Hillary's dilemma: fight and lose or wait and win

The Sunday Telegraph ^ | December 22, 2002 | Julian Coman

[MadIvan]

This article extrapolates far too much from New York's polity and applies it to the American electorate as a whole. Hillary is too shrill and divisive a figure to win the Presidency - and furthermore she has a tendency to pick on weak targets, choosing a liberal state in which to run for the Senate, etc. President Bush is hardly a weak target - and he has outwitted the Democrats at every turn. I suspect she will wait until 2008 and hope for weaker prey.

Regards, Ivan

[MadIvan]

Bump!

[Voltage]

I urge here to run! She could go into the book of records for not taking a single state!

Wasn't it George McGovern who currently has the records with just 1 state?

[Jhoffa_]

I dunno, I mean two years is a long time.. and it's an eternity in politics. Look at what a couple of weeks did to Lott? Remember how x41 was supposed to have a guranteed second term?

I think it's premature to cast either Dubya or Hill in the catbird seat for 2004.

[Jhoffa_]

Wasn't it George McGovern who currently has the records with just 1 state?

LOL! You're kidding?

And every idiot liberal on the planet is "proud" to have supported him, to hear them talk now anyway.

(LOL!)

[LdSentinal]

Polls suggest that she is the only candidate capable of defeating President George W. Bush at the ballot box

What poll shows this?

[HoundsTooth_BP]

I would not urge her to run. She is pure evil, but many are fooled by the Clintons, especially Hillary.

[2nd Amendment]

I think she would take D.C., Massachusetts, California, and possibly New York.

[speekinout]

The clintoons reliably get a large turnout of Blacks. They are about 13% of the eligible voters, and since usually only about 45% of all voters go to the polls, that is a sizable number.
But last Nov., appearances by either of the clintoons brought out larger numbers of white Conservatives and Independents. Most of the candidates they supported lost.

If hill runs, I think there will be a lot more voters going to the polls than we've ever seen. She is the most divisive politician on the scene today.

[artsie]

I am not so sure she can afford to wait. She has the money man in place, McAuliffe, she forced Gore out ;), she is up for re-election to the Senate in 2006. If Rudy or Pataki take her on she could lose and poof there goes her chance for 08.She can't risk a Dem winning the WH in 04 again poof go her chances. Can she risk a star up and comer? She is not aging well. Therefore, I hold my breath and think she will make a charge in 04.

[Cicero]

Normally, Hillary Rodham Clinton wouldn't have a chance. But as we've seen before, the clintons are willing to do anything to get elected, and I mean anything. That means complete control of the press, blackmailing of campaign contributors, and accidents happening to inconvenient people. Plus fraud and corruption on a massive scale.

I'm one of those who doesn't think she just has 900 outdated FBI files. She has the entire contents of the national security database, if I know anything about the way she operates--including the information she needs to blackmail CIA and FBI agents into giving her fresh updates.

We've had presidential corruption before, under Ulysses S. Grant and Warren G. Harding, but we've never seen professional criminals like the clintons in the White House before.

It isn't safe to underestimate her.

[Imal]

We could only hope that the 'rats would trot out Hillary as their 2004 presidential candidate.

This Julian Coman is pushing some very wishful thinking, and anyone who trusts an agenda-driven charlatan like John Zogby may just as well believe in the tooth fairy.

File this one under "speculative fiction".

[optimistically_conservative]

The worst thing about her running is whether she wins or loses, the campaign will be MEAN, UGLY and EXHAUSTING for America.

It will be GW's 2d term, so if he wins - who cares, but it may make it tough in 2008 when Hitlary points to the ugly tactics used by Republicans in the 2004 campaign and the new guy is saying "Its the issues - Stupid."

[HoundsTooth_BP]

(We've had presidential corruption before, under Ulysses S. Grant and Warren G. Harding, but we've never seen professional criminals like the clintons in the White House before.

It isn't safe to underestimate her.)

I agree 100%. I am afraid that the statement that Mrs. Clinton said about Republicans which was played all over the communist news tonight and this morning is more proof that she has presidential ambitions in 2004.

[Jim Noble]

>>Mrs Clinton has insisted that she intends to see out her term as New York senator<<

BUT she is a chronic and habitual liar...

[Democrap]

OH please run Hillary for the children and us rats.

Democrap's home page

[VRWC For Truth]

It isn't safe to underestimate her.

Bump. The 'Toons are cockroaches.

[LdSentinal]

This Julian Coman is pushing some very wishful thinking, and anyone who trusts an agenda-driven charlatan like John Zogby may just as well believe in the tooth fairy.

Zogby loves her for her "Jew Bastard" comment and after she hugged Arafart's wife after the latter said Israelis gassed Palestinian children.

[11B3]

Yeah, she's going to run in 2004. If she wins - no doubt by stealing the election, I'd be willing to bet we'd have an armed revolution as a result. (If the DoD didn't decide on a coup.) Rather like Russia in '91.

[Arpege92]

If Hillary waits until 2008 then the Republicans should encourage Condoleezza Rice to run.