OT: 2008 Elections

[JackB1]

FWIW, McCain v Clinton polls;
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... n-224.html

+1.8 for McCain is very close. It would all come down to the debates.

I like everything about McCain (if it has to be a Rep.) except the fact that he wants to continue this war. I can't get past that. Sure, violence is down at the moment, but what happens when we leave. What's McCain's exit plan? Does anyone really think the violence won't go back up to pre-invasion levels after we leave? Dividing the country into 2 sections for the Sunni's and Shiites is a great idea, but is it practical? Does anyone even know what our objective in Iraq really is anymore? The old list (WMD's, Democracy, Iraqi's being self sufficient) isn't even talked about anymore. You really think enough American's will back McCain's agenda of staying in Iraq with no way out anytime soon?

P.S. Will Obama pick up most of Edwards supporters? You gotta think so.
If that's the case, this becomes a crapshoot. Look at the last ratings:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... n-191.html
Clinton 42% (Obama 33% (+ Edwards 14%) = 47%....+5% over Clinton!

[pk500]

Jack:

What is Hillary's exit plan? Will it flip-flop like her stance on the war?

Take care,
PK

[RobVarak]

Jack:

What is Hillary's exit plan? Will it flip-flop like her stance on the war?

Take care,
PK

I was just telling my wife last night. It would almost be worth it to see Hillary win just to watch and enjoy how she wiggles out of her ridiculous 60 day pullout pledge.

[JackB1]

Jack:

What is Hillary's exit plan? Will it flip-flop like her stance on the war?

Take care,
PK

Honestly, I don't know. She's been too busy spreading lies about Obama.
All I ever hear from Hillary is her damn "35 Years of Experience". Hillary is my last choice for Pres. in the Dem. party. Even the Kennedy family abandoned The Clintons in favor of Obama. If the race comes down to Hillary vs McCain I don't know what I'll do.

[Slumberland]

McCain knows how to get Bin Laden! Only problem is we have to elect him before he'll do it!

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/01/2 ... bin-laden/

[JRod]

Obama is in the same mess as any of the dem candidates. Once they get in there, they are going to realize that Iraq is a lot more fragile than they wanted to admit. And pulling out with Iraq so weak would certainly mean, Al Queda, tribal groups would be able to infiltrate or control the government in a very short time frame.

I just don't see how, if they pull out, how Iraq doesn't turn into a post Soviet war Afghanistan, where the Taliban was able to seize and consolidate power because there was the government was so weak.

[Inuyasha]

I can bet you if hillary gets elected president, we will have a draft.

[Brando70]

McCain knows how to get Bin Laden! Only problem is we have to elect him before he'll do it!

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/01/2 ... bin-laden/

I think it involves a box, a stick, some string, and a carrot

Hillary Clinton is a polarizing figure, but she's also consistently underestimated. The McCain of 2008 is not the McCain of 2000. He has shown plenty of "flip-flopping" since his Straight Talk days. I agree that McCain probably gives her a harder time than any other candidate, but it's not a given.

As for Iraq, I don't think it turns into Afghanistan because of Iran. If anything the Iranians will use the opportunity to reshape Iraq in their own image, which brings its own host of problems.

There's also a way to get out of Iraq politically -- make the case that it is hurting us in the War on Terror. While we're busy in Iraq, the terrorists are regrouping in Afghanistan and trying like crazy to destabilize Pakistan. The next President could argue that the military needs to relocate to Afghanistan to prevent that from happening, and in the process could bring some troops home.

[JRod]

I can bet you if hillary gets elected president, we will have a draft.

I'm not a Hilary supporter but this is just BS.

[TheHiddenTrack]

I can bet you if hillary gets elected president, we will have a draft.

I'm not a Hilary supporter but this is just BS.

What? BS? Well, I head that if hillary gets elected everyone will get AIDS! (pass it on)

[dougb]

I'm curious as to why there is so much Hillary hate. What precisely has she done or not done to get everyone roasting her. Obviously the press despise her (and Bill and Gore), but from a policy standpoint or personality standpoint what is it that exorcises people so much?

Best wishes,

Doug

[Naples39]

I'm curious as to why there is so much Hillary hate. What precisely has she done or not done to get everyone roasting her. Obviously the press despise her (and Bill and Gore), but from a policy standpoint or personality standpoint what is it that exorcises people so much?

Best wishes,

Doug

For me it's not so much things that I dislike, it's just a total absence of things to like.

I have tried to personally evaluate all the candidates, and for the life of me I just can't find anything in Hillary the candidate to get excited about. She just spouts meaningless party lines in most cases. I actually read the NY Times endorsement of her today to try and find redeeming qualities, but again was left with nothing. The Times seem to be impressed with powerful intellect, and baldly asserted that "Mrs. Clinton has tackled complex policy issues." I wish they had cited some examples because I am unaware of her ever successfully tackling anything of note in office.

I just can't help but wonder how many votes she gets because; 1) she is the only candidate with a vagina, and 2) her last name is Clinton. I strongly suspect that if Hillary was a white man without the Clinton name her campaign would've died long ago.

[pk500]

I'm curious as to why there is so much Hillary hate. What precisely has she done or not done to get everyone roasting her. Obviously the press despise her (and Bill and Gore), but from a policy standpoint or personality standpoint what is it that exorcises people so much?

Best wishes,

Doug

Doug:

Naples is spot-on.

Please name me one successful policy initiative this woman has created. Please tell me how successful her national health-care plan was in 1994. Please tell me what her relevant experience was during her husband's eight years in the Oval Office.

And as a nearly lifelong resident of upstate N.Y., I can say without reservation that Hillary has been a very ineffective senator. Sure, she came to upstate during her campaigns and promised the moon and has delivered almost nothing.

I'm just tired of her trumpeting her experience and effectiveness, when she has neither. It's total smoke and mirrors.

Take care,
PK

[RobVarak]

I'm curious as to why there is so much Hillary hate. What precisely has she done or not done to get everyone roasting her. Obviously the press despise her (and Bill and Gore), but from a policy standpoint or personality standpoint what is it that exorcises people so much?

Best wishes,

Doug

Did you live through the 90's???

[dougb]

I'm curious as to why there is so much Hillary hate. What precisely has she done or not done to get everyone roasting her. Obviously the press despise her (and Bill and Gore), but from a policy standpoint or personality standpoint what is it that exorcises people so much?

Best wishes,

Doug

Did you live through the 90's???

Apart from the Whitewater crap, and it was pretty much established by 1993-94 that the allegations were groundless - what exactly did she do during the 90's that pisses people off so much? PK mentioned the health care debacle, but it seems that the ire for that would be more appropriately aimed at the foes of health care reform (Republican's in Congress, health insurance industry, lobbyists, Democrats in Congress on the lobbying money train). I mean it's not like she was responsible for Bill's extracurricular activities in the Oval office...

More recently she's pissed off progressives for her votes on Iraq and Iran, but that really has nothing to do with the vitriol from the right.

Best wishes,

Doug

Best wishes,

Doug

[JRod]

My issue is simply this, would she be here if she was Hillary Rodham and not Clinton. Would she even be Senator if it wasn't for her husband.

There is far too much nepotism in politics and I hate it when children and spouses of political leaders turn into political dynasties. Not because they are quality leaders or individuals, but because they spouse, family has important contacts and ties to money.

I have no issue that she's a women but it just bothers me how she got to be a presidential candidate.

[pk500]

Apart from the Whitewater crap, and it was pretty much established by 1993-94 that the allegations were groundless - what exactly did she do during the 90's that pisses people off so much? PK mentioned the health care debacle, but it seems that the ire for that would be more appropriately aimed at the foes of health care reform (Republican's in Congress, health insurance industry, lobbyists, Democrats in Congress on the lobbying money train). I mean it's not like she was responsible for Bill's extracurricular activities in the Oval office...

Again, it's not a question of what Hillary has done. How can you question her accomplishments when she has none?

That's what rubs people the wrong way about her. She trumpets her experience and long career of public service, yet she's been a U.S. senator for seven years, a whopping four years longer than Barack Obama. It's not like we're talking about a legislative tenure like that of Robert Byrd, Strom Thurmond or Ted Kennedy.

Hillary is a phony, running on her last name and her husband's coattails.

Take care,
PK

[webdanzer]

I mean it's not like she was responsible for Bill's extracurricular activities in the Oval office...

Right. The vast right wing conspiracy was responsible for that.

I forget who fingered those guys.

[wco81]

There's a lot of resentment about her ridding coattails.

No doubt she depended on the Clinton name. But that is the state of our politics. When they take polls, it's often more about name recognition than anything else.

The Clintons had political enemies who dogged them from Arkansas on and they kept throwing s*** -- filegate, travelgate, troopergate, Whitewater, commodities futures, etc. -- to see what would stick.

One of the first things that she said which was spun negatively was when she snarked back in Bill's first campaign "what do they expect me to do, bake cookies?"

Proponents of "family values" took that as an attack on stay-at-home wives and how she wasn't deferential enough to traditional values where men are the head of the family.

As for her accomplishments, many of the ones criticizing her for the failure of Hilarycare are a bit disingenuous. They wouldn't a) support govt. intervention in health care in the first place and b) if they'd succeeded, the critics would have complained that she had no electoral authority to push for such a policy.

She was an activist in various public interest issues a long time before anyone had ever heard of the Clintons. Perhaps that's what they were referring to?

I agree that her claims about foreign policy experience rings hollow, unless she can demonstrate she sat in on national security meetings at the White House or something.

And as I recall, nobody handed her that Senate seat. If Rudi had run that year, we may not even be talking about her presidential candidacy right now.

She won re-election by a huge margin in NY. So she must have done something while in office.

[dougb]

Apart from the Whitewater crap, and it was pretty much established by 1993-94 that the allegations were groundless - what exactly did she do during the 90's that pisses people off so much? PK mentioned the health care debacle, but it seems that the ire for that would be more appropriately aimed at the foes of health care reform (Republican's in Congress, health insurance industry, lobbyists, Democrats in Congress on the lobbying money train). I mean it's not like she was responsible for Bill's extracurricular activities in the Oval office...

Again, it's not a question of what Hillary has done. How can you question her accomplishments when she has none?

That's what rubs people the wrong way about her. She trumpets her experience and long career of public service, yet she's been a U.S. senator for seven years, a whopping four years longer than Barack Obama. It's not like we're talking about a legislative tenure like that of Robert Byrd, Strom Thurmond or Ted Kennedy.

Hillary is a phony, running on her last name and her husband's coattails.

Take care,
PK

But PK, given all the controversy over her husband is she running on his coattails or away from his coattails? Granted he's got a fairly large core level of support but I would have thought that the name Clinton has to be a huge handicap with the majority of American voters. I'd guess the big advantage coming from her name and her husband are the internal party connections and fundraising ability (admittedly very big advantages).

Policy wise I can't imagine she's done much to excite progressives or dismay conservatives - I recognize that there's not much in the way of legislative accomplishments on her record. Had she voted against the Iraq authorization she at least would have been able to trumpet that as an example of a principled and courageous stand. Unfortunately the fig leaf that she (and Kerry) use of not directly authorizing the war is incredibly thin.

Experience can be relative - her comments around experience and public service strike me as at worst somewhat exaggerated rather than false. It's also hard to understand how much was she going to be able to accomplish legislatively sitting in the senate with Bush in the White House and Republican Majorities in the Senate and the House for much of that time.

Best wishes,

Doug

[pk500]

She won re-election by a huge margin in NY. So she must have done something while in office.

You're from California; it's completely understandable that you don't know the dynamics of New York state politics.

First, New York generally is a Democratic state. Second, if you have backing from the New York City Democratic party machine coupled with the Clinton name, you're a shoo-in for victory regardless of your lack of appeal upstate. There are a hell of a lot more people, and Democrats, living downstate than upstate.

Finally, Clinton's opponents in both of her Senate elections were VERY feeble. In 2000, she beat Rick Lazio, a tempermental, ill-prepared young Congressman from Long Island. In 2006, she beat former Yonkers mayor John Spencer, to whom the Republican Party barely lended any support. No one upstate ever heard of the guy before he ran.

So don't mistake Clinton's re-election as any kind of validation of a job well done. She was running against the political equivalent of 1974 Ford Pinto.

Take care,
PK

[wco81]

She's not a liberal politician, even though that is how she will be depicted.

She's considered "Republican-lite" by many liberals because she raises a lot of money from the same big interests who donate to Republican candidates.

In '94, she may have been willing to cut out health insurers and pharmaceuticals out of the deliberations about health care reform but she probably won't have the same attitude if she's taking money from these entities.

[wco81]

She won re-election by a huge margin in NY. So she must have done something while in office.

You're from California; it's completely understandable that you don't know the dynamics of New York state politics.

First, New York generally is a Democratic state. Second, if you have backing from the New York City Democratic party machine coupled with the Clinton name, you're a shoo-in for victory regardless of your lack of appeal upstate. There are a hell of a lot more people, and Democrats, living downstate than upstate.

Finally, Clinton's opponents in both of her Senate elections were VERY feeble. In 2000, she beat Rick Lazio, a tempermental, ill-prepared young Congressman from Long Island. In 2006, she beat former Yonkers mayor John Spencer, to whom the Republican Party barely lended any support. No one upstate ever heard of the guy before he ran.

So don't mistake Clinton's re-election as any kind of validation of a job well done. She was running against the political equivalent of 1974 Ford Pinto.

Take care,
PK

I know upstate is conservative.

But Democratic politicians don't win automatically in NY or else Pataki wouldn't have been governor for how many terms?

Or how long was D'Amato a Senator up there?

What should she have done to do a better job? Get more pork projects for upstate appropriated?

I've read accounts that she worked hard, that she didn't shirk her responsibilities. Wasn't as if she blew off committee meetings and votes in order to go shopping or something.

[Jared]

I'm curious as to why there is so much Hillary hate. What precisely has she done or not done to get everyone roasting her.

1) Her vote for the Iraq war.

2) The whole issue of whether she'd be who she was without the Clinton name. Especially when she campaigns on "35 years of experience", and has only been an elected official for seven years...sorry, first lady doesn't count.

3) Her campaign has been filled with spin and cheap politics. From trying to seat Michigan and Florida delegates after the fact, for trying to claim victory in Florida, for playing the race card against Obama (for example, Bill's Jesse Jackson comments), for dishonestly twisting Obama's positions (trying to paint him as an Iraq war supporter, as a Reagan supporter), etc. She is a politician in the negative sense of the word.

And these are criticisms coming from the Democratic side.

[Inuyasha]

I don't hate hillary, but I get a feeling that if she's president, she's gotta prove to the most men out there that she's manly enough to be president. And the best way to do that is implement a draft.

one more thing, I did like bill clinton post 96 as president and once bush took over. I mean compared to bush and his screwups, clinton was fdr.

but even if you're the biggest clinton supporter, you have to admit that the clintons are one of the biggest scumbags when it comes to politics. Sure, nobody got killed during their lies unlike bush's lies, but when it comes to pure bullshit, the clintons share the gold medal.

So for this reason I think Obama is done. Because the only way he can defeat the Clintons is to play their game. And I don't think Obama can touch the clintons when it comes to dirty tricks.