I Say She's Running. What About You?

Self | 12/7/03 | JohnRobertson

[John Robertson]

Hillary's running in 2004. Yes, the economy's coming back, and I trust our side to have things under control in Iraq. And I think we'll probably have the whereabouts of Osama and Saddam nailed down by then (literally, I hope!). But I believe she's looking at the big Overall, and now is her time. Let's get the obvious one out of the way: She ain't gettin' no younger.

And now, here is the rest....

But the landscape is shifting.

[John Robertson]

People say she can't risk running and losing, 'cause that would "finish her." Please. If she ran and lost, she'd be cast as the first woman candidate in US presidential election history, and that "valiant" effort would be accomplishment enough to guarantee her high-paid, powerful positions in government or the private/public sector for the rest of her days. And a certain and considerable piece of the population would always--always--revere her...St. Hillary. That's a heck of a consolation prize.

But who says she has to lose? She and her advisors are looking at a political/cultural landscape that shifts a bit away from them every day. If George Bush is re-elected, they can tack on four more years of a further weakening of the leftist media they're part of, and a further strengthening of the internet, Fox News, etc. Now the media we use are a growing force. Four years hence, they'll be a gale force. The Big Three networks will be further eroded. Dan Rather will be gone, and so might the other two.

But now? Now, "their media" has taken some big hits, but it's still solid, still strong. And will still work like hell to get her elected. Not to mention, there is all kinds of serious fund-raising and organizing and grassroots building (that's prepping for vote fraud, for those form Rio Lindo), going on for pro-Left causes and candidates right now, even more than usual for one year out from a presidential election.

And when she waltzes in and takes the nomination (though of course it will be presented as her "saving the party," as many others have pointed out), there is one overriding, single issue she can play that W. can't touch: Her handlers will frame that issue as:

Are you afraid to vote for a woman for president? Are you against having a woman for president? Do you really want to vote against the first woman presidential candidate?

If they can make that an overriding issue, and keep it out in front, they can win. It will attract many a feminized American man, and many a weak-minded or disaffected or otherwise miserable American woman. It will be very difficult for our side to say, Wait! It's not that we don't want a woman elected, it's that we don't want THAT woman elected! without sounding lamebrained ourselves. It's a variation on playing the race card, and I believe it will work. I believe you'll hear the guy at JiffyLube saying, Yeah, why don't we give a woman a chance--she can't do any worse than a man. If they frame the issue that way, we are in trouble.

Still, it's not issue enough to get elected on, but if you give her the 40-45% of the vote she'd get just for having her name on the ballot, that one issue would likely, I believe, pull enough votes from the middle for her to win. Add unions, liberal pukes everywhere, big cities and vote fraud (though those last two might be the same), and she has a great shot.

But if she lost, in a fairly close election? What's the downside? So many here have said, Let's finish her off here and now! Folks, what makes you think she wouldn't come back in 2008? A respectable loss now only strengthens her in 2008. In fact, it almost locks the presidency for her. Al Gore lost in 2000, and the only reason the nomination is not his for the asking right now is because he chose to say the hell with it. If she has a failed presidential run under her belt, and retains a strong constituency, and professes to still want it in 2008, few in her party will stand seriously in her way. What I'm saying is, running in 2004 and losing does not mean she loses it for all time.

What say you, Freepers? Let's get it going, and get it going seriously, okay? Some of the past comments I've heard here over the years: Bring her on! Everybody hates her! We'll give her a beating that'll drive her out of politic! That's Crap, Folks. We all talk to like-minded people, so of course everybody we know hates her. But don't forget how many on the other side hate W.

But first, may I share a wonderful joke my brother just sent me:

One Good Marine

A squad of Marines drove up the highway between Basra and Baghdad. They came upon an Iraqi soldier badly injured and unconscious. Nearby on the opposite side of the road was an American Marine in a similar state, but he was alert. As first aid was given to both soldiers, they asked what had happened. The Marine responded "I was heavily armed and moving north along the highway. Coming south was a heavily armed Iraqi soldier". "What happened then?" a corpsman asked. "I told him Saddam Hussein was a miserable piece of s##t, and then the Iraqi told me that Tom Daschle, Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton were miserable pieces of s##t."

"We were shaking hands when the truck hit us."

[billorites]

She would galvanize the fractured, disorganized and self-destructive Democratic Party like none of the current candidates could dream of doing.

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

[mrs tiggywinkle]

Your thoughts?

[John Robertson]

Thank you. You see it, too. I am afraid, believe me.

[Tax Government]

Is she running at the mouth? Definitely.

[hapc]

She's running alrght..as General Wes Clark's running mate!

She wouldnt answer the question on ABC this morning

[Renegade]

With a war on there is no way in hell she stands a chance of being elected . Hitlery is not as popular as you think she is. The liberal press keeps putting her on the pedestal but there are a LOT of women out there that know she lies and was an enabler in the Lewinsky affair. Also, all the secret baggage she carries will be exploited.

[areafiftyone]

Even if she ran she wouldn't win. Even in my state of New York the polls all say that New Yorkers don't want her to run for president. She wouldn't even win NY State if she ran. Let her run. How many people in this country would actually vote for her?

[ladyinred]

Yes, she has been running for all these long months now. This longest running book signing in history is her campaign. Hillary doesn't feel she has to announce, file, etc. to be a candidate. That is for the little people. She has entitlement you see. The throne is hers for the asking.

Hillary would never be classified as losing no matter what. Bush would just steal the election again. The media would crown her the winner no matter what , just as they did Al Gore. I doubt her fraud would fail like his did.

[gatorbait]

She has been running for President for 3 years now, actively. Now she is taking the tarp off the wagon..That's all.

I can see the same crap about strong woman and that kind of idiocy already, in fact , already hearing it on talk radio now.

[tkathy]

Maybe I'm crazy, but I don't think she would do all that well. Before 9/11 she would win in a landslide, but it's a whole new electorate in 2004.

[mystery-ak]

Im very afraid also...I will never under estimate what she and McAwful will do to win the Presidency.

God save the military if she ever becomes CinC.

[bert]

Here's the deal.

As a real leader Hillary must plan for all contingencies.

Plan A is to run for the presidency in '08. Infrastructure development 5 years early will ease the process down the road.

Plan B involves the need to plan for candidacy in '04 in the event of catastrophic failure of the nomination process.The infrastructure is in place if needed in July or August '04..

[Arkie2]

It would certainly change the Republican plans for the Veep spot. Maybe Condi Rice on the ticket? She would definitely be the most polarizing candidate the Dems could field.

[sissyjane]

I've been saying this over and over--she's running this time. She has set it up perfectly to come to the aid of her party,and save them.

If you thought the press went crazy over Arnolds announcement on Jay Leno, than fasten your seatbelt.

[jocon307]

"Her handlers will frame that issue as:

Are you afraid to vote for a woman for president? Are you against having a woman for president? Do you really want to vote against the first woman presidential candidate?"

And I think, in the current climate of war the general public, men & women alike will answer "YES, YES AND YES" to those questions. Especially THAT woman, Mrs. Clinton.

They may not tell it to the pollsters, they may not say it to their friends, but when they get in that voting booth they are going to want to pull the lever for a man.

Now, another relevant question, that I do not know the answer to, does she have to give up her senate seat to run? If so I doubt she'll go at this time. I think it would be a bad bet for her, based on my "yes" answers above and based on the fact that she'd be out of the game if she lost. She has insufficient charm and stature to stay on the scene by carping, a la her hubby. She needs to stay visible, in the power loop, and she needs the Dem nominee to lose in '04. She does that best by keeping up the coquetterie while counting on the fact that one of the 4 or so viable candidates (all men, I might add) will secure the nomination and lose to Bush.

The only one she might stab in the back is Dean, because Dean will make mince-meat out of her, Bill and McAuliffe. Kerry peaked too soon, he's toast. Edwards is too much of a neophyte. Leiberman is relatively charmless, plus he's Jewish, I don't think that'll fly at this time, neither do the Jewish dem $ guys, hence, no dough for him. So it'll be Dean or Daschle. So it'll probably be Dean. He better watch his back, because if he starts to look like a lock, Madam Queen might try and orchestrate the scenario you propose, where she can win, even if by losing.

(How many times have I contradicted myself on this subject? She can run, but she can't win, I have to leave the country if she does. She can win in '08, if it is God's will to inflict this harridan on us, my kid will be out fo college by that time and I can just.....go.)

[concerned about politics]

She could just be saving money by not going through the primaries, and she doesn't do well without a script.
Hillary has celebrity, but that's all she has.
Her political record is a flop. She's failed at everything she's tried. Bill was her only strength, but could now be her greatest weakness. Who'd want a discraced impeached man back in the White House? About 30% - 40% max- right now.
What the right has to do is deminish her celebrity, by bring back the "I did not have sex - but yes I did" guy. The "only Hillary" camera is all she has. It keeps her alive. What we need is Bill back in front of the camera. His favorability is even worse than Hillaries - about 23%!
From now on , it should be Mrs. Clinton, Bill and Hill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill.

[TheBigB]

She ain't running. Period. Zip it up. It's over. She's out.

[At _War_With_Liberals]

Hillary, Clark, 2004.

If she loses, she is still the most powerful woman on the planet. She will still run in 2008. It's win, win.

If Dean is way behind Bush in the polls, she will run. The media pounding will be devestating. I think you are overconfident about the Rats being made irrelevant by Fox and a few websites. WAY overconfident. We have 5% of the media at best. Besides, Fox is not exactly partisan lately.

[oceanview]

let's not get too optimistic. she would win NY. she would win the senate race here again if her opponenet were the same.

that said, I do not believe she could beat Bush nationally, she has a clear shot at 2008, where she has a better chance.