Wife Tries To Abort And Poison Husband's Lovechild
Man Injured By Tree Limb Files Suit Against City
Charles Barron Will Run For Council Speaker
Alleged Tiger Mistress Is Unrecognizable To Dead Fiancee's Dad
New Jersey State Senate To Vote On Gay Marriage
Hillary Clinton, the junior Senator from New York, make the cover of the local papers after announcing her entry into the 2008 presidential race, by way of starting an exploratory committee. The NY Post proclaims
The Daily News looks at her ascent into politics. Clinton's staffers are trying to emphasize her one-on-one skills. Of course, the Republican party loves that she's entered the race, in spite of her strong potential to win. and the NY Times analyzes that Clinton's success in the 2008 is no sure thing.
If you look at Hillary's website, you'll see there are a number of "conversations" scheduled this week as 7PM. The Daily News says New York women are thrilled with her stepping into the race, and we hear some people have already joined "Team Hillary" and/or become "HillRaisers." But money man George Soros is now backing Barack Obama.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Wow, she wants to have conversations with her constituents. Maybe she could finally listen to their demands to end the war in Iraq.
Great. Is Hilllary the new Shake Shack?
Clinton/Obama '08!
I have nothing against a woman being president, but she just isn't the right one. In fact, I think her saving grace, and the only thing that has kept her popular (and in office) is the fact that she is a woman. Take that factor out of the equation, and you're left with just one more old-school, spineless, icky politician.
And what about her job as our representative in the Senate? Her new term has barely started, and already she is preparing to run for president? I mean, it doesn't come as a surprise, but still... We can't be so naive as to think that the presidential bid won't be her top priority. She said it, "I'm in it to win." Our state will no longer be a major concern for her (if it ever was), but there is no doubt in my mind that we will definitely be paying at least part of the bill.
Why would Obama want to attach himself to a loser like Clinton? He's young. He can wait until 2016 if necessary. And note how Obama doesn't need to attack Bush every time he opens his mouth. He's smart enough to know he needs some of the middle of the spectrum voters that split their vote. Those voters resent being insulted for occasionally voting Republican. Hell, I have been called a neocon for voting for Giuliani. Obama gets it. Bush isn't on the ballot in 2008. Now is the time to be laying out your vision for the future. Hillary is too busy pandering to the really vocal angry Bush hating crowd. If those people really support her they would look at the long term campaign and not demand an anti-Iraq sound bite every news cycle.
"the really vocal angry Bush hating crowd" is now the entire country--or didn't you notice the GOP just lost both houses of Congress and Bush has the lowest approval rating of ANY modern president at the 6 year mark? Bush is reviled all across the country as a fascist loser idiot---and he will very much be on the ballot in '08, get real. The next election wil be all about the terrible reign of King George---Hillary will want to put it behind us and McCain will want to continue it. End result: congrats, Madame President!
and he [Bush] will very much be on the ballot in '08, get real. The next election wil be all about the terrible reign of King George---Hillary will want to put it behind us and McCain will want to continue it.
See, you can't even put together a post without ranting about the last six years. I'm glad you pulled up short of calling me a Bush supporter like so many of the simple minded posters here. Funny how many of you just don't want to shine the light on the shortcomings of the Democratic party. You are making a huge assumption that McCain is going to be the GOP candidate. I would agree with you that if it comes down to McCain v. Clinton then the ghost of Iraq will loom large. But seeing as how there are still 12 months to go before the first primaries I don't think it makes sense to run that campaign now. Obama isn't. If Bush does draw down troops by the end of 2007 and McCain is not the candidate Clinton is going to be remembered as the insider candidate that was for the war before she was against it. Sound familiar?
The Democratic candidates need to run a campaign that ensures they hold onto the kinds of voters they got this year and that's no small task. You act as though the Democratic takeover of the House and Senate reflect a wholesale rejection of the GOP. Well, they did manage to get 49 Senate seats and 202 House seats. And while you might want to paint all of those voters with one broad brush stroke and call them all stupid hicks it is worth saying (again) that there are different types of Republican voters. The easiest division to look at is the moral values, religious types in the South and the small government types in the Midwest and Mountain states. Take a look at a map of where the Democrats did better this year. Besides the war in Iraq a lot of people in the Mountain states are angry that the GOP Congress expanded spending at about 10% per year. Just because they threw their Senators and Congressmen out this year does not make them a lock for voting for a Democratic President.
And it is worth mentioning that about this time in 1991 nobody knew who Bill Clinton was other than that guy that gave the lousy speech at the 1988 Democratic convention.
[4] wow. just wow.
"I have nothing against a woman being president, but she just isn't the right one."
is this 1957 or 2007? it's really great that you have nothing against a woman being president. that is really something to be proud of. now excuse me while i get off my husband's computer and go back into the kitchen and make him dinner.
ps: do you really live in nyc or in shack in alabama somewhere? (not shake shack though.)
[8] Before you go to the kitchen you might want to stop by a school and start with what women and men who wish to grow intellectually have been doing for centuries: Learn how to read.
I am not congratulating myself for not caring about the next president's gender. In fact, I was making the point that gender is such a non-issue that we should judge Ms. Clinton for her record, and nothing else.
If I started out by stating that I don't care about gender it is because yes, I do in fact happen to live in New York City, and I know that even here, people are likely to accuse you of chauvinism if you judge a woman for what she has done and said rather than her gender--much like you have done.
yawn..im much more excited about Bill Richardson's announcement
HC can go to hell
[9] In fact, I was making the point that gender is such a non-issue
If it's such a non issue, why did you even mention it in the first place? I've lived in NYC for years and cannot imagine any of my male friends starting off with "I have nothing against a woman being president..." It's just...creepy.
I am sure you really believe it was not a chauvinist statement, but it was. Maybe that is why people keep accusing you of chauvinism. Because you say crap like that.