Will you support Hillary if she is the nominee?

[YEM]

The reason I ask is that everytime this discussion comes up with friends and family, they all say "yes," they would support here, But...they hope she isn't the nominee because she would never win. I don't buy that. It really depends on who the rethugs pimp out there to run. I don't see another GWB type for their side. Thoughts?

[Walt Starr]

1. Hell, I support her becoming the nominee!

Plus, I prefer her over any other potential candidate.

The coldest and sweetest revenge I can ever imagine is handing the powers fought for by the Busheviks over to Hillary Clinton.

[rodeodance]

4. of course-need you ask?

[Stand and Fight]

2. Key word:

IF... If she became the nominee. Yes, I would support her if she became the nomineee, but I think it's going to be one hell of an uphill battle in the general election. Hillary Clinton is a brilliant woman, and I don't think she'll take shit from the Republicans. She seems to have what it takes to beat them at their own game, and if she is the nominee I will stand behind her 100% and work my tail off to get her elected. Though I still think it's a long shot... Just my two cents.

PS: I hope the Hillary-bashers can just allow a discussion without their vitirol. We're used to their arguments and their baseless hatred. She's not my idle candidate, but attacking our own is one of the major, major reasons the Democratic party is not more successful. I mean would you want the head of the dysfunctional family next door conducting repairs on your home? We'v really got to get it together and start to work as a party -- these arguments are all the more petty in light of the grave political, social, and economic climate in our country.

[G2099]

3. In a word . . .

No . . .

[YEM]

8. Those who say "no," what are your options?

Will you just sit this one out? Having a woman in there could only help us right now. Even if you don't agree with all of her policy decisions (which I don't), but I really couldn't imagine agreeing with ANY of them completely.

[radwriter0555]

36. I say no because she's a red herring. The GOP owns the voting machines.

Running ANY candidate is utterly moot.

We'd be better off not running anyone at all, and letting them hang themselves.

That said, I'm not appreciative of the Clinton's alliance and alignment with the bush regime, and their slipping over to the dark side.

I'd rather run the esteemed Senator Kerry again, if no one else. He's a good man and would make a great president.. However, since, as I said, the GOP owns the voting machines, we don't stand a chance.

[Boredtodeath]

5. No, and for the life of me, I can't understand

Why anyone wants to inflict more of the damage the Clintons have done to this country. Can you say NAFTA, WTO, welfare reform?

Political dynasties are a disaster for this country. Why would we try to create another one? What, the Bush Dynasty isn't enough?

If Hillary Clinton is the 2008 nominee, I will permanently leave the Democratic party.

[shadowknows69]

24. amen to that

If Hilary is our candidate. And if she gets shoved down our throats and all but picked for us like Kerry was I'll sign over to independent with you Bored.

[earth mom]

31. I'm with you on that!

Hillary = Rethug Lite. The last thing we need is more of the same-UGH! :thumbsdown:

[mtnsnake]

37. Are you kidding me? The Clintons have damaged the country?

This country enjoyed 8 great years under Bill (and Hillary), wiping out Reagan's disastrous deficit and promoting peace and prosperity at the same time.

Yeah, they really inflicted quite the damage :eyes:

[Pepperbelly]

44. I am really tiring of these kinds of posts ...

You make the most heinous charges and then, rather than proving your point, you merely post a hodgepodge of buzzwords assuming MUCH from their utterance.

Specifically, you said, "Why anyone wants to inflict more of the damage the Clintons have done to this country. Can you say NAFTA, WTO, welfare reform?"

What about NAFTA? It was a done deal before Clinton was ever elected. How is it that you hold him solely accountable for something that was done before he even fucking drove up? Whatever detail you wish to add now, while welcome, would serve mainly to establish the lack of same in your OP as well as the implications you made within that sentence.

The WTO? They have been working on that beast since 19-fucking-47 when the 'imf and GATT were established. I suppose Clinton rolled over in the crib and masterminded that beginning, eh? Because clearly, the implication of your post was that he was responsible.

Welfare reform? Do you not think that the system in place before welfare reform was in need of reforming? I certainly think that it was. And, if you want, I can go into excrutiating ddetail about it. Even without doing that, the fact is that a very operable majorityof the electorate believed that it needed to be done. In our system, the majority would rule in that regard.

What you failed to mention was that Clinton vetoed two bills with GODAWFUL provisions that Newtie and his pirates wanted. Bill told them to fuck themselves by veto. They took another bite at the apple and no, Bill vetoed that as well. Finally, when they took out most of the truly egregious evils in their original bill, Clinton accepted it, signed it and then ameliorated the bad parts left through good use of DHS regs.

No, I call bullshit on your post.

[oasis]

50. Send us a postcard.

:hi:

[Drifter]

6. I will support anything that gets nominated ...

I will not support her bid to be nominated.

I am tired of her being my Senator. I can not think of a single thing that she has done that doesn't involve brown lipstick and the current administration.

Cheers
Drifter

[GreenArrow]

7. no.

I don't think she could win, but I didn't think she would win in New York either. Regardless, I don't like her.

[rhett o rick]

9. Probably but I would be once again disappointed at the Demo's

Why count on the Repub's running someone that might loose. First of all they have some geniuses at work. They have found the secret to divide the powerful moderate middle class into two factions. Our candidate needs to be able to mend this division. An intellectual, especially a woman, will not do this. We need someone charismatic that appeals to all moderates even in red states. If we don't pick up some red's we will loose again. It isn't enough to have the best candidate and loose. Too many intellectuals are feeling superior while the Country goes to hell. We need control back. How about Colin Powell.

[IrateCitizen]

10. No, I wouldn't.

Flame away if you must, but I see a Hillary Clinton presidency as being disastrous for this country and the Democratic Party in the long run. She would alienate the left, galvanize the right, and continue the politics of pandering and twisting-in-the-wind that have brought us to where we are today.

Plus, I don't think there's any way she could possibly win, for the reasons I stated above.

[JDPriestly]

11. I'm a pretty strong Democrat,

but it would depend on the circumstances. She's pretty conservative about the war and I thihk a history of having supported the Iraq war will be a problem for any Democrat who runs.

[vi5]

12. It would be very hard for me to support her....

I'm a staunch dem and believer in supporting the dem nominee. But I honestly do not see her as even in the top 20 or 30 candidates we could field. I just do not like her. I obviously do not think she is the force of evil that the right does, but I also do not and have never trusted her.

[livinginphotographs]

13. I would not support her in the primaries

But I'd hold my nose and vote for her if she were the nominee, kind of like last time.

[King Coal]

14. My feelings exactly.

[HamdenRice]

15. If she is the nominee, I will leave the Democratic Party

Bill Clinton was a complex guy. There are some things I liked about him (tax policies, management of the economy, diplomacy, reluctance to use force) and some things I didn't (lack of core principles, thinking that moving the party to the right would win support).

I don't think Hillary is a complex politician. I view her as utterly lacking in principles other than the desire for power, the willingness to pander, and a vague preference to benefit corporate interests.

Everything you need to know about Hillary was revealed in the health care fiasco. At the time, I had a family member who was very ill and depended on my health insurance, so I followed the news about her initiative very closely. Patients and doctors were both being screwed by the insurance companies, as they still are. What was Hillary's approach? Secret meetings of her task force, dominated by the insurance companies, which came up with a system that handed the entire health care system over to the insurance companies.

The day she is the nominee is the day I re-register as Green.

Hillary is a political, ethical and personal horror show, and I am very happy for the Big Dog that he has found a way to live his life apart from this appalling woman.

<edited>

[Blue_Roses]

16. why do you start this obvious flame-bait thread

it just amazes me how "under the radar" some fly around here:eyes:

[Dora]

23. Good question.

Don't hold your breath on getting an answer, though. :eyes:

[earth mom]

33. Who's flying under the radar?

Some people are calling Hillary out for the right winger she is. She and Bill are in bed with the *s. Those that choose to be in denial about it have the problem-perhaps the same "flying under the radar" label could be said of them. :eyes:

[Warren Stupidity]

17. of course

She is not my first choice but I will support whomever we choose to run.

[renaissanceguy]

18. I want to see if she will speak up

during this filibuster situation. Does anyone know if she is supposed to speak?

http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues/454063

[ArkDem]

19. YES

[SharonRB]

20. If she is the nominee, I will definitely support her

However, that being said, I most likely will not vote for her in the primary because I think she's too divisive within the party and I don't think she can win in the general election. I think there are too many Democrats who hate her and, depending on who the Repukes have running, would be willing to vote against her.

[shadowknows69]

21. I don't decide to support any candidate

until I know who they both are. Flame on but I probably would've voted for McCain over Gore in 2000 because I thought he would be a stronger President despite his party affiliation. The country would be in a hell of a better place with him or Gore in the office. I don't like Hilary. Nothing personal but I don't think she has universal appeal enough to win it and she caves on our core issues far too much. Totally new blood I say. Kucinich or Sharpton would've been my first choices in 2004.

[smartvoter]

22. Yep, and those saying "no" will as well or it's 4 more years of hell.nt

[MadHound]

25. No, but then again, there aren't many Dems in sight that I would vote for

I'm tired of the two party/same corporate master system of government, tired of having Dems and 'Pugs playing good cop/bad cop in a game where the rich get richer, while the rest of us despair. The gap between the rich and the rest of us opened up to a record breaking chasm under Clinton, and has only expanded under Bush. Expecting any real change under a corporate controlled Dem is just so much pissing in the wind.

I am going to support candidates who refuse to take corporate money. In the last election cycle, Kucinich was the only one on the Dem side who did that, and I worked hard for him, and donated heavily. And in the spirit of ABB, I reluctantly worked for and donated to Kerry. But after watching the performance of these corporate Dems for the past five years, no more.

If the Dems put up another corporate candidate in '08, then I will be voting Green, for it is their policy to refuse all corporate cash. And I'm going to be working like hell to make puclicly financed election campains a reality in my state.

Hillary, or any other corporate Dem is not the answer. We must break free of corporate lucre if we want to see a real change in this country. Until then, we're going to continue on the same path that we're on, right over the cliff edge.

[DemonFighterLives]

26. Not looking forward to her

But I will support the democratic nominee whoever it is. Dean was leading my pack or Clark. Kerry went belly up and Hillary is too wishy washy. She needs to get a voice and keep hammering. Fight the reps. and quit kissing ass with dubby. Bill should get away from Poppy because that is destroying much of what we believe in.
What has happened to Dean btw? Has he been muzzled?

[PST]

29. Dean will be on Meet the Press this Sunday n/t

[Geek_Girl]

27. I'm not sure yet

Most Likely I'll vote for her but I don't think I'll volunteer, give money, or write LTE's and I may just vote green this time around.

[Stinky The Clown]

28. Yes, I would support her if she gets the nod

But I'd rather she didn't get the nod. But if she does, I'll be there right next to her.

[AndreaCG]

30. I don't understand

those who say no. Do we want to give the Pugs a third turn to continue leading this country into hell?

I'm not for her, but would work for any Democrat against the Pugs.

[IrateCitizen]

32. Then let me give you some insight into our perspective...

Hillary Clinton is my Senator. Personally, I think she's an absolute disaster. I went from someone who expected her to at least stand up for some policies pushing in a slightly progressive direction, to someone who saw her as nothing but a panderer completely lacking any principles besides promoting her own ambition and "electability".

To be blunt, I see the Democratic Party, on the national stage, just as complicit in the degeneration of our body politic as the Republicans. I blame the Republicans because they're mean spirited, heartless and ruthless. I blame the Democrats because they allow themselves to be complicit in the Republican agenda.

I mean, why even bother with most national Dems when they're going to be pro-imperialism, pro-militarism, pro-corporate and such -- just with a slightly less ruthless bent than the Republicans? Why vote for them when they're going to act in the interests of maintaining the status quo and perpetuating the same corrupt system that sells out ordinary people for big business, while completely failing to tackle the real problems that face us?

I've served as a Democratic district leader in my community, and I will continue to support local and state Dems who subscribe to the progressive agenda. I'll even support the rare Democrat who stands up for that agenda. But I won't actively support those Democrats who stand against the progressive agenda 95% where as the Republican stands against it 100%. To me, it's more important to fight for that agenda than to beg for that 5% of scraps to be thrown our way.

[leesa]

34. Not unless she publicly states the war is illegal and fights against it.

[shadowknows69]

39. whoever our candidate is

and I know that this is going to sound crazy but we need to put them on notice and say: You WILL follow your party's agenda which needs to be different from theirs (ie THE WAR STUPID) if you don't stnad your ground on this from day one then we might as well stay with the devils we know and we're not showing up at the polls. Either have some nuts (hil included) or we'll hand it to them. Tough love I say.

[katinmn]

35. I will only support a progressive candidate who stands up and

speaks truthfully.

Has Hillary Clinton been doing that?

Lately she and Bill are both using glossy rhetoric that only serves to maintain the status quo. We need drastic change.

[hector459]

38. I think Hillary is much too smart to run in 2008.

But that's me.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

40. No. Been there, done that.

I held my nose and voted for Clinton twice. Twice burned by a DLC(R)candidate is enough.

[Snotcicles]

41. I think we need to send Kerry to smack-ass school and send him back

out there. Did you hear him on the senate floor the other day calling all the pukes liars? it was f-in great.

[Clark2008]

42. Put me in the category with your friends and family.

I'll VERY RELUCTANTLY support her (especially if Frist is the Republican nominee), but she won't win. We HAVE to turn at least one red state to blue to win and she won't do that.

[Catchawave]

43. Will she be promising a full Senate term to NY in 2006....

...I think they'll want to know?

I adore Hill, but just not sure she can win at this point as the smear campaigns have already begun, and they're going to get bloodier!

I'd like to support a candidate without any baggage in 08 :)

[Pepperbelly]

45. interesting ...

I do not think that she will lie about it. If she promises not to run, I don't think she will. However ... I an uncertain how she can wiggle out of that question without it becoming a virtual declaration of candidacy which would not serve her interests during the 06 election. I do not know how she can get out of that.

[salin]

46. I will support the dem nominee

whoever it is will be miles better than whoever is on the other side.

[AnnInLa]

47. Enthusiastically!.....eom

[eridani]

48. Only in the general election

No fucking way will I support a war apologist in the primaries.

[LWolf]

49. If I have to.

I prefer others.

[NoPasaran]

51. Yes

I will support the Democratic nominee in 2008 whoever it is.

[Blue_In_AK]

52. That's a big yes, BUT.............. n/t

[southernleftylady]

53. no

[Ladyhawk]

54. Very, very reluctantly. n/t