You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: Politix
Democrats Are Worrying Over Clinton in 2008
2006-01-25
Senator Clinton's emergence as the early and perhaps prohibitive favorite for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008 is fueling anxiety among Democratic strategists and operatives who are worried she would lose to a Republican in the general election. Recent polling underscores some of those worries. In a CNN/USA Today/ Gallup poll made public yesterday, 51% of voters said they would definitely not vote for Mrs. Clinton if she chooses to run for president in 2008. In a separate nationwide poll conducted this month for a spirits company, Diageo, and a political newsletter, the Hotline, 44% of all voters and 19% of self-described Democrats said they viewed the New York senator unfavorably.

According to Democratic Party insiders, such numbers are adding to skittishness about Mrs. Clinton's potential candidacy. "There are a lot of people who are conventional Democrats ideologically who think she can't win, and we're caught in this bind where she's unstoppable and therefore our goose is essentially cooked," a Democratic consultant and former aide to Senator Lieberman, Dan Gerstein, said.

A former chairman of the South Carolina Democratic Party, Richard Harpootlian, is among those who will own up to such misgivings. "Mrs. Clinton, because of some positions she has taken over the years, gets a visceral reaction to her here, both negative and positive. I'm afraid around the South and Midwest the visceral reaction is not good," he told The New York Sun.
Hillary brings out the "crawl naked over broken glass to vote against her" in people.
Posted by:Steve

#18  Like many on the Net I believe Y2006 vv the Rogues/WOT will decide what Der Waffen SS Marx/StalinMaterfrau does for 2008. Save MSM-verif Bush/GOP-blamed nuke mushroom clouds over US cities and or US Milfors oversea vv "brinkmanship", Hillary's got nuthin - her "MEN BAD, WOMEN GOOD", Absolute Political Neutralism = Absolute Truth/Reality, hyper-correct MSM strategems are not getting her anywhere. Other than new casualty-intesive 9-11's events by the Spetzlamists, only Dubya himself admitting to being complicit or ordering 9-11 or Y2000 elex fraud can save her POTUS ambitions for 2008. The DemoLefties know it - anti-US War(s) and Cold War-style nuke "brinkmanship" are all they hsve left.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2006-01-25 21:21  

#17  Cindy/Cindy 2008!

Now there's an image ...
Posted by: Steve White   2006-01-25 21:15  

#16  TomAnon: google up John F. Kennedy's inaugural address and read it. Then try to imagine any of today's Democrats-- ANY of them-- uttering those words.

I couldn't. So I left.
Posted by: Dave D.   2006-01-25 20:47  

#15  I tell ya' Dave D. as a lifetime Republican I lament the loss of real Liberal Democrats that would offer credible opposition. I'm glad to see you come on over; however, I still miss credible opposition.
Posted by: TomAnon   2006-01-25 20:21  

#14  The Hildabeast is much too 'moderate' for the Democratic 'mainstream' to get the nomination. I'm expecting them to pick Cindy Sheehan or maybe Cynthia McKinney.
Posted by: DMFD   2006-01-25 19:32  

#13  "The Kos/Atrios/DU/Soros Angry Left is slowly but surely taking control of the Democratic Party."

I dunno, Mike; seems to me more like, "...have taken control of the Democratic Party with lightning speed".

I really don't think most rank-and-file Democrats understand yet how thoroughly the extreme Left has taken over the Party; many don't even have a clue it's happened at all.

I myself began to wake up in the late 90's, and switched parties-- after three decades as a Donk-- a couple of years ago. And after what I've seen since 9/11, I will NEVER vote for another Democrat, ever again, for any public office high or low-- no matter what.

And now I'm beginning to wonder whether America can afford to even let these evil bastards run around free.

Posted by: Dave D.   2006-01-25 18:16  

#12  A question to fellow Ranters:

Aren't the KOS Kids, Moveon.org folks etc. breaking the law when they take over the Democratic Party? I thought the whole point of a "527" was they couldn't participate in party politics. Otherwise it was an tax violation. Shouldn't these guys be liable for millions of $ in taxes?

Al
Posted by: Frozen Al   2006-01-25 16:37  

#11  "prepare to be assimilated!"
Posted by: Frank G   2006-01-25 14:41  

#10  YEOW MOOSE !



Posted by: RD   2006-01-25 14:32  

#9  Thanks Moose, nice blue dress she has.
Posted by: Besoeker   2006-01-25 14:30  

#8  Image hosting by Photobucket
Posted by: Anonymoose   2006-01-25 12:53  

#7  Hillary brings out the "crawl naked over broken glass to vote against her" in people.

You got that right Steve! I have always sent campaign money to my state and local pols at election time but I never sent money (other than for President) to a candidate outside of California. That is, until Hillary ran for Senate in 2000. I sent money to Rick Lazio. I couldn't wait to write the check. I got a bunch of other people to send money too. Hillary's negatives are so high I think it would be suicide for the Dems to nominate her. The only way she can win is if the Repubs put up a "non-candidate" like they did with Bob Dole in 96.
Posted by: Intrinsicpilot   2006-01-25 12:40  

#6  How will she get the Cindy Sheehan vote when Gore runs? Especially after she's has staked ground to the right of Bush on Iran. Nice Triangulation, LOL!

Clinton, Kerry, Gore.....

Better Mickey Moore and Belafonte get seats of honor at the convention.
Posted by: danking_70   2006-01-25 12:21  

#5  I love the hillderbeast!
She's a GOP dream come true!
Posted by: bigjim-ky   2006-01-25 11:27  

#4  The Kos/Atrios/DU/Soros Angry Left is slowly but surely taking control of the Democratic Party. In 2004, they could control the buzz enough to make Howard Dean the apparent frontrunner, but didn't have the infrastructure to turn buzz into votes. Since the Dems are a more hierarchical organization than the Republicans--they give far more power to party bosses, even to the point of making them automatic convention delegates--and the Clintonistas controlled the infrastructure, and they wanted Kerry instead of Dean or Weasel Clark, so, amazingly enough, Kerry won the nomination.

Since then, the Angry Left has taken control of the party infrastructure (Chairman Dean, etc.). In 2008, they'll be the ones running the show, in ways that they couldn't dream of four years previously. They remember what Hillary! did to them last time around, and they can't forgive her for her hawkish stance on the war.

Me, I'm gonna make popcorn and watch the red-on-red fratricide from a safe distance.
Posted by: Mike   2006-01-25 10:57  

#3  Harpootlian and the dems "skittish" have misgivings? Homophobia strikes again! Slick was the first "Black" president, Hillary can easily become the first... well, er uh...
Posted by: Besoeker   2006-01-25 10:45  

#2  LOL BH! Democrats = Know Nothings
Posted by: Secret Master   2006-01-25 10:45  

#1  After the Dems' behavior over the last 5 years, it shouldn't even come down to whether or not people like Clinton. I want the "Democrat" Party to go the way of the Whigs.
Posted by: BH   2006-01-25 10:28  

00:00