Scott Hardie | January 20, 2007
"I'm in," her web site says. (link) She may as well have pulled a Michael Jordan and issued a two-word press release. With that, Hillary Clinton officially launches her White House campaign... in her living room on a floral-print cushion, surely the most presidential impression she could have made. This is going to be one hell of an interesting election, whether you intend to vote for Clinton or for the Republican against Clinton.

Lori Lancaster | January 21, 2007
[hidden by request]

Scott Horowitz | January 21, 2007
Well, I personally am supporting John Edwards right now. But Vilsack is also intriguing. I just think Obama is a little too young, and his middle name may hurt potential voters.

Erik Bates | January 21, 2007
[hidden by request]

Scott Hardie | January 22, 2007
Possibly not, Erik. A number of states are sick of Iowa and New Hampshire hogging all the early attention and are floating bills to move up their primary dates, so it's anybody's guess where the first primaries of the next presidential race will be held. It seems to me this issue won't be resolved for good until there's some kind of rotating schedule so every state is satisfied, which would require major mediation by the federal government and/or the two big parties to pull off.

Kerry Odell | January 23, 2007
Do we really want Bill back in the White House playing "smoke the cigar" with the interns with little else to keep him occupied? Or how bout a different twist...Hillary only has male interns with which she plays "smoke the cigar"?

Hmmm...I dunno. I think I've lost faith in both parties, mainly because elections are a mud slinging, dollar grabbing, string pulling, media circus. Where's the integrity, the dignity, and the intelligence of old? Can you really see today's politicians writing the constitution, the bill of rights or the emancipation proclamation? Don't even get me started on education...

It will be interesting to see what happens, but I could do without either Clinton in the White House again!

Amy Austin | January 23, 2007
I don't necessarily think that Hilary would change any interns (I know someone who served as a White House photographer during the "Clinton I" administration, and he had some stories to tell), but I do think she would probably be just as focused on her job when it's important and more discreet when it's not. That is... if the Republicans will allow it.

Scott Hardie | January 23, 2007
Kerry, I miss the integrity and the intelligence as well. What I wouldn't give for a politician today to give a speech as eloquent as the Gettysburg Address, let alone speak that way regularly. The poor grammar in Clinton's announcement this weekend was disappointing enough.

You're right, too, that it's a sham. I was tickled that only thirty minutes after I read Senator Chuck Schumer's pedestrian essay in Newsweek about how the Democrats need to abandon their ambiguous, bullshit, fool-nobody platforms such as "affordable health care for all," Hillary Clinton announced the first major platform of her campaign: Affordable health care for all.

My only preference for Obama over Clinton so far is that he is charismatic and has demonstrated an ability to work with both parties. Clinton, on the other hand, is the only figure in modern politics more polarizing than George W. Bush, and another four years of the vicious animosity between red states and blue states is not something I look forward to.

Aaron Shurtleff | January 23, 2007
I think what gets me about Obama is that we don't really know all that much about him. Hillary...I might know more than I want or need to know!

Of course, it's not necessarily a benefit (nor a hindrance) to be quite the unknown. And, of course, I'm not the political know-all either. But, DAMN, it is way too early for me to think about the 2008 election!

I'm going on political vacation until March 2008! At least as far as presidential hopefuls go.

Anna Gregoline | January 23, 2007
I think what gets me about Obama is that we don't really know all that much about him.

He's actually been far more forthcoming about his life than a lot of other politicians seem to be - admitting past cocaine use, for example.

I am SO MAD that Hillary is running.

Denise Sawicki | January 23, 2007
I am SO MAD that Hillary is running.

I am rather bothered by it myself just because I can't imagine her coming anywhere close to winning. This is just my totally uninformed opinion however.

Scott Hardie | January 24, 2007
Why so mad, Anna?

Erik Bates | January 24, 2007
[hidden by request]

Amy Austin | January 24, 2007
I don't really care too much for it, either, and I think it will make women voters' choices just that much more difficult (if they don't favor her to begin with)... and possibly interrupt votes for a legitimately decent candidate. (Such as Obama, whom I know at least Mike E. of those here doesn't favor, but who will also bring that "edge" among other candidates, because he is not white.)

I'm with Scott and Aaron, and I don't really care about any of it right now. My own life is difficult enough to manage right now without worrying about a handful of Presidential hopefuls... none of whom I can imagine fucking things up any worse than they already are right now. Transmission out.

Mike Eberhart | January 24, 2007
Amy, True, I will probably vote for whoever get the Republican nomination, but if that wasn't a choice, and I had to vote for a democrat, I would rather it be Obama running than another fucking Clinton. I for one am sick of having the past 20 years dominated by Bush's & Clinton's. PLEASE LET SOMEONE ELSE BE PRESIDENT FOR ONCE.

Jackie Mason | January 24, 2007
[hidden by request]

Steve Dunn | January 24, 2007
Obama could be the first Democrat I vote for in a presidential race. I'm with Mike on the Bush/Clinton thing. The worst part is that if Clinton wins and then is re-elected in 2012, there's a very real possibility that ANOTHER Bush could be waiting in the wings to run in 2016.

Tony Peters | January 24, 2007
Not that it matters to me (actually I know very very little about the man) but I find the chances of Obama actually being elected to be very very slim. This country is too racist to elect a black man and even if they could get over that he's also a practicing Muslim which the evangelicals could never allow to be elected.

Dave Mitzman | January 24, 2007
I was under the impression that Obama was raised Muslim but converted to Christianity. Not that it matters, the Democrats went and fucked this one up royally. The Republicans gave us an EIGHT YEAR HEAD FUCKING START and this is what we're given? Not to sound like a racist, but Obama won't win it this time and Hillary has as much of a chance of winning it as he does. Kerry was a big enough disappointment in a candidate but I'm not terribly pleased with the chances of the Dems taking back the White House. I still refuse to vote Republican based on a lot of things so whomever gets the Dem nod will probably get my vote (sad but true). And Mike, there is no such thing as "let someone else be president for once". In the grand scheme of things, we had Bush for 1 term, Clinton for 2, and then Bush for 2. If Hillary ends up winning it all (which stands such little chance because so many people have a great dislike for her), who cares? She'll be the policy maker and of course Bill will be there in whatever role he fits in, but so what? If she can run the country properly and take care of all the problems our current administration has dumped on us, who cares if it's a Clinton?

Anna Gregoline | January 25, 2007
Obama is not Muslim, he's Christian.

Steve Dunn | January 25, 2007
I saw Dick Morris give a speech a couple years ago in which he made a persuasive case that Hillary could win if she got the Democratic nomination.

His point was that Kerry almost won, and Hillary polls much much better than Kerry among women, blacks and Latinos. According to Morris, Hillary would get every vote that Kerry got, plus about three million more from the aforementioned groups.

I think Hillary's a much more plausible candidate among the general public than she is among the activist Democratic base. Her problem in the primary will be that she is perceived as "too conservative" or "too establishment" for the bloggers and true believers (ie, former Deaniacs). She was pretty solidly in favor of the Iraq war, for example. I see Hillary as being widely despised on the far left and the far right, but not so much in the middle. For that reason, I see her as electable.

Steve Dunn | January 25, 2007
I should clarify... I don't like Hillary. All I'm saying is that I think she can win.

A large part of me hopes that Obama wins so that we can all re-examine our assumptions about how racist America is. (Or, if he gets crushed, maybe I should re-examine my own assumptions). All I know is that I've got friends on all parts of the political spectrum who are ready to start writing checks and volunteering for the Obama campaign. This is anecdotal evidence, but at this point he's the most unifying candidate I think I've ever seen.

Think about it: Anna and I are talking about voting for the same person. That's gotta count for something.

Michael Paul Cote | January 25, 2007
I'm going to vote for Cthuhlu. I'm sick of choosing the lesser of two evils.

Amy Austin | January 25, 2007
"Amen" to that, Steve (and Mike -- heheh) -- I am in total agreement with everything you said.

And thank you, Dave & Anna, for correcting on Obama's denomination... I was just clarifying the same thing for somebody else, even though I was not positive because of whom I was talking to (a female friend who holds a PhD in chemistry) -- seems that whole "Obama/Osama" thing could potentially hurt him, even among the well-educated (not that she is anti-Muslim, just that she is misinformed). But I am thinking that I could vote for the man, too... even though I'd rather elect a woman first (not because I'm racist, but only because everyone wants to promote their own cause first) -- I just don't think I can let it be Hillary. I am just as interested in the results of an election with Obama as you are, Steve... I really think that America may finally be ready to elect someone other than some ritchie/Ivy/old white guy who thinks he knows what's best -- and will be incredibly disappointed to be proven wrong!

Tony Peters | January 25, 2007
My bad on his religion... though my cynical side thinks this is more likely a plant put out by the Clinton people than the Republicans. She's the only one right now with anything to loose by his candidacy and his gathering of money.

Anna Gregoline | January 26, 2007
I doubt that very much - Obama and Hillary, in my mind, are likely to join forces rather than fight against each other, at least at this very early date.

We're going to see some VERY ugly things said about Obama, however. Racism in this country is alive and kicking us in the mouth.

Tony Peters | January 26, 2007
If you beleive the stories out right now Clintons people are very well known in the political arena for playing hardball...Bill's campaign was worse in its treatment of his fellow Dems than anything against the Republicans. Hillary's people are already playing hardball against Obama for money in Cali. Mind you W was just as bad during his 1st campaign....look what he said about McCain. Stories like that are better saved for the election if being used by the opposing party...the fact that the he's her major threat makes me beleive that the democratic party is still in the wolfpack mentality that caused them to back a rich white loser against Joe Liberman...that was a waste of money that just proved that democrates in america still don't have a purpose

Jackie Mason | January 26, 2007
[hidden by request]

Jackie Mason | February 2, 2007
[hidden by request]

Amy Austin | February 2, 2007
Can I get an "Amen", sistah!

(Good thing I'm not running, huh. ;-D)

Want to participate? Please create an account a new account or log in.

Other Discussions Started by Scott Hardie


If you had to choose one, would you go blind for one day or deaf for one week? Go »

Hussein Poll

I want to do a quick poll here, and after a few days I'll explain why. With which of the following do you most agree: A) It is likely that Saddam Hussein was involved in the September 11th attacks. Go »

Search Me

It took a very long time, but the old Archive pages across this site have been fixed, renamed, and expanded: Search Goos Search Reviews Search Discussions Search Blogs Search Concerts Search Game Sessions overall site search They all shared the same core search code that no longer worked, so each one had to be completely rebuilt. Go »

100 Things I Like

The following is a list of one hundred things I like. I didn't want to write this list. It was assigned as homework by that teacher who I reported yesterday (two entries ago) that I didn't like. Go »

Bummer of the Week Award II

This news story depressed me. Partly it's because I used to be like that kid, and partly because it's just sad. Go »

Picky Eaters Club

After recently meeting a guy who only eats plain hamburgers, cheese pizza, and steak, Kelly and I have counted ourselves lucky that we are not picky eaters and do not have children who are picky eaters. Go »