Comments: Had enough?

"The name shouldn't be Clinton." -- What? Not even Bill?
I mean, don't you agree that our fractured base will turn out for him more solidly than for any of our other self-appointed/self-promoted "leaders"? And don't you think that the swift-boating/gloating attacks that BC would get from Machine Right will be no worse -- and maybe less punishing -- than whatever The Other Clinton will be in for? And as for the duh-factor Social Right, who are they more likely to accept, a man who has sinned and been punished, or . . .?

Posted by Zuck at March 30, 2006 08:33 AM

The one thing Clinton has going for him is that, in the public's perception, he didn't cave in to the Republicans. So, on that front, I agree that he's going to be able to tap into more support than any of our current candidates.

However, on the same note, all another candidate has to do is to stand up and tell the truth, and sound intelligent enough to help us fix the mess the Rightwingnuts have gotten us into, and (s)he should be able to tap into the same enthusiasm.

On our part ("us" being the alert and interested Left at the moment), what we have to do is to keep our eyes open for said SwiftBoating tactics and counter them immediately and with a volume that even the MSM can't ignore.

(This, of course, will mean things that most of the otherwise "vocal" world o'blog rarely does, like taking an actual piece of paper and writing an actual letter to an editor, but we're about to find that point where the rubber meets the road, so to speak. As much fun as it might be to sit in front of our keyboards and post complaints on the internet, people have ot realize that it's getting off the 'net and interacting with the physical world that's going to make each individual contribution count most.)

Posted by Anne at March 30, 2006 09:04 AM