Hillary on GMA...

[CapeCodTenor]

Look - she moved to New York and ran for Senate under New York's rules. Why do some people have a problem with that? New York's rules allow somebody who has recently moved to the state to be their Senator. The people of New York voted overwhelmingly for her. She has by all accounts been a good and popular Senator well representing her State. After seeing the job she did for six years, the people of New York voted even more overwhelmingly for her. What's the problem? (other than people don't like Hillary and look to pin things on her.)

Now, if somebody doesn't want to vote for her as New York Senator because they feel she isn't enough of a New Yorker, I can see that. But why somebody would dislike her, or not want to vote for her for President because she ran for Senate in New York - that I don't get.

Those are New York rules and that's fine. They can make the rules as they see fit, doesn't mean I have to like it. I still see her as an opportunist.

 

[Laz]

So just exactly what state should she have made her bid from to satisfy you? Her birth state? The state where she spent the most time? The state she bought her first car? What? Let's face it, as far as Hillary is concerned, no state would be okay with you because you dislike her. If it were a Republican, I doubt very much you would have the same level of outrage.

She was raised in Illinois and her husband was governor of Arkansas. Why didn't she run in those states? She couldn't win where her husband was governor?

I am actually discouraged by who is running in the Republican Party right now.

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

Are you Ed Schultz the talk radio guy?

Sure...and you must be Rush Limbaugh...nice to meet you.

 

[SwedishMeatball]

She was raised in Illinois and her husband was governor of Arkansas. Why didn't she run in those states? She couldn't win where her husband was governor?

I am actually discouraged by who is running in the Republican Party right now.

I think she would have stood a good chance to win in either of those states. Looking at the big picture though, I believe she wanted to run in a state with a huge electoral vote. I think the plan was to prove herself and win relection, thus securing the state for '08. She's no dummy, I'll give her that.

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

I am actually discouraged by who is running in the Republican Party right now.

I think that sentiment pretty much rings true throughout the entire Republican constituency. As long as you all are more content bashing the Democratic Presidential candidates instead of looking for a viable candidate that can wash the bad taste of the current Administration out of the collective mouths of the American public, you're in big trouble. Since I'd prefer a Democratic President in '08, I say more power to you, bash away!

 

[eclectics]

I think she would have stood a good chance to win in either of those states. Looking at the big picture though, I believe she wanted to run in a state with a huge electoral vote. I think the plan was to prove herself and win relection, thus securing the state for '08. She's no dummy, I'll give her that.

Aren't her policies, views on issues, and her politics a little more important than what state she is running from? How many of us still live in the state we were born in? When I pick a candidate, those things I just listed above are a little more important to me than if the candidate was or wasn't born in a particular state. Seems like a silly thing to make an issue over, but if it's important to some, okay. I just don't happen to feel it's an issue and I'll say that about any candidate, regardless of party.

 

[SwedishMeatball]

Aren't her policies, views on issues, and her politics a little more important than what state she is running from? How many of us still live in the state we were born in? When I pick a candidate, those things I just listed above are a little more important to me than if the candidate was or wasn't born in a particular state. Seems like a silly thing to make an issue over, but if it's important to some, okay. I just don't happen to feel it's an issue and I'll say that about any candidate, regardless of party.

People will always question a politicians motives, as well we should. I don't believe she was as much interested in serving the people of NY as she was in serving her own ambitions. I do think there are politicians on a local/state level that have a deep committment to the people they serve. I don't consider Hillary to be one of them. Sure the finger can be pointed at others for pursuing a similar path, but I thought this particular conversation was centered around Hillary.

 

[Laz]

I think that sentiment pretty much rings true throughout the entire Republican constituency. As long as you all are more content bashing the Democratic Presidential candidates instead of looking for a viable candidate that can wash the bad taste of the current Administration out of the collective mouths of the American public, you're in big trouble. Since I'd prefer a Democratic President in '08, I say more power to you, bash away!

To be honest, what I want to bash is the same old candidates with the same tired old campaign--Democrate or Republican. I have been paying attention to the fresh faces: Obama and Gulliani. These two don't make me want to scream and shout for them, but I am so tired of the current politics, I am ready to listen to the new ones on the block.

 

[Fitswimmer]

To be honest, what I want to bash is the same old candidates with the same tired old campaign--Democrate or Republican. I have been paying attention to the fresh faces: Obama and Gulliani. These two don't make me want to scream and shout for them, but I am so tired of the current politics, I am ready to listen to the new ones on the block.

Me too! I'm looking at shelf life this time. I'm tired of the same old, same old-no McCain, no Clinton, no Gore.

I'm looking hard at Senator Obama, Governor Richardson and Rudy. It concerns me handing power to the same party for the executive and the legislative branches, especially considering the rubber stamp Congress this administration had up to now-but I'll do it if there's nobody reasonable on the Republican side.

 

[JoeEpcotRocks]

I haven't followed MR's career, but I laughed at the Rep. party here when they put Alan Keyes on the ballot for senate a few years back.

As an IL Republican, I must say -- what an train wreck that was.

 

[eclectics]

Me too! I'm looking at shelf life this time. I'm tired of the same old, same old-no McCain, no Clinton, no Gore.

I'm looking hard at Senator Obama, Governor Richardson and Rudy. It concerns me handing power to the same party for the executive and the legislative branches, especially considering the rubber stamp Congress this administration had up to now-but I'll do it if there's nobody reasonable on the Republican side.

You have to keep in mind though that the majority is razor thin, forcing debate and compromise on both sides. It's not like the Dems have a huge majority in either house. A Dem President would not exactly have a rubber stamp, as Bush has had.

 

[eclectics]

People will always question a politicians motives, as well we should. I don't believe she was as much interested in serving the people of NY as she was in serving her own ambitions. I do think there are politicians on a local/state level that have a deep committment to the people they serve. I don't consider Hillary to be one of them. Sure the finger can be pointed at others for pursuing a similar path, but I thought this particular conversation was centered around Hillary.

If it boils down to Hillary being an opportunist, I have yet to see a politician who isn't, past or present..... and on either side of the aisle. Some are just better at it than others. So, if you're looking for a candidate who isn't... Good luck!

 

[LuvDuke]

I find it amusing how threatening Hilary is to people, especially men.

Sorry you got skeered this morning Charade. Perhaps a Valium or a Bloody Mary is in order to help calm your nerves?

Ain't it the truth. It would almost be worth having Hillary Clinton elected president just to see the Republicans **** a gold brick whenever they play "Hail to the Chief".

 

[LuvDuke]

Me too! I'm looking at shelf life this time. I'm tired of the same old, same old-no McCain, no Clinton, no Gore.

I'm looking hard at Senator Obama, Governor Richardson and Rudy. It concerns me handing power to the same party for the executive and the legislative branches, especially considering the rubber stamp Congress this administration had up to now-but I'll do it if there's nobody reasonable on the Republican side.

My crystal ball tells me Bill Richardson is going to take off like a shot with maybe Dodd as his running mate.

On the Republican side, the freak show of Giuliani, McCain, Romney, and Gingrich really have to go. I'm looking at either Chuck Hagel or Fred Thompson getting into the race. Btw, I wouldn't vote for either one of them, but I usually like what they have to say.

However, on the upside, the neo-cons and the far right are dead in the water.

 

[Laz]

I thought this article was interesting. I know, I know, consider the source and polls can be made to say anything, but it is still interesting:

http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/fi...ns-would-not-vote-for-clinton-2007-03-27.html

Fifty percent of adults would not vote for Clinton
By Kelly McCormack
March 27, 2007
Half of voting-age Americans say they would not vote for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) if she became the Democratic nominee for president in 2008, according to a Harris Interactive poll released Tuesday.
More than one in five Democrats that participated in the survey said they would not vote for Clinton. Overall, 36 percent say they would vote for the former first lady and 11 percent are unsure of their top choice.

Forty-eight percent of Independent voters also said that they would choose another candidate over Clinton, the poll, which surveyed 2,223 potential voters, states.

Fifty-six percent of men said that they would not vote for Clinton, while 45 percent of women said that she would not be their pick. In addition, 69 percent of those 62 and older said that they would not vote for Clinton.

Nearly half of the respondents said that they dislike Clinton’s political opinions and Clinton as a person. Fifty-two percent of people also said that “she does not appear to connect with people on a personal level.”

 

[Chicago526]

As an IL Republican, I must say -- what an train wreck that was.

Yeah, I almost feel sorry for IL Republican voters, the Republican party as all but imploded here in recent years. They couldn't even come up with a good challenger to Blogo in the last race for govenor, had they come up with someone better than Topinka, they may have had a shot! Me, I couldn't vote for either one of those yahoo's so I voted for the Green party as a protest vote.

 

[eclectics]

I thought this article was interesting. I know, I know, consider the source and polls can be made to say anything, but it is still interesting:

http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/fi...ns-would-not-vote-for-clinton-2007-03-27.html

Fifty percent of adults would not vote for Clinton
By Kelly McCormack
March 27, 2007
Half of voting-age Americans say they would not vote for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) if she became the Democratic nominee for president in 2008, according to a Harris Interactive poll released Tuesday.
More than one in five Democrats that participated in the survey said they would not vote for Clinton. Overall, 36 percent say they would vote for the former first lady and 11 percent are unsure of their top choice.

Forty-eight percent of Independent voters also said that they would choose another candidate over Clinton, the poll, which surveyed 2,223 potential voters, states.

Fifty-six percent of men said that they would not vote for Clinton, while 45 percent of women said that she would not be their pick. In addition, 69 percent of those 62 and older said that they would not vote for Clinton.

Nearly half of the respondents said that they dislike Clinton’s political opinions and Clinton as a person. Fifty-two percent of people also said that “she does not appear to connect with people on a personal level.”

That sounds about right as the country is split pretty much 50/50 Republican and Democrat. If you had said 50% of registered Dems would not vote for her if she became the nominee, then that would be ridiculous. Independants are also usually split 50/50. All the numbers stated are nothing shocking to me. Republicans will vote for their nominee, Dems will vote for theirs, and Indies will split 50/50. It will come down to a couple of states, as usual.

 

[wvrevy]

Nearly half of the respondents said that they dislike Clinton’s political opinions and Clinton as a person. Fifty-two percent of people also said that “she does not appear to connect with people on a personal level.”

1 - Half the respondants to the poll probably couldn't name a single one of Hillary's political opinions.

2 - We are coming off a disastrous 8 years where people selected a presidential candidate that they thought would be a good drinking buddy. Should we really give a rat's derrierre how well the candidates "connect with people on a personal level" ??? She's in the running to be the President of the United States, not the replacement for Oprah Freakin' Winfrey.

Sometimes, I think Bush is exactly the president we deserve.

 

[wvrevy]

Oh, and 3) in reference to eclectics' comments...that is why it all comes down to getting out the vote. It's why a complete imbecile is sitting in the White House at this moment. The religious right believed - all evidence to the contrary - that Shrub would support their values through his policy, so they put together a massive get-out-the-vote operation. Even though the left was unified in it's disdain for Shrub, it just wasn't enough to combat that. (It's either that, or this country is in a lot worse trouble with it's education system than I thought.)

For the record...this is why I'm fairly confident of a Democratic victory in the 2008 election. Not one of the current Republican candidates can unite their party the way Shrub somehow did. About the only thing that could happen that COULD lead to a Republican victory in '08 would be if Hillary won the Democratic nomination. Their irrational hatred for her might just drive them out to the polls as nothing else could.

 

[Laz]

1 - Half the respondants to the poll probably couldn't name a single one of Hillary's political opinions.

2 - We are coming off a disastrous 8 years where people selected a presidential candidate that they thought would be a good drinking buddy. Should we really give a rat's derrierre how well the candidates "connect with people on a personal level" ??? She's in the running to be the President of the United States, not the replacement for Oprah Freakin' Winfrey.

Sometimes, I think Bush is exactly the president we deserve.