L E T T E R S
November 30, 2007
Never have I thought Senator Hillary Clinton would get the Democrat nomination then voted in as president of the United States.
Why? Well first off I happen to believe my neighbors are a pretty darn smart. When we get all the facts, more often than not...we make swell decisions.
Secondly, over the past year I found two people (This is true.) out of hundreds, ranging from far left to far right and all those in-between, who said they’d vote for her.
My grocery store polls have never come close - ever - to those expensive froo, froo polls.
What her alleged nomination/presidency has been instead, was an extraordinary execution of psychological warfare. The back room artists in want of Hillary, exercised great artistry painting her in the White House as though it were a done deal.
Their goal was to plant the idea that she was already there, and that all we had left to do was to give up, give in, and hand them their desired results.
Their stealth game had encapsulated us in a tomb of doom.
But only temporarily.
A little heavy handed, they hammered too hard and smacked a big crack in that tomb by assuming men, women, Democrats,
Republicans are stupid.
We’re not.
We found that crack, and by Spring we’ll bust out all over!
And that, my smart neighbors, is when the real race will begin.
Roni Bell Sylvester
P.O. Box 155
La Salle, CO 80645
970-284-6874
ps. See the following article.
News Alert from Newsmax.com
Mort Kondracke: Hillary CAN Lose Nomination
Hillary Clinton's prospects of capturing the Democratic Party's presidential nomination and going on to take the White House are "a lot less certain" than they used to be, a top political journalist says.
Noting that while Clinton would almost certainly be her party's nominee should she win the Iowa caucuses January 3, Mort Kondracke, executive editor of Capitol Hill's influential "Roll Call," wrote that it is now easy to see her losing that crucial first primary contest.
Moreover, he predicts "if she finishes third or significantly trails as No. 2 - especially behind Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) - it could set off a cascade that causes her to lose New Hampshire and then the nomination."
1. According to the longtime Washington correspondent, polls "suggest that Clinton has built up lots of firewalls in states after New Hampshire, where she currently leads by 13 points. She leads in Michigan (Jan. 15) and Nevada (Jan. 19) by more than 20 points, according to RealClearPolitics.com averages, South Carolina (Jan. 26) by 12 points and Florida (Jan. 29) by 26 points."
He adds, "In Feb. 5 [so-called Tsunami Tuesday] states like California, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, her leads are close to 30 points."
But all of that would be meaningless, Kondracke explains, if defeats in Iowa and New Hampshire "burn through the those firewalls and re-create the dynamic of 1984, where the establishment candidate, former Vice President Walter Mondale, almost lost the nomination to fresh-face challenger Sen. Gary Hart (Colo.)."
Polls in Iowa he writes, now indicate that Clinton is in deep trouble. "The topline ABC/Washington Post poll results showing Obama with 30 percent, Clinton with 26 percent and former Sen. John Edwards (N.C.) with 22 mean less than other factors."
For example, the ABC/Washington Post poll indicates that among Iowa Democrats, Clinton's points of advantage - "strength and experience" — are far less important than Obama's "new direction and new ideas" by a margin of more than 20 percent.
Obama, he observes, "is more likely to defeat Clinton for the nomination — especially if an Iowa victory makes him the top story of the night and excites Independents in New Hampshire to vote in the Democratic primary."
© 2007 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
You are right on the money with your observation that Hillary is not a done deal for the Presidency.
There will be a real horse race.
If this economy plunges into recession as many of the economists predict, all bets are off. People really vote according to their pocket books. If their personal finances are in jeopardy then they will be looking to lynch the politicos.
2008 should prove to be a fascinating year.
M. S. Hollis
How can you vote for a woman who can't even keep her husband from constantly cheating on her? If She can not stand up to her husband and confront him with his cheating, how can you expect her to stand up to the rest of the bullies in the world that want to destroy everything America stands for?"Mark Eddington
I am so glad that you are not going to vote for Hillary!
Since she is so blind to her husbands faults, anybody, anywhere could pull the wool over her eyes, tell her anything and she will believe it.
Let us pray that everyone else can see her as she really is. A pushy self interested woman who only cares to see how far she can push herself up the ladder of respectiblity. She makes everyone I know just sick to see or hear her voice. I really can not see her in the white house, except as a parlor maid cleaning up after Bills wild antics with other women. Because that is all she has ever done since she met the man. She has plenty of experience in that dept.
And in the end I can not see the American male voting for a woman whose voice reminds them of the ex-wife demanding the latest installment in her alimony and child support check.
With that statement I shall close this email with the thought that "heaven help us if Hillary R. Clinton is elected our to be our president". If the rest of the world thinks we are "bonkers" for electing G.W.B what will they think of us if we are hoodwinked into electing a woman who has no respect for herself? How can she have any respect for herself if she allows her husband to walk all over her just so that she can achieve her obsession of becoming the first woman president of the United States?
One more comment: She is trying to market herself as another "Margaret Thacher, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. Her "baby bond scheme" was taken directly from Tony Blair's "think tank Policy group."
Since I had lived in the United Kingdom during his term in office I was able to see exactly how he operated on a day to day base. Every decision he made was the result of his "think tanks" latest opinions. Those opinions where based on what the latest polls indicated that the electorate would respond to.
Every candidate starts running for re-election the moment that are elected to office they are constantly trying to placid their electorate by responding to the latest opinion polls. I should add with the exception of George W. Bush. He does not base any of his decisions on the latest opinion polls. He takes the longer view of making his decision on how those decisions he makes today for our country will effect our country in the future.
With warm regards for all the hard work that you do Roni in alerting the rest of us to what is going on in your world I remain respectively yours,
Colleen Walsh