NH called for Clinton

[DCJenn]

Re: NH called for Clinton

Well, we also have Richardson running, too which adds one more category to the list:

Hispanic.

All I have to say is that it's about f-ing time that any/all of the various 'factors' a part of a real national election.

Ms. Rice is one smart cookie and I have a feeling that at the end of the day, there are times when she just wants to backhand her buddy George.

The current First Lady has made it abundently clear that she has no interest in being active in politics for herself and from what I understand, she was less than enthusiastic about her husband running in the first place. Much like Alma Powell who basically told Colin, "not no but hell no."

Personally, I think it's a refreshing change that BOTH sides have lots of interesting and VERY different candidates to choose from.

Jenn

[MDPhDWife]

Re: NH called for Clinton

It actually bothers me that the press are so focused on that one "moment" and many people are saying that's why Clinton eeked out a win last night.

To Tara's point, I've actually given thought to what I would do if Condeleeza Rice won. I'm with Kris in the "I would celebrate her candicacy" camp. I don't think I could ever, ever vote for her, if her politics are truly as much of a rubber-stamp of GWB's as it seems. But I do think she's truly an amazing woman.

As far as the whole "Hillary got there on Bill's coat tails" (which I know is from another thread - we've got about 3 running on this topic), I think that is bunk. He likely would not have gotten where he did if she wasn't on his team.

FWIW, I do say "when we were in residency". I'd never say "When I diagnosed that cancer" b/c I didn't do it. But we, as a family, were in residency. When Clinton refers to things "they" did in the white house, I have no doubt she was involved in the process. She tried to re-define the role of First Lady, and got a whole lot of flack for it.

The comparision to a scenario where Laura Bush announces she's running for president is apples to oranges, even though they're both First Ladies (former in Clinton's case). Mrs. Clinton is a lawyer, a senator (who won a very convincing re-election). incredibly smart, a Yale Law grad (who did not get in on a family legacy). Mrs. Bush was a librarian in an elementary school. She may be smart - but she doesn't generally open her mouth to share anything but an echo of her husband's opinion - so I can't really make that determination on my own. I don't begrudge Mrs. Bush for the role she's chosen to play, but I think an outraged reaction at such an announcement from her would be vaild.

ITA

And thanks Jenn (SA) for finally mentioning the fact that we have a latino candidate!!! It always bothers me when we mention how impressive it is to have a woman and an African American running, but few people remember the governor of my state (NM) is hispanic. I have to say that Richardson is very much underhyped. His resume speaks volumes and his foreign policy and energy experiece would serve our country well.

[Flynn]

Re: NH called for Clinton

Well, we also have Richardson running, too which adds one more category to the list:

Hispanic.

All I have to say is that it's about f-ing time that any/all of the various 'factors' a part of a real national election.


Jenn

ABSOLUTELY. I didn't mention Richardson or Obama because we were talking about Hillary but I whole heartedly agree with the above.

I've heard some buzz that Richardson would be a great VP. I think who gets the nomination will be very interesting on BOTH sides and then who they choose as running mates will be equally interesting.

This election isn't following any of the "old rules" so to speak.

Re: NH called for Clinton

This is huge.
This is history.
My grandchildren will ask about this election someday. How did I feel? What was it like? Why did it take so long?

ITA Flynn. The other day Quinn was looking at a placemat with all of the US Presidents on it. He said "Aren't there any girl presidents?" I said "One is trying buddy. One is trying."

[Rapunzel]

Re: NH called for Clinton

The funny thing is that of all the Democratic contenders dh and I like Richardson best. I don't know that that would translate into voting for him (even as a VP). However, from watching the democratic side of the debates we much prefer Richardson's personality to any of the others.

And, yup, we also noted that this is the first time a latino is in the running (no way he's going to be president - but, hey, he's at least trying ).

[Rapunzel]

Re: NH called for Clinton

The reason I brought up the Condi question (which you answered so eliquently, BTW ) is because when Pelosi or insert other dem woman, black, etc., became Speaker the press, women, and a host of others were all over the place saying how wonderful this is what a great step for women blah, blah ,blah.

It's just like when NOW raves about the accomplishments of certain women in politics. It's only the women THEY like, the ones who share THEIR views, the ones THEY think are "achieving things for women." It's not about women--it's about THEIR women. There is the sense that, for example, Republican or conservative female politicians are viewed as not "really for women" so their accomplishments are worth heralding. NOW isn't for all women, as the moniker suggests. It's for certain, very particular viewpoints on how the world should be, to best serve women pursuant to THEIR understanding of what would be in women's best interests. And people who don't endorse their views are perceived as "anti-women"...even if they are female.

I consider NOW quite anti-woman, actually. Now, there is a certain type of historic role model I like (the kind of women who got Utah up and running as the first place in the U.S. to give women the vote) and these NOW people are quite far removed from that role model. There is this self-loathing among the NOW types that I just cannot stand (Gloria Steinem comes to mind).

Re: NH called for Clinton

If only 1 out of 100 senators were men and all presidential candidates were always...always women...you'd be ok with that and feel like your needs, your life, and your issues were represented? Be honest....

I suppose I might be more inclined to "cheer" for a man if that counterfactual were the case -- provided I liked his policies. So, I guess I'd still be back to policies. I mean if the man were Teddy Kennedy-esque than the answer is still no cheering.

So, I'm not trying to be obtuse, but I really don't think that gender alone even in your scenario, would be sufficient to feel that someone "got my issues" or could represent me better because we shared just our gender.

But I think another issue that predisposes us to be more likely to think differently about candidates is where we diverge on the role of government in general. That is, I think that the old adage "the government that governs least, governs best". Given that, from the start I'm very wary of thinking a man or women with a plan for [insert large scale government creation of such and such or overhaul of something] will be the silver bullet to [insert issue du jour, month, year].

Almost always, I start with the supposition that a government program will be costly, not fix what it is intended to fix, interfere with the free market, "incentivize" (if that's a word) the wrong behaviors and create a whole lot of negative, unintended externalities that the "man" or "woman" of the people never thinks about, understands or cares about when he/she is getting the "rah, rah" from the crowds.

So, given the above paragraph Mrs. Hilary Clinton scares the beejeezus out of me not because of her gender but her grand policy plans in terms of healthcare and other areas. Ditto for the populist ambulance chaser Edwards who soon should be taking his "fighting" spirit back to the Tarheel state. And suprise - John McCain scares me. He's not a true conservative (see McCain-Feingold, etc.) and he's got a little bit (just a little) of that great man syndrome. He wouldn't be a conservative victory, he'd be an extreme wildcard. So, I'd be back to praying for gridlock again.

[GrayMatterWife]

Re: NH called for Clinton

The funny thing is that of all the Democratic contenders dh and I like Richardson best.

I've hear that same sentiment from a lot of my Dem friends! I can see that. He strikes me as a broadly appealing, affable guy with a reasonable amount of real foreign policy experience. I did, however, hear that he will be dropping out today.

[MDPhDWife]

Re: NH called for Clinton

Well it's official....another one bites the dust. Richardson officially dropped out today. I knew he didn't have a chance, but it was nice to see a latino man that had real presidential potential, from my home state, making a run for it.

He has said that he's not interested in being a VP, since he thinks being the governor of NM is better. It would be nice if he were to reconsider, although I don't know that anyone would take him. I have heard though that he's got a shoe in to the cabinet should a Democrat win presidency. :huh:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22591470/

[DCJenn]

Re: NH called for Clinton

I'm seeing Secretary of State for Richardson.

Jenn

[Rapunzel]

Re: NH called for Clinton

Well, I liked his personality on camera - but it doesn't mean I like his potential policies.