Hillary is fast moving to the center.

If I were you, id go Clark/McCain, or, since that cant happen, Clark/Dean

If you want a morderate, go Lieberman, he's not as hated as Clinton is in some circles. He may be boring, but nobody really hates him.

Clark is a military man, he's tough, and if I'm not mistaken, doenst have a huge political record that can be picked apart to hurt him.

Hillary isn't hated. In fact, she's quite popular on both sides of the isle and not as "morderate" as you think. If you were referencing her abortion speech, what she said was nothing new and is the view held by most pro-choice advocates. Reduce abortions without destroying a woman's right to choose.

It'll swing on gun control for her. There are a LOT of pro-gun dems, and the issue is toxic for right leaning people. Right now she's seen as VERY anti-2nd. Remember, even clinton said that the dems took huge losses over gun control issues in congress.

I've never heard a right winger speak well of Hillary. I've heard a lot of respect for clark, and a great deal of them like Lieberman. Now, I know you cant win by pandering to repubs, but moving to the left isnt really going to work either. The trick for the left is gonna be to stand for something, but not something so far out there that you lose the middle. You CAN have it both ways.

Really, you can probably win regardless of which major player you nominate if you do your GOTV efforts NOW, instead of waiting a few years. The GOP had a GOTV running all four years G-dub was in office, and put togeather a tidy little Patriotism/Faith package that was easy to buy into. You guys get a good message out there, you can take it.

Clarke would be solid. And he can be credible with Defence/Terra issues too, which, according to some folks, was more what won it for George than Faith. Get somebody that nobody can smear on defence. With Terror/War dominating the news, thats whats got to be addressed. Clarke would play better than that for Hillary.

Get a pro-2a, strong on defence dem, you have a shot (and by strong on defence, i dont mean "bomb everybody" i mean somebody who doesnt give the impression he'll puss out when the chips are down. The repubs managed to paint Kerry that way, they'd not have done so well with Clarke)

I hate to bring up an old argument, but you do realize that the 2nd Amendment reads:

A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

It leaves me less than enthusiastic at this point, but there's plenty of time to improve the possibility.

Both Clintons knew very well to let the gunlovers know they weren't after grandpa's double barrell but even being a yellow dog dem I am sick to death of the polarization and incivility. More than a little guilty of that myself, but Bush is adding insult to injury. God please spare me having to swallow the indignity of another fratboy and "dick". Wes Clark is a dream Pres. A bright mind, defense cred, taught economics at West Point. Don't get me wrong, I have high regard for Hill, but the nut job right will never give it a rest. Please, Please, Please don't make me swallow Jeb/Delay and I'll try and find something nice to say about more than one Republican (see I'm already trying, I left out the "pug" or "thug".

Thats fine with me:

U.S. Code Annotated (U.S.C.A.) title 10 sec. 311 (as amended Nov. 30, 1993) [relating to the definition of militia]

"311. Militia: composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are--

(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia."

So as you see it, women not in the national guard cant own guns.

Thats also not the point though. The point is we have a right to own firearms in this country, and most people don't want to see that go away. If you run sombody who is anti-2a, you are going to run into a LOT of problems. Leave the guns alone, you'll go a LONG way towards winning. You dont even have to pose for shots prancing around the field like you're a hunter (and violate a few basic gun saftey rules while you're at it, so anybody who actually shoots knows you're full of shit), you just have to not bring it up. Leave it the hell alone. Very few people will REFUSE to vote for somebody who isnt going to pass gun control laws, but MANY MANY MANY people refuse to vote for somebody who will. If that issue gets left alone, you'll get ahead.

Stephen,

You are a blowhard.

He's got you there Lactar, you do seem to have issues. By the way, those hunting comments, is that anything like landing on a carrier in a flight suit when you yourself dodged the draft, calling the other eastcoast elitist that did go a coward/liar, non stop kissing of "our troops" ass so you get close enough to shove the knife in their back, Oh and destroying SS because the nasty man took a bank away from your grandpa? Why did the nasty man take the bank, HMMMM, interesting story there! Sad is watching him take this country apart a thread at a time, Sorry is the second coming of Jesus bit. What would a tear in the eye of Jesus look like? I wouldn't be in too big a hurry for the rapture if I were he and dick./

A.) The carrier stunt WAS a stunt, everybody could see that. This is not Bush vs Liberals, this is liberals having a prayer in 08. How well did Bush's landing play with you? Im guessing poorly. Thats about how well Kerry's hunting trip went with pro 2a folks.

B.) If you were refering to MY grandfather, personally, his issues there started about 10 years ago, so this isnt an issue with any one administration. And while I do support veterans benifits, and supporting our troops, I would discourage speaking for them too much,

http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?s=1-292925-2004surveygraphics.php

that sorta seems to indicate that the military is more heavily pro-bush than the country in general, and slightly more so with those deployed to combat zones. Though the military is tough to poll, i've not seen numbers that say Kerry was ever in the lead.

If all you have to say is that I'm a blowhard, well, thats fine, and if I irritate you a little, its just payback for the month or so my little brother watched "Kids in the Hall".

1. The idea that anyone makes a decision about who to vote for in the present political climate based on their NRA rating is beyond pathetic. Worry about something remotely vital, will you? Freedom of the press, free speech, right to privacy... the list of libertarian approved concerns goes on.

2. Hillary is, thanks to hate radio, the most widely despised figure in American politics. There is no running mate in the universe, with the possible exception of Bubba and Oprah, that could get her elected in a national race. Wait. Oprah and Bill, there's a winning ticket.

3. "Plainspoken" Governor from West, South or Midwest + Minority, Woman, Combat Veteran (or combo) = victory in 2008

Payback for "Kids in the Hall"? Never heard of it. Do I like a President sold to the public the way fast food is sold as nutrition, no. KFC will harden my arteries; Bush would send my son to impose his vision on a people who havn't a clue what we really are about, furthermore, what they have seen they don't want to see more. I've seen the sights of the soldiers who are out there "winning hearts and minds". You do that to my grandbabies and I'll hate you forever, I'm funny that way. A republican with honor and credibility could possibly win my vote, if the subject here truly is Dems in 08 or Hillary, Martin made the point, hate radio has so demonized her that no matter what, I would view her chance as slim. Wes Clark? I voted for him in the primary. I looked at the others and to me he was the total package. There are many young up and comers. I held Tom Daschle in very high regard, it involved the color of his character. I could not give a rat's ass about the second amendment, live and let live. You want em have at it. It is my steadfast belief that you eat what you kill. God mourns even the fallen sparrow. God is the creator of all things. To waste a life for shits and giggles is an obscenity, Thou shall not kill ring a bell? Yes I'm getting testy, I have nothing against the ten commandments, put them in schools put them in courthouses, just read them, know what they mean, and keep your own house clean before you bitch about everybody else.

Moderate, schmoderate. I voted for Wes Clark in the CA primary and think he'd make a great president. I'm a fan of Hillary's too but would rather see her as Senat Majority Leader or a Supreme Court Justice than running for the presidency.

Hillary's negatives are too great. I think she'd be a disaster.

Freedom of the Press? Good god man, vital yes, but if you dont like Bush having control of the press, do you want to give him ALL THE GUNS. Think about how our country started. Think about Hitler's gun control (I'll give you three guesses about who wasnt allowed to get a permit). RTKBA IS vital. It is the last defence for the populace. You people wax on about how this evil nazi government is going to run rampant over you, and now you want to hand over all the weapons. Brilliant. Abso-fucking-lutly brillaint. Genocided is ALWAYS preceded by disarming.

The "Kids in the Hall" was directed at somebody else.

Guess what cindy, 80 million gun owners didnt kill anybody today. Heres something to think about:

Alcohol is a factor in about half of all traffic fatalities.
Alcohol is a factor in more than half of all homicides.

Alcohol serves NO social good whatsoever.

Yet nobody would ever ban it.
Think about how many tens of thousands of people would still be alive right now if there was no alcohol.
Are all those lives worth your ability to go have a good time on saturday night?
You wanna think about "controling" something, start with the booze.

Anyway, thats off topic. Neat that I said Hillary is toxic and everybody jumps down my throat, but somebody else says it, and he's right.

Anyway, if you want a shot, you need Clarke.

Lactar said: "Neat that I said Hillary is toxic and everybody jumps down my throat, but somebody else says it, and he's right."

You might have more luck if you don't bury your insightful comments in borderline incoherent horseshit.

Lactar said: "Neat that I said Hillary is toxic and everybody jumps down my throat, but somebody else says it, and he's right."

You might have more luck if you don't bury your insightful comments in borderline incoherent horseshit.

I live out here in the wilderness, Lactar, I KNOW people who would not have meat on their table if they did not hunt, I have nothing against responsible gun ownership, I have a problem with idiots who use them in an irresponsible manner. I loathe alchohol, I view it as an enviromental poison, that's just my viewpoint-many would argue. Do I enjoy the occasional glass of wine? Sure do, just don't take it to extremes. Once again, Martin nailed you. You make valid points but the hostility and aggression tends to cloud the discourse there. Hillary is an incredible woman, but in 2005 many people are not ready for a female leader. Catherine the Great, Elizabeth 1, Cleopatra be damned, it will be many years if ever before a woman leads this country. I find that disappointing because I think color of character, common sense, and intellect are the three bottom line requirements. Checked out "About Us" many apologies to Biederman, BTW like Stephen better, "Laktar" makes me think, "yeah right, more like lactose intolerant!

I'd guess that the first female president will be black and republican. Lotta reasons for that, but just mark it down as my unoffical prediciton.

Yeah, I'm a bit hostile. This is because I'm in a really hard place with my beliefs right now. Our current leadership has done a great deal to associate what should be solid, respectable viewpoints with realtive insanity. Meanwhile, people are flocking to the left wing by default, and I keep remembering what happens to large, powerful nations when they become "socialist" or "communist", hell, even some small ones.

I also see a left wing that stares so hard into the blinding sun of our current leaderships mistakes that they fail to see their own hypocracy, hell, can't even find their principals most days, and so, lose.

So when I get here, read about A.) Our current leaderships latest fuckup, and B.) The oppositions completely fucked up responce, I have a physical/emotional reaction that maybe Mr. Cesca can relate to, and then it hits me that the proper reply would be a page long, nuanced, and I get that where to start feeling, and wind up slamming out the bare bones of it in a very pissed off fashion. Which is odd, because I'm not an angry person, and I've gotten offers to write/speak for political sites, and newspapers, and odd venues, and do crappy web radio shows, so managing to express a viewpoint clearly is not often a weak point. I guess by the time I get down to this little box, Im pretty pissed, and usually tired, so I come off that way a bit.

No on the Hillary part. For some reason, I haven't seen any spine out of her. She just locksteps along with the Republicans.

Stephen,

Go live your Columbine fantasies on some other blog comments. You consistently prove yourself to be an uninformed miscreant and it is a waste of time. You factless, facist post are more than boring they are disturbing.

Lactar wrote:

"Meanwhile, people are flocking to the left wing by default, and I keep remembering what happens to large, powerful nations when they become "socialist" or "communist", hell, even some small ones."

First off, people flocking to the left wing are really people flocking to the truth. It does not mean "socialist" or "communist" (that one actually made me laugh at loud). As far as your BIG concerns about the country going "socialist", you should probably look up the definition of Socialism in practice (much like numerous countries in Europe) before you claim that we are not already a socialist country. A working socialist government underwrites and subsidizes large parts of the economy - just the same way Bush, et. al. subsidizes his big corporate pals with massive tax cuts and reversing legislation. These are not free market thinkers (and the US has never really been a free market economy - there has always been a firm government hand) and there is nothing wrong with that - primarily because free markets don't really work that well and need constant adjusting, realigning, regulation and subsidies - or, in a word, socialism.

Stephen, homework, please.

Didn't we learn a lesson with Kerry? Big Pharma, et al, will grind her to a pulp.