Now is the Time on Liberal Rage Where We Rant.
Please to STFU Markos.
Hillary Clinton: Too Much of a Clinton Democrat?
Hillary Clinton has a few problems if she wants to secure the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination. She is a leader who fails to lead. She does not appear "electable." But most of all, Hillary has a Bill Clinton problem. (And no, it's not about that.)
Moving into 2008, Republicans will be fighting to shake off the legacy of the Bush years: the jobless recovery, the foreign misadventures, the nightmarish fiscal mismanagement, the Katrina mess, unimaginable corruption and an imperial presidency with little regard for the Constitution or the rule of law. Every Democratic contender will be offering change, but activists will be demanding the sort of change that can come only from outside the Beltway.
Hillary Clinton leads her Democratic rivals in the polls and in fundraising. Unfortunately, however, the New York senator is part of a failed Democratic Party establishment -- led by her husband -- that enabled the George W. Bush presidency and the Republican majorities, and all the havoc they have wreaked at home and abroad.
[...]And therein lie Hillary Clinton's biggest problems. She epitomizes the "insider" label of the early crowd of 2008 Democratic contenders. She's part of the Clinton machine that decimated the national Democratic Party. And she remains surrounded by many of the old consultants who counsel meekness and caution. James Carville, the famed longtime adviser to the Clintons, told Newsweek last week, "The American people are going to be ready for an era of realism. They've seen the consequences of having too many 'big ideas.' "
Meanwhile, pollster Mark Penn, a brilliant numbers guy, has counseled the Hillary team to ignore the party's netroots activists as "irrelevant." (After all, didn't Dean lose?) Little surprise that in late March, the Daily Kos's bimonthly presidential straw poll delivered bleak results for Clinton, with just 2 percent of respondents making her their top choice for 2008.
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH LUNA SMASH.
I just... I can't even begin to describe how irritating & condescending I find this article. I was just chatting about this very attitude with girlfromsouth tonight.
And for the record, the people who keep winning DKos straw polls are NEVER GOING TO GET ELECTED, SO CHILL MARKOS. Seriously, who honestly thinks Al Gore or Russ Feingold are going to get the '08 nom? Even as much as I heart Mark Warner and Wes Clark, those guys are long shots too.
I know there's a lot of people who think Hillary is a bad, bad idea for 2008. I am not one of them, but I will listen to the arguements. This op-ed, however, is nothing but a bunch of condescending snobbery. Not to mention - I was *happy* with Bill Clinton's presidency, and I think quite a bit of the rest of the country was too. And can someone explain to me how a Clinton Democrat can be "too much of a Clinton Democrat"? That doesn't even make sense.
In conclusion, STFU Markos.
Hillary Clinton: Too Much of a Clinton Democrat?
Hillary Clinton has a few problems if she wants to secure the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination. She is a leader who fails to lead. She does not appear "electable." But most of all, Hillary has a Bill Clinton problem. (And no, it's not about that.)
Moving into 2008, Republicans will be fighting to shake off the legacy of the Bush years: the jobless recovery, the foreign misadventures, the nightmarish fiscal mismanagement, the Katrina mess, unimaginable corruption and an imperial presidency with little regard for the Constitution or the rule of law. Every Democratic contender will be offering change, but activists will be demanding the sort of change that can come only from outside the Beltway.
Hillary Clinton leads her Democratic rivals in the polls and in fundraising. Unfortunately, however, the New York senator is part of a failed Democratic Party establishment -- led by her husband -- that enabled the George W. Bush presidency and the Republican majorities, and all the havoc they have wreaked at home and abroad.
[...]And therein lie Hillary Clinton's biggest problems. She epitomizes the "insider" label of the early crowd of 2008 Democratic contenders. She's part of the Clinton machine that decimated the national Democratic Party. And she remains surrounded by many of the old consultants who counsel meekness and caution. James Carville, the famed longtime adviser to the Clintons, told Newsweek last week, "The American people are going to be ready for an era of realism. They've seen the consequences of having too many 'big ideas.' "
Meanwhile, pollster Mark Penn, a brilliant numbers guy, has counseled the Hillary team to ignore the party's netroots activists as "irrelevant." (After all, didn't Dean lose?) Little surprise that in late March, the Daily Kos's bimonthly presidential straw poll delivered bleak results for Clinton, with just 2 percent of respondents making her their top choice for 2008.
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH LUNA SMASH.
I just... I can't even begin to describe how irritating & condescending I find this article. I was just chatting about this very attitude with girlfromsouth tonight.
And for the record, the people who keep winning DKos straw polls are NEVER GOING TO GET ELECTED, SO CHILL MARKOS. Seriously, who honestly thinks Al Gore or Russ Feingold are going to get the '08 nom? Even as much as I heart Mark Warner and Wes Clark, those guys are long shots too.
I know there's a lot of people who think Hillary is a bad, bad idea for 2008. I am not one of them, but I will listen to the arguements. This op-ed, however, is nothing but a bunch of condescending snobbery. Not to mention - I was *happy* with Bill Clinton's presidency, and I think quite a bit of the rest of the country was too. And can someone explain to me how a Clinton Democrat can be "too much of a Clinton Democrat"? That doesn't even make sense.
In conclusion, STFU Markos.