for his presidential aspirations but "entree into the Washington and New York fundraising communities." Early in the 1992 primaries, writes Baer, "financially, Clinton's key Wall Street support was almost exclusively DLC-based," especially at firms like New York's Goldman, Sachs.

The DLC's investment in Clinton paid off, of course, after the 1992 election. Not only did the DLC bask in its status as idea factory and influence broker for the White House, but it also reaped immediate financial rewards. One month after the election, Clinton headlined a fundraising dinner for the DLC that drew 2,200 to Washington's Union Station, where tables went for $15,000 apiece. Corporate officials and lobbyists were lined up to meet the new White House occupant, including 139 trade associations, law firms, and companies who kicked in more than $2 million, for a total of $3.3 million raised in a single evening. The DLC-PPI's revenues climbed steadily upward, reaching $5 million in 1996 and, according to its most recent available tax returns, $6.3 million for 1999. "Our revenues for 2000 will probably end up around $7.2 million," says Chuck Alston, the DLC's executive director.

He was a skilled and frequent robber of banks, and when asked why he robbed banks, he replied: "Because that's where the money is."

Politicians are in a similar position regarding corporations and the wealthy. Money is essential to politics; it is to a political campaign what bullets are to an army. It can only be got from people who have it in quantities they can spare. There have been recent indications it may be possible to gain sufficient cash from retail collection of small donations using electronic comunications, and that would certainly be a good thing, but it is not yet sufficiently established as a method for professionals to let go of the tried and true methods entirely.

Now, some people would consider it good news that Democrats are recieving donations from elements that would be expected normally to contribute to Republicans. They would be cheered by the increase in available funds, and consider it a possible indication of schism within the business elite, owing to several possible factors that might lead to considerable disenchantment with the modern Republican Party.

Many make an excellent case that the Democratic Party will not regain its former dominance if it canot regain the support of some voting blocs that, several decades ago, began deserting the Democratic standard, at the time the Democratic Party became increasingly easy to caricature as an extreme left organization. The problem is a real one, though not all who recognize the problem have put forward proposed solutions to it that seem likely to me to work.

I like that! The Willie Suttons of today have found a different way to steal money. Just like bank robbers and just like republicans.

Is that practically no New York Democratic voters know her record? Given the high degree of support she has there, that's presumably the only way to explain matters given your claim.

That the inhabitants of New York are simple folk and have no newspapers to serve them, much less any electronic media. They rely on travellers making their way from village to village, telling what stories they have heard each night as they rest at the inn.

JONATHAN TASINI FOR SENATE! Throw the DINO Hillary out!


NO HILLARY FOR SENATE IN '06, NO HILLARY FOR PRESIDENT IN '08!

http://www.tasinifornewyork.org/


John

failure, but I can't see the repugs crowning her either.
She's a warmonger. 'Nuff said, she's not a Dem I will support.

one could infer from that that she's representing her constituents to their liking. From there it's a pretty Rovian leap to call her a failure.

When I meet someone who likes her I'll come around to your point of view.

I mean, I fell asleep for a bit for what I felt was only about an hour and it was 05/17/2006 and I wake up and it's two years later? What the hell happened to my life!!!!

Wake up and smell the damn coffee. Give me one reason why I should worry about Hillary Clinton possibly running for president in 2008 when we have important elections coming up RIGHT NOW.

Republicans would love nothing more than for us to drop everything and fret about something THAT HASN'T EVEN HAPPENED YET.

Perhaps if you put his much energy into your local & state elections coming up in November as you are with Hillary's 2008 potential presidential nomination we might actually be able to take about a few seats in the US Congress and maybe turn our states more blue than red.

But go about your business, you're absolutely right - this keeping Hillary off the presidential ticket in 2008 should be our MOST important duty right now all the way through 2008 :sarcasm:

She's building up a war chest now. She's got something like 18 million for a basically uncontested primary race.

That's why.

Don't be so polyannaish.

Hillary is big moneys candidate and we need to fight her now.

I intend to drive up her negatives so people in my party will consider nominating a better democrat.

ANYBODY BUT HILLARY 2008.

it's more than negative the smallest negative number, but less than the smallest positive number too...

more people will decide to vote for hillary based on her fashion sense on some random tuesday in january than anything you have to say, get a hold of reality buddy.

:applause:

That individuals have no power against entrenched power and the political machine. :sarcasm:

Very Democratic of you :sarcasm:

I'm not kidding either.

The amazing thing is we read about poll numbers here - like the ones where people were saying that Chuck Pennachio was getting better numbers than Bob Casey with the PA Senate Primary. I like Chuck and think he would have been the better choice because he's more progressive. But then I remember that we, the online community of political junkies, is just a small segment of the overall voter populations. Not only did Casey beat Pennachio by about 570k votes but even even had about 50k more votes than the republicans who voted for Santorum in their primary. This phenomenon also explains why Howard Dean and Wes Clark were amazingly popular when you read about them here at DU and other webforums and yet neither barely made a blip in the actually primary race in 2004. To be honest, most voters can't be bothered with this day to day political analysis of online politics and end up voting based on some obscure method that the most intelligent of scholars have yet to figure out.

But that doesn't mean I'm ready to give up nor does it mean I'm ready to cede the democratic presidential nomination to someone who hasn't even said she's running. I guess what it means is I need to worry about what I can do right now. And right now I can spend time each weekend traveling to one of the few Pennsylvania congressional districts nearby that have shown promise for a democratic pickup. But I promise - by the time 2007 rolls around I'll be ready to focus on the presidential election. One battle at a time!

The media is ready to gift her the 2008 nomination. Front runner status is very valuable. If we want the best possible candidate we need to talk about why Hillary is a disapointment. That's the first word out of any New Yorkers mouth when I ask what they think of thier junior Senator. She's been a disapointment to the state.

There - that can be your cause Du'Jour for your anti-hillary movement.

I'm not the only one bored silly with this anti-Hillary 2008 talk here on DU. Isn't there ANYTHING happening in this country today that could inspire you to get involved with some 2006 campaigns or is your tunnel vision that severe?

You are the people that ruin the democratic party by falling into the Rove gameplan. Get democrats all worried about Hillary running for president and like little sheepies they'll lose focus about WHAT IS IMPORTANT RIGHT NOW

I'm not too keen about Joe Biden running either and he's my sentator. Hell my home newspaper has a link to a page where they report all things "Joe Biden for President" related. I looked at that link only ONE time and then realized that I had bigger fish to fry like these 2006 midterm elections. We have a chance to take back at least the house and hopefully the senate too. So don't mind me if I poo-poo on your anti-Hillary parade because I'd rather focus on important things like getting those 15 house seats that I think we can get in 2006. We do that and we can start making changes NOW instead of fretting & wasting our times away worrying about 2008. This is Rovian tactics - don't play into it.

And btw - on George Bush's absolutely bestest day ever and Hillary Clintons most absolutely frighteningest worst day I'd still vote for Hillary. Hell I could say the same about any other republican vs. Hillary. Does that make me a Clinton supporter? No - just putting all things into perspective.

You live in NYC so you probably don't have too many republican congressional seats you can pick-up in your city. I know the feeling - we have so few options here in DE. But gas prices be damned, I'm going to start driving to PA every weekend I can to help win a few seats like Patrick Murphy in PA-08 or Lois Murphy in PA-06 (no they aren't related). I think this is way more important than anything that could be happening in 2008. Perhaps you can find a few good races outside of NYC you can help with!

It's all Rove's dirty plan. Make Hillary the frontrunner and then anybody who says she shouldn't get the nomination is falling into Rove's plan.

Talk about tin-foil.

Sometimes I'm grateful for the fact that we online political junkies are such a small segment of actual real voters.

Please stop crying "Wolf" because one day there will be a wolf and no one will believe you. Seriously, is there absolutely nothing else going on politically in NYC - is it that devoid of political activism? Hell, at least my mayor is a democrat here in Wilmington DE.

Worry about 2006 - or are you just interested in making sure Bush can finish his last two years without anyone stopping him in congress.

Because I can think about 2006 and 2008.

I guess you'd like all voters to be functionaly retarded as well as political ignorant?

and therefore I'd rather keep them focus on one thing - the election coming up.

These are voters that get most of their political knowledge from soundbytes on the evening news, most of them use their computers for email, games and downloading music and porn. I've spent many days pounding the pavement and knocking on doors - you have about 1 minute to get your message across before they lose interest.


There are so many amazing reasons for why we should get these voters to vote out republicans that if we start jumping ahead to the next election we'll lose their interest in this one. We have two years to worry about the presidential election and believe me, Hillary isn't the only democrat building a war chest. You're right - we do need to educate the voters; make em smarter! But we need to do it for NOW to help clean up congress - use the primaries to get rid of bad democrats and the general election to get rid of republicans.

Are they?

So I think we can talk about anything we want here.

Thank you.

and most stick with what is current and try not to fret the ones coming up a few years down the line.

Our strategizing in here should be on how we're going to win more Congressional Seats, Senate Seats, Governorships, State Congresses, Mayors, Judges, School Boards, Dogcatchers and any other election that is coming up in 2006. Your post is old & dated but my insomnia has me enjoy the spare with another anti-hillary-bot.

So enjoy your conversations now but please take off the blinders and take a look at what is happening now. All of DU is getting geared up for 2006. What are you doing to make a difference this November?

I take it you mean the Senate race. That holds true for nearly all incumbents. If you were referring to the Presidential primaries, then you have lost your mind.

Her opponent has no money and no name ID.

she deserves the nomination.

How has her Senate tenure been an embarassment, other than she's not out there in far left field with you and Lenin?

nice slur there.

Her idea of leadership is spear heading a movment to burn flag burning.

She's a disgrace and if that makes me a communist in your wicked mind then so be it.

what's your point? her senate career is a failure because she's being consistent on an issue, OH MY GOD.

Is that what you call it?

She still supports this war. After it has come out that i was based on a lie.

She's a neocon if you ask me.

yeah that's consistent. russ feingold has been consistent in a much more correct way concerning the war, however the definition of consistency doesn't change based on whether one's stance on an issue is correct, just that it stays the same.

so you're whole issue is with the fact she's staying consistent on the war. you know, i'd rather have hillary in office than jeb, cheney, allen, frist, romney, huckabee, barbour, or any other potential republican nominee. but i guess i see the big picture instead of sitting in my room crying over the idea of hillary clinton in office while watching hentai.

Our soliders are dying because politicians like Hillary dont' have the bravery to shut down Bush's war.

And you are defending her.

i'm really interested to hear your theory.

That'd be one small step. Many of her colleagues have.

But nothing..... stay the course. Or whatever bullshit triangulation position she's cravenly steaked for herself lately.

That's a new Democrat for you, afterall.

I never said she had to. I want her to mearly oppose it. You want to kiss her royal behind for being consistent.

This war is immoral and she supports it. She's a failure.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

She didn't. She's a failure. You can't handle it so you have to call names.

as full of hate and bitterness as you are.

Did Hillary Clinton not hug you enough when you were a kid?

:rofl:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

If her ideas for the country convince enough people to vote for her, she deserves what she earned.

"Abortion is bad"

"Flag burning should be illegal"

"Stay the course"

"Fox and Ruper Murdoch are my friends"

"This is Hillary's Senate office, please leave a message at the beep."

her statement was we need to LESSEN the number of abortions, which can be done through better sex ed and greater access to contraception.

It's settled law and I don't care that 30% of the country wants to change that.

She should focus on issues that matter to 80% of the country. Like perhaps lowering the payroll tax.

smart, let's put less funding in social entitlements created by progressives.

Cut taxes for the middle class and raise it on the upper class:

- Repeal the Bush tax cuts for people earning more then 150K+ a year

- Raise the tax rate on dividends and capital gains

- Eliminate the cap on payroll taxes

Are you so full of hatred for the former First Lady of the United States of America and junior senator from the great state of New York that you'll sit there and faithfully reproduce such broad and fuzzy republican talking points?

And for the record, name me one politician who has ever said "Abortion is good."

No one thinks abortions are good. But that doesn't mean they should be illegal.

Just because I think she's been a bad Senator and she's a sell out to Democratic values and she spends her time pandering to Fox News and the religious right?

This sentiment comes from the dissapointment I have with what she's done with my Senate seat (they do belong to us) and a desire to ensure that she doesn't take MSM frontrunner status, 50 million from wall street and use it to shut out a better Democrat from winning in 2008.

As if you'd be complaining if a candidate you were more favourable towards was raising the money Hillary is right now.

Stop changing your story and stick to it.

And how is one Rupert Murdoch fundraiser and her going to Fox News' birthday bash for a few suddenly "pandering to Fox News"?

At least she wasn't on the 700 club, like Dean.

placebo, i want to carry your centrist dlc babies.

It's manufactured by United Defense, a subsidiary of the Carlyle Group.

See, I learned that from Fahrenheit 911.

Never let it be said I ain't learned.

manufactured continuously by Smith and Testen.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Make that a one and one third term senator. She'll be serving the first of her two presidential terms in what would be the final two thirds of her SECOND term as a NY senator.

Fortunately I think our nation will be spared.

A great many Democrats think so, including a large number who do not think she would be the best candidate the Party could field.

I want the best possible Democrat to win. There are about 3 names I could drop right now that would be better.

Gore, Fiengold, and Clarke.

Hillary is the worst pick for the nomination. She'd lose in the general in my oppinion and even if she did win she'd be a mediocre President. Our country is in bad shape and we need an oustanding President.

In 2008 I'm not just going to support my candidate, i'm going to get out the word as to who's the worst pick too.

And that's my right.

And I'm going to chime in on her Senate run in 2006 too.

her excellent opportunity to get a good health care plan in place in the US when she had a sporting chance?

Lets all bow down in humble, respectful, and somewhat fearful agreement!

:crazy: iConoclastNYC for Prez 2008! :silly:

and Hillary is advocating EXACTLY the same policies
as the big dog. Enough said.

pack their bags and move to Arkansas so fast it would make your head spin . . . such is her commitment to her adopted state . . .

On 2008 presidential threads, I'm anti-Hillary. I'll be voting for her in the Senate race, though, and for roughly the same reasons. Don't get me wrong - I get pissed at her sometimes. She's voted well more often than badly, though. I don't want her to run in 2008 for a number of reasons, but above all, because I truly believe she'd lose. In 2006, she'll win. It's really that simple. Next time around, I'd really like to see all our Senators in the Senate instead of out on the campaign trail. We need them fulltime. There's so much to do.

The last thing we need is to risk a Senate seat by nominating someone with no name recognition that the average voter isn't going to know from whoever the Republicans get to run. Plus, if an unknown was running instead of Hillary the Republicans would know they were in the race and they'd put much more into the race.

The first and most important thing is putting as many Democrats in as possible. Hillary stood with the vast majority of the Democrats recently to demonstrate that there is a difference when they all voted against the Enzi non-insurance bill. We need as many Democrats as possible in both houses as soon as possible.

If we were to regain the Senate this year, bye bye Senator Pat "Cover-Up" Roberts' committee chair.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

she's okay, but not as a candidate for President.

if in a fake election ......which one do you think would get the most votes?

Hillary can not screw up the country any more than bush has done............if she gets the votes to run.let her...back her.........or vote for the GOP McCain..or the other want-a-b's.........its your choice...

flamebait