Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

HILLARY'S COUP D'ETAT! (Hillary to Replace Kerry)
HenchPAC Exclusive ^ | 09/21/04 | Henchster

Posted on 09/21/2004 4:47:21 PM PDT by Henchster

Shortly after the 2002 election, after watching the cadaver Lautenberg easily win after Torricelli had been way behind, I realized that assault on democracy, which we’ll call the “Torch Lighting,” was simply a dry run for the real thing in 2004.

Everyone knows Hillary wants to be Queen, and not just of New York. Yet even Hillary the Vain knows she can’t survive a year-long campaign, either her mouth or her past would catch up to her, and that would be the end of that. No, she needs a dramatically shortened campaign season to be successful.

How amazing that first Howard Dean and the other Dem hopefuls go down in flames, and Kerry, whose own campaign was on verge of collapse in December, rises up to be the nominee.

How convenient that Kerry emphasizes his brief Vietnam history, as flawed as it is, to focus his attacks on President Bush’s Guard service. And yet, he flip-flopped from being for the war when he seeking the nomination, to being against it, and attacking the President on his Iraq War policy.

How ironic that Kerry’s own service record falls apart under scrutiny, and his own campaign gets caught in a forged military records scandal.

These are NOT coincidences. Behind the scenes, for the last four years, the Clintons have been charting the course, picking the players, setting the policy, and tracking the results. When Dean looked poised to run away with the nomination, the Clintons whispered into the ears of fatcats in smokey back rooms that maybe they should get on the Kerry wagon, and Dean was gone faster than you could say “YEEEAAAARRRGGGHH!” Remember though, it wasn’t the Dean-Scream that caused his plunge, the scream was the result – of the Clinton influence that worked the least-liked, most wishy-washy, dopey, overly nuanced dork of the whole bunch from worst to first. Even Kucinich had more gravitas.

And now, the Clintons are ready, and in the perfect position, for the biggest power-play of their lives. The “Torch Lighting” of Kerry has started, and it will only be days before you begin to hear the grumblings of the liberal masses that Kerry is a loser, and maybe should be replaced. Once the media even starts to talk about the story, Kerry is French toast, and the move to replace Kerry with Hillary will be all but complete, with just the coronation speech to cap it off.

Here’s my comment in August on the following post. It’s worked out so far, and there’s no reason to believe the Clintons would stop now:

FR Thread

1) Next week, RNC convention and very Presidential speech net Bush a 10 point lead in some polls.

2) Sep 5-15. Kerry continues to flip-flop, and get caught in more lies about his Vietnam "service."

3) Sep 15-25. Media covers Kerry implosion 24/7. Dems panic, launch "Torricelli Switch" trial balloon.

4) Sep 25-30. Kerry, under pressure from every side, drops out for X reason. (X = health, family, ?whatever dumb thing Kerry thinks of?)

5) Oct 1. Hillary "drafted" by Dems, makes droning "Ya know" speech. Liberal media go nuts, 24/7 Hillary love fest begins.

6) Month of Oct. Hillary gets clobbered by Bush in debates - liberal media still oozes Clinton DNA over her "Strong performances."

7) Nov 2. Hillary wins by narrow margin as liberal precincts around the country report record turnout - 150-200% in some cases.

Don't laugh, she's running THIS year. Everything is perfectly aligned, just as the Clintons have planned it since January 2001.

Be afraid, be VERY afraid.

9 posted on 08/26/2004 10:27:43 AM PDT by Henchster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies |Report Abuse ]

OK, things are going precisely as they have planned it, so what can us Freepers do to wreck this train before it even leaves the station?

Get the word out. Tell your friends, relatives, and especially, any news types you know. We need the story that Hillary is waiting to replace Kerry to be out there BEFORE it happens. That eliminates the media excitement factor to a degree.

Keep our eyes open for signs. Signs of a candidate in such deep trouble, he’s starting to inflate the life raft.

Signs like:

Campaign stop or fundraiser cancellations. Post these ASAP and imply that Kerry is dropping out and will be replaced by Hillary any moment now.

Associates distancing themselves from Kerry. Like Edwards has already done! Michael Moore made some comments on how Kerry is a loser, but they’re stuck with him, so they need to make the best of it. Comments like that are just one short step away from abandonment.

Don’t be complacent that Hillary can’t win. She’ll get virtually every vote that Gore got in 2000, plus a few female Bush voters who will vote for her just because she’s a woman, and don’t forget that vote fraud, there’s no way they’ll mess up again like they did in Florida by spiking the Buchanan hole instead of the Gore one.


TOPICS: Government; Politics/Elections; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: clinton; elections; hillary; kerry; l00pythe0ry; scaretactics; tinfoil; votefraud
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 281-288 next last
To: Henchster

Ain't gonna happen. If Bill thought Bush had a chance of losing Hillary would already have been the nominee. He did the arithmatic last year and realized that Bush couldn't be beat. Why waste Hillary's chances will a sure fire defeat. Better to wait to 08 and not run against an incumbent. Question is, who will be the GOP nominee? Probably a governor of a good Republican state since Kerry will have proven how hard it is for a senator to get elected. How about Mark Sanford of South Carolina?


141 posted on 09/21/2004 6:11:53 PM PDT by ops33 (Retired USAF Senior Master Sergeant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Argus

The appointment has to be ratified by the Senate which will stay in Republican control.


142 posted on 09/21/2004 6:14:33 PM PDT by ops33 (Retired USAF Senior Master Sergeant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Henchster

First Kerry can't win this election as that will destroy the Dem's plans to get Hillary elected in 2008. The very reason that Kerry is even in this race this year is two fold. (1) IF he wins election even the Dems know he would be worse than Jimmy Carter with no chance of re-election. He would, however fill the supreme court with hand picked ultra liberal judges. Hillary steps in in 2008 to save the day - with nothing except crappy Kerry to compare with she gets elected in a sweep. (2) WHEN Kerry loses Hillary doesn't have to run against another democrat - it's a wide open race as there is no incumbent hurdle to jump over.

In either case in 2008 Hillary Clinton will be annointed queen of the US with Bill as VP (I believe that is legal).


143 posted on 09/21/2004 6:14:52 PM PDT by msrngtp2002 (Call them on their talking points - it will make them whisper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

> We aren't voting for the candidates, we vote for
> electors that represent political parties.

I understand that, and even so, electors aren't 100%
reliable. We have the example of MacBride'72, and the
untested faithless-elector laws.

> Again, the barrier that I see to the entire switcheroo-
> scenario is the DEM party obtaining a majority of the
> electoral votes. Without that, the point is moot.

Scenario: Kerry admits on 30 Oct that he did in fact
commit treason in 1971, which makes him ineligible to
be president. "Vote for me anyway" he says, and the
DNC promises to replace me with Zell Miller (much to
the surprise of Zell).

... or something equally bizzare.

These people will do anything for power. If there are
any stealth scenarios, it doesn't hurt to be prepared.

Fortunately, I think we can count on Kerry's soulless
life-long ambition, arrogance and apparent self-
delusion to keep him, and only him, in play until 02 Nov.


144 posted on 09/21/2004 6:16:44 PM PDT by Boundless
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: Loyalist
It's one thing to replace a candidate who dies or becomes seriously incapacitated during the campaign; it's quite another to replace one just because he's proven to be undesirable.

Ever heard of Arkancide?

145 posted on 09/21/2004 6:29:44 PM PDT by Conservative Infidel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Henchster

How did Tom Eagleton (George McGovern' VP running mate) get replaced -- after the convention -- by Sargent Shriver back in 1972? Whatever the procedure was, I don't know why it couldn't be done again to swap out one candidate and replace him with another.


146 posted on 09/21/2004 6:46:06 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (I'm PatrickHenry and I approve this message.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: big'ol_freeper

She couldn't win a write in campaign-she would be chopped liver in a right in campaign.

Not trying to be a smart ass, I never won any spelling bees either. I just couldn't ignore the irony of the Queen of the liberal left, running in a right in contest.


147 posted on 09/21/2004 6:55:04 PM PDT by F.J. Mitchell (Vote Kerry-Edwards...........................out of office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Shriver replaced Eagleton on 7/31/1972, so it was way earlier, but you're right, it was AFTER the convention, since that was held in Miami between the 10th and 13th of July.

It's my understanding that the National parties have great leeway in changing their candidates so long as ballots haven't been printed, and if they have, they can still get around it by having the party pay all the re-print expenses, if it is still logistically possible.

The old "But we have to give people a choice" argument always seems to win out in these cases.

148 posted on 09/21/2004 7:00:01 PM PDT by Henchster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason

I believe Hillary has had a hand in sabotaging the Kerry campaign, that seems at least a possibility beiing a successful Kerry campaign would mean the end to her Presidancy run.

Beyond that, the rest of the comments on this thread should be read with a tin foiled hat while drunk on wine.

Conservatives are responsible people unless we are joking and if they are not joking here, then the thread is full of jokers anyway.


149 posted on 09/21/2004 7:01:20 PM PDT by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Henchster
hmmmmmmmmmmm. I've been thinking about this a bit more. The legislature for each state chooses the electors, so it really depends how many states have legislatures that would allow a Carnahan (e.g. the 2000 election and Ashcroft in Missouri) and how much fight each state's Republican party would be willing to put in to challange the election for their state.
150 posted on 09/21/2004 7:08:04 PM PDT by Truth Table
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: All
I've read the posts here, and many of you believe there is NO WAY Hillary is running this year, but she is certainly running in 2008.

Let me tell you why she is running THIS YEAR:

1) Why wait, when you can move in now? Hillary sees President Bush as a knock-off of his father, who she has fond memories of ousting from the White House. She sees the war in Iraq as 43's Vietnam quagmire, and believes he is beatable.

2) She can't wait until 2008. She'll be four years older, four years fuglier, and four years fatter. The internet blogs will completely police the mainstream media, forcing more of the truth to come out than ever before. This year is just a taste of the power of the web.

3) She can't wait until 2008! Hillary doesn't want to wait, she wants to rule the World now. She doesn't want to have to run for re-election of her Senate seat, Rudy would kill her and ruin her political career. She needs to move on, and up, ASAP. She knows that she won't have anywhere near the backroom string pulling ability if her AND Bill are not in any position of power, and the MacAuliffe DNC-Clinton machine will be fully disassembled if Kerry gets crushed in November and takes House/Senate/Governor seats down with him.

Now, if you STILL think she's running in 2008: Don't hide your head in the sand like an Ostrich thinking that she's not running until 2008, so we don't need to worry about her yet. EVEN if she's not running this year, it's better to slay the beast before it reaches maturity.

151 posted on 09/21/2004 7:16:30 PM PDT by Henchster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: Truth Table
I think the only thing that matters is that the electors have been picked by the party as reliable party people.

If that's the case, and the Dems (Hillary) wins a majority of the electoral votes, I don't think there would be any problem with the electors voting for Hillary rather than Kerry, even IF she's not on the ballot come election day.

152 posted on 09/21/2004 7:21:16 PM PDT by Henchster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: Henchster
Let me tell you why she is running THIS YEAR:

I agree with your reasons. I've had a bet with a friend since the start of this year that no matter who got the nomination, Hillary would be the Dem candidate on election day.

153 posted on 09/21/2004 7:22:04 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (I'm PatrickHenry and I approve this message.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry; Ironclad
I have a bet with FReeper Ironclad that he will conform of you ping him. OK, I will.

In May, 2003 I bet $100 that Hillary would be who the Dems were voting for come election day 2004. I didn't say win the nomination. I didn't say be on the ballot.

Since then, I have hosed Ironclad into letting me double-down on the bet, of course, all at Ironclad's recommendation. I let Ironclad ask me.

Just like Hillary will let the Dem party ask her to replace F'n.

154 posted on 09/21/2004 7:28:44 PM PDT by Henchster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

Anyone would look good following him.


155 posted on 09/21/2004 7:52:33 PM PDT by Clump
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Henchster
HILLARY'S COUP D'ETAT! (Hillary to Replace Kerry)...

Don't agree. If Hillary had planned on "torching" the dem nominee, she would have helped Howard Dean through the primaries.

If Dean were the dem candidate, Bush would be sitting on a 20 point lead right now instead of 13. ;-)

156 posted on 09/21/2004 8:01:04 PM PDT by TheEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Henchster

Quick, grab your tinfoil hats!


157 posted on 09/21/2004 8:02:02 PM PDT by JoeGar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Henchster

I don't think hitlery counted on Memogate. I don't think she'll step into the void.


158 posted on 09/21/2004 8:05:08 PM PDT by lawgirl (Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of the party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Henchster

The RATmedia is now nutless and can't help Hillary.

I would love to watch the chaos which would ensue and the certain further destruction of the Democrat Party it would ensure. But the Bitch is too smart to try this.


159 posted on 09/21/2004 8:06:35 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (My father is 10X the hero John Fraud Kerry is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheEngineer
"If Dean were the dem candidate, Bush would be sitting on a 20 point lead right now instead of 13."

EXACTLY! Kerry has done an effective job of throwing mud, of which some has stuck, and kept the margin reasonable, but not too much to over come. The problem for the Dems isn't that Bush is a fabulous candidate, (even if Republicans think so) it's that Kerry is a poor candidate.

Now, if they had got Kucinich shoed in, the margin would be 40 points.

160 posted on 09/21/2004 8:07:36 PM PDT by Henchster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 281-288 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson