If Hillary Clinton wins the nomination, how many states South

of the Mason-Dixon line and east of the Mississippi River will she win in the General election? I ask because, if that number is zero, then we end up with a Republican 1 year from tomorrow, and right now, that number looks like zero to me.

Someone convince me otherwise.

I'm afraid, once again, we are choosing a candidate that is not electable next fall.

Michigan and Florida are iffy.

Even funnier if you're being serious!

*EDIT* I meant to respond to ileus. Sorry.

but I seriously doubt it.. or anything even close to that expectation.

Are you saying that she'll win every state?

and we will take all 50 states?

there's no way in Hell that would ever happen.

If we nominate Obama. I think the south would be a worse blow-out with Obama than Clinton. But we cannot pick our candidate based on a fear of their racism, irrational Clinton hatred or sexism.

I have lived in both South Carolina and North Carolina and in my experiences, people seemed less prejudice than what I had been lead to believe. I would say, they would consider Obama before Bill Clinton again. The Republican's have poisoned the Clinton name down in those states.

:spray:

among the liberal wing of the Democratic party who have been taken for granted for years?

It will be interesting if mccain is the republican candidate how she tries to diferentiate herself from him, especially when it wasn't that long ago after a trip to Iraq with mccain, she was a pro-war, and the light was at the end of the tunnel as mccain was

Of course I could be proven wrong, and we will get to see soon enough

And why aren't they participating in the process?

In the course of time whether the Clinton baggage helps or hurts

Clinton left office with a 65% approval rating, the highest end-of-presidency rating of any President that came into office after World War II. However, public reaction to the Lewinsky scandal left a mixed impression about his personal character. Since leaving office, Clinton has been involved in public speaking and humanitarian work. He created the William J. Clinton Foundation to promote and address international causes, such as treatment and prevention of HIV/AIDS and global warming. In 2004, he released a personal autobiography, My Life. His wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, is the junior United States Senator from the state of New York, where they both currently reside, and a Democratic candidate for president in the 2008 election.<snip>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton

She doesn't have his charm nor his charisma.

and the results are in. There is not much middle ground there -- people pretty much either strongly support her or strongly dislike her. It is the degrees of seperation that matter -- and why she is THE "polarizing one" out of all 12 (or however many are left) people running for this office.

Senate seat. Bill pulls HUGE crowds wherever he goes...to this day. There's nothing they can throw at them now that will make any difference. People are sick of the attacks on the Clinton's. They can see through it.

But by all means -- launch her into the general and let me know how that works out.

All you want is a restoration of the Clinton oval office I guess, with the same policies (free trade, dismantling of the New Deal social service net, etc.)

Of course Obama probably has the same agenda.

but, I think you are. :rofl:

Arizona is a real possibility too (unless McCain wins the GOP)

I think she'll do well in Fl too.

if she can take FL, AZ, NV and NM we'll be fine

in the region I asked about. Florida will not go to Hillary Clinton, IMO.

:hi:

settles out. Might be clearer then. :shrug:

Truth be told, my dead dog - may he run in peace - would beat any of the (R) candidates this year.

at their convention, and depending who it is, all bets are off

I figure he'll go down with Iraq.

since you're worried about the politics of hate?

I'm saying we need a reality check. I'm not voting for Hillary, and it's not because she's a woman. Nice of you to judge every voter in the South who disagrees with Hillary a sexist, though.

hating-Clinton factor.

that we are all racist and sexist. My bad.

lots of ppl hate Clinton because she didn't deball Bill publically as well as many other reasons.
Sadly, I think there is more overt racism in the South. There's racism in the west and north as well but it hides better.

will do substantially better in the South than in past elections but there are still ways to win the WH.

Obama also has some bad news ahead I'm afraid due to his past dealings with Rezko, that seems to be turning rather ominous.

I feel like this is all playing right into the GOP's hands. Again.

They get rid of the ones they're afraid of by having their media ignore him, and set up the ones they know they can rip to shreds to be the Dem nominee.

Hillary will do better battling the GOP than Barack, but a battle it will be. And nothing will guarantee a GOP voter turnout like "that woman" Hillary or "that black man" Barack.

is that the AA vote which is the democrats most loyal voting bloc may not be as motivated. Yes, Hillary would probably win 90% of its vote but will enthusiasm and turnout be down among AA? if so, she doesn't win any states in the South. In a way I feel if Hillary is the nominee she may very well need Obama who has demonstrated strength with young voters and younger voters as her running mate to win.

unmotivated Dems. I personally believe that the AA vote will rally behind her as well.

If we were looking at a choice between Hillary and Romney or Hucky or even Cainy, the Dems will be motivated.

will rally behind her is wishful thinking at this point. I can't imagine what the Clintons can do to repare the damage they've inflicted. I suppose it's possible, but they're in for a tough battle as regards this situation.

If the general is Clinton vs Romney, Clinton faces few problems. For one thing, Romney is pro-war, 75% of the U.S population is anti-war. Romney wants to double the size of Guantanamo. I don't see this as the dominate thinking here in the U.S.

75% of the people can want the war to end, but if it is at the bottom of their priority list -- that needs to be taken into account.

Potential (R) polling question:

-- Would you rather see an end to the war or stop Hillary Clinton from becoming the next POTUS?

THAT would be interesting to know.

where she can win (or any dem) without the south.

The electoral college numbers have changed slightly since 2000, but look at the map. If gore had taken 2 states from the pool of nevada, colorado, arizona, and new mexico he would not have needed Florida (and that was the only southern state he *won* ).

He would have sealed the 2000 election sans involving the Felonious Five.

If they nominate McCain it will make things difficult, but not imossible, in the southwest.
If they nominate Huckabee, I don't really see her winning Arkansas, but she'll do better in the west.
If they nominate Romney, Michigan might be competitive, but the south apparently hates mormons so Arkansas and Virgina will be easier to win.
Confused? Thats America!

I'd bet large sums of money on it.

She could maybe eke out a victory
in Michigan.

My predictions --

Nevada 55-45 Hillary loses
New Mex 53-47 Hillary loses
Colo 56-44 Hillary loses
Ariz 58-42 Hillary loses
Ark 60-40 Hillary loses (against Huckabee)
Ark 56-44 Hillary loses (against McCain or Romney)
Missori 57-43 Hillary loses
Virginia 59-41 Hillary loses
West Va 58-42 Hillary loses
Ohio 54-46 Hillary loses
Michigan 50-49 Hillary wins (against Huckabee)
Michigan 53-47 Hillary loses (against McCain or Romney)
Wisconsin 50-49 Hillary loses (against Huckabee)
Wisconsin 54-46 Hillary loses (against McCain or Romney)
Iowa 53-47 Hillary loses
Florida 52-48 Hillary loses (against Huckabee)
Florida 56-44 Hillary loses (against McCain or Romney)

Pennsylvania 51-49 Hillary wins (against Huckabee)
Pennsylvania 52-48 Hillary loses (against McCain or Romney)
New Jersey 57-43 Hillary wins (against Huckabee)
New Jersey 52-48 Hillary wins (against McCain or Romney)
California 54-46 Hillary wins
New York 58-42 Hillary wins
Massachusetts 60-40 Hillary wins (against Huckabee)
Massachusetts 52-48 Hillary wins (against McCain or Romney)

This, again, is the very conundrum we are in, and both Hillary and Obama would have a very tough time in the South (which is why I supported Edwards from the beginning, but in the Democratic base he was a victim of bad timing being squeezed between two better financed candidates with huge base appeal). However, winning the general election with either Hillary or Obama is doable depending on such factors as the GOP nominee, voter motivation and turnout, strength and smarts of the competing campaigns, entry of a third party candidate, what happens in the economy, what happens in Iraq, our candidate's ability to appeal to the independents who will decide the race... As to flipping red states blue, with the right campaign and the right set of other dynamics, even Hillary could possibly flip such states as Florida, Nevada, Arkansas, Ohio, Colorado, New Mexico, and Iowa. Hopefully she could also hang on to all of the blue states. I think that on the GOP side, our scariest opponent is McCain. Romney would also be formidable nationally. If Rudy loses Florida, stick a fork in him. So, we'll just have to see what happens. But I will tell you this, if Hillary is nominated, we better be in solidarity because we MUST win this election and it will bode VERY badly for our party if we lose with Bush's approvals in the tank and such a huge majority of the nation who think our country is on the wrong track.

Bush fatigue is old news. In 6 months people will be tired of hearing about Bush and the war, not angry -- as they were in 72.

I forsee a McCain blowout if it's McCain v. Hillary.

McCain + Bloomberg could reduce Hillary to nothing like Perot
almost did to Bush.

Just be thankful if McCain is the R nominee and not
neocons Giuliani or fundie Huckabee. McCain is slightly left
of Reagan and a massive Hillary defeat (which is inevitable)
would destroy the DLC wing of the party.

(Unless those of us who suspect that the Blue Dogs are
corporate-sponsored "loyal opposition" designed to keep Dems
"a seat at the table" are right, in which case Hillary supporters
will use her loss as an excuse to drive Dean wing out of the party
and form a Progressive Dems party, like Carville tried to use past DLC
failings to motivate folks to drive Dean out because he was
moving successfully in the "wrong" direction.)

If the DLC wing is discredited and the Dem congressional
majority moves to the left (I see a lot of cross ticket
voting for McCain + Dems if Hillary is the nominee) then
a reinvigorated Congrress faced with a reality check might leave
McCain in roughly the situation Reagan was in early in his term,
before the yuppie supply-side media takeover -- the Reagan
coalition was a cooperation between yuppie suburban baby boomers
worried about crime and taxes, and racist, out of work blue
collar Dems that threw the Dems into the doghouse in 1984.

More likely they will panic, declare the so called
(anti-war, fair trade) "Dean revolution" over and
that will be that.

A Hillary nomination would galvanize a republican opposition vote like no other candidate could. That will happen in red states outside the south as well.

Whether fair or not, the Clinton name is a double edge sword that cuts both ways

There is no one who has a neutral position on Hillary

In a year where there should have been NO PROBLEM FOR THE DEMOCRATS winning the presidential election.

Because of that, the only advantage we have is that the republican line up is pathetic. mccain should not be underestimated that he can move the independents to vote for him

I really wish it would go undecided to the convention, and Gore would run...

Gore is NOT running, he won't run, and so let's forget that. And we won't have a brokered convention. Our race will be decided convincingly on Feb. 5th, and as of now Hillary has the edge. Either way, out nominee will be Obama or Hillary, period. Whomever it is, we better ALL damn well get behind our nominee BIGTIME. How do we beat McCain? We do it by outcampaigning him. We tie him to his OVERWHELMING pro-Bush/Cheney support and voting record (peal off the "moderate" label which DOES NOT hold ANY water when you look at the big picture), we frame him around Bush and Cheney and his statements that he is a "conservative Republican" and that he would support "bases in Iraq for 100 years". Stick a powerful negative framing narrative onto the R candidate like superglue. Make the public understand that 4 more years of and R in the White House is 4 more years of a Bush/Cheney fraternal twin.

We all know that the republican candidates are going to campaign to have a permanent presence there, and if our candidate takes a similar position, I probably won't vote for the presidential ticket

Yes, I do think the war is paramount because it has a direct bearing on our economy, standard of living, and way of life

I think McCain won't find it that hard to win more independants

To win Maryland, Delaware, Virginia, Florida and the District of Columbia.

But frankly, if all we do is hang on to the Kerry states and keep Ohio from being stolen again, we win, whatever happens in Dixie.

If it doesn't then there are quite a few people in Ohio who are complete idiots, and just have to look at there economic situtation to realize what has happened to their state

and, although their Dad had to move there because he was fired from his job in the South (Eastman Kodak) for trying to bring in the Union...they always vote their fundy religion. Maybe this time their pockets will speak louder than their preachers.

Unions used to be in the Democratic realm

interest last election. Republicans have a way of getting people to do that, with all their "God Bless America" bullcrap.

By backing business-supported, social liberal, economically conservative
"machine Democrats" -- the ones who run every major US city -- every time.

The ones who voted to:

** illegalize feeding the homeless in Orlando
** demolish 60-year old public housing occupied by
displaced Katrina refugees on Christmas
** demolish an entire neighborhoods to build a
publically financed, corporate owned ballpark in DC
and corporate office parks in Balto, Philly etc.
** eliminate welfare
** tell unions not to strike or "strike at the ballot box"
** cross picket lines
** implement increased free trade deals
** declare outsourcing "inevitable"
** encourage increased immigration of low-skilled workers
** encourage increased outmigration of "dirty" industries
to China and India (which have no enviro regulations)
while increasing the trade imbalance with those countres
** Get unions to vote to accept factory disbanding deals
where the unions vote to ensure fewer benefits and no
right to strike for younger workers, like at Sparrows Point

Virginians are quite happy with Governor Kaine and Senator Webb so Democrats are doing well in the state. It may be close but I think northern Virginia will carry Hillary to a victory in the old Commonwealth.

:hi:

:hi:

These are the people who believe that a wife must submit to the authority of her husband. They're not going to vote for a woman president. Nor will the hate radio listeners who believe the ridiculous lie that Hillary is a "liberal". Irony is that they would probably agree with her neocon positions on many issues, but they'll never hear about that from FAUX or Mush Limpdick.

that's for sure.

Of course it could be argued that they would not vote for any Democrat period

but, I think it would be a mistake. We had several candidates that could win in the South over Republicans. Clinton isn't one of them, IMO. I hope I'm wrong if she gets the nomination. I'm afraid I won't be.

you actually think that Americans are going to elect another GOPer after Bush and especially in view of the ragtag bunch running?

McCain wins every Southern State.

:hi:

Because, as Mike Malloy has so eloquently put it, "Nothing else matters, as long as the queers can't get married!!"

Huckster and Mittens are already putting their theocratic bullshit out there, and McCain was kissing Jerry Falwell's ass before Jerry took the waterslide to Hell.

If it comes to that -- PM me as I would like to venture a friendly wager.

The odds on an easy bet are never favorable for those of us who know what the outcome will be.

If anyone put money down on Hillary, a dozen people would buy a wager and the winnings would have to be split among them.

but she wouldn't need any to become President.

and not by small margins. Worse, the loss will be attributed to "Walter Mondale liberals like Kerry and Dean" and the DLC will call for a more conservative candidate next time, possibly splitting the party. If the winning Repub is a social liberal or Huckabee, the Repubs could be partly split too.

They'll be out voting for her in droves when she wins the nomination.

There is nothing that reminds them of their traditional values like bowing their head to a woman as their patriarch. And her New York vibe is right at home in the South.

Yes sir. This will prove to be the most brilliant move ever made by democrats, running Hillary Clinton at this critical junction in the corporate takeover of America. She will be a guaranteed victory.

Well said, Prefer. :)

Very hard to win any other state in the Old South. Clinton, Obama, or Edwards might be able to win in NC or VA. Would depend on the opponent and events.

Even harder to win one in the Deep South.

Might be possible in the Faux South in FL.

Unless Alan Keyes gets the Repub nomination! Then even we might sweep like Obama for Senator.

Coattails down-ballot are a problem particularly for Clinton in the close states that could be won, but where turnout could cause big problems for Dems in close races. The hatred for the Clintons would be fanned by every local candidate in the South to get out their vote.

Obama might improve AA turnout, but much of that would be Deep South. His lack of understanding of what really happened during the civil rights movement and his tendency towards careless off-the-cuff remarks would scare the Hell out of me wrt anywhere, particularly in the South. I realize Obama grew up isolated from any significant contact with the conventional "Black experience", seemingly none with the civil rights movement, and none with the South.



Edwards might provide the best mix of coattails in the South. His haters are already motivated and already vote R.

Otherwise, I agree.

The Mason-Dixon Line divides MD and PA, so MD answers the question. I forgot to include Delaware.

Both MD and DE are part of the Old South.

Whoever wins Ohio wins the race.

Right now Ohio is a strong blue state. Hillary would carry Ohio and thats all that matters.

east of the river so I left it on.

She would side with Nagin, Landrieu, and (EX) Governor Blanco whose party lost the Governors race to Reagan republican Jindal. EVEN INNER CITY BLACKS voted Jindal. There were Jindal signs on every other corner in the 9th Ward. It was a major topic of discussion. They feel betrayed by the (racist) Louisiana Democratic party and the (uncaring) national Dems who refuse to use Katrina as an issue (because they don't want to look like the "black candidate").