Actually, it really isn’t- most politicians would pay to have this kind of opposition:
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s support for the war in Iraq has outraged many liberal activists in the Democratic Party, who are warning of retribution, including a primary challenge to her re-election campaign next year.
Some liberal activists are angry over Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s stand on the Iraq war, and are supporting a 2006 primary challenger.
But the activists are in the same sort of political bind that liberals found themselves in a decade ago when Bill Clinton defied liberal orthodoxies: struggling to bring meaningful pressure to bear on a politician who is cherished by many traditional Democrats.
The frustration on the left toward Mrs. Clinton, the junior senator from New York, has been building for months, particularly as opinion has turned against the war and some Democrats in Congress have begun to pressure President Bush to begin a withdrawal of American troops.
Recently, the anger erupted into public view, with antiwar activists publicly protesting against the senator and, perhaps more significantly, an antiwar candidate emerging to challenge her in the Democratic primary next year.
That challenger, Jonathan Tasini, a longtime labor advocate, has the support of Cindy Sheehan, the antiwar protester who lost her son in the war and who camped for weeks outside Mr. Bush’s Texas ranch, demanding to meet with him. Mrs. Sheehan has been critical of Mrs. Clinton.
I can see how Clinton infuriates some on the hard left (hell- her video game crap and the support for flag-burning legislation annoys me to no end), but these kinds of attacks on Clinton only make her more palatable to the majority of the public.