Why Hillary WON'T run for re-election in 2006.......and a few other special surprise predictions....

one man's opinion.....

[ken5050]

Among the millions of words of pure unadulterated garbage written lately about all things Clintonian, it's very hard to find anything close to the truth, but in assessing Hillary's political strategy, as she pursues her goal of the WH in 2008, it is hard to come to any conclusion except that she will NOT run for re-election to the Senate in 2006, and there's a good chance that she might even resign from the Senate before that. So, for political insight that makes more sense than anything Dick Morris has every written, and better predictions than any astrologer, read on....

[SevenDaysInMay]

According to Wm. Safire, Hillary is a congenital liar. Her '...Hystary' is only a position paper produced by staff so that if ever asked about the tricky parts, she will say that she has already answered that in her 2003 book.

Her menopause is damaging becaue her cold blooded bile is so vitriolic. The 2006 eledction will be during her plastic surgery and botox response. Even her bottle blond hair may thin.

She can't wait for control of America through her executive powers over the DOJ and the Homeland Security & Patriot Acts. Her misuse of senior officers as waiters as co-CIC is well known throughout the Pentagon. She told us that all federal databases illegally copied for the DNC were deletated. Her Leninist world view is dangerous; writings of Clintons' treasons are clear.

We the People were put on notice of Hillery's intentions February 1993 at Mt. Carmel near Waco, Texas. Federal JBTs assaulted some 150 men, women, and children in their wood frame church home by BATF units shooting full auto from the ground and air.

The temporary senator, Hillary said as co-president, "The Party is the nation." The Clintons' Politburo will make it so with their power unchallenged with "living" Constitution.

Hillary will say anything, her "journalist" lickspittles and coprophages will repeat "Her Big and Little Lies" until it becomes "record".

[BradyLS]

5. OK, so to recap...she's tossed out Bill fro screwing around, and resigned her Senate seat, all this sometime in 2005. The media circus is huge...all of which is good for Hillary. The drumbeat for 2008 swells...there's no one else on the Dem side, and all she needs to do is to start to "re-enter" public life, putting on a brave face to the world. And how best to do this, you ask?..why, that's easy....adopt a new role, the ultimate warm-fuzzy-image....the "mother of the bride"...that's right, boy's and girls....look for Chelsea to get engaged in 2005, with a June 2006 wedding....and Hillary throwing herself into the whirlwind of planning for it....imagine all the covers on Bride, People, et al, and of course the overarching question...how will she deal with Bill, the ex-president, ex-husband, at the wedding? I mean, when the bride's parents have their dance....can you just die?..and will Bill come stag, of bring his squeeze du-jour? It boggles the mind......go ahead, just think about it..

I think this is your weakest point. It assumes that with both Bill and Hill out of office, they'll still be seen as on the edge of the political limelight for three years. I don't think so. The Clintons won't wield a fraction of the political clout that they have with Hill in the Senate if they are both out of office. Any cotterie of Dems that ever nursed a secret grudge against the Clintons will seize the opportunity to fill the void with new players. They'll use their record of scandal, corruption, and gluttony against them. Saddled with bills, no office to dispense favors, and away from their home base in Arkansas, they'll be on the outs with the players in both New York and DC.

They'll still find ways to plaster their faces across newspapers and TV screens, but if they embarrass their party too much with their shennanigans, a new body of DNC leadership will see to it the are relagated to the looney pages of The Star and The Enquirer.

Hitlery needs a win in 2006 for any chance at the White House. How big she wins to keep her seat will determine whether she makes the leap in 2008 or sets the stage for 2012.

[Southack]

Ask yourself, if you were a screaming fanatic of a Democrat, how would you get all three of the Dems' major national political figures (Bill C., Al Gore, Hillary) back into the media spotlight and spin cycle today.

Now ask yourself, what's to stop Bill Clinton from winning the recall election for governor of California this year?

And how powerful would a landslide California governor's victory be if Bill Clinton was thereafter campaigning for Al Gore as a Presidential candidate and for Hillary as a VP candidate in 2004?

Oh, have you considered that VP candidates are *selected*? They don't even have to campaign in the primaries (to wit: Dick Cheney).

Also, do you really think that Al Gore and Bill Clinton have retired from politics?! Is there some reason that you haven't factored them in to your post for this thread?

[Southack]

C#103

[BradyLS]

My guess is she tries for the White House in 2004. She's all over the news these days - the book, the speech in Germany, Cyndy Adams in the Daily News, etc. Her 15 minutes of fame can't last forever.

Hillary's book tour, ironically, has actually been a tremendous success. Sales aren't the criteria. Political dirt is. You see, once again, everyone in the press is consumed by Bill's affair with Monica. This has nothing to do with Hillary's career as a Senator, "First Lady," nor as "the smartest woman in the world."

If that's all the media focuses on now, they'll never ask the hard questions when she runs in 2007.

[ken5050]

Interesting comments......the idea of Bubba running for gov of Cal is intriguing..but he won't do it, because it's way too big a mess..he's smart enough to avoid it..Gore is finished politically...when he went on SNL and did the hot tub scene with a Lieberman look-alike...well, let's just say that it wouldn't make a very good campaign poster...

[ken5050]

The flaw in your logic, with respect, is the phrase " if they ( the Clintons) embarass their party too much.."...that's an impossibility...the Dem party will have to perform an exorcism to rid themselves of all things Clinton....it's years off..

[cardinal4]

I would disagree with only one thing; the Bloomberg part. I see a rich old codger, who contributes heavily to the DNC, played golf with Tip Oneil, advised the Kennedys, that type. Quiet, behind the scenes big money.

[ken5050]

FYI..enjoy.

[ken5050]

Hi..southie..sorry, I somehow missed you comments...always enjoy our discourse....Clinton wouldn't be stupid enough to run for Gov, simply because the state is in such a fiscal mess...that's why Feinstein declined....it's a no win situation...as for Gore...when he appeared on SNL in the hot tub, with a Lieberman look-alike...he removed himself forever from politics...just go look at the pics.....he'll never run for anything again..

Hillary won't run as VP in 2004...because if she somehow helped the ticket to win..she's pushing her own chance out for 8 years....and a big loss tarnishes her..heck..she could have the nomination tomorrow if she wanted it..so why would she take the #2 spot?..

[Southack]

Good points, but...

Ask yourself, if you were a screaming fanatic of a Democrat, how would you get all three of the Dems' major national political figures (Bill C., Al Gore, Hillary) back into the media spotlight and spin cycle today.

[ken5050]

Ask me how to spin gold from lead.....it's easier...Gore doesn't want to be in the same state as the Clintons..let alone the same room...Al goes to sleep every night knowing that if he, or any Dem had done the right thing and called on Slick to resign, then Gore would wake up this morning in the WH.....for me, the fact that this played out this way affirms that there is indeed a God, and that He does have a special place in His heart for this country, thought He does have a mighty strange way of achieving His ends...

[Southack]

I have to admit that I was *baffled* when the Democrats failed to pull out the long knives in 1998/2000. It made no (functional) sense. Had they taken the high ground, they would have been seen as diligently policing their own kind, and that perception alone would have propelled them forward with great political force.

And Clinton would have been replaced by Gore, who could have selected Hillary, Dean, or Wellstone as his VP in either 1998 or 2000. I doubt that *anyone* would have viewed that chain of events as detrimental to the Left, either.

So, the Dems have certainly been behaving as if they want the new title of the "Stupid Party". The 1998/2000 miscalculation, the Wellstone memorial miscalculation, and then wasting the filibuster option on lower court federal judges rather than waiting for a Supreme Court vacancy this year...all of those mistakes point to a serious lack of mental firepower at the top of the DNC.

[ken5050]

Concur....and the operative word is "functional"..they lack it.....it's all about power...Clinton made the Demw swear fealty to him....not to the country, not the Constitutions, not the office of the Presidency, hell, not even to the Dem party....if they'd forced him to resign...Gore would have stepped right in, and easily won in 2000.....they blew it big time...happily....actually, it's a pattern for the Dems....as I wrote on a California thread...they'll force Davis to resign, to let the LtGov take over, moot the recall, and they'll think they foiled the GOP..but the state will continue to collapse economically, and they'll lose their shirts in 2004.....I think they can ytake Boxer's seat..

[Southack]

"actually, it's a pattern for the Dems....as I wrote on a California thread...they'll force Davis to resign, to let the LtGov take over, moot the recall, and they'll think they foiled the GOP..but the state will continue to collapse economically, and they'll lose their shirts in 2004.....I think they can ytake Boxer's seat..."

If the Dems find a sneaky way to thwart the recall, then absolutely yes...Boxer's Senate seat becomes ours for the taking.

My one fear was/is that the Dems would *embrace* the recall effort and bring in a national Dem like Gore or Clinton to win the governorship. Outisde of that one danger, however, the downside clearly weighs more on the Dems because they would either be stuck with low-approval Davis or low-approval Bustamante, either of which would hurt the national effort for the Dems in 2004.

[ken5050]

FYI..regards...

[ken5050]

As requested..BTW..you've got Freepmail

[ken5050]

Here ya go!!!

[bert]

Unless of course she is in an airplane crash. Bill may not want to go out in the cold.

[Grampa Dave]

I think that $inator HildeBea$t, her Bubba, the First Black President and McAuwful are getting her ready to be drafted in 2004 if things turn bad for GW.

The current nine rat bozos trying to run for president are such a pitiful group of losers. They could "force" the convention to draft $inator HildeBea$t if the economy goes sour or something bad happens to GW.

If GW continues on the same trail and our economy is booming along, she will not run. They will put up Dean or some other losers to be a Mondale.

Then if we get enough additional senators, 60 in 2004 or 2006, your prediction will come true. Being a back bencher of a real losing political party will be depressing to most of the top Rats in the Senate. There will be a mass leaving to spend time with their families. We know that the HildeBea$t can't wait to spend more time with her husband, the first black president.