Who's afraid of the big, bad Hillary?

The Right certainly are. Check out this bizarre little nugget from Jay Cost:

Many people on the right see Hillary (and, of course, Bill) as devils. A Google search of "Hillary Clinton devil" yielded 1.25 million hits. Wow.

Wow indeed. And why are they scared? Here's his answer:

It was obvious to the right from all the way back in 1992 that the Clintons were not worthy of the office. And yet, despite the right's best efforts, the Clintons beat the elder Bush. In 1996 (or at least in 1995), the right was convinced they finally had the Clintons' number. They had raised taxes, tried to socialize medicine, and so on. 1994, the right thought, was a harbinger of the Clintons' electoral doom. Nope. Clinton won handily. Finally, in 1998 the right was convinced that they had them. The Lewinsky affair would surely end their reign, they thought. Again, no way. Lewinsky brought down Gingrich, not Clinton!

Every time, the right has been left scratching its head and wondering, "How in the hell did they beat us again?!" They've never had a good answer to the question.

So despite Bill's murky past, Hillary - as this New Yorker piece suggests - is running on a single issue ticket: her husband's legacy.

Hillary’s advisers argue that the obvious lesson of [the failed campaigns of Howard Dean and John Kerry] is that invoking Democratic resentment about [Bill] Clinton’s ideological and personal failings does not work. But his prominence this time makes the strategy irresistible. “The whole race is going to end up there,” a spokesman for one of Hillary’s rivals told me. “It has to, because that’s what she’s running on. She’s running on Bill Clinton. If she were running on her Senate record or some new ideas for the future, rather than the nineties, it would be different. But her biggest strength is Bill Clinton, so the only way to attack her is to take that head on.”

Murad Ahmed

Comments

[Don]

"A Google search of "Hillary Clinton devil" yielded 1.25 million hits. Wow."

This is news?!!

A Google search of "Bush Nazi" yielded 2.48 million.

So whom is afraid of whom?

[Don]

Hillary is a piker. Her beloved hubby ex-President Bill Conton got 1.9 million hists. Third-ranking and third-rate Democratic candidate John Edwards got 2.2 million, although Barack Obama came in at a mere 650,000 hits.

Ronald Reagan got 1.9http://timesonline.typepad.com/comment/2007/09/jay-cost-asks-w.html#comments million despite being a deceased devil, but included this priceless link: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060609080656AAmdwb8

And finally, 'Bush devil' yeilded almost 2.5 million links. So it's obvious that Hillary Clintoin has a ways to go to achieve the notoriety of many of her make counterparts.....

[James of England]

This would be a much more reasonable comment if she was running as Bill Clinton Jnr. Instead, she's running as Dick Gephardt Jnr (and has been endorsed by her husband's old political opponent).

Bill won and remained popular because of Sister Souljah moments. He consistently took stands that infuriated his party. Welfare reform, the NAFTA, Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the Defense of Marriage Act, Operation Desert Fox, and the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act all worked to make sure that when he left office, a decent portion of those voting Bush, as well as those who voted Gore, gave him positive approval ratings.

He had only one major political failure, a fiasco over health care that caused the biggest Democrat defeat in history in the 94 election since 1938. Hillary was closely involved in one political venture, the aforementioned fiasco later known as Hillarycare.

She's called the devil for the same reason twice as many people call Bush the devil. It's relatively widespread partisan hyperbole. Lots of Republicans don't get why Bill won, just like many Democrats/ readers of this newspaper, don't get why George won. There's no content in this piece.

[James of England]

It's also worth noting that the way google works, a lot of links such as those from Hillary supporting sites selling T shirts claiming "Bush is the Devil" get added onto her score. Embedded links don't seem to work, but if you're wishing to disagree with this comment, you'll find it useful to have a google page up anyway.

So, here goes: as well as George Bush (and devil), Tony Blair and Ted Kennedy get more google hits, Dick Cheney, and Harry Reid get about the same, Rumsfeld just a few lower, despite the fact that Hillary's full name is used more than theirs (because there's an obvious possible confusion if you just call her Clinton). Perhaps Republicans fear Sen. Reid more than anyone else, but I honestly don't see that. Maybe Republicans are astonished that Ted Kennedy keeps winning MA elections. ;-)

[ferg]

You really do write the S***est post Murad

[Terry]

Look at the name of the article writer...methinks another member of the "religion of peace"

[Ron in Oklahoma]

Your article fails to add that both Presidential elections cited, 1992 and 96, there was a third national candidate, Ross Perot. He voiced great concern and dislike for Bush 41. Without Perot's intervention in that first election, Geo. Bush, Sr. would have won re-election.
Granted, that may only have delayed an inevitable election of Clinton by four years.

[Jeanne]

The thoughts of Hilary being President is just disgusting. She must have forgotten to take some pieces of furniture when they left the White House last time. Did they take any momentos from the Oval Office where Bill brought fame to his Intern and others while taking care of business to make us Americans proud? Hilary shouldn't be looked upon as "Strong" because she kept her cool through all the "Hard" times, she's just looking for "Pay Back" with Bill until she has to make a big decision on the week of PMS. God Help Us!

[Ross]

I'm a Democrat, but not happy about having Hillary in our faces for yet another 4 years. Just the same just about anyone stacks up well against the incumbent who has plumbed new depths of mediocrity. As usual the choices are poor on both sides.

[Aaron]

Without wanting to appear racist or sexist...more realist...Do you think the southern states, which decide the presidency, are ready for either a black man or a women to be there leader? Some of the high schools in this area don't teach evolution, they don't have to agree with the theory...but at least teach it. Me thinks Mr Gulliani will have a new house shortly...

[TAD Arizona]

The next president will have their hands full at home. The U.S. cannot allow the same wind bags and pundits to occupy, they need a leader with vision and fresh idea's.
Hillary ain't it! supporting lobbyists money,A LaRaza co chair on her campaign, and not answering simple questions about illegals and drivers licenses. Not a Leader.

[Kim]

I think America has swung too far to the right for the past 7 odd years and its time to put a person who has good credentials and should represent a somewhat middle ground especially when dealing with the rest of the world.
Barrack Obama is viewed as too left wing while the rest of the candidates are just pretenders.
Its time to elect a female candidate who can put this right.

This is the view from an outsider!

[Jack]

I am a long standing liberal democrat, but if its Hillary, I shall vote for any republican who is that party's standard bearer.(Michigan)

[Alexandra]

I will never vote for Hillary because of her fake laughter. Everything about her is fake.

[Ann]

My prediction, the US is either going to see the 1st woman president in our history or the first African American President in our history. There's no candidate in the Republican party that can win. They simply do not have the charisma that the Democratic candidates have. Even the Republicans I know do not like any of their candidates. As for someone who says the South won't vote for a 'minority' president, we'll see about that. Louisiana voters last year for the first time elected an Asian-Indian governor.

[Elaura]

I'm a democrat and I cannot stand Hillary Clinton. I don't want her or Bill in the White House again, and I don't care if she's a woman. Whenever I look at her I feel like i'm looking at a mask. Like at any moment she's going to pull it off scooby doo style. I just can't stand the woman.

[J. Dean]

When I consider that SENATOR CLINTON is an out and out Socialist of the Stalinist order - I cringe with FEAR. I see what a mess Socialists have made of the land of my ancestors: GREAT BRITAIN - and I pray to Almighty God that we may be spared this plague - this blight.

[Larry M]

The only reason, only one that allows Hillary to state that she will be ready to go from day one is that once the doors to the Oval Office close, it will be Bill's but in the chair. Don't believe me? Listen to them. It's Bills ideas, his suggestions, his thoughts on situations, very little of her thoughts. etc. This little adventure of the Clintons, if successful, allows Hillary the History entry, and Bill the opportunity to bypass the Term Limit rules. Nice! Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton. Is this what you really want your children to read in American History books in the future.

[Larry M]

This is a view from a different outsider, one who has taken the time to follow the debates, read the websites, compare them side by side and what they stand for. They both, Hillary and Obama, are very close to each other in regards to policies, except foreign relations and health care. These differences themselves are in fact minor, so to call Obama too liberal, too left wing is also accuse Hilary of being the same. Compare them side by side. Don't just follow what the press or each others websites have to say. Educate yourselves away from the hyperbole, and open your eyes. As a Conservative Party supporter in Canada, I enjoy having a Government that espouses better relations with you, our neighbor, and I hope that come November we still do. The voices of America seem to be shouting for a directional change, party notwithstanding, and you stand on the threshold of having a Leader that would be a historic first. Just ensure that when you decide, when you make your choice, that the choice you make is your own. Make sure that it is based upon what YOU have learned about each candidate, not what you have been told by others.

[zqll]

Jay Cost says:

"1994, the right thought, was a harbinger of the Clintons' electoral doom. Nope. Clinton won handily."
------------------------
Fails to mention that in 1994 the Republicans took over the House and Senate. He may have won in 1996 but he was no longer in control. He had to work with the Republicans. And it was the Republicans who were responsible for the passage of the Welfare Reform Act that Clinton signed into law. There were no longer enough Demos to defeat the Welfare Reform Act.
Then came Boy Clinton's stupid move with Lewinsky.
And Repubs have now won the last two elections and will, barring a miracle for the Demos, win this next one.
Although the Demos have control of the House and Senate, they have not been able to translate that control into action as the Repubs did after they took control in '94.

Little bit of info.
All the last Presidents after Kennedy, (1963) have been from either the South or West with the exception of Gerald Ford who was from the Midwest.
And since Kennedy, 1963, only two Democrats have been elected President. All the rest (4) have been Republican.