Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

2004: Wishful Thinking? The Latest Hillary Scenario (barf alert? or just warning to organize?)
Newsweek Magazine ^ | November 24 issue | Howard Fineman

Posted on 11/16/2003 7:45:00 AM PST by Maria S

Edited on 11/16/2003 8:29:38 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

Some dreams never die, including one clung to by loyal Clintonistas: that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton will be the Democrats’ presidential nominee next year. Is there a chance she would get into the race?

“That depends on what you mean by ‘get into the race’,” one of her closest friends and advisers explained to NEWSWEEK.

THE SCENARIO, as sketched by this hard-boiled insider, calls for Clinton to make an entrance as healer and unifier at the end of the primary season in May or June in the unlikely—but not impossible—event that none of the existing contenders has amassed a majority of the convention delegates.

“You’d have to have Howard Dean not wrapping it up, and being an angry, wounded front runner,” this adviser said. “You’d have to have two of the other challengers tearing each other apart in primary after primary. Then Hillary could come in, well in advance of the convention, and say, ‘Look, somebody has to save the party’.”


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2004; hillary; wishfulthinking
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-56 next last
Ran thru search; didn't find that it had been posted yet.
1 posted on 11/16/2003 7:45:01 AM PST by Maria S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Maria S
Adm Moderator - this is the article in its entirety...if it needs to be 'excerpted', please make the correct changes. I don't want any of us in trouble with NEWSWEEK.
2 posted on 11/16/2003 7:51:35 AM PST by Maria S ("When the passions become masters, they are vices." Pascal, 1670)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maria S
There is also the "defensive" consideration for Hillie. Her best plan is to let Gore lose in 2004 and not do too much damage, allowing her to "save" the party in 2008. But, if it looks like total disater in 2004, leaving not much to be salvaged in 2008, she may jump into the race againsy Bush.

The "disaster" could be the belief that the dems will cease to exist as a viable organization by 2008. This could happen if the blacks finally wise up and Sharpton runs as an independend. Nader, with Sharpton or in addition to him, could result in the dem voting turnout being nothing but the dead, Jamaicans, Haitians, Mexicans, Hollywood has-beens, and reyired union executives.

Hillie might jump in as a long shot in 2004, believing that there would be no chance in 2008.

3 posted on 11/16/2003 7:53:56 AM PST by Tacis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maria S
And the media? The media is hoping and praying Hillary ends up with the nomination. Why? Because she’s a great story. Always has been and always will be.”

Bull! They want her in the White House because they are socialists, just like Hillary.

4 posted on 11/16/2003 7:54:48 AM PST by Paul Atreides (Is it really so difficult to post the entire article?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maria S
I anyone saw her on the tube, I would like to know if old thunder thighs boughtt a new pantsuit yet?
5 posted on 11/16/2003 7:57:37 AM PST by Piquaboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Atreides
And the media's efforts to lower the public to a primitiveness more controllable by socialism continues on many fronts.
6 posted on 11/16/2003 7:59:49 AM PST by P.O.E.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Maria S
...calls for Clinton to make an entrance as healer and unifier at the end of the primary season in May or June...

Someone needs to tell Howie that that the "healer and unifier" crap isn't going to cut it with the rest of America.

7 posted on 11/16/2003 8:06:58 AM PST by Right_in_Virginia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator
Ping for excerpt edit - Newsweek article posted in its entirety above.
8 posted on 11/16/2003 8:09:15 AM PST by Semper911 (For some people, bread and circus are not enough. Hence, FreeRepublic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tacis
I dont think she wants to wait until 2012. If bush does not have the economy back, with all of our jobs and factories returned from asia, and our federal budget and balance of trade balanced by next summer, then any democrat can win, and Hillary will see that.

This is looking more and more like a rerun of 1992(war in Iraq, recession, joblessness, etc with clinton beating bush). Hillary is just as qualified to beat a bush, as Bill was. People will vote their pocketbooks, and she will easily get the big electorial states like California, New York, and Illinois without any campaigning.

The clintons have a lot of political favors to call in, and have a lot of money to spend on the few swing states that she would need.

9 posted on 11/16/2003 8:16:46 AM PST by waterstraat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Maria S
I'm more worried about VICE President Hillary!™

• She keeps he promise not to run for president in '04
• Two years and one day into her term the first slotter gets arkincided
• Under Article XXII, she can still run for two full terms as the incumbent
• The Hillary!™ Decade begins
• Hillary uses the Patriot Act to it's fullest extent, and beyond
• At the end of the Hillary!™ Decade there is a National Emergency "temporarily" delaying the elections
• Under the pressure of the National Emergency, the 2nd and 22nd amendments are repealed...

Just as an aside, with the Clinton's love of all things Military - Wesley Clark is VERY expendible, isn't he?
10 posted on 11/16/2003 8:20:27 AM PST by null and void (Watching liberals fry in their own grease is a great pass time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tacis
Hillie might jump in as a long shot in 2004, believing that there would be no chance in 2008.

That's not a likely political consideration. Four years is an eternity in politics. No matter how badly the Democratic Party might lose in 2004, it would not be a good political prediction (or strategy) to assume that it could not bounce back in 2008.

Who might be a candidate in 2008 is more susceptible to prediction. Very few candidates materialize out of thin air, with no prior history, to become an instant, serious contender. Ross Perot is the only one I can think of off-hand, and he failed precisely because he lacked the political credentials and campaign toughening that most Presidential candidates have acquired. And look at the way Wesley Clark is self-destructing.

So Hillary can spec out the Democratic field and see that she has an easy shot at the 2008 nomination. By then she'll have had eight years as a U.S. Senator, and she can plausibly run in her own right. It just makes too much sense for her to wait till then.

11 posted on 11/16/2003 8:22:21 AM PST by dpwiener
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Piquaboy
if old thunder thighs boughtt a new pantsuit yet

Last evening's pantsuit was a charcoal pinstripe number, with some sort of lace collar blouse thing that practically draped her shoulders. Her thunder thighs tested the load capacity of the high tensile polyester, and her fat ankles completed the ensemble.

12 posted on 11/16/2003 8:22:37 AM PST by Semper911 (For some people, bread and circus are not enough. Hence, FreeRepublic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Right_in_Virginia
I wanted to throw up, listening to that bunch of sideshow freaks last night, talking about Republicans dividing people along racial lines and gender lines. They are learning from the Clintons: take their own faults and project them onto others.
13 posted on 11/16/2003 8:27:39 AM PST by Paul Atreides (Is it really so difficult to post the entire article?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Paul Atreides
They are learning from the Clintons: take their own faults and project them onto others.

And if that doesn't work...then they're prepared to turn their faults into virtues.

Heaven help us!

14 posted on 11/16/2003 8:30:19 AM PST by Right_in_Virginia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Semper911
Thank you.
15 posted on 11/16/2003 8:30:25 AM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Tacis
Hillary doesn't chances. Hillary made certain she didn't have to run in the NY primary for her Senate seat and would unlikely enter the primaries leading to 2008 unless she is totally unopposed. Remember how Hillary removed herself from public view after health care fiasco. Furthermore, the Clintons are fully aware that it is rare for a Senator to be successful in running for the presidency, partly because of the preference of the electorate for a new face,i.e. Clinton in '92. Hillary will shortly begin to be overly exposed which be re-enforced by her already apparent premature aging. If consider the Clinton operatives in all of the current contenders campaign staffs except for the Dean staff, the Clintons appear to positioning themselves to sabotage any campaign that shows signs of emerging from a funk, i.e. the Clintons are doing their best to deadlock the existing Democrat field.

I've been proposing the Fineman scenario for quite some time and I think it is becoming more probable each day. Hillary's appearance at last night's affair was just another step in Clintons' grand plan.

16 posted on 11/16/2003 8:45:49 AM PST by monocle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Right_in_Virginia
In any case, a person would have to be an absolute moron to be impressed by that collection of sideshow freaks, last night. Hillary came across as a has-been celebrity, reduced to hosting a third-rate game show. And, all the other candidates had to offer was Bush-hatred. All they did was read from a McAuliffe/Clinton script.
17 posted on 11/16/2003 8:59:32 AM PST by Paul Atreides (Is it really so difficult to post the entire article?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Paul Atreides
In any case, a person would have to be an absolute moron to be impressed by that collection of sideshow freaks, last night.

Synonyms for "absolute moron" include "democrat", "liberal", "reporter", and "clinton kool-aid drinker". There are lots of regestered voters dead and alive that fit one or more of these catagories...

18 posted on 11/16/2003 9:07:08 AM PST by null and void (Watching liberals fry in their own grease is a great pass time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: waterstraat
Hillary is just as qualified to beat a bush, as Bill was.

Mr. Subliminal here, the question before us is this,
was this a simple slip of the tongue or something brand spanking new.

Obviously Hillery! has beaten as many bushs as Bill, probably more. In fact she has probably beaten some of the
same bushs! And more effectively too.

So in summation we can say that bill and Hill! both have beaten their share of bushs, and the statement above is
correct by all accounts.

Next up, Hillery! spanks the monkey.
19 posted on 11/16/2003 9:09:53 AM PST by tet68 ( Patrick Henry ......."Who fears the wrath of cowards?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: waterstraat
Re: (war in Iraq, recession, joblessness)

With all due respet, these 3 things are not true.

1) The "War in Iraq" has been won by the United States of America, Saddam is deposed, and his government has been rolled up. As with any victorious military power with responsibility to rebuild, we've moved on to the rebuilding and transfer of power stage.

2) "Recession" has nat happened in this country since the 3rd quarter of 2001 when GDP contracted -0.1% to -0.4%. Since then, GDP has been consistently increasing leading to the latest Q3 numbers of +7.2% (A stunningly historic number). On the "recession" question, GWB deserves congratulations for ending the recession in the first year of his first term.

3) "joblessness", while still to high, has gone down in Q3, 2003 and signs point to more jobs as the manufactturing sector finds the last of it's efficiencies. Any single digit enemployment rate is a success (anyone remember the 70s stagflation?), and Bush deserves to be congratulated for bringing the country through the act of war that was 9/11, and returning confidence to the economy and country.

Let's be straight:

GWB ended the recession in the first year of his first term, put the country back to work on a path to confidence, defeated 2 our declared enemies in 18 months, and has done more to EARN my vote than any other person in the country today.

20 posted on 11/16/2003 9:25:39 AM PST by ChadGore (Kakkate Koi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-56 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson