Clinton Gears up for Presidential bid

[thatsrightimirish]

Clinton Gears Up for Presidential Bid

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) appears to be gearing up for a 2008 presidential run, according to The Hill. She "is to step down soon from her position in the Democratic leadership, a move that clears the deck for her ambitions."

"Clinton is also keeping her campaign offices in New York and Washington operational despite the fact that she does not face reelection for six years, and had scant opposition last Tuesday."

Update: Hotline On Call notes that Clinton's "top donors have been told to expect a private signal as early as December. If that timetable is correct -- and no one who knows for sure is talking -- Clinton could push 'go' over the Thanksgiving holidays. Long-time allies of the Clintons would expect to see public trial balloons floated as early as the first week in December

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/11/14/clinton_gears_up_for_presidential_bid.html

[davidwparker]

1. 2008 will be easy for me if she is the nominee. Just show up and vote.

No contributions. No talking up the candidate. No phone calls.

[election_2004]

9. I'll show up and vote...

...but it won't be for Hillary or McCain.

[davidwparker]

44. You GO! I wish I was the sort to write in Dean's name, but I'm going

to protest by doing nothing else.

[election_2004]

49. Also, I live in a safe state...

My piddly little vote won't sway California's 55 electoral votes away from Hillary, if she's the Democratic nominee. I won't vote for the Republican, or campaign against Hillary, but I won't support her or vote for her either. I will vote for the presidential candidate who I believe has the most integrity (and, in that scenario, it will most likely be a third-party candidate).

I realize that it's much harder of a decision for folks in the battleground states, and I wouldn't hold it against anyone for giving their vote to Hillary at the risk of a right-wing extremist appointing Supreme Court nominees.

That said, I myself cannot stomach supporting a faux candidate who has been basically manufactured and given a free pass by the corporate media whores.

[thereismore]

2. I still think she won't run. we'll see. nt

[jackbourassa]

26. She'll run...but drop out

when she falls behind. Which is inevitable.

She began with 40% Democratic support, it fell to 35%, then to 30%. Now the latest poll (the one with Obama) has her at 28%.

[fooj]

3. Lovely. What a surprise.

:eyes:

[rubberducky]

4. I sincerely hope she decides NOT to run.

She`ll get my vote if she is the nominee, but I won`t be happy. It`s time for a new name in the white house. I loved the "Big Dog", but let`s just leave it there. No more Clintons or bushes for a long, long time.

[meuniermr]

40. She attended Bilderberg this year..

I dont want ANOTHER of those New World Order people in the WH, even if it is a Clinton.

[SaveElmer]

5. Excellent...

I hope she pulls the trigger!!!

[wulfwolf]

6. ....

I agree with RD partially.

Yes, I'm democrat (obviously), but i want to someone else in. Like, giulliani, or pelosi or somebody other than yet another clinton.

No offense, it's just, i'm starting to feel like a freaking monarchy at the moment. I mean, think about it:

George HW Bush, Bill Clinton, George W Bush, Hillary Clinton(?) ....What next, Jeb bush? The clinton daughter?

:-S Makes my head hurt just thinking about it.

There's Biden, Vilsack, Gravel, etc...

Heck, I'd even vote for Giulliani, McCain, or Smith (Oregon). They're reasonable picks if i don't care for whoever is on the DNC ticket.

Anyway, I'm shooting to soon, it's only '06. Got two years left, who knows what will happen between now and then.

Peace, ~Lucas

[BootinUp]

11. You're a democrat that would vote for

Guiliani or McCain, Yeah right. :eyes:

[wulfwolf]

13. ....

Yeah, believe it or not.

I'm not confined to strictly one part in my choices.

I'm more open minded than that.

I mean, look at it this way, they're much better than another Bush, Cheney, or anyone from their neck of the GOP woods.

Right?

Or, is it wrong for a person to vote for whomever they wish? No matter what their party, or their preferences party?

Something to think about.

~L

[BootinUp]

16. Both of those guys

Guiliani and McCain are seriously misguided on how to proceed to solve the foreign policy crisis inflicted on the world by BushCo. More troopsin Iraq, more death, more distrust of the US around the world, no thanks.

I would consider a Republican if he/she was the best choice for leading the country in the right direction. Those two? Nope.

[wulfwolf]

17. ....

Who isn't?

Seriously, would less troops and further withdrawing from Iraq benefit our world image/foreign policy?

Granted, in some cases we'd be seen as not being meddling,etc... but what about the possibility of our image being crushed because we didnt stay and stabilize the country, i.e. we didnt take respobsibility for our administrations actions.

Don't get me wrong, I don't care for the Iraq war anymore. I used to be all for it, only because i was ecstatic that the iraqi's would have a chance to have democracy. That soon came crashing down upon further research.

Granted, I would too. However, are we ever going to find a candidate that will truly do that? Every politician has their faults, what i think we need....are statesmen/women. Those who don't go for careers in politics, but who really want to lead america and make it better. I feel that Giulliani, and mccain can both do that, but i admit they have their faults.


~L

[BootinUp]

20. The reason more troops is not the answer

is that the problem is political. It can't be solved by 150,000 US troops or 250,000. BTW, we don't have any more brigades to send in there. We are sending people back for a third tour, preventing soldiers from leaving active duty, extending enlistment, I recommend the following video to you, McCain on Hardball:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/10/20/whats-st-mccains-iraq-war-plan-again/


Why should we trust guys that have been so wrong? McCains' predictions have been wrong over and over again. Iraq was the wrong war.

I would suggest you take a look/listen to General Wesley Clark as someone who does have the right ideas on Iraq and the Middle East and when to use military force and when to use diplomacy. He has been right all along.

[wulfwolf]

24. ....

Tell me this, what about those who had the same access to the same information that Bush, Cheney, and the gop had when making the decision to go to war in Iraq?

They made a bad decision, a bad prediction....right?

I'm just saying...you call them as they are, if members of both parties mess up, call them on it. Don't go blaming one party when the other(s) are just as bad on the issue. Ya know? Accountability.


I do see your point on McCain though.

[BootinUp]

27. Unlike many friends here at DU, and unlike the media

I do not equate the Iraq War Resolution vote with a Declaration of War. The IRW vote was made to give Bush more support at the UN to get a real coalition together and to force Iraq to stop obstructing UN inspectors. THe facts are clear, once the IWR vote was seen as passing Saddam dramatically changed his tune on inspectors and how much access they would have. I think Democrats that voted for the IWR believed that the inspections would continue longer and that without more support from Germany and France and others the invasion would not go forward. The year after 9/11 was a tough time for Democrats, they wanted to support the Commander in Chief and the people of America expected that as well.

[wulfwolf]

28. ....

I do, because no matter how you paint it - they all had the same info, and most made the same decision.

Who knows, we're not them. I'd like to know, heck, i would like to know a lot of things.

[BootinUp]

29. The info the Dems had was what

the administration wanted them to have. Intelligence was distorted, that much we do know. I don't want to take over this whole thread, maybe we can continue this another time. cya.

[wulfwolf]

31. ....

If you come back and read this, here is something to think about.

Can you prove it?

Can you prove that those you look to for information, don't have an agenda? I think not, everyone has bias, and agendas. No matter what they are.


Sure, we can...how about over at my blog (in sig below), or via email. I think it shows in my profile.


~L

(Also, i apologize for hijacking this thread)

[BootinUp]

22. you won't wanna miss this...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2717698

[Cha]

35. That's not how we do it.

This is a Democratic Board..DEMOCRATICUNDERGROUND. ghouliani and mclame are fucking republiCONS.

[Joey Liberal]

7. Hillary should not run

I feel that Hillary does much more good for the country in the Senate. I hope she does not run for President. I also feel that John Kerry shouldn't run either. But, that's just my opinion..........

[election_2004]

8. I agree with "Joey Liberal"

I don't support Clinton, Kerry, or Edwards -- although out of those three, Edwards would be the strongest candidate (he'd be able to net the widest support, and would have the least baggage). I think John and Elizabeth are decent, down-to-earth people, whereas Bill and Hillary mainly care more about being in the limelight and their joint "legacy."

I have varying levels of enthusiasm for Clark, Richardson, Bayh, and Vilsack. Although if I was forced to choose one of them at this point in time, based on the information that I have, I'd go with Clark.

Dodd and Biden are non-starters. Biden is a decent public servant, but he puts his foot in his mouth too often.

[Joey Liberal]

15. Well put and I concur! n/t

[bigdarryl]

10. She needs to stay out of 08 it's a LOSER!!! for the party

[VforVicarious]

12. I don't like this

Hilary tries to be all things to all people, but usually ends up with everybody hating her.


Bad idea

[skipos]

14. Hello President McCain!!! nt

[FormerDittoHead]

18. Why all the talk now? 2008 is a long way off. First comes 2007!

:sarcasm:

[Hippo_Tron]

23. LOL, seriously we have Governors races in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Kentucky

No talk about presidential elections until those are over.

[election_2004]

39. So does that mean....

...you will be critical of any Democrat who sets up a "presidential exploratory committee" prior to November 2007?

[IndianaGreen]

19. It is almost like waiting for the flu season to start

too bad we don't have a vaccine to protect us from our "Deliverer," the mighty Hillary.

Wes Clark, where are you now that we need you?

[Alexander]

21. I hope she doesn't get the nom, but if she does I'll vote for her in the general.

But that's it. Just voting. I worked my ass off for Kerry and Gore and both candidates were far better and more inspiring than Hillary.

Here's hoping Gore beats her in the primaries.

[Imagevision]

25. Hello President Clinton (If Obama doesn't run)

[AtomicKitten]

30. May the best Democrat win.

:)

[hijinx87]

36. I think the "unelectable" argument is garbage

but the only thing that will convince people is for her to
declare for the nomination, and prove it to people in the
primaries.

[AtomicKitten]

41. it is a completely subjective label

thrown out there to hamstring the competition

[hijinx87]

43. and also, worrying overmuch about "electability" can lead to some . . .

less than desirable results.

[ElizabethDC]

47. I agree - she's got to EARN the nomination

and I think she should have a chance to do that before people start ruling her out.

[Tinksrival]

32. Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Clinton.......

Is not moving forward. It's rolling around in the same muck.
Nothing personal but America needs to move on.

[AJH032]

33. Where do you get that timeline?

n/t

[k_jerome]

34. I'm ready to mobilize. nt.

[Bobbie Jo]

37. Oh yeah...she's going for it.

Not only will she run...watch her pull it off. The Rethugs are scared shitless of this lady.

[RiverStone]

38. Looking at the straw polls here at DU re: Pres preference in 08

Hillary has never placed in the top two slots (that I can recall). I'd put Gore or Clark way ahead of her. Just one opinion of many....

She's even farther down in this current thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2707037&mesg_id=2707037

She would make an excellent Secretary of State; though I believe she is way too polarizing to ever win a Presidential election.

[IndianaGreen]

46. Hillary lacks the depth of an Al Gore, a Wes Clark, or even a John Kerry

Hillary has the charisma of a turnip. Everytime she makes a public appearance with Big Dog, we are reminded of why we voted for Bill, and why we won't vote for Hil.

Part of the reason for the excitement that an Obama candidacy has generated is because a lot of Democrats dread the thought of Hillary as the nominee.

[wisteria]

42. She is one Democrat I will never vote for-no way -no how.

She is far from deserving.
She has clout only because of her last name.
She is a boring speaker.
She shows no real leadership other than dictating what others in the party should do.
She is not a risk taker. Everything is a poll to her.
She has no real stands on issues.
I do not trust her to defend this country properly.
She wants the positron for personal gain and not to better this country.
I don't trust her to defend and stick to an issue if public opinion differs from her opinion.

She has no personality.
She uses words like "relish" in, I am going to relish this victory-yuck.
And, she is an untrustworthy,un loyal, power hungry carp.

[ElizabethDC]

45. It's going to be interesting . . .

I, for one, hope she runs because I think it will be interesting to see what happens. It could really go either way for her: she could self-destruct in the primaries, or she could become a very powerful force for the Democrats and sail right through. I hope she surprises us, but at the same time, I'm excited to see how the primary process plays out, because you never know what's going to happen. For that reason, I don't rule any of our potential candidates out. It's way too early for that.

As for those who say they'll never vote for Hillary under any circumstances, I truly think that would be a mistake because I believe that she would be a better president than any of the Republican contenders. Whatever disagreements one may have with Hillary's positions on the issues (and I have a few disagreements myself), she's still a Democrat, and if she gets the Democratic nomination, I can't imagine a circumstance in which the Republican candidate would be a better option.

[More Than A Feeling]

48. She and her supporters get a chance to make her case just like everyone else.

They can start by answering this question: I've read some of her issue statements on her website, and her record seems to be one of caution and passing minor legislation. How do I know that that kind of caution won't continue to characterize her if she becomes president, even if the American people have a larger appettite for change and improvement?