Posted on 01/29/2006 6:17:41 PM PST by demlosers
HILLARY Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign is running
Leon Panetta, Mr Clinton's former chief of staff, said there was "nervousness" among Democrats about backing such a controversial figure at a time when many Americans believe President George W.Bush has polarised the country.
Like Mr McCurry, he wondered whether Ms Clinton was "the kind of lightning rod that would stimulate all of the opposition" and resurrect the "hate side of the political agenda".
"Ultimately the issue is: do we turn to something new? We've been through the Clintons, we've been through the Gores, we've been through the Kerrys, all of whom are known quantities in politics," Mr Panetta said.
Mr Bush described Ms Clinton as "formidable" in an interview ahead of his annual State of the Union address tomorrow. Republicans are determined not to underestimate her voter appeal in 2008, particularly as they are short of well-known candidates. "This is an unusual year because this is the first time there hasn't been a kind of natural successor in the party," Mr Bush said.
The Democrats have a rising star in Mark Warner, who recently stepped down as governor of the conservative state of Virginia. His proven appeal to moderate voters is attracting Democrats of all shades who are anxious to win, but he remains little known on the national scene.
The doubts about Ms Clinton's electoral viability have surfaced as she romps towards re-election as New York senator this year.
She has already seen off one Republican challenger, whose campaign was reduced to tatters, and last week dispatched another, Ed Cox, the son-in-law of former president Richard Nixon. He turned down his party's increasingly desperate pleas to stand.
Ms Clinton's modest success with voters in small-town upstate New York is taken by some as proof she can win over conservatives, although according to last week's poll, 90per cent of Republicans would definitely not vote for her.
New Republic magazine, the left-of-centre weekly, argues in its current issue that the voters of rural New York bear little comparison to diehard Republican voters in the south and midwest.
"She is going to have to bring something else to the national stage," it warned.
Ms Clinton's hawkish stance on the war on terror, Iraq and Iran has infuriated the anti-war movement. Molly Ivins, a left-wing commentator, wrote last week that she would not support her for president.
"Enough," she fumed. "Enough clever straddling, enough not offending anyone."
Mr McCurry believes that, contrary to popular belief, Ms Clinton is a conviction politician rather than "a wild-eyed liberal", but says that were she to become president her divisive reputation could get in the way of her program for government.
"It would not be a comfortable place to be hunkered in a bunker for four to eight years getting pelted by the Republicans with rotten tomatoes," he said.
Ms Clinton is waiting for her Senate race to be over in November before making a final decision on whether to stand. There is no doubt she would love to return to the White House, this time with Bill as "first gentleman".
The further away he is from the centre of power, the more Mr Clinton has gained in popularity. If he returns to the fray, the cash-for-pardons scandal at the end of his presidency and the minutiae of his sex life are likely to be re-examined. And after two Bushes in the White House, two President Clintons could be regarded as overly dynastic.
In the Senate, Ms Clinton has forged political alliances on such issues as the environment and healthcare with Senator John McCain, a 2008 Republican contender. According to Mr McCurry, she is enjoying the role of consensus-maker.
"She clearly understands there is a real need to re-establish some sense of bipartisan co-operation and has to ask herself: 'Could I be that kind of leader?'," he said.
"That takes you to the question the polls raise, which is: will she get that opportunity?"
The Sunday Times
I thought Pataki pushed Cox out of the race to make room for Pataki's favorite (name escapes me) .... And then SHE dropped out.
Clinton will destroy the Dem Wimps in the primaries, by whatever means she thinks she can get away with. The Dems will have no choice but to flock to her banner in 08.
Yes....I can see why the people that would run her campaign might not want a taste of the medicine that they have been shoving at Bush for 6 years...
translation: she blew it big time with a typical liberal plantation remark...
Ms Clinton's modest success with voters in small-town upstate New York is taken by some as proof she can win over conservativesI personally am baffled by that success. Could someone who knows New York State politics please explain it to us?
Remember that the Dems torpedoed Dean for Kerry because they thought Dean was too risky.
I gotta hand it to them. The Dems are a very calculating bunch. Unfortunately for them, even their "moderates" are actually liberal nutcases.
Too many people already hate her, including a lot of swing voters and dems. I don't know if she'd be able to overcome that.
Yeah, but the old Ray-O-Vacs are running low.
What about the loud old drunk in the Senate? He's got family name ...
The guys in the smoke-filled rooms will never allow a Hillary nomination. And besides, Gore will dig up some dirt.
We would like to think so.
But then, we also thought so when she made that "eff'n jew b@$tards" remark just before she was elected senator from New York.
Go figure.
Why didn't Rudy keep his pants on and hand this woman her head six years ago? How 'bout that for starters?
The only people who are "polarized" are Marxists, atheists, feminists, and homosexuals.
The far left, who is battling moderates for control of the dem party don't like or want Hillary. The moderates are afraid she can't win. Us pubbies are hoping she is the dem nominee. But the MSM clearly wants one of two candidates....... Hillary or McCain.
The guys in the smoke-filled room are Slick and Beastie.
Beastwoman pulled Gore's plug with three or four phone calls in 2003, when he started scouting around for early money. He took a trip out to California to try to tap Slick's old Silicon Valley backers that Slick had courted so assiduously since 1991......Hillary called ahead and cut his water off before he even got there.
No Gore candidacy in 2004.
No Gore-or-anybody-else candidacy in 2008.
Dubya has to find a successor now. And it can't be Jeff, and Condi has bumped herself off (probably the right call: she's still too green, and hasn't been a state governor yet; she's probably waiting on Ahnuld to move on).
"She clearly understands there is a real need to re-establish some sense of bipartisan co-operation and has to ask herself: 'Could I be that kind of leader?'," he said. "
Translation - she understands that she must be careful about stabbing people in the back....
It doesn`t amount to much other than a story line as without the dem strongholds of NYC and Albany she still wouldn`t get far in the rest of the state.
What is that all about? Certainly not among anyone I know.
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.