Draft Hillary

Are the Koch brothers and Karl Rove colluding behind the scenes to advance Hillary as the Democratic 2016 candidate, knowing that almost any Republican with a pulse could beat her?

NoCoPilot wrote:

...almost any Republican with a pulse could beat her?

I think you're wrong in this assumption. I'm not crazy about the woman, but I don't doubt that she would be a viable candidate.

Nobody below the 39th Parallel will vote for her. Nobody right of Bernie Sanders will vote for her.

Why do you believe that?

She's damaged goods.

Not really.
You'd be shocked how annoyed with Obama the female liberal contingent is.

Oh I'm fully willing to believe that. But perhaps you'd be shocked at what a lightning rod Hillary is to the Right.

NoCoPilot wrote:

She's damaged goods.

How so?

_Howard wrote:

How so?

Seriously?

Yes. Seriously. What has she done to consider her damaged goods?
I don't mean what has faux news said, I mean what has she actually done?

It "does" matter what faux news said because they are the mouthpiece for the opposition. In their view: Benghazi, Vince Foster, Bill (and standing by him)... Jesus, this could take all night. I need to catch a bus.

Start here: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/09/23/sarah-palin-hillary-clinton-ill-suited-for-president/comment-page-27/

But you don't have anything closely connected to reality?

Faux, et.al. will make up shit about any Democrat running.

NoCoPilot wrote:

Oh I'm fully willing to believe that.  But perhaps you'd be shocked at what a lightning rod Hillary is to the Right.

Not really. I guess I just take for granted they are dipshits so why pay attention. I think really, the inequality is such people are almost ready to listen to anyone who's got a way out.

Anyone who doesn't idolize Reagan and Bush is a lightning rod to the right.
It doesn't matter who opposes the Republican candidate for the viewers and listeners of right-wing media; they are going to vote against any Democrat who is put up. The Democrats can win if they put up a candidate who will bring out the voters. I think Hillary can do that. Well, I hope she can, anyway.

_Howard wrote:

Anyone who doesn't idolize Reagan and Bush is a lightning rod to the right.
It doesn't matter who opposes the Republican candidate for the viewers and listeners of right-wing media; they are going to vote against any Democrat who is put up. The Democrats can win if they put up  a candidate who will bring out the voters. I think Hillary can do that. Well, I hope she can, anyway.

Ms. Warren is also proving promising. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/07/why-is-elizabeth-warren-campaigning-in-red-states/374465/ Wouldn't a Clinton/Warren ticket be amazing? Or a Warren/Clinton.

I'm crazy about Elizabeth Warren, but I don't think she is enough of a political animal to either get elected or effectively execute the job of president.

I think the best place for her is a cabinet position that puts her in charge of the economy.

Of course, if she ever gained a position of real economic power, the wealthy and the corporations would probably put out a hit on her right away.

_Howard wrote:

But you don't have anything closely connected to reality?

I don't think reality is the standard for the Right.

Listen, with the systematic disenfranchisement of liberal voters I think some crossover will be required for a Dem to win in 16, just like Obama had in 08. Hillary -- though she's probably capable, just has too much baggage, too many years in the White House (don't kid yourself, electing Hillary would be putting Bill back in office -- the only president ever to be impeached), and the Right has developed several well-oiled narratives about her and Bill.

We need somebody new. Somebody without all the baggage and name recognition. Someone not married to Bill.

I think it's entirely possible, and long overdue, that both parties might put forward female candidates for he top job. But that's not a reason to vote for Billary.

I love Elizabeth Warren too but I agree she does not have the experience yet. She's no even a constitutional law scholar like Obama.

But as a vice? Interesting thought. Might even make a Clinton ticket viable.

NoCoPilot wrote:

She's no even a constitutional law scholar like Obama.

I love the stuff we say to ourselves.
Yeah, cuz him being a con law guy so totes helped out. We sure did good in this admin, it's a good thing Obama picked that specialty.

    
I got no ability to buy the bullshit left.

Jenni wrote:

I love the stuff we say to ourselves.

Yeah, you're totes right.

NoCoPilot wrote:

Jenni wrote:

I love the stuff we say to ourselves.

Yeah, you're totes right.

Problem is, there's a whole bunch of us disillusioned leftists who need a reason to make it to the poll in November(s).

Somebody has finally explained Hillary..  She's a witch!

NoCoPilot wrote:

Are the Koch brothers and Karl Rove colluding behind the scenes to advance Hillary as the Democratic 2016 candidate, knowing that almost any Republican with a pulse could beat her?

Let me turn my own question inside out, for your consideration -- in light of recent events.

NoCoPilot wrote:

Are the Koch brothers and Karl Rove colluding behind the scenes to advance Hillary as the Democratic 2016 candidate, and Donald Trump as the Republican 2016 candidate, knowing that Donald cannot win the general and Hillary is the only candidate in the race with their best interests in mind?