Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Friday, October 28, 2011

Hillary: Why she leads the pack

Polls indicate that if Hillary Clinton were a candidate, she would -- at this moment -- demolish any Republican opponent, even Romney. How much stock should we put in these findings?

Not much. Hillary's enthusiasts are forgetting one key fact: She has been getting good press from the mainstream media, while the right-wing propagandists have more or less left her alone for years. They have concentrated most of their fire elsewhere.

Were Hillary a candidate, they would spread bizarre, hysterical conspiracy tales about her with all the zeal they now expend in their war on Obama. Worse, much of the progressive left would aid and abet the Murdochian misinformation effort. After a month of heavy bombardment, her numbers would go way down, though perhaps not to Obama's dismal current level.

Never forget: Propaganda works. Too many people think what they are told to think. In late 2007, Hillary Clinton was leading Obama, even among black voters. In very short order, a propaganda barrage changed how the public perceived her.

Semi-unrelated fact: In recent months, quite a few pundits have noted that, if Ronald Reagan were running for president today, many teabaggers would damn him as a traitor to conservatism; he might even be forced to wear the "socialist" label. After all, he raised taxes on the rich to combat a recession. Nowadays, Ronald Reagan could never be elected: He would be labeled too far to the left -- too extreme.

I recall taking a high school civics course circa 1976. That year, Reagan mounted a challenge to Gerry Ford. My teacher -- a self-described conservative who made no attempt to hide his political leanings -- loudly declared to the class that Ronald Reagan would never be president of the United States. Why? "Because he's too far to the right -- too extreme."

His exact words. I recall them well.
Yes, Hillary Clinton's popularity is somewhat of an illusion because there is no cable news channel that presently supports her.

Even with MSNBC's low ratings, the fact that they are on 24 hours a day makes them lethal to anyone democrat they do not like.

Not to mention that Huffington Post is out there as well, forming a formidable one two punch.

If the Republicans were smart they would ask Hillary to run as a Republican and support her.
Even if Hillary Clinton did not change her position on anything, republicans and the United States would thrive under a Hillary Clinton presidency.
Guys--why not just give credit where it's due? Hillary is the most popular Democrat around, pure and simple. Most people like her, even if embittered progressives don't. She has always been more popular than Obama.
The print and broadcast media, on orders from their corporate masters, will attack Hillary should she even have a dream about running again. The Kossholes and Huff-Puffers will gleefully join the fray. As it is Hillary's current popularity is just another weapon to use against Obama by the RNM.

If by some miracle Hillary should decide to run and win nothing much will come of it because she will be surrounded by fools and cowards like Pelosi and Reid.

Think back to the repeal of Glass-Steagall, Democrats took the thirty pieces of Wall Street silver and gave the republicans a veto proof majority. (The Kossholes and Puffers know this but still blamed Bill Clinton because they were willing to stoop to any level for an Obama win.)

There is a failure of leadership on Liberal issues thru the entire Democratic party with one or two islands of the courage that Elizabeth Warren is displaying. It won't matter who is in the White House
in 2012 because ineffectual Democrats will be ineffectual Democrats.
Hear, hear on the Warren shout out, Mr. Mike. I wish I lived in Massachusetts so I could cast a vote for her. I'm a huge Hillary Clinton supporter, even though I don't always agree with her foreign policy stands. There's no doubt in my mind, however, that we would be in a much better place domestically if she were in the WH.

But that time has passed. Clinton has been clear on her intentions and I see no reason to disbelieve her. I'd be thrilled if she changed her mind but I don't see that happening.

Elizabeth Warren, however, is another candidate I can easily get behind, even though she's not as liberal as I am or as liberal as many other disenchanted, politically homeless Dems. Thing is? She's smart and committed. She's clear about the dangers, the destructive effects of unfettered capitalism and corporatism gone mad, and she speaks to and for those who have been most hurt by our current economic tailspin--the working class, the working poor, the huge swath of middle-class people who can't get ahead and, in fact, are falling behind in all sectors. She's not afraid to call out the abusers either--the banks, the mortgage companies, the crooked regulators, etc.

She's my kind of candidate. And if I lived in Massachusetts, I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.

I admire Hillary Clinton. But we lost that opportunity. Time to lean forward and start tapping the other good people out there.

Peggy Sue
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Image and video hosting by TinyPic