Heyo, long time no talk.
I have a question for you. I need you to explain to my why Hillary is worth defending.
Hillary is, by far, the demo front-runner.
Logic would seem to suggest those who don't
support the front-runner might need to do
the explaining, not the other way around. If
there comes a time when she's no longer the
front-runner in a scientific poll, and I still
insist she's outr best chance, get back to me.
I am honestly not seeing it. Beyond her
policy blunders is the simple fact that very few
white men south and west of New York are going
to vote for her in '08, under any circumstances.
That's a recipie for electoral disaster.
Again.
I don't think the numbers are with you on that.
Are you talking science or a "gut feeling?"
Going from memory, Gore won about 50 percent of
the women's vote. Kerry won about 42 percent
of women, the difference being 9-11 and women
thinking that Bush would be better against terrorism
because Kerry allowed himself to be portaryed
as a wishy-washy loser who'd never defend himself,
much less the nation.
But when you add Hillary to this equation, she
ranks 16 percent higher with women, but I can't
remember if that 16 points is added to Gore's
or Kerry's number. But either way, that's 16 points of
the biggest voting block there is stolen from
the GOP. I say that holds great value, especially since
we lost the last two times by inches.
This is why the GOP, some say, are trying to push
Condi in the race because their research
showed that Condi is the only candidate
they have that could present an obstacle for Hillary.
The last election was about Vietnam, and if Hillary
is the nominee, the next one will be about her
husband's penis. ALL the old shit will
get dug up and thrown against the wall...because why invent
new shit when you've got perfectly usable old
shit just laying around?
I shudder at the idea of a long campaign about
Whitewater, Monica, the blue dress, Waco, Mena airport,
Vince Fister, Hillarycare, the 19 murdered Clinton
foes, etc. The Greatest Hits, as it were.
It will happen, you can bet your soul on it.
I will light myself on fire.
But, what if Hillary answers with, "We have important
issues to be dealt with, let's not re-hash old news
from days gone by," and leave it at that?
Bush got away from the cocaine questions that way, remember?
Until Bush, candidates had to answer for their past - they no longer do.
Do you think the country wants to go thru Monica
again?
I think talk radio and FOX News will make it an issue, but the GOP candidates
won't.
Besides all that is the simple fact that most
of the progressive grassroots will join me in self-immolation.
You can sneer at them, denigrate them with bon
mots like "Yah, you want purity, that's why we lose, etc.,"
but it is worth noting the lack of enthusiastic
groundwork any campaign will enjoy if the roots are not behind you with
enthusaism.
It's not sneering to say, "We lost 49 states
when we abandoned the center."
Bill is called lots of names by the hard left,
too, and he's the last guy since FDR to win two elections.
That has to count for something.
If your reason for defending her is that you think
she can win, I'm not seeing it.
If you think the stands she has taken are good
ones, I'm not seeing that either.
The stands we don't like are the handjob stands
like flag-burning and video game censorship.
She's playing the stupid people - shhh
- don't tell. And I think she's got an out with her war vote.
Bush lied, and when it's time, she'll go with
that.. Hillary's vote didn't send us to war, but that vote
lessens the right's ability to scream,
"She's in bed with Cindy Shehan, Jane Fonda and Code Pink!"
When you get a sec, explain it to me. I
am not trying to pick a brawl here; I am of the "Win first" mentality as
well
when it comes to national elections against these
psychopaths. We have a pretty goddam good field of candidates
laying in the reeds: Feingold, Boxer, Clark,
Edwards, Kerry, Warner, etc.
Weren't those same candidates available in 2004?
I think you might be underestimating the "broken
glass" factor, as in the number of people who will do anything
for Hillary who wouldn't leave the house for
the others on your list. That's an opinion, we all have them :)
Hillary also has instant, worldwide goodwill.
That will be valuable when trying to convince
other nations to take over Iraq.
Plus, I notice you haven't mention Bill Clinton.
You don't think he'd be a factor in the race
and the Clinton 44 administration?
I'm not seeing Hillary as anything other than a stone torpedo below the waterline.
Thanks for taking the time.
Hope all is well,
(withheld)
The way I see it, your top argument involves predicting the future.
The present has Hillary 29 points ahead of Kerry the Quitter.
If we argue science and facts, I think she looks pretty good.
I appreciate the tangle and thanks for keeping it civil.
I'd expect nothing less from a man of your character.
It was great to hear from you.
Note: I didn't have permission to use the e-mailers name, but
I knew it would take
valuable time
to answer his questions so I went with the straddle.