|
|
|
All he will have to do is change his abortion stance & get an endorsement from a respected fundie.
tenacitus |
10.08.07 - 4:01 am | #
|
|
Yeah, the calculations and numbers look increasingly dismal for the GOP. None of the folks running are "pure" enough for the Protestant Right crowd, which opens the door wide for the Dems (the PR will split the GOP right down the middle).
Thanks for the "Steve-ism" at the end. He would have LOVED watching the slow implosion of the GOP.
brat |
10.08.07 - 4:59 am | #
|
|
There is one person, and one person only, who can make what the repubicans do, and whom they pick, relevant and a threat to keep the white house.
Her name is Hillary Rodham Clinton.
If Edwards, or Obama, or Richardson, are nominated, the the GOP convention will be picking a sacrificial lamb.
You can invert it;
If the democrats ARE insane enough to nominate Clinton, then practically EVERY repubican who bears some of the responsibility for the fuckup in the white house now, will ROAR down to the polls to vote against her, like she was Jane Fonda.
Nominating Hillary will mean 25 percentage points for the republicans, minimum. It will make "viable" contenders out of most of the republicans who are running for president.
THAT is how to make Rudy and the rest of them, back into serious threats.
Tanbark |
10.08.07 - 10:28 am | #
|
|
Tanbark has a good point, he leves soem of the equation out. there are those of us who are currently sideing with teh dems who see very little diference between the actions of bus h and the actions of clinton. I will not vote to replace one athritarian protodictator with another.
nominateing hillery is a good way to both energize the republican base and demotivate the democratic allies.
moonglum. White; Non-Germanic |
10.08.07 - 10:34 am | #
|
|
www.TrueWorldHistory.info
Sam |
Homepage |
10.08.07 - 11:23 am | #
|
|
What Moonglum said. :o)
There'll be republicans getting out of their fucking death beds, to vote against Hillary.
And just as moon says, there will be democrats with hangnails, who will be in too much "pain" to go to the polls.
(TB checks his fingers...moans...:o) )
Tanbark |
10.08.07 - 11:40 am | #
|
|
Sam: please remove the tinfoil, its on a little too tight
moonglum. White; Non-Germanic |
10.08.07 - 12:57 pm | #
|
|
Well I'm not a big Hillary fan, but I just don't see her losing to Giuliani, Romney, or Thompson.
On the one hand plenty of Republicans _HATE_ her. On the other there are enough people out there who don't think Giuliani is conservative enough and won't vote for a Mormon former governor of Massachusetts.
For the most part so-called swing voters and moderate to liberal Republicans don't have a big problem with Hillary.
Those "soccer" moms? Watch 'em turn out in droves for Hillary.
While the Democrats can fuck this up still, at this point it is looking like we could nominate Kucinich and win.
Chris Stefan |
10.08.07 - 2:49 pm | #
|
|
Let's see here...Gore was a member of the DLC and somehow lost to Boosh. Kerry was/is a member of the DLC and somehow lost to Boosh. Hillary is a member of the DLC and...
MORE THAN THE REPUBLICANS, THE GODDAMNED DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP COUNCIL LOOKS LIKE THE PROBLEM TO ME.
Mr. Natural |
Homepage |
10.08.07 - 2:54 pm | #
|
|
A three way race would also allow Very Serious People to observe that a majority of the country does not support Clinton and her eevul liberal policies and she should govern from the center with bipartisan people like Joe Lieberman, Lindsey Graham, and Arlen Specter. A Clinton administration would also contain several people either dumb or insecure enough to believe that horseshit.
anabasis |
10.08.07 - 3:18 pm | #
|
|
"...moderate to liberal republicans don't have a big problem with Hillary..."
I'm sorry, Chris. I think you're as wrong as two left feet. She won't get 1% of the people who voted for bush in 2000 and 2004. They hate her, pure and simple. Remember, these are the same people who savaged Bill, she, and her family for the better part of 8 years.
There WERE no "moderate to liberal" republicans who thought that witch-hunting after Bill Clinton AND his wife, was excessive. They were ALL on board for Ken Starr's posse, and for Rush Limbaugh's lies and innuendoes about Hillary.
Same thing with independents.
And conservative democrats dislike her almost as much as their GOP counterparts, and the "moderates" I know don't care for her that much, either. Her natural constituents, the progressives, have had it with her shitting on their heads.
Where are the votes to elect her president coming from? She's a democratic train wreck, waiting to happen. Karl Rove and his ilk, have wet dreams about seeing the democrats nominate her. They'll tear her to pieces.
As always, she has yet to eat that authorizing vote. And that means she can't say the invasion was a mistake.
Do you seriously think she can get away with THAT, 13 months from now?
It's not complicated; Iraq is going to be THE issue in the election, only, with her parroting so many of bushCo's talking points, she can't capitalize on that. The republicans will just go back and dig up all the support she's given bush, and stick that in front of the voters, and she'll snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, just like Gore and Kerry.
We can't afford that. This election is for all the marbles. Either we win a big, safe, majority in both houses, AND the white house, or the republicans will succeed in wrenching the country even further to the right. SCOTUS is the conservatives' Alpine Redoubt. There will be appointments to be made in the next 8 years. If a republican gets to make them, you'll see an "activist" court with an agenda for a corporate state that won't whoa.
Nominating Hillary Clinton will be ritual seppuku, for the democrats.
Tanbark |
10.08.07 - 3:26 pm | #
|
|
P.S.: Soccer Moms by themselves, do not elect presidents. And there are plenty of conservative soccer moms, too.
You badly misjudge the depth of animosity in middle america toward Hillary. It's a mile wide and a mile deep. She is simply not electable.
Tanbark |
10.08.07 - 3:29 pm | #
|
|
Hate to say this, but Kung Fu Monkey's friend Tyrone had made that prediction 2 years ago.
http://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/
200...zification.html
abanterer |
10.08.07 - 6:28 pm | #
|
|
Hhmmm - Tanbark sez "Hillary no good".
Well, we've still got time enough for Bush to resign so maybe that'll have some effect on the coming electoral hap'nin's. Or maybe not...
drbopperthp |
10.08.07 - 7:43 pm | #
|
|
final score: cleveland 6, yankees 4.
Can I get a fuck the fucking yankees for Steve?
mikeinseattle |
10.08.07 - 8:52 pm | #
|
|
If neither of the two major political parties nominates an individual who pledges himself or herself to the sanctity of human life, we will join others in voting for a minor-party candidate.
----------------------------------------
Hey! Would James Dobson support a pro-life Democrat for real?!? Man! I would love to see that! I wish Dennis Kucinich stayed pro-life!
I. L. Ike Truth |
Homepage |
10.09.07 - 12:11 am | #
|
|
2 Visitors Online
|
Commenting by HaloScan
|