Hillary is sure she can win

Starting her first full week as a presidential contender, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton expressed confidence she can win the 2008 Democratic nomination.

Clinton, speaking publicly for the first time since declaring her candidacy on her Web site, said Sunday she decided to run after doing a “thorough review” of the challenges facing the country. She said she is the best candidate for the job and is eager to begin campaigning.

“It’ll be a great contest with a lot of talented people and I’m very confident. I’m in, I’m in it to win and that’s what I intend to do,” she said.

The former first lady was vying to be the first woman and first presidential spouse to win the White House. Polls show her leading a crowded field of Democratic candidates that includes Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, who hopes to become the first black president.

A Washington Post-ABC News poll released Sunday shows Clinton is the favorite of 41 percent of Democrats, more than double the support of any of her rivals.

Despite abundant strengths, Clinton remains a polarizing figure to many voters and faces questions about her ability to win a general election. Her position on the Iraq war — she voted to authorize the invasion in 2002 and has refused to call for a date-certain removal of troops — has alienated many Democratic activists, who vote heavily in primaries.

Howard Wolfson, a senior adviser to Clinton, conceded Monday that there were those who didn’t like her. But, he told CBS’ “The Early Show,” “For people who wonder whether Senator Clinton can win, we say Senator Clinton is already winning in the polls.”

Terry McAuliffe, a former Democratic Party chairman who has joined her campaign, said one of Clinton’s challenges is to get people to know her.

He also said he did not believe there was any concept such as Clinton fatique in the U.S. electorate.

“People look very fondly upon those eight years of the Clinton administration,” McAuliffe said on NBC’s “Today” program. He said that one advantage Clinton has over her Democratic rivals is that “She knows every world leader on a first-name basis, and that’s what we need … Americans want to know that their president can keep them safe.”

Clinton was scheduled to start a three-day series of Web chats with supporters Monday evening, and travels to Iowa, site of the first nominating caucuses, next weekend.

“I want to have a conversation with our citizens about what we want for our country,” Clinton said.

Clinton’s comments came during a visit to a Manhattan community health clinic, where she was promoting a federal children’s health-care program.

Clinton said she would introduce legislation to expand the Children’s Health Insurance Program to all families who need it, regardless of income. Aides said Clinton was determined to attend to her Senate duties throughout the campaign.

Reflecting her new status as a leading presidential contender, the room was packed with media — some two dozen television camera crews jockeyed for position with scores of reporters from as far away as Germany. Photographers waited outside in chilly temperatures for over an hour to snap pictures of Clinton’s arrival.

Clinton said she decided to run after talking to family, friends and supporters since her re-election in November.

“I concluded, based on the work of my lifetime and my experience and my understanding of what our country has to confront in order to continue to make opportunity available to all of our citizens here and to restore our leadership and respect of America around the world, that I would be able to do that — to bring our country together to meet those tough challenges,” she said.

Clinton and Obama are the most visible candidates in a field that includes the 2004 vice presidential nominee, John Edwards. Other candidates include Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd, former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack, and Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich. New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson jumped in Sunday; Delaware Sen. Joe Biden has said he is running and would formalize his decision soon.


Associated Press writer Karen Matthews contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2007 The Associated Press


  1. Sharon Haley

    If you are content with the wealthy elite continuing to run our country then vote for Hillary but before you do you might want to explore how much her husband being a member of the Bilderberg group ( since 1991 & she has attended meetings) has influenced her, and what deceptions will she allow to continue to be brought to bear on the American people. If you aren’t familiar with the Bilderbergs I suggest you get familiar. It seems also that quickly forgotton is Hillarys coziness with the republicans.
    As for Obama..When has he ever had a clear concise answer to a clearly put question? None that I’ve ever heard. Seems to me he is standing in the middle until he figures out which way the wind is blowing and tries to cover that with a lot of long winded talk that never clearly answers or defines his stand on anything.
    I’m tired of the corporate control, the bull, the lies, the deception, our people sent to fight and die, considered to be expendable by those too cowardly to fight their own fights for their greedy goals, and the global killing of innocents all for the greed of the few.
    The one who stands up and declares they won’t be bought, who has a record of working for the people against the wrong and will fight like hell to bring an end to it all, who has integrity, morality, honesty & truly cares about the least among us..that person will get my vote.
    To hell with the politicians, the posers. I want a real human being, a real American that personifies that one word.

  2. Ray


    This is a fine example of the influence peddled through the lawmakers in the form of cash or other favors and or threats.

    I am the fartherest thing from a Bigot or a antisemite and hold no prejudices for any of the human race. In the comment that was banned, I did use the J word, and it must have broken the sacred rule. Seems others have used the N word and others have used foul words, but never, never, say the J word unless it praises or supports, or excuses,those of self proclaimed highness and rightousness.

    I would wonder why one particular small element of the human species can hold itself above All Other elements of the species to the level that men are jailed for simply telling on them. You talk about arrogance.
    Doug, you know the workings of DC better than anyone. Who gives the most money to the politicians and who has the most influence by doing so? Who recieves the most foriegn aid per capita? Who has nuclear weapons and no permission to have them?

    Who has the US wrapped around thier little finger?

    Can’t say, might not be ah
    ah ah …correct politically……….

    It appears anti-semite is a fabricated catch-all term for anything that may portray something less than perfect ( fact or not ) about a certain (special) genre on the planet.

    Do the Seminole Native Americans have a connection with this semite thing?

    I have no picking order for the human species. Man is equal in all ways. And one of those ways is that we all have sin. Why some beleive they do not, and partake in slaughtering thier nieghbors while demanding that no one look or criticize the genocide, is beyond me.

    Bigot? Anti-human? Hardly!


  3. SEAL

    What we need to do is completely change the way people are elected to public office. I, for one, would support mandatory voting making it a class A misdomeanor to fail to vote absent justifiable reason. However, if we did that, there would have to be a category (e) [none of the above] giving the voter the option of rejecting all the candidates. Also, it would have to require the winner to receive more than 50% of the total voting public.

    Elections should be publically funded.

    If we were to do that it would drastically change the way candidates are selected and how the campaigns are run. I think it would improve our government.

  4. SEAL

    Excelent presentation Mr. Fox. Unfortunately we do not select and/or elect our presidents based upon credentials.

    Of all those presently in the hunt, I agree that, based upon record, performance, and public acceptability that Richaedson is far superior to any other candidate. But he has neither the amount of money nor the support of those democrats in the party that have large amouts of influence or power to win the nomination.

    In order to get the amount of money needed and the support of those “certain” power brokers in the party a candidate must sell out to certain corporate interests. That, of course, makes the candidate unacceptable to those of us who want a proper candidate.

    The general public bases their decision on personality and the image the advertizing experts create. In close races it is the most ruthless who wins.

    During my lifetime of 68 years I have been astounded by the continual stupidity of the democratic party when it comes to selecting candidates for president. Humphrey, Mondale, Stevenson, and Kerry are classic examples of men who had little or no chance. The thing that really bewilders me is situations like we had in the last election where all they had to do was give the nation a decent candidate to win.

    On top of their deplorable candidate selection they always fail to present their man as a strong courageous leader. They allow the opposition to cast them as weak and indecisive. The last election is the best example of that. Kennedy was the only exception but that was his doing and not the party’s.

    I have never understood how people capable of acheiving such high positions could be so stupid.


    Sorry to say, but Hillary, Obama, John Edwards, Kerry,
    et alia, seem like uninspiring recycled hacks (or in Obama’s case: great
    person,just inexperienced). To me, Bill Richardson running for President is
    far more interesting than any of the other announced candidates.

    I have been profoundly impressed with William Blaine Richardson III for 29 years. I first met him in 1978 when he worked for Senator George McGovern’s
    Foreign Relations Committee; he had a full beard as well as one of the most endearingly messy desks on Capitol Hill, a place notorious for clean desks.
    Take the time to read Richardson’s biography: Between Two Worlds: the Making of an American Life.

    At the onset, I clarify that my concerns are almost entirely international (for 3 years, I have been developing a UN Resolution for the UN General Assembly to create a new United Nations Undersecretary General for Nutrition and Consumer Protection.

    I recently proposed to Richardson that he and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-
    Moon should go to the Sudan to convince President Al-Bashir to end the genocide, and to hopefully bring a lasting Peace to Darfur by convincing President Al- Bashir to accept UN troops in Darfur.

    No other Presidential candidate even comes close to the level of international diplomatic experience and abilities evidenced by Bill Richardson.

    His lengthy international resume comprise a real breath of fresh air in
    USA’s politics, especially after the absurdities
    evidenced thus far by Bush/Cheney/Halliburton/Rumsfeld and the reign of
    corporate-manipulated klepto-plutocrats.

    Most critics would clearly point to the Pentagon’s budget and the Pentagon’s
    actions as proof of this systemic erosion of America’s good sense.

    However, this is equally evident in the malfunctioning of the Food and Drug Administration, which finally has a Commissioner, Andrew Von Eschenbach, M.D. The FDA still rushes through approval for harmful food additive chemicals at the request of multinational corporations, the health of
    Americans and the rest of the world be damned and ignored. The most egregious of these chemicals is aspartame, the neurotoxic artificial sweetener that is metabolized as methanol, formaldehyde, and
    diketopiperazine. Aspartame was forced through the FDA in 1981 by then-CEO of
    G.D. Searle, even though the Pentagon already considered Aspartame as a biochemical weapon, and even though the FDA, to its credit, had turned down the approval for Aspartame for 15 years, since its discovery in 1966.

    Richardson believes that the states must take back their powers in these
    realms, in order to protect the health of the citizens of each state. This is precisely what is about to occur in the New Mexico Legislature with legislation in both chambers to ban Aspartame, which Governor Richardson has quietly encouraged.

    In the larger international scheme of things, the average America, may have
    forgotten what diplomacy and non-military interventions in the processes of governments are all about, but I can assure you that none of the heads of state and world leaders in other nations have forgotten.

    The incontrovertible truth is that the USA direly needs an internationalist
    Democrat, if there will ever be any hope of rebuilding the USA’s
    international image and influence, in which we are rapidly losing traction
    to China, especially in Africa and in South America.

    How else will we be able to recover from the present
    Administration continuing to gouge the USA’s expenditures into more
    weapons, more troop deployment, more senseless grudge matches, and another
    $160 billion to waste in Iraq and in Afghanistan, regardless of how
    squandering more billions in Iraq and Afghanistan inexorably depletes America’s internal economies, the inner cities, the budgets for education, Universities, schools, social services, and research; and regardless of the loss of markets and esteem for the USA in Africa, Europe, Asia, and South America due to these depravities and depredations?

    Not long ago, Lech Walesa visited the Armand Hammer United World College of
    the American West in New Mexico. The Nobel Peace Laureate and former Polish
    President observed sadly that despite uncontested military powers, the USA has far less real political, economic, and moral power than we Americans perceived us as having two or three decades ago. He
    unequivocally blamed the present administration for accelerating this loss
    of political, economic, and moral power.

    However, I don’t really believe that the USA is doomed to suffer an
    inevitable descent into a lamentable status as a corporate-militarized
    police state/3rd world economy, glutted on more and more wasted expenditures for the corporate hogs feeding at the public trough; if such a descent were totally inevitable, it would be a waste of time and effort for anyone to even try to countermand it.

    Bill Richardson will help to bring about such a recovery through the course
    of the candidates’ dialogue, if given the chance he will get as a very viable presidential candidate. If he is edged out, strategists, pundits, and the other candidates will recognize that he will also make a great Vice Presidential candidate.
    In addition to his abilities, intellect, and great resume, one more reason is clearly that he will pull in a lot of Hispanic voters, and other minority voters, in all 50 states.

    New Mexicans have seen him in action as Governor for the past four years, and he was recently re-elected to a second term with the largest majority in New Mexico’s history, almost 70%!

    Richardson will never be one to perpetuate any international idiocy and unavoidable resultant decline, both internally and internationally. We should help him win by talking with our friends, family, and colleagues in other states, and in other nations….

    Podemos todavia esperar, que non? (We can always hope!)

    Stephen Fox
    505 983-2002
    Santa Fe, New Mexico