Linkypoo

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Sen. Hillary Clinton jumped into the fray as a 2008 presidential candidate with the words "I'm in" posted on her Web site.

"And I'm in to win," she added in a statement, announcing she has set up an exploratory committee that can gauge opinions and raise money for a presidential campaign.

The former first lady and Democratic senator from New York is considered her party's front-runner in what has become a diverse Democratic field. (Watch Clinton's offer to chat with voters as she launches her White House campaign Video)

Should she win, she would be the first woman to serve as president of the United States -- and the first presidential spouse to do so as well. President Bill Clinton served two terms -- from 1993-2001.

On Tuesday, Democrat Sen. Barack Obama announced that he was filing papers to form a presidential exploratory committee, a bid to become the first African-American president. (Full story)

And on Sunday, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, also a Democrat, is expected to announce his bid, one that could make him the first Latino president.

Live 'video chats' start Monday

Bringing "the right end" to the war in Iraq, reducing the deficit, making the country energy independent and health care affordable were issues Clinton touted in her announcement, speaking on a video posted on her site.

"After six years of George Bush, it is time to renew the promise of America," she said.

"I grew up in a middle-class family in the middle of America, and we believed in that promise," the 59-year-old native of Chicago said.

"I still do. I've spent my entire life trying to make good on it, whether it was fighting for women's basic rights or children's basic health care, protecting our social security or protecting our soldiers."

In the video, she invited Americans to join her in a three-night series of live video Web chats beginning Monday.

"So let's talk. Let's chat, let's start a dialogue about your ideas and mine, because the conversation in Washington has been just a little one-sided lately, don't you think?"

When Clinton launched her Senate bid in New York in 1999, she began a "listening tour" around the state to explore views on education, business and health care issues.

Her Republican opponent, Rick Lazio, called her a "carpetbagger" because she had not previously lived in New York. But she wound up beating him, becoming the first sitting first lady to win an elected office -- and was re-elected last year with 67 percent of the vote, a landslide.

A crowded field

Clinton's announcement puts her in a Democratic crowd of candidates.

Former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, the party's 2004 vice presidential nominee, declared his candidacy late last year, as did Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, a liberal critic of the war in Iraq, and Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack.

In addition to Richardson, Sens. Joe Biden of Delaware and Chris Dodd of Connecticut said they will seek the nomination. Other Democrats mentioned as possible candidates include the party's 2004 presidential candidate, Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts; retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark, and the Rev. Al Sharpton.

Clinton, who just returned from a trip to U.S. military facilities in Afghanistan, Iraq and Germany, has urged the Bush administration to return its focus to Afghanistan.

She has proposed a bill to cap troop levels in Iraq and require congressional approval before the president may send more troops.

She has also been highly critical of Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, saying Washington should cut off financial support to the Iraqi government unless it shows commitment to stemming the sectarian violence there.

"I don't have any faith," she said of him, when asked by CNN.

CNN's John Roberts contributed to this report.

I'd like to think we can make a civilized discussion out of this. She's the 3rd best Democratic candidate in my eyes, behind Obama and Edwards. I'd also put McCain ahead of her if we're including likely Republican candidates.

I'd put her over Obama because of name recognition, her attitude, and her personality. Obama is still a big unknown in many regards and may just be a flash in the pan as far as any of us know. And at this stage, if she gets the nomination, I'll probably vote for her.

The '04 primaries really showed that frontrunners can change at any time.

This is going to be one helluva race this time. First non-incumbent election since '28.

I'll give you the name recognition part. I also have a hard time arguing with her political views, but I'm worried about her electability. Unfortunately, the society we live in has a lot of people who wont vote for her because she's a woman and because her husband got a bj from a fat chick in 1996. Unfortuntely, she's got baggage, even if it isnt her fault. Obama has his own baggage to overcome, but I think he'd make a gret leader.

2008 is going to be fun on both sides.

I'd vote for Obama over her, actually. Not to say she's a bad candidate -- she isn't -- but I think there are people who can do the job just as good as she could.

In the 2008 elections, I know we're going to have options better than what we've had to choose from for the past eight years. We had some really poor choices before. That may not be the case next year.

I don't really understand why so many people apparently dislike her so intensely. I'm in New York state and I can't see where she is worse than any other politician and she's better than a lot of them. It's too early to have much of an opinion on the whole presidential race yet, but this is certainly going to be an interesting one. (Although I wish it weren't starting so early.) If she can pull this one off, then she deserves the office.

I'd put her over Obama because of name recognition, her attitude, and her personality. Obama is still a big unknown in many regards and may just be a flash in the pan as far as any of us know. And at this stage, if she gets the nomination, I'll probably vote for her.

The '04 primaries really showed that frontrunners can change at any time.

This is going to be one helluva race this time. First non-incumbent election since '28.

or Eisenhower v. Stevenson in '52

She's against video games...screw her.

Edited January 20, 200719 yr by Dodgefan

I'd put her over Obama because of name recognition, her attitude, and her personality. Obama is still a big unknown in many regards and may just be a flash in the pan as far as any of us know. And at this stage, if she gets the nomination, I'll probably vote for her.

The '04 primaries really showed that frontrunners can change at any time.

This is going to be one helluva race this time. First non-incumbent election since '28.

I must spend far too much time on here with cars because i haven't the slightest frickin clue who this OSAMA dude is that everyone is talking about! Is OSAMA BIN LADEN running for president? WTF?

Hilary for pres, i always figured it was the first part of the apocalypse, but after all these years with gypsum wall board as president, i figure Hilary is bound to be an upgrade, with all Bill's old buddies and Teddy Kenndy pulling the nationstrings for awhile. HUMMERS FOR BILL! "you can be my chief of my staff, Monica"

The only thing that would really suck about this is Rosie O Donnell as vice president.

Iwas ROTFLMAO the other day. They had an article about John Kerry asking a crowd if he should run again and there was deafening silence or something. I'm like, DUH! He's a RUBE!!!!!!!!!!

Edited January 21, 200719 yr by regfootball

My biggest objection to her running: Do we really want 24+ years of the same two families in the Whitehouse?

I must spend far too much time on here with cars because i haven't the slightest frickin clue who this OSAMA dude is that everyone is talking about! Is OSAMA BIN LADEN running for president? WTF?

Dude, are you serious? I bet you'll make fun of his name more when you find out his middle name is Hussein. Because that totally makes him some Islamic terrorist.

Anyway, Edwards may be a pretty boy smooth talker, but his policies are awful.

This reminds me I should probably register to vote at some point....

Hmmmm......Hillary 2009-2016, Jeb Bush 2017-2024, Chelsea Clinton 2025-2032?

I must spend far too much time on here with cars because i haven't the slightest frickin clue who this OSAMA dude is that everyone is talking about! Is OSAMA BIN LADEN running for president? WTF?

Dude, are you serious? I bet you'll make fun of his name more when you find out his middle name is Hussein. Because that totally makes him some Islamic terrorist.

Yeah, retarded things like that are why Obama will probably be a long shot. As long as people are too stupid to overlook a name or skin color or gender, a genuine change cannot take place. White Christian men dont always have the right answers.

no, seriously, i have no idea who the dude is. But his name sounds like OSAMA. not a good thing. I honestly have no idea who he is.

Edited January 20, 200719 yr by regfootball

no, seriously, i have no idea who the dude is. But his name sounds like OSAMA. not a good thing. I honestly have no idea who he is.

http://obama.senate.gov/

I'll have to check it out.

Only thing, will the dem's beat each other up so badly that the repubs will slide someone in under the radar to win while the dems bloody up each other debating whether a woman or an Afro American should be prez? Honestly, the dems may end up focusing more on that than trying to unify.

Billary has far deeper pockets and connections and mafia. In the end, I bet Billary gets the nod.

Edited January 20, 200719 yr by regfootball

An African American friend of mine told me that the country isn't ready to elect a black or a woman in our lifetime. However, I respond to him that I believe that the heavily populated, more progressive states on the east and west coasts and the Great Lakes would vote for either Obama or Hillary. Pundits on the Chris Matthews show this morning said to look for Al Gore to enter the race if Hillary's candidacy starts to fall apart.

I'd like to think we can make a civilized discussion out of this. She's the 3rd best Democratic candidate in my eyes, behind Obama and Edwards. I'd also put McCain ahead of her if we're including likely Republican candidates.

McCain?!

Yes he was good until he sold his soul and his independent mind to GWB and Karl Rove.

Edited January 20, 200719 yr by CD/BP

...

Nope. Still hate Hillary's guts.

An African American friend of mine told me that the country isn't ready to elect a black or a woman in our lifetime. However, I respond to him that I believe that the heavily populated, more progressive states on the east and west coasts and the Great Lakes would vote for either Obama or Hillary. Pundits on the Chris Matthews show this morning said to look for Al Gore to enter the race if Hillary's candidacy starts to fall apart.

I'm ready to vote for a woman, just not Hilary. I can't remember one thing off the top of my head that she's done for NYS since she's been here. I knew when she was elected Senator in 2000 that she was going to just take up space in the Senate and use it as a stepping stone to the White House.

If Guiliani makes it as the top Republican, him vs. Hilary would make for an interesting race.

McCain's support for the Iraq war, perhaps as strong or stronger than Bush's, has diminished his chances.

Giuliani's views on social issues will not sit well with the base. I don't know how Romney's Mormonism will play down in the South.

I would support Chuck Hagel if he runs.

I'm assuming McCain will distance himself from Bush and head more towards the center, which would make him suitable. If he doesn't, then screw him. Edwars and McCain will prpbably benefit a lot from actually being in the race before. Hillary will get most recognition as a former first lady.

I... can't say I like Hilary all that much, but I don't know much about the other candidates.

McCain is too old to run, IMHO...he's 70 now..will be 72 in '08.

I'm willing to go with Hillary...though I like Obama also...

After voting for Gore in '00, Kerry in '04, I'd really, really like to be voting for a Democratic winner in '08.

McCain may move to the center on social, economic, and environmental issues, but he will be far to the right on Iraq, dooming his candidacy.

I think an argument could be made that John Edwards is the strongest Democratic candidate. Labor, minorities, and environmentalists could easily support him. However, I could never vote for someone who became very wealthy as a trial attorney.

Obama will most likely be torn apart for his lack of experience compared to Hillary or Edwards. On the other hand he is likable and very articulate so that could work in his favor as well.

He seems to be following a path similar to JFK...... 'cept for the "richer than Roosevelt" part.

Young, dynamic, well liked, not much experience, "new face", outsider, optimistic.....

He seems to be following a path similar to JFK...... 'cept for the "richer than Roosevelt" part.

Young, dynamic, well liked, not much experience, "new face", outsider, optimistic.....

Plus he's a pretty good orator. The keynote speech at the 2004 DNC was exceptional.

That's it i'm moving to Canada.

all i can say is if Gore ends up in this, it will be sad. gore, kerry, edwards, is that all they can muster?

It'll be Hillary with Obama as her running mate in the end (possibly vis-a-versa). Either way, the two together is a strong combination for the Democrats.

It'll be Hillary with Obama as her running mate in the end (possibly vis-a-versa). Either way, the two together is a strong combination for the Democrats.

That would be one hell of a combo, but I doubt the dems will let that happen. White woman+African-American man with a name that some yokels wont be able to get past=formula for disaster.

That would be one hell of a combo, but I doubt the dems will let that happen. White woman+African-American man with a name that some yokels wont be able to get past=formula for disaster.

As a registered republican who has become disenchanted with the party I'm allowed to say that I would love to see it happen. You can practically hear those neo-con sphincters slamming shut all across the country!

our country has become so polarized and niche marketed, politically.

just like the auto industry. and it only serves to divide up the country.

Its impossible to come up with any candidates that don't offend the masses.

its time we had volume sellers again. Cars like the late 70's caprice. everyone bought them. politicans with universal appeal who can unite people. I'm tired of all our fractioning in this country. Bill Clinton was probably the closest thing to someone having universal appeal, yet he was equally offensive to diehard conservatives.

Edited January 21, 200719 yr by regfootball

I'd rather have Howard Dean, Pat Buchanan or Condolesa Rice for our next president than her.

DEAD SERIOUS.

She is a carpet-bagging, useless, worthless $@#dumpster of a human being.

~~~~~~~~~~~

On June 15th, 2007 T!GHT WH1P$ will be witnessing the ultimate epoch of 1950s Mopar originality!

http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index...showtopic=14872

“Both optimists and pessimists contribute to our society. The optimist invents the airplane and the pessimist the parachute.”

- G. B. Stern (British novelist)

Edited January 21, 200719 yr by Sixty8panther

An African American friend of mine told me that the country isn't ready to elect a black or a woman in our lifetime.

I am. The more I think about it, the more I'd cast a vote for Obama if he was the democratic candidate in the main '08 election.

The dude's name is OBAMA..... Jesus that's way too soon.

Colin Powell on the other hand, I'd vote for him in a heartbeat.

The dude's name is OBAMA..... Jesus that's way too soon.

What does the guys name have to do with anything? God thats a retarded argument. Thats like saying, "I wont vote for Bush because I'm gay" or "I wont vote for any candidate named John because I once had a traumatic experience with a toilet".

What does the guys name have to do with anything? God thats a retarded argument.

Thats like saying, "I wont vote for Bush because I'm gay"

That's a terrible comparison. You know better.

Voting or not voting for someone based solely on their name is ridiculous like you said. Gay people have very real and very good reasons not to vote for someone like GWB.

Edited January 21, 200719 yr by CD/BP

I did not say I would not vote form him but get real Bro... if you think

middle America is going to vote in a President who's name is one

letter off from the most hated enemy of the US of A and also reminds

people of SADDAM who we just saw hung on YOUTUBE that than I'm

pretty sure all hope for a logical disussion is lost.

The guy's F**KING name is "Barack Hussein Obama"

Most Americans do not know the differance between Iran & Iraq and

many more can not find Vietnam, Lebanon or Somalia on a world

map so I'm pretty sure most of them are not going to vote for him.

They're going to hear "Barack Hussein Obama" and the visual image

will be this:

Barack isn't that the movie with the guy from that Ali G show where he tries to put P.A. Lee into a WIFE BAG?

Hussein I thought we strung up that sum-a-bitch on the gallows in Iraq...

Obama Holy $h! reminds me of Bin Laden, no f**kin' way is he gettin' my vote!

Why is there always some kind of friction between me and a few members here, I think

I'm just saying here what everyone else (90%) are thinking.

I did not say I would not vote form him but get real Bro... if you think

middle America is going to vote in a President who's name is one

letter off from the most hated enemy of the US of A and also reminds

people of SADDAM who we just saw hung on YOUTUBE that than I'm

pretty sure all hope for a logical disussion is lost.

Middle America voted the current President into office.

Middle America listens to and watches Sean Hannity.

Middle America is a waste of resources.

Yea but you're from Florida Fly...you guys dont even know how to vote.

Edited January 21, 200719 yr by CD/BP

Politics aren't my favorite pass-time, but 2008 should be interesting. I just hope they get better ads on tv.

Well if Hillary doesn't win the primaries she'll pull a Lieberman and get her cohorts to sleeze her way in as an Independent candidate.

Hillary Clinton?

I need to move to Portugal, Italy, Uruguay, somewhere....

I'm non-partisan, though more of a Democrat in ideology. I'd like to vote Democrat, but I'd like to see the party run a mainstream candidate that doesn't polarize. Why are Republicans SO conservative and why are Democrats SO liberal?

I don't like her...AT ALL. I don't expect any politician to be nice...neither male nor female...however, this one is vile...accounts of her treatment of staff/etc. at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue as depicted in various books do not paint a good picture...in fact, they point to some serious abilities to kick-start her vibrator....vroom...vroom...since we know her and Bill don't do "the nasty" very much, if ever.

I think the Clinton dynasty needs to end...just as the Bush dynasty needs to end. What is she doing in NY, anyway? She adopted it as a domicile. It's absurd...as absurd as it would have been for Giuliani to run for governor of Arkansas.

Frankly, whether Obama or Clinton gets the Dem. nomination, they stand a better chance of winning the presidency than whoever the Republican candidate is. Never mind the growing disdain for the Rs but just who the hell is Brownback? And I think there was another guy throwing his hat into the Republican ring, no idea who he is either.

Barack and Hillary have greater recognition than them, I think.

I just hope the 2008 race isn't made to be about racism (if Obama is nominated) or sexism (Hilary) among voters. Wishful thinking, I know.

That's a terrible comparison. You know better.

Voting or not voting for someone based solely on their name is ridiculous like you said. Gay people have very real and very good reasons not to vote for someone like GWB.

I know, I've been sick with a stomach thing so I really didn't want to try to do better, but you get the point. I was just trying to be topical, just make a play on the name.

And I agree with Fly's middle America comment. If "middle America" cannot get past a guy's name to see his politics then they've failed democracy.

Back to Hillary, if you dislike her because her liberal views disagree with your more conservative views, fine, thats actually making democracy work. If you dont want to vote for her because she's a woman, you're a neandrothal, if you dont want to vote for her because her husband got a bj from a fat chick, you're an asshat.

I just hope the 2008 race isn't made to be about racism (if Obama is nominated) or sexism (Hilary) among voters. Wishful thinking, I know.

It will be. People tend to be very "knee jerk" on this kind of stuff. And great chunks of this country are still very conservative.

Middle America voted the current President into office.

Middle America listens to and watches Sean Hannity.

Middle America is a waste of resources.

Oh, where art thou Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan. Help represent the other side of "middle America".

Hillary is a pretty middle of the road moderate. I think she's done better than most people expected, but she has a lot of baggage and is too polarizing, deservedly or not. And the left wing of the Democratic Party hates her stance on the Iraq war. She's not a particularly brilliant speaker, like her husband or Obama is. Obama's lack of experience will allow his competitors fewer things to attack, but he is also an unknown--what exactly are his views? Richardson and Vilsack are longshots. I like Kucinich, but he has zero chance. About Joe Biden, I just keep thinking about the plagiarism accusations the last time he ran.

On the Republican side, McCain has disappointed too many people, and he comes across as a sell-out now. Brownback is filling the void for the social conservatives, but he is too right-wing for middle America. Hagel is like an old-time Republican and is where the party should return to. I don't know enough about him, but I find him to be the most interesting so far. Giuliani is not someone the conservative base will support.