![](http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo.com/util/anysize/345,http%3A%2F%2Fus.news2.yimg.com%2Fus.yimg.com%2Fp%2Fafp%2F20050429%2Fcapt.sge.lju41.290405191314.photo00.photo.default-278x366.jpg?v=1")
Posted on 05/01/2005 7:11:49 AM PDT by Libloather
Former Bush aid says 2008 Democratic nomination belongs to Hillary Clinton
SYRACUSE, N.Y. (AP) - A former aide to President Bush says the 2008 Democratic nomination for president is all Hillary Rodham Clinton's if she wants it. But former Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer said Clinton, now a Democratic senator representing New York, has no chance of actually becoming president.
Fleischer's comments were made Friday as he spoke at an Oneida County luncheon attended by supporters of Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, R-New Hartford.
Fleischer said there's not a Democrat anywhere in the country that can beat Mrs. Clinton in a Democratic primary. "She is the passion of the party," Fleischer said.
Still, he said while there's no clear successor to George W. Bush, he predicted another Republican will ultimately take the White House again in 2008.
Fleischer said Democrats have become the party of Fahrenheit 9-11 filmaker Michael Moore and the liberal wing, which he claims is out of touch with a nation that is becoming increasingly conservative.
Polls have shown Clinton leading the field for the Democratic presidential nomination. Nonetheless, the former first lady and her top aides maintain her focus is on winning a second Senate term in 2006, and they have stopped talking publicly about the White House and the next presidential election.
Even so, veteran Republican operative Arthur Finkelstein on Friday launched a campaign called "Stop Her Now," featuring telephone calls aimed at "spreading the truth about Hillary Clinton and her dangerous plans for our country."
William Black, a Virginia-based political fundraiser who is executive director of the Stop Her Now effort, said he would like to raise about $10 million this year through the telephone calls, a direct-mail campaign that will be launched later and through the Web site, www.StopHerNow.com. Black said he hoped to begin the TV ad campaign sometime this year.
Maybe she'll do well with the illegal alien vote...
I believe there is a clear successor, Condi Rice.
She gets more frightening looking as time goes on.......
She gets more frightening looking as time goes on.......
Or Frist, depending on the outcome of the constitutional option showdown in the Senate.
Does anyone else think Her Royal Highness is starting to look like Janet Reno?
I think Condi is Pres. Bush's choice.
Condi Rice won't win in the rural portions of the country. Plus she has pro-choice views.
So who's gonna be proven right -- Ari or Newt?
I don't think that's true. I live in a rural area, and I think Condi would do quite well here, particularly against Hillary Clinton.
If she is the DNC's candidate, it'll just prove that the Dems have learned nothing from 2004.
Of course Hillary will win overwhelmingly with all illegal votes, including illegal aliens, but she has been talking tough on illegal immigration so there is a chance she will be able to play it both ways and score politically. The media will certainly aid her in this, as they will allow her to talk tough w/o labeling her a racist/bigot/xenophobe, etc.
After reading the thread "Is Matt Drudge Gay?", I see this about Hillary, then Reno's name is brought up.
That's just too much for a Sunday morning.
If by 'clear', you mean bad, then I'd agree.
She is most likely to the left on social/cultural issues. She is pro-racial preferences. She is pro-choice. Her judicial picks would most likely be atrocious.
Like Giuliani, she should return to her home state and run for something there. I'd support her wholeheartedly against Sens Boxer or Feinstein, or for governor of Ca, but not for President.
Never has one individual best represented the Democrat Party!
"She gets more frightening looking as time goes on......."
What she says to groups made up of Rats is what is really scary!
Pro-choice might be a problem in West Virginia but I think she'd still carry the state. The killer is being pro-gun control. That killed both Gore and Kerry in this state.
Condi is as pro-choice as GWB is. The three exceptions, no?
She also thinks Roe v. Wade should be overturned and abortion be reguulated by the states.
That's a heck of a lot better than Hillary "NARAL" Clinton.
Don't worry, she will be visiting her plastic surgeon in due time. We will see a more rested, youthful Hillary.
Nothing is going to stop her. I have little, to NO faith, in the American People.
What are the chances that the democrats, running for President, will help destroy her in the nomination process? I suspect very little.
a wise belief...""ROE" Decision was more claptrap by the Activists @ USSC"
But the biggest problem remains; She spoils everything when she speaks because each time it amounts to telling us; "you're stupid" and "I'll decide what's best for you".
From the picture, you might just say, "THE ALIENS" think she looks great.
i'm really curious who the republican candidate would be that he thinks will beat hillary.
if the pubbies put up a bob dope, like they did in 1996, forget it.
I agree that Hillary probably can't win...in a two-way race against a strong Republican candidate. But if McCain or Rudy G. gets the nomination, I can envision a third party conservative running, which would split the Republican vote and hand the White House to Hillary. Bill Clinton won the presidency in '92 with 43% of the popular vote.
Those negatives are way too high
The only way I can see Hillary overcoming those is if the Republicans are doing so badly nationally that anyone could beat them.
----
Hillary has no shot in Hell of winning....
----
Thank you too. NO chance of winning...none. nt
----
The righties hate her for being female and having political power. The lefties are ticked off by her support of the war and the PATRIOT Act.
----
She doesn't look virginal, earth mothery or grandmotherly, so she's threatning in some poeple's eyes. She wears pants. She's direct and a maybe a bit abrasive in some people's eyes. She worked outside the home, and her marriage is imperfect and unconventional.
She's a social conservative's nightmare, and most seniors fairly conservative on social issues. We have to keep the senors happy, they're just about the only group you can safely count on for a good turnout.
----
Hillary is "their" candidate, not ours.
Every right-wing radio station in the country is pushing for Hillary to get the democratic nomination. Bloomberg brings it up daily. Ask yourself, why? She's not our candidate, she's their "pick" for us. Because they know she can't win and just the mention of her name energizes the republican base. Don't fall for their crap.
----
Hillary is NOT polarizing -- She is just plain hated ...
by Democrats and republicans alike. If she were polarizing, then here effect on the electorate would be to split it, Dems from repugs, or left from right. She just rubs many people the wrong way, including me, and I'm a NY Democrat. The main reason I dislike her is that she stands for absolutely nothing except her own ambition. Also, I will never, ever forget the health care reform fiasco, which was entirely her fault. The problem with health care is the insurance companies. They oppress both patients and doctors. So what did Hillary do? She creates a super secret reform process that includes ONLY insurance companies and excludes doctors and patient advocates. Those are her instincts. I will definitely get involved in local political action in NY to make sure she does not win the NY primary.
----
I would have to agree that Hillary serves her own ambition first. I don't trust her. Simple as that. If it came down to a choice between Hillary and one of the Neo-con apes, I'd choose her, but I'd hate myself in the morning.
----
I think she would take a lot of states that Kerry took. However, we need a candidate in '08 that can turn some of the red states on '04 to blue in '08. You think Hillary could ever take Texas, Missouri, Indiana, Georgia, etc.? If so then you're living in a fantasy world.
----
With Hillary you get all the negatives of running a candidate who people think is a socialist, but in reality would be the farther to the right than either Kerry or Gore. I see no advantage in running her. She's not well liked. Not only that, but she's not very liberal. Hey, if we're goin to run a freakin centrist, I'd rather have a chance in winning. I don't see it happening with Hillary.
The gulllable Americans will vote for her believing she is telling the truth about putting a lid on Illegals.
She wins both ways.
just as the chinese gave up mao suits, the feminists started wearing them here.
"I think Condi would do quite well here, particularly against Hillary Clinton."
Condi has minuses for sure, but a lot of pluses that compensate. On abortion, if she just came out for strict constructionist judges, that would do more on the abortion front than Bush has done. Condi would likely pick up more women (much less black women)than would be lost to Hillary. And Condi is just a class act while Hillary is a hoe.
Weird things could happen. Say Frist implodes from jello spine and Giulani and Newt are all that's left at the forefront, both of whom are damaged goods in my opinion. Suddenly Condi's negatives don't look so bad.
"Hillary is NOT polarizing -- She is just plain hated ... "
That's rich, I'll have to use that one.
Correct.
But former Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer said Clinton, now a Democratic senator representing New York, has no chance of actually becoming president.
Also correct. Which is why you will see a concerted effort to field a third party candidate to split the GOP and moderate Dem vote. Watch this very carefully. If McCain doesn't get the votes in the GOP primary, he will storm off mad and Dem operatives will whisper into his ear about an independent run for President, with money from George Soros rolling in. If that doesn't work, they'll look for some other patsy. They need to get 10 percent or so nationwide and that will be enough to get Hillary over the top in several swing states (Ohio, Florida) and the electoral votes to win.
Straight out of the Clinton 92 playbook. Good ol' Mr. 43 percent. Funny, I never heard anything in 1993 that Clinton wasn't entitled to get his way because he didn't have enough votes for a mandate.
She couldn't have run for VP in 2000 because she had never held an elective office--she needed the Senate seat to be a credible candidate for national office, and anyway Gore was trying to put a little distance between himself and the Clintons (like LBJ not picking Bobby Kennedy for his running mate in 1964). Last year she had no reason to want to be on Kerry's ticket...she gets plenty of media attention as senator and wouldn't be any better positioned for 2008 if she had been the unsuccessful VP candidate.
At the time of the 2008 election, she will be about a month and a half older than Kerry was at the time of the 2004 election. Maybe there will be two botoxicated Democrat nominees in a row.
To show you how unpredictable our presidential elections are, remember this oldie circa 1976.
Pick a winner out of the following group of presidential candidates running against each other.
Bentsen, Lloyd - Brown, Jerry - . Byrd, Robert ,-. Carter, Jimmy ,-. Church, Frank - Harris, Fred ,- . Jackson, Henry M. "Scoop" - Kennedy, Edward M. "Ted" - Muskie, Edmund S.
You say you don't know who Jimmy Carter is?
No matter he is not known nationally and doesn't have a prayer to get the nomination away from Bentsen, Kennedy, Muskie or Scoop Jackson., let alone to win the presidency.
(Speaking of unknown Govs. In 1978 Bill Clinton would win the Governorship of Arkansas only to be defeated 2 years later by a Republican Frank White.)
But time makes changes and that is why speculating on the elections years away from happening is folly. - Tom
It depends who she is running against. Next to Hillary there is no comparison.
Most days, my thoughts are not choppy and foam-flecked ;) and on those days I doubt Hillary will win the nomination, and even if she does, it's good for our side.
I try to be a good conservative but I just can't fear this woman, nor do I fear that a majority of voters would be fooled by her.
That said, President Bush needs to find himself a successor. An "anointee" who would, after briefly serving as veep, make a plausible presidential candidate.
Do you have a source for this?
I don't recall ever hearing her say that she believes abortion is a right.
Definition of "pro-choice".
That's not a source.
Some believe in the 3 exceptions. Do you believe that GWB is pro-choice as well?
"By her own description, she is pro-choice..."Said the same on Meet the Press a few months ago.
Thanks for the source.
She always has time to "clarify" her position.
If she feels that Roe V. Wade should be overturned, she would appoint judges who would feel the same. That would be a good thing.
Rice has said she's "mildly pro-choice" on abortion.
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050311-115948-2015r.htm
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice yesterday pointedly declined to rule out running for president in 2008, and gave her most detailed explanation of a "mildly pro-choice" stance on abortion.
In an interview with editors and reporters in the office of the editor in chief at The Washington Times, she said she would not want the government "forcing its views" on abortion.
Describing pro-lifers as "the other side" is one of the ways Miss Rice articulates her position as a "mildly pro-choice" Republican. She explained that she is "in effect kind of libertarian on this issue," adding: "I have been concerned about a government role."
Condoleezza Rice doesn't feel Roe v. Wade should be overturned. If she did, she would not say she is pro-choice. If she wants to "clarify", the only thing that would do is if she reverses herself and openly denounces Roe.
Rice has said she's "mildly pro-choice" on abortion.
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050311-115948-2015r.htm
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice yesterday pointedly declined to rule out running for president in 2008, and gave her most detailed explanation of a "mildly pro-choice" stance on abortion.
In an interview with editors and reporters in the office of the editor in chief at The Washington Times, she said she would not want the government "forcing its views" on abortion.
Describing pro-lifers as "the other side" is one of the ways Miss Rice articulates her position as a "mildly pro-choice" Republican. She explained that she is "in effect kind of libertarian on this issue," adding: "I have been concerned about a government role."
The Republicans should pray Hillary gets the nomination.
Put Barbara Box on as VP and Harold Ickes as Attorney General.
Michael Jackson as Dem party chairman in charge of recruitment.
You are right. I have zero faith in our people's ability to see through these swine. Billy Jeff could have been elected president for life. The Dems have run two dreadful candidates in succession and the GOP barely won, and with Bush, the strongest possible candidate running.
The only thing I have less faith in than the sheeple is our crummy judicial system.
Good Lord - Frist?
I've seen coma patients with more personality. Frist can't keep the gutless wonders on Capitol Hill in line. He sure as heck isn't going to win the nomination in `08!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.