Yay Hillary is running

[Gusterfell]

I saw polls comparing Giuliani and Hillary head to head in each state, and Hillary pretty much only won the states that Dukakis won in '88. I think California was for Giuliani, as was Michigan, Maine, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland. Only New York, Massachusetts, Hawaii, Rhode Island, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Washington, and Oregon went for Hillary.

Of course these should be taken with a grain of salt, but if Hillary has even the slightest chance of being mopped across the floor, then we need to find someone better to run.

[nowensone]

Like you said yourself, New Yorkers, who know both candidates better than anyone, prefer Clinton.

[Charlotteman]

snowguy 716, I've been predicting the exact same thing about Hillary's chances in 2008----she would probably manage to carry only the states that Dukakis carried in 1988. Except I don't think Hillary could carry W.Virginia.

Dukakis couldn't carry California in 1988, and I don't think Hillary could carry it in 2008.

[atlrvr]

What was so mediocre about Giuliani's term as mayor? I ask, because I don't truly know.

His reputation was that he cleaned up crime significantly, taking NY from one of the most dangerous cities to one of the safest cities in America, he was able to keep NYC government fiscally healthy without jacking taxes through the roof, and of course was known as a strong leader post 9/11 who wasn't afraid to get dirty and be where the action was.

I'm sure he had negatives (besides his divorce) but I don't think they got national attention. Can someone enlighten me?

And I agree fully about Hillary, I think everyone is tired of hearing about her. I was tired of hearing about her when Bill was president. I think most people perceive her as the "shady one" behind the various financial scandals. Obama will sputter, I'm guessing. I am interested in hearing more about Bill Richardson. No thanks on Edwards. What has he done as a Senator besides try to become president? And I ask that as a former constituent.

I think Bill Richardson has a couple advantages. For one, he is a governor, which historically is the direct path to prez over a senator. Also, people won't be tired of him by the time the primaries come. He has remained drama free. On the downside, he doesn't "look" like a president, but rather the nice uncle who always has a joke or pulls a quarter from behind your ear.

[nowensone]

I personally like Rudy, though Bloomberg (according to various sources that I am only regurgitating at you as opposed to having first hand knowledge of) is touted as making NYC significantly more fiscally healthy than Giuliani, and additionally, is responsible for smoking and trans-fat bans, tougher gun control laws, a complete [positive] reform of the education system, as well as a continued reduction in crime himself. Bloomberg has also given a lot of his personal money to various causes while mayor, some that back his public policies which is kind of rare, and of course he doesn't take a salary. He is also in favor of same-sex marriage, maybe some won't see that as a good thing. There are a few other assorted things though again, just regurgitation, there must be some New Yorkers here to give a first hand accounting.

Giuliani is of course the public face of heroism for his part in 9-11, though some are going to argue that is more an honor born of circumstance than personal mettle. I hesitate to form an opinion on that because I did not live in NYC following 9-11, though my gut tells me he deserves the praise for his part in it.

[Gusterfell]

What was so mediocre about Giuliani's term as mayor? I ask, because I don't truly know.

His reputation was that he cleaned up crime significantly, taking NY from one of the most dangerous cities to one of the safest cities in America, he was able to keep NYC government fiscally healthy without jacking taxes through the roof, and of course was known as a strong leader post 9/11 who wasn't afraid to get dirty and be where the action was.

[peaceloveunderstanding]

This article talks about Giuliani's performance on 9/11, then goes on to give some examples of the Giuliani New Yorkers know.

[monsoon]

^It's mostly a moot point. I think the GOP is going to be routed in the next election. The continued revelations on the incompetence, corruption, nepotism, and blatant disregard of the nation's laws and Constitution by the Bush administration is completely destroying the GOP brand. The common people are getting highly pissed off about it and they are going to punish GOP candidates in 2008.

The Democrats could probably run Osama bin Laden as their candidate in the next election and he would manage to beat whoever the GOP nominates. In other words, it doesn't matter if Guliani runs or not, he won't win.

[erdogs]

I don't think Giuliani can win the GOP nomination. However if he could, I believe he would beat Hillary nationally.

A lot of people want to take away from what he did for NYC as Mayor, but the results in crime reduction and the renewed economy speaks for themselves. He also cleaned up much of the corruption and seedy underworld that held the citizens hostage. Unfortunately too many people in NYC have forgotten what it was like pre-Giuliani. Usually too much familiarity breeds resentment. Go ahead and give the credit to Dinkins or Bill Clinton if you want, it doesn't change the facts, he got results.

Otherwise, he did nothing that any other mayor in America wouldn't have done.

[Charlotteman]

metro, I think the Reps could nominate Osama bin Laden and still beat Hillary:) An exaggeration of course, but I think the ONLY way the Reps could win the White House in 2008 is if Hillary is the Dem nominee.

So for all those Dems that wanna see another 4 years of Rep madness, go ahead and support Hillary, give her campaign donations, work to make her the nominee.....

[monsoon]

^I think Hillary is going to raise a lot of money and I think she is going to fail miserably in the primary. She is a big polarizer and I agree with you that putting another Clinton on the ticket would re-energize the GOP war machine. While the religious fanatics, neo-cons, and big business/rich people can't agree on almost anything, the one thing that unite them is their universal hatred of another Clinton in office. Hillary being nominated would make Rush Limbaugh and Jerry Falwell the happiest people on the earth.

I don't hate the Clintons as the nation did pretty good under Bill Clinton, but I am ready to end this Clinton/Bush dynasty which has held the White House in one form or another since 1980. The United States needs someone with new ideas and not someone with a lot of political baggage. This not only includes the figureheads themselves but all of the political appointees that go with them.

[Miesian Corners]

Funny, as I type this, there is a McCain 2008 banner ad with a big American flag waving at me below the text box. "Surrender is not an option", it says. Please.

Anyway, I'm done with Hillary and the lot. Hillary keeps changing her mind on EVERYTHING. She needs to decide if she's a Democrat or a Republican.

The only Democrat running that I like is Dennis Kucinich. He's the only one who actually has a REAL stand on issues and isn't scared to say what he thinks. As an example, check out the following quote taken from his campaign website:

I firmly believe that this nation must take a new direction: away from war and toward peace; away from convoluted schemes that promise expanded health care for all Americans but deliver only a fraction; away from trade policies that rob our nation of jobs; away from fear-inspired laws that deny basic Constitutional rights and lead to oppression and abuse. And, importantly, away from policies that discriminate against targeted groups of citizens because their lifestyles are "different."

Regrettably, the America of which I dream and to which I and the many who stand with me have committed ourselves, is not the same America that the Republican Administration or the Democratic Party are campaigning to realize. The Republican Administration is promoting a Constitutional Amendment that would deny Americans the rights that the state of Massachusetts has granted. The leadership of the Democratic Party is content to advocate a state-by-state approach to the issue of same-sex marriages, cloaking its lack of resolve with the words "civil unions." On this issue, as on every other, the mainstream political leadership of our nation finds political expediency and political popularity preferable to political courage...It will not end until peace, economic and social justice, health care for all Americans, and Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms and protections are afforded equally to all citizens.

[Charlotteman]

Here here Kucinich:) A beautiful and eloquent statement, and I agree with it 100%.

Of course Kucinich isn't gonna be president. I personally agree with him on most issues, but I think most Americans see him as an "extreme leftist". The American people have a sordid history of who they put in the White House. So don't expect them to recognize that Dennis is speaking FOR THEM-----not corporations and fanatical religious groups like most of the other candidates.

Politically, America is a sad sad place. We never get "the best". We always get the lessor of two evils, and when we get an evil, boy do we get an evil. From a country that put GWB in the White House, you can't expect very much.

[erdogs]

"The energy of the stars becomes us. We become the energy of the stars. Stardust and spirit unite and we begin: one with the universe, whole and holy. From one source, endless creative energy, bursting forth, kinetic, elemental; we, the earth, air, water and fire-source of nearly fifteen billion years of cosmic spiraling." -- Kucinich, in the "Journal of Concious Evolution"

[nowensone]

This is the real Dennis Kucinich and why he would never win the Democrat nomination. The guy is an idealist and means well, but his lack of reality will do him in everytime.

Also, when he talks about the U.S. targeting innocent civilians, he losses all credibility with me. He views the U.S. as the the enemy of the world and believes we are the cause of most of the worlds ills.

[ChiefJoJo]

Why just a VP? He's undoubtedly more qualified than Hillary , Edwards or Obama. I honestly think people are going to be tired of the latter three. I'm already sick of the Anointed Triumvirate of CNN. I think Richardson deserves serious consideration from the media. It's disturbin in the same way that Bush was simply given a coronation by the GOP and the media. We need to have a real election folks, not a parade on tv.

[atlrvr]

Metro, you predicted a Dem landslide in 2008. I'm not so sure. Sure, progressives are fed up with Bush, Rove, and the rest of them, but there are plenty of centrist voters who will just as easily vote for a moderate Republican.....

[Gusterfell]

Disagreed.....while many people within and outside the US disagree with the Iraqi war, the country and life will go on for the most part unchanged. Vietnam didn't shape the future of the country in the same way WWII did. Iraq isn't yet close to Vietnam.

[monsoon]

^Indeed it did. American society changed more from 1960 to 1970 than any other decade in the history of the nation.

I think people are completely fed up with the GOP in it's present form and it is hardly a centrist party and it is incapable of nominating a candidate with these qualities. As I said somewhere else on this forum it had devolved down to religious fanatics, neo-cons, and rich people. It's not just Iraq, but it is the culture of neoptism, corruption and incompetence that this party has come to represent which had caused the center to move away from it. And, I think, people are just plain tired of being told they have to be scared of the rest of the world and instead want to return to the days of being example for the rest of the world to follow. The hateful spiteful dogma coming out of todays GOP simply does not show a party willing to be this for the people.