Honest Question For Dems

[Nym90]

Bill and Hillary want the Dem nominee to win, whomever that is. They probably would rather see someone other than Dean win the nomination, but they will support Dean if he does win, and if he wants their help they'll give it to him in the campaign. If they were so intent on stopping Dean they would've endorsed someone else.
The Clintons care about the country and their party more than their own personal ambitions. I know you don't agree, but my conclusion about this is just as obvious to me as yours is to you.

[Nym90]

She doesn't necessarily think Dems will lose, she's just saying that she might run in 2008 if there wasn't an incumbent Democrat.

[Nym90]

I completely disagree, and I'm not kidding. You must be the one who is kidding for thinking that the Clintons wouldn't put the party and the country ahead of their own political ambitions. The Clintons want a Democratic President to be elected in 2004. Sure, if the nomination is available in 2008 Hillary may well run for it, but she'd much rather have a Democrat elected in 2004, even Dean. It's absolutely absurd to suggest that the Clintons would deliberately try to get Dean defeated in 2004. There is no way that the Clintons want 4 more years of Bush.

I guess this shows why the nation was (and still is today) so divided during the Clinton years. People like me thought he was a great president, while others absolutely loathed him. And for both sides, their view of him was obviously and without question the correct one.

[Nym90]

Well, I laugh at the prospect that the Clintons care only about their own ambitions and would deliberately sabotage Dean in 2004, and want Dean to lose. They may not want Dean to win the nomination, that much I'll agree with, but they would prefer any of the serious Dem candidates to Bush.

I agree that I don't want this to be a flame war, but what would you conservatives say if I was on here saying the Bush family only cares about their own ambitions, they don't care about the GOP or the country at all, they deliberately sabotaged Dole's campaign in 1996 because they wanted him to lose so that W could run in 2000, W knew he couldn't win that year so they wanted Clinton to win, otherwise W would've had to wait until 2004.  You have to at least expect liberals to not let ridiculous charges like yours go unanswered.

And if Bush wins reelection they'll probably do it again in 2008, they'll know that Jeb can't run right away because it'll be too dynastic, so they'll deliberately sabotage the GOP nominee that year so that Jeb can run in 2012, they don't want someone like Frist to win because then Jeb would have to wait until 2016.
If I was as delusional as you are, that's the kind of stuff I'd be saying.

[Nym90]

It's interesting that you bring up the pardons, as Clinton was recently absolved of any wrongdoing in the Marc Rich pardons.
I agree that Bill would be more willing to compromise than Hillary, mainly because Bill is more moderate and thus more inclined to try to reach consensus with his opponents.
I'm not necessarily saying that my view of Clinton is the only correct one, but a lot of Republicans just take it as a fact that the Clintons are corrupt and power hungry and will destroy anyone in their path to get whatever they want, including fellow Dems. To me, the exact opposite is plainly obvious, that the Clintons are both extremely caring individuals who rose up from the bottom ranks on their own sweat and toil and thus have a genuine appreciation for the problems and concerns of ordinary folk, unlike most other politicians. I personally have great admiration for the fact that Bill Clinton was more or less just a regular kid in rural Arkansas, with a bad family life, lost his father before he was even born, had an abusive step father, and then rose from that situation in a middle class family with humble roots to become President of the United States. It truly is the American dream come true.