Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

2008: Vice President Hillary Clinton?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
AJH032 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-05 09:03 PM
Original message
2008: Vice President Hillary Clinton?
Edited on Thu Sep-22-05 09:03 PM by AJH032
Sorry to post another 2008 thread, but I'm really curious to know if everyone here opposed to a presidential nomination for Hillary Clinton would also be opposed to her as the vice president nominee. Howabout Gore-Clinton or Clark-Clinton? Would DUers, in general, be supportive of this? I'm really curious, thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
AX10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-05 09:03 PM
Response to Original message
1. I oppose Hillary for VP too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
billbuckhead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-05 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I'm for Clinton-Clark
The only person who would talk me out of this is Al Gore, a rightful president of the United States.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AX10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-05 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Clark/Sebelius!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-05 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #3
31. THE rightful President of the USA
not a rightful President...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sellitman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-05 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
2. No thanks!
LOTS of better choices abound.

Lots!!!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-05 09:19 PM
Response to Original message
5. Not me...
No DLC Candidates. Period.

TC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AJH032 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-05 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. So, if Clark chooses Clinton as his running mate...
you couldn't vote Clark for President?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-05 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. HA! Good one!
I'll vote for whoever the Democrats nominate. We could nominate Lieberman-Timberlake and I'd vote straight Demo, gladly.

But that said, the DLC ain't doing it for me lately. They've fallen from their Clinton-Nunn heyday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cosmocat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-05 09:44 PM
Response to Original message
7. Absolutely ...
This is where I am at ... I think a Clark or Dean with Hillary VP ticket would be a drop dead winner, I mean even with Diebold giving the R's a handicap ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueStater Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-05 10:35 PM
Response to Original message
8. Sorry but I'm hoping we can make 2008 the first election in 28 years...
...that doesn't have a Bush or a Clinton on the ballot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AJH032 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-05 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. We did
Mondale/Ferraro (1984)
Dukakis/Bentsen (1988)
Gore/Lieberman (2000)
Kerry/Edwards (2004)

...no Clinton or Bush on those tickets. The only time we ran a ticket with a Clinton on it in the last 28 years were the only ones we won.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiCoup2K4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-05 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #11
30. We won 2000 - despite Holy Joe being on the ticket.
Damn the DLC revisionist history gets so deep in here you need hip waders......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-05 10:47 PM
Response to Original message
9. Please don't drink the Hillary potion. It's hemlock.
I adore Senator Clinton. I'm probably one of the few DUers to support her on the video game violence issue. But she would lose the election massively--particularly if they put McCain on the ticket. People who don't get that are not really in touch with how noncoastal voters think. She'd win bigger in California and the northeast, get us slaughtered in half a dozen swing states. We'd lose Ohio, Pennsylvania, possibly Maryland and Michigan.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneTwentyoNine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-05 06:24 AM
Response to Reply #9
16. Hillary against video game violence but voted for Iraq with REAL killing..
Talk about hypocrisy. Make sure 18 year olds can't shoot someone in a fantasy video game but if they want to sign up they can go kill people in an illegally invaded country for real.

She hasn't got a chance in a trillion of being the next President,why waste the time running Hillary?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueIris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-05 05:13 AM
Response to Original message
12. Hillary as the candidate is yucky. Hillary as the V.P. is GENIUS.
Edited on Fri Sep-23-05 05:15 AM by BlueIris
Especially if she runs with Kerry, Clark or Gore. (Although that last combo, as many of you may know, would be a damn tough sell.) Why? Assassination. Proof. Ticket. All three of those candidates would face the serious threat of assassination should they run, mainly because of their stated opposition to the war, although each has other liabilities as well. But just as Gore in many ways, served as Clinton's protection from that awful fate, so would Hillary serve those men. Personally, however, I don't like the idea of Hillary being the V.P. I think if she can't be the nom, she should stay where she is, where she's still doing competent work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ladylibertee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-05 05:18 AM
Response to Original message
13. Edwards/Clinton.Anyone who does not like Hillary is suspect.LOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-05 05:45 AM
Response to Original message
14. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-05 06:21 AM
Response to Original message
15. Why...
...are so many posters PUSHING Hillary for 2008 when it's only 2005? Is this some sort of 'assignment'?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ladylibertee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-05 06:32 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. HILLARY ! HILLARY ! HILLARY ! Must Vote HILLARY !
:crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
howmad1 Donating Member (959 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-05 11:34 PM
Response to Reply #15
24. Could be a vast right wing conspiracy.
I'm not kidding. I think the rethugs would love to have Hillary on a 2008 ticket. Talk about mobilizing the base and fixing an election. They'd kill anybody who got in their way of defeating Clinton. My advice to Gore, Clark, Edwards, et al: Stay away from Hillary, she's poison in 2008.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CJCRANE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-05 06:37 AM
Response to Original message
18. Clark/Clinton
looks like a good pragmatic choice but it depends on the other ticket.

Kerry/Clark would have been a better match against Bush/Cheney for instance.

(Although Kerry/Edwards probably did actually win by a small margin in '05).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cosmocat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-05 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. It is a winner ...
Almost universally ...

Clark a "strong" man, good looking, but incredibly moderate and level headed ... Issues abroad are only going to get worse, and not even McCain brings the international credibility that he would bring ... He would be VERY hard to for R/Cons to paint negatively ...

Hillary would be a STRONG VP candidate ... Again, the connection of having spent 8 years in the white house, a lot of connections with people who got the country back on solid financial standing, and the country will be in a REAL pickle economically when Bushco gets run out ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
election_2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-05 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. Clark doesn't need Clinton
If Clark was nominated and wanted to select a female V.P., then Debbie Stabenow or Kathleen Sebelius would be much smarter choices.

Clark/Stabenow
or
Clark/Sebelius
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
election_2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-05 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. dupe
Edited on Fri Sep-23-05 11:25 PM by election_2004
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CJCRANE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-05 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #21
29. Pragmatism.
In this instance you also have to look at pragamtic factors like name recognition, fund-raising ability, connections etc.

Clark has the vision but I think Hillary would bring all the benefits of a heavyweight political campaigner.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
election_2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-05 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #29
33. Another woman
Stabenow and Sebelius would receive instant name recognition by virtue of being the first woman nominated to be a major party vice-presidential running mate in 24 years...consequently, fundraising efforts would go through the roof for either of them.

And if Hillary is such a loyal Democrat, she should be willing to fundraise for and campaign on behalf of Clark even if she's NOT on the ticket.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lojasmo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-05 10:17 AM
Response to Original message
20. Eh. I'd vote for Gore/anybody....
even clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
election_2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-05 11:26 PM
Response to Original message
23. I'd prefer Clark/Feingold
I think Feingold would supplement Clark with a lot of the legislative experience Clark is lacking, while helping to unite moderates and progressives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paineinthearse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-05 01:00 AM
Response to Original message
25. 2006...2006...2006...2006!
:argh:

Focus on 2006...2006...2006...2006!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GetTheRightVote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-05 01:17 AM
Response to Original message
26. I did not know about Clinton before but after Judge Roberts,
She is starting to look more presidental to me.

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
win_in_06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-05 01:23 AM
Response to Original message
27. I think the VP should be someone who can deliver a red state
Gephardt
Bayh
Reid
Richardson
Warner


...and they should do as much campaigning in that red state as it takes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hawkowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-05 02:01 AM
Response to Reply #27
28. Indiana is undeliverable
There is not a democrat alive or dead that could deliver Indiana as a blue state. Grew up in northwest Indiana.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
election_2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-05 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #28
34. No one expects Indiana to go blue
The focus would be on some of the more winnable red states...Florida, Ohio, Arkansas, Virginia, North Carolina, Louisiana, Tenneessee, Colorado, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WA98296 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-05 11:19 AM
Response to Original message
32. She gives up our Privacy & votes for war --she's a Republican
What has Hillary done to deserve our support? AT BEST she's a centerist, she started her ideology as a republican . She voted to give Bush the authority to go to war. She doesn't want to pull out currently.

She is in favor of standing shoulder to shoulder with Bill Frist and Newt trying to appeal to the repub votes. They can have her.

She's been all too comfortable sitting back and watching this travesty in virtual silence. She is too worried that she'll soil her political aspirations. Her career is more important to her than we are. Distill that, she doesn't deserve us.

__________________

This is all being said by a FORMER Clinton fan.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Crunchy Frog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-05 11:36 AM
Response to Original message
35. I do not think that she would be a good person to have on the ticket.
This is not meant as an attack, but I think she would be poison on the Dem ticket. There are too many people who literally think she's the anti-Christ. She would lose far more potential voters than she would bring in. I think she's a decent Senator for NY state, and hope she decides to stay there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 06:30 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC