Don't be fooled by those who tell you "don't be fooled" by Hillary's powerful lead in the polls.

She's ahead for a reason, and it's not "superficial." It's rock-solid.

She's ahead because she's the most electible (as evidenced in many recent polls, and we CANNOT afford to risk losing), the most experienced (yes, she learned a lot from her years in the White House), and the strongest and most popular choice we have to defeat the Republicans. She won't back down. She's a fighter, and she fights for us.

Don't be fooled. She's the real deal.

But its a long road ahead.

to post this rubbish every single day?

I'm so sick of the Hillary flag wavers that I'm going to campaign twice as hard for another in the primary. Thanks for the kick in the pants!

In fact, I've begun hiding all Hillary threads, pro or con. I'm sick of her wishy washy ways, her less than liberal attitude, and all her Hill Trolls on DU... sick, sick, sick. There is so many valid reasons to dislike her, that the laugh and the other jokes are meaningless.

The pro-Hill crowd have done her no good here at all. None.

The Hillbots annoy you, but the Hillbashers don't.
The Hillbots motivate you to work against her, but the Hillbashers motivate you to ignore them.

Thats' OK.

She is not getting good helpers around here... she doesn't really need this kind of help, anyway. With friends like these...

There's more than one of you using that screen name, aren't there?

I think she's also done extremely well in the debates. She comes across as someone who is serious, and is focused on the issues. She knows the issues very well, and I think people know that on January 20, 2009, she is ready to be President. No major on-the-job training required.

I also think her time in the Senate has done her well. Even some of her staunchest critics (who don't agree with her politically, and also voted to impeach her husband and remove him from office) sing her praises as a Senator. They talk about how she is a workhorse. She didn't come to the Senate as some primma donna. She isn't afraid to 'do nuance' as the saying goes.

I've watched Sen Hillary Clinton for years and I think she will continue to do an okay job in the Senate. Frankly she does nuance to the point where I have to laugh as hard as she does. I will do everything I can to make sure another Dem gets the chance.

...and a good leader.

Hillary knows the politics, though a true leader represents the collective view of the people she serves. She does not, at least from a national perspective. Don't know about NY specifically.

On DU, the consensus is she is far from leadership material.

The MSM - I don't trust em.

Just so you know, I am not here for group think. Too many DUers on here seem all to willing to engage in group think. And I think that's a dangerous thing.

And I believe that Sen. Clinton is not only a good politician, but a good leader.

She lead on the issue of education as First Lady of Arkansas. She has lead on the issue of Gulf War Snydrome for our veterans who returned home ill from the first Gulf War. She has led on the issue of trying to get the Pentagon to start planning for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq. And so many more issues.

Too many DUers on here seem all to willing to engage in group think. And I think that's a dangerous thing.

Ironically journalist3072, just speaking for myself - Hillary's propensity to buy into the DLC/Corporate "group think" and pander to the right is exactly why I see her as the consummate politician, but lacking the heart to represent true Dem ideals. She and the MSM have fully bought into group think - no doubt there.

She does not have an authentic voice in my book, but a damn good political one. Many, many more authentic Dem voices than hers. Gore, Kucinich to name a couple.

Though when the dust settle, if she is the last one standing --- she has my vote in the General.

Respectfully, I could give a shit...

Nothing the Hillary supporters could say would shift my view either. So I figure we are equal in the I could give a shit category.

She is unequivocally the most rethuglican of all the Dem candidates; but you have heard that before.

Though in the end DemocratSinceBirth, where our paths shall meet happens (or so I hope) after the eventual DEM nominee accepts the vote results from the delegates at the convention. From there we move forward to defeat a common enemy. And as much as I dislike HRC, my disgust for the BushCo regime and his minions far surpasses that. Rudy, Fred, Mitt, John are all just as repulsive!

Between now and then you, I, and many others will debate, rant, challenge --- maybe not change many minds. Though after the primaries, I'm going DEM regardless. If Hillary is the winner, I'll offer my hand shake in cyberspace. :)

But I'm gonna fight like hell to see that she does not win those delegate votes in the meantime...ahhh, democracy rocks!

As there are plenty of people on DU backing her and even more saying she is a strong leader, even if they disagree with her or are backing someone else - there is no such consensus as you suggest. Asserting it does not make it so.

And none of them were ever seen again as they went off to the crusade...

When so many voters in the early states haven't even made up their minds yet polls like this are a bit superfluous.

But don't let that burst your bubble.

The "main stream media" is presenting her as the front runner. This is another fixed race people.
How many people vote for the most popular because the think every one else is also? Would you vote for someone endorsed by bu$h? That should at least make you stop and think.

Puhleeeeze.

You are right, completely and absolutely right.

Someone who went to law school and obtained her law degree. Someone who was asked to come here to DC to serve on the impeachment proceedings against Richard Nixon. Someone who worked for Marian Wright Edelman at the Children's Defense Fund. Someone who helped reform education in Arkansas. Someone who worked on the issue of Gulf War Syndrome for our vets returning home from the first Gulf War. Someone who was elected and re-elected to the U.S. Senate. Someone who went to China, stared down their government, and said "women's rights are human rights, once and for all." Someone who has led on the issue of getting the Pentagon to start planning for withdrawal from Iraq.

Yea, she's a joke alright.

College Republican.



You forgot those credentials.

But whatfuckingever...

Hillary has made no secret of the fact that she was a Goldwater Girl. She grew up in a very conservative neighborhood, with a conservative father, and as many children do, took on the politics of her parents (well at least her father).

What I admire about her, though, is that she developed her own views and thoughts. She has credited the civil rights movement and the turbulent 60s with changing her views. She saw there was a whole other world out there.

You might want to read Hillary Clinton: The Inside Story by Judith Warner.

Here's a particularly profound passage from that book: (pages 27-28)

Hillary arrived at college a Park Ridge Republican with box-pleat skirts.....All of that changed, though, rather quickly.....A great deal happened in the world during her last six months of her senior year in high school. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. had the march on Selma, Alabama....Hillary Rodham, who only two years before had shook Dr. King's hand, saw white policeman in storm trooper boots using cattle prods on peaceful black and white demonstrators....Such images did not fail to make a mark on her......She edged her way leftward through the moderate Rockefeller wing of the Republican Party and by 1968 was campaigning for the Democrat Eugene McCarthy, thinking about women's issues, and talking about minority rights and the needs of the poor.


So please, enough of the tired "She was a Goldwater Girl" talking point.

What I admire about that story is that Sen. Clinton saw there was a whole other world out there other than what she had been exposed to in a conservative Chicago neighborhood, and she developed her own set of ideals and principles.

of Democratic voters. Puzzles me how they think that helps their chances (if they still have any).

and my question is why? The mind is reeling with questions.

zalinda

however I do think Obama is a real threat to her. As I said in my other post, he may be doing better than we think?

:rofl:

NANCY REAGAN FOR PRESIDENT 2008 !!!

by people who try to fool us into not being fooled?

She's inexperienced and her only real strength is her husband and his past record. Without Bill Clinton, she's a 3d tier candidate, easily. Also the media and polling agencies support her. She will not win Iowa, Obama will. When that happens, what will all these percentages represent? Also. don't get happy because she out raised Obama this quarter. For the entire campaign, Obama has raised 12 million dollars more during the entire campaign. This "hype" is a bias attempt to steer americans to support her. The media thinks that they can psychologically convince you by consistently representing her on TV daily and in the press, saying that she is the candidate to beat.

Even the Republicans have decided to tout her because they know that Obama is a formidable opponent and hard to beat as opposed to Hillary. With Hillary, they will bring the kitchen sink with all the plumbing from years of the Clinton administration to the forefront. Monica, Whitewater, Susan McDougall, Travel-gate, Vince Foster, impeachment and on and on and on, Remember, american citizens have long memories and don't think that because GWB has fucked everything up, that they will see Hillary as a solution. That's what she's banking on but the Clinton's history of misguided values, corruption and lies are still fresh in people's minds. You want the Repubs to galvanize and support their nominee, make Hillary our Democratic candidate.

The Repubs suck, but they will vote just to keep Bill and Hillary out of the White House, Plus a large majority of Dems will not vote for Hillary, even if she is the Dem candidate. You may not want to believe that but just to clarify, take a poll. The Republicans knows she's weak. Reconsider your support and back Barack Obama. You want a Democrat in the White House, but you're backing the wrong horse.:kick:

I agree, the MSM hype is the tail wagging the dog. I don't believe them or the coporate fed POLL #'s

I'll only vote for HRC if she is the last one standing after the convention next August; the alternative would even be worse then her.

Till then DK's my man - minus an Al Gore miracle entrance. Believe me, Al would knock Hillary down to tier 3 the day he announced.

Woopie! Race is over.

people need to quit making false assumptions.

But - folks like to bet on horse racers (well, I don't).

Nationally, 89% prefer Clinton, Obama, Edwards and Richardson. 11% other and undecided.
http://www.pollster.com/08-US-Dem-Pres-Primary.php

In Iowa 74% prefer Clinton, Obama, Edwards and Richardson. 26% other and undecided.
http://www.pollster.com/08-IA-Dem-Pres-Primary.php

In NH 81% prefer Clinton, Obama, Edwards and Richardson. 19% other or undecided.
http://www.pollster.com/08-NH-Dem-Pres-Primary.php

In NV 78% prefer Clinton, Obama, Edwards and Richardson. 22% other or undecided.
http://www.pollster.com/08-NV-Dem-Pres-Primary.php

In SC 83 prefer Clinton, Obama, Edwards and Richardson. 17% other or undecided.
http://www.pollster.com/08-SC-Dem-Pres-Primary.php

In other words, laureloak, you pulled that statistic out of your ass.

I ain't foolin'

I'll just wait to see what happens in the primaries, thanks.

Either that, or it's comedy....

:rofl:

nt