Don't worry, she will lose by 3.5M votes as well. The battle lines are drawn. We outnumber them.
Ask yourself which is better, Hillary lending support to immigration enforcement or trying to socialize another private industry?
BITS
"Don't worry, she will lose by 3.5M votes as well. The battle lines are drawn. We outnumber them."
I don't believe that. I think there are a lot of voters who don't pay much attention, and don't have strong beliefs. I know a lot of people who voted for Clinton, and then switched to Bush.
I just wouldn't be confident. You're implying that we don't even need to try.
The liberal media almost got Ho Chi Kerry elected. They'll triple their efforts to get Hillary elected in '08.
When the issue is cultural values, Democrats lose. When the issue is economic populism, Democrats win because they are very, very good at presenting themselves as the party that will protect Joe Sixpack from "fat cat special interests". Like the free trade open borders types.
Religious conservatives are a lot of Joe Sixpacks who have blue collar economic interests. Their parents and grandparents were New Deal Democrats and their great grandparents were William Jennings Bryan Populists. If Hillary can convince them that she respects red state values and mores (she did after all live in the Arkansas governor's mansion) and won't pack the judiciary with sodomite loving activists they will listen to what she has to say.
Hillary is doing nothing for conservatives. However, the Bush family is going all out to see that she will be elected in 2008. Whoever runs on the Republican ticket will be a sacrificial lamb.
Let me spell it out for you. Politicians say things they do not mean, do not believe in, and will not follow through on. What they say is designed to sway the voter, and it works. What they do or do not do in office is quite different.
The U.S. has open borders and is moving rapidly toward 3rd world socialism, which better serves the power and money lust of the oligarchy.