Maggie's Farm

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

Much Sorry with Delays
Birth, Death and All That Stuff in Between
How to Honor Labor Day, Every Day
My Yom Kippur Miracle (Repost from 2010)
Good intro to fly casting
Peach update, with pie
NYC update
Easy for you to say: To the elites on mass immigration
For NYC on 9/11, Sailors' Snug Harbor
Pickled Peaches
Water Shoes
Labor Costs in U.S.
Your "identity"
Good news about The Great Courses
Uses of Hot Pepper Jelly/Sauce, Chutneys, and Jams
A Saturday Drive to Litchfield County, CT
How to Pick a Kayak
Civilized: Fruit forks and knives
Loads of kayaking on Cape Cod
Psychology Experiments' Questionable Results

Categories


All categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Add to Google

Subscribe with Bloglines

Monday, January 7. 2008

Talk of a Hillary exit?

This is astonishing news - that people are actually talking about it. Her national polls are tanking. They say she will be running out of money, too.

What was the foundation for her campaign, with all of its trappings of inevitability? Is it possible that very few Dems ever really found her an attractive candidate? And why on earth did she ever let her husband campaign for her? That is dumb dumb dumb: as somebody noted somewhere, we never saw Dennis Thatcher campaigning for Maggie.

Update: Many, like Blue Crab, smell a rat.

Posted by Bird Dog in Politics at 14:10 | Comments (21) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

A lot of folks ain't buying it, saying it's a ploy. I do think people are starting to realize having Clintons back in the White House is something they don't want to go through again.
#1 Santay on 2008-01-07 15:23 (Reply)
If it's true, it's not a good thing. Hillary is the least electable of the Democrats -- nobody else would motivate more conservatives to get to the polls and vote. If Obama gets the nomination, I suspect we can pop corn, sit back, and watch the Democrats destroy his chances -- the nutroots hate him, and the identity politics folks do, too. He's not "black enough," you know. The candidate to fear is Edwards -- see Iowa and Huckabee.

I suspect Hillary will stay in until the last cent is gone. She wants the power too badly.
#2 rightwingprof (Link) on 2008-01-07 15:42 (Reply)
''She wants the power too badly''

Right -- she's as mad as a hatter for it --bonkers, nuts, insane for it.
#3 buddy larsen on 2008-01-07 16:17 (Reply)
If the tearing up in Plymouth is as advertised, then it is possible she might have had momentary feelings of hopelessness, and even said something which was overheard. But she cannot stay away. This is what she has lived for, and has sacrificed everything to it - except perhaps her daughter, for which I give her credit. She has traded all the good things we seek in life - a decent marriage, honor, friendships, even money for many years, (though that has proved important to her as well). Like Al Gore, she has nothing else. However bloodied, she will re-enter the fray. She has nothing left to lose.
#4 Assistant Village Idiot (Link) on 2008-01-07 17:59 (Reply)
She's finished. A true potemkin candidate discarded by the dem media as soon as they found a more appealing potemkin candidate, BHO, who is much more dangerous. He'll be practically immune from criticism from the PC lefty media, and has the rock star appeal to capture the youth vote, who are apparently finally motivated to go to the polls. How many brainwashed students who see the world through the eyes of the likes of Howard Zinn have entered the voting ranks since 2000? He's the perfect PC Tranzi candidate, right down to refusing to hold his hand over his heart during the pledge of allegiance. The Gramscian plan is unfolding and we are at the tipping point. I think Fred's the only Repub who could beat him, and the media knows it and treats him like a leper. It doesn't look good.
#5 Paul on 2008-01-07 18:37 (Reply)
You have both Gramsci and Zinn in your post! Congrats! We did a longpost on Gramsci a while back, and have a piece on Zinn in the pipeline.
#5.1 BD on 2008-01-07 18:46 (Reply)
Paul, at least the election will be a clean fight between the left and the right. With the Clintons in it, it--the election, the nation, the future--will all be reduced to another dreary, demorlizing leg of the Clinton's private "journey".
#5.2 buddy larsen on 2008-01-07 18:56 (Reply)
True, but if the left wins and they go on to implement their socialist-pacifist policies with a Dem congress and President we are in for hard times. Right now the Islamists are back on their heels, but given time to regroup and a soft, concilliatory American foreign policy they could strike a callamitous blow. If I were them I would never attack the USA again until I was able to get nukes in American cities and do it right. 911 tipped their hand to early. I think they understand that now, and are prepared to wait for us to go to go to sleep in Obama-fantasy land until they can adequately prepare to really cut the tendons of American civilisation.

Even if the WOT isn't an issue entering the socialist black hole is likely to be fatal. Only the USA prevented worldwide socialism from prevailing in the 20th century. I'm much more worried than I was anticipating a Rudy-Hillary matchup.
#5.2.1 Paul on 2008-01-07 19:46 (Reply)
well, you do far a fact make some good points -- perhaps I'm a little blinded by the light of the possibility of the end of the Clintons.
#5.2.1.1 buddy larsen on 2008-01-07 19:51 (Reply)
Sure, the demise the Clinton juggernaut is delicious, though the fact that it's turning out to be such a house of cards is a bit surreal. But winning the battle only to lose the war is not what we want obviously. I think she would have been much easier to beat as she just doesn't have the personal appeal of an Obama. That's how I see it now but who knows how things will shake out. Things that appear certain one week are phantoms the next it seems.

Just want to add Buddy that I think you are one of the most interesting and informed commenters in the b-sphere, and a real gentleman.
#5.2.1.1.1 Paul on 2008-01-07 21:20 (Reply)
well that--and LSU's 17 unanswered points ag/ the Buckeyes--just made my day!
:-)
#5.2.1.1.1.1 buddy larsen on 2008-01-07 21:32 (Reply)
Well the useful idiots are multiplying at a frightening rate and it helps to understand their pedigree, even if they do not. What gets me is why more pundits on the right don't talk about it.
#6 Paul on 2008-01-07 18:56 (Reply)
It's certainly intriguing, because there are two seriously opposing forces involved. As 'rightwingprog' said, she's positively slobbering for power, but, on the other hand, as the article stated:

"She doesn't want the Clinton brand to be damaged with back-to-back-to-back defeats."

There's something to that. Better to just bow out gracefully and go back to being a powerful, popular senator than have the word 'loser' attached to your name for all eternity, a la Al Gore, John Kerry, et al.

On the other hand, as soon as I saw James Carville's name mentioned, I went "Uh-oh!", because if Carville is involved, you're almost guaranteed that some kind of chicanery is going on.

Me, I've figured on there being five steps from the beginning.

#1, Hillary does fabulously in the polls because it's just so cool to be a liberal and be for Hillary, but

#2, when they actually get there in the voting booth, all alone, with no one watching, they're

#3, going to think about 9/11 and Iran going nuclear and 'dirty bombs' -- and it's all going to flash through their head in a second -- and then they're going to

#4, think of how tired they are of "Bush" and "Clinton" and "brands" and "dynasties", and

#5, they're going to vote for the male and tell everyone who asks "Of course I voted for Hillary!"

I've always thought that Hillary being female was the single greatest asset the Republicans could have. I think a whole pisspot full of Dems, especially men, are going to get in the voting booth, glance around to make sure the wife isn't looking, then hit the button for the man.

Human nature.

I'd rather rely on it than a million polls.

In the meantime, the right-wing bloggers have just spent the past year expending 95% of their political energy tearing her down, never quite asking themselves the question: If Hillary's knocked out, who does that leave?

Well, in my opinion, it leaves someone with a lot better chance of winning the White House. So, do you want an inexperienced rookie in the White House or a glorified dandy?

I'm going with the rookie. I think the 'Pubs are going to get clobbered, and, looking back, the pundits will say the RW bloggers should have realized the fight was hopeless and given more support to their Congressional races. It won't feel like that at the time, but that's what the critique will be, hindsight being 20/20 and all.

Not that anyone's interested, but I make a short case for Obama here:

http://www.dr-mercury.com/tb/tbobama.htm
____________________________________

In other news, I saw one of the most amazing videos yesterday. Near the end, "Okay, Color Me Surprised".

I'll say.

http://www.dr-mercury.com/tb/tbshortvids.htm
#7 Dr. Mercury (Link) on 2008-01-07 19:15 (Reply)
This rare footaage demonstrates the squeakying, whining noise ploy of the tiny weasel. Seldom seen or heard, it is used only to get a large bovine or other ruminant to lower it's head. When the giant bovine's head is in position the tiny weasel leaps up and rips out the bovine's throat. Then the weasel eats for days and days.
#8 Carl H. (Link) on 2008-01-07 21:46 (Reply)
American voteing a muslim into Whitehouse is jihadi dream.

Y'all may vote it but the Whitehouse will not be taken by miscreant mob.

Kenyan politics may work for Hampster's but y'all are just a B rated movie, like Hussein.

Hillbillary cain't but smell like a rat.

There is a conspiracy theory that her candidacy is but a whip to propell Khalifa to nomination but ya'at'eeh;

Moslem dimwits believe a girly faced buraq ass ended-whipped Muhammad beyond the throne of Jesus and back to Medina, though the fable has come down to white dhimmi that he lighted back in Jerusalem.

What with mormon gods created on earth and moslem khalif running for American presidency what's a girl to do.

Smell like a rat, a cat, a buraq tail, underside of a cockroach...anybody to win the prize.

She is getting cuter.

Nominate that girl, democrats.
#9 Leag on 2008-01-07 23:20 (Reply)
She wasn't named after Sir Edmund Hillary just to give up on this mountain climb. She's just at a base camp. She's seen the mountain top!
#10 bob on 2008-01-08 02:23 (Reply)
She did claim she was named after Hillary -- but she was IIRC (from reading about this little 'tell') already seven years old when Sir Edmond made his famous climb.

So either she had no name for seven years ("Hey Nameless, time to start second grade!"), or ma & pa knew when she was born that there was this guy named Hillary who would in about seven years time surely climb Everest and become famous enough to name a kid after--or before.
#10.1 buddy larsen on 2008-01-08 08:10 (Reply)
Or she's a serial confabulator. I'm pretty sure that's a requirement for all Dem candidates.
#10.1.1 Paul on 2008-01-08 11:27 (Reply)
Scrappleface says she can claim her last name is after a former President of the United States, buddy, and she be telling da truth for once :)

When she was born Sir Edmund was an unknown beekeeper.
#11 bob on 2008-01-08 13:38 (Reply)
"Unknown" ? well, as she would likely say, you can say that because you're not a bee.

If you were a bee, seeing your hive shrink and finding pollen and nectar harder and harder to find, you'd have more respect for the beekeeper, instead of joining the vast beekeeper disrespect conspiracy.

and oh yes, the beekeeper needs money. no, not a contribution -- your money. all of it. now.
#11.1 buddy larsen on 2008-01-08 15:33 (Reply)
Hillary's mum inculcated in her that 'flexible, results oriented approach to truth' , necessary in today's political world, according to scrappleface :)
#12 bob on 2008-01-08 13:44 (Reply)

Add Comment
(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)

By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email
addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications.

Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u],
[url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here.

Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

BBCode format allowed
 
 
A Chris Southern Consulting website.