OK kids! Time for another gratuitous "Hillary bashing" thread

Just a question, actually. Do you agree with the conventional wisdom that says that Democrats run to the left in the primaries (and Repubs run to the right, which they clearly are), and then run to the "center" in the general election? And if so, is Hillary running to HER left now? :shrug: Just wonderin'.

underdogs in the primaries run to the right or left. It's the best way to shore up the base. But the leading candidate doesn't really need to do that. That's why Giuliani still won't come out and say he's anti-abortion and wants to make them illegal. It's also why dark-horse candidates like Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo are running just to the left of Goebbels.

Similarly, Hillary doesn't have to run to the left. But dark horses like Kucinich and Gravel sure do.

Those are the extremes of the lead candidates and the furthest dark horses. The second tier folks will just run slightly to the left or right, which is what you see in Obama and Edwards and Romney and McCain.

I dunno. That sounds a little too cult-of-personality for me.

they cant afford their own real views.. they use think teams.

arrested when and if he became president. Why wait? do not the people have the right to demand citizens arrest if they have proof a crime has been committed? Many people hold the proof and yet they still stand unharmed while they continue their criminal acitivity daily.

Dennis has his foot in the door, he can find a way to be heard where most ordinary citizens do not have that ability, though I love what he says he stands for, I have to wonder why his actions do not match his words.

There is so much more than to just be in attendance to vote.

I wonder why Conyers who has been attempting to force these criminals out of hiding for the past several years has not made much of a dent?

I for one am tired of hearing we don't understand how government works, its pretty apparent that in this day and age the government is run by a select few and the others are no more than window dressing....

Such can be stopped but it takes a village and not just the leaders of said village but the populace of said village themselves.

It appears the best we can hope is that Hillary is running "as is". Can't wait to hear the noises she makes when she's up against the likes of Giuliani :scared:

for those of us to her left. Especially if Giuliani wins the nomination. A Giuliani win means the religious right either goes third party or, at the very least, doesn't show up. Hillary won't need to run any more centrist than she is now. And while I'd like to see a more-progressive candidate, I really disagree that Hillary's some sort of conservative shill. She's a step in the right direction on a lot of issues.

My hope is that she is running more to the center to attract more conservative voters, but will run the White House (if she wins) more to the left of what her campaign has been. If not, well......

I think you're dreaming. She doesn't need to attract more conservatives until the general.

I didn't make that clear. My dream is basicly that I hope she is more left that what she appears now, but I don't think so.

Disclaimer: I don't support Hillary, and I am NOT dreaming of her being #44.

She believes that she's going to win the nomination, so she's moderating her positions with the general election in mind.

It's a gamble, of course, because she could displease many on the left during the primaries.

I think she is chasing the right at the moment, thinking the left will vote for her anyways. However, the idea that she would turn back leftwards if she became president is doubtful. In politics, you dance with whomever brung ya. And the bringers are big pharma, insurance, blackwater, Murdoch, etc.
I don't think those backers would be happy if she suddenly turned into a more liberal candidate/office holder.

My impression is that the left, although in a majority, will be screwed regardless