Following up on Sha's thoughts, Kevin's post on Hillary caught my eye this morning as well but I don't think he gets it quite right. I agree to the extent that any Democratic candidate is going to suffer demonization from the wingers. The politics of polarization is all they know and it's worked for them. They're going to keep going with it no matter who the nominee is. But Kevin relies too much on the conventional beltway wisdom and if we could trust polls to tell the story, wouldn't Kerry have won? The exit polls showed him the victor and yet we ended up with four more dismal years of Bush.
Clinton Derangement Syndrome extends far beyond ordinary hate to the average Jake who isn't even all that interested in politics or particularly versed on issues. The mere mention of the name brings outs a rash of vitriolic comments about both Hill and Bill on blogs that don't even address politics. And beyond that, she doesn't exactly have a huge plurality of support among Democrats. If her numbers were running in the 60s among Dems, I'd agree we can ignore the CDS factor but they're not and we ignore the mood of the electorate at our peril.
The people on the street want change and the largest growing demographic is in Independent voters. I'm not so certain enough people will vote to trade one family dynasty for another. Maybe she can win, but winning by a few hundred thousand votes isn't going to heal what's ailing our country. We need a leader that can bring our people together, not one that's going to pound the wedge between us in more firmly.
Granted, the rightwing rage machine hates all Democrats, all liberals and the whole progressive agenda and I agree we shouldn't let them dictate our choices, but that works both ways. We shouldn't not vote for her because they hate her, but neither should we vote for her to prove we can't be bullied. That's just as short-sighted.