Hillary now supports faith based initiatives...

Embar Angylwrath · Post by **Embar Angylwrath** » Thu Jan 20, 2005 1:11 pm

Guess she saw how the Republicans were able to turn support of the concept into support of a candidate. So now she supports the concept.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massac ... es?mode=PF

Any comment Beek?

Post by **Ddrak** » Thu Jan 20, 2005 2:19 pm

I remember one comment surfacing from the DNC after the election that the Dems need to work on their image and start showing that they are the champions of religious freedoms rather than freedom from religion. In other words, try to co-opt the mainstream religious masses from the right wing nuts that people cringe from.

This could be something along those lines starting to emerge.

Dd

Burz · Post by **Burz** » Thu Jan 20, 2005 2:22 pm

Ddrak wrote:Dems need to work on their image and start showing that they are the champions of religious freedoms rather than freedom from religion.

Flip floppahz!

Sindarre · Post by **Sindarre** » Thu Jan 20, 2005 2:23 pm

A politician sucking up to the masses for a vote or two?? Say it ain't so Ddrak!!

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Thu Jan 20, 2005 2:25 pm

Why would I have any comment? I'm not a Hillary fan.

Eidolon Faer · Post by **Eidolon Faer** » Thu Jan 20, 2005 7:06 pm

Didn't Carville say something about the Democrats needing to be "Born Again"?

Ah yes...here's the article...

http://washingtontimes.com/national/200 ... -7714r.htm

Looks like Hillary is taking his advice seriously.

Partha · Post by **Partha** » Thu Jan 20, 2005 11:53 pm

Realizing, of course, that the Clintons aren't actual liberals in the sense that most Republicans think.

SabiarofErudin · Post by **SabiarofErudin** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 10:21 am

This will backfire.

Embar Angylwrath · Post by **Embar Angylwrath** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 11:29 am

Relbeek Einre wrote:Why would I have any comment? I'm not a Hillary fan.

Because she's likely to be the Democratic presidential contender in 2008. Right now, the Democrats have no other likely candidates. And if she is going to be the Democrat's presidential nominee, then the Democrats will either have to swallow her package on faith based initiatives, or fracture themselves again as they lose cohesiveness.

So the questions remains Beek, will you swallow Hillary's package?

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 11:37 am

Phfft.

No, I won't. And screw your scenario, too. Wishful thinking on your part.

Becoming "Republican Lite" is what's destroyed the Democrats the last two elections. More of that won't do shit for us.

Embar Angylwrath · Post by **Embar Angylwrath** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 11:40 am

You think the Democrats are incapable of self-implosion over idealogical principles within their party?

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 11:45 am

I think the damage done is over ideological principles vs. pandering.

The Democratic Leadership Council think Clinton's success was due to making himself appear more conservative. Which simply isn't the case. His amazing natural charisma and his ability to speak to LIBERAL principles won the day because they energized the Democratic base. The DLC wants their boys in office and seems to have forgotten why.

We need leaders who energize our base, not who get milquetoast and speak boring platitudes with mass appeal.

I think the Democratic base has principles on which they're more or less united - progressive taxation, education, intelligent foreign policy, economic growth for the citizens instead of the corporations, government out of our bedrooms, free speech, and separation of church and state.

Faith based initiatives are all well and good - why fuck them up by getting government involved in them, First Amendment issues aside?

Embar Angylwrath · Post by **Embar Angylwrath** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 11:47 am

You didn't answer my question.

Post by **Ddrak** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 11:52 am

I think you'll see the same thing happen to the Dems as is happening to the GOP from the neocons - it won't necessarily fracture (there's too much at stake) but there will be a lot of unrest and backroom fights.

Dd

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 12:15 pm

The question is meaningless, Embar... of course they're capable of it. It's just not likely. The battle's drawn across different lines right now.

Cartumandua · Post by **Cartumandua** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 2:09 pm

Hillary won't win the nomination. That's wishful thinking for the republicans.

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 2:25 pm

I'd give it 50/50, Cart. Barak Obama's going to be the Dems' new golden boy, but he's not ready to run for President in 2008. I don't know who else can run. Boxer and Feinstein are both strong but vulnerable candidates. Dean energized the base in ways no candidate, not even Clinton, managed to do in years, but he's way too vulnerable.

The DLC definitely wants Hillary. And they won the fight for who gets nominated in 2004. However, I think most Democrats on the inside are realizing the DLC paves the road to failure. It may take the midterm elections to prove that with finality, however - the 2006 elections for the Democrats are largely going to depend on the Democrats' purging the DLC's influence. Another failure will hopefully nail the coffin in the DLC, but if they're minimized before then, we should see some solid Democratic gains.

But it's possible that the influence of the DLC, combined with savvy politicking on Hillary's part, could still seal her the nomination. I hope not - we need to move on, and Hillary doesn't have nearly her husband's charisma but has all her husband's baggage.

Burz · Post by **Burz** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 3:00 pm

Hillary needs to get religious since Bush is a satanist.

Partha · Post by **Partha** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 3:37 pm

Relbeek Einre wrote:I'd give it 50/50, Cart. Barak Obama's going to be the Dems' new golden boy, but he's not ready to run for President in 2008. I don't know who else can run. Boxer and Feinstein are both strong but vulnerable candidates. Dean energized the base in ways no candidate, not even Clinton, managed to do in years, but he's way too vulnerable.

The DLC definitely wants Hillary. And they won the fight for who gets nominated in 2004. However, I think most Democrats on the inside are realizing the DLC paves the road to failure. It may take the midterm elections to prove that with finality, however - the 2006 elections for the Democrats are largely going to depend on the Democrats' purging the DLC's influence. Another failure will hopefully nail the coffin in the DLC, but if they're minimized before then, we should see some solid Democratic gains.

But it's possible that the influence of the DLC, combined with savvy politicking on Hillary's part, could still seal her the nomination. I hope not - we need to move on, and Hillary doesn't have nearly her husband's charisma but has all her husband's baggage.

In order of most likely to run, this is the list right now:

Biden
Boxer
Kerry
Edwards
Joementum....er, Lieberman
Hillary
Obama

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 3:46 pm

I think Kerry and Edwards won't run. They had their chance. Biden is likely to run, I'll give you that.

Who do you think is going to be the Republican nominee in 2008? Jeb Bush is a gimme; who else?

Brell Rants

Hillary now supports faith based initiatives...

Hillary now supports faith based initiatives...

lalal

Re:

Re: