She’s in

Me three. I actually had some money on it.Silly me.I don’t agree with tony above – I am far from sure she would lose a general election. But now we have to brave the coming sh*t-storm, not from the right-wing nutcases, but from the so-called liberal media, led by the New York Times.

I think if it were 2012, she would have a chance at winning. But most of her b.s. is still too fresh in the people’s minds for her to win: The Career’s Bill, her gun control obsession, her secret health care hearings, the pharma stuff, the commodities scandal, defending her husband’s reckless behavior and not having him neutered back when he allegedly raped Juanita Brodderick, etc. Sure, Kerry was an awful nominee and an awful candidate, in general, and almost won. A speculator could easily say that the Dems only have to hold what Kerry got and win one more big state. But where? Where does Hilary win where Kerry and Gore – less divisive figures – couldn’t? The opposition lied about Kerry’s military record and was able to con people into not voting for him. Granted, his less than forceful defense of himself didn’t help matters. Neither did the windsurfing or yelling at Secret Service officers while skiing in Vail. But if Hilary is the nominee, they won’t have to lie about much. It’s already out there, like low hanging fruit, ripe for the pickins’ … She is just too divisive an individual to win a general election.

I got a call Saturday morning from the John Kerry exploratory committee (or at least, someone claiming to be phoning on behalf of such).

Hillary the candidate to beat – if anyone can. With her fundraiser-in-chief husband Hillary maybe able to raise in excess of 200 million dollars in the next year and a half.The war will be the central issue defining next years presidential election, and every other issue will be a distant second except for possibly economics issues if the US goes in recession.Obama will not be a factor next year. He has too many negatives that the Clintons can rubbed his face in. He has too Muslim family connections; too inexperienced; too experienced with cocaine; too experienced smoking cigarettes; and he has been too revealing about himself. The Clintons have 20/20 vision of the campaign trial and Barack Obama is going to get the political lesson of his life the next several months.The Clintons also have a way of reinventing themselves and 2007 and 2008 will the year of the extreme makeover. Hillary is much more pleasant and assuming now than she was in 1992 and 1993. She is almost a different person from 15 years ago.However, I have to admit that I cannot wait for the day when neither a Bush or Clinton is not on the ballot. American politics version of tag team wrestling -the Bushes and Clintons – is getting old. It is time for something new!Danny L. McDanielLafayette, Indiana

Don’t forget Dennis Kucinich in the list of Dem candidates. I think he’ll win almost as many states as Dodd.

It will be great fun seeing whose speeches Biden cribs from this time around.

Jon Keller, ‘hardly a Kerry fan’ ??Pu-leeeeeeeeeze.I laugh out loud every time I read or hear him tut-tut about the lack of civility among the ‘Clinton haters’ and the ‘Bush haters.’ His obsession with Kerry (of whom I am no big supporter), and his eagerness to pass off his anti-Kerry bias as straight reporting, is painfully obvious. As for Hillary, there are several other Dems I’d prefer – Clark, Edwards, Obama, Richardson, Brian Schweitzer – but compared to the freak show the GOP seems to be putting together, she’s positively presidential.

The guy not to rule out if Gore.