RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events Hillary in 2008

The usual G-man response. "bitchy wife" seemed a bit over the top to me as well as saying she screamed like you just claimed. Neither have anything to do with important issues.

I thought it was Edwards that tried making a grab for being the "change" candidate (y'know just like Obama) in last night's debate. Hillary has been consistent with highlighting her experience & being the one who can step into the presidency & get things done. As long as she sticks with that I think she'll be alright in the long run.

You exagerate once again though G-man. Hillary's experience involves more than just being a wife to a popular President. You are aware she's a twice elected Senator for New York.

Which puts her time in the Senate at only slightly more than either Obama or Edwards.

Obama hasn't even finished his first term yet though, has he? One thing that I don't think your going to care for is now that Obama has won Iowa, he's going to be scrutinized alot more. So his record or lack of one is going to be an issue now & not later when he's up against whoever the GOP candidate is.

I saw Hillary on a debate last night. Mostly she took shots at Obama and talked about how cool she thought she was. Maybe that's all debates are.

When talking about his lack of experience on the daily show Obama had something like this to say "What we're trying to do on this campaign is get people to see past convential wisdom. What people really want, when they talk about is experience, is good judgement. The idea being that the more experience you have the better your judgement. But that's not true. We all know 50, 60, 70 year olds who have bad judgement because they keep making the same mistakes. No one had a longer resume then Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld and look how well that turned out".

What he said was very close to that, and truer words were never spoken.

It seems to me that that is what debates have degenerated into, on both sides of the Aisle.

Who was surprised that Cheney & Rumsfeld were awful? And how did they get their positions of power. IMHO, it took one guy who was in way over his head to be President but had the charisma to convince people that it was OK to elect him. Obama has flubbed up enough foriegn policy questions where I really wish he would have waited & gained some of that experience that he doesn't think is important before running for such an important job.

Actually, Cheney and Rumsfeld were considered wise old hands from his father's administration and I think most people without an idealogical bias saw them as such. At the time Bush first took office it was Ashcroft who most people considered the "problematic" cabinet member.

Cheney was certainly wise back when he said taking out Saddam would destabalize the area.

Actually I do remember that Bush Jr. did push the wise old hands bit to reassure voters that it was OK to elect him. The problem is they ended having much more power due to our President not being up to the job. I do agree that Ashcroft easily drew the most fire.

So I wonder who will be Obama's seasoned hands? Or considering his feelings about experience perhaps maybe he'll try something new?

In the New Hampshire debate on ABC Saturday night, it was funny to see the Republicans all gang up on Romney, and in the second half with the Democrat candidates, all the Dems ganged up on Hillary Clinton. Even though neither one is the front-runner, in either Iowa or New Hampshire right now.

Of all the debates so far, I felt this one was most interesting when the Democrats were onstage. I have to say, I gained a bit more respect, both personally and professionally, for Obama, Edwards, Richardson, and Hillary Clinton. All of them spoke with a broad macro-picture of the major issues facing the country, whether or not I agreed with their answers completely.

I felt it got more into what they actually beleive, and what they answered from their gut, rather than a rehearsed P.C. answer to the questions raised. And perhaps because there were only 4 of them, each was more able to better get their point across. The sniping was clever and funny too.

Although Obama isn't my man, he does seem to have the optimistic vision for the future of the nation, that I felt Clinton had when he was elected in 1992. Oddly, Hillary has the "building a bridge to the future" guy (Bill) on her team, but can't seem to project a future vision for her campaign. A few months ago, I posted how a Democrat strategist summed up Hillary's message as "building a bridge to the past", and while she was in the lead, she didn't deviate from that strategy.

Now that she sees it's working for Obama she'll likely shift her image more in that direction, toward a more poll-friendly future-vision.

That's also what's feuling the rise of Huckabee and McCain on the Republican side.

Part of the problem for Hillary is that she tried, not without some justification, to use Bill's existing popularity as a former president to boost her own campaign. The problem with doing so, however, was that it created the risk (perhaps proven out) that people would be hungry for change more than for nostalgia this time around. Ironically, had she run in 2004, she might have fared better with that approach.

Her husband is much more of an asset to her campaign than not IMHO. I think Gore in retrospect wished he had used Clinton more in 2000.

I'm sure that you do think he's an asset. And please note that I conceded her belief in him being an asset was not unreasonable. I also conceded that, at another time, he might have been more of an asset.

My only point was that, in politics, what's an asset in one election may not be in another, simply because the voting public has different priorities at different times.

Polls show that dissatisfaction with nearly every aspect of the federal government is at an all time low: both in terms of the Republican president and the Democrat congress. People seem to want a change, a "fresh face."

It's very, very, difficult to portray yourself as a "fresh face" when you've been in the public eye since 1992 and you're campaigning as a de facto continuation of a prior administration, regardless of how popular the head of that administration might be.

Well I can't argue with you about Hillary not being a fresh face. She's been around the block a couple of times & is pretty much stuck running with her being the experience candidate who can bring about change. In the long run I hope that will pay off.

Man, I'm trying SO hard not to take the cheap shot right about now...

DESPERATE CAMPAIGN GOES ON LAST-DITCH ATTACK

• Hillary Rodham Clinton, trailing by as much as 13 points in New Hampshire polls, went on a rampage yesterday against Barack Obama -- ripping him as all talk and no action and blasting his votes on everything from Iraq to ethics in a slash-and-burn effort to deny him a victory here.
  
  With her game face on just two days before New Hampshire's primary, Clinton hit the warpath by saying the country needs a "doer, not a talker" - then eviscerated Obama on lobbyists, Iraq, and ethics.
  
  Clinton - whose inner circle is girding for a possible defeat in New Hampshire's primary tomorrow - ran through issues where she said Obama's words didn't match his deeds, repeating each time, "That's not change."
  
  Last night, Team Clinton lobbed another grenade, saying that Obama's camp "may be violating the law" by sending out automated "robo-calls" to New Hampshire voters on a do-not-call list.
  
  Those calls challenge Clinton's charges that Obama skipped some abortion votes, saying her "last-minute smears" won't protect the right to choose.

Things aren't looking good for Hillary right now. The press is even starting to ask her if she might drop out if she loses New Hampshire. She's by no means dead, but right now it looks to some like the momentum is against her.

Yeah, the campaign must know it's in trouble.

Blogger the Anchoress predicted last week:

• What I dread most in this political season is the “genuine” moment - and it is coming, soon, sometime between today and tomorrow, or tomorrow and New Hampshire - when Mrs. Clinton, in her ongoing effort to turn herself into whatever the polls says she must be, cries in public. It’s going to be genuinely ghastly.

Now comes this from ABC News:

• Campaigning in New Hampshire one day before the first-in-the-nation primary, Senator Hillary Clinton got emotional and had tears in her eyes as she spoke with voters about how hard it is to balance a busy campaign life and her passion for the country's future.
  
  "It's not easy, and I couldn't do it if I didn't passionately believe it was the right thing to do. You know, I have so many opportunities from this country just don't want to see us fall backwards," she said.
  
  Her voice breaking and tears in her eyes, she said, "You know, this is very personal for me. It's not just political it's not just public. I see what's happening, and we have to reverse it."

So much for foregone conclusions.


Never underestimate the will of the people.

I just caught the video of Hillary letting her shield down for a minute. It was the kind of nice moment that Hillary haters find intolerable

As for the latest polls,I doubt she's going to win NH but it's still early enough where there could be another chance for a comeback later on.

According to the latest Gallup poll, Hillary's national poll lead is gone. I don't mean reduced. I mean gone. Obama is tied with her at 33%.

No wonder she "let down her shield." Which, I'm sure was completely unscripted since, after all, Hillary is so often emotional and given to spontenaity.

Meanwhile, Drudge is reporting on talk that Hillary is considering dropping out if she loses New Hampshire.

I'm skeptical, especially given the source. However, Greg Sargent of TalkingPointsMemo, a pretty influential liberal blog, has checked with his sources, and he's found something not too far from what Drudge was saying:

• According to a Hillary adviser I spoke to today, Camp Hillary insiders who have been with her a very long time, such as Patti Solis Doyle, are worried about the long term damage that could be done to Hillary if she decides to fight on after a New Hampshire loss, though there's no indication they are yet urging an exit.
  
  "People who are close to Hillary personally are worried about what this is doing to her, what it might do to her career," the adviser says. "This is about protecting her future. That's the way it's being presented. You have a number who are saying to her, `Consider the Senate career.'
  
  "They're worried about the way the media might characterize her — a woman being on the attack, that kind of thing," the adviser continued. "There's a real debate going on within the campaign." (Solis Doyle didn't immediately respond to a request for comment left through a spokesperson.)

So maybe there is talk of "what the hell do we do if we lose New Hampshire?" in camp Hillary...

It's doubtful that there is really any talk from the Clinton campaign about dropping out this early. It would be damaging for her to quit the minute things got tough & quite frankly not in her character.

There's something that you and Rush Limbaugh agree on.

He says the only way she's leaving this race is in a straitjacket."

I think it was a given that Rush Limbaugh would have something nasty to say. Does anyone care anymore?

The Swamp

At least she didn't cry. That's good.

Edwards kind of mocked her crying today in an interview on CNN.

Yeah I read about that. Depending on who wins the nomination I just may be voting Republican this year.

He is a douchebag......he was basically saying that a woman couldn't handle being president.

nice to know she respects our freedom of expression.

but seriously, you couldn't stage something like that at all. not a chance in hell.

and it's highly unlikely that some assholes would do something like that

BTW congrats on going for so long without calling Hillary a bitch. It's nice when people try to be better.

So you think I can attend a Bush public appearance and chant slogans about Iraq and be allowed to continue unfettered?

C'mon Sammitch, you act as if Hillary's campaign has staged things in the past...

That's different Whomod. Bush is a Republican.