Exactly, and good point.
The thing conscientious voters will focus on will be his record of achievement during his two terms, or the lack thereof.
Posted on 02/25/2006 9:23:31 AM PST by shortstop
Dear Hillary:
We'd like to welcome you to Tampa for your fundraiser today, and thank you for your long service to our country and your party.
We expect that after your re-election this fall as junior senator from New York, you will dedicate yourself to seeking a higher office. But you're a pragmatist, Hillary, so we urge you to be satisfied with the Senate.
If you run for president, chances are good that you'll secure your party's nomination. But realistically, how do you think you can win the White House? You are the most polarizing figure in the Democratic Party, and your negatives among likely voters are prohibitively high. Many people simply don't trust you. You may share your husband's name, but what people liked about him is not transferable to you. You are not the person to help define a party that needs to convince voters it can govern from the vital center.
Even yellow dog Florida Democrats express profound reservations about your presidential ambitions. They worry that you cannot attract moderate and independent voters and that your presence will hurt the election chances of other Democratic candidates up and down the ballot.
They fear, Hillary, that you would doom Democrats to impotence for decades. Republicans might relish that prospect, but on reflection, they would acknowledge the importance of a strong two-party political system. Should the Democratic Party be crippled, the Republican Party is likely to become complacent, uninspired and unaccountable.
Fair or not, you are identified with the far left, and you are not the person to convince voters that Democrats have ideas for keeping families safe and the country secure.
You are not the one who can assure Americans they will have a chance to get ahead.
You may be a champion for women's rights and a strong advocate for children, but you are too much the Washington insider to convince voters you would fix a political system that seems remote from everyday life.
If you run, you'll position yourself from the center, knowing full well that even if you alienate your base, they'll support you, because they have no one else to turn to.
But even if you moderate your positions, you do so at some political risk. When you suddenly support a constitutional amendment to ban flag-burning, your changing position seems superficial and self-serving. Hillary the "moderate progressive" candidate would be a hard sell.
Although you apparently work well with your Senate colleagues, your candidacy would remind voters that you are not a consensus builder. Your health care plan failed during your husband's first term because you were largely tone-deaf. You shut people out, and when things went awry, you blamed the media.
By the time George Bush leaves office in 2009, this country will have had 20 years with either a Bush or Clinton at the helm. Citizens want a break from that White House tradition.
Think, Hillary, not about what you want, but what's best for your party and country.
Please, don't run.
Wonderful. He would open the flood gates to the 3rd world south of us even wider than dubya has.
Bush/Cheney 2008
Jeb/Lynne
Slick never got anywhere near 50% of the vote. The left-wing rats and a few numb-skull independents elected him and we are still paying for his worthless, incompentent, treasonous presidency.
Exactly, and good point.
The thing conscientious voters will focus on will be his record of achievement during his two terms, or the lack thereof.
"I would LOVE to see Jeb run. He woud be a splendid candidate. But I don't know if it's possible to overcome the propaganda campaign the MSM and the DNC would bring against the Bush dynasty angle."
On the other hand, Florida would overwhelmingly be for Jeb and what he did for Florida as his time as governor would put him over the top in numerous places.
Jeb is the best of the three Bushes.
Gee, if Hillary brings all of those negatives to the table then I think she should run.
Pbbbbt. That's like asking a dog to do what's best for the cat.
Not that I'm calling Scarlett O'Hillary a dog.
And the down side of this is???? Seems to me like they are pretty impotent already, thanks to the likes of Slick, algore and kerryheinz, just to name a few.
I agree entirely. The Pubbies are going to be complacent, and be uninspired by their candidate. They need Hillary to fire up the base in order to win in 2008. Run Hillary, run.
I don't want to catch a virus. What's at that link?
Personally, Jeb would be better than George but I can't see any possible way the country would elect him. After eight years of Bush=Hitler, the name is going to doom him from the start just as the name "Clinton" dooms Hillary from the start. Jeb and Hillary are both unelectable because their namesakes have already been publicly taken to the woodshed.
I also long for a GOP ticket without a Bush or Dole on it. You have to go back to Nixon for that.
Uh, excuse me? What long service to this country would that be?
She hasn't even finished out one carpetbagging term.
More like dupe voters.
A sound effect (wav file).
You might, but the majority of the electorate won't, just like they won't accept Hillary.
LOLOLOL---They wrote that sentence as if it's in the realm of possibility.(Still LOL)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.