Pure Horserace: Conservatives For Clinton?
Does the "vast, right-wing conspiracy" that Hillary Clinton identified in the 1990s exist — and is it now advocating her nomination for president?
It seems we've been transported light years from the days when conservative Republicans were filling the airwaves, newspapers and books with attacks on the former First Lady and her husband. From cattle future fortunes to her failed health-care plan, from Rose Law Firm billing records to the Monica Lewinsky scandal, conservatives and Clinton carried on a decade-long battle.
Now, some conservatives are, well, almost singing her praises as Clinton competes to become the first woman ever to head a national presidential ticket. Even before last week's Democratic debate in South Carolina, radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh was putting Clinton's chances of being the next president at 80%.
Following that event, Limbaugh was almost laudatory of her answer to a question about what her response would be to a massive terrorist attack on the United States. Clinton said she would retaliate against those responsible, leading Limbaugh to say, "you have to admit, folks, that answer is far more intelligent. In the last half of it she went astray, had to throw in the Bush bash for the base. I understand that, but 'move as swiftly as prudent to retaliate?' She's the only one on the dais last night that said this."
Conservative commentator and three-time presidential candidate Pat Buchanan went even further following the debate, comparing Clinton favorably to Ronald Reagan for her response. As if all that weren't enough, conservative writer Bruce Bartlett took it to a whole new level in an opinion piece for National Review Online.
With current GOP chances in 2008 appearing dim overall at the moment, Bartlett wondered aloud if it might make sense for conservatives to dabble in the Democratic primary — on behalf of Clinton. He wrote: "At some point, politically sophisticated conservatives will have to recognize that no Republican can win in 2008 and that their only choice is to support the most conservative Democrat for the nomination. Call me crazy, but I think that person is Hillary Clinton."
Conservatives for Hillary — or a right-wing conspiracy to start making Democratic primary voters start to wonder what makes Clinton so appealing to the ideological enemy? It could be that these sudden praises reflect a desire on the part of conservatives to face he in the general election and a view that she is unelectable. If that's the case, conservatives might want to be careful what they wish for. Democrats prior to 1980 said the same about another supposedly divisive politician — Reagan. — Vaughn Ververs
Edwards Goes Viral: Democrat John Edwards has used President Bush's veto of the Iraq war spending bill to launch the first TV ads of his campaign. The ad shows people who disagree with Bush's veto and urge Congress to keep sending him the same bill.
But Edwards has picked a curious market for the start of his paid media campaign. Instead of airing ads in one of the early primary states, the campaign has bought air time in Washington, D.C., which isn't a key player in the 2008 primary process. The Edwards campaign says the ad is designed to speak to Congress, but its real purpose appears to be an attempt at viral marketing.
An e-mail to supporters announcing the ad makes it clear that the commercial is a vehicle for other things — namely, fundraising and building grassroots support. It includes an appeal to help the campaign raise $100,000 in 24 hours to cover the ad's cost, as well as giving people the chance to add their own message to Congress to the ad, and then post it online.
An Edwards aide, speaking on background, said persuading voters isn't the ad's point. In fact, the candidate's only presence in the spot is the typical 'I endorsed this message" blurb at the end. "The other dimension to this is that not only is it going to build our lists and going to build our online community, but also raise money, in a grassroots way," the aide told CBSNews.com. "We want to cut people into the ad, people standing in front of the [St. Louis] arch, in front of the Golden Gate Bridge." — David Miller
A League Of His Own: On Tuesday Republican John McCain unveiled a new foreign policy initiative, the League of Democracies. Basically, the organization would be a coalition of democratic nations from around the world — like NATO, but on a global scale.
"The new League of Democracies would form the core of an international order of peace based on freedom," McCain said. "It could act where the U.N. fails to act, to relieve human suffering in places like Darfur."
McCain says the organization wouldn't replace the U.N., but would instead complement it. The implication is that the group would have different rules of engagement than the U.N., which is very reluctant to send peacekeepers into an armed conflict. By definition, the league would also exclude Russia and China, who have used their veto power at the U.N. in the past to block initiatives favored by the United States.
Politically, the proposal also allows McCain to be like the current administration by eschewing the U.N., but also not be like the White House by placing an emphasis on international bodies and multilateral action.
The proposal could appeal to both moderates who want more diplomacy and conservatives who are wary of the U.N.. But by splitting the difference between those two factions, McCain's plan could just as easily push both groups away. — David Miller
Going Ga-Ga For Gravel: In the mainstream media (yes, that includes us), Democrat Mike Gravel has been portrayed as a fringe candidate, and a slightly crazy one at that, especially after his headline-grabbing performance at last week's debate in South Carolina.
But on the Internet, Gravel is a sensation — a refreshing face amid a sea of cookie-cutter candidates seen as typical politicians. On Digg.com, where users post links to articles and then let the rest of "Diggnation" determine which stories get the most exposure, the two top stories on the politics page in the past 24 hours are about Gravel. The comments below each link are overwhelmingly positive.
"I love this guy. He's refreshing. You can't help but get the impression that all the other candidates are grade school children compared to this guy," said one poster identified as run4ny.
In another popular corner of the Internet, Fark.com, one commenter said, "This guy has GOT to stick around. People would be LUCKY to have the opportunity to vote for a guy who displays this kind of honesty and courage."
In a posting on its site, the Gravel campaign says this wellspring of online support is responsible for pressuring CNN to invite Gravel to participate in an upcoming debate in New Hampshire. "This invitation is a direct result of the dedication and work of those of you who have stood up for this campaign in the last 72 hours," press secretary Shawn Alexander Colvin wrote.
This doesn't mean Gravel is going to move up in the polls. Many Internet sites are frequented by people with an anti-establishment, libertarian streak — the exact kind of people that are drawn to candidates like Gravel and Republican Ron Paul — but they don't make up a large chunk of the population.
However, it does look like Gravel got more than fleeting fame out of his debate appearance: He also got a base. — David Miller
Editor's Note: Pure Horserace is a daily update of political news as interpreted by the political observers at CBSNews.com. Click here to sign up for the e-mail version.
By Vaughn Ververs and David Miller
Copyright 2009 CBS. All rights reserved. It seems we've been transported light years from the days when conservative Republicans were filling the airwaves, newspapers and books with attacks on the former First Lady and her husband. From cattle future fortunes to her failed health-care plan, from Rose Law Firm billing records to the Monica Lewinsky scandal, conservatives and Clinton carried on a decade-long battle.
Now, some conservatives are, well, almost singing her praises as Clinton competes to become the first woman ever to head a national presidential ticket. Even before last week's Democratic debate in South Carolina, radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh was putting Clinton's chances of being the next president at 80%.
Following that event, Limbaugh was almost laudatory of her answer to a question about what her response would be to a massive terrorist attack on the United States. Clinton said she would retaliate against those responsible, leading Limbaugh to say, "you have to admit, folks, that answer is far more intelligent. In the last half of it she went astray, had to throw in the Bush bash for the base. I understand that, but 'move as swiftly as prudent to retaliate?' She's the only one on the dais last night that said this."
Conservative commentator and three-time presidential candidate Pat Buchanan went even further following the debate, comparing Clinton favorably to Ronald Reagan for her response. As if all that weren't enough, conservative writer Bruce Bartlett took it to a whole new level in an opinion piece for National Review Online.
With current GOP chances in 2008 appearing dim overall at the moment, Bartlett wondered aloud if it might make sense for conservatives to dabble in the Democratic primary — on behalf of Clinton. He wrote: "At some point, politically sophisticated conservatives will have to recognize that no Republican can win in 2008 and that their only choice is to support the most conservative Democrat for the nomination. Call me crazy, but I think that person is Hillary Clinton."
Conservatives for Hillary — or a right-wing conspiracy to start making Democratic primary voters start to wonder what makes Clinton so appealing to the ideological enemy? It could be that these sudden praises reflect a desire on the part of conservatives to face he in the general election and a view that she is unelectable. If that's the case, conservatives might want to be careful what they wish for. Democrats prior to 1980 said the same about another supposedly divisive politician — Reagan. — Vaughn Ververs
Edwards Goes Viral: Democrat John Edwards has used President Bush's veto of the Iraq war spending bill to launch the first TV ads of his campaign. The ad shows people who disagree with Bush's veto and urge Congress to keep sending him the same bill.
But Edwards has picked a curious market for the start of his paid media campaign. Instead of airing ads in one of the early primary states, the campaign has bought air time in Washington, D.C., which isn't a key player in the 2008 primary process. The Edwards campaign says the ad is designed to speak to Congress, but its real purpose appears to be an attempt at viral marketing.
An e-mail to supporters announcing the ad makes it clear that the commercial is a vehicle for other things — namely, fundraising and building grassroots support. It includes an appeal to help the campaign raise $100,000 in 24 hours to cover the ad's cost, as well as giving people the chance to add their own message to Congress to the ad, and then post it online.
An Edwards aide, speaking on background, said persuading voters isn't the ad's point. In fact, the candidate's only presence in the spot is the typical 'I endorsed this message" blurb at the end. "The other dimension to this is that not only is it going to build our lists and going to build our online community, but also raise money, in a grassroots way," the aide told CBSNews.com. "We want to cut people into the ad, people standing in front of the [St. Louis] arch, in front of the Golden Gate Bridge." — David Miller
A League Of His Own: On Tuesday Republican John McCain unveiled a new foreign policy initiative, the League of Democracies. Basically, the organization would be a coalition of democratic nations from around the world — like NATO, but on a global scale.
"The new League of Democracies would form the core of an international order of peace based on freedom," McCain said. "It could act where the U.N. fails to act, to relieve human suffering in places like Darfur."
McCain says the organization wouldn't replace the U.N., but would instead complement it. The implication is that the group would have different rules of engagement than the U.N., which is very reluctant to send peacekeepers into an armed conflict. By definition, the league would also exclude Russia and China, who have used their veto power at the U.N. in the past to block initiatives favored by the United States.
Politically, the proposal also allows McCain to be like the current administration by eschewing the U.N., but also not be like the White House by placing an emphasis on international bodies and multilateral action.
The proposal could appeal to both moderates who want more diplomacy and conservatives who are wary of the U.N.. But by splitting the difference between those two factions, McCain's plan could just as easily push both groups away. — David Miller
Going Ga-Ga For Gravel: In the mainstream media (yes, that includes us), Democrat Mike Gravel has been portrayed as a fringe candidate, and a slightly crazy one at that, especially after his headline-grabbing performance at last week's debate in South Carolina.
But on the Internet, Gravel is a sensation — a refreshing face amid a sea of cookie-cutter candidates seen as typical politicians. On Digg.com, where users post links to articles and then let the rest of "Diggnation" determine which stories get the most exposure, the two top stories on the politics page in the past 24 hours are about Gravel. The comments below each link are overwhelmingly positive.
"I love this guy. He's refreshing. You can't help but get the impression that all the other candidates are grade school children compared to this guy," said one poster identified as run4ny.
In another popular corner of the Internet, Fark.com, one commenter said, "This guy has GOT to stick around. People would be LUCKY to have the opportunity to vote for a guy who displays this kind of honesty and courage."
In a posting on its site, the Gravel campaign says this wellspring of online support is responsible for pressuring CNN to invite Gravel to participate in an upcoming debate in New Hampshire. "This invitation is a direct result of the dedication and work of those of you who have stood up for this campaign in the last 72 hours," press secretary Shawn Alexander Colvin wrote.
This doesn't mean Gravel is going to move up in the polls. Many Internet sites are frequented by people with an anti-establishment, libertarian streak — the exact kind of people that are drawn to candidates like Gravel and Republican Ron Paul — but they don't make up a large chunk of the population.
However, it does look like Gravel got more than fleeting fame out of his debate appearance: He also got a base. — David Miller
Editor's Note: Pure Horserace is a daily update of political news as interpreted by the political observers at CBSNews.com. Click here to sign up for the e-mail version.
By Vaughn Ververs and David Miller
Popular in Politics
- Officials on Benghazi: "We made mistakes, but without malice" 277 Comments
- Where is the Benghazi cover-up Republicans promised? 346 Comments
- FBI seeks anonymous source behind Menendez allegations
- Ousted IRS chief: "I did not mislead" the American people 253 Comments
- Why Obama should worry that current scandals might impact 2016 216 Comments
- House GOP to vote on Obamacare repeal - Vol. 37 928 Comments
- Immigration deal reached in House
- Obama: I didn't know about IRS report 608 Comments
"Iz comes too far to turn back now......"
If you had dug a little deeper, you'd have learned that the quote you reference here was in fact Hillary herself quoting a black hero, James Cleveland. Is her dialect rather amateurish? Sure. But to suggest that she was trying to fool the audience that she actually talks that way herself is extremely unethical and/or ignorant on your part. (Unethical if you know better, ignorant, lazy-minded, and uncurious if you don't.)
See http://mediamatters.org/items/200704260001
Personally I don't trust her and will not be voting for her, unless she's the only Dem, and then, I'd much rather have Ron Paul. I think she's a neocon and a globalist, and will continue to sell us all down the river, like Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush have done, each to their own degree, Reagan by borrowing & spending us from a creditor to a debtor nation, into which sad state we have continued the downward spiral, Bush pere initiating the New World Order with all his Skull & Bones JFK Iran-Contra CIA baggage, Clinton signing NAFTA, GATT, and the Telecom act, effectively selling out independent media and our trade sovereignty, and Bush fils being the all time greatest clown, idiot, and ruiner of what little is left of us, completely in the power of a rogue element in the Pentagon, NORTHCOM, CENTCOM, SPACECOM, and generally the MIC.
So I'm not a supporter of Hillary. But let's get the facts straight when we speak, eh?
Bruce Bartlett,
conservative writer
Ok, you're CRAZY! Actually, crazy is too kind. You are a moonbat! What is a "conservative writer"? I've never heard of this guy before. Maybe they mean he is "conservative" with his mental abilities.
Now I'm hearing on the radio that, as a youth, she was babysitting poor, migrant farm worker's children while they worked in the fields.
This Hillary chick knows no shame. Like Geffen said, "the Clintons lie with such ease it's disturbing." And you libs call Bush a liar. HA!
Maybe they would have a chance if instead of just catering to their base that only makes up 1/3 of America --they instead catered to the majority. After all the election is for President of the United States NOT President of the neo cons.
I don't know how you can figure that anyone is either electable or not at this point. I'm not knocking Edwards or promoting Obama,but Edwards hasn't done any more to prove himself electable than Obama. Both were elected to the Senate and neither has yet stood for re-election. Don't base your vote on some mythical political strategy. Just remember, 4 years ago the media pounded into our heads that Kerry should be the nominee because he was supposedly electable. He's who the powers that be wanted us to nominate.
This time they're pounding Hillary into our heads.
It's too early to buy into any of these folks.
"ABC - Anybody But Carter."
The list goes on. Do I hear "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" coming from Lamebrain and Bucknaked?
Nice plan Rush and Pat.
She is a phony, self-absorbed, hag with one goal in life.. to be Bill
Clinton.
Posted by drivelphobe at 11:47 AM : May 03, 2007
........Yeah but her friends in our corrupt liberal MSM wolfpack are going to do all the can to use their left-wing propaganda to make Americans "think" she's ok...........while they generate lying stories and false perceptions against the GOP candidates........ NO DOUBT...... it's happening now and this story is part of their corrupt propaganda campaign.........really sad
No wonder she has so much money, in politics the best prostitute will get the most funds!
Well, the other guy who says the first guy has never been in the service? I think the second guy is correct...IT'S "commander IN chief"!! FOO.