well, we'll see in 2008 won't we :)

General Wesley Clark in 08! We love Hillary but it's just not time for her. I would rather have seen her up against Bush than Kerry.

Visit HillaryNow! at our new location.
always updated, always accurate, always dependable http://www.hillarynow.tk

Hillary Clinton for President 2008

I like Hillary Clinton. She has most (or all) of the right stuff to be President. It must be noted that on January 25, 2005, Senator Clinton voted to confirm Condolezza Rice for Secretary of State.

The Truth About Centrism.

Here is the truth about Centrism. While i do not mind we have an agenda that unites the country behind both the Democrats and Republicans, because like Barack Obama, I agree that this is the United States of America, not a Republican America not a Democratic Ameirca. It is the united states of America. And it is not a liberal america or a conservative america. Its the united states of america.

But here is the truth about Centrism.

Centrism is nothing better than Conservatism with another 'C'.

It makesyou look nothing more like a Conservative, and has Harry S Truman has specified, If a Republican and the Republicans are Conservative, And the Democrats are Conservative, and the Democrats ARE SUPPOSED TO BE THE LIBERAL PARTY, and the Republicans ARE SUPPOSED TO BE THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY, Who the hell are the people going to vote for and what kind of choice is that going to be? What kind of difference?

Come on we all know.

They are going to vote for the REAL CONSERVATIVE AGENDA.

That is the Republican Party.

Enuff Said.

I'll repeat - If the people are given a choice between a Republican and a Republican, Theyre going to vote for the Republican - THE REAL THING - every time.

That is why i do not support Harold Ickes for DNC Chairman, nor do i support any of those fricking DLC Liters, especially the DLCers that do not even have a clue about what is going on.

These DLCers are just not Democrats.

They are fictitious Republicans disguised as democrats.

They are originally people that probably were Republicans and alot were Conservative, and so they felt that It was their moment in the sun to move into the Democratic Party and take over so that the Progressives "never return to power again."

This country is going to be on the brink of catastrophe if indeed we have Harold Ickes as DNC Chairman and he paves the way for a disastrous Hillary defeat in a landslide.

Then we all know what will happen.

Yuppers.

the Stock Market will crash in 2009, and we will go into a widespread depression because the GDP is not performing straight worldwide and nationwide, and by 2012 everyone will be clinging to the Democrats when they finally realize we need a REAL PROGRESSIVE to fix the mess and that you wont get that with a Republican that is mostly for the most part conservative.

They will realize we can only get that with a Democrat, one that is progressive and not republican lite dlc morons.

And then in 2028, we will all recall what they ahd did to us 16 years before as Harry Truman in 1948.

"that the battle lines are the same now as they were in 1948, when the nation lie helpless and prostrate as a result of republican misrule and inaction."

Truman's 1948 convention speech.

Oops that date should say 1932. aka 2012 unless we win that white house back and get some common sense fiscally conservative progressive policies and not dlc lite conservative or radical conservative policies.

I also am amused at the site though of Howard Dean being called a liberal when he has the backing of groups like the NRA and when he balanced budgets in Vermont.

Well, if it takes a liberal to balance the budget then, We need one in the WHITE HOUSE.

oh Come on you can be pro-gun and anti NRA.

Just look at Michael Moore and Bowling For Columbine.

By the way i Guess Barack Obama isnt as liberal as he perceived to be because he voted for the completely insane liar to be our next Sec Of State. But then again look at the brides side. 2008 will be much easier now with Condi Rice at the helm when everyone knwos that She should have never have became SEc of State in the first palce as she lied her way there and all.

Might be easier for the Dems to win the White House back.

Russ Feingold in 2008!

fraternally,
jerry

All polls point to Hillary being favored over all other democrats.
I am sorry but I now agree she might win this. How can we say we support women and are the freedom party. If we can't support her! we are no better then the sexist republicans. I for one want to see the Clintons back in the white house.

Yeah people hate hillary... But even more HATE BUSH! what is your point exactly?

"I beg to dream and differ from the hollow lies"

The Atheist Bible(My website)

Hillary might be favored in a primary but she cannot win, and besides its the Clinton DLC lite agenda that is the problem in our party. If we're to take back our party for the kind of FDR/Truman Progressive values we need a candidate like Dean, Gore, Feingold, etc. Maybe a DLC liter would be alright for Veep on the ticket though, as it will help draw swing voters. But the truth you shall inherit is probably that a Hillary candidacy would be a disaster for the Democratic Party. If we nominate Hillary, we will kiss the White House goodbye until 2012 or 2016 or later. She will be doomed for us.

However, I do agree that we need a woman president, But she is not the answer.

Hillary VS Condi
Hillary VS Elizabeth Dole

What powerplayer do you think the Repugs are going to nominate if they find a sellout woman on their side of the aisle to go up against Hillary being "credible" on our side.

The time needs a woman president, but Hillary is not the answer.

Now if your talking a Gore-Clinton ticket, then maybe i could agree to Hillary.

If she does this as senator, don't even think of complaining if she is president.

http://blog.democrats.com/node/3083

One other thing. Her and Howard Dean don't get along(heard this from Jesse Jackson) so I can't help but wonder what type of battle will take place between them. Between the two, I trust Dean, no comparison.

Would Bill Clinton be qualified to seek it again, on the reverse?

I thought he was constitutionally inelgible.

Polls say the only republican that poses a threat to Hillary Is Guiliani and there is NO WAY a pro-abortion-rights, pro-affirmative-action, pro-gay-rights, pro-gun-control, can win the Republican primaries... We have a chance with her lets not blow it on fear... This is what they want us to think.

"I beg to dream and differ from the hollow lies"

The Atheist Bible(My website)

Oh im not fearful of Hillary. Hillary is credible, but she is a polarizing figure. Kind of like Kerry and Dean too. What we just need is someone who can unite the Liberal Wing and the Centrist Wing, and then attract swing voters with someone who will appeal to swing voters atleast as veep, because the presidential candidate for our party no matter who it is that unites both wings probably wont be able to attract swing voters without selecting a veep that can do that. but Hillary doesnt scare me, as if shes going to lose a landslide, though she is hated by all Repuglican voters though. She is a bit too polarizing, but there was a recent poll that put her with women voters 60-40.

probably that the democrats cant win without a Clinton and that the Repugs cant win without a Bush. LOL.

But does anyone know here the impact of a Hillary race for President? I was actually debating what i felt rightwing pundits wanted Hillary in 2008 so that she can lose a landslide. But i actually am debating something else when i look at the history in the WhiteHouse since 1989, added to how the economy performs in cycles every ten years. You dont think there is a rightwing conspiracy to say that they want Hillary in 2008 to win, and then when the economy starts to sink about 2012 like it always does (or does it?) in economic cycles at the beginning of a decade that they want Hillary to suffer to the huge defeat 20 years after Bush Sr lost to be vindicated by Clinton.

I mean if you look at the history: they claim we have a 1 term bush, 2 term clinton, "2 term bush" and i will give you a guess why i put that in quotes lol, and a 1 term hillary. What does that possibly mean? And how can we stop the Media if that is their ultimate goal to collide with the Repugs to do that to us?

Bush, HW (1988)
Clinton, WJ (1992)
Bush, W (2000)
Clinton, Hil (2008)
Bush, Jeb (?? 2012 or 2016)

What about the Kids(all girls?)
Will they continue the trend?

\

Probably. After all, After Hillary gets vindicated by jeb Bush in 2012, Jeb Bush will serve 2 terms, and in 2020, Chelsea Clinton will come to exact the opposite as GW 2000 and win. then in 2008, most likely Jeb Bush's pathetic hispanic son will come back in 2028. And it will be an endless cycle of endless bushes and clintons ruling the White House. LOL.

No we seriously will have to move the parties away from the Clintons and the Bushes eventually im sure.

I love all and any democrats who stand up to the repug lying hate machine and she did a cutting slashing great one yesterday in a sound-bite that made the ABC evening news:

"I find ironic that so-called conservatives are in favor of paying for the privatization gamble with $2 trillion dollars worth of debt."

I was really rooting for John McCain in 2000 though because i thought it would be a chance he would have took the Repuglican Party back from the EVIL AND CORRUPT Bush Family. I was even hoping that he would have challenged Bush this past year in a primary in the way Ted Kennedy challenged Jimmy Carter on issues of moral clarity of abandoning the left wing of the party (ies.) John McCain or someone will eventually take the Repugs back from the evil corrupt bush family someday and sometime. We cannot have an America with them in charge anymore.

At times like these, I wish Reagan would have went with Ford for his vice president back in 1980. Boy it makes you wish and wonder.

Bush-Clinton-B-C-B

Note how chummy they have become

And Clinton is a darn Centrist too. The current DLC in the Democratic Party that has caused us to lose Governorships, Senate seats, representative seats, etc since 1985 when it was formed does not realize that Bill Clinton and Al Gore won those three terms because they were fighters. They didnt win on that agenda, they won because they were fighters. Why dont the DLC Lite morons growup and look into the Democratic Party core values? That is Progressive values, for i mean they are at fault for the decaying of the Democrats. I hope Dean brings his entire campaign and organization with him to the Democratic National Committee so that he can wipe some sense into their heads that Bill Clinton and Al Gore won because they were likeable and because they were fighters,not because of a Centrist DLC lite agenda that they ran on.

Well Gore ran on a progressive agenda in 2000 though, and won the popular vote by over a half of a million votes.

I even noticed in my home state of IL where Gore took it 55-43 that he took it by a better margin than Clinton in either time i beleive.

To be truthful, I hate Hillary Clinton. Shes the most offtopic cramp&crap the Democratic party has to offer. Benefits for the family and other problem unrelated crap. The US has enough problems and what I want 2008 is a straight election campaign about unemployment, war, casualties, death, social security, ENRON, World Com and all other shit produced by Bush in 8 years. I want Gore. In fact, it hasnt to be Dean. The job as chairman fits him better.

Yeah and she had a pathetic look on her face as she was clapping for Bush's state of the Union speech on wednesday night on the tube. I dont believe Hillary is our hope for 2008, i think it would be a disaster. Besides, the only ones that have mentioned her as a frontrunner are rightwing loonies. Liberals wouldnt give her a second look unless we all knew she was our only chance.

Hillary Clinton is really best to become nothing more than another Ted Kennedy and live in the Senate forever. Let a real Democrat get the nomination.

I still believe Hillary would be credible, but just she would also be a disaster.

Another thing is, if the Repuglicans found out only Rudy stood a chance in 2008 against her, they would probably make sure that rudy got the nomination. But then again in a party with 1/3 control by the Religious Right Fundies, I dont believe she would race Rudy. I believe the most likely Republican heir apparent to George W Bush is the rightwing lunatic from Pennsylvania, Rick Santorum. Or it will be probably Bill Frist.

I still would like the Repuglicans to nominate a governor, Bill Owens of Colorado.

And any governor would win the white house for either party back for sure, but probably more so for our party in 2008 the party that has been "out of power because we had the last elections stolen (2000) and rigged (2004) from us.

We would definitely have to consider Wesley Clark, a governor, or probably Al gore or we wont win. The Repuglicans probably wouldnt nominate anyone but Rudy which is what they are probably saving him for.

But given Rudy had a fallen out over the whole Bernie Kerik ordeal, He maynot even be as credible as he is for either Senate in NY, Gov of NY, or President of the us.