Ceilings And Canaries

Has Hillary Clinton hit the ceiling in her bid for the presidency? The Rasmussen analysis of head-to-head general election matchups involving Hillary Clinton has created considerable buzz. She has not been able to gain a majority of voters in any of the matchups with the Republican frontrunners, although she maintains slim leads against all of them except Rudy Giuliani (46%-44% Giuliani).
Does this put her in a losing position in 2008, and should the Democrats start looking elsewhere in the primaries? At Heading Right, I look at the canary in the coal mine, but caution against overanalyzing a race that hasn’t really yet begun. These numbers may shift when Hillary starts speaking to more people than just the hard-Left activist base.
I’ll talk with Jim Geraghty about this on Heading Right Radio today at 2 pm CT.

33 thoughts on “Ceilings And Canaries”

  1. These polls are just the beginning. A recent poll indicated a majority of Americans think things are getting worse in Iraq, when in fact they are getting much better.
    Next summer, when it’s abundantly clear the the war in Iraq has been won, the GOP will be running ads of Rodham Clinton calling Petraeus a liar. It will then be obvious to everyone that Petraeus in fact had understated the progress-as he had to.
    The bottom will then fall out of Rodham Clinton’s campaign.

  2. It still feels like statemate. No quarter is winning a thing. Instead, there’s no movement. Whether you keep taking people’s temperatures; or you keep doing polls.
    Stalemates, it seems are built into our Constitution. I didn’t know this. Until I began reading THE GENIUS OF AMERICA.
    As that book begins, the Federation, which lasted 11 years, following 1776, lay in ruins. The experiment a failure. But our Founding Fathers dealt with that!
    The Constitution functions as a BRAKE. It slows the process down, when there’s no consensus. Just two sides. Not budging one inch.
    How it does this takes a book to tell. But it basically explains what you know, now. The press isn’t covering Irak. There are people who are divided on what we’ve gained. With the reality that we spent $3-trillion-dollars, so far. For what? To give the Saud’s a chance to gobble up territory?
    Ya know, when more reasonable times approach, we’re gonna se that the Saud’s pocketed Bush, early. And, then? Like in “walking back the cat” … you’ll see how Saddam was taken out. For what? Well, for angering the Bush family. And, the Saud’s cooked up a scheme.
    Too bad. For a lot less money, back in 1991, the saud’s were about to get handed their heads on a plate. By Saddam.
    Up ahead? Perhaps, by Iran?
    New war, ahead? Nah. Not on the agenda. Not after Israel (seemingly) “popped the cork” on syria’s nuke project … with enough ease … you don’t even know how, why, or what happened. You don’t know how Israel flew … or walked in. Either.
    You also know that despots are all the arabs produce. And, you can throw into this mix, china, and russia, and the persians. Bad guys. And, we can’t cure this with penicillin.
    On the other hand? We sure did “buy” Irak. Where Saddam is gone. But the people remain. And, Saddam didn’t handle them with kid gloves.
    You think the American military, donning kid gloves, is gonna make a dent? I doubt it.
    While I also doubt Bush gets to give the Saud’s the terrorist state they’re dreaming of producing. Sans, the “palestinians” needing to drop terror.
    Yes. This letter to King Fahd, promising this state, exists. It was written in August 2001.
    While we’re sitting on stalemate.
    Did some blogs make bets? Sure. The left has their own methodology. And, the right picked the US Military; without looking at what it means to move troops, when the People are at odds.
    Stalemate.
    Hillary? Sure looks like the democrats have their candidate. (And, they haven’t disclosed a single card.) Here’s what I mean.
    Right now, it’s the republicans staking out positions, and digging in; that have “picked” their profile. While in stalemate, the very definition means, Americans can “pick” a president from one party. And, congress from another. (And, in the case of Nixon? Well, you remember that, don’t cha?) Better to fight among ourselves, than to watch mistakes on the battlefield, erupt.
    Oh, yeah. I think Bush lies. I think he lies every time he claims to be a friend of Israel!
    But this is nothing new, either. Israel’s been dealing with this particular beast, for a very long time. Even while Baker, Botts, brought in moneybags. Money isn’t everything.
    And, in Irak? You want to claim you’re proud? Of what? Wouldn’t it have been better if Saddam, using his own sunnis, had pushed the saud’s (and their cousins the Kuwaitis), into the sea? To late now.
    But if all Bush used was luck, it could be that it just ran out.
    While the democrats keep sitting and waiting.
    And, the republicans, when they do their polling, might want to assume, we’re still at stalemate? It’s just like our US Constitution, to provide the levers.
    You think I’m kidding?
    How hard is it to go to Amazon, and plug in the title GENIUS OF AMERICA … Now, how hard is that?

  3. “These numbers may shift when Hillary starts speaking to more people than just the hard-Left activist base.”
    Then we need to remind people that she only cares about her far left base. Besides the Chinese source of campaign dollars flowing into her coffers.
    Butch Rodham has no regard or even interest in the vast majority of the American people.
    Add her disregard to her corruption and her inexperience (I like Mitt’s remark that she’d be an “intern” in the Oval Office), I am confident that the American people will reject this loser at the polls, just like they did losers Gore and Kerry before her.

  4. These numbers may shift when Hillary starts speaking to more people than just the hard-Left activist base.
    Ah, there’s the rub. I almost feel sorry for her. Almost. When she starts heading for the center, that activist base is going to grow increasingly unhappy with her, and increasingly noisy about it.
    I could see them going into a full-scale revolt in the middle of the election.
    Zealots can be so…unpragmatic.

  5. She had the same numbers in her New York Senate race, and won. I wouldn’t read too much into it.

  6. Real statistics, versus lies.
    I notice the poll, above, separates Guiliani and Hillary, by 2 points.
    Best polls in the world, leave a +/- allowance of 3-points.
    Makes any predictions less than scientific, right now.
    We also don’t know what the White House is capable of, either.
    Heck, you guessed FEMA was gona do a phony “news show” involving the fires in San Diego? How good did that make the White House just look? As Bush finger-flaps “reprimands” I’m sure; IF he’s willing to pay attention. And, of that? I am not sure.
    Ya know? It’s one thing to name-call the press. Sure. I’ve done it! I just left the party, early, that’s all. (Before the fun begins.)
    But IF we’re at war, I think the future will need, as much as you hate the idea of this … a cooperative press … and hollywood; to help keep patriotism, alive. You think FDR didn’t know this?
    Gosh. Basic.
    This time? Our military has been sent out to stick itself up on a limb. How many people scratch their heads when they see outcomes?
    I’d bet everyone whose ever bought a losing ticket on a “sure thing” horse; feels remorse.
    I know. There’s no “remorse” at this table.
    But just for comparison: How come Israel, living surrounded by despots, was not too concerned with Saddam. But is very much worried about how the Saud’s have imbedded themselves in America’s current “ruling family?” You think I’m kidding?
    Why couldn’t our military do a swift “in and out?”
    You think syria’s about to regain its edge with it’s nuke program any time soon?
    You think Israel sees the midget in Iran as stuck there forever? Or, perhaps, a wedge that could someday galvanize iranians to climb up the world’s tallest mountains. And, then down again. To blow the saud’s into the sea?
    You think I’m kidding?
    We used a pazooka on a flea.
    And, no matter how good the PR machinery is, the US Army cannot get TNR to surrender. Do you know why? (Rules of engagement. And, Rules of Evidence.) Nifong lost his license trying to keep evidence away from the defense.
    So you’ve got lawyers who pepper you with “how long is it gonna take TNR to surrender? Well, I’ve got an answer for them: NEVER.
    And, name-calling isn’t the best way to grow your customer base.
    You just can’t limit the choices most Americans get. When they vote? Somebody loses.

  7. Was anyone more hated than Nixon?
    You think he scored, well, in polls?
    I mean. Give me a break. When Nixon lost to Kennedy, he than ran for governor of California. And, he lost that, too. So, he had a press conference; where he uttered these words:
    “You won’t have Nixon to kick around, anymore.”
    Alas, he came back.
    He also went on Laugh-In, (a very popular show), and he played a “cameo” appearance, where his line was: SOCK IT TO ME.
    Given another shot at him, so it seems, indeed.
    And, you think Hillary’s negatives are high?
    I think those are the words you hear from one side of the divide. Can Hillary get elected?
    You mean you don’t think she knows about how to eek out a victory at the 50-yard line? You’re kidding me.
    It’s like women who used to feed families, on shoestrings.

  8. Given the choice between more Bush style presidents or more Clinton style presidents the majority would go with Clinton. Most people don’t look back at the Clinton years and see it as a horror show like a 28 percenter does, they see it an economic success for 2 terms and no super costly wars of choice. I think many will vote for Clinton because they want Bill back not because they like Hillary. In a hypothetical head to head Bill would destroy W. in resounding fashion.

  9. Given the choice between more Bush style presidents or more Clinton style presidents the majority would go with Clinton. Most people don’t look back at the Clinton years and see it as a horror show like a 28 percenter does, they see it an economic success for 2 terms and no super costly wars of choice. I think many will vote for Clinton because they want Bill back not because they like Hillary. In a hypothetical head to head Bill would destroy W. in resounding fashion.
    Maybe so, but the same folks who pine for a new “Clint-a-lot” will also be the first ones to say, “What the f*** happened?” when an Islamofascist nuke takes out an American city.
    They may learn, too late, that History works at its own pace, and to its own ends, and doesn’t give a s*** about their personal nostalgia trips.

  10. The last Democrat to win as much as 51% of the popular vote was LBJ in 1964. Changing from Hillary to one of the others won’t matter– none of them could poll any better. Dems top out at about 49% nationally.

  11. A terror nuke may take out a city, which is why many would ask why didn’t Bush toughen the borders and port security while he had eight years to do it. That being the case it still doesn’t mean Clinton won’t win. Each party tops out just below 50% that is how a two party system works, given the history of this admin, it will take a lot of whitewash to make people forget that these republicans are of the same party as bush.

  12. BARRASSO,
    Unfourtunately for you Bush is not running for a third term. While your probably right that Clinton would beat Bush, unpopular wars tend to severly hurt to presidents poll numbers…See Johnson and Truman. Maybe if Clinton had taken Al Qaeda a little more seriously, there would not have been a war during Bush’s term in office. Clinton did nothing after WTC in 93, nothing after the Khobar Towers, nothing after the embassies in Africa and nothing after the Cole bombing. Bush has had to clean up Clinton’s mess because Clinton was too much of a gutless coward to do the unpopular thing like lead the fight against the Islamists who declared war on us in 1998. I will give Clinton some credit on the economic front but on foreign policy he was a coward hiding behind his polls scared to do anything which he might be the criticized for.

  13. First off, Hillary is not Bill. Never was. Bill’s about Bill. Most of all, he wants to be loved. Gave us a certain amount of protection, cause he wasn’t about to do anything risky or radical that could backfire on his all-important affection rating. Hillary is about her personal power and 60s socialism/feminism. She’d destroy the whole country if she could retain power, and force in her ideas. She’s basically the leftist Nixon. Second, do any of these polls give the option of “none of the above”? Would be runaway winner.

  14. Hillary may have Bill Clinton’s money, insider connections, and personal destruction machine, but she doesn’t have his charisma or ability to play the moderate.
    Democrats only win when they appear to be moderate and affable – see Carter and Clinton.
    Hillary can only win if the Republicans have a complete melt down.
    As pathetic as it may seem, Edwards is actually the most electable of the three main Democrat candidates.

  15. A terror nuke may take out a city, which is why many would ask why didn’t Bush toughen the borders and port security while he had eight years to do it. That being the case it still doesn’t mean Clinton won’t win.

    Bzzt! Sorry Barrasso, but that’s not how the game is played. You see, what we’ve been taught for the last 7 years is that the currently-sitting President is completely responsible for everything starting from the minute he/she is inaugurated.

  16. You see, what we’ve been taught for the last 7 years is that the currently-sitting President is completely responsible for everything starting from the minute he/she is inaugurated.
    I think that Tim W disagrees,
    Bush has had to clean up Clinton’s mess because Clinton was too much of a gutless coward to do the unpopular thing like lead the fight against the Islamists who declared war on us in 1998.
    If all that was true wasn’t this all the fault of that ‘gutless coward’ Reagan for wetting his pants and cutting and running after getting a couple hundred marines killed in Beirut. That pretty much showed the islamists that republicans would cave at the drop of a hat.

  17. It’s too early to make any predictions other than this: the Democratic party could throw up Josef Mengele’s bones and get close to 50% of the vote after the huge get out the vote drive, wall to wall media support, and the voter fraud is all said and done.
    Lets face it, there are about 30% of the voters who’ll pull the lever for their party no matter what, and too many of the rest are swayed by the media’s coverage.

  18. I am definitely not amongst those people who think that Hillary can’t possibly win, but it’s clear that she’s going to have a tough road to climb.
    Needless to say, if it weren’t for her so-called husband she couldn’t get elected dogcatcher, but she can win overwhelmingly in states such as New York and California because Slick Willie is practically worshipped like a God in those places, and that is the only thing that even gives her a chance.
    Try as hard as she might, she really isn’t going to be able hide that shrill, unlikeable personality once the gloves really start to come off next year. And she is definitely one of those people that the more you see her, the less you like her, which is why in the end I think she loses, in spite of all the Republicans’ difficulties.
    It is pretty darn amusing that at a time when the Democrat party loyalists are supposedly seething with rage over the war in Iraq, that they’re going to overwhelmingly vote for war authorizer Hillary over people like Obama and Kucinich, who were unequivocally opposed to the war right from the very start! What this tells me if that the alleged anti Iraq war sentiment in America is just yet another thing being vastly overblown by the mainstream press.

  19. It is pretty darn amusing that at a time when the Democrat party loyalists are supposedly seething with rage over the war in Iraq, that they’re going to overwhelmingly vote for war authorizer Hillary
    If the Bill Clinton years taught us anything it is that the Left’s primary goal is the acquisition of political power. If you can get hardened feminist activists to defend a serial sexual harrasser, you can get members of the Left to do almost anything…

  20. Here, we are. In the 7th year of Bush’s presidency. And, it feels awful.
    So many decisions got made that cost the USA real treasure. And, we’ve got nothing to show for it at all.
    What’s it gonna be like in 2008?
    I’m sure Bush expects a parade.
    Heck, he expects to be up there, on the republican nominating stage; as the “champ” who hands his title to somebody else.
    RA. RA. RA.
    Does it matter when half the country takes a vacation? They don’t like Bush. They don’t write patriotic music. There are no patriotic musicals. No “OVER THERE” … No Irving Berlin. Nothing.
    As if it’s not strange, when there’s “nothing.”
    The other thing?
    In 2000, a very lackluster presidential campaign came to a terrible end. But Hillary was running for the senate seat in New York. She worked hard to get it.
    The GOP? After telling Guiliani to “step down,” Pataki put up the GOP’s “silk pony.” What hair! Rick Lazio. Boy. Did he lose.
    Hillary sailed over the finish line. And, I don’t think Rick Lazio has even been seen, since. His hooves must be galavanting around somewhere, though?
    As to the 2000 results. Hillary nailed it. She won her seat by a very wide margin. Where she had campaigned in Upstate New York. Upstate NY “should’a” gone to the silk pony. And, didn’t.
    So, I jus sigh when I hear people thinking Hillary doesn’t know how to campaign.
    Or, I hear, Americans wouldn’t dream of voting for a woman.
    Hell, you want to know the nightmare? This country voted in branches from the crap produced on the Bush family farm.
    I know.
    A big shroud will fall over Bush. And, you’ll play a game called “HIDE HIM.” You’ll make believe he’s not in the way. That he’s done no damage. And, that he isn’t a millstone.
    Do what you want.
    Bush never made the sale.
    Irak is $3-trillion and rising.
    And, you can love the military and still realize that we’re a nation who wouldn’t want to live under military rule.
    Heck, Americans may be the most “revolutionary” people in the world? If so? A woman, and an Italian can compete for the presidency. And, people will be glad to come out to vote.
    It’s still stalemate, if we’re stuck at 50/50.
    Both, by the way; Hillary and Guiliani. Will do well with the press. So, at least that crappy wet blanket will lift. Different agendas? Sure.
    Unless you’re talking about the middle of the road, there. The middle is a blend of both sides, forming some sort of compromise.

  21. If the Bill Clinton years taught us anything it is that the Left’s primary goal is the acquisition of political power. If you can get hardened feminist activists to defend a serial sexual harrasser, you can get members of the Left to do almost anything…
    If the rise of Rudy Giuliani teaches us anything it is that the Right’s primary goal is the acquisition of political power. If you can get hardened conservative activists to defend a DLC Democrat, you can get members of the Right to do almost anything…
    Both parties display a tendency to put power well ahead of principle.

  22. Wishful thinking. It reminds me of Rick Lazio, the GOP nominee, going on vacation in the middle of Hillary Clinton’s first U.S. Senate race here in New York on grounds that “New Yorkers never will vote for her.” He was both wrong and stupid, as are all of you who echo the same faulty logic.
    Hillary Clinton is very hard-working, very clever, a control freak, and very driven. Anyone who underestimates her, or her husband, is a fool.

  23. Hillary Rodham Barrasso says:
    “Most people don’t look back at the Clinton years and see it as a horror show like a 28 percenter does, they see it an economic success for 2 terms and no super costly wars of choice.”
    Brilliant satire! First of all, Bill and Wes Clarke DID start a war of choice, in Kosovo. We’re still there, even though Billy Jeff said our troops would be home “by Christmas”. Naturally it hasn’t been as costly as our current wars, but it IS still ongoing.
    Now, how do you spin the fact that when he left office, the majority of Americans said his Presidency would only be remembered for scandal?
    Clinton’s true Presidential “legacy” is 9/11/01. Nothing more.

  24. If the numbers you have indicated continue into late spring the Clinton machine will do all it can to get Ron Paul to run as a third party candidate.
    Bill Clinton had the same numbers problem that Hillary has now. Ross Perot carried the day for Clinton with 18% and Bill won with 43% of the vote. In 1996 he won again with 49%.
    It worked then and it would probably work again. What you can be certain of is the Clinton machine will stop at nothing to get the White House. Virtually every news room, here and overseas, will pitch in.
    If Soros isn’t secretly getting money to Paul right now, I would be shocked.

  25. Nicely said, quickjustice. She’s a most formidable candidate. Her major problem tends to be her ‘wishlist’ mentality (free_______: fill in the blank). If she can tone that down, she’s electable.

  26. BARRASO,
    I think you would find many people here consider Reagan bugging out of Lebanon one of his biggest mistakes. Clinton further reinforced Bin Ladens perception of the U.S. after Somalia and his lack of response to multiple acts of terrorism.
    As far as Clinton goes, she is smart and disciplined and since she is so totally corrupt she will have lots of money. She can definitely win and it would be crazy to underestimate the level of ruthlessness she will demonstrate to attain absolute power. She will be the opposite of Bill who only cared about high poll numbers and being liked. With Hillary, it will be about reshaping America in her socialist vision and anybody who gets in her way will be subject to destruction.

  27. ‘Now, how do you spin the fact that when he left office, the majority of Americans said his Presidency would only be remembered for scandal?’
    I’m saying that people NOW remember it for the differences between he and W, at the end of his term we had had years of the drooling press corp enjoying a constant sex scandal refrain. As for 9/11 being anyones fault I only blame those 19 terrorists, I don’t think it was preventable at the time, by Clinton, Gore, or W. No matter who was in office we didn’t have the foresight or dots connected it would have happened on anyones shift.

  28. Not me. I don’t think Reagan “bugged out” of Beirut, exactly. He did what great generals do when they’re suffering unnecessary losses. He re-groups.
    Lebanon is a place that even the Israelis don’t want.
    That’s what the summer of 2006 was about. They did what they had to do to retrieve two kidnapped soldiers; while none of their “fwends” raised a finger. (It was an illegal capture.)
    But what the hell. The UN doesn’t function.
    And, Bush is NOT a friend to the Jews. Or, as he likes to deliniate: The Israelies.
    As a matter of fact, now that we $3-trillion in the hole, and climbing; do you know what Bush thought he’d get out of Irak?
    Did you know that Keith Dayton, (of our military), brought $16-million in fresh armaments to the “fatah” in gazoo. Not one ounce of it was used! But they were supposed to take out teammates, of theirs, who are even less rational. Guess Dayton guessed wrong, huh?
    Then? Baker, Botts & Moneybags, has been pushing a $16-billion deal FOR Saudi Arabia. The schnook in the White House, dreamed up a plan … where the Saud’s (who only attack Americans and Jews), would “halp” attack Iran.
    We still have a year to go with Bush in the White HOuse. Anything can happen.
    But seeing the Saud’s become the “controllers” of the Mideast?
    I think you’d be misreading the world’s map. Nobody wants to say a word. (It’s not just Olmert who stays mum.)
    But the “military gambit” planned by Bush … might just be “the awakening” ahead? No, it’s not that Americans don’t like military music; we just don’t typically choose the military to rule and tell us “what to do.”
    And, Bush hasn’t quite figured out a way to “sell” his plans. This confuses him. Sell? He just wants to tell.
    ANd, then? People yell back at him that he can go to hell.
    While the blogs? Widespread. Out on a limb. Waiting for Godot.
    That’s okay. We can talk among ourselves. But we can’t steer. That’s the job for others.
    And, Irak? You want me to be happy? The only Iraqi I like is Baghdad Bob.
    And, I’m not stupid. I know the saud’s had their asses on the line back in 1991. Heck, “sunnis” in Irak, were no friends of “sunni cousins” in Kuwait. They folded them up like a cheap suitcase.
    Till Bush #41 got mad. And, you know the rest.
    What an opportunity scattered.
    We could’a been rid of the stinking saud’s. And, the Mideast? Would remain weak. Which isn’t a bad outcome, when you’re talking about what lies over there.
    No longer the choice!
    But Bush is stymied. He was “promised” by the Saud’s they’d play his game. And, “recognize” Israel. Well? If farting in Israel’s general direction is like sending them wind for energy, so be it.
    But the story? Wait. $3-trillion dollars. Your eyes will roll.
    Reagan was right to get out from under these conniving arabs. Choice #2 was worse.
    Oh, the saud’s were the “convincing agent.” You really should read Craig Unger’s book, which wasn’t even allowed to be published in England.
    The Saud’s provided the Americans with a plan that involved bombing the residential building, where the “Mastermind” of the barracks bombing lived. Only he didn’t. And, we set off a charge that killed 160 innocent people.
    Then? Bander “gave up the name of his chauffeur.” To pay for the crime.
    Those Saud’s. Better than wholesale. Nobody ever delivers the bill.

  29. MIke M. People have second thoughts. There are lots of Americans, now, who are suffering from fatigue.
    As to Hillary “being shrill,” I think she beat the rap in 2000. She pulled better numbers than Gore. And, in that race, her husband concentrated his efforts to see that she won. She’s been in the senate, now, as long as Dubya’s been president.
    Dubya squandered his reputation. To satisify some “debt” or family obligation to the Saud’s.
    While I don’t think you can point to one “shrill” thing about Hillary. As a matter of fact, she seems like a hard worker. And, she’s way more rational than the senators Massa2shits produces.
    Now, anything can happen, ahead. But in all likelihood, we will see a match between Guiliani and Hillary.
    As to your remark that “a dirty nuke can go off in an American city,” it shows ya … the price we are paying for playing with the Saud’s! Geez. Saddam was this close to ridding the world of this menace, back in 1991. But Poppy got “mad.”
    His “mad” is way worse than any “mad” Hillary’s ever been accused of. She’s also turned 60. Her “changes” are behind her. And, that, too, adds mellowness to a woman’s character.
    We can’t elect a woman? Agentina did. France? Almost did. But they picked the guy on the Right. (Whose grandfather was Jewish.)
    People have the oddest way of “shifting.”
    And, in politics “shifts” happen.
    The republicans would have it easier; if this president wasn’t such a lummox.
    Also, things are very quiet. Before the storm?

  30. And you are forgetting how cozy the Clintons were with Arafat? Who can erase that picture of Madame Hillary planting a kiss on Mrs. Arafat?

  31. All in favor of Carol Herman starting her own blog raise your cursors.
    Carol, I do like reading some of your posts, but you have a tendency to be verbose. You realize that you are commenting, not convincing others, right? We recognize that you like the words trillion and Sauds. Please edit your thoughts so that you don’t appear to try to dominate the comments by mere volume rather than substance. You do have intelligent coherent thoughts, and some are pithy (or words that rhyme with that). With this much to say, a blog of your very own would surely be visited by all who are interested.

  32. Liberal New York state is not the United States. I lived in New York and endured both of her campaigns. Her first Republican opponent, Congressman Rick Lazio, ran a terrible campaign. She also had lots of money.
    The democrats are beginning to worry about Hillary being on the ticket in states where freshman democrats ran to the right of their opponents. Clinton will energize the republican base as no one else can, convincing donors to write those checks and dissatisfied republicans to show up in November to vote against her.
    Democrats did not win the 2006 elections, the Republicans lost them by acting like liberal, tax and spend democrats. Two recent elections have been very revealing. As expected, Paul Tsongas’ widow Nikki won a house seat in Massachusetts, but her margin was surprising low (51-45). In Louisiana, Bobby Jindal won the state house taking 88% of the vote. Voters in New Orleans’ 9th ward, the traditional democrat power base, have not returned to the state.
    Hillary may well win the Presidency in 2008 and I she does, I will support her as Commander-in-Chief. Unfortunately, her domestic programs will break the bank and she will nominate two or three judges to the Supreme Court.
    But, if I were a democrat, I wouldn’t pop the champagne corks just yet.

Comments are closed.