Skip to main content

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton walks past after arriving at the airport in New Delhi May 7, 2012. Clinton said on Monday that Pakistan had not taken enough action against Hafiz Saeed, the Islamist blamed for masterminding the 2008 attack by Pakis
Five days ago, Village mouthpiece Chris Cillizza said Hillary Clinton had just had the worst week in Washington:
When “Hard Choices,” Hillary Rodham Clinton’s memoir of her time at the State Department, came out in early June, the book — and subsequent book tour — were touted as the first steps in the inevitable 2016 presidential bid by the nation’s former top diplomat. If that’s what they are, Clinton may be in for some tough times.
Unfortunately for Cillizza and his ilk, the Beltway bubble does not speak for the American people:
Hillary Clinton remains in good shape for a 2016 presidential run, according to a new Quinnipiac University poll released Tuesday.

The poll was taken as Clinton continues her book tour. She’s been criticized for comments about her wealth, but the poll found that the former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “sweeps the Democratic primary field for the 2016 presidential race.” She would get 58 percent of the vote.

And against the Republicans?
Clinton would beat ‘em all. Here are the Quinnipiac matchups:

47 – 38 percent over Christie;

49 – 40 percent over Paul;

49 – 40 percent over Huckabee;

48 – 41 percent over Bush;

48 – 41 percent over Ryan.

If that's what the insular echo chamber of DC pundits considers a bad week for Hillary Clinton, the insular echo chamber of DC pundits is going to have a very bad decade.

Originally posted to Laurence Lewis on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 10:27 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  So basically her (12+ / 0-)

    rockstar-level name recognition gets her a maximum of 9 points ahead of a bunch of guys that the overwhelming majority of Americans couldn't pick out of a lineup? That hardly makes her a safe bet.

  •  Thanks Lawrence. g (12+ / 0-)

    Humor Alert! No statement from this UID is intended to be true, including this one. Intended for recreational purposes only. Unauthorized interpretations may lead to unexpected results. This waiver void where prohibited. Artistic License - 420420

    by HoundDog on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 10:36:14 AM PDT

  •  9 points over the Huckster. That just isn't (11+ / 0-)

    enough!  Geez, the guy's a freaking theocrat!

    The only hawk I like is the kind that has feathers. My birding blogs: http://thisskysings.wordpress.com/ and canyonbirds.net

    by cany on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 10:39:01 AM PDT

  •  I wouldn't call a 7 point lead a "trounce" (0+ / 0-)

    but she's certainly beating the hell out of the others in the primary. She could lose 10 pints all to her nearest opponent and still have almost a 30 point lead.

    Hillary Clinton's Liberal Ranking http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/10/122232/619

    by tigercourse on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 10:40:18 AM PDT

  •  So she has gone from polling in the high 50's t... (3+ / 0-)

    So she has gone from polling in the high 50's to 60's to the high 40's. She is the only one doing any talking or campaigning. And that is what this book tour is. And she has managed to drop 10 points?

    The Kochs are still attacking Obama and the Senate dems. What is going to happen when they dump a billion to destroy her?

  •  Hmmm. From a purely (0+ / 0-)

    predictive perspective: head-to-heads 2 1/2 years out, or the ad hoc pontifications of Beltway blowhards?

    I hate to say it, but that's roughly a tossup.

    Still, a good showing can reverberate and affect decisions by potential candidates -- so there is a definite upside; it just doesn't involve predicting the 2016 winner.

    "I've always admired your tart honesty and ability to be personally offended by broad social trends." -Principal Skinner.

    by cardinal on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 10:49:45 AM PDT

  •  You can't be a pundit (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis, Deep Texan, Janet 707

    unless you listen to the village echo chamber.

    Blessed are the hearts that can bend; for they can never be broken Albert Camus

    by vcmvo2 on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 10:50:40 AM PDT

  •  She also began criticizing Obama in a move (5+ / 0-)

    to the right.  Yeah, she's terrific.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

    I want to live in a world where George Zimmerman offered Trayvon Martin a ride home to get him out of the rain that night. -Bishop G. Brewer

    by the dogs sockpuppet on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 10:57:19 AM PDT

  •  60-40 is an historic landslide (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Deep Texan, Jakeston

    Any GOP goober gets 35 percent simply by being on the ballot here in the idiocracy we call the U.S.

    And if one of these hairballs gets 45-47, who cares?  

    I'll take a 55-45, as it comes with lots of Senate and House seats.

  •  That doesn't look like "trouncing" to me (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cybrestrike, the dogs sockpuppet, TJ

    She was winning by MUCH more in 2007.

    "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

    by gjohnsit on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 11:06:17 AM PDT

    •  From CNN 2007 (6+ / 0-)
      In a head-to-head matchup of the two front-runners, Clinton leads Giuliani 51 percent to 45 percent. That lead has increased since October, when Clinton led Giuliani 49 percent to 47 percent.
      •  The Giuliani juggernaught (3+ / 0-)

        And remember this headline from December 2007:

         The Dec. 14-16, 2007, poll shows that Clinton continues to have a large lead over her competitors, with 45% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents saying they support her for the nomination. Twenty-seven percent of Democrats support Obama and 15% support Edwards.
         What I haven't seen posted by the pro-Hillary people is why did Hillary lose in 2007, and what is different now?

        "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

        by gjohnsit on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 11:24:26 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Difference now is she is 40 points ahead (3+ / 0-)

          Of Saint Liz the Not-Running, and there's no one else who would even do that well against her.  Yes, right now.  But really ... does anyone see a Barack Obama in a crowd of Joe Bidens and Martin O'Malleys?

          •  I can easily see (4+ / 0-)

            someone better coming out in the next two years. Easily.
            I can also easily see Hillary blowing a big lead and losing to some Dubya-type candidate in 2016.

            "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

            by gjohnsit on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 11:31:50 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Anything more than speculation? (0+ / 0-)

              Being able to imagine a someone that could come out has very little to do with reality.  The reality is, you can't come up with a name that would gather any support as "better".  

              Every day someone fails to come up with a plausible alternative convinces me that HRC will, and should be, the nominee.  

              Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

              by Inland on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:36:03 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Of course I can (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                cybrestrike, DeadHead, splintersawry
                The reality is, you can't come up with a name that would gather any support as "better".
                I can think of four name right off the top of my head.
                  But it doesn't matter because none of them have decided to run yet.

                "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

                by gjohnsit on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:38:16 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  No, you can't. (0+ / 0-)

                  That's why you don't list them.  You'd rather spend the day badmouthing HRC (who has not declared, either) then allow anyone to compare her to actual people instead of purist platonic ideals.

                  Every day....I guess every comment, now....that fails to come up with a plausible alternative convinces me.

                  Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

                  by Inland on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:49:56 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  You are thinking of someone else (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Portlaw, DeadHead

                    I didn't even spend much time talking about Hillary during the 2008 campaign, much less now.
                      I'm not a "Hillary-hater", although admittedly I don't like her.

                     I don't spend that time because it isn't going to come down to me. I won't be voting for a neoliberal candidate, and personally I don't see a non-neoliberal candidate being nominated.
                      At least not without a grassroots movement for real change. And right now, DKos is moving away from "netroots" to "machine politics". The days of 2006 are over here.

                    "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

                    by gjohnsit on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:56:11 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Oh, there are others who can't as well. (0+ / 0-)

                      It's a widespread phenomenon, which is why every day that someone likes you has nothing but negative campaigning convinces me that Hilllary will, and should be, the nominee.

                      I don't understand how this is supposed to be a sophisticated site when someone complains about a lack of a "grassroots movement" and just declines to even name a plausible alternative. When did you start to think a "grassroots movement" consisted solely of negative campaigning?

                      Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

                      by Inland on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:01:24 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Brown, O"Malley, Warren (0+ / 0-)
                        •  How are they better than HRC? (0+ / 0-)

                          Anyone who wants can run it up the flag pole, see if anyone else salutes.  

                          Personally, I can't get behind someone like Warren for president when she's never had an opinion on foreign policy that I"ve heard of.  

                          Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

                          by Inland on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:09:07 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Foreign policy (0+ / 0-)
                            Personally, I can't get behind someone like Warren for president when she's never had an opinion on foreign policy that I"ve heard of.
                            The country elected a president twice (Dubya) who had absolutely no interest in knowing what the rest of the world was like before going to the White House.
                               Foreign policy is not what is going to win or lose an election.

                            "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

                            by gjohnsit on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:26:18 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  This is precisely the fail I'm talking about: (0+ / 0-)
                            Foreign policy is not what is going to win or lose an election
                            The attacks on HRC include her being a neocon or neocon adjacent.  But no, we can't actually COMPARE her to Warren on that point; it suddenly becomes unimportant because elections aren't decided on that.

                            Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

                            by Inland on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:31:24 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Have you ever heard (0+ / 0-)

                            of a presidential election being decided, or even significantly effected, by foreign policy in the last 40 years?

                            "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

                            by gjohnsit on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:33:51 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You don't read my comments, do you. (0+ / 0-)

                            If hating HRC on foreign policy grounds is legit, then at least we should know Warren's positions before pretending we'd rather have her as president.  

                            I'm really getting tired of people trying to tell me the terms of the debate; it's clearly being tailored for a specific purpose, and it's not finding the best person to be president.

                            Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

                            by Inland on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:40:26 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You and I agree on the topic at hand, but (0+ / 0-)

                            I think the Obama/Clinton primary was probably mostly decided on the Iraq votes, don't you?

                            I want to live in a world where George Zimmerman offered Trayvon Martin a ride home to get him out of the rain that night. -Bishop G. Brewer

                            by the dogs sockpuppet on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:41:37 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Maybe (0+ / 0-)

                            That wasn't my impression, but I could be wrong.

                             What I was thinking of was how Democrats tried to make a big deal of Dubya being completely ignorant of the rest of the world in 2000. And it didn't matter in the end.

                            "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

                            by gjohnsit on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:50:10 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I've heard a lot of analysis around that point... (0+ / 0-)

                            Anyway, it would be the exception to the foreign policy not deciding elections rule.

                            Well, in reflection, I wonder how much GWB scaring us into fearing another terrorist attack might have played into the '04 election?

                            Anyway, just trying to stay fact based, not derail the conversation!

                            I want to live in a world where George Zimmerman offered Trayvon Martin a ride home to get him out of the rain that night. -Bishop G. Brewer

                            by the dogs sockpuppet on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:53:20 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Didn't Obama vote for invading Iraq? (0+ / 0-)

                            That's what I remember. So I can't see how it wasn't going to be THE issue in the primary.

                            "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

                            by gjohnsit on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:55:23 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gjohnsit

                            Here's a WaPo article on the subject. It gives a lot of the nuance:
                            http://voices.washingtonpost.com/...

                            I want to live in a world where George Zimmerman offered Trayvon Martin a ride home to get him out of the rain that night. -Bishop G. Brewer

                            by the dogs sockpuppet on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:58:09 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  O'Malley has proven Executive experience (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            GoGoGoEverton

                            Hillary doesn't.

                            KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

                            by fcvaguy on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 02:28:45 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I suppose; it's better to run as a governor or (0+ / 0-)

                            as an unemployed person than from the senate.  But I don't know how far he goes being the governor of a smallish state with proximity to the federal government as one of its main economic drivers.  

                            Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

                            by Inland on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 06:51:48 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                  •  You weren't convinced before? (0+ / 0-)

                    And when, exactly, did you stop "badmouthing" her?




                    Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

                    by DeadHead on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:24:37 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  You're blathering about something or other. (0+ / 0-)

                      Since I assume it's your usual passive aggressive blogginess, I won't ask for clarification.

                      Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

                      by Inland on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:28:10 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  No, I asked you a couple of questions... (0+ / 0-)

                        ...in the hopes you'd expand on your previous comment.

                        I'll assume it's just your usual "deflection when presented with uncomfortable questions," so I won't hold my breath waiting for you to answer.




                        Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

                        by DeadHead on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 02:48:07 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  No, you didn't. (0+ / 0-)

                          The questions didn't ask for an expansion on my previous comment.  You're making that up in order to continue your usual bloggy back and forth, never rising from your meta bullshit, passive aggressive "LOL"ing and your floundering ignorance of substantial issues.

                          Now, make up more shit. It's what you do.

                          Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

                          by Inland on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 03:15:18 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Yes, I did... (0+ / 0-)

                            You said:

                            You'd rather spend the day badmouthing HRC [...]
                            and
                            Every day....I guess every comment, now....that fails to come up with a plausible alternative convinces me.

                            ...which prompted me to ask...
                            You weren't convinced before?

                            And when, exactly, did you stop "badmouthing" her?

                            ...which you don't want to answer, understandably.




                            Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

                            by DeadHead on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 04:14:46 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Your show sucked first time. (0+ / 0-)

                            I'm not watching the reruns.

                            Go peddle it to someone who gives a shit about your meta.  

                            Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

                            by Inland on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 05:02:37 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  It's only "meta" to you... (0+ / 0-)

                            ...because you're unwilling to recognize that trolling HRC critics in 2014 doesn't automatically make up for the fact that you, yourself, were quite outspoken in your "badmouthing" of her last time around.

                            In light of the degree to which you opened your big mouth previously, no one should take seriously anything you have to say on the subject, nowadays. But, in your typically tone-deaf way, you don't care that your comment history makes a mockery of what you're trying to peddle off on unwitting readers currently.

                            Maybe if you had refrained from doing things like, say, comparing HRC to Bush/Rove in 2008, people wouldn't be so inclined to think you're acting in bad faith when you start harassing people for not pledging fealty to her like you have apparently done, only after you realized you could use it as another means by which to go after your real targets, Lefties, that is.




                            Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

                            by DeadHead on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 06:20:39 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  It doesn't matter what you call your shit. (0+ / 0-)

                            I really don't care what you call your worthless patter.  We're well past the point of autopsy and into asking you to carry your stinking corpse out of the site to join the people you worked so hard to impress.

                            Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

                            by Inland on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 06:40:39 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                  •  If Martin O'Malley runs (0+ / 0-)

                    which is beginning to look like he will, he will be competitive against Hillary.

                    KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

                    by fcvaguy on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 02:27:24 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  Its more than just speculation (0+ / 0-)

                Given where the 2008 race was in 2006, gjohnsit is right. These polls are totally meaningless. Clinton had it in the bag in 2006 and 2007.

                KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

                by fcvaguy on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 02:26:14 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  I actually think Warren is running. That's (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            the dogs sockpuppet, Portlaw

            why she's out stumping for Dems in red areas.

            Hillary Clinton's Liberal Ranking http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/10/122232/619

            by tigercourse on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 11:34:58 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  She isn't facing Barack Obama this time. (3+ / 0-)

          Most people would consider the absence of the greatest political talent in a generation to be a meaningful factor in analyzing an election.

          (Seriously, you've never seen any "pro-Hillary people," or just plain reality-based political observers, make the point that it's harder to win an election when you have to run against Barack Obama? OK.)

          Oh, and your goalpost-moving from general election numbers to primary numbers still doesn't work. Hillary had an 18% lead over her Democratic rivals in the poll you cite; this time, her lead in primary match ups is 2-3 times larger.

          Art is the handmaid of human good.

          by joe from Lowell on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 11:33:51 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Excuse me? (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Johnny Q, cybrestrike, cville townie
            the absence of the greatest political talent in a generation
             The guy with a 40% approval rating is " the greatest political talent in a generation"? Are you kidding me?
            Hillary had an 18% lead over her Democratic rivals in the poll you cite; this time, her lead in primary match ups is 2-3 times larger
            Speaking of goal-post moving. That poll was 11 months before the election against people actually running for office.
              Not 2.5 years before an election against people not yet running.

            "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

            by gjohnsit on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 11:37:46 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Nope (4+ / 0-)
              The guy with a 40% approval rating is " the greatest political talent in a generation"? Are you kidding me?
              The guy who went from being the keynote speaker in '04 to the nominee in '08 is the greatest political talent in a generation.

              The guy who beat Team Clinton, and leapt right past the establishment on his way to the nomination is the greatest political talent in a generation.

              Think about it. In so many ways '08 was historic, and the craving for change was there, but exactly HOW many Dems could defeat the Clinton machine? It was a David and Goliath story that is just not repeatable 8 years after.

              "Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek." - Barack Obama

              by anshmishra on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 11:44:48 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You answered your own question (5+ / 0-)
                 In so many ways '08 was historic, and the craving for change was there, but exactly HOW many Dems could defeat the Clinton machine?
                That's why Clinton lost in '08. She wasn't "change".
                   Now ask yourself if people want change in '16 as well? Because if people aren't satisfied with the way things are (and that's what the polls say without question) then Hillary is vulnerable in '16 too.

                  But since we are trying very hard to shut down any opposition to Hillary now, Dems may never know that mistake until the general election.

                "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

                by gjohnsit on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 11:48:47 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Who will the Reps nominate? (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Deep Texan, fcvaguy

                  Look, I'm not a huge Hillary fan, I'd vote for her in the general (if I could vote in 2016, which I can't) but who can they get who can be an alternative to change?

                   I see Bush as the most likely candidate to leave the fray, and what can he do? Hillary's weakness is that she's the establishment, but the Reps can't take another risk. Cruz would be worse than another Goldwater, the neocons would revolt against Paul, and Rubio isn't running.

                  I'm for a primary challenge to the left. Hell, I'd welcome an '08 style clusterf*ck. The more the merrier! I just think it'll end up like 2000, with Bradley getting owned by Gore. Not that we shouldn't try to get people to run, but.. you know.

                  "Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek." - Barack Obama

                  by anshmishra on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 11:56:07 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  We shouldn't even worry about who the Repubs (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    cybrestrike, Portlaw, splintersawry

                    will pick. That's both beyond our control and impossible to predict.
                      Besides, at this stage it doesn't matter anyway.

                     The job of the netroots at this stage is to present the best Dem candidates.

                    "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

                    by gjohnsit on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:36:44 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  What are you, Unskewed Polls guy! (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Deep Texan, Inland, Dr Swig Mcjigger

                  Oh noes, people reporting polling data that gives me a sad are pushing an agenda!

                  Art is the handmaid of human good.

                  by joe from Lowell on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:01:07 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Heh. "You're shutting me down!" (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Dr Swig Mcjigger
                  But since we are trying very hard to shut down any opposition to Hillary now
                  I think people are demanding a more thoughtful, less victimy line of opposition.

                  Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

                  by Inland on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:37:27 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  You sound like a Republican (0+ / 0-)

                    "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

                    by gjohnsit on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:39:18 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  You don't know politics. (0+ / 0-)

                      If you think you're getting shut down, or that I sound like a republican, or that Obama isn't a phenom campaigner, et al., you need a remedial class in politics.  

                      Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

                      by Inland on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:53:25 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

            •  Lol, keep digging. If you want to pretend that... (4+ / 0-)

              Barack Obama isn't a phenomenally talented campaigner, go right ahead.

              It's a good way to let everyone know who seriously to take your commentary.

              Art is the handmaid of human good.

              by joe from Lowell on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 11:59:43 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  i know right! (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                joe from Lowell, emelyn

                -You want to change the system, run for office.

                by Deep Texan on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:22:01 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  More moving of goalposts (4+ / 0-)

                So now you've gone from "greatest political talent in a generation" to "phenomenally talented campaigner".
                  If you were to honestly debate me, you would admit you just moved the goalposts about 90 yards. But I won't hold my breath.

                 Anyway, I admit he's the most talented public speaker in a generation. That was obvious.
                  But greatest political talent? Hardly. No one with a 40% approval rating deserves that.

                 If you are trying to sell me that Hillary lost by some no-way-to-predict, one-in-a-lifetime event, you can stop trying now. Because I ain't buyin.

                "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

                by gjohnsit on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:30:50 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  G.W. Bush Had a 90% approval rating (2+ / 0-)

                  after 9/11.  Reagan's approval rating was lower than Obama's at different points.  Shifting approval ratings are not how I would judge a political talent.  

                  Life is good. Injustice? Not so much.

                  by westyny on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:06:17 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Approval ratings translate into votes (0+ / 0-)

                    Clinton ended his presidency with around 60% approval rating, despite being impeached.

                     The other way you can measure political talent is getting your agenda implemented. Obama can't declare victory here either.

                    "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

                    by gjohnsit on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:29:01 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Obama passed the most extensive liberal agenda.... (0+ / 0-)

                      since Johnson.

                      Every comment you write makes informed followers of politics realize how ridiculous your argument is.

                      Please write more comments.

                      Art is the handmaid of human good.

                      by joe from Lowell on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:31:17 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Really? (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        lenzy1000

                        Are you really going to tell us that Obama was successful in getting his agenda made into law?
                          Because every comment on DKos over the last six years says otherwise.

                        "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

                        by gjohnsit on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:36:52 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Yep. More successful than Bush, Clinton, Bush... (0+ / 0-)

                          Reagan, Carter, Ford, or Nixon.

                          I like the way you 1) cite comments on Daily Kos as your evidence about objective matters and 2) can't even get that right.

                          Art is the handmaid of human good.

                          by joe from Lowell on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:43:43 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Wow (0+ / 0-)

                            So you are just going to make up your own facts, huh?

                            "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

                            by gjohnsit on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:46:43 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  LOL, Keep digging. I just posted a comment... (0+ / 0-)

                            featuring two peer-reviewed research articles from political scientists about the remarkable success President Obama has had at achieving his agenda.

                            Oopsie.

                            You know, standing there with your mouth agape isn't actually the devastating rhetorical technique you seem to think it is.

                            Art is the handmaid of human good.

                            by joe from Lowell on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:55:39 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Sure (0+ / 0-)

                            Obama got more of his agenda through Congress than Clinton or Reagan.
                               I will just discount everything said on DKos over the past 6 years, plus my memory of all events, and believe you.

                            "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

                            by gjohnsit on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 02:12:05 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Or you could click the links I provided and read. (0+ / 0-)

                            No, that's something a reality-based person would do.

                            You should just keep going with your gut checks.

                            Art is the handmaid of human good.

                            by joe from Lowell on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 02:18:16 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  Take a look at what political scientists say: (0+ / 0-)
                          In his first year in office, President Obama did better even than legendary arm-twister Lyndon Johnson in winning congressional votes on issues where he took a position, a Congressional Quarterly study finds.

                          The new CQ study gives Obama a higher mark than any other president since it began scoring presidential success rates in Congress more than five decades ago.

                          Or perhaps this one:
                          The ideathat a president's legislative and political success go hand in hand is starkly contradicted by the first two years of Barack Obama's presidency. With the help of Democratic majorities in the House and Senate, Obama pushed through a huge economic stimulus package targeting the deep recession he had inherited, initiated comprehensive reforms of the nation's health care system, and signed a major redesign of financial regulation aimed at preventing a repeat of the financial meltdown that had made the recession so severe. These legislative achievements made the 111th Congress among the most productive in many years, and they were fully consistent with promises Obama made during his successful campaign for the White House. Obama also kept his campaign pledge to wind down the United States' involvement in Iraq and to reallocate American forces to confront the resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan.

                          In short, Obama had done what he might reasonably believe he was elected to do. His reward was to see his Democratic Party suffer a crushing defeat in the 2010 midterm elections, with Republicans gaining 64 House seats to win their largest majority (242193) since 1946, and six Senate seats, putting them within easy striking distance of a majority in that chamber in 2012. (1) Not only did the president and his party reap no political benefit from their legislative accomplishments, they were evidently punished for them. The congressional Republicans' strategy of all-out opposition, adopted not long after Obama took office, turned out to be remarkably successful, delivering a stunning setback to a majority party that had won a sweeping victory just two years earlier.

                          Just FYI, among the people who actually study politics for a living, the notion that Barack Obama was a remarkably successful President who accomplished a historically large agenda is roughly as much of a consensus as anthropogenic global warming is among climate scientists.

                          Art is the handmaid of human good.

                          by joe from Lowell on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:53:42 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                •  LOL, that's supposed to be a move? (0+ / 0-)

                  You know, when someone tells you to "keep digging," you're not actually supposed to take the advice.

                  Now you're just getting silly and desperate.

                  And no, I don't want to debate you. More like, hand you a microphone. Please proceed, crackpot.

                  BTW, Ronald Reagan once had an approval rating in the 30s. So did Bill Clinton. Man, those guys suck at politics!

                  Art is the handmaid of human good.

                  by joe from Lowell on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:30:05 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Reagan had lower approval ratings (0+ / 0-)

              at his lowest point. Yet he won two landslide elections. Does that mean he wasn't the greatest talent in a generation in the 80s?

    •  Wait til she starts stumping and her negatives (0+ / 0-)

      go way up.  It's going to be a nailbiter to the end if she's our candidate. (I still think we prevail, but barely).

      I want to live in a world where George Zimmerman offered Trayvon Martin a ride home to get him out of the rain that night. -Bishop G. Brewer

      by the dogs sockpuppet on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 11:24:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  We can't put all our eggs in one basket (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        the dogs sockpuppet, BradyB, Portlaw

        Otherwise it could easily nit us in the a**.

        "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

        by gjohnsit on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 11:27:42 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Isn't that a little backwards? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dr Swig Mcjigger, emelyn

        Hillary's been attacked since the 90s with accusations ranging from murder to being against stay at home moms.  How do you drive up the negatives of a well known public figure like that?  

        Rather, it's the opponents that are vulnerable to negative campaigning.

        Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

        by Inland on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:41:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Have you forgotten 2008 and the (0+ / 0-)

          "kitchen sink" approach?  Her negatives went through the roof.  When she's stumping she says things in a way she doesn't really mean to come off.  Please see her recent comments about being "flat broke" leaving the White House and about race.

          I want to live in a world where George Zimmerman offered Trayvon Martin a ride home to get him out of the rain that night. -Bishop G. Brewer

          by the dogs sockpuppet on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:02:00 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Nobody's forgotten anything. (0+ / 0-)

            And she still polls well.  That's the point about the negatives.

            Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

            by Inland on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:03:55 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Her negatives went way up when she (0+ / 0-)

              was campaigning in '08 and will again once she starts campaigning this time. That was my only point and it's supported by the data.

              http://politics.suntimes.com/...

              I want to live in a world where George Zimmerman offered Trayvon Martin a ride home to get him out of the rain that night. -Bishop G. Brewer

              by the dogs sockpuppet on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:26:00 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I trust that if she runs a good campaign, (0+ / 0-)

                she'll be relatively immune to negatives.....more so than an unknown who also runs a good campaign.

                All other things being equal, her being a known quantity isn't a problem.

                Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

                by Inland on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:36:53 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  "If she runs a good campaign" (0+ / 0-)

                  Inland, if she runs a good campaign... if she can... I'll happily get behind her.  Hillary is a lot of things, some great some not so great... but she was not a great campaigner.

                  Maybe she's sharper and stronger now, but her book tour was concerning on that front.

                  This story drove me nuts.  She can be better! : http://www.dailykos.com/...

                  I want to live in a world where George Zimmerman offered Trayvon Martin a ride home to get him out of the rain that night. -Bishop G. Brewer

                  by the dogs sockpuppet on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:47:22 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

  •  I really wish someone one primary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    the dogs sockpuppet

    her. If for no other reason than to get her act together. I'm afraid she will carelessly blunder away her lead in the general if she doesn't have to stay sharp in a primary. And to keep her from running as a squishy moderate right off the bat.

  •  Congratulations to HRC...I guess. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    the dogs sockpuppet

    We're still going to be in trouble with her corporatist and warhawk ideology.

    So if Clinton runs, she wins. Then what?

    [crickets]

    Fighting against centrist, authoritarian, and conservative policies since 2002.

    by cybrestrike on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 11:45:31 AM PDT

  •  Interesting (3+ / 0-)

    I see you do not cite any Dem challengers.  

    Oh, maybe because the Clinton machine is once again attempting to squash opposition within the Party two years before the election?  Worked so well in 2008.

    Why is that?  

    You're on the train I presume?

    "When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains, And the women come out to cut up what remains, Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains An' go to your Gawd like a soldier." Rudyard Kipling

    by EdMass on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 11:46:53 AM PDT

  •  Many NEOCONS are quite comfortable with HRC! (4+ / 0-)

    From Saturday's NYT (resplendent with a standard summary dismissal by the Front Page of Daily Kos, no less)...


    "The Next Act of the Neocons"


    Are Neocons Getting Ready to Ally With Hillary Clinton?

    by JACOB HEILBRUNN
    New York Times
    Saturday, July 5th, 2014

    And, of course, we already know that Wall Street's very comfortable with her, too!

    Wall Street Offers Clinton a Thorny Embrace.”

    By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE and AMY CHOZICK  
    New York Times
    JULY 7, 2014

    As its relationship with Democrats hits a historic low, Wall Street sees a solution on the horizon: Hillary Rodham Clinton….

    Let’s stop right there, at the headline and the first sentence..."thorny embrace" my ass!

    (By the way, this is one hell of an incredible piece of propaganda in today's NYT! Some sincerely twisted bullshit and shilling, to say the least. Quoting Hillary from 2007 & 2008? That's like quoting Barack Obama from 2007 & 2008!)

    "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

    by bobswern on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:14:09 PM PDT

    •  Serious hyperbole in your headline, Turkana... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gooderservice

      2 yrs. and 4 mos. before the 2016 general election; with a 7 pt. lead? That's light years away from the political definition of: "trounce." (Frankly, in practical/political terms, it's meaningless. Those numbers could change overnight; and there are 850 nights between now and November 4th, 2016.)

      "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

      by bobswern on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:24:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Republicans... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bobswern

      will say anything to derail a potential HRC presidency.  Tying HRC to neo-con foreign policy will do that.  This is about pushing the Democrat base against her so that the strongest candidate the Democrats can field can't make it through the increasingly belligerent left-wing base of the Democrat Party.  Looks like they are trying to play the eleventy dimensional chess that the President currently plays.  

      Oh, and I apologize for the dog whistle I just used in this...I recently learned that using "Neo-Conservative" to criticize someone's foreign policy is racist.  

      If it isn't clear enough, this was sarcasm.  If you could only see me while I typed that pile of drivel...my eyes nearly got stuck in the back of my head.  

      "[I]n the absence of genuine leadership, they'll listen to anyone who steps up to the microphone...They're so thirsty for it they'll crawl through the desert toward a mirage, and when they discover there's no water, they'll drink the sand."

      by cardboardurinal on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:35:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Where'd you "learn" this? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cardboardurinal, gooderservice
        ...I recently learned that using "Neo-Conservative" to criticize someone's foreign policy is racist....
        Curious about the source of this faux outrage?

        "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

        by bobswern on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:40:21 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not sure... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          bobswern

          I actually saw it on DKos a week ago.

          "[I]n the absence of genuine leadership, they'll listen to anyone who steps up to the microphone...They're so thirsty for it they'll crawl through the desert toward a mirage, and when they discover there's no water, they'll drink the sand."

          by cardboardurinal on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:58:29 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Here is some discussion: (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          bobswern

          Neo-conservativism isn't racist, it is "Anti-Semitic."  

          "[I]n the absence of genuine leadership, they'll listen to anyone who steps up to the microphone...They're so thirsty for it they'll crawl through the desert toward a mirage, and when they discover there's no water, they'll drink the sand."

          by cardboardurinal on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:02:19 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well, I'm a secular Jew, and that's bullshit... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            cardboardurinal

            ...since the fact of the matter is that the majority of American Jews--those who are tired of the Likud Party's warmongering in Israel--are not, for the most part, neoconservatives, at all.

            Reminds of someone--who was/is NOT Jewish--telling someone in the comments in one of my posts, about six months ago, that the use of the word, "banksters," was an anti-semitic term, and that they preferred using the term, "moneychangers" (which IS a biblically-based, anti-semitic term, by the way), instead!

            Newsflash: There are a lot of religious Jews that are also foreign policy neoconservatives, just like there are a lot of fundamentalist Christians that consider themselves to be neoconservatives. (Jerry Falwell comes to mind, among others.) BTW, Sheldon Adelson, whose political positions offend most Jews that I know, is also (a Jew and) a neoconservative! Ronald Reagan was a neoconservative. Paul Laffer's a neoconservative.

            The term has nothing to do with one's religious beliefs, except for the fact that fundamentalists--regardless of their religious beliefs--tend to be more conservative/neoconservative than non-fundamentalists.

            Anyone who's attempting to pigeonhole those that use the term, neoconservative, as a religious slur are playing rhetorical games, IMHO.

            "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

            by bobswern on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:25:37 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  You're pretty credulous. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      emelyn

      Basically, you've got a headline based on people namedropping their supposed connections to HRC.  Fail.

      Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

      by Inland on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:42:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Once again, you make vacuous comments... (0+ / 0-)

        ...while ignoring the CONTENT in the articles to which I link. You're not credulous. You're just predictable; at least when it comes to my interactions with your shallow comments in this community.

        "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

        by bobswern on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:29:26 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well, I don't believe a neocon (0+ / 0-)

          just because he's saying something about Hillary Clinton.  And I don't try to win the irony sweepstakes.  Is there anyone who you don't simply denounce when he fails to kiss your ring?  Because THAT, dude, is predictable.  

          Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

          by Inland on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:53:08 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Congratulations, you just won irony sweepstakes! (0+ / 0-)

            Because you proved: a.) you didn't read anything regarding that which I was referencing, prior to responding to it; and, b.) even now, after commenting again, either you're ignoring what I wrote, or you still didn't even bother clicking on the links. As I like to tell people, "I keep hitting my head against the wall because it feels so good when I stop!" (But, you just don't know when to stop, do you?)

            "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

            by bobswern on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 02:29:10 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Actually, I read it when it was first published. (0+ / 0-)

              Both of them.  You get your information by searching for blogs that agree with whatever you're grinding at the moment, and if that doesn't work, you misrepresent them.
              I don't.  I actually read a published newspaper, sometimes in actual paper, and don't misrepresent it.

              That's one way to keep from announcing a double dip recession that never came.

              Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

              by Inland on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 03:06:02 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  She "reaches out" all right (0+ / 0-)
    •  Many (0+ / 0-)

      non-neocons are also comfortable with a Hillary presidency, thats the problem for progressives

  •  I never tire of this poll (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Deep Texan, high uintas

    conducted in Alaska by PPP 18 months ago pitting Clinton against Palin (where "name recognition" differences would not be a factor.)

    It's not a match up likely to occur but Clinton would destroy Sarah Palin in a hypothetical match up in the state, 53/37, including a 62/25 lead with independents.
    The sweetness continues:
    To put into perspective just how poorly thought of Palin is in Alaska now, consider this: Congress has an 8% favorability rating in the state. But asked whether they have a higher opinion of Congress or Palin, Alaskans pick Congress by a 50/34 margin.
    http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/...
  •  sweet (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    virginislandsguy

    -You want to change the system, run for office.

    by Deep Texan on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:23:02 PM PDT

  •  It will be fun watching her try to capture... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DeadHead

    the votes of the most ardent Obama supporters while at the same time distancing herself from the President's policies.

    If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

    by HairyTrueMan on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:26:28 PM PDT

  •  asdf (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cybrestrike

    I will not vote for Hillary.

    by dkmich on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 12:38:25 PM PDT

  •  We desparately need an honest media who (0+ / 0-)

    will report facts truthfully.  Not just that, but actually reports on current events vs. all this infotainment crap.

    Dallasdoc: "Snowden is the natural successor to Osama bin Laden as the most consequential person in the world, as his actions have the potential to undo those taken in response to Osama."

    by gooderservice on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:11:59 PM PDT

  •  Cool (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DeadHead

    No one needs to do anything. No gotv, no donations, no registration of voters. Nothing. Hillary Clinton is the winner, everyone go home.

    I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

    by jbou on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:12:01 PM PDT

  •  Hillary's spent the last week tacking hard right (0+ / 0-)

    with macho talk about Edward Snowden being a scum-sucking traitor and a Putin-lover.  She intersperses this talk with bald-faced lies about the kind of legal defense whistleblowers get in our "justice" system.  Fuck her.  She's not getting my vote.  She's trash.

  •  Good news for John McCain: (0+ / 0-)
    Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Tuesday said her favorite Republican in Congress is Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).
    Great news.  Wonder if she wins if she'll appoint McCain Secretary of Defense or even Secretary of State.

    Can't wait to find out.

    http://thehill.com/...

    Dallasdoc: "Snowden is the natural successor to Osama bin Laden as the most consequential person in the world, as his actions have the potential to undo those taken in response to Osama."

    by gooderservice on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 01:17:54 PM PDT

  •  Ann Coulter endorsed Hillary in 2008 (0+ / 0-)

    if the general came down to a contest between her and John McCain.

    "She's more conservative than he is," Coulter said on Fox News. "She lies less than John McCain. She's smarter than John McCain.

    "I will campaign for her if it's McCain," she said.

    This was full-throated endorsement from Ann Fucking Coulter, and it wasn't something she said just once. Coulter mentioned it in multiple interviews and op-ed pieces.   Of course the Hillary fan club has expunged this ugliness from their memories, but I remember it well.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/...

  •  All she needs if Obama's endorsement n/t (0+ / 0-)
  •  How exciting. When it comes to issue-promotion (0+ / 0-)

    time (assuming that for once substantive issues can't be avoided in Presidential races) I wonder which of these Hillary will be pushing the most?

    1. Prosecution of ongoing and past criminal activity by the banking class.
    2. Pulling out of the endless war on endless MONSTERS ABROAD everyone in decision making seems to think matters more than saving our own cities
    3. Reversing the Corporate takeover of damn near everything
    4. Acting decisively against the machinations of the Toxic Fuel Industry
    5. Ending the Stalker State, with both its governmental and business arms
    6. Finally give us the Apollo Program, and do everything possible to stop exporting jobs overseas

    Yeah, ol' Hill is going to turn this nation around. And there is nobody, not one other person in America who can defeat a Republican. At least, not without having to raise issues that matter to people.

    Remember, if Hillary wins, then America wi... well, at least it won't be Republicans messing us up. Smell the enthusiasm.


    A government is a body of people usually notably ungoverned. -- Firefly

    by Jim P on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 02:09:09 PM PDT

  •  All you have to do is read the comments on this (0+ / 0-)

    diary to know just how badly the next 17 months are going to suck here in Kossakstan.

    Non futuis apud Boston

    by kenlac on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 03:12:08 PM PDT

  •  It takes time for any candidate to get into a (0+ / 0-)

    rhythm. She's using this time to figure out how to approach the 2016 election. What she seems to be learning is that speaking out on the issues that matter to base voters (hobby lobby and gay rights) resonate and talking about what DC wants to talk about (Benghazi and old stuff) doesn't.  I've also noticed that she has started to dial back some of her rhetoric distancing herself from Obama.  I think she has learned from being on the trail that despite the ephemeral poll numbers, Obama is a giant in American politics who resonates with the bloc of voters that will guarantee her a victory.

    Global Shakedown - Alternative rock with something to say. Check out their latest release, "A Time to Recognize": Available on iTunes, Amazon, Google Play, Spotify and other major online music sites. Visit http://www.globalshakedown.com.

    by khyber900 on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 03:32:05 PM PDT

  •   the media is a joke (0+ / 0-)

    One of worse is Chris Matthews.  All week he has been bad mouthing the President.  All that seems ti matter to Matthews is photo op events.  Is that what it has all come down to?  that is depressing.

    of course, Hillary did not have a bad week.  Little slips do not make a bad week.

    "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Riane Eisler

    by noofsh on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 04:49:59 PM PDT

  •  pivoting to the general before the primary (0+ / 0-)

    ...is pretty strange. Why on earth, given the screamingly obvious history of the past six years (at least) would Hillary take Obama to task for not cooperating with Republicans more? Talking like this before the primary season has yet to begin is...odd.

    More to the point, the criticism is hardly accurate. Obama, in many ways, whether from pragmatic calculation or genuine belief, has been in the view of many not too resistant but rather too accommodating to dead-end conservative intransigence. There was the "pivot" away from employment and toward the deficit in the first term, for example, as well as Geithner at the Fed and the Repub SecDefs. The first time the default hostage takers pledged to send the country over the cliff, Obama cut a deal. Obama also declared himself open to the "grand bargain" (perhaps calling a bluff, but still going on the record for cutting social security).

    However, admirably, the second time the Republican hostage takers tried to use default to extract more from Obama, he simply and unequivocally said no, as well he should have.  

    Would Hillary have played ball with the default hostage-takers the second time around?  Or is this example of Obama not compromising okay with her? Someone should ask her.

  •  51% is a lot better (0+ / 0-)

    That's a clear victory.

  •  Of course she trounces them. (4+ / 0-)

    I'm not exactly her biggest fan--she's a corporatist Dem. But so far she's facing a who's who of right-wing morons. In fact, even despite Dubya, this field is even more "Dem friendly" so than it was in 2008.

    I could be wrong, but so far I believe whoever wins the DNC nomination will win the general, even if it isn't Hillary.

    •  Arguably, any other half way decent Dem would (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Shaylors Provence, karma13612

      do better than HRC, given the rabid hatred of her on the right, and the palpable disgust among those of us on the left who are determined to break the cycle of rotating chairs among neocons and neolibs.

      Just HOW do we get our representatives to move in a populist direction without threatening electoral consequences for their willful failure to do so? (This is the issue routinely avoided by party loyalists at the GOS.)

      by WisePiper on Thu Jul 10, 2014 at 06:51:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Hmmmm...a political analysis that considers... (0+ / 0-)

        the right and a tiny fringe of the left wing.

        It's a good thing that liberals and moderates aren't any sort of meaningful force in American elections, or your analysis might have been severely wanting.

        Art is the handmaid of human good.

        by joe from Lowell on Thu Jul 10, 2014 at 08:21:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  joe, there'll come a day when (0+ / 0-)

          enthusiastic supporters of the pols who enable the looting of the commons will be widely and justifiably derided for calling themselves "liberals." Until then, enjoy your newspeak.

          Just HOW do we get our representatives to move in a populist direction without threatening electoral consequences for their willful failure to do so? (This is the issue routinely avoided by party loyalists at the GOS.)

          by WisePiper on Thu Jul 10, 2014 at 08:58:00 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  WisePiper, there will never be a day, ever, when.. (0+ / 0-)

            your political opinions will be widely supported.

            Sorry you hate liberalism, man.

            Art is the handmaid of human good.

            by joe from Lowell on Thu Jul 10, 2014 at 09:05:52 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  More of your absurd newspeak. (0+ / 0-)

              "Liberalism" has never (except in its neo incarnation), ever been about enriching the elites and solidifying their stranglehold on the nation's economy.

              Clinton, Obama, Clinton - masterful in their ability to gauge the direction the American People are already moving on social issues while they beat feet to rush to the front of the parade. Meanwhile, often under the radar, these three have worked overtime to cede America's sovereignty to stateless multi-national actors.

              Take comfort in your ongoing willful ignorance. I weep for your children and mine, who will likely never know America's promise.

              Just HOW do we get our representatives to move in a populist direction without threatening electoral consequences for their willful failure to do so? (This is the issue routinely avoided by party loyalists at the GOS.)

              by WisePiper on Thu Jul 10, 2014 at 09:20:51 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Someone has a new 50 cent word! (0+ / 0-)

                Good for you, buddy!

                (Is "buddy" newspeak? It is, isn't it? After all, it's something that bothers you, so it must be).

                And no, liberalism isn't about enriching the blabby blabby blah blah. That's just the language you decided to use to describe contemporary liberalism, and I ignored it to talk about actual liberalism.

                It's kinda cute the way you go off on irrelevant tears over whatever is floating through your head at the moment whenever you get worked up.

                Art is the handmaid of human good.

                by joe from Lowell on Fri Jul 11, 2014 at 06:37:16 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  That would not surprise me one bit. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        WisePiper

        Just like Obama coasted past everybody else after the right threw everything and the sink at Hillary before the official nomination. Only to sneak up from behind before they could coordinate their attacks against him as the #1 enemy of the right.

        It wouldn't surprise me, nor would it bother me, if it happened again. In fact, given her husband's legacy, which includes NAFTA, I hope someone else does. And I hope that someone has the last name Warren, Sanders or Brown (Sherrod Brown).

    •  It's a weak field, even before indictments (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      joe from Lowell

      are handed down.  Nobody is going to say that Christie or Walker managed their states competently.   And money can only do so much.

      Paraphrasing Mencken, today's republicans are motivated by the haunting fear that somewhere, some black guy may be getting away with something.

      by Inland on Thu Jul 10, 2014 at 07:41:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Neoliberals who smile win over the ones who don't (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WisePiper, elwior

    Thank Jesus the oligarchs will still be safe from the 99% come 2016.

    Hillary does not have the benefit of a glib tongue.

    by The Dead Man on Thu Jul 10, 2014 at 06:23:23 PM PDT

  •  She looks good against the yahoos the GOP (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elwior, joe from Lowell

    wheel out.  Now, my big wish is for her to get a robust primary challenge.  She is an uninspiring candidate in the sort of neutered economy we are facing - a lot of the chickens of the Clinton years coming home to roost (let alone the GOP who made it worse).  A robust challenge would make her a better candidate and one who might actually provide something other than corporatist neoliberal claptrap.

    After all, Team Clinton was who unleashed Rahm Emanuel and Blue Dogs on this country.  

  •  Hilary Clinton 2012 (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elwior, Shaylors Provence

    The polls may or may not look good for Hillary Clinton, but for me (and I consider myself unrepentant liberal), she is not a candidate I will vote for.

    Why should I? For voting for the Iraq war, or suggesting that we train 100,000 Islamist to overthrow  Assad? Or continuing to demonize  Snowden in her continuing support of the surveillance state?

    You can keep Hillary but count me out, but her rock star fame does not impress e. She is a better fit to the republican party.

  •  Anyone who supports Monasanto (0+ / 1-)
    Recommended by:
    Hidden by:
    Jeff Simpson

    and  Big Ag will never get our vote.

    Go Green because voting for Hillary will just be a waste of your vote.

    •  Green Party? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      joe from Lowell

      You are advocating for a third party on a Democratic blog?  

      It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

      by Radiowalla on Thu Jul 10, 2014 at 07:03:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Given his/her username, and the clear content of (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Small Family Farmer

        the comment, "Go Green" is just as likely to be an entreaty to reject the corrupt horror of corporate farming, and those who enable them, than an exhortation to bolt to the Green Party. Absent clarification, I think it's premature to add this user to the ban list so feverishly advocated by many Hillary supporters.

        Just HOW do we get our representatives to move in a populist direction without threatening electoral consequences for their willful failure to do so? (This is the issue routinely avoided by party loyalists at the GOS.)

        by WisePiper on Thu Jul 10, 2014 at 07:15:04 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Thank you for your consideration WisePiper (0+ / 0-)

          but I've obviously made a mistake in thinking this was a forum for Progressive thinkers and not a competitor with DU.

          We've had a POTUS and a Democratically controlled Senate for six years who have done NOTHING to end "the corrupt horror of corporate farming, and those who enable them". Apparently your party is now going to support a candidate who believes Monsanto is a power for good in agriculture.

          I'll pass. If any of you feel the need to formally ban me, so be it. I've got too much to do to spend time with a community that apparently hasn't paid attention to this quote of Einstein's "We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them."

          Thanks again WP but I'm afraid I'm one of those people who feels the Democratic Party has lost its way and soul. I will leave you all to your belief that the Democratic Party has not become a wholly owned subsidiary of those who profit from feeding off of and exploiting the vast majority of us.

          My apologies.

          •  Thanks for your comment. (0+ / 0-)

            While advocating for a third party violates this site's rules, I do hope you'll stick around and continue to contribute your point of view about corporate farming, and any other issue that stirs your passion.

            Some of us here believe the Democratic Party can still be reformed, if only we find the courage to hold its bad actors accountable at the ballot box when they break faith with the American People.

            Just HOW do we get our representatives to move in a populist direction without threatening electoral consequences for their willful failure to do so? (This is the issue routinely avoided by party loyalists at the GOS.)

            by WisePiper on Thu Jul 10, 2014 at 07:45:29 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Since you have better things to do, ban yourself. (0+ / 0-)

            Bye! Thanks for leaving us!

            Art is the handmaid of human good.

            by joe from Lowell on Thu Jul 10, 2014 at 08:19:47 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  We are, in fact, very interested (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Remediator

            in industrial agriculture and, speaking for myself, would welcome diaries on the topic .  VLBaker used to run a series of diaries on factory farming and they were very well received.

            Bashing Democrats is less popular, however, since this is a site that wishes to improve the quality and quantity of Democrats in government.  

            It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

            by Radiowalla on Thu Jul 10, 2014 at 08:34:31 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  And that's why I didn't HR the (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          WisePiper

          comment in the first place.  

          It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

          by Radiowalla on Thu Jul 10, 2014 at 08:27:16 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Progressives have had (0+ / 0-)

      Green and other third party options on their ballots in previous elections and in every case all but ignored them and supported the Democratic ticket.  

      The Green Party has some very smart people in it but not very many people altogether, not enough to sway the majority of progressive votes in a national election, and nowhere near enough to threaten the present two major parties.  

      No arithmetic at the moment supports a likelihood of a third party triumph for the 2016 election.  They won't be remotely competitive, in fact.  

      If any did, people still voting for either of the two major parties have the same right to do so as you do to bolt for the Greens.  

      No vote is a 'waste.'  It's how the game is played.  

      "How can we know the dancer from the dance?" (Yeats)

      by Remediator on Fri Jul 11, 2014 at 03:38:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Some of these threads here absolutely blow my (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sandy on Signal, joe from Lowell

    mind. I'd say nine points these days is damned good.

    What do they expect her to have these days? A lead of twenty points? Even with her "name recognition?" Ain't ever going to happen in this divided a country.

    Just with the women's vote alone she'll dominate a Rand Paul or a Chris Christie. Even by the election. But women will turn and support a Paul or a Ted Cruz over her?
    Shit.

    I'd say with this divided, polarized nation she'd win by 51-52% to 47-48% Yep, that's a prediction. She'll win by 3-4 points. And I'll fricking take it. That's what we'd be glad to win by in a national election these days.

    "The soil under the grass is dreaming of a young forest, and under the pavement the soil is dreaming of grass."--Wendell Berry

    by Wildthumb on Thu Jul 10, 2014 at 07:10:33 PM PDT

  •  Here is a good breakdown (0+ / 0-)

    of the polling over the past year. All I see is blue...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/...

  •  I'll vote for a cinderblock. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jeremimi, joe from Lowell, Odysseus

    So long as it promises to nominate liberals and moderates to SCOTUS.

  •  Let's skip the primary, (0+ / 0-)

    then skip the election, and make Hillary Queen.  Maybe we can be her vassals?

    In the GOP your status is inversely proportional to your integrity.

    by anothergreenbus on Thu Jul 10, 2014 at 07:54:23 PM PDT

  •  Yay. (0+ / 0-)

    Political dynasties are so invigorating.

    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

    by DocGonzo on Thu Jul 10, 2014 at 07:54:44 PM PDT

  •  The real key (0+ / 0-)

    is the fact that the republicans are scared to death about having to run against Hilary. They know that every one of their lackeys is a weak failure and will not stand a chance against her. That is why they are already lashing out whenever they get a chance. They know they will not have nearly as difficult time if the Dem candidate is Sen. Warren or Gov. O'Malley. You can rant and scream all you want but the TRUTH be told: Hilary Clinton will be so much more formidable than any other Dem candidate, will have very long coat tails and the Republicans know it. Also, remember how vital it is that there is a Dem in the WH to appoint the next 4 justices to the SCOTUS almost certain to come open before 2020. BTW, anyone who would not be absolutely thrilled with a 7-9 point win has been smoking way too much dope and needs to take a long nap.
    This is not good for John McCain.

  •  President Obama set a high standard.. (0+ / 0-)

       After being elected in '04 he went all out to elect a Democratic  Congress working with Howard Dean's 50 state strategy.
      And The Ds won. His supporters did not seek to preempt
    other campaigns. Until he announced few knew or thought he would run. He took on and welcomed all comers. And the party was strengthened. Plus he earned a lot of real IOUs based on his electoral performance in the '06 midterms, campaigning for others and being a team player.  
          Now going into the mid terms, who is the tip of the spear going forward.? Joe Biden has proven far more effective in winning  blue collar voters and his region, Pa Del Ohio, than Bill Clinton every was in carrying his, Ark Tenn Texas Ga  Joe Biden?  He knows how to campaign and fire up the base.
        The  Democratic Party would be far better off, if Joe Biden was seen as the presumptive nominee and inheritor of the Obama Machine and base mandate, going in to these midterms    Just from a point of tactics, strategy. Joe knows how to win. Others are already shrinking.  They don't want to be blamed if Ds fail to take the house and hold the senate. Fine.  That is why r'ight now' we need Joe Biden and President Obama focusing on what they do better than any team in the past 50 years of D party politics.      
       Then if Joe Biden decided to run or not, then to door would be open for others.
         Thinking about '16 too early is proving to have been a big tactical blunder. One, that has hurt the party's chances in '14. The good part there is time to correct this error, get Joe out front and win back the House and hold the Senate      

  •  Hillary the Corporatist (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    peregrine kate

    I'm far more interested in seeing her numbers against people like Elizabeth Warren or Howard Dean should either change their mind and seriously decide to run. The populist movement is gaining steam.

    I'll be watching the Republican primaries for amusement. I'll be watching the Democratic primaries for the soul and future of our nation.

  •  So are the PUMA's coming back (0+ / 0-)

    Remember those folks that left.

    "In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became 50,000 friends. In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets. " James Webb, Sep 02

    by ParaHammer on Fri Jul 11, 2014 at 10:19:13 AM PDT

  •  GMO Zionist fan Hillary (0+ / 0-)

    Is going to sink the Democrats.

  •  fast question: WHAT Dem. primary field? (0+ / 0-)

    Please. Tell me names.

    I admire Hillary deeply, I get very POed at people who trash her, and I'd vote for her in a NewYork-minute against any of the current Republicans.

    But while I admire her, I don't think she's the president we need now. I wish Elizabeth Warren were a possibility, but I'll respect her right to not want to go through that circus/sausage mill (any presidential campaign). That leaves me, though, and many others looking around.

    Don't we have any progressives talking about running other than Bernie?

    One size of anything NEVER fits all.

    by KDfrAZ on Sat Jul 12, 2014 at 04:07:32 PM PDT

  •  Romney in a landslide! (0+ / 0-)

    Right Republicans?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site