WHY HILLARY MUST NOT WIN. WHY HILLARY CANNOT WIN.

12.10.05 | Mia T

[Mia T]

WHY HILLARY MUST NOT WIN.
WHY HILLARY CANNOT WIN.

by Mia T, 12.10.05

When it comes to electing our first female president, we can do better than Hillary Clinton.

We need to do better than Hillary Clinton, or the symbolism of a woman as president will be marred by electing a woman who has done almost as much to inflict mistreatment on real-life women as her misogynist husband.

Candice Jackson
Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine

 

'04 ELECTION PROVIDES CLUE

To better understand why this move is fatal for missus clinton, we must go back to November 8, 2004, which is exactly six days after the re-election of George W. Bush.

The venue is Washington Journal (C-SPAN).

Enter Harold Ickes, looking weirder, more Ichabod-Crane-on-crank, than usual. Looking weirder still when one remembers that Harold Ickes is a strictly behind-the-scenes sort of guy.

Only something very important could have coaxed Harold Ickes onto center stage....²¹

Forgoing the standard niceties, Ickes launches into his planned tirade. He accuses Bush of terrorizing white women to get their vote.²² (The way he carried on, you would think he was accusing the president of rape or something.)²³

"If you look at white women, and I think that was the key to this election, Kerry won 45% based on the exit polls--but they're generally in agreement--Kerry won 45%, Bush won 55% of white women.

By contrast, Bush won only 45% of white women in 2000, so he upped is percentages by 10 points.

In 1996, bill clinton won 48% of white women compared to Bob Dole's 43%.

That is a huge, huge difference. I don't think you can lay all that at the doorstep of moral values.

I think that this president unabashedly and abjectly took the issue of terror and used it to terrorize... white women."

HEAR HAROLD ICKES
Washington Journal
Nov. 8, 2004
C-SPAN

Now fast forward to October 11, 2005. Susan Estrich, alignments adjusted upward--ALL alignments--is on Hannity and Colmes. She is there to huckster The Case for Hillary Clinton, ²⁴ both the book and candidate.

Estrich's spiel turns her recent dire warning to the Democrats ("The clintons are sucking up all the air. Get them off the stage!" )²⁵ on its literal head.²⁶ (Air? Who needs air when you have a clinton?)

ICKES + ESTRICH PROVIDE ROADMAP FOR HILLARY DEFEAT (oops!)

Susan Estrich attempts to tie the fate of all women to the fate of the hillary clinton candidacy in a cynical attempt to get the women's vote.

She argues that hillary clinton is the best chance, probably the only chance, for a woman president in our lifetime.

The false and demeaning argument and offensive gender bias aside, someone ought to clue in Susan Estrich. Gender feminism requires as its token a functional female.

So why is Susan Estrich making such a transparently spurious and insulting argument? She isn't that dumb.

For the same reason Harold Ickes is fulminating on C-SPAN.

The election of 2004 confirmed missus clinton's worst fears:
9/11 and the clintons' willful, utter failure for eight years to confront terrorism) were transformative. They caused a political realignment--for all practical purposes permanent--that is not good news for clinton, or for the Democrats, generally.

The white woman, the only real swing voter, the demographic the Democrats MUST get in order to win the White House, has turned red.


Next installment...
THE ROADMAP FOR DEFEATING HILLARY

In the immediate aftermath of the 2004 presidential election, a journalistic consensus emerged to explain George W. Bush's victory. Despite the sluggish economy and deteriorating situation in Iraq, voters supported Bush primarily because of his values. One prominently featured exit poll question showed "moral values" to be the most important issue for voters, ahead of terrorism, Iraq, and the economy. Backlash against the Massachusetts court ruling allowing gay marriage and attraction of Bush's appeals to Christian faith helped bring out socially conservative voters and cement Bush's second term. This explains why Bush won Ohio, for example, where an anti-gay marriage proposal was on the ballot. However compelling this story might be, it is wrong.

Instead, Bush won because married and white women increased their support for the Republican ticket....

In this article I briefly account for the factors behind Bush's rise in the state-by-state popular vote between 2000 and 2004. This is not the same as identifying who elected Bush. That sort of analysis would put responsibility on white men since they voted 61-38 for Bush and comprise almost half of the active electorate. Instead, I focus on what changed between 2000 and 2004. In this view, it is white women who are responsible because they showed more aggregate change.

Identifying a cause for this shift looks for an explanation also in things that changed in the past four years. For example, John Kerry was not exactly Al Gore, so differences between Bush's two opponents could be a factor. But I suggest that such differences are dwarfed by a much larger intervention: the attacks of September 11. Turnout was up in 2004 because the perceived heightening of the stakes after 9-11 and because of intense competition between the candidates in a small number of battleground states. Higher turnout also appears to have helped Bush slightly. But it was the shift of married white women from the Democratic camp to the Republican camp that gave him the edge in 2004.

Post Election 2004: An Alternative Account of the 2004 Presidential Election
BarryC.Burden
Harvard University
The Forum, Volume2, Issue 42004 Article2
burden@fas.harvard.edu

COMPLETE ARTICLE

IMPERIOUS HILLARY
(THE REPORTS OF HER DEATH ARE GREATLY UNDERSTATED)
Mia T, 12.05.05

 

December 7, 1941+64

Dear Concerned Americans,

Hillary Clinton's revisionist tome notwithstanding, 'living history' begets a certain symmetry. It is in that light that I make this not-so-modest proposal on this day, exactly 64 years after the attack on Pearl Harbor.

The context of our concern today--regardless of political affiliation--is Iraq and The War on Terror, but the larger fear is that our democracy may not survive. We have the requisite machines, power and know-how to defeat the enemy in Iraq and elsewhere, but do we have the will?

In particular, do we have the will to identify and defeat the enemy in our midst?

Answerable to no one, heir apparent in her own mind, self-serving in the extreme, Hillary Clinton incarnates this insidious new threat to our survival.

What we decide to do about Missus Clinton will tell us much about what awaits us in these perilous new times....

EXCERPT
COMPLETE LETTER

AN OPEN LETTER TO TIM ROBBINS, DAVID GEFFEN, CHRIS MATTHEWS, MAUREEN DOWD + JEANINE PIRRO
RE: a not-so-modest proposal concerning hillary clinton
Mia T
December 7, 1941+64

IT TAKES A CLINTON TO RAZE A COUNTRY
by Mia T, 11.14.05

(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)
 

AN OPEN LETTER TO TIM ROBBINS, DAVID GEFFEN, CHRIS MATTHEWS, MAUREEN DOWD + JEANINE PIRRO
RE: a not-so-modest proposal concerning hillary clinton
December 7, 1941+64


IMPERIOUS HILLARY
(THE REPORTS OF HER DEATH ARE GREATLY UNDERSTATED)


REINVENTING HILLARY... AGAIN
(clinton machine dumps Geena Davis for Margaret Thatcher)
how the clintons are handling the hillary dud factor₂


SCHEMA PINOCCHIO
how the clintons are handling the hillary dud factor


for the birds
(THE INCOMPETENCE OF HILLARY CLINTON)


HEAR CHRIS MATTHEWS + MAUREEN DOWD DEVOUR HILLARY


THE DANGER OF RUNNING VICARIOUSLY
Bill O'Reilly chews up and spits out the hillary clinton candidacy
(clip included)


clintonCORRUPTION: the more things change. . . .


Yitzhak Shamir Validated: THE CLINTONS ARE "A GREAT DANGER TO JEWS"


THE FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT?
clinton legacy of lynching update


KLEIN BOOK CAUSES HILLARY TO (oops!) CONFIRM "THE TRUTH ABOUT HILLARY"
CLINTON'S REACTION EXPOSES FASCISTIC MINDSET, TEXTBOOK CASE OF PARANOIA + MEGALOMANIA, AND A CONSCIOUSNESS OF GUILT IN BROADDRICK RAPE


HILLARY'S COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF PROBLEM
(see descriptor morphs)


STRANGE BEDFELLOWS: ED KLEIN AND SUSAN ESTRICH AGREE ABOUT HILLARY


HEAR SUSAN ESTRICH: hillary plays 'the victim' for votes


retrograde feminist fraud positions herself as victim (again) in order to win White House
[FOOL ME ONCE, SHAME ON YOU! FOOL ME TWICE, SHAME ON ME!]


HILLARY FLUNKED D.C. BAR EXAM
"the smartest woman in the world" sought less competitive venue


HILLARY!?? WHAT IS THIS MORIBUND LOSER DOING IN THE POLITICAL ARENA, ANYWAY? (bill's bud explains)


the clinton-clinton-Broaddrick kind of rape, according to Susan Estrich


CLINTONS' DOCUMENTED ABUSE OF WOMEN


hillary clinton is a "CONGENITAL LIAR"
("I am not a crook")


NOTE THE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN CLINTON REACTION TIME AND CONTENT TO THE TWO RAPE CHARGES


WHY DID BILL CLINTON IGNORE TERRORISM?
Was it simply the constraints of his liberal mindset, or was it something even more threatening to our national security?


IT TAKES A CLINTON TO RAZE A COUNTRY


BIN LADEN FINGERS CLINTON FOR TERROR SUCCESS (SEE FOOTAGE)
THE THREAT OF TERRORISM IS AS CLOSE AS A CLINTON IS TO THE OVAL OFFICE


PRESIDENTIAL FAILURE, 9/11 + KATRINA


I M P E A C H M E N T
h e a r --c l i n t o n --l o s e --i t


CROOKS PARDONING CROOKS PARDONING CROOKS:
Justice Undone in the clinton White House


sandy berger haberdashery feint
(the specs, not the pants or the socks)


CHENEY: CALL THEM REPREHENSIBLE
THE DEMOCRATS ARE GONNA GET US KILLED (kerry, clinton + sandy berger's pants) SERlES₅


A CALL TO IMPEACH CLINTON IN ABSENTIA


THE LEFT'S RECKLESS TET-OFFENSIVE-GAMBIT REPLAY:
the left's jihad against America is killing our troops, aiding + abetting the terrorists and imperiling all Americans


pro-islamofascist-terrorist radical chic
WHY THE LEFT IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA


The Left's Fatally Flawed "Animal Farm" Mentality
(Why America Must NEVER AGAIN Elect a Democrat President)


NANO-PRESIDENT, MEGA-DISASTER
history will not be kind to bill + hillary clinton


NANO-PRESIDENT
the danger of the unrelenting smallness of bill + hillary clinton


HIROSHIMA'S NUCLEAR LESSON
bill clinton is no Harry Truman


CLINTON RAPES, REVISIONISM, USEFUL IDIOTS AND ENTROPY (an update)


JENNINGS DOES A DIMBLEBY: clinton legacy-RAGE redux


1st Feminist Prez Impeached
(clinton, pushed by the "smartest woman in the world," managed to impeach himself)


For the children?
the clintons ARE pornography downloads


Why hillary clinton should never be allowed anywhere near the Oval Office... or any position of power
REASON 1: SHE HIRED JAMIE GORELICK


HILLARY'S TRIPLE PLAY
the clinton putsch + filegate + the gorelick wall


HILLARY'S MIDDLE-FINGER MINDSET (MAD COVER 2)
Do you really want THAT finger on the button?


"What, me worry?"


ALFRED E."What, me worry?" CLINTON + CRAZY HIL MAD COVER STORY
THE THREAT OF TERRORISM IS AS CLOSE AS A CLINTON IS TO THE OVAL OFFICE


How did the flower children fall for the clintons, 2 such self-evident thugs and opportunists?
(FOOL ME ONCE, SHAME ON YOU! FOOL ME TWICE, SHAME ON ME!)


Alfred E. Neuman + the threat of terrorism, according to hillary


HILLARY IS NIXON-PLUS ^{part 1}
BEWARE THE SYNERGY
Nixonian paranoia and fascistic mindset combine with
clintonian megalomania, ineptitude and, most important, easy betrayal of America
to make hillary clinton deadly dangerous for us all.


HILLARY IS NIXON-PLUS ^{part 2}
BEWARE THE SYNERGY
Nixonian paranoia and fascistic mindset combine with
clintonian megalomania, ineptitude and, most important, easy betrayal of America
to make hillary clinton deadly dangerous for us all.

 

COPYRIGHT MIA T 2005

[moose2004]

Below is a link to an article on Hitlery in the latest Newsweek by Eleanor Clift. Clift takes the opportunity to villify the former first lady for her phony moves to the center. She brings up the possibility of another Al Gore candidacy, and she sings the praises of Virginia Governor Mark Warner. Could this be the beginning of the "Vast Left Wing Conspiracy" against Hillary?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10401164/site/newsweek/

[ALOHA RONNIE]

.

NEVER FORGET


After HILLARY & BILL CLINTON purposefully refused 3 Free Offers from the Sudan during the 1990's to hand over our No. 1 Teorrorist Enemy OSAMA bin LADEN to American custody before he could hit us real hard here at home...


came...


911 Lifesaving Hero RICK RESCORLA, R.I.P.

http://www.RickRescorla.com

http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24361



And as we now see JOHN DEAN publically invite our defeat in a new war on terrorism with our own Freedom directly at stake here at home....


TRAN Blasts DEAN: Calls for Solidarity in Iraq

http://www.Freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1536289/posts



For our Enemies Within now want what happened to a once Free South Vietnam 30 years ago, after our abandoning them to their fate at the hands of heavily Soviet-backed invading terrrorists from the North, to happen again in the Middle East.



An abandonment which brought us...


Pictures of a vietnamese Re-Education Camp

http://www.Freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1308949/posts



IT COULD HAPPEN HERE..!!!
And HILLARY is doing all she can to make it so.




Signed:.."ALOHA RONNIE" Guyer
Veteran-"WE WERE SOLDIERS" Battle of IA DRANG-1965

http://www.lzxray.com/guyer_set1.htm
(Vietnam Photos-40 years ago, exactly)


NEVER FORGET

.

[poobear]

"...she reminds many men of their first wife,.."

It's not the men I worry about, at the same time it will probably be only the liberal former hippie women from the blue states and the indoctrinated leftist women in and just out of college that will vote for her.

It will boil down to voting fraud that we cannot let happen that will determine whether miss hillary gets her toes into the white house. I'm sure the left machine is working on this as we speak.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[griswold3]

One thing that concerns me is the "Clintonistas" in prominate media roles... Stephanopolis, Deutche, etc.

[Dont_Tread_On_Me_888]

Hillary CAN win.

Thx Mia T for another GREAT post with your usual excellent background reasearch. Outstanding!

Hillary CAN and WILL win.

I order to retain the White House, the Republicans will need the most passionate groundswell of support they have ever had, even greater than 2000, when the Clinton corruption caused many conservatives to give up their jobs temporarily (like I did for two months) to aid in the campaign.

The socialist budgets and the hard drift to the left by Bush and nearly all Republicans in Congress has depressed so many true conservatives that they will stay home in 2006 and 2008.

Demographics are constantly at work, and every year, there is another large group of voters who are children of nontaxpayers; nontaxpayers have a much higher birthrate than taxpayers. The illegal aliens will be voting in far greater numbers than in 2000. Another four years of demographics working against conservatives will also take its toll.

The very liberal moves by Bush and his push for amnesty for illegals will hand the White House to Hillary.

It is not just Bush. Even Santorum, Grassley and Frist (besides his failure to go nuclear) have done some very liberal jawboning just recently:

EXAMPLES (excerpt from a post I made just minutes ago on another thread):


1] Senator Santorum (RINO-PA) wants to give/follow the UN guidelines and give a fixed % of our GDP to global charity.

2] Senator Charles Grasley (RINO-IA) wants to force the oil industry to give a fixed % of their profits to the poor.

3] Senator Bill Frist (RINO-TN) said he would accept a windfall profits tax on the oil industry.

END excerpt

Besides you normal RINOs like McCain, Snowe, Chafee, etc., even those many consider normal conservatives have gotten quite socialist/statist.

Hillary WILL win in 2008. The Republicans turning their backs on everything we believe in will depress the passion and enthusiasm to support Republicans by conservative voters.

Is it possible to prevent this? Sure! But the Republicans will have to do a 180 degree change in focus, priorities, and revert to putting the USA as #1, not foreign governments, and will have to cut the budget by at least $500 billion to start a path back toward LIMITED GOVERNMENT (a term not even used anymore among elected Republicans).

That ain't gonna happen, MIA. Hillary WILL win.

This thread is being saved to hard disk for post 2006/2008 discussion.

[Mia T]

Gore and Warner are squeezing the triangulator from opposite directions. Party loyalists despise hillary and her self-anointment. They know she is bad news for the party.

 

That missus clinton has managed, thereby, to stake out Iraqi territory occupied apparently by no one⁶ seems to have escaped her notice. Nonetheless, this constituency of zero is the least of her troubles....

COMPLETE ARTICLE

IMPERIOUS HILLARY
(THE REPORTS OF HER DEATH ARE GREATLY UNDERSTATED)
by Mia T, 12.05.05

 

 

 

[stephenjohnbanker]

If voting fraud pushes her over the top, she will have won. Republicans don't fight back. The only hope is fractionalized groups becoming cohesive. Miami Cubans, FReepers, Minutemen all banding together might save us.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Correct. If the Republicans nominate an open borders(easy to spot) candidate, we WILL lose the Presidency, period.

[Squantos]

Awesome.....BTTT !

[Tuba Guy]

Vince Foster died for her sins ....

[Cautor]

Thanks Mia T (I mean "appeal" not "appear" in my comment. Bttt.

[poobear]

"Miami Cubans, FReepers, Minutemen all banding together might save us."

You can count me in!

[Mia T]

You are absolutely right about the dynamic nature of demographics, illegal immigration-vote fraud, etc.

Two points:

(1) We do have to change our focus. Our vote will be depressed only if we allow it to be. If clinton is the nominee, WE MUST PUT ASIDE ALL OF OUR PROBLEMS, ISSUES, ETC. AND FOCUS ON ONLY ONE THING--DEFEATING HILLARY CLINTON.

(2) We must continuously adjust our strategies to the changing demographics. My idea for cementing the white-women demographic will also capture the Latino vote. Will expand in upcoming post.

[princess leah]

Vince Foster was "murdered" because he knew too much of her sins!

[IndyTiger]

Hillary CAN and WILL win.

I regret to say that I agree with your analysis. I also believe that HRC will in all likelihood win in 2008. If there is a credible third-party candidate, it will only enhance her chances of getting elected.

[C210N]

I don't know that the focus of 'Defeating HRC' is a winning one. Here is a case where a lesson should be taken quite seriously from the 2004 'rats, when they were just out to defeat Bush at any cost (in their case, trying to offset a defective candidate).

If Republicans put up a defective candidate and then focus on keeping HRC out at any cost, we will LOSE. Republicans must put up a morally strong candidate we can rally around regardless of what the 'rats do.

[indcons]

Bump

[FreeReign]

1] Senator Santorum (RINO-PA) wants to give/follow the UN guidelines and give a fixed % of our GDP to global charity.

2] Senator Charles Grasley (RINO-IA) wants to force the oil industry to give a fixed % of their profits to the poor.

3] Senator Bill Frist (RINO-TN) said he would accept a windfall profits tax on the oil industry.

END excerpt

What are the sources of your punch-list?

[FreeReign]

If there is a credible third-party candidate, it will only enhance her chances of getting elected.

A well promoted third party candidate is the Clinton formula.