Hillary is running (Farah Believes that Hillary Clinton "Is Running" for President in 2004)

Farah Columns ^ | 11-03-03 | Farah, Joseph

[zeugma]

Of course she already has that role. From her perspective though, anyone who gets time in the limelight is stealing her thunder. She's one of the most narcicistic(sp?) politicians I can think of, and that is saying quite a bit.

I still don't think she has a risk-taking bone in her body. If she thinks there is a chance of defeat, she won't do it.

[DoctorHydrocal]

I'd advise Hillary to run because:

1) The leader of the Democrat race right now is so far to the left that he'll never come close to Bush in 2004. The 'old money' Democrats know that and they're nervous because Howard Dean's money is coming in from people who aren't part of the clique. The big money people want someone who has a better chance against Bush than Dean.

2) There is no shame in losing to a popular President while running a good campaign. Hillary needs to consider 2004 as the warm-up for 2008. There are several people elected President who didn't win the first time they ran for the office. If Hillary runs a good campaign she will be far ahead of any rivals for the open seat in 2008. Open seats bring everyone out of the woodwork.

3) No woman has ever been nominated by a major party for President. A nomination in 2008 looks 'normal' compared to the 'groundbreaking' nomination in 2004. Hillary can take the novelty off her campaign in 2008 by running in 2004. Americans don't want novelty in their President.

4) Hillary needs to establish herself as a legitimate Presidential candidate before the historians start doing their thing. Writing history takes time.

5) As economic cycles go, it is highly likely that the economy will heal in the four years after 2004. Hillary can gain lots of votes now by pointing back to the 'good old days' of the Clinton Administration. Hillary will be out asking Ronald Reagan's question, "Are you better off today than you were four years ago?" That strategy won't be as effective in 2008.

6) Even if Hillary loses, she is still a US Senator who gains seniority in 2005. She runs for the Senate again in 2006, wins, and proves she can win on her own record. A reelection to the Senate confirms her power.

[theFIRMbss]

>There is no shame in losing to a popular President ...

People support Bush
because there's war simmering.
Talking to people

on the street, I find
however, that Bush angered
patriot-types by

coddling the Saudis,
Evangelicals are mad
because Bush always

urges "restraint" from
Israel, and, of course, the
libertarians

are mad over all
the "homeland security"
things Bush enacted.

Without these core groups
solid behind Bush, I think
the 'Rats take the prize.

[G.Mason]

"She can win the presidency with 13 large electoral vote states alone, excluding TX."

I know I shot you a quick answer, as I had to go.

Let me run this out for you?

Calif = 55
NY = 31
FL = 27
Ill = 21
Penn = 21
Ohio =20
Mich =17
NJ = 15
N.C. = 15
VA = 13
Mass = 12
Tenn = 11
Missouri = 11
TOTAL of top 13 states w/o Texas = 269

So you see even if the Clinton bimbette could [and she couldn't] get the top 13 states she is still short, for whatever the hell that means.

[G.Mason]

"She creates more Republican votes than any other method, and her/it running would be a dream come true for Republicans."

100% correct!

A "dream" for every red blooded American that loves his country.

So much so that the poll booths will be filled from their opening through their closing.

[G.Mason]

"I think Farah is dead wrong on this one. Hillary was indeed keeping her option open as long as possible, and the nomination has always been hers for the taking. My prediction is that she will not run 2004. Reason: Good economic news. No dim is going to beat Bush in '04, and she has no intention of being the lamb that goes to the electoral slaughter."

Some of us are on the right track here.

Others? Well let's say paranoia is striking deep.

My logic says she's a loser in 2008 against Rudy, or another "light" that hasn't shown as yet.

The dims have gone down the road that leads to extinction for the far left.

Graham of Fl. is going to the "BobDole" retirement farm. Good chance Fl will get a Repub senator in 2004.

Zell Miller ....... Arnold Schwarzenegger ....... the list goes on.

I'll keep the faith.

[murdoog]

I am unhappy with Bush about most of the things you mentioned, but the one sure way to get me to put all my criticisms and disagreements aside is for Hillary to run. It's like Luis said, there is no third choice.

[Salvation]

All the dirt on Hitlery needs to be dug up if this happens.

And I have an inkling it might.

[Bob J]

Going against Prez. Bush would be a serious risk...

That's what they said about Bill in '92.

[Bob J]

Hillary can run and lose in '04 and not suffer the loser label that hangs around Gore. That makes her a shoo in for the '08 nomination.

Hillary has nothing to lose and everything to gain by running in '04.

[Zebra]

I have always maintained that HRC is unelectable as President. It was no surprise tha she won her Senate seat in her carefully guarded "listening tour". That was a euphemism for her handlers keeping her from close public view, lest her greatest weakness be exposed: she is singularly unlikable. Her husband, for all his sloth and perversion, came across as likable. It may have been insincere, but it worked with a lot of people who vote on a superficial basis. Under the closer scrutiny of a national campaign, her unlikability will come out. Most Americans still want as President someone they like. It won't be her.

[Hildy]

Is that HR Puffenstuff???? Where's WitchyPoo?

[Mia T]

I don't think she can resist --which explains the way she's talking recently.
She's getting vitriolic against President Bush.
She's going postal.
She's going ballistic.
She's even more shrill than usual

--Farah, Hillary is running

 

missus clinton's Cover Lies and the Howard Dean Syndrome_bump

hillary talks update
(schemes and themes)

missus clinton's REAL virtual office update
http://hillarytalks.blogspot.com
http://virtualclintonlibrary.blogspot.com
http://www.hillarytalks.us
http://www.hillarytalks.org
fiendsofhillary.blogspot.com
fiendsofhillary.us
fiendsofhillary.org
fraudsofhillary.com
 

hillary talks: ON STANDING BY MY MAN (viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE) hillary talks: ON VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN (viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE) hillary talks: ON CHINA (viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE) hillary talks: On White House "ministering" (viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE) hillary talks: On White House Coverups (viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

hillary talks: ON CLINTON "FINANCES" (viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE) hillary talks: ON PREDATORS (viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE) hillary talks: On White House Intimidation (viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)  hillary talks: ON TRAVEL OFFICE (viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

copyright Mia T 2003

[Mia T]

bump

The clintons have arrogated the Democratic party in perpetuity,
have remade it in their ugly image,
and have,in the span of a few short years, therefore,
managed not only to destroy their party utterly,
but to begin to take this great country down wih it.

One has to wonder how much longer
the average D pol will tolerate this noxious pair....
There are doubtless multiple coups in the works.
Susan Estrich is merely greasing the guillotine.

missus clinton's Cover Lies and the Howard Dean Syndrome

Mia T, 6.25.03

 

The clinton Complex-Question Fallacy Scheme notwithstanding, it is axiomatic and confirmed on a daily basis by clinton "infrastructure" strategy, itself, that hillary ("listening tour" / cozy-clintonoid-interviews-of-the-Colmes-kind) clinton is no better than Howard Dean at withstanding media scrutiny... and is likely significantly worse.

From this it follows--if one also notices that media genuflection before the altar of clinton is no longer de rigueur--that hillary clinton cannot survive the standard, lengthy, probing presidential-campaign process. An end run is her only option.

And contrary to conventional wisdom, time is not on her side. Not only are the clintons in general decline, but in this post-9/11 world,

as increasingly, more clinton failures and betrayals are documented, demographics favorable to liberals projected for 2008 will not resuscitate disfavored, dysfunctional, dangerous demagogues like the clintons.

Look, therefore, for the clintons to make their move in '04. Susan Estrich, Al From and The Times aren't on the same "Get the clintons off the stage!" page for no reason.

 

 

[ml/nj]

I have always maintained that HRC is unelectable as President. It was no surprise tha she won her Senate seat in her carefully guarded "listening tour". That was a euphemism for her handlers keeping her from close public view, lest her greatest weakness be exposed: she is singularly unlikable. Her husband, for all his sloth and perversion, came across as likable. It may have been insincere, but it worked with a lot of people who vote on a superficial basis. Under the closer scrutiny of a national campaign, her unlikability will come out. Most Americans still want as President someone they like. It won't be her.

She may be singularly unlikeable to you and to me. but there are lots of stupid people out there. I saw a whole bunch of them waiting on line to be blessed by the Queen here in NJ when I was part of a booksigning freep. If half the people have below average IQs and she gets 90% of them plus the dead, we're doomed.

And I wonder where this closer scrutiny is going to come from, Dan Rather? She'll do a National Listening Tour while we pull our hair out. Do not underestimate this woman.

ML/NJ