OK, so if I am responding to Mr. Spud and Karen M (as opposed to the excellent notreadytomakenice), I would have to say that your arguments, while vehement, aren't sound.

"Impatient, I find it rather hilarious/irrational/infuriating that you claim to be a big fan of Bill Clinton's and at the same time you see Hillary as some kind of wicked worse-than-republican wolf in sheep's clothing. Dude! Show me where thier policies are different! I hate to say it guys, but I think you've all been HAD by the vast right-wing conspiracy."

I don't see their policies as being different at all! I never said anything to the contrary. Bill is every bit as much a centrist as Hilary is, and every bit as much a political animal willing to sell out every ethical urge he ever had to gain access to political power. The difference between them is that Bill comes off as a "man of the people"---warm, likeable, feels their pain. Hilary doesn't come off that way at all. But that is all image and I don't think ANY of us is advocating that Bill be back in office, even if only as Mr. Congeniality. Furthermore, I pointed out that Bill's policies actually seemed to enable the "election" of Dubya. The last thing in the world we can afford is something like THAT again. What we are saying is hardly commensurate with being conned by 'the vast right wing conspiracy'. In fact if anything, I wonder what the vast right wing conspiracy thinks of Hilary THESE days. And vice versa. From what I can tell, they seem to have made up.

Now as to Karen M, who said

"But as for Hillary-- I didn't expect to be defending her, but here goes. I will admit that she's not my first choice (Dodd is), but-- Good Grief!-- folks, do you really want another Republican installing more justices on the Supreme Court? I can't believe that it is still necessary to make that argument, after six years of GOP (same as Dems? NOT!!!). However centrist Hillary might be, I honestly don't believe that she would continue to stack the court with the same sort of justices that Bush has chosen... and that the other GOP candidates would likely continue with. It's not just about abortion, either, but our civil rights, and the rights that should be due to individuals when they are opposed by corporations."

Yes, I think we all get that---- about the issues and how important this election is going to be and repeatedly we've said people here have said they would vote for Hilary if it comes to that, as NO ONE wants to enable another Republican to win. We all get that.

BUT we are not yet in the primaries and this is where we determine the quality of who that candidate will be. This is where John Kerry got chosen---exactly the man Bush WANTED to run against. A man who was arrogant and treated staffers badly, and a man who came off as elitist and the exact opposite of a Texas Good ol boy man of the people. If we had been able to see THEN what the election strategy of the other side was, we might have been able to avoid the debacle of 2004 (no matter HOW much Rove put the fix in). THAT is why we have to discuss issues like Hilary's likeability and electability and even though we ALL know a number of women who are thrilled that Hilary is running and that they will have the opportunity to cast a vote for her, that doesn't mean ENOUGH of them feel that way about her. Others have pointed out that no other candidate is able to inspire such strong emotions in reaction to their candidacy, with Hilary solidifying the opposition and unifying only a small faction in favor of her candidacy.

It seems to me that if they republicans are CHOOSING their opposition, Hilary looks pretty damned good to them, and that is something we ought to be aware of. So that we do NOT get saddled with a Supreme Court who will decide that Corporate America is sacrosanct and that women are second class citizens and that the executive branch really does get to do whatever it damned well pleases for the rest of all time.

It has to go beyond whether or not she is smart, and beyond that she is a woman. It has to be who can win and still be great.

The Nobel Prize announcements are coming up in a week or so. If Al Gore wins the Noel Peace Prize for the Global Warming work, he not only gains an incredible "endorsement" of the world, and gives us a little credibility back, but he also gains a graceful way to enter the race after all this time claiming he had no interest in running. I am hoping for that. If it DOESN'T happen, I will be hoping John Edwards wins, but failing that, I will settle for any Democrat.

Surely, you must know that pretty much all of the American electorate feels that way. Everyone understands what the stakes are.