Gillibrand (0.00 / 0)

She's the one...

She is ruthless and ambitious (compared to Tracy Flick), so she really would want and fight for this opportunity, and she has a 100% NRA rating, which is like gold for Democrats in the general... No one in our history has ever had that advantage...

She has to win re-election, but her path is to be at least a contender for the 2016 nomination.  

Of course, we have to see how she does in the meantime....

BTW, I'm not rooting for her.. I know little about her... What I do know makes me cringe a bit, but I'm pretty sure that she's already thinking about the opportunity...

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

---

by: lord_mike @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 11:29:42 AM CST

I agree. (4.00 / 1)

Gillibrand has a lot of potential for advancement, whether you like her or not.  Personally, I think she's got a lot of potential to grow and I don't think she's as conservative as everyone fears.  She did a good job representing a conservative district while still generally voting the party line, and she's shown that she's willing to adjust to her statewide constituency.  She's got the potential to go far.

One thing though.  She's definately ambitious, which is something I would hope all politicians had (notice that it's only supposed to be a bad thing in female politicians), but where do you get that she's ruthless?

Check out Blue Arkansas:
http://bluearkansas.blogspot.com/

---

by: ARDem @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 11:38:03 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Internet rumors... (0.00 / 0)

I should have said "supposedly" in my post.  People have been quoted as comparing her to Tracy Flick... but, it could be just people wanted to badmouth here... so take with many grains of salt.

I worry about politicians who are too ambitious, female or male, especially if they are willing to say or do anything to win.  I don't want a repeat of the Clinton years where it was all about them, and the party was left to whither on the vine...  That's my concern, and it has nothing to do with her gender.  Obviously, I want someone who wants to win... that is a trait that Americans like, and many of our candidates in the past have not tried very hard.  So, ambition in that sense, is very good... as long as the party gets included as well...

I think she has the potential to be a future star... but, I've also heard that she's comes across like Mary Landrieu (i.e. not very bright)... again, hearsay evidence... I would like to hear more from her... and I hope she's not like Landrieu, 'cos I can't support a Mary Landrieu clone under any circumstance...

I've also heard a lot of good things about her, too, so I am open minded and hopeful.  If she is as good as her supporters say, she really could be the next president of the united states!

I know that she's been one of the better blue dogs, but she's still a blue dog, and that is also a concern.  How conservative/liberal is she really...

I guess we'll find out over the next few years... If she survives a primary challenge in 2010, she will be interesting to watch...  

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

---

by: lord_mike @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 11:50:10 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Um (4.00 / 6)

She might want to pull ahead for the Senate nomination in New York, before anyone starts talking her up for Prez.

She has won all of two elections, both for House during terrible years for Republicans. As such, we don't really have any proof of exceptional political or campaigning ability yet.

---

by: Chris Bowers @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 11:51:50 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Those two elections were impressive in their own right (0.00 / 0)

John Sweeney was supposed to be the strongest repug in the state of New York until his defeat. Sure, he got caught drinking with frat boys, and sure some scandal occured the day before the election, but it's not like voters really knew, heard or cared about those things anyways. It was her dedicated and well-run campaign, as well as her fundraising that ultimately beat Sweeney, giving her a dead-heat before that scandal even came out.

As for her second election, she was supposed to be vulnerable against a highly touted self-funder, but ultimately won with 63%. I remember a post, it may've been on MyDD, that humorously mentioned that by the beginning of 2008, Kirsten Gillibrand held more COH than the NRCC, which reflects well on her.

And it's not like Hillary has faced any tough elections anyways. NY-Sen is much more democratic than NY-20, and both elections were relative landslides.

I highly doubt that, barring a MAJOR Paterson-like fall of Kirsten Gillibrand, she would be defeated in the primary.

---

by: KainIIIC @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 12:58:30 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Gore (4.00 / 4)

The thing people forget about Gore is that, while he's got the whole statesman thing down pat, he's not a very good campaigner or politician. He'd flame out against Clinton pretty quick.

---

by: Chachy @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 11:30:21 AM CST

He's also pretty happy where he is. (0.00 / 0)

By all accounts.

Check out Blue Arkansas:
http://bluearkansas.blogspot.com/

---

by: ARDem @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 11:32:48 AM CST

[ Parent ]

She was the heir apparent last cycle and that didn't work out too well. (4.00 / 2)

She could very well run in 2016, and I got to admit I wouldn't be opposed to it if she gets a lot of great work done in the Obama administration.  One thing that we should be prepared for is a deadly dose of ageism combined with sexism.  I don't think it would doom her election, but it would be a hurtle.

Still though, 2016 is a long way off and a lot could happen by then.  Hell, by that point we could be talking about the potential for President Al Franken.

Check out Blue Arkansas:
http://bluearkansas.blogspot.com/

---

by: ARDem @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 11:31:26 AM CST

? No it worked out very well. (4.00 / 1)

And that is not a joke intro.

She used her very good rapport with voters, her high favorab;es, her speaking ability and a massive cadre of supporters to almost beat the finest campaigner America has ever seen. Campaign team if thats preferable to you. I really think if you look back that Obama was a stunning juggernaught of great leadership great team great execution and brilliant planning. The bopok has not been written on this yet, but Obama was never inevitable, never a sure bet. This was an amazing set of victories built on top of victories.

This is one of the reasons that America has such favorables in part. It just seems that thios person has reserve powers of leadership and insight that will be put to use. They are comfortable that if anyone can pull this off, its this fellow.

I am not saying Obama is right on the money all the time, or that I don't disagree with things he done, or appears to plan to do.

Nor does it mean that people should relax and trust him to do it all. I am sure that organizing America around single payer for example is necessary. Anyone have groups of links for Single Payer orga and events and contacts? Lets et them published here.

back to Hillary. I wish her well, and hope she feels as strong as she looks now in 2016. I advise upper body exercise (LOL seriously). It is just about the best thing a woman can do to stave off the calcium, muscle and joint things that are so prevalent. And ginko biloba.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

---

by: HousesofProgress @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 11:52:53 AM CST

[ Parent ]

we're going to have a field of great candidates in 2016 (4.00 / 4)

the competition is going to be stiff, and a lot of the pundits are going to bite their lips. but in the end, competition will just attract that much more attention to the Democratic party, and will make sure that our 2016 nominee is top notch.

you're right that a lot of hopes ride on Obama's performance.

---

by: danthrax @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 11:45:21 AM CST

She doesn't look old either (4.00 / 3)

I'd bet that if most people looked at her and were asked their age, few who didn't know would say that she's over 60. Compare that to John McCain, who looks all of 104.

Conduct your own interview of Sarah Palin!

---

by: fwiffo @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 11:47:42 AM CST

well this ruined my day (4.00 / 2)

I can't see how on earth a Clinton candidacy would be a good thing for progressives.

---

by: TravisDisaster @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 11:49:56 AM CST

Well, the PUMA's calim she's a closet liberal... (0.00 / 0)

...awaiting to unleash her progressiveness!

I have grave doubts about that... but, maybe they are right... in which case, we would be in good shape.  After all, a successful Obama presidency would be nothing more than a springboard to more progressive administration, and Hillary could lead the way...  if the PUMa's are right, of course.


REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

---

by: lord_mike @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 11:52:05 AM CST

[ Parent ]

"if the PUMa's are right" (4.00 / 4)

is sort of like "if being struck by lightning cures shyness in teens"

---

by: TravisDisaster @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 11:54:23 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Im not I understand or supprt your underlying assumption or point but that is some funny. (0.00 / 0)

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

---

by: HousesofProgress @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 12:24:01 PM CST

[ Parent ]

2012/2016 (0.00 / 0)

Hillary will be too old. Obama should be open to a new VP in 2012. Women should be scoping out their horses to ride in the future right now. Obama/Solis or Obama/Sebelius or Obama/Gillibrand or one of several others in 2012 would allow any one of a younger generation to have "foreign policy" credentials while maintaining an ongoing sense of change.

---

by: wind off the lake @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 11:54:09 AM CST

that 7 month edge (4.00 / 2)

Sebelius has over HRC should make all the difference.

---

by: dblhelix @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 12:09:02 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I am not sure Hillary will be too old. Thats not ajudgement that voters have made before. (4.00 / 3)

Although I do think the chances that Obama has a new VP in 2012 to be quite high. I look forward to it. It would add excitement and change to the administration midstream. People would know they were helping to boost an heir apparent. It would even allow people to add a 'corrective' to what they might perceive as needed changes to their ongoing administration.

Obama/?????? 2012!!!!

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

---

by: HousesofProgress @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 12:28:36 PM CST

[ Parent ]

H. Clinton favorables skyrocket (4.00 / 5)

once she stopped campaigning.

Does that bode well for her political future?

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

---

by: SpitBall @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 12:38:45 PM CST

It also helps to be Sec of State (4.00 / 4)

Once you become Sec of State, you become postpartisan to a lot of the country. I think Condoleeza Rice had the highest favs in the Bush cabinet, and we all know what Powell's numbers were like. You're a statesman or stateswoman and not involved in domestic politics, which obviously helps the favorables.  

---

by: ai002h @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 13:28:12 PM CST

[ Parent ]

HRC is bad news (0.00 / 0)

She is in AIPAC's pocket.  She is a deep devotee of imperial policy and militarism.  She is actively instigating an escalation with Iran.  Obama's terrible post-election decisions are too many to count already, but this one will prove to be the worst.

---

by: davmd @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 22:05:58 PM CST