Posted on 11/24/2007 12:21:27 AM PST by Senator Goldwater
"For 15 years I have stood up against the right-wing machine, and I've come out stronger," Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said at a Democratic presidential debate this year. "So if you want a winner who knows how to take them on, I'm your girl."
Again and again, Mrs. Clinton tells Democratic primary voters she can win the 2008 general election because she knows how to fight the Republicans. And it's true that probably no contemporary public figure outside her marriage has more experience fighting Republicans.
But fighting is not the same as winning. The truth is that Hillary Clinton's win-loss record in political conflicts with the Republicans isn't so great.
Yes, she handily won both of her Senate contests in New York. But her adopted home state isn't exactly unfavorable partisan terrain, and her opponents were none too impressive.
Of course, Mrs. Clinton's boasts are less about this decade than the last. So, how well did the Clintons fare against Republicans, the conservative movement and what Mrs. Clinton called the "vast, right-wing conspiracy"?
After the eight-year Clinton reign, the Republicans were in better shape.
(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ...
“But, given the impunity with which the Bush-Cheney administration has sanctioned torture and warrantless wiretapping”
Now, see, this is really puzzling to me...
Does this cortical paralytic really believe what he wrote here, or does he just feel justified in making the slur on the grounds that, “If it isn’t true, it should be”?
It would be interesting to have the opportunity to get some answers out of him.
there is going to be a point in the clitonista campaign that it will become evident that the only way to recapture their holy grail (1600 penn ave) is by locking hillary in a closet and bj campaigning full time on her behalf.
JMHO
>>Schaller, a poly-sci professor at UMBC, is finally getting to the worst kept secret in politics: Hillary is an electoral loser. Her willing accomplices in the drive-by media are apparently the last to know.
Here is a better kept secret for you. Bill never won a majority either. Both times he was elected by less then half the vote, but the majority vote was split while other opposition voters were encouraged to just stay home, letting Bill slip by. The Newsweek 1992 post-election cover on Bill’s 43% vote was what a “Mandate for Change” he had received.
This appears to be the game plan yet again for Hillary, with the encouragement of a Ron Paul third party on one hand, and people like Charlie Rangel publicly gloating how people like Free Republic will sabotage the nominee and stay home if he isn’t 100% “pure”. It was a good plan before and judging by much written here, it still is a good plan.
Then would the conservative secret handshake be punching this crapweasel in the mouth?
Don’t give them any ideas.
We’re scared of Hillary.
Terrified.
Every time she goes out to the plains and says she’s the only one who can fight the republicans, we tremor in our shoes.
When I lived in Alaska, I enjoyed voting against a very liberal Republican Senator - TED Stevens. It was early in my learning, not to vote the ticket, but to support conservative nominees.
The democrats learned this by running supposedly conservative democrats and winning. However I did have enough sense not to vote for Jim Webb of VA
Ron Paul is not going to run on a 3rd Party.
What the GOP needs to do to beat any Democrat is field a real conservative, like Ron Paul, not these RINO's who give the Democrats a victory that they shouldn't have as was the case with Truman-Dewey, Carter-Ford, Clinton-Bush Sr., Clinton-Dole.
If we run a true conservative we will win, if we don't, they run to our right (as Hillary is positioning herself now) and beat us.
The MSM love to be abused by the Clintons. That makes them feel like they’ve been tough. That they’re just as tough on the Clintons as they are on the Republicans. See, why would the Clintons complain about the media so much, if the media were simply Clinton lapdogs. They is no limit to MSM self-delusion.
The beast will be a big time loser and she will pull the rat down by his ears across America. Read the London Telegraph piece posted above. She is hated beyond what the writer could imagine. When a ratmedia outlet like this even whispers this story down its sleeve on a Saturday, you know they KNOW more.
I tend to think you are right that the Hill is the end of the line for the Left, if....she gets the nomination.
Slayer??
Oh, great! Get that image out of my head!
Hillary Michelle Gellar!
“Hillary Clinton is going to be an even bigger challenge for the media. “
One thing that people can’t stand is when someone is weak, and that is what Hillary shows when she whines about the VRWC or says a reasonable person like Russert is being partisan because he asked a question she didn’t like.
That was also one of Kerry’s problems. He came across as weak because he whine about the SwiftBoaters.
The Dems have to field a candidate that is a victim b/c that is their constituency, but the general populace can’t stand professional victims.
It was Newsweek’s Evan Thomas who admitted that the Drive-Bys’ support for Kerry-Edwards would give them the extra 15 points.
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.