Why Do Republicans Want Sen. Clinton to be our choice?

I have my own theory for this (related to Zogby's latest poll results), but it is clear to me that Republicans have succeed in manipulating the Democratic perspective on our candidates. Republican candidates and pundits refer to her the most whenever attacking Democrats and it seems low-posting lurkers here tend to be extremely pro-Clinton (again, refer to the thread on Zogby's poll on Clinton vs. Repub candidates).

This makes me extremely suspicious. I am suspicious that they are taking a perfectly great candidate and making the Democrats not like her. If she is the most likely to win, then they've succeeded in changing that. If she really would be the worst candidate against the repubs, then they're doing the wrong thing in attacking her (she's no longer a clear front runner).

Anyone have any ideas,theories as what their strategy is with Clinton?

And while I'm not a Clinton supporter or hater, I feel that the Democratic party is being manipulated on this issue. I plan to support the Democratic candidate whoever that may be.

and it gives them a cheatin' shot for the Presidency

There is nothing Republicans fear more right now than Hillary in the WH. I think they are relying on the fact that there would be an enormous movement by Republican voters to make sure she doesnt win the WH. I mean they hate her. They absolutely hate her.

A candidate who isn't owned by corporate interests. That is their nightmare.

which they aren't as likely to do now since their candidates are all so bland. All they need is the fear factor to motivate them: and Hillary is IT! She's got a lot of baggage, and they will dredge up all the old bullshit all over again. It worked before, it will work again.

The other Dem candidates all have less baggage, so there's less to pick on. Freepers really don't like Hillary, and the GOP knows if she's the Dem nominee it will be easier for them to spin stories, motivate their base, and steal the elections. (Again.)

I will vote for Hillary if she's it, but I do not think she will bring about the change we really need. It will be better than having a Republican in office, but not the clean sweep and fresh start we desperately need at this point.

A Hillary nomination would bring out the anti-Dem vote like no other candidate would.

Do you remember flip-flopper and swift boating? Kerry seemed a very agreeable candidate even her on DU, yet he was skewered by the right wing.he came out of the election being a lying, waffling, unpatriotic man. Do you think just because _________ <insert dem candidate name here> may be the nominee they will fare any better from the attack machine?

But we need to be smart and give them less to work with in the first place. With Hill, Monica will be a celebrity all over again. It will be the Clinton Administration under fire all over again: the blow job, White Water, Hillary's days as an attorney, Bill's pardons, etc.

Nevermind what Bush II has done - look at those awful Clintons! We surely can't risk having THEM back in the White House again!! :sarcasm:

Thy will stretch as hard, yack as loudly, and lie as much. Hillary might even have a better chance because, well, everyone already knows all the skeletons in her closet. There's no "new material" and will result in people going "so what" and changing the channel

Freepers will be outraged, but freepers are always outraged. Fuck 'em

FSM knows, they have little to vote FOR.

Voting AGAINST Hillary will make them feel relevant.

All 30% of them.

much of her agenda is the same as theirs

would you rather our nominee ran against Dick Cheney or Rudy?

support your candidate. vote for your candidate. If Clinton gets the nomination, support her if you can, and if you can't do whatever.

Want to comment on Edwards' house?

What will you do if Obama or Clinton is the candidate?

and hold my nose for the other. I'll vote Dem either way.

The Republicans are terrified of her.

Goes back to that people mock what they fear thing.

Don

And the second one was a joke, a mere formality.

psych out and the Dems fell for it.

With Hillary, it's not a psych out. It's because she'll loose. If she is the nominee, I'm probably going to write in someone else. I live in a historically red state that is starting to trend blue. But, Hillary will never carry it. Another nominee may. With the all-or-nothing electoral votes, it wouldn't matter if I wrote in my vote.

Possibly mobilize them, more than Democrats.

loose. Besides, the GOP and the MSM have invested a lot of money in their canned anti-Hillary ads and these would be for nothing if someone like Edwards, Biden, or Obama were the nominee. :)

Hillary needs to take Reid's position where her triangulating skills can be put to good use.

Kucinich. He'll also take are of NAFTA too. Kucinich can't get elected if people don't cast votes for him. Admittedly, the pace gets set by IA and NH, so, if you are in one of those states, think about it.

Tired of the same old same old, You can change it.

I didnt realize it was about Kucinich.

inevitable. It is not, if we choose leaders who will end it. If we the people want to end this occupation, we can, by nominating and then voting for those who are on record as stating they will unconditionally end it.

Does your candidate bob and weave about the Iraq occupation?

Many do!

Some people enjoy hating things.

She's not 'a perfectly great candidate'. She's miles away better than anything the Repubs could hope to dredge up, and I'll support her for that reason. But, she's a centrist. And being in the center these days means being a corporate shill, for the status quo. No thanks.

If the pubs weren't so full of hate, they'd see that Hillary is actually closest to their own beliefs out of all the nominees. But they can't see past it. And nothing will excite the Bubbas of the nation than getting to pull the lever against Hillary. Bubba ain't coming out for Rudy. That's why.

and millions of dollars already invested in smearing her. They don't want to see that investment go to waste. I think that they assume they have brainwashed enough people into hating her "just because" to insure a repub win should she get the nomination.

If they are wrong and she wins the presidency, it will be highly entertaining to watch them swallow their tongues...

Any other candidate would win walking away. Hillary's high negatives give the pubs a fighting chance.

:hi:

....but.... psssst..... I've been here since 2003!

You must be shy.

The Limbaugh wing of the party wants a Clinton nomination because they know she'll energize the disillusioned Republican base. They've got 15 years worth of hate in storage, just waiting to be used. She's the only one they can beat, and they know it.

The corporate wing wants a Clinton nomination because she really is their perfect candidate. She's GW Bush in every way that matters, and seemingly benign in every way that *doesn't* matter. In other words, they know she'll continue the "government exists to serve business" philosophy they love so much, without empowering all those annoying religious wackos.

1. She rallys the "cultural base" for them yet there is a contradiction.

2. They also prefer her as President if it impossible for GOP to win.
While they love to throw the "librul monniker" at her, they believe
she is the most conservative of Dems running. Therefore they
believe they could best work with her.

This is in no way to disparage Senator Clinton or her views.
It is an effort to honestly answer the question.

Pure and simple GOP prefer DLC and Blue Dog Democrats.

Simply vote and support the candidate that you like, for whatever reason that you like him/her. In your post you sound like you're trying to outfake yourself, I could vote for A, but maybe that's who they want me to vote for, so I'll vote for B instead, but maybe they're really one step ahead of me, so no, I'll vote for A:shrug:

Vote for who you want to vote for and the rest will fall as it may. Personally I'm voting for Kucinich, simply because I feel that he's the best person for the job. I'm not voting for Clinton because I feel that she's the worst person for the job. I haven't come to these conclusions by being swayed by the MSM(I consume little of that) or because of posters on an anonymous internet chat board. I did my own research, mulled it over and came to my conclusions. Perhaps you should do the same.

It's all manipulation, they know they can't beat her, so they want to try and cause the Democrats to nominate someone else they could have a chance in beating.

I love the fact that, all through the 90s, Repukes were saying that she was the real power behind the White House, that she was running things ... now that she says that she has the experience, the Repukes are saying "What experience? Being First Lady is not running things!" (Of course, allegedly boinking a Senator was enough experience for Elizabeth Dole to run and win a Senate seat, just really on name alone ...)

That's why. None of that time-consuming "opposition research." Instead, we'll just roll the clock back to 1998, lather, rinse and repeat.

I fear that a HRC candidacy will electrify the right and bore the left. She isn't a motivating figure to progressives -- just more of the same old same old that is in power today.

They will try all their crap on whoever our nominee is, but
she is just about the only one who has had their entire arsenal
emptied at her time and time again already. Their entire gun rack
is locked and loaded against any of the others. That said, if she
is the nominee, they'll just regurgitate what they threw at her
before and hope (probably correctly) that most people have forgotten
that they have heard this crap before.

It's what they thrive on and Hillary is the Anti-Christ for them. But I personally don't support her for our nominee of my own free will. Nothing the Repubs can do will make me do one thing or another.

You know how RWers are with their obsessions right?

somebody put up here the other day?

Clinton is a neo-liberal tool.

and stains.

You think they'll spend one SECOND defending this idiot?

:shrug:

we'll lose all around...the presidency, the congress and the senate. :scared:

I'm worried about who I want. and so should everyone here.

It is so freakin' obvious. Not only is she a woman, which the redneck hicks are nowhere NEAR ready for, but she's Hillary Freakin' Clinton! People HATE her! Even Democrats hate her!

She is a Republican's wet dream candidate.

that she'll fragment the democratic vote by being so uninspiring that some progressive democrats will never vote for her, thus ensuring lower turnout during the election... not to mention the Congressional seats they'll pick up from that. How embarrassing will it be if she gets elected, turnout is low because there's a portion of the party that, in good conscience, will not vote for her, and the end result will be Republicans GAINING seats when in all actuality they are disliked even more than HRC?
That's why she's not getting my vote in the primary, that's for sure. When the election rolls around, I'll tell you how I feel then as well.

and they see a continuation of many of their policies.

just like Bill was, for as much as they whined about Bill they managed to make lots of money.

quite a while now.

I'm not sure I see where this game is supposed to go, though?

to their keeping the White House...

They are trying to DIVIDE US....by smearing her, confusing us, and supporting a weaker candidate...that is their plan..

viscerally. Normal, thinking people hate her with a purple passion. THey'll vote for a total lunatic before they'll vote for Hillary. In other words, a Republican.

this reality, that they can TELL us she will be the nominee.

It's a bit of a dilemma for them (a small one). As you say, the promotion of the idea that she is the inevitable front runner and nominee requires her name to be mentioned constantly.

The promotion of the idea that she is evil, divisive, a bitch, or whatever the slander of the day is requires them to talk about her in a negative way. Obviously this risks damaging her for the primary contest which raises the risk that she would not even win the nomination, which is the primary outcome they seek (aside from, obviously, defeating her in the general election). Their control over media and people is not so complete that they can orchestrate this exactly as they wish, to have her sail to the nomination yet be so damaged by negative coverage as to get creamed in the general election (or lose another "missed it by that much" close one).

AND, it may well be that she is just not strong enough a candidate to make it to the nomination no matter what spin and manipulation happen.

We will see.