Can Clinton Be Stopped?

washingtonpost.com: Hillary Sits Atop The Democratic Field In A Tier By Herself

(Washingtonpost.com)  This story was written by Dan Balz in washingtonpost.com's blog The Trail.

---

The Hillary Clinton who appeared on five Sunday morning shows was a formidable political candidate: poised, polished, knowledgeable. The package she presented was designed to send a message to her Democratic rivals: catch me if you can.

She now sits atop the Democratic field, in a tier by herself. She has achieved that by performing at a consistently high level in debates and on the campaign trail, along with help from a campaign that has been largely free of major mistakes. She showed Sunday she could stand in against some of the best pitching in political journalism.

Clinton's goal has been to surround her candidacy with an aura of inevitability, which is certainly common among front-runners. The more she can do that, the more she puts the focus on whether her rivals have a strategy to stop her. The more she does that, the less focus there will be on questions pertinent to what kind of general election candidate or president she actually might be.

The rush to anoint Clinton as an inevitable nominee overlooks the history of nomination battles, which is that few candidate win these contests without a struggle or without at least one serious setback or stumble -- either self-inflicted or inflicted by the voters. What happens before the voters are heard from is not unimportant, but it is rarely decisive.

What could trip up Clinton? Many things: a scandal, a mistake or an unexpected event -- although mistakes seem the least likely given what has transpired to date. The most likely is a defeat and that certainly appears most possible in Iowa. A Clinton loss in Iowa would instantly change perceptions of the Democratic race and bring new scrutiny to Clinton's candidacy that may be overlooked right now.

Iowa is the outlier in the polls at this point in the campaign. Clinton holds a sizeable lead in national polls, and she has, on average, double-digit leads in the other early states. But in Iowa, the polls show a three-way contest that also includes Barack Obama and John Edwards -- and what happens in Iowa and New Hampshire will affect all the other states.

Iowa's electorate is notoriously picky about its choices. The voters there demand considerable attention and, even when they get it from the candidates, wait until the last minute to make up their minds. Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin believes more than half the likely Democratic caucus voters have not settled on a candidate. Advisers to the leading candidates say the percentage may be even higher than that. No matter what the polls show elsewhere, Iowa is a real battleground.

An Obama victory in Iowa would deal a serious -- though not fatal -- setback to Clinton. Although Clinton has a lead in New Hampshire today, Obama has a potentially receptive electorate in New Hampshire because of the sizeable number of independents who are likely to vote in the Democratic primary. If Obama were to win both Iowa and New Hampshire, Clinton then would be in deep trouble.

An Edwards victory over Clinton in Iowa would present a potential obstacle to her nomination, but perhaps not one as significant as if Obama were to win Iowa. That's because Edwards did not do well in New Hampshire in 2004 and has struggled there this year. Knowing that, he and Elizabeth Edwards have been investing more time and resources in New Hampshire, but no one can say with any confidence whether it could pay off if he wins Iowa.

Clinton is acting as if her whole campaign depends on Iowa -- and it may. She has rebuilt her ground operation there. She has used Iowa as the venue for major speeches on Iraq and health care to position herself favorably for the Democratic electorate. Twice now she has brought in her husband to campaign across the state with her. She and her advisers believe a victory there could secure her nomination. They also know that a loss there would scramble what has so far been generally smooth march forward.

What happens next depends in part on her opponents. She and the other Democrats will assemble in New Hampshire for a two-hour debate on Wednesday night (9-11 p.m. on MSNBC), moderated by NBC's Tim Russert. That event likely will reveal how they intend to try to stop her.

Obama may be forced onto the attack, if only to shake up a race that has been largely unchanged for months. Or he may try to avoid direct confrontation awhile longer, hoping that Edwards assumes that role immediately. Last week's debate in Iowa also found Joe Biden and Chris Dodd willing to challenge Clinton on the key question of whether she is the strongest Democratic standard-bearer in the general election and the kind of politician who could accomplish big things as president.

At some point, the voters will face up to those questions more directly than that have. Whether that will be during the primaries or, if Clinton is the nominee, after she has effectively wrapped up the nomination, depends in part on what the New York senator's opponents decide. But after the week she just wrapped up -- her most dominating week of the campaign to day -- her rivals must be ever more aware of the consequences of not doing so.

[dogband]

What a great comment another person had posted:

How are the current Bush supporters going to feel when Hillary begins using the presidental powers that Bush has created?

Whats good for one is good for the other.

***, I''d bet some folks will be loosing sleep over this question, I certainly hope so.

[tnt1954]

no, the clintons cannot be stopped. billary.
they are in my opinion, too old for the job.
you only have to be 35 to run for president.
age and experience or ''senility''. sagacious or
''senile''. serenity or ''senility''. complete
with crotchety behavior and cranky attitude.

[signof4]

''Nor does Clinton%u2019s hypocrisy have any limits. When asked about the recent MoveOn.org ad suggesting that Gen. David Petraeus has betrayed the country, Clinton on "Meet the Press" on Sept. 23 called for an end to such attacks. %u201CI don%u2019t condone anything like that, and I have voted against those who would impugn the patriotism and the service of the people who wear the uniform of our country,%u201D she said.

Yet three days earlier, Clinton had voted against a Senate resolution to condemn the MoveOn.org ad. Her closest competitor, Sen. Barack Obama, voted earlier that day but conveniently missed the vote condemning the ad.''

[signof4]

Once the shoe falls regarding Hzu, she''ll stop. Don''t think that just because the LAMEstream media isn''t reporting on it that investigations aren''t under way.

[thelovegod]

I think Hillary Clinton will be the next President.

[jack3213]

"QUEEN OF THE FLIP FLOP" ( Sounds annoying, so perhaps when those in support of her "stub their toe" they will find a new shoe)

Hillary''s realism: Total retreat from Iraq a fantasy

12 hours, 55 minutes ago

ON SUNDAY Sen. Hillary Clinton created a great deal of buzz when she refused to say she would pull all troops out of Iraq immediately, or even by the end of her first term.

"I am committed to bringing the vast majority of our troops home, and I will begin to do that as soon as I am President," she said on CBS'' "Face the Nation."

Not all the troops, though.

She said on ABC''s "This Week" that she would leave troops to complete several important missions, including protecting our embassy and personnel, defending the Kurds, training the Iraqi army and serving as a deterrent to Iranian ambitions.

That''s far more realistic than the pie-in-the-sky withdrawal proposals spouted by Democratic candidates Bill Richardson and Dennis Kucinich, who say all U.S. forces should leave immediately.

Sen. Barack Obama and former Sen. John Edwards also say they''d keep some forces in Iraq. But Clinton seems to have a more realistic idea of what those troops would do and how long they could stay.

Among the Democratic candidates, only Sen. Joe Biden has been as forthright about Iraq as Sen. Clinton is sounding now. It''s good to see that the grown ups are having a say.

[prinzowhales]

HR2640, the anti-gun bill, is being put forward in the Senate by the piece of treasonous-dung-eating vermin Chuck Schumer--a ''dual'' citizen which means "Israel first and America last". This will allow a diagnosis of mental problems--such as those that arise in connection with veterans suffering from the effects of Gulf War Syndrome...Without being given a chance to defend themselves in court, any veteran can have his Second Amendment rights removed by a pop-diagnosis by one of the mental health Mengelas.

Not only veterans--but those who had diagnoses of ADHD as a child--perhaps by some teacher or counselor and forced on Ritalin. Thousands of police officers will be affected.

Listen to Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America which is fighting this disgusting gun-grabbing move on the Alex Jones Show...inforwars.com

[getloud1]

Hillary Is Corrupt Like Her Husband They Just Cover up Good! With their corrupt corporate friends. This is why they are doing a media Blackout On Ron Paul because He Is For The People!

The censored GQ report must see the light of day. Hopefully, the author will let a copy slip into the hands of some talk radio star or even Huffington, since she despises Hillary. Clearly, it is imperitive that talk radio and alternate media, along with Fox, publicize full details of the Clintons'' sexual crimes, along with details of Hillary''s stolen FBI files, the 100k commodity bribe, campaign finance and other corruptions involving Hillary, since polls show that corruption is at the top of voters'' concerns when voting.

Oh And Yes Hillary & Bill Are members Of The CFR!

GO RON PAUL 2008 - The People''s Champion
http://www.ronpaul2008.com

Join The ReVoLuTiOn:
http://ronpaul.meetup.com/cities/

[getloud1]

Ron Paul has it all.

**** TAKE AMERICA BACK ****
**** STOP THE WAR & Corporate Corruption****

He has NEVER voted:
* to raise taxes
* for an unbalanced budget
* to raise congressional pay
* for a federal restriction on gun ownership
* to increase the power of the executive branch

He HAS voted:
* against the Iraq war
* against the inappropriately named USA PATRIOT act
* against regulating the internet
* against the Military Commissions Act

He will eliminate the IRS, Wasteful Government Spending & Stop The Iraq War Immediately!

Most importantly, he voted NO on anything in Congress that is not allowed by the Constitution.

He is the only candidate not a member of the CFR!

Shouldn''''t ALL members of Congress uphold the Constitution? Aren''''t they SWORN to uphold it? You can bet Paul won''''t call the Constitution "just a G**D***ed piece of paper" like George Bush is reported to have.

If you want a candidate you can TRUST due to a proven track record, visit ronpaul2008.com and get busy spreading the word. The Mainstream Media is a lagging indicator!!

Join The ReVoLuTiOn In Your City Stand Up America:
http://ronpaul.meetup.com/cities/

Also checkout http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ron+paul

[brianbwb-2009]

" think that their are other significant differences. Nader has always operated outside of our 2 dominant Party structure, for example, while Paul operates from within this establishment."
Posted by FeelFree1

I stand wrongly proven, you make a valid point, but I posit that it is exactly their respective traits that you mention that they will not get anywhere near the WH, and if by some miracle they did, the money would soon either buy them off, or knock them off.

[j-whitman]

radio,,,,, Hillary is still more of a man than both Bush & Rudy combined

[j-whitman]

radio,,,, Whats Bush in a red dress and a blonde wig? ---- More competition for Rudy in his dresses & wigs

[j-whitman]

screen_ident,
,, Rudy took money from 9/11 profiteering, the mob, & from making speeches instead of serving his patriotic duty to our troops & country on the Iraq Study group, they fired his corrupt asss.

Thompson took money from a law firm & Lybia for defending the Lockerby Pan Am Flight 103 terrorists.

[radiob-2009]

Whats Bush in a red dress and a blonde wig?

Barney Fife or Hillary?

[j-whitman]

screen_ident,,,,, Bush took money from ENRON & unlicensed morticians.

[name_verify]

Hillarys campaign takes money from NAMBLA.

[j-whitman]

didntinhale,,,, Rudy ?? LOL --- He couldn''t get electeted to any position in NYC, not even mayor again.

[j-whitman]

Who''s comparing Hilliary to Bush ???,,, Come on there is no comparison --- Hillary isn''t afraid of horses or cows. And will actually support the military with something other than Texas BS.

[starleo146]

George Bush, George Bush, George Bush... WHY DO YOU LIBS KEEP COMPARING HILLARY CLINTON TO GEORGE BUSH?? I got news for you- George Bush isn''''t running for President again. Hillary isn''''t running against George Bush. I don''''t see any of you Libs comparing or commenting on Guiliani''''s record, Thompson''''s record, Romney''''s record, McCain''''s record...
And do you know why? Because you idiots don''''t know anything about them. You only know about Bush because he''''s President, BUT YOU WOULD THINK BY THE WAY YOU TALK THAT HILLARY IS RUNNING AGAINST HIM. SHE''''S NOT. The reason why there isn''''t more mention of the Republican candidates is because Libs don''''t follow politics enough to know anything about them. They only follow what they hear, which is usually what''''s on John Stewart that night OR what their idiot friend tells them, who watched John Stewart that night.

Posted by bizzzz at 06:56 PM : Sep 25, 2007

We know Bush isn''t running but the ones that are running in his place are just like him that is why we get confused we see no difference at all same old same Bush doctrine some more of Bush.

[starleo146]

Here is the only guy who can stop Hillary cause there are rumors that she is gayy.

Posted by BaghdadsHere at 08:18 PM : Sep 25, 2007

Who started that rumor the boat authors or maybe a republican to try and even things up. Is this there strategy. I bet it is someone from the south PESOS where are you?