Is Hillary a good politician?

[forgethell]

It is, of course, gospel that Hillary Clinton is a political genius, or something to that effect. She is so brilliant that potential Democratic opponents are warned by pundits everywhere that she will work her secret devil arts on the poor fool who dares cross her. She is that good. Ostensibly, the only hope that humble conservatives have to keep her from being the first female president is some tawdry book by Ed Klein.

...snip...

If her political accomplishments are unimpressive, why is she so feared? Why is she seen to be a political genius? The answer to this question eluded me for a long time, perhaps because it is so simple. The plain fact is that Hillary Clinton is actually one of the worst politicians in national politics today. She is feared as a brilliant politician only because she is such an obvious politician, which is actually the key mark of a bad politician

I don't agree with a lot of stuff in this article, but I have always thought that Hillary was over-rated as a politician, and will probably lead the Democrats to defeat.. I's an interesting read. I'd appreciate other opinions.







http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110006566

[whistle]

1. Maybe not so good a politician, but she is extremely intelligent....

...what do New York state residents think of her as a senator?

[UCLA Dem]

2. In polls I saw a while back, she has been extremely popular.

[whistle]

6. That's good, she needs to demonstrate her capabilities as a....

...senator and build a strong loyal base, not just national admirers.

[Oysteria]

13. Here's some Rassmussen numbers

Hillary Poll numbers

[Dr Ron]

3. Ask again in 2008

I think it is too early.

So far she has one major negative--her health care plan. Not only was it an awful plan policy wise, it was poltiically a bad move, greatly contributing to the Democrats loss of control of Congress.

Her major accomplishment on her own was winning a Senate seat. No small achievement, but not enough to be considered a major politician in terms of the presidency.

We've seen her try to move to the center on national security and moral values. It's too early to tell whether she will succeed at this.

[forgethell]

7. Will this move to the center

hurt her with the base? Assuming that it does, will she pick up enough votes from the Sheeple to more than offset that? Assuming that it doesn't, will the sheeple 'trust' her move?

It seems to me that this is the crucial point. Once trust is lost, it can be regained only with great difficulty. And not by somebody who still is positioning herself towards some other goal, such as getting elected.

[Clark2008]

15. What I haven't figured out is why one would need to "move to the

center" on national security issues and moral values.

National security and foreign policy are two of my most important issues and I'm to the left on them, but still maintain that the positions to which I subscribe would be more beneficial to the American people. For example, I honestly believe that we would draw more flies with honey than with vinegar and that Sept. 11 would never have happened if it weren't for an on-going series of events which tie the BFEE and the Saudi royal family (read "House of Bush, House of Saud"). I also believe that had Gore been allowed to take the presidency that he WON, there would never have been a 9/11 because he would have listened to Richard Clarke. NS/FP is not about "might making right," it's about empowering people so that they feel no need to lash out against you. Hillary's hawkishness on the Iraqi War, for example, just proves to me that she understands only half of "big stick" policy.

On moral issues, it's worth noting that most Christians in our society aren't of the fundie variety. We go about our daily lives never once feeling we need to shove the Bible down everyone's throat and we realize that Jesus spoke of peace and forgiveness, not hate and derision. Her pandering to the fundies on this issue will not win her any points. They won't vote for her. It's the people in the middle she needs to appeal to. If Delay and Frist keep up their overly-pandering attitudes toward the meddlesome fundies, that's going to turn off a lot of people and they won't have anyone to turn to if the Dems are doing it, too.

We all know the media is out of touch with most Americans - preferring to serve us a diet of pap, religiosity (based on the same exit polling they claim is flawed on the other hand in terms of who should have won the 2004 election) and fear, fear and more fear. Americans are growing very weary of this and it's beginning to show as more and more Americans get their news from the Internet and foreign news sources.

[wabranty]

4. Consider the source . . .

The Wall Street Journal Opinion Page is as far-right as you can get and not have to wear the armbands. Lots of unsubstantiated opinions that serve only to open up the GOP attack that Hillary is just pretending to be centrist when she is really an American-hating, expresso-sipping, immoral liberal. Did like this phrase for its irony: "The media are not a very bright bunch, insofar as politicians can frequently pull the wool over their eyes." Sounds like he's talking about W and the gang here.

Check out Mr. Cost's blog: http://www.redstate.org/story/2004/7/10/122032/263
and this amusing quote:
"The Left has proven that blogs can thrive on the fringe, in a petri dish of pessimism and protest. We intend to make blogs a voice for mainstream America, and articulate the deeply held ideals of a free and virtuous nation. We aim to provide an arena for serious thought and a force for influence in Republican politics and policy - and we intend to lead."

DU must be a very big petri dish. Hello to all the fellow progressive amobeas. :hi:

[forgethell]

9. Yes, well

the WSJ editorial page is pretty conservative. that doesn't, however, mean they can't analyze the political environment as accurately as anybody else.

I'm not saying they're right. I'm saying that we can't just dismiss them by saying they are conservative.

[wabranty]

11. True but this article has no real facts . . .

to support the author's conclusions such as poll results or survey findings. He just assumes this or makes an assertion and then goes on as if it was an established fact.

[Totally Committed]

5. I believe she and Bill are both consummate politicians...

And, it is matched by their particular brand of "fire in the belly".

Never underestimate Hillary Clinton.

TC

[calico1]

8. Well, I saw her debate that little rat face

she ran against when she first ran for Senate-- Rick Lazio Anyway, he went on the attack. Attacked her like a pit bull. She maintained her cool throughout and came across as quite professional and polished while he made an idiot out of himself. So I would say one of her strong points as a politician is being able to maintain her cool when she is attacked. She's not my favorite Democrat and I hope she stays in the Senate but she isn't a bad politician, imo.

[RaleighNCDUer]

10. If she was really responsible for everything the fanatical rw

wackos say, she would have to be an evil genius on the level of Moriarty or Ming the Merciless.

If she was really astute as they would have us believe, the Clinton health plan would not have foundered so quickly and completely.

[ArkDem]

12. Good enough to bury the likes of any republican or

army general!

[Clark2008]

16. Hardly... n/t

[DemGirl7]

14. As a New York State Resident...

Hillary is ok as a politcian, I don't mind having her as senator, my problem is that I would rather have someone in he seat who is a little more progressive.

[Toots]

17. How many days was she at Ground Zero before Bush* managed to show up?

How many souls had she tried to comfort and how much aid and assistance did she garner for New York compared to Bush*? She has compassion, Bush* talks about compassion. Bush* knows how to pronounce compassion so that makes Hillary a bad politician. Hillary is smarter than the whole GOP combined and that scares the beJesus out of them. If Hillary ever decided to run for President they would tremble. They do not want their Manly man to be beaten by a woman. If Hillary ran they would have to find a woman to run against her..Condi comes to mind. Condi isn't even in the same legue as Hillary let alone Presidential material and besides the GOP is so rascist and sexist that Condi wouldn't even get twenty-five percent of the vote. Hillary would terrify them and everyone in America knows it.

[forgethell]

18. I don't think so.

I don't think the Republicans are currently terrified about any Dem, although perhaps they ought to be.