I am pleased to share the great news with all of you that the Concord Monitor has endorsed Hillary! The full endorsement will be out in tomorrow’s paper, but here is an excerpt!
“Clinton’s ambitious to-do list for her first few weeks in office gives us confidence that her priorities are right and that she would act swiftly to make a positive difference. She is the Monitor’s choice in the Jan. 8 Democratic primary.
New Hampshire Democrats and independents are blessed with a strong field of presidential candidates at a time when a change of course is desperately needed. We have been impressed by Joe Biden’s pragmatic foreign policy and by John Edwards’s insistence that we pay attention to the poorest Americans.
Barack Obama, more than most, has the power to inspire. The positive tone of his campaign is not a gimmick. He is a serious candidate with sober ideas. For reasons symbolic and substantive, he would also be a nominee Democrats could feel proud to vote for.
But Hillary Clinton’s unique combination of smarts, experience and toughness makes her the best choice to win the November election and truly get things done.”
I have endorsed Hillary as well. I am excited about her candidacy, and look forward to a Democratic victory in 2008. If you would like to get involved in her campaign, you can contact me directly at KateDonaghue@aol.com or at 508-404-8531.
I have to say, the Concord Monitor hit the nail on the head when they said Hillary is the only candidate with the “unique combination of smarts, experience, and toughness” to win. She seems to have that magical combination – she’s savvy, she’s smart, and she has heart – and after much reflection I truly believe she is the only candidate who can put a Democrat in the White House.
<
p>Here’s hoping the Pats will give us a second piece of great news tonight!
Kate, is that a switch for you? I thought you were with Deval’s guy Obama???
<
p>The Concord Monitor is surely ahead of the game this year. It nailed Mitt Romney as the phony he is and now has endorsed the Democrat who has what it takes to win in November, but more importantly, to serve as a strong president.
<
p>My preference would have been Richardson or Biden or even Dodd…but they have not mounted campaigns that can carry the day against the media darlings…and that’s the way it is.
<
p>If Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee I will support her 100% and then some….and hopefully the fates will smile on us and Huckabee will be the GOP option.
HPLeary, Not a switch. I have been with Hillary since this summer, although I was not active in the campaign until the fall when the Fifth CD campaign ended. Senator Clinton is a great candidate with a great campaign. I delayed making a decision longer than usual, because I was focusing on the Fifth. Because of the way that we currently choose our presidential nominees, if one wants to influence the decision, it is necessary that we either donate money early on, or volunteer in Iowa or NH. We have a number of great candidates, and Congressman McGovern was very influential in my decision, although I put a lot of value in Governor Patrick’s endorsement. Last winter I saw my summer changing before my eyes when it was clear that Congressman Meehan was stepping down and Rep. Eldridge was running. Campaigns are a lot of fun. Going door to door is a great way to hear what “normal” people are thinking. We spend a lot of time talking with each other. Let’s spend some time talking with voters! Kate
Kate…you are so right…talking to the people who vote is far better than talking to the “players”or parsing poll numbers. If you want to find out how an election is going, the local coffee shop is better than CNN.
<
p>As for Congressman McGovern’s endorsement of Senator Clinton, that also carries weight with me. I think he is the cream of the MA Congressional delegation, surely the hardest worker, and I have great respect for him.
is on record about pulling the troops out if Iraq “immediately”.
But at the next speaking engagement she says by 2013.
I can’t support a dynasty based upon Orwellian doublespeak.
Candidates say they will “restore” the middle class. Oh, really, going to get the jobs back from Chinese gulags?
<
p>Done also with stupid people thinking “their leader” is going to make things right.
If we talk about realities not right wing statements. I don’t think that helps in the dialog. In my opinion Barrack and Hillary are very similar. That’s why it’s difficult for me to make a final decision. Then Edwards, Richardson and Dodd for that matter look very appealing as candidates. Barrack’s statement concerning Bhutto, with Axelrod being a complete idiot, pushes Hillary ahead for me (this week anyway). That actually should be a post here, maybe I’ll post it tomorrow if no one else does.
<
p>But coming back to the 2013 statement, I believe that it stems from this debate question. That’s Hillary, Barrack and John Edwards. But the reality is that all candidates want to redeploy troops out of Iraq, the question is a full withdrawal. I not so sure that is wise, we are in fact in many countries, do you think we should withdraw all troops everywhere? You might, but that’s not the question at hand. I think you are confusing what we are doing in Iraq with this right wing 2013 statement which is not factual in how you framed it. Does Hillary want to redeploy troops out of Iraq? Yes. That hasn’t changed. Are we keeping troops in the middle east, that answer is probably yes as well. But I don’t think you’ll see too much of a difference in any candidate.
It’s okay that you are torn between two choices and find it difficult to decide.
Since there is no actual difference between the two choices your choice wouldnt realy matter and besides … the final decision has already been made for you.
You will get status quo dressed up to look like change (ooh a woman or … ooh a black … now thats change)
Remember how excited people were when all those republicans were switching parties and becoming democrats … Think about that for a while.
Now get back to worshiping sports heroes secure in the knowledge that better minds are looking out for your benifit.
I fully believe the entire Bush administration belongs behind bars. That being said Hillary even upon casual observation is not wholly consumed by vitriolic hatred, disgust, outrage, tar and feather them all go get em, round em all up. No, she like Bush are part of an elite club, far removed from the concerns and problems of proles like you and me. In my book that just makes her another minion of Satan.
It’s a legitimate concern of a candidate, what will they stand for once elected.
<
p>While I don’t share the same view of Hillary, I haven’t decided yet, my vote will probably go down to the wire. I do see many positives in the group of candidates we have running. At this point no one has sealed the deal.
<
p>I won’t vote for Hillary because of another candidate attacking her, instead I’ll take a situation like in Pakistan and gauge the response by each candidate. Do they have a grasp of what’s going on? How did they respond. Barrack in this case failed. It happened. He didn’t come out like a complete idiot like Huckabee, who started talking about immigration. Don’t know how any Republican would have any confidence voting for him but he still failed in this situation. That goes to the final judgment.
The reality is that many of us today are not even qualified to vote due to the marketing influence of media.
Indeed do we have a grasp on what is going on.
<
p>Obama voted patriot act extension and that gets him contempt in my view.
<
p>Truth be told even the most radical, Ron Paul is a little too mainstream for my worldview but that may illustrate my complete contempt for the rest of the pack. Dennis and Dodd are the exceptions.
<
p>Check out some of the lesser known candidates, Hugh Cort for example….ah..on second thought, don’t spoil your New Year.
It is so easy to call other people ignorant (or Satan for that matter) when they do not agree with your views.
…and I have been disappointed by how she has been treated on liberal blogs. The venom some of aimed at her is the likes you would expect from the right, not the left.
<
p>I have always been sympathetic to her candidacy, but made a final decision just this month. Too me, she has the kind of experience no other candidate can match, being part of a two-term presidency already. Do not underestimate the significance of being the kind of First Lady she was. She knows policy inside and out and is well respected around the world. I agree with her husband when he says that American standing in the world will instantly shoot up the moment she is inaugurated. Anything negative that could have come out about her already would have and the Clintons, unlike some previous nominees it seems, know how to fight back. On a less serious note, electing Hillary will give us all the pleasure of watching the right wing of this country throw a royal temper tantrum which will be fun. I certainly don’t buy what strikes me as a knee-jerk reaction that she is somehow not electable.
<
p>My second choice is Barack Obama and I would love to see him as the VP nominee. So many people have responded to his message of hope and I think it is good that he is willing to speak about values, and even faith, in a way that can unite us. In other years, I might have dismissed him as not experienced enough (as I did with Edwards in 2004, while also hoping he would be Kerry’s running mate), but seeing and participating in Deval’s campaign keeps me from doing that. I believe Clinton and Obama offer a contrast in styles that working together can make for a powerhouse ticket.
<
p>I’m looking forward to the results and as political junkie wouldn’t mind not having a coronation, but it may be too much to ask for a convention that mattered!
<
p>(BTW Kate, it looks like you mistyped your email address in your original post.)
But I’ll live with Clinton or Obama, too. Edwards is the only one whose even talking about what’s really wrecking our government, and our country: the influence of big $$$ on our democracy. He’s not perfect (I’m not 100% on his Iraq policy), but from where I’m standing, he’s the guy who is most likely to fight the power. Hillary and Barak? Not so much…but still far, far better than the GOP choices.
<
p>My only real fear about Hillary is that just by being her, she’ll insight the GOP base into a frenzy and attract voters who would–at least in this cycle–sit the election out due to “Wide Stance” disgust (among other Republican gems).That’s not her fault, of course.
<
p>People of good will can disagree on who to vote for; I’m glad we have some solid choices. We’ll all (hopefully) be on the same side after the convention.
That we’ve criticized her vote for war in Iraq, which over 20 other Senators had the foresight not to authorize? That we’re worried that she’s more centrist, calculating, and automatically attracts deep polarization? I dare you to find any attack on her coming from BMG that comes close to the type of attack other Democrats lobbed at Howard Dean. Has our “venom,” been nearly as poisonous to the national discourse as the “likes of the right”?
I guess I was mostly refering to Daily Kos, which really has torn her apart in I feel a really nasty way. It’s not hateful to express disappointment in a vote, though I personally don’t care about a five-year old vote like on Iraq. What’s done is done, now what? Many have all but called her a Republican, which she certainly hasn’t been in a long time. Why do you think so many real Republicans hate her so much? To me centrism is not a bad thing as I believe you need the right balance of liberalism and centrism to be successful. After all, her husband, the former DLC chairman, has been our ONLY successful nominee in a generation. The Clinton presidency was the best we’ve had in a long time and I am looking forward to that restoration. BTW if just over 20 really is all the Senators that did not to authorize, then it seems she had very good bipartisan company.
<
p>I supported Kerry in the 2004 primary cycle for many of the same reasons. My own attitude toward Dean was that he was not right for the moment either to be nominee or President, but I am glad he is Chairman, a role for which I think he is much better suited. Yes I realize Kerry did not win, but I’m not convinced Dean would have and I have no regrets about supporting Kerry.
I am not surprised as they endorsed another Republican the day before. And Hillary has voted for a lot of things the Bush administration wanted, The war in Iraq, No Child Left Behind ( that she now opposes too, although she should have known that the Republicans would never fund it ), and the worst piece of legislation ever, The Patriot Act.
<
p>Has anyone reading this tried to renew their Drivers’ License lately? They require several pieces of identification toward little end. More waste in administration and more bureaucracy.
<
p>God, I think it is a shame that we don’t get the government we need, (Thinking that Al Gore should have run), and that we’ll probably get the government we deserve.
Good comeback. I notice that you couldn’t refute anything that I stated. Electing Hillary is tantamount to electing a Republican….wait….Wasn’t she the Chair of the Young Republicans too??? Then please vote for Obama or Edwards, either one so long as Hillary does not get the nomination. They’re not perfect, but then again, they’re not Al Gore.