[camle]

as I have said many times before - 2008 is hillary's to lose. not because she is strong, but because we are so weak.

[oceanview]

indeed, but many freepers refuse to accept that. in fact, you'll find on most of these "Hillary 2008" threads, that most freepers want to exclude our best known possible candidates, like McCain or Rudy, from consideration. I honestly believe that many people here would rather see Hillary be president, then elect a so-called RINO.

[Obadiah]

The simple fact is that America will never elect a liberal woman as president. Americans may genuinely give serious weight to a conservative woman, but in the end analysis, voters will simply not be able to pull the trigger for a liberal woman.

I am not discounting the possibility that Hillary could get her party's nomination, and that might actually be a good thing, because all the left wing-nuts will come out of the woodwork and reveal the real agenda being longed for.

People may have abbreviated memories, but not THAT abbreviated. Moreover, to get her party's nomination she will have to bring along the 'ol ball and chain - not Bill - the left wing-nuts that control the party. Besides, Hillary has a record, both in the White House, i.e., HillaryCare, and in the Senate. She cannot run from that.

Hillary is unelectable in a national general election.

[veronica]

Oh please.

She'd be lucky to win 5 states.