Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SJackson
Mr. Morris argues she's electable in 2008.

That's the best evidence I've seen that she can't win. But I suppose Morris has to be right someday about something. I just hope that when he is, someone is around to give me CPR.

Hillary's dilemma is that Bush currently looks unbeatable, so she'd like to wait until 2008, but she's definitely beatable in 2006 (at least if Rudy runs), and she'd hate to have to run as a washed-up former Senator.

4 posted on 05/06/2003 5:08:53 AM PDT by Stay the course
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Stay the course
The GOP needs to turn the '06 NY Senate campaign into a bloodbath. Almost more importantly than winning, the Pub candidate needs to demolish her character, her tactics, her record, everything. It will take pros to do this, of course. They can't leave her standing with a sympathetic electorate. She must either be ousted, or damaged beyond repair.
5 posted on 05/06/2003 5:22:08 AM PDT by Mr. Bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: Stay the course; SJackson
 

John Zogby, president and CEO of Zogby International, said... she always starts with AT LEAST 33 percent that hate her guts."

...Jeff Stonecash, political science professor with the Maxwell School at New York's Syracuse University, [said] he had "never seen a candidate who, before ever running for office, elicited such remarkably polarized reactions.....

Hillary '04 Speculation Continues Amid Declining Popularity in NY

Can you spell
u-n-e-l-e-c-t-a-b-l-e ??


 

hyperlinked images of shame
copyright Mia T 2003.

The Democratic Party's Problem Transcends Its Anti-War Contingent


by Mia T, 4.6.03

 

If Act I was a thinly veiled allegory about naked clintonism, then Act II is a parable about the plan for world domination by the Establishment, aged hippies in pinstripes all, with their infantile, solipsistic world view amazingly untouched by time.

 

Mia T, THE ALIENS

 

Al From is sounding the alarm. "Unless we convince Americans that Democrats are strong on national security," he warns his party, "Democrats will continue to lose elections."

Helloooo? That the Democrats have to be spoon-fed what should be axiomatic post-9/11 is, in and of itself, incontrovertible proof that From's advice is insufficient to solve their problem.

From's failure to fully lay out the nature of the Democrats' problem is not surprising: he is the guy who helped seal his party's fate. It was his Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) that institutionalized the proximate cause of the problem, clintonism, and legitimized its two eponymic provincial operators on the national stage. The "Third Way" and "triangulation" don't come from the same Latin root for no reason.

That "convince" is From's operative word underscores the Democrats' dilemma. Nine-eleven was transformative. It is no longer sufficient merely to convince. One must demonstrate, demonstrate convincingly, if you will… which means both in real time and historically.

When it comes to national security, Americans will no longer take any chances. Turning the turn of phrase back on itself, the era of the Placebo President is over. (Incidentally, the oft-quote out-of-context sentence fragment alluded to here transformed meaningless clinton triangulation into a meaningful if deceptive soundbite.)

Although From is loath to admit it -- the terror in his eyes belies his facile solution -- the Democratic party's problem transcends its anti-war contingent.

With a philosophy that relinquishes our national sovereignty -- and relinquishes it reflexively… and to the UN no less -- the Democratic party is, by definition, the party of national insecurity.

With policy ruled by pathologic self-interest -- witness the "Lieberman Paradigm," Kerry's "regime change" bon mot (gone bad), Edwards' and the clintons' brazen echoes thereof (or, alternatively, Pelosi's less strident wartime non-putdown putdown)… and, of course, the clincher -- eight years of the clintons' infantilism, grotesquerie and utter failure -- the Democratic party is, historically and in real time, the party of national insecurity.

The Democrats used to be able to wallpaper their national insecurity with dollars and demogoguery. But that was before 9/11.

The REAL "Living History" -- clintoplasmodial slime



Q ERTY8Either THEY are obsolete… or civilization is bump!

22 posted on 05/06/2003 2:06:54 PM PDT by Mia T (SCUM (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson