Janet Napolitano, Claire McCaskill, Kathleen Sebelius, Barbara Boxer, Patty Murray, Jeanne Shaheen,

[Stop Cornyn]

Christine Gregoire, Ruth Ann Minner, Barbara Mikulski, Debbie Stabenow, Amy Klobuchar, or Maria Cantwell.

Will one of them be the first woman President?

Will it be someone else?

Will it be Hillary?

No one owns a trademark on the title "America's first woman President."

[splat]

1. At this rate, it's going to be Lulafana D'Orgus in 2080

[dorktv]

2. Well it took women that fifty years after the 15th Amendment passed...

and 212 to get to the point of having a woman VP nominated.

And 232 to get a viable woman presidential candidate.

so yeah, I can see your point.

[Gore1FL]

8. Hillary broke a lot of ground and blazed a lot of path for the future

but she was viable for the wrong reasons. Her campaign staff is what killed it for her in the end, however.

[dorktv]

15. she was viable because she was an internationally known woman.

She had the connections she needed to raise money at the start, she was well known and finally she was willing to put up with a vast amount of crap thrown her way.

She was not viable for the wrong reasons.

[Gore1FL]

23. The reason she had all of that was because of her last name

Nancy Reagan, Barbara Bush, and Laura Bush had/have all of that too. They could have arguably been viable for the same reasons Hillary was.

HEll, when you get right down to it, She was viable for the same Reasons Dubya was--not the right reasons.

[splat]

42. Oh, were they famous for their brains and leadership in college, too?

She would have gone farther faster with the Arkansas detour.

[Gore1FL]

60. Apples and oranges

Nancy Reagan was well know for her acting as was Ronnie. I don't have any of their transcripts in front of me to gauge them, however.

How does one get to be famous for brains and leadership at the collegiate level?

[splat]

93. Student govt prez Hillary's commencement speech was covered by Time magazine

[splat]

94. (her name was Hillary Rodham then)

[TBF]

119. Big deal. You really think THAT qualifies her to be president?

[dorktv]

43. In other words: that damn woman slept her way to the top?

How...charming of you.

The fact is that she could have simply done what those other ladies did-however she chose to do what Eleanor Roosevelt did and that meant continuing to work while having a famous name.

[jgraz]

49. edit: I'm an asshole.

[dorktv]

53. Yes, blame the person cheated on. IF she had ONLY been more accomidating...

[Occam Bandage]

55. I'm not a fan of "lol Hillary is sexually inadequate for Bill" jokes.

[jgraz]

57. Yeah, you're right. Knee-jerk reaction, sexist and beneath me.

Time to go out and play.

[Gore1FL]

54. What are you talking about?

I never said that. I never implied that. I did mention Dubya, however. By your logic he fucked his way to the top?

Jeez. You don't have anything valid to argue with, so you you concoct that?

[dorktv]

64. How did she get her name? She married it.

Not that twisted.

[Gore1FL]

74. What does that have to do with her sleeping her way to the top?

A lot of people are well known because of their spouse. It doesn't mean they used sex as a tool to make it that way. If you are implying something different, I guess it means I think more highly of women than you do--or for that matter of men who are married to powerful wives.

[dorktv]

75. Obviously you do not since you brought up the fact that she only has a

famous last name because she was married to it.

I said that she is an internationally known woman-she was working her way up before she met President Clinton and probably would still be internationally known without him. However YOU think she only got that way by virtue of her marrying it.

[Gore1FL]

80. And she might have very-well worked herself up to the White House

and became internationally known on her own and had been viable for the right reasons.

But as reality turned out, she didn't. She became internationally known. And she was viable for the wrong reasons.

Your arguments are full of what ifs, but lacking heavily it the "what was" department. Trying to portray my historically grounded arguments as sexist only leads us to what I said in the first post you responded to above.

[dorktv]

82. And you are claiming she is viable for the wrong reasons.

How is it a wrong reason to be married to a famous man that she helped get there?

How is it a wrong reason to be tough, educated, smart and talented?

How is it a wrong reason to use a network of donors you helped build up?

How is it a wrong reason to use what assets you have?

[Gore1FL]

87. here is the thing:

How is it a wrong reason to be married to a famous man that she helped get there?

It isn't wrong to be married to a famous man or helping him to be famous. But how does that qualify her to be president?

How is it a wrong reason to be tough, educated, smart and talented?

Who ever said it was wrong--I mean besides her campaign staff who minimizes such people as "elitists"?

How is it a wrong reason to use a network of donors you helped build up?

They were not built up for her. She would not have them if Bill was anonymous.

How is it a wrong reason to use what assets you have?

Nothing. But she needed more than her husband's political assets.

I guess I am more pro-woman than you. I believe a woman to have the capabilities to do things on their own, and not have to rely on their husband's name, network, and political assets. One can look at people like Gov. Sebelius, Harriet Woods, former Gov Shaheen, etc to see examples of this.

[dorktv]

90. honestly, stop claiming that I am being sexist for pointing out

someone who DID help her husband get where he got, who DID do the campaign solicitations for him and oh! right for her campaign for Senate, who DID work her ass off to get him and many other people like him elected including herself, and who DID have the sense to not blow an asset she help build.

This is not a woman who stayed far away from what her spouse was doing, this is a woman who was right there all along and had the sense to use what she had.

Apparently you think it is sexist to use what you help build.

I do not.

[Gore1FL]

92. I thought you thought it to be sexist

Weren't you just saying that she did this all by sleeping with Bill?

You were the one who said that, not me. Though you did try to imply I said it, when I clearly didn't

[dorktv]

108. Pretty clear to me-she married her name, it was not a birth right.

And the biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig difference between her and ANYONE else who was born to it is that she worked to create that name.

So my seeing how you are implying (and in fact with your "viable for the wrong reasons" idea) she has no legitimate right to claim what she did in the past by her being married to it is way way more sexist. You were just to chickenshit to say what you meant.

[Gore1FL]

112. Nah.

It was implied that I implied something that I didn't. I just merely turned the tables to show how ridiculous your attempt to frame it that way was.

[dorktv]

116. Nope, you were the one who implied and said that she was viable for the wrong reasons

the only reason she was wrong was because it came from her husband. Regardless of the effort she put into building that name that they both share.

See the connection that a reasonable person could make?

[Gore1FL]

122. Ok this again.

I guess we could go tho the top and just repeat the same posts over and over.

OR we could take a quiz.

You first heard of Hillary Clinton Because:
a> you read a time magazine 40 years ago
b> her 1.3 terms in the Senate
c> She was married to President Bill Clinton.

Hillary Clinton is qualified to be president mostly because:
a> of her experience in elected public office
b> being the Fist Lady of AR and the U.S.

Hillary Clinton's Political connections came from:
a> her 8 years in the Senate
b> Her husband's political connections

Hillary Clinton Money Making ties came from
a> her 8 years in the Senate
b> her husbands money making ties.

This doesn't have jack shit to do with her sex life. You came up with that in order to imply sexism. The phrase you first used was "sleeping her war to the top." That implies fucking all the bosses on the way up for favors. When used the way you implied it, it implies they had no real relationship. In order to frame the debate so you could use a sexism argument, you actually cast aspersions on the candidate you support and her relationship to her husband.

I am simply pointing out the obvious, and you are simply trying to spin these observations as if they came from a cesspool of sexist beliefs.

I am sorry you have no better answer that you had to respect to it. I am even sorrier that you endd up looking like the one with a problem with gender.

Hillary could very well of had a political career of her own without anything from Bill. She didn't. To suggest otherwise escapes documented history. To imply documented history is somehow sexist is sickening and irrelevant.

If you want to argue the merits,OK. I am ready to have a discussion. When you start throw non-related aspersions to try to frame the discussion erroneously in order to avoid such a debate, then I am done.

[dorktv]

125. Why did you claim it was for the wrong reasons then?

She worked equally hard on his becoming President, and then when she sensibly chose to use what she had helped build up, you claim it is "viable for the wrong reasons."

And then used a completely different set up to prove that it is viable for the wrong reasons by claiming it exactly the same as being born to it. There is a VAST difference...but you cannot conceive of it or you really do think she slept her way to the top.

Either she is a smart woman using the network she helped build with her husband or she is a woman who never would have gotten anywhere without him.

The fact is that she is using the network she helped build with him to try to win the White House back, and yet you think it is wrong? How could it be wrong?

Since when do women have to only make it on their own to be correct?

[Gore1FL]

130. Well since you would rather try to smear me than address my arguments

I'm done.

Use the extra time to try to paint others as sexists, because it isn;t working on me, and frankly, I'd rather debate someone willing to actually engage in a rational one.

[dorktv]

131. Basically, you cannot explain why a woman would be wrong to use something she worked on

for over twenty years and are now dodging the issue. Too bad, it would have been interesting to see how you could have explained it.

[Gore1FL]

133. What part of 'done' don't you get?

[dorktv]

134. *laughs at you* You are still responding are you not?

Look, you made a stupid statement saying that she was viable for the wrong reasons. As if she had never worked a day in her life for President Clinton to get where he got and where she then went on to do (I mean going to small towns in upstate New York she was never going to win.) She spent years of her life working on the network that she then rather sensibly used for her current campaign.

How is that wrong? And how is claiming she only got where she was because she married it right?

[Gore1FL]

135. ...

Goto 8 and continue to here
Repeat Until you get a clue

End

[dorktv]

136. Hey, I have issues admitting I am wrong at times too.

But eventually I get to the point I can admit after I calm down. You still have not answered how it is wrong for her to use something she has built up with her husband.

That only women on their own somehow are okay to run for president.

[Gore1FL]

140. Obviously

[dorktv]

3. None of them. They are probably looking at what Senator Clinton has gone through and thought...

well...why would I put myself and my family through that?

[splat]

4. So she can't quit -- she has to win it

[Gore1FL]

5. That is true with anyone running for Presidsent

yet people always run.

[dorktv]

Which is why it took the US 232 years to get to the point where a

viable woman candidate ran. Oh and that whole could not vote for the first 144 years.

Oh and that whole women should not work outside the home thing (regardless of reality...)

[Gore1FL]

13. change the numbers around and the same could be said about a black man

If Obama had lost there would still be African American's running in the future. There will be women who run in the future too.

Neither Hillary's nor Barack's campaign is going to influence that simple truth in a negative way.

[dorktv]

19. Jesse Jackson was the first viable black candidate. That was in 1988.

Colin Powell, had he run, would have been number two (and probably would have given President Clinton the fight of his life because how the hell do you counter that?)

so nope, the numbers do not match up.

[Gore1FL]

27. No not really

Jesse Jackson was not going to get the nomination in 1984 or 1988. No one thought that was going to happen. Colin Powell never ran, so the point is moot. Yes, the numbers add up just fine.

[dorktv]

That is not the impression I got, I got the impression Dukakis won because

he was able to barely beat Jackson in 1988.

And Colin Powell never ran, but had he, he would have probably won.

[Gore1FL]

66. barely beat Jackson in 1988?

2687 delegates to 1218 is not "barely"

the Colin Powell thing is utter speculation, however. Who knows how well Eleanor Roosevelt would have done had she run...

[dorktv]

71. Eleanor Roosevelt would not have run. She did however continue working

she was Ambassador to the UN.

Yeah by the time it got to convention on Jackson.

[Gore1FL]

76. Colin Powell evidently would not have run either.

He did continue working as Secretary of State for the BA.

Well before the convention, everyone knew who the nominee was,and despite my vte for him, Jackson wasn't close.

[splat]

29. Obama hasn't won't yet -- the convention votes in August

Reality.

[Gore1FL]

41. He'll have 2025 in the next few weeks.

He won it in WI. Nothing has happened to change that.

[splat]

46. The superdelegates exist to rescue the party from a candidate who nosedives late

And he will. Count on it.

[unlawflcombatnt]

58. And Obama already is nosediving

And it will only get worse. He's a terrible candidate.

[Stop Cornyn]

96. Actually, here on Earth, Obama is kicking ass. What's the weather like on your planet?

[Gore1FL]

69. Where?

Puerto Rico? A blowout there is going to change the tide?

[dorktv]

47. He still has not won though-"will have" is not "have."

[Gore1FL]

67. for all intents and purposes of this discussion

they are the same thing.

[dorktv]

72. No, sorry but they are not. Will have is not the same as have.

You know this, but the people who want her gone keep claiming it is.

Until it happens, it is "will or probably..."

[Gore1FL]

78. OK fine

if you want we'll take this up again in a couple of weeks...

Your argument is like saying WWI is not over for the U.S.because we didn;t sign the treaty that ended it, but hey, if you are a dot the i and cross the t type of person, more power to you.

[Evergreen Emerald]

6. The treatment she received will likely put a chill on women in many

aspects of society. It has been OK to be sexist in America.

[Occam Bandage]

16. The treatment Hillary has received has been no worse than any other candidate. You seem to be

suggesting that women are weaker than men are. I completely reject your sexist beliefs.

[dorktv]

20. Yes, because bros is such a harsh word to use against a man.

:eyes:

[Occam Bandage]

25. Omg someone insulted a politician this is a first in politics how sexist

[dorktv]

30. *laughs* You really think it is just the fact that there were a few insults tossed her way?

No, it is more likely that her supporters are furious that she has had sexist attacks with no repercussions against those who used them.

That time that there was the "iron my shirt" comment. That should have been shouted down just as much as if someone had the gall to say to Senator Obama "boy."

Same with the disgustingly named PAC against her, and the myriad other ways.

[Occam Bandage]

35. The "Iron My Shirt" comment was by a pair of shock jocks, and was met with national opposition.

The fact that you--and I--have heard about it means that yes, it was shouted down. The Republican C.U.N.T. "PAC" was on the same level as the Obama-monkey shirts: one dickhead who thinks of something insulting to put on a T-shirt.

If you can't stand the occasional glory-seeking heckler, you have no business being in politics. I completely reject your belief that women are somehow weaker or more fragile than men.

[dorktv]

38. That is quite a leap you are making. That I must think women are

"weaker" or "more fragile" then men for not wanting to put up with being constantly insulted and demeaned.

No, I just think that they look at what may happen and make a decision to not put themselves in that position. Being treated like crap is not fun, and it hurts, and sometimes, you just simply choose to not do it.

By the way, are you a politician?

[Occam Bandage]

48. Yes. Anyone who runs for President is treated like shit. John Kerry,

a man who served his nation honorably for years at great risk to life and limb, was called a coward, a phony, and a wimp by men who had never put on a uniform. Al Gore, who had spent a lifetime in honest public service, was ridiculed as a liar, a bore, and a huckster by men who had never told the truth but accidentally.

Anyone who runs for President is putting themselves up to be treated like crap. You're saying that there won't be another female President for a long time, because women are too "hurt" when they're "insulted and demeaned." You're saying that women are more fragile than men, and that they can't hold up under the pressure of running for President. That is grade-A sexism disguised as feminism, and I hope that most Hillary supporters aren't as sexist as you are.

[dorktv]

62. First off, I am not a Senator Clinton supporter-I defend her because I think she is

getting a raw deal.

Second-Women process things differently then men. They look at what she has gone through and say "you know, I think I might want to just not go through that."

It is one of the reasons why it is hard to get women to run for office. Well among other reasons. Most women will cheerfully work their hearts out for another person, but be the one having the insults hurled at them? Rather not. It is not "weak" or "fragile" to not put oneself into a position to be treated horribly. It is sensible-especially since women tend to personalize insults-men have a habit of being 'oh you called me a whatever? well you are a whatever!" Women are not going to do the same thing back.

To ignore it or claim it is being "weak" or "fragile" is stupid.

By the way, are you a politician?

[Occam Bandage]

73. I don't care if you're a Senator Clinton supporter. You're claiming that women all

"personalize" insults, can't get past them, and thus do not have the composure required to run for President. That is back-asswards 1800s-era thinking, and it would be sexist coming out of anyone's mouth. I've known more than a few women who aren't the dainty little flowers--incapable of taking a punch--you seem to believe all women are. You may not like seeing your thoughts put in such unflattering terms, but you think women are too fragile to be President, and that is absolutely, completely sexist.

I am a "politician" in the most minor possible sense of the word. I recently finished a stint as the vice-chair of my precinct's Dem party, and sat on a city council for a term. The worst 'abuse' I got was being called too young/immature to hold any sort of office (I was still in college at the time).

[dorktv]

81. Actually you are twisting my words:

1. Never said all women. The current batch of nationally known women (which basically is Pelosi, Boxer and Clinton to those not constantly reading and watching the news, but for the purposes of this discussion will include those named) probably are looking at the idea of being in the center of such a hate storm and saying "yeah no."

2. How did you get "weak" or "fragile" from pointing out that MOST women (and a great deal of men too) would not want to spend months being told how awful they are? It takes a lot to put up with that kind of abuse and if a woman wants to avoid it she is not being weak at all. She is simply chosing what is best for her and most likely her family.

3. Okay, you served a term on the city council, so you ran for that office and got lucky with only being told you are too young? Not only that but are you going to run again? Could you face what she has gone through? Or what the other two candidates cited have gone through?

If you can, I expect to see you running in however long it takes you to reach 35 or we need another D candidate running for office. Otherwise you are just "weak."

[Occam Bandage]

84. Nope.

1. Okay, so replace "all women" with "all currently existent women." I'm sorry. You think all women in politics now don't have the composure to run for President.

2. Because you aren't saying the same thing about men. You're saying that women can't handle the heat--but ignoring the fact that men apparently can.

3. Nope. Decided I didn't want to gamble on that path; too high-risk-low-reward. I'm going to law school now, and I plan on being an intellectual-property lawyer. I might run for the state legislature in a decade or so; I might not. I probably won't even run for Congress.

[dorktv]

88. Again with the twisting of my words.

1. Lots more women in politics then the current batch. Perhaps in a few years they will be up there and they will decide "maybe this time it will not be so bad."

2. Men can in greater number than women. Men can handle being insulted all the time because they choose to do it to each other and get it from women they ask out. Women on the other hand are not like that. It is not sexist to say that women are different then men.

3. Oh, I see, could not take the heat. Oh well.

[TBF]

120. Women "process" things differently than men?

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

[dorktv]

126. They have different things that matter to them in order of importance.

A guy for instance might not be bothered when someone insults him. A woman on the other hand has to talk it out.

[TBF]

128. Seriously?

This may be your experience, but in my experience gender has nothing to do with those reactions.

[dorktv]

132. mmmm, no, there have been plenty of studies done on how

genders react to different problems in different ways.

I had a internet discussion once about the idea of women in combat. The guy had been in charge of two different teams-one all female and one all male. He said that the women, while they may have taken longer to get everyone's input, had a greater chance of solving problems in the future because they had throughly discussed the situation and possible issues. He said the men were quicker to form a heirarchy but that they had problems later on if there were situations that devoloped that were outside the original scope. I thought it was interesting and it does show how women have different styles then men because they have different interests in what is important-everyone getting buy in for trust or getting behind a leader.

[TBF]

137. Links to the studies? Anecdotes are nice, but hardly representative.

[dorktv]

138. they are out there...I will go dig them up later...I am off to watch TV. :)

that and I suck at googling so I have to slowly find this stuff.

[dorktv]

139. wait! Never mind...found a link a few links..

http://sfhelp.org/02/gender.htm

http://books.google.com/books?id=toN-9fUwq8UC&pg=PA25&lpg=PA25&dq=male+v+female+priorities&source=web&ots=8oGpq0mqu3&sig=sgNBq9nFdXSZrIPr_NfPQLgSYfg&hl=en#PPA29,M1

http://pressreleases.cnetnetworks.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=67325&p=irol-newsArticle_Print&ID=465312&highlight= This one is about the difference in buying electronics...

http://www.thesportjournal.org/article/effect-gender-opportunity-sports-priorities-and-aspirations-young-athletes

[Captain Hilts]

154. Has Matthews called Obama or McCain names like "Madame DeFarge," "Nurse Ratched," etc.

When's he going to call McCain "Captain Queeq?"

He isn't.

[Stop Cornyn]

7. I don't think any of them are as weak as that. Why do you think they are all so weak?

[dorktv]

11. I know why one will never be able to run.

Not only is she female, she um...bats for the one side.

She has not announced it so it is an open secret but that is why she would not do it.

And I said "them and their families." Senator Clinton has a child she kept well protected from the media-yet that child was still vilified in the press. Most women care about their families and do not want to put them through that kind of thing. Men on the other hand are a bit more me me me...

[Stop Cornyn]

24. Homophobic AND sexist in one post. You win the exacta!

[dorktv]

33. The woman happens to be one of THE most effective politicians I know

yet YOU know as well as I do that the rest of the country outside of her state could not handle the idea.

and it is depressing.

[TBF]

121. There we go with the stereotypes again. Women care about their

families but men do not? I feel sorry for you. Are you married?

[splat]

14. Would you be willing to be vilified the way DU vilifies her? Or are you too 'weak'?

It's been nasty, personal and sexist -- like John Lennon said, "Woman is the Nigger of the World."

[Stop Cornyn]

28. If "Woman is the Nigger of the World," as you quote, where do African Americans rank in your world?

It has been nasty. More of the "nasty" has come from Hillary's campaign toward Obama than in the other direction. On this website, the Obama supporters have been ugly but Obama's campaign has not been particularly nasty.

[splat]

37. Do you 'rank' people? I don't -- John Lennon knew sexism was more acceptable than racism

With DU et al doing Obama's wetwork, he can just smile and wave.

[Stop Cornyn]

59. I suppose that must be why there are so many more black Senators and Governors than female Senators

and Governors.

Oh, wait ...

[jgraz]

9. It's a simple formula: choose a candidate worthy of the office.

i.e. Not a right-wing, pro-war DLC drone.

[splat]

26. Many of us think Obama's more a spokesmodel than 'worthy of the office'

He's done little but be charming.

[jgraz]

34. Well, that's one more thing than Hillary's capable of.

[splat]

39. Miss America can be charming; I want a competent, experience exec

He's not that.

[jgraz]

40. Oh really? Tell me, who had the better-managed campaign?

Hmm?

[splat]

50. Is the presidency a campaign? Can you hire a presidency manager? (Cheney?)

The netroots wanted to prove they could deliver somebody. But they can't deliver the mood of the people, which is changing. As long as Hillary stays in, she'll win it.

[jgraz]

56. Seriously, it took you five minutes to think of THAT?

Jesus, this is pathetic even by Clinton standards. Go back and dig through your campaign talking points again. I'm sure you'll find something in there that at least parses as English.

[splat]

63. I thought you'd decided you were an asshole and were going outside to play?

[jgraz]

70. Ah, resorting to stalking. Hopefully you're better at that than adult discussion

[splat]

86. I'm resorting to reading: You said that a few messages above this one in this thread

Here's the link, in case your memory is wobbly.


Goodbye.

[TBF]

123. The campaign is not the presidency, but if you can't even stay in budget when you run the campaign

and stay VIABLE as a candidate who is going to vote for you in the GE? She is deeply in debt, Obama won twice as many states as she has, and has the delegates as well. She has nothing but a bunch of supporters she has conned into doing her dirty work by playing the martyr. She disgusts me.

[chascarrillo]

10. I still say Maria Cantwell has a great shot.

Great on interior issues. Positive approval ratings across the state (in Washington, that's a BIG deal). Yeah, there's a few votes I don't like, and she's the more centrist Senator... but still, she's pretty brilliant.

[Yanez Houston Jordan]

18. I like Boxer and Murray, but I think it is likely to be Napolitano, McCaskill, Cantwell or Sebelius.

[lumberjack_jeff]

148. Not Cantwell. Gregoire or Murray before Cantwell.

Cantwell lost my support when she refused to help block Alito's nomination. Her limitless appetite for H1-B visas just seals the deal.

[Brundle_Fly]

12. wasnt hillary's time.

but man Barbara Boxer would be an awesome president.

[splat]

22. Actually, it is Hillary's time -- she'll end up winning this

[Stop Cornyn]

31. Don't hold your breath on that ... nevermind. Knock yourself out.

[anigbrowl]

17. I'm hoping for Jan Napolitano myself.

[dorktv]

21. But she could not run...which is more depressing then you know.

[anigbrowl]

45. Hasn't stopped her so far

Some people are in love with defeat. Why meet trouble half way? If we all took your attitude, she wouldn't even be a governor.

[dorktv]

51. Arizona is a pretty libertarian state-that is why we voted down the

stupid ban they wanted written into the constitution.

And why when Salmon mentioned it he was told to shut up about it. Unfortunately the rest of the country does not have that sense.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

61. It BARELY failed and only because of concerted, well-organized opposition

And because it included language that applied to all unmarried couples. When the straights realized it might effect them enough of them voted against it. Arizona is no hotbed of libertarianism. They like their guns here but that's about it. Look at how overwhelmingly all those horrible anti-immigrant initiatives passed. Libertarians are pro-immigration.

[dorktv]

68. State wide, Arizonans tend to be more libertarian.

Which is why one reason why it failed.

And source on the pro-undocumented immigrant thing?

[mrreowwr_kittty]

79. Here's the first article that popped up when I googled "Libertarians are pro-immigration".

Libertarians Celebrate Fifth Annual Pro-Immigration Rally

[dorktv]

83. please pay attention-they are pro-undocumented?

Because that is not the impression I get from my libertarian friends.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

95. Your libertarian friends are probably Republicans who want to smoke weed and get laid.

But they probably embrace authoritarianism when it comes to clamping down on others' freedom. Oh, and ask your friends if they're for greatly increasing the number of visas issued, since all they care about is the undocumented part, and all. I'll bet they won't be for that.

[dorktv]

109. Interesting conclusion there. All from me pointing out the difference between

undocumented and documented.

[DU GrovelBot]

32. ## DON'T DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our second quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Whatever you do, do not click the link below!

[NewHampshireDem]

36. Jeanne Shaheen? Don't make me puke.

She could have fixed NH's school funding crisis once and for all, but she was more concerned about her political future than about NH's children. I've held my nose and voted for her--and will do so again in her Senate race--but we don't need another Democrat like her--spineless.

[SoxFan]

85. Don't blame ,me, I voted for Mark Fernald!

[NewHampshireDem]

98. Hehe! Me too!

The only person with a real plan and some solid numbers. He and Carol Shae Porter are the only NH politician who I ever sent a donation to directly. My NH money does to the NH democratic party or organizations like True Majority.

Frankly, I don't have much use for most of the 'democrats' in our state. I do have hope that it is beginning to change, though. Hopefully we won't be holding our noses much longer; once Jeanne ends up in the Senate I think she'll take Kathy Sullivan with her and we'll see some more progressive dems move up through the ranks. (Please, god, please!)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

44. Murray would be great. Cantwell..ugh.

[lumberjack_jeff]

149. Exactly. n/t

[unlawflcombatnt]

52. I'd vote for Claire McCaskill

I'd readily vote for McCaskill over anyone running for President at the present.

Debbie Stabenow might also be good.

Barbara Boxer has some strong points as well.

But never Gregoire. She's come out openly in favor of increasing H1B visas, to help her rich Corporate IT supporters (like Bill 'American-workers-are-stupid' Gates).

Maria Cantwell is no champion of American workers either.

And why Janet Napolitano? Has she done anything to help the people of Arizona? Has she done something "good" that I missed?

P.S.
I'm a male. I don't have any special interest one way or the other whether the next President is a woman or not. It just so happens that I think Hillary Clinton would be the best choice at the present time.

I really like Claire McCaskill and have been thinking, since she was first elected to the Senate, that she had future Presidential potential, as do Jim Webb and John Tester.

I'd readily vote for a woman for President, if she was the best choice.
If, as the soundbite goes, "the best man for the job is a woman," so be it. I'll vote for her.

[splat]

65. Most of the country has never heard of any of these people

[Occam Bandage]

77. Most of the country hadn't heard of Barack Obama four years ago.

[splat]

91. Two unknowns is a swell winning ticket!!!

[Stop Cornyn]

97. It's gotta work better than having the politician with Hillary's low approval rating on the ticket

[Occam Bandage]

100. He certainly isn't unknown now.

[Hippo_Tron]

141. Most candidates are unheard of until they run for President

Unless you are part of a dynasty like the Clintons, Kennedys, or Bushes or you were Vice President or ran for Vice President, chances are that most people outside of your home state don't know who you are until you run.

[Ino]

115. What do people see in McCaskill?

As a Missourian, I've been rather disappointed in her.

Cons: She votes for all the war funding because "we must support the troops, and Bush will just take the money from somewhere else." She condemned the moveon "Betrayus" ad because Petraeus is an honorable man and she believes him. She voted FOR telecom immunity because "it's not their fault if Bush lied to them."

Pros: she supports Obama, she voted against Mukasey and Kyle-Lieberman, she's not Jim Talent, and she answers my irate emails.

I haven't seen much courage or leadership from her. Kind of a mixed bag. Nice lady though.

[lumberjack_jeff]

150. Hey! Welcome back!

Haven't heard from you recently.

FWIW, I'm more inclined to give Gregoire the benefit of the doubt than I am Cantwell. Gregoire didn't put Alito on the court.

[Czolgosz]

89. If not Obama-Kaine or Obama-Graham, I like Obama-McCaskill

[Stop Cornyn]

99. I agree.

[Honeycombe8]

104. McCaskill has said Obama is too smart to ask her for VP. She's happy where she is.

And those other folks aren't known, so they are out. It's too much for a ticket for the public to be introduced to TWO totally new faces on the same ticket.

[Czolgosz]

145. Webb said the EXACT same thing. I think that's sort of the generic response

[Honeycombe8]

151. Yeah, but I could tell Webb would consider it. Actually, the 1st time he was asked...

he didn't say, at first, that he wasn't interested. It took him a couple of sentences to get around to saying that.

It sounded like McKaskill was serious.

But as one potential politician said....hey, it's an honor to be asked, so who wouldn't at least consider it? I think that's probably right.

[Spider Jerusalem]

101. Kathleen Sebelius in 2016, if Obama picks her as his running mate.

She's a strong contender for the number two slot on the ticket, and after 8 years as VP would be the natural Democratic standard-bearer.

[Stop Cornyn]

102. What does Sebelius offer that McCaskill doesn't also bring to the table?

[MadBadger]

117. Executive Experience

Plus, Obama cannot choose a freshman senator, unless its somebody like Webb who has prior experience.

[Honeycombe8]

105. Who is she? nt

[Stop Cornyn]

106. Sebelius is governor of Kansas; McCaskill is senator from Missouri

[Honeycombe8]

113. Thx. I knew who McCaskill was, tho. Very savvy, IMO. (she won't be vp, tho)...

She said she likes being senator, and Obama would be stupid to pick her.

[ecdab]

129. I agree with that assessment. Sebelius has the best chance of those

mentioned in this thread of getting the VP slot, and thus the best shot at becoming the first female President.

[Honeycombe8]

103. If I had to guess...I'd guess Kay Bailey Hutchinson. Just my guess. nt

[Stop Cornyn]

107. Don't even joke like that; you're scaring me.

[Honeycombe8]

114. Sorry. That's what I think. She's one of the most popular female politicians in the country....

She is liked by both Repubs and Dems. I live in TX, so I know quite a bit about her. I like her, too (altho not her policies and positions). She was a hit when she was on Real Time with Bill Maher. She's an excellent communicator.

She would be my guess....if she runs for governor first. She says she has no plans to run for governor, though.

[Stop Cornyn]

124. I actually agree that she is the Repub nominee who gives us the most trouble.

[crimsonblue]

110. Nancy Reagan already claims this title...

By 86, Reagan was showing bad signs of Alzheimer's, and his wife did much of his official correspondance and decision-making in private-- many times after calling upon psychic power to help her. By the time he left office, Reagan was a shell of his former self, and many Washington insiders believed that she was the one runnings in the White House the last couple years (with the aid of the chief of staff). There's a reason Ronnie made so few public appearances after he left office-- he couldn't remember who his wife and kids were, let alone the current occupant of the white house.

[Hippo_Tron]

142. Edith Wilson beat her to it actually

She was running the country after her husband had a stroke.

[crimsonblue]

144. yeah i guess that's right...

also, I've seen a few articles by historians that examined the influence of Eleanor Roosevelt on her husband's presidency, and some have come to the conclusion that she was one of the major influences, especially during FDR's 3rd and 4th terms.

[Hippo_Tron]

146. Eleanor Roosevelt was a remarkable first lady

And she was one of the major influences that pushed her husband in the right direction on civil rights issues.

But she wasn't running the country from behind the scenes.

[crimsonblue]

152. That's not what I intended to say..

As far as first ladies go, she probably ranks in the top 5. She wasn't tied down to her husband (unlike so many recent republican wives), and she had fierce independence and intelligence.

[mmonk]

111. Very true.

[bain_sidhe]

118. Ask the media, they're the ones who decide who's "viable" and who isn't

The "norm" is for them to decide that both female and minority candidates aren't viable.

They couldn't do that to Hillary because of her unique "advantages"--establishment support, associated with the last successful Dem president, years on the national stage. Whether you call them the right or the wrong ones, they undeniably prevented the media from treating her like a joke, the way they do most female candidates.

I don't see any other female currently on the national stage having anything close to those kinds of advantages, so my guess is the media will revert to form and treat any of them like jokes too.

I'd like to point out though... they couldn't marginalize Obama, either, but he really had no unique advantages a la Clinton. So, in my mind, his is the more impressive accomplishment, and additionally gives me some hope that some woman, maybe even in my lifetime, will be able to do the same thing. I'm not really optimistic about it, but at least I can see a possibility, based on Obama's success. I don't think any of the ones you mentioned have "it" though, whatever "it" is that Obama has that allowed him to get through the media firewall against women and minorities as Presidental candidates.

[dorktv]

127. My impression with his having mostly positive press

regardless of what happened that day is that the media for whatever reason picked him.

Like they picked Senator McCain oh so many years ago. The media often picks someone and plays them up until they get bored. This time too many other people joined the movement before it could fizzle.

[AnnieBW]

143. It won't be Babs Mikulski

Unfortunately. I like her - she's spunky. But, she's short, plump, and outspoken. Obama would have to kneel down to hold hands with her. I can see whoever the Repuke VP candidate trying to debate her, and she rips him a new one.

Nope, not gonna happen.

It's a shame that Janet Granholm isn't eligible. She's gorgeous.

[Texas Hill Country]

147. it would be pretty bad if he passed over hillary for another woman... perceptually

[sfam]

153. Feminism at its best!! There can be only ONE!!!!

I love the incongruency in this position. If you have a vagina and are not named Hillary, you are excluded from the VP selection process because Hillary's feminist supporters will not allow it...

Just wonderful meaning there...

[OzarkDem]

155. Not if there's a man running against them in the Dem primary

Sorry, ladies. Glass ceiling is still intact.