Posted on 02/02/2006 1:46:05 PM PST by FerdieMurphy
Political junkies are witnessing a true phenomenon in presidential politics: more than two years before the next presidential election cycle there's a movement to target someone considered by the news media and pundits to be a frontrunner in 2008 -- Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Even with softball interviews by the likes of Katie Couric and Diane Sawyer, and with almost a daily practice by some members of the mainstream news media of publishing her press releases as if they were news, Hillary Clinton is facing tough opposition not only from Republicans but also from members of her own party.
Right after a poll showed last week that most Americans would “definitely” not vote for her, Senator John Kerry suddenly sprung to life on the ski slopes of Switzerland to head up an attempt at filibustering the confirmation of US Supreme Court nominee Judge Samuel Alito. It's no secret within the Beltway that Kerry believes he has a shot at the presidency even after losing to President Bush in 2004. There's no doubt that Kerry monitors the polls that are showing Hillary is vulnerable to attack from both the right and the left.
In fact, there are many Republicans storing their symbolic "flip-flop" sandals for the next Presidential campaign since Clinton is all over the place on issues, taking positions based on whom she's addressing. She's for tough border security, but votes no on legislation that would increase the number of border agents and detention beds. She claims she supports the war, but says she's sorry she voted to go to war after the reigning queen of the anti-war movement, Cindy Sheehan, spanked her in California by calling her a warmonger. She wants to curtail illegal immigration, but she also wants to provide illegal immigrants with education and healthcare.
Former staff members in Bill Clinton’s White House are privately saying she could be a risky choice. To the left, an anti-war “stop Hillary” movement is gathering traction, threatening her ability to unite the Democrats. Which is possibly why Al Gore is criss-crossing the US giving the most vitriolic speeches for left-wing groups such as MoveOn.Org. He too envisions another shot at the White House prize.
According to the Sunday Times, Mike McCurry, Bill Clinton’s White House press secretary, claims he fears the 2008 campaign could be brutal for the former first lady. He said he remembers how she became a “lightning rod” for conservatives during her husband’s years in office.
“She has proven that she works hard at being senator and does that job well, but bringing the country together and moving it in a different direction is an entirely different matter,” McCurry said. “It is very hard to reinvent yourself in politics.”
However, McCurry proves that old habits, such as blowing smoke when it comes to the Clintons, are hard to break. Ask McCurry what piece of legislation Hillary has sponsored and you will get a glazed look. When New Yorkers are asked what's she done for New York State or for the nation, besides bloviating at functions and hobnobbing with the Manhattan and Hollywood elite, they usually answer with abstract notions such as "she gives us hope."
It's the same reaction you get if you ask African-Americans what Bill Clinton, the "first black president" did for them in his eight years in office. They think and think and then say, "He gave us hope." Hope doesn't pay the rent, feed the kids or make car payments. The true answer for both Clintons is: they do nothing but talk your ears off.
A CNN/Gallup/USA Today poll last week found that 51% of Americans “definitely” would not vote for Hillary and only 16% said they definitely would. Among men, 60% said they would not vote for her. And 43% of women said they wouldn't vote for her either.
“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,” said Leon Panetta, a driving force within the Democrat Party and a Bill Clinton loyalist.
The Democrats have a new 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 eager to win, but he remains little known on the national scene at this point. However, that is likely to change as the perception of Senator Clinton as damaged good starts to take hold within the Democrat Party.
The doubts about Clinton’s electabilty are growing almost with each speech. On Martin Luther King's Birthday, during a memorial in Harlem, Hillary chose to attack Republicans rather than honor the civil rights icon. She even managed to include the words "plantation" and "Republicans" in the same sentence in order to continue the myth of Republican racism.
Talk host Laura Ingraham was incensed over Hillary's playing of the race card. Ingraham told her listeners it was a speech designed to create fear in blacks that the evil Republicans can't be trusted. Even news stories about her ignoring washed-up Calypso singer Harry Belafonte at a New York function were promulgated to protect her from being linked to the rantings of an ignorant fool who prides himself as an intellectual.
Conservatives know that Hillary's heart is with Belafonte, but her mind wants to reside once again in the White House. As with singer Madonna, Hillary tries and tries to reinvent herself and it could have worked had there been no Internet news and blogs, no talk radio, and no Fox News Channel.
Clinton’s small successes with voters in the small towns in New York is seen as proof that she can win over conservatives, although according to last week’s poll, 90% of Republicans will “definitely” not vote for her. Even New York Democrats -- many of whom are former Reagan Democrats -- may be comfortable with her warming a seat in the senate, but giving her the power of President and Commander-in-Chief is a horse -- or donkey -- of a different color.
New Republic magazine, the left-wing 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.
So folks, the Stop Hillary train is leaving the station. And it's coming to a station near you.
That just about sums it all up perfectly.
You heard it here first (well, maybe not) . . . the 2008 campaign is going to be a "throwback election" from the early 1800s -- contested between Virginians Mark Warner and George Allen.
It's worth noting that since World War II, the only candidates to secure their party's nomination for a presidential election after previously losing as a VP candidate were Bob Dole (ran in 1996 after losing in 1976 as Ford's running mate) and Walter Mondale (ran in 1984 after losing in 1980 as Carter's running mate). It's no coincidence that they ended up being two of the worst presidential candidates in recent memory.
Edwards may seem young and dynamic to you, but people in the media who covered his 2004 campaign for the Democratic nomination later described him as thoroughly dull and mediocre. The consensus among them was that hearing his "two Americas" campaign speech once would have been enough -- but hearing the same damn speech several times every day for weeks and months at a time made them wonder if the guy ever had an original thought in his head.
That's exactly the reason she won't win. The cynical, focus-grouped approach of the 90's doesn't work anymore. Hillary will take a poll to determine what to eat for breakfast but that kind of manipulation won't attract the moonbats who will choose the next nominee.
Many here laugh at Al Gore and I admit I find him comical as well but he is very clever and knows exactly what he is doing. He has effectively positioned himself as the anti-Hillary, the candidate of the true believers and not of the ambitious cynics. That's why he'll be the nominee.
And don't underestimate him come November, either. The MSM will do everything in their power to elect him and recall that tens of millions of Americans have already voted for the guy for President so that psychological barrier has already been overcome.
Actually, believe it or not, Joe Biden is the sanest person among the credible presidential candidates. If you knew for a fact that the Dems would win in '08 you would have to hope he got the nomination. And what a sad statement about the state of the Democratic party that is.
Please don't confuse me with a Democrat. Edwards does NOT seem young and dynamic to me. I was writing about the impression he makes on Democrats.
Worse yet, she'll never be able to avoid the fact the we would dread to have the Big Creep in the Whitehouse again.
"Cindy Sheehan, spanked her in California..."
Must have been in San Francisco.
Just one problem with Edwards-he's a phoney-baloney and it's glaringly apparent. The public won't buy it...
Yeah that's what we all said about Clinton until November 1992. People are just too smart to vote for that. But they did, twice, and look how many voted for his veep after that. And how many voted for Kerry after that.
They've got to pick someone and Edwards has less baggage than any other candidate.
oooooo, scary democrats.
The only place Hillary does well is in NY. Hope she runs and loses her seat and her aspirations to become the next president.
And just when, is she going to accomplish this feat? It would have to be soon, to have any credibility whatever. To attempt it after she's won the nomination is a non-starter. Nobody would buy it...
the infowarrior
Garbage is all they have, so garbage recycle they will.
James Carville and all the people who the Arkansas mafia forgot to kill.
Maybe Al Gore will cleverly pick a day when it's 20 below in New York to deliver his 'global warming' rant...If Orca the killer whale Ted stumps for him that'll be the ribbon on the package!
Al? Don't get caught inthe strainer as you go down the drain...Again.
"The more I think about it the more I'm convinced that the Dems will nominate Al Gore again."
There are three factions:
1. Kennedy - Kerry
2. Clinton - Media
3. Dean - Gore
This is going to be a dog fight. Meanwhile the best bet for the RATS to take the WH in 2008 rests with none of them. Each one is more radical Marxist than the next and it already has been shown that the lunatic fringe is the base.
So my bet would be if Warner/Richardson can get out of the gate, they would have the best chance of winning in 08. Against them I would put Allen/Coburn.
Now let them debate ideas and give us a Presidential race we can enjoy without the anger and lies.
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.