But Why Can't Hillary Win? (delusional Leftist alert)

Political insiders mostly agree: Despite being an early front-runner for the 2008 Democratic nomination, Hillary Clinton faces long odds of ever being elected president. But if she can't win, why can't she?

One facile argument, often voiced by Hillary-loathers on the right, is that she's too far to the left. The "real" Hillary is closer to Howard Dean than Bill Clinton, a recent piece in the National Review asserted. Wrong! An unhedged supporter of the war in Iraq, Sen. Clinton stands at the hawkish, interventionist extreme of her party on foreign policy. Despite her pandering vote against CAFTA, she's a confirmed free-trader and deficit hawk. On the cultural issues that often undermine Democrats, she seeks common ground, sometimes with flat-earth conservatives like Rick Santorum, and has been nattering about the "tragedy" of abortion. Even Hillary's notorious government takeover of health care was misconstrued as an ultra-lib stance. In opting for a mixed, private-public managed-competition plan, the then-first lady was repudiating the single-payer model long favored by paleo-liberals. Her plan was flawed in many ways, but it wasn't what Ted Kennedy wanted...

After hearing Hillary give one or two shreeky speeches, the general public will want to put their hands over their ears.

I mean, c'mon. Did ya ever hear Hillary try and raise her voice to an emotional pitch, which is what any good presidential candidate must do constantly. A good speech giver she aint. Her voice is grating on the nerves.

And this time Hillary can't count on the New York 70-30 percent registered Dem voter edge to carry her over the top.

I believe Hillary is already the nominee. Who else?
We should be prepared.
The only stopper is if she loses the Senate seat in '06. She can't afford that, so I predict she will step aside to run. This will be sold as the virtuous and proper move, as she will not have the time to properly serve the interests of the fine people of the great state of New York.

She will have plenty to do, front and center at the DLC, directing the cashflow and talking points.

Hillary's speechmaking is horrid. Shrill.
This is arguably another reason the dims will pick her,
in true Gore/Kerry tradition.

But remember, Bill will be out there stumping too, and he knows what he is doing, still has an army ready to roll.

She can wink at the left while she claims to be
against Gov't waste,spending, uncontrolled
immigration,and highly sugered breakfast cereal,
health care costs,high gas prices and overweight children.
She will be for strong defence, of course.
But...
"Bring home the troops".
Gauranteed.

She will begin speeches by thanking her family,country and God. Taking back God will be a biggun.
R's think they have a monopoly etc.

The softkneed public, trained in the soapy sappy Phil Donahue to Opera tradition, warmed up by a full scale Hollywood assault(commenced with Geena Davis)
will eat it up.

The press will not ask her any questions, instead rail against the Clinton hating,sexist,homophobic, racist and pro highly sugered breakfast cereal politics of personal destrucion being practiced by the VRWC.

The issue will be "woman", not the politics.

Dean? I can see her laughing.."Oh that Howard..tee hee. He is so silly sometimes".

Debating the truth of her words?
Throws back Repub words against them on
Gov't spending, deficits,privacy etc.

Our R's better start taking care of business. They will take the blame, it could very well steamroll into a disaster.

Of course, it is possible they will end up spending less again, as Repubs actually start saying no to spending, as under Bill Clinton.

Maybe that is what it will take?

All considered,she will be a formidable candidate.

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.