We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Tuesday, October 9. 2007
Today at 4. It's easy to like the guy, but let's see what he has under the hood.
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
If I were he, I wouldn’t be interested in running. There’s too much in-house pettiness and chicanery within the GOP, and the electorate is in the irrational mood of wanting a supposed change for the sake of change, even if it means rejecting the less than ideal Republicans in favor of the corrupt and demonstrably crazy Dems. “Change” will be another Clinton co-Presidency, but perhaps this one WILL be different, with Chelsea of age and perhaps willing to join a triumvirate.
Fred and the others won’t stand a chance against the Hillary. It will be a gentleman’s loss for him and country club Repubs in ‘08, a domestic and foreign policy defeat for all of us for years to come. Some might say losing will re-energize the party and core principles, but i have to wonder to what end, since the country under two terms of a liberal- transnational Dem WH and Congress could very well Progress to the point that conservatives will be left with arguing whether we should bend on the right or left knee when apologizing to the world and to all of the aggrieved (and growing) minority/ special interest groups here at home.
Oh, the regrets.
Hang in there Kirby...Hillary has not a shred of charisma. And, she and her co-candidate have a truckload of baggage to deal with. She won't play well outside of the major metro-centers. That may well be enough but the battle is not over by a long shot.
What you say is objectively true, but I and some others I know in biz and politics (not arch cons by any means) don't believe it will matter in the case of Hill&Bill. No one dislikes Hillary and her ideas more than conservatives, but our voting allegiance has faltered in recent times over differences, and the vast center seems fairly open to the First Lady-Senator and not the least bit hostile to her proposals, which she frames quite astutely. And voters still like Bill, which I'll never understand. Ever.
The mo is there for some unknowable reason and the back-channel media and policy politicking with oodles of Soros and other money is becoming a below the surface PR tsunami that the Repubs so far have been unable to stem. Or effectively counter with their own.
This could be another '06 election in which the GOP hopes only to hold onto its seats in Congress. Could be a squeaker, but I doubt it- think subconscious choices have already been made, waiting only to be formalized at the polls. We can bet on the media being smarter and more disciplined this Presidential election, too.
I'm less despondent over this likely prospect than accepting of a new political reality, not a good one, imo, but things change and life moves on. I'll adapt to a blue state mentality on the streets and stay red at home, if it's to be Presidents Clinton and a new age of global progress :)
Of course, she could always blow it during the campaign season by dissing Jews, the military, stay-at-home mothers, white men, etc. Oh wait, she's already done that and she's leading the pack of contenders. We'll see. So far she and the Clinton machine are running a pretty tight campaign.
Good points all Kirby... I tend to think that as the next fourteen months or so unfolds that another Clinton Presidency will start to look like a re-run of a bad movie. Also, despite all Bill's vaunted popularity, I don't think he got a majority of popular votes in either election. I seem to recall 43% in 92 and 49% in 96. Again, I don't think Hillary has any charm at all so she will have an uphill battle on a purely personal level. But...We shall see. As for the grand old party, they need to run a technically solid campaign with a viable candidate. No, we can't run another Bob Dole and expect to win. I love Bob Dole but believe he was way past his prime when he ran against Bill. I won't go into my pick for the Republican's as it does not matter to me so much as he be a strong, viable candidate with obvious leadership ability. If so, I think the country will make the right choice...regards,
geez, your post is going to give me nightmares tonight. if she wins and a mass suicide follows, i guess we'll know who drank the juice first.
WTH are you talking about? Suicide? Get a grip. The personal swipes are fun here. Civil discourse is no longer for conservatives.
Perhaps someone has not been reading the news and analyses everywhere that show the GOP is playing defense to the Dems who are setting the agenda and showing more party discipline, despite the mental whackos on the Left. It's almost delusional for people to think Hillary isn't a very strong possibility-probablity for the WH in '08.
I've presented a fairly straight-forward case, in civil tones, that isn't earth-shatteringly bizarre, and you'd think I just threw my drink in your faces. How we discuss and disagree matters.
Wow. That was lovely.
Party insiders I know say exactly what I just said. Will pass on your advice.
Those brainy party insiders created the mess. What do they know?
That's right. They know nothing, and I'm an idiot. Point well taken. We should all be assured that how the "base" acts has nothing to do with the GOP and conservatism having started to slide these least few years. Evidently, it's only about those in charge because they didn't do what we advised them to do (never mind that there have been a thousand absolutely correct positions that the GOP should've taken as pointed out by thousands of us).
I accept shared responsibility for Republican losses. I don't accept ad hominem, though, when nothing personally rude was done to prompt it.
Gingrich said his party does face a tough road in its quest to re-capture the White House. "I think the odds are 80 per cent that Sen. Clinton is the next president; I think she is almost certainly going to win the Democratic nomination," he said of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-New York. "And I think unless the Republicans can find a way to represent real change for the current situation in Washington, unless they can convince the American people they represent fundamental change, I think they'll have a very hard time."
I support Thompson or any other GOP candidate, but just because I happen to think Hillary and her unfortunate policies stand a very good chance of winning in '08 doesn't make me a bad guy, suicidal, or in need of Prozac. With that kind of reflexive denial and shoot the messenger/ smear a discussant mentality, the GOP is sure to keep supporters and win new ones--- (Thanks Anonymous and Scott for your considered replies.)
The Republican Party appears to be coalescing around the happy assumption that, while Hillary Clinton will win the Democratic nomination, she cannot be elected. So, the self-delusive logic says, she is really God's gift to the Republican Party.
This optimistic set of assumptions comes through loud and clear in the comments the president and Karl Rove made to Bill Sammon as he interviewed them for his new book Strategery. But their confidence indicates simply that they don't even begin to understand what they will be up against in a Hillary candidacy.
It has always been Mrs. Clinton's strategery to wrap herself in the generic. By embracing a set of liberal issues, she avoids personal scrutiny. By identifying with working women who are "trying to balance career and family", she buys a pass on charges of a conflict of interest over Rose Law Firm representation of Arkansas while her husband was governor. And now, by hiding behind the generic question of "Are we ready for a woman president?" she invites the question of whether we want this particular woman in the Oval Office.
The cultural forces that Hillary's candidacy will unleash - from the media, from Hollywood and from the cultural icons who decree our lifestyles - will be far beyond those that normally line up behind a presidential candidate. A small foretaste emerged in ABC TV's show "Commander in Chief," in which Geena Davis plays a female president who masters the men and the crises that litter her path. What other presidential candidacy was foreshadowed by a prime-time, hour-long weekly television show?
Hillary's candidacy will not be Democratic so much as demographic and not nearly as political as it will be cultural. The pent-up emotions of half of America will rise to the surface just as Catholics rallied to JFK's candidacy in 1960.
And white women are the swing vote in our politics…[read the rest]
Kirby: You are not an idiot. Not by any means. I just don't think you can call a game before the first inning is over.
Thanks, BD. Predictions are done in sports and politics all of the time. People even make and lose money over them. You know about those markets.
If we don't face up to the very real possibility that Hillary will win and get it together without all of us thousands of brilliant Repubs who want our own way, second and third guessing every single issue all of the time, even during an important election, our prospects will be dim.
Counting on the anti-Hillary vote isn't near enough. Anyway, polls show her gaining in popularity:(
Go, Thompson! May he and the other candidates offer up some esp resonating real-world conservative principle and platform. And may the rest of us go along more cohesively if we really want the win we say we do.
IOW, it's not enough that our nominee be the anti-Hillary. imo.
Agree. This focus on 'personality' will cost the Right in '08. There seems to be little thought or effort towards building a strong platform that can support the candidate, whomever that candidate is. I think that the values that are important to Republicans are very often the same as those that are important to Democrats and if those values are supported and articulated and repeated they will resonate. Ms. Clinton would then have a solid opponent and the voters would have a real choice.
Also, I still think a third party "spoiler", such as Perot or Nader is a definite possibility.