Hillary's Iowa Mailer Features Praise From Veterans
A Dem operative forwards us a new mailer the Hillary campaign has dropped in Iowa called "Voices of Veterans." It features local vets praising her efforts on their behalf and claiming, in the words of one, that she has the "experience to bring our troops home safely." Take a look:
Comments (28)
Michael wrote on November 27, 2007 9:36 AM:Does anybody remember another presidential candidate running on their first name alone? Everyone I can recall went by their last names. It seems more presidential. Why doesn't she just go by clinton? She's trying to run on his record anyway.
david knowles wrote on November 27, 2007 9:39 AM:Zogby has her losing to the top FIVE repubs. Should we trust Zobgy?
http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2007/11/27/clinton-loses-general-election/
megisi wrote on November 27, 2007 9:40 AM:It's a Hillary surge!
Sadly, I suspect that she will roll up a 5-7 point win in Iowa and crush Obama and Edwards in New Hampshire. The rest of the primary campaign will be reduced to a Hillary victory lap.
There are worse outcomes.
hadenough wrote on November 27, 2007 9:43 AM:pollster hates America:
A new Zogby Interactive poll, conducted using volunteers over the internet, has produced some odd results for trial heats involving Senator Clinton against all four top Republican opponents. What makes this especially odd is that the results are not equally unusual for Obama.
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/zogby_internet_poll_trial_heat.php
You are right hadenough. Zogby is a left-wing, naderite, uneducated, wacko, pinko, commie, traitorous, lunatic organization. It should be banned from doing any polling of clinton II at all. That's how we deal with dissenters in the clintonocracy, right.
Liberal Larry wrote on November 27, 2007 10:08 AM:Bush-Lite and her K $treet allies want to escalate the privatization of our military.
hilltard wrote on November 27, 2007 10:16 AM:Geez, "Michael", I seem to remember that there was some idiot that went by just a middle initial.
Michael wrote on November 27, 2007 10:23 AM:I kind of remember that it was bush/cheney 00 and 04. There were some W's running around on bumper stickers, but I don't remember him sending mailer's that just had W on them. Also, I don't remember the king running around saying call me W or george or georgie for that matter. Also, great example for someone who was "presidential."
brewmn wrote on November 27, 2007 10:25 AM:If Hillary hadn't voted to send our troops into harm's way, then maybe they wouldn't need her "experience" to get them home.
Oh, and is Hillary now claiming that she was Seceretary of Veterans' Affairs during the Clinton administration?
Hillary: the Unelected Cheney of the First Clinton Administration. Man, that girl's hands were in everything back then. Funny how that never got reported in the press.
texasdem wrote on November 27, 2007 10:34 AM:I'm curious as to whether these mailers will work for her. Both my father and husband are retired military, and my husband still works with the military and other retirees.
Granted, most are Fox News-watching Republicans, but they are united in their extreme hatred for Hillary. That has been consistent at every assignment we've had since the 1992.
Of course, being the daughter and wife of veterans doesn't give me the EXPERIENCE required to speak for veterans. :)
hadenough wrote on November 27, 2007 10:47 AM:"Michael wrote on November 27, 2007 10:05 AM:
You are right hadenough. Zogby is a left-wing, naderite, uneducated, wacko, pinko, commie, traitorous, lunatic organization. It should be banned from doing any polling of clinton II at all. That's how we deal with dissenters in the clintonocracy, right."
Exactly!
DemAC wrote on November 27, 2007 10:57 AM:Michael,
Yeah, yeah, yeah…
Yawn, yawn, yawn…
Spill your venom and spew your disdain best you can, apparently that’s all you do here. When this election is over you can always recall with pride how you let yourself rot in your own misogynic hatred.
Pathetic.
Michael wrote on November 27, 2007 11:18 AM:demac, such a typical republican, I mean clinton II lover response. What exactly about my posts was venomous or disdainful? What evidences either misogyny or hatred? Answer nothing.
I actually have been wondering about the running around calling herself "hillary" thing. For campaign purposes, when she gets a running mate, will the bumper stickers be hillary/wes in 08, hillary/evan in 08 or so I don't get called misogynist how about hillary/laura in 08. Kind of sounds childish don't you think? I am sure your response will be more vitriol. That's about all you clinton II lovers, I mean republicans or clintonistas know. You don't think. You just attack.
DemAC wrote on November 27, 2007 11:28 AM:Oh poor, poor little Michael: just spewing out his normal stupidities and Hillary Clinton hate, and suddenly being called misogynic and hateful. Hurt poor, poor little Michael’s feelings perhaps?
Pathetic.
Michael wrote on November 27, 2007 11:52 AM:Nope. Still spewing your venom demac. Why don't you hang out where you and your candidate are more welcome, like a republican blog.
DemAC wrote on November 27, 2007 12:04 PM:Cause in poor, poor little Michael’s world everyone who doesn’t appreciate imbecile hatred of Hillary Clinton must, must, must be a repub.
You know what I think? I think poor, poor little Michael was badly spanked as a child, and now takes it out on strong women, that would, sort of, make sense.
Michael wrote on November 27, 2007 12:15 PM:Aw, gee you convinced me with your intelligent and persuasive argument to change my ways. I will now commit to vote for any woman as president just because she is a woman. I was spanked as a child and like it now as an adult. Spank me please demac. What a joke.
RWN wrote on November 27, 2007 12:16 PM:Hey david knowles (Should we trust Zobgy) megisi (I suspect that she will roll up a 5-7 point win in Iowa), and hadenough (pollster hates America)
The three wouldn't be in this program that Andrew Sullivan found for his blog (
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/) where individuals are being paid $1.00 for positive posts to political blogs.
Let us be real, Pollster.com composite polling is showing Clinton falling in all the polls and Obama gaining and this Zogby poll confirms the premise that over 50% are opposed to Clinton. The question of inevitability and electability is coming to the head as the campaign is engaged.
I suspect Zogby polls is an indicator to this already identified situation about a known Clinton liability.
DemAC wrote on November 27, 2007 12:20 PM:Poor, poor little Michael,
I’m afraid only professional treatment will change your ways. But you could employ some kind of exploratory self-treatment. See if you could go by for 24 hours without writing something really, really stupid about Hillary Clinton. You think you can do that Michael?
And just think: this oh-so-edifying exchange between "Michael" and "DemAC" will essentially comprise the national conversation if the Dems nominate HRH HRC. Fun, no? And great for the country!
Surely there's an island somewhere that can serve as home to all Bushes, Clintons, their most loyal retainers, and Tim Russert and Wolf Blitzer. They can indulge in their personal dramas, running against each other for "Tribal Chief" in perpetuity, and leave the rest of us to try and solve the problems that face our country. Maybe they can even sell the broadcast rights, particularly if the writers' strike goes much longer. Everybody wins!
Michael wrote on November 27, 2007 12:34 PM:You are very strange demac. Gee I guess your candidate can't take a little "heat" from a posting on the internet pointing out how your candidate is a fraud. You may choose to ignore facts and believe the fantasy, that's your choice.
By the way, you are absolutely correct dajafi. I don't know why I am wasting my time with demac. Anybody but clinton II in 08.
John McCutchen wrote on November 27, 2007 12:35 PM:Sgt Kleefeld's getting on my last raw nerve with these Brunehilde Literature Dumps
dajafi wrote on November 27, 2007 1:00 PM:I should add that while I credit the criticism of Zogby's methodology, unless I've missed something, none of the traditional pollsters really have cracked the nut of ascertaining preferences among an electorate that isn't reachable by the same methods that worked 20-30 years ago.
And though I'm not by any means a Clinton supporter--I deplore the style and distrust the substance, and I'm still not sure what her backers perceive to be the reason she's even in the race--I certainly believe she can win. Her team plays the game well, and they should be able to exploit the abundant weaknesses of whoever the Republicans nominate to the point of securing 270 electoral votes.
That something like 48 percent of the country won't vote for Sen. Clinton under any circumstance bothers me much more for the ramifications of what happens after she wins. The Republicans in Congress will have no incentive to work with Clinton II, and if you think she's distrusted by the liberal elements within the party now, just wait until 2010 or so.
I'd really prefer to avoid the whole problem by nominating any of Obama (my first choice), Edwards, Dodd, Biden, or even Richardson--who'd surely be a better president than he is a candidate.
votenic wrote on November 27, 2007 1:18 PM:2008 Presidential Candidate Weekly Poll
The Only Poll That Matters.
Results Posted Weekly Tuesday Evening At Midnight.
For what it's worth, I agree with your post almost 100%. I think that clinton II just might get beat in a general because, in part, of the 48% figure that you are referring to. If she does win, she won't get a damn thing done in congress because of your point about the republican minority in the senate. She will have no mandate or anything to work with and it will be 4 more years of stagnation, which I don't think the country can afford. We are running out of time and the economic situtation keeps getting worse and worse due to many structural problems with our economy that need to be addressed, starting with health care.
Cy Guy wrote on November 27, 2007 4:16 PM:Is it just me, or does Geraldine Felton's picture look like the head was poorly photoshopped onto another body? I'm wondering if the original image they used had Colonel Felton appearing in uniform, which violates the Military Code of Conduct. If that is the case, then really they should not be using that image at all and should have requested a new image from her in civilian clothes.
Also a note to TPM and to the person that sent in the examples. If you are going to cross out the address you should also cross out the barcode as the barcode can be reverse engineered to reveal your home mailing address. (TPM folks, you may want to blur those on the sender's behalf).
Holy Crap! I know the guy in the first picture (upper left). Frankly, I'm stunned that he is a Democrat and even more amazed that he is a Hillary supporter. But his generation had a lot of FDR democrats.
What I remember most about him is that he had to give up farming because of his WWII injuries and that he has had endless problems with the VA hospital system.
ROBERT wrote on December 10, 2007 8:18 PM:SENATOR BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA REFUSED TO PUT HIS HAND ON HIS HEART DURING THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, BUT ALSO REFUSED TO SAY THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE AMERICAN FLAG.
WE CAN NOT HAVE SOMEONE LIKE THAT IN THE WHITE HOUSE.
PASS THIS INFORMATION ON TO EVERYONE.
