Boy, the Republicans really want to run against Hillary, don't they?

God, I hope not. I'm just afraid that when Obama wins the nomination, Hillary will claim it's part of a vast melanin-enhanced conspiracy.

On second thought, she might claim it's a testosterone conspiracy.

/Either way, she doesn't want to offend her bingo-player base.

Rove is also vehemently against Obama. It's clear that the Republicans have so much to throw at Clinton that they're going to be bewildered if Obama takes it. The Republicans have been working up an anti-Hillary playbook for the last year and a half.

Does anyone require further proof that she's unfit for office? This pretty much seals it for me...

What, no Kiss-Of-Death jokes?

In 2004, the GOP went after Kerry because they didn't want to run against Edwards, right? Same deal here; they'd be farked against BerrrikHusseinObama.

the GOP people are unusually transparant this election cycle.

Bill Frist: the GOP people are unusually transparant this election cycle.


This.

Question for any Republicans: What makes McCain suitable for President anymore than your other candidates? Why is he polling so high? He's more war-happy than our current President is -- America simply cannot afford such excursions now, let alone after the market corrections coming our way. I'm genuinely interested.

>


Newt loves republican wantabe-Hillary!

Ceph: Question for any Republicans: What makes McCain suitable for President anymore than your other candidates? Why is he polling so high? He's more war-happy than our current President is -- America simply cannot afford such excursions now, let alone after the market corrections coming our way. I'm genuinely interested.

McCain is media friendly. He does things that make news (gang of 14), he compromises a lot to push legislation through (mccain-feingold), and he's a war hero.

McCain's current plurality in the polls is unlikely to last as more conservative states get their say in the matter.

Most actual conservatives like Thompson. While most pedestrian republicans (or perhaps realists? I don't know) generally prefer Rudy or Romney.

It's those "above the fray" types that generally choose McCain-like politicians.

So you're right, he polls well right now, but I doubt it will last.

By the way, thanks for not sinking to a "chimp" or "regime" reference. Your civility is appreciated.

Echoic: Rove is also vehemently against Obama. It's clear that the Republicans have so much to throw at Clinton that they're going to be bewildered if Obama takes it. The Republicans have been working up an anti-Hillary playbook for the last year and a half.

Plus Obama poses a real threat to their Christian pandering. He'll take a good chunk of those votes for being a sensible person alone. You take away the whole 'liberal != Christianity' angle and the Republican becomes the Southern Christian Fundie party and quickly is usurped by the Ron Paulite/Libertarian Party and becomes the new dead political party for a few years.

I say Gobama. There are so many reasons he could win this and if everybody angry at the current government goes his way, we could possibly make some headway.

Echoic: Rove is also vehemently against Obama. It's clear that the Republicans have so much to throw at Clinton that they're going to be bewildered if Obama takes it. The Republicans have been working up an anti-Hillary playbook for the last year and a half two decades.

There, that's more accurate. But yeah, you're absolutely right. Candidate Hillary Clinton is every conservative's wet dream.

AcornMan: Echoic: Rove is also vehemently against Obama. It's clear that the Republicans have so much to throw at Clinton that they're going to be bewildered if Obama takes it. The Republicans have been working up an anti-Hillary playbook for the last year and a half two decades.

There, that's more accurate. But yeah, you're absolutely right. Candidate Hillary Clinton is every conservative's wet dream.

Was that a gay joke? I can't tell anymore.

Falcc: AcornMan: Echoic: Rove is also vehemently against Obama. It's clear that the Republicans have so much to throw at Clinton that they're going to be bewildered if Obama takes it. The Republicans have been working up an anti-Hillary playbook for the last year and a half two decades.

There, that's more accurate. But yeah, you're absolutely right. Candidate Hillary Clinton is every conservative's wet dream.

Was that a gay joke? I can't tell anymore.

LOL!

Newt likes her because she is a Neo-Con. Look at her funding, votes and rhetoric, it is clear as day that she is one of them.

I don't like Obama much better, but I'd rather him than her by a long shot.

Actually, Gingrich and Clinton worked together rather well. They had strong opposing views, but Newt and Bill were both pragmatists who felt a half loaf wasn't a total disaster. Newt probably doesn't agree with Hillary on too many issues, but that doesn't mean they can't find some common ground.

The problem with the notion that the Republicans want to run against Hillary because they've been building an arsenal for 'X' years is that old news is old news. If it happened 10yrs ago and nobody knew it, it's news; if it happened years ago and people know (it's been exploited before) it's worthless as a weapon--spent fuel. Obama may not have a lot of history, but what is there hasn't yet been fully exploited by the Repubs. Hillary, on the other hand, has been through it all, her life (mainly as part of Bill's) has been exploited with a fine-toothed comb; which is why so many of you spew such vitriol against her and yet she's doing so well in the polls. I'd hazard to guess that Obama will be a juicy target should he get the Democratic nod.

Echoic: Rove is also vehemently against Obama. It's clear that the Republicans have so much to throw at Clinton that they're going to be bewildered if Obama takes it. The Republicans have been working up an anti-Hillary playbook for the last year and a half.

Try 16 years. Everyone knew she was gonna run.

hich is why so many of you spew such vitriol against her and yet she's doing so well in the polls.

She was doing weak in the polls prior to her NH win. So was McCain.

The national polls are insanely influenced by the most recent primary.

Just another crawler

I would love for Hillary to be chosen in the primaries, because that makes it easier to vote for McCain in the presidential election. However, if Obama wins the primary, it would be a tougher choice for me and I'd probably want to vote for Obama.
In the end, there is no candidate for me (fiscal conservative but social liberal) and the Republicans keep insisting on throwing religious nutcases at us while the Democrats keep running socialists . So since none of the candidates are favorable to my positions, I have to vote for whomever is going to throw a wrench in the gears as much as possible. Obama would probably do that a lot more than Clinton would, and McCain more so. I don't have any problems voting against Huckabee or any of the other Republicans, and I don't have any problems voting against Kucinich or Clinton.
Since there's no moderate candidate, I have to screw up the majority as much as possible so that they can't pass their idiotic legislations with a rubber stamp in the White House.
If it was a Republican majority in the Congress, I'd vote Hillary just to screw with that, and since the House is run by Pelosi, I'd like to throw a right-winger at the White House, except that the right wingers the Republicans have now are so WEIRD I can't do that.
I think the best case scenario would be to have a Constitutional watchdog in the White House and some whackos from either party in control of the House , with the other whackos from the other party in control of the Senate. Maximum gridlock would be acheived, and all that would survive that process would be those things they can agree on.
That, of course, would appear to be a set containing zero elements.

LOL

newt

Newt's hot for some jack-booted Hillary BDSM action.

ChaoticLimbs: I would love for Hillary to be chosen in the primaries, because that makes it easier to vote for McCain in the presidential election. However, if Obama wins the primary, it would be a tougher choice for me and I'd probably want to vote for Obama.
In the end, there is no candidate for me (fiscal conservative but social liberal) and the Republicans keep insisting on throwing religious nutcases at us while the Democrats keep running socialists . So since none of the candidates are favorable to my positions, I have to vote for whomever is going to throw a wrench in the gears as much as possible. Obama would probably do that a lot more than Clinton would, and McCain more so. I don't have any problems voting against Huckabee or any of the other Republicans, and I don't have any problems voting against Kucinich or Clinton.

You say you want a social liberal and fiscal conservative. I'm drawing from this that you find Obama to be the social liberal while McCain is the fiscal conservative, but neither are both. I'm going to have to point out that while Obama is a social liberal, as you were alluding to, McCain is not a fiscal conservative, either. The only fiscal conservative running for the Republican ticket is Ron Paul.

Isn't this the same guy that backs Huckabee. Well this makes sence.

I'm a reformed neo-con and don't think much of politicians in general, but I can't help but love Newt. What I like about him most is that he really wants to accomplish things... rather than the usual political farce.

And if you've ever heard him speak, you know exactly why he got as much done as he did when he was speaker.