HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Bill Clinton stirs talk o...

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 08:46 PM

Bill Clinton stirs talk of possible Hillary Clinton presidential bid in 2016

Source: The Guardian

The 2012 election may be far from decided, but on Sunday all the speculation centered on the 2016 race, and whether a certain household Democrat name might once again feature on the ballot paper.

The prospect of a Hillary Clinton run for the White House gained momentum when Bill Clinton offered the broadest hint yet that she might go for it.

Hillary Clinton is due to stand down soon as secretary of state, probably in January, and take at least six months out to write her memoirs about her time in office. After that, she will make up mind whether she will run, according to the Clinton camp.

Aged 64, she is still young enough for a bid in 2016 and is, at present, ahead of any of her rivals in terms of standing and popularity inside the party. She retains a driving desire to become the first female president.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/23/bill-clinton-hillary-presidential-2016?newsfeed=true

162 replies, 26636 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 162 replies Author Time Post
Reply Bill Clinton stirs talk of possible Hillary Clinton presidential bid in 2016 (Original post)
IDemo Sep 2012 OP
Laurajr Sep 2012 #1
bluestateguy Sep 2012 #2
get the red out Sep 2012 #3
L0oniX Sep 2012 #4
littlemissmartypants Sep 2012 #38
Auntie Bush Sep 2012 #5
nolabear Sep 2012 #6
4lbs Sep 2012 #7
antigop Sep 2012 #8
antigop Sep 2012 #12
graham4anything Sep 2012 #20
antigop Sep 2012 #23
graham4anything Sep 2012 #41
antigop Sep 2012 #44
antigop Sep 2012 #46
antigop Sep 2012 #47
liberalmuse Sep 2012 #52
antigop Sep 2012 #59
Politicalboi Sep 2012 #126
graham4anything Sep 2012 #55
antigop Sep 2012 #57
graham4anything Sep 2012 #76
antigop Sep 2012 #78
graham4anything Sep 2012 #88
antigop Sep 2012 #89
antigop Sep 2012 #91
OhioChick Sep 2012 #120
OhioChick Sep 2012 #121
antigop Sep 2012 #92
antigop Sep 2012 #93
antigop Sep 2012 #97
OhioChick Sep 2012 #122
ChromeFoundry Sep 2012 #123
antigop Sep 2012 #124
graham4anything Sep 2012 #134
antigop Sep 2012 #138
graham4anything Sep 2012 #148
antigop Sep 2012 #149
antigop Sep 2012 #150
antigop Sep 2012 #152
antigop Sep 2012 #139
antigop Sep 2012 #142
antigop Sep 2012 #140
antigop Sep 2012 #128
antigop Sep 2012 #141
colorado_ufo Sep 2012 #61
antigop Sep 2012 #62
Freddie Sep 2012 #9
antigop Sep 2012 #10
roguevalley Sep 2012 #22
skeewee08 Sep 2012 #11
McCamy Taylor Sep 2012 #13
nobodyspecial Sep 2012 #14
Lint Head Sep 2012 #15
Ter Sep 2012 #16
former9thward Sep 2012 #17
Lint Head Sep 2012 #18
PoliticAverse Sep 2012 #33
former9thward Sep 2012 #56
markpkessinger Sep 2012 #104
former9thward Sep 2012 #111
Ter Sep 2012 #125
former9thward Sep 2012 #127
Ter Sep 2012 #145
former9thward Sep 2012 #147
Ter Sep 2012 #154
former9thward Sep 2012 #157
Ter Sep 2012 #162
graham4anything Sep 2012 #19
bevb Sep 2012 #146
davidpdx Sep 2012 #21
randome Sep 2012 #25
Mojorabbit Sep 2012 #30
adigal Sep 2012 #68
Mojorabbit Sep 2012 #102
Beacool Sep 2012 #34
littlemissmartypants Sep 2012 #39
randome Sep 2012 #43
obamanut2012 Sep 2012 #49
Jennicut Sep 2012 #66
Beacool Sep 2012 #71
Jennicut Sep 2012 #75
Beacool Sep 2012 #110
LanternWaste Sep 2012 #72
randome Sep 2012 #74
LanternWaste Sep 2012 #83
davidpdx Sep 2012 #40
obamanut2012 Sep 2012 #48
randome Sep 2012 #54
Drunken Irishman Sep 2012 #106
randome Sep 2012 #107
Beacool Sep 2012 #113
randome Sep 2012 #114
Beacool Sep 2012 #115
Cosmocat Sep 2012 #69
davidpdx Sep 2012 #130
Cosmocat Sep 2012 #131
randome Sep 2012 #132
Cosmocat Sep 2012 #137
davidpdx Sep 2012 #133
Cosmocat Sep 2012 #136
davidpdx Sep 2012 #144
antigop Sep 2012 #151
antigop Sep 2012 #143
davidpdx Sep 2012 #155
antigop Sep 2012 #24
obamanut2012 Sep 2012 #50
antigop Sep 2012 #51
obamanut2012 Sep 2012 #53
antigop Sep 2012 #60
LanternWaste Sep 2012 #73
antigop Sep 2012 #77
antigop Sep 2012 #79
randome Sep 2012 #80
antigop Sep 2012 #82
antigop Sep 2012 #84
LanternWaste Sep 2012 #86
antigop Sep 2012 #95
antigop Sep 2012 #96
antigop Sep 2012 #98
randome Sep 2012 #99
antigop Sep 2012 #100
antigop Sep 2012 #81
R. Daneel Olivaw Sep 2012 #26
antigop Sep 2012 #27
R. Daneel Olivaw Sep 2012 #28
Volaris Sep 2012 #29
R. Daneel Olivaw Sep 2012 #63
OverBurn Sep 2012 #31
Mkap Sep 2012 #32
Beacool Sep 2012 #65
randome Sep 2012 #67
truthisfreedom Sep 2012 #35
Beacool Sep 2012 #36
gopiscrap Sep 2012 #37
Franker65 Sep 2012 #42
antigop Sep 2012 #45
Remmah2 Sep 2012 #58
phleshdef Sep 2012 #64
MrsBrady Sep 2012 #70
Ash_F Sep 2012 #85
Blue_Tires Sep 2012 #87
windowpilot Sep 2012 #90
cpwm17 Sep 2012 #109
DerelictDeminGA Sep 2012 #94
samsingh Sep 2012 #101
maxsolomon Sep 2012 #103
graham4anything Sep 2012 #116
maxsolomon Sep 2012 #117
graham4anything Sep 2012 #118
maxsolomon Sep 2012 #156
davidpdx Sep 2012 #158
graham4anything Sep 2012 #159
davidpdx Sep 2012 #160
olddad56 Sep 2012 #105
Dems to Win Sep 2012 #108
randome Sep 2012 #112
NYC Liberal Sep 2012 #119
DonCoquixote Sep 2012 #129
graham4anything Sep 2012 #135
HockeyMom Sep 2012 #153
JoFerret Sep 2012 #161

Response to IDemo (Original post)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 08:48 PM

1. That would be awesome

I think a lot of people like her more than they did 4 years ago...she has done a great job as sec of state

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 08:49 PM

2. I sure hope so

She towers over any other candidate of either party.

If she runs, name the time and place and I'll show up to help.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 08:50 PM

3. Sounds like a plan!

Fine by me!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 08:52 PM

4. LOL ...that will kill off what's left of the angry old racist misogynist white guys for sure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #4)


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 08:53 PM

5. That would be a dream come true. When she dropped out in 2008

I thought I'd never live to see a woman president...now maybe I will.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Auntie Bush (Reply #5)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 08:58 PM

6. You and me both, Auntie Bush. All us older(ish) women should write and beg.

I would be so happy.

(On edit) And Limbaugh would just shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 09:01 PM

7. I would like that.

Imagine TWO two-term POTUS' stumping for her: Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 09:04 PM

8. Elizabeth Warren 2016! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #8)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 09:11 PM

12. Elizabeth hasn't sold out American workers -- Hillary has sold them out n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #8)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 10:38 PM

20. If (and that is a big if) she wins the senate, she needs to stay there

 

not be a stepping stone

If only she would announce to the Mass. people she will promise to stay the full 6 years she would gain 3 to 10 points and seal the deal.
Those looking for her to move up more are sabatoging her, making me question whether they are Warren fans at all, or maybe want Scott to win.
because she is nothing if she don't win the senate, and real dems need her to stay in the senate and lead like Teddy did once he gave up his hope to be president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #20)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 10:54 PM

23. Nope, Elizabeth 2016 -- not Hillary. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #23)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 06:13 AM

41. Stop sabatoging Warren's senate hopes...(if you actually value her as an asset to the party)

 

because talk like that is sabatoging her campaign, and is the #1 reason she and the cosmo guy are tied and she can't break into a substantial lead.

Only an egotist would want her to win,(which she has NOT yet done), then give up the seat,(she has NOT yet won), and then allow Brown to just re-take it, makes no sense. She really needs to make that speech promising to serve the entire 6 year term(and run for reelection).
(I do ASSUME you want the dems to rule the senate from the left, no???(never assume though because if one assumes...)

Do you know politics and history?

(let alone Warren has actually no real accomplishments to run a nationwide campaign on that Barack Obama didn't give her, and he would back Hillary most likely which means all of Obama's fans would vote for who Obama would back (and the democrat needs THOSE voters like me to vote to win an election.) That was proven in both 2008 and 2012 and it was proven otherwise in 2010.

Warren has about as much chance getting the nomination as say Kucinich (or the fraudsters Edwards/Ron Paul)ever did.(zero).(Kucinich great person,great vision, but nominee? Yeah, sure.Like Eugene McCarthy won the nomination)

(let alone after Herr Mittens loses, most likely neither party will ever nominate (for president) someone from Mass again, after recent history, Dukakis, Kerry, Tsongis, Herr Mittens and sad to say Teddy, etc. all failed.) Vice president, perhaps.

(Its like baseball, while I am a NY Met fan, any person can plainly see the Yankees crush the Red Sox time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time again.(except what, once out of 26?)

We do agree though it will be a woman 45, and better be a democrat.

but i predict there won't even be much of a primary for democrats. It will be more 2012 than 2008. Because democrats have learned what they f''ked up in 1968(when LBJ should easily have been the nominee and would have defeated Nixon) and 1980(the one and only time Teddy never should have run, any other election(1972,7,84,88,92,96)but not 1980.
And winners do what losers won't, and dems now like winning.

(Now if only the NY Jets realized that -You go with Mark Sanchez and not with a loser like egotist Tebow).

I would not mind a Hillary/Warren ticket, but Hillary /Patrick or Hillary/Castro is more likely.(though I would prefer Patrick joining SCOTUS, Castro becoming Texas Gov, Warren becoming majority leader).

Warren also has that same problem Andrew (the lesser) Cuomo has in NY. Neither are the #1 favorite from the state for a national ticket. (Patrick is in Mass, Hillary/Bill in NY)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #41)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 09:00 AM

44. I'm not sabotaging Warren's campaign ---LOL

Sounds like someone doesn't want people supporting Elizabeth for Prez and is trying to shut down her support.

ELIZABETH 2016.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #41)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 09:11 AM

46. the saboteurs are the ones who keep bringing up this Hillary nonsense before we even win in 2012.

I didn't bring it up. The OP did. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #41)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 09:37 AM

47. instead of attacking me, how about addressing DLC Hillary's statements on outsourcing? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #47)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 09:45 AM

52. It's funny...

I remember your handle because I always see you attacking someone on DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberalmuse (Reply #52)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 10:46 AM

59. it's funny how Hillary supporters won't address HER OWN WORDS on outsourcing N/T

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #59)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 09:55 PM

126. This one is my favorite



But if she ran in 2016, I would vote for her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #47)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 10:36 AM

55. democrats winning is the only thing I care about, Mitt & any repub will not get you what u want

 

you go with the single strongest candidate of the year
not these little wedge issues to divide the dems

long before MY President Obama used the word forward, I have used that term

and also 10% of something is better than 100% of nothing

2 steps forward 1 step back=1 step forward

shooting for the moon and getting zero is meaningless

the fringes shout, but don't achieve

Health care success achieved for first time in 50 years
LBJ signed the acts that others only talked about LBJ did it
yet fools in the party tore LBJ down when he would have destroyed Nixon

what does that gain the Dems? NOTHING but a loss in 1968 and 1980

(not to mention Bobby could have won in 1972 and 1976 AFTER LBJ finished his 10 years.

learn from history

and remember the republicans will not get any REAL DEMOCRAT anything that they want.
It takes a democrat president to do so.

if you wish to talk outsourcing or any wedge issue, start a new thread on that.

This is a Hillary 2016 thread.

If you value Elizabeth Warren, work for her senate election and the easiest way for her to gain 3 to 10 points is to pledge to DO THE DAMN JOB SHE IS RUNNING FOR and not to have her
supposed fans push her to cut and run, which will lead to Brown coming back (which is why John Kerry also needs to remain in the senate.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #55)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 10:41 AM

57. still haven't addressed Hillary's OWN words on outsourcing, have you?If this is a Hillary 2016

thread, why don't you address her OWN words on this important issue?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #57)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:10 PM

76. you won't get it, but

 

while this is important to you, it is not for me.

it is a trivial wedge issue and when push comes to shove, a person with a record will do both good and not so good stuff as it warrants

for all of Dennis Kucinich's fans talks(and there were lots of them), push came to shove, Kucinich backed 100% Obama. end of story

(that is a correlation you can interpret to Warren.)

(and Warren is 100% on Obama's side which means if he 100% supports Hillary, other's won't run anyhow).

And btw, no one is attacking you, i am generally and have in a bunch of posts said those that value Warren should want her to win the senate seat. (and then keep it).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #76)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:13 PM

78. outsourcing is NOT A TRIVIAL WEDGE ISSUE to the thousands of workers who have lost their jobs.

That's why Hillary has a problem for 2016.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #78)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:28 PM

88. the workers here need to be RETRAINED for new jobs(more education)

 

the old jobs are never coming back

this is 2012 not 1850s

We need more education and retraining.
(and outsourcing is a code word anyhow, meaning all things to all people.)

We need more balanced formula, which some increased in taxes on imports could do (once we get out of office all republicanteapartylibertarians)

and as 2016 is shaping up Jeb vs. Hillary, the player to keep in mind is Jeb.
A Clinton already beat a Bush. A Clinton knows how to do it. And with the backing of 2 time winner Obama, victory will be assured.

BTW-Hillary when she ran for NY Senate, was never in danger of losing her first race. Warren is still tied or only a point or two ahead.

FOCUS ON HER SENATE SEAT- THE DEMS NEED IT TO BE DEMOCRAT SEAT AND TO STAY DEMOCRAT and have a great liberal voice leading the senate.
As Teddy proved, there is no shame in being a great senator. Stop acting like it is.

Hillary as President, Warren as Majority leader, what would sound better than that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #88)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:32 PM

89. I'm sorry you won't get it...but training doesn't matter if they keep outsourcing jobs. nt

<edit> took caps off

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #88)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:34 PM

91. there are plenty of engineers and IT people who have lost their jobs to outsourcing

They don't need any more training. They are highly trained.


ELIZABETH 2016 -- not Hillary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #91)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 09:01 PM

120. I wholeheartedly agree with you..

Whoever said that outsourcing was a "wedge issue" is clueless. It's killing US workers, literally.

Unions Press Clinton on Outsourcing Of U.S. Jobs

When Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton flew to New Delhi to meet with Indian business leaders in 2005, she offered a blunt assessment of the loss of American jobs across the Pacific. "There is no way to legislate against reality," she declared. "Outsourcing will continue. . . . We are not against all outsourcing; we are not in favor of putting up fences."

Two years later, as a Democratic presidential hopeful, Clinton struck a different tone when she told students in New Hampshire that she hated "seeing U.S. telemarketing jobs done in remote locations far, far from our shores."

The two speeches delivered continents apart highlight the delicate balance the senator from New York, a dedicated free-trader, is seeking to maintain as she courts two competing constituencies: wealthy Indian immigrants who have pledged to donate and raise as much as $5 million for her 2008 campaign and powerful American labor unions that are crucial to any Democratic primary victory.

Despite aggressive courtship by Democratic candidates, major unions such as the AFL-CIO, the Teamsters and the Service Employees International Union have withheld their endorsements as they scrutinize the candidates' records and solicit views on a variety of issues.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/07/AR2007090702780.html

Obama camp attacks Hillary's Indian links

The D-Punjab reference apparently refers to a joke Senator Clinton made last year, at a fund-raiser hosted by New York-based hotelier and top Democratic fund-raiser Sant Singh Chatwal. 'I can certainly run for the Senate seat in Punjab and win easily,' she had said on that occasion.

The document references the Clintons' recently released financial disclosure forms, to underline former President Bill Clinton's acceptance of $300,000 for paid speeches from Cisco Systems, a company that, the document notes, has 'shifted hundreds of jobs from America to India.'

It further says Hillary Clinton accepted almost $60,000 in contributions from employees of Cisco Systems, 'which laid off American workers to hire Indian techies.'

The document points out that Clinton 'invested tens of thousands' in an Indian bill payment company -- a reference to the former president's disclosure form that lists between $15,001 and $50,000 worth of stock in Easy Bill Limited, an Indian company.

Much more: http://www.rediff.com/news/2007/jun/15clinton.htm

Hillary Clinton reaffirms support for more H-1B visas



Those are only a sampling of articles on a quick Google search.
Hillary is pro-outsourcing/offshoring & pro-H-1B.
This would be a nightmare for the already struggling (what's left of it) Middle Class of America.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #88)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 09:14 PM

121. What are these "new jobs" you speak of?

I'm sorry, but the US already has a plethora of highly trained people in many fields who are unemployed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #76)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:36 PM

92. but thanks for the kick so more people can read HER OWN WORDS ON OUTSOURCING n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #76)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:38 PM

93. outsourcing is a big issue.. former BAIN workers on the agenda at dem convention

Outsourcing is NOT A TRIVIAL WEDGE ISSUE.

Former Employees of Companies Controlled by Bain Capital Speak at DNC

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #76)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:54 PM

97. Obama campaign thinks it's a big enough issue to run ads against Romney's outsourcing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #97)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 09:16 PM

122. And Obama is running those ads here in Ohio because it's NOT a wedge issue

To a majority of Ohioans, it's the only issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #76)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 09:16 PM

123. Really?!?!

Outsourcing: "it is a trivial wedge issue"


How clueless does one need to be to make a statement like that? I mean, really?!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChromeFoundry (Reply #123)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 09:31 PM

124. sad, isn't it? to call outsourcing a "trivial wedge issue"?

The Hillary supporters can't defend her statements on outsourcing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #124)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 07:39 AM

134. I am sorry you don't think a human being living in China is equal to a person in the US

 

a democrat should care about ALL world people

we are the world, the world is us

we work with the world, working for all people as one

trivial political dividers end on election day

2016 is 4 years away, and sure, there will be other stupid issues trying to divide

meanwhile, ah, how does Elizabeth Warren whom you are groupieing for, on any part of this issue as she has no track record, only a president does.(or the extremists on each side freaks like Ron Paul on the right who doesn't believe in woman's rights, or minority American rights, and anarchist lefty's or righty's, who want to tear everything down. For that matter how will Jeb Bush do things the way you want?

the choice is simple.

Jeb or Hillary. If you tear Hillary down, you are supporting the Bush family.
choice is yours(if you are a democrat).
republicans choice is bad to worse and they hate foreigners.

me, I support ALL earthlings in ALL countries. selfish is to think the US is better than anyone else. Sorry, we are all one.

BTW, I side with minorities, because as a whole, minorities have a worse unemployment than anyone else, yet minorities don't tend to whine, they just work harder and make ends meet.


whining about outsourcing is a political football good for soundbytes.
day after election its the whiners (not minorities) that are still whining
everyone else is working and sweating.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #134)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 09:12 AM

138. I'm sorry if you and Hillary don't support American workers

Right now I'll take Elizabeth over Hillary.

ELIZABETH 2016!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #138)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 02:34 PM

148. A strong world economy= a strong US economy. We are all one

 

sorry you are dividing people and seemingly putting down the Chinese people.

Tax them but don't shun them. After all, we need them more than they need us

and sorry you dont want the democrats to win the senate.

sad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #148)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 02:43 PM

149. Americans with decent jobs = strong US economy...sorry if that is lost on you and Hillary n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #148)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 02:44 PM

150. but keep it up...Obama campaign is running ads against Romney's outsourcing....

you haven't answered that, have you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #148)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 02:48 PM

152. thanks for the kick again....n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #134)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 09:14 AM

139. If outsourcing is a "trivial wedge issue", why is Obama running ads against Romney's outsourcing? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #134)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 09:20 AM

142. thanks for the kick so more people can find out the true Hillary n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #124)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 09:15 AM

140. yes, truly sad indeed. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChromeFoundry (Reply #123)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 10:52 PM

128. The Cheaters -- Obama for America TV ad

&feature=player_embedded

The Obama campaign doesn't consider outsourcing a "trivial wedge issue".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChromeFoundry (Reply #123)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 09:18 AM

141. they've got nothing else to offer, ChromeFoundry...can't address Obama's ads and the

outsourced workers on the agenda at the Dem convention.

The Obama campaign considers outsourcing a huge election issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #8)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 11:03 AM

61. Think long term!

I don't know her age, but Elizabeth looks somewhat younger than Hillary. Support Hillary to win; she has the broader political experience and the best chance of winning. Then she can pave the way to be followed by the NEXT female president, Elizabeth Warren.

Keep the Dems in power!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to colorado_ufo (Reply #61)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 11:05 AM

62. No...Hillary's statements on outsourcing are a real problem for her. Elizabeth 2016. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 09:05 PM

9. With running mate Deval Patrick or Martin O'Malley

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 09:08 PM

10. DLC Hillary sold out the American worker.

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/ndtv-exclusive-hillary-clinton-on-fdi-mamata-outsourcing-and-hafiz-saeed-full-transcript-20759

Hillary Clinton: So you are talking about the outsourcing of US jobs to India. We know it's been going on for many years now and it's part of our economic relationship with India and I think there are advantages with it that have certainly benefitted many parts of our country and there are disadvantages that go to the need to improve the job fields of our own people and create a better economic environment so it's like anything like the pluses and minuses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #10)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 10:46 PM

22. I'm tired of hearing bush and clinton and the like. go home.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 09:08 PM

11. I like the sounds of that

VP Duvall Patrick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 09:32 PM

13. If she can beat Brother Jeb, more power to her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 09:52 PM

14. My vision: She and Biden switch roles

giving her renewed exposure on the national stage. I really believe the Clintons and Obama have cut a deal. Bill's speech was a huge pivot point in the campaign. They are not walking away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 10:00 PM

15. Bill would make a great VP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lint Head (Reply #15)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 10:16 PM

16. He's ineligible

 

n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ter (Reply #16)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 10:27 PM

17. 22nd Amendment says "elected".

No one can be "elected to the office of President" more than twice. It says nothing about the VP and if the VP takes over he is not being "elected" to the office of President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #17)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 10:35 PM

18. You are correct! He can be VP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lint Head (Reply #18)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 01:35 AM

33. No he can't... But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President....

"But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."

(From Amendment XII)

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amendments_11-27.html#12

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PoliticAverse (Reply #33)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 10:36 AM

56. Yes, he can.

The 12th Amendment means you have to be at least 35 and a natural born citizen like the president. Clinton would not be constitutionally ineligible for the office -- he just can't be elected to it another time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #56)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 03:17 PM

104. Ne, he can't -- 22nd Amendment

The 22nd Amendment limits the term of office to two terms. As an Amendment to the Constitution, it becomes incorporated into what constitutes eligibility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to markpkessinger (Reply #104)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 04:19 PM

111. No as explained in another post that amendment uses the word "elected".

You can't be elected more than twice to the office. If a VP becomes president because of the inability of the president to serve then he was not elected to the position.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #56)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 09:32 PM

125. According to the 22nd Amendment, he is absolutely constitutionally ineligible

 

"But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."

22nd Amendment:

Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

Section 2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.

Now, let's say he becomes House Speaker (which is third in line for President) and the Prez and VP both resign. Then it would get tricky, because he would not be elected. Still, I think it would lose at the Supreme Court. If not, he's br the only President to be impeached twice, this time with much better reasoning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ter (Reply #125)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 10:21 PM

127. But he is not constitutionally ineligible.

The Constitution has two requirements to be president. You must be 35 and a natural born citizen. Clinton meets those. It also says you can't be elected more than twice to be president. If Clinton became president as a result of being VP he would not be elected to that office. He would simply assume it. If the drafters of the 22nd Amend had wanted it to be the way you suggest they would not have used the word "elected" in front of "to the office of President". They would have said no one could be president who has "served as President two terms".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #127)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 11:58 AM

145. The 22nd Amendment made him constitutionally ineligible

 

So, technically once the 22nd was implemented, it added a third requirement, of no more than 2 terms, and it says a VP has all the same requirements. If Clinton was on the ticket this year and Obama won, he would be elected. However, it would not get that far. He would not be allowed to be a running mate of anyone, and his name would be thrown off the ballot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ter (Reply #145)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 01:14 PM

147. You continue to ignore the word "elected".

You also ignore that the 22nd A says elected to the office of the President. It says nothing about elected to the office of VP. If the writers of the 22nd A had intended what you suggest they would have included being elected to either office. But I guess we have to disagree and the issue will probably never come up anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #147)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 07:45 PM

154. You tell me how he becomes VP without getting elected

 

Biden resigning and Obama nominating him would be one way, but I thought you were talking about a Clinton/Clinton ticket in 2016.

It doesn't have to say "elected" to VP, because the VP requirements are the same as President. He can't run on a ticket. The "nominated to VP" would be much more interesting, and possibly possible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ter (Reply #154)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 09:16 PM

157. The amendment says "elected to the office of President"

The word acts as a modifier to the phrase "office of the President". It does not mention being elected to VP at all. The amendment only counts the number of times you have been elected to POTUS. Not any other office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #157)

Thu Sep 27, 2012, 09:33 AM

162. True, but since VP has the exact same constitutional requirements....

 

Could they say it's the same as getting elected president, since he's on a presidential ticket?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 10:35 PM

19. Hillary shall win, and beat Jeb Bush in 2016 and Dems forever after

 

America wins when Obama is reelected

Hillary will ensure the dems control all 3 branches, and the US Supreme Court for life.

I was not a fan til she proved her loyalty to our/my party and became the single greatest SOS of all time. I now back her 100% in 2016 and 2020

Just in DC this weekend, and it was great seeing all the Obama/Bill Clinton ads driving the dems message home.

Dems that work together win together

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #19)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 12:27 PM

146. I agree with you

I'm now a Hillary fan too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 10:40 PM

21. I think it is highly unlikely given she's already said no multiple times

Yes, she is high popular because she remains largely outside politics as SOS. I've seen a few of the interviews done by Bill Clinton recently and I think the media hype is largely behind the idea that she will run. Why? Because they want to see a brutal knock down race, one the current election has not given them. The media is disappointed the race between Obama and Romney was not nearly as exciting as they'd hoped for. I suppose there is still plenty of time that the current race could get nastier, but I highly doubt it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #21)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 11:02 PM

25. The wishful glee of some is almost amusing if it wasn't so naive.

She has already said no, as you pointed out.

She LOOKS old. She's only 64 but, like it or not, looks matter in politics.

It isn't fair that she didn't get her chance. That's life.

We need to continue the trend set by Obama and nominate younger, fresher faces, not re-nominate someone who didn't work out last time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #25)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 12:47 AM

30. She looks fabulous

She would win a big part of Republican women's vote. I know a lot of right wing women who love her.
I agree that I would like to see some fresh faces but I think she would have a wonderful shot at winning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mojorabbit (Reply #30)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 12:45 PM

68. I have to agree she looks tired and out of shape

I hate her hair longer, she looks so much better with it shorter. I wish her rest and peace, get back in shape, get her hair cut (!!) and then decide if she wants to go for it. I would support her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to adigal (Reply #68)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 03:13 PM

102. I love her new do

I was admiring it in the latest photos for the press conference for the ambassador who was just murdered.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #25)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 01:38 AM

34. She looks old???????

What kind of crappy, sexist comment is that?

Yeah, let's keep electing neophytes because younger is better, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #34)


Response to Beacool (Reply #34)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 07:35 AM

43. Not MY crappy, sexist comment. Political reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #43)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 09:41 AM

49. uh huh

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #34)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 12:27 PM

66. Hey Bea!

Totally sexist and agesim.
Hillary Clinton is old enough to be my mother (Chelsea in only a few years younger then me) but I don't think she is too old or she looks old. She looks great to me.

McCain seemed old to me but he acted like a cranky get off my lawn type. I am not against candidates in their late 60's/early 70's as long as they are healthy. It is their views which are most important to me. Some of my favorite Dems are not close to being in my generation.

You know what shocked me the other day? Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are both 72. I had no idea, they both seem younger then that. And our VP is 69 and has more energy then that idiot Paul Ryan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jennicut (Reply #66)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 01:46 PM

71. Hi, Jenny!!!

Long time no see. How are you?

The Clintons are much older than I am, but they have more energy than I do. Everyone who knows Hillary also knows that she has more stamina than most people half her age. An editor from Travel magazine went along on one of Hillary's recent trips. He was the latest one to notice how exhausted everyone was, including the press, but not Hillary.

I don't know what she will plan to do in the future, but if she does choose to run, then it will be because she thinks that she's up to the physical demands of the job.

Hugs!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #71)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:01 PM

75. I have been crazy busy.

Going back to school for a teaching certificate, working as a sub teacher in schools on some days. My girls are now 8 and 7 and they are doing well but have tons of after school stuff.

I wish I had Hillary's energy at the end of the day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jennicut (Reply #75)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 04:14 PM

110. Good for you!!!

Best of luck with your teaching certificate. Wow, the girls are getting big.

As for Hillary's energy, I too wish I had as much as she has. I don't know how she does it. I just came back last week from a trip abroad. That night I fell asleep at the table. I'm lucky that I didn't fall face first into my plate. LOL!!!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #34)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 01:53 PM

72. Given enough time, we all of us often fail to hide our biases.

"She look old..."

Given enough time, we all of us often fail to hide all of our biases; and then, when confronted with them, we rationalize it by projecting our biases onto the electorate as whole (e.g., 'that's just political reality...")


There's a few good reasons why I rarely trust the wisdom of anyone under thirty. His is just one of them...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #72)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:01 PM

74. I'm fifty four. I text faster than my daughters. I push elevator buttons with my foot.

You should be wary of making assumptions on an anonymous discussion forum.

Actually, my birthday isn't until October 2nd so you still have time to buy me something!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #74)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:22 PM

83. I'm afraid I didn't make any presumptions specific to any one person

I'm afraid I didn't make any presumptions specific to any one person-- merely a a general observation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #25)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 05:00 AM

40. Well I wouldn't say she look old

But she has had to do quite a bit of traveling around the world and that takes a toll on you (I know from having traveled back and forth from the US to Asia many times). Between being a US Senator, the presidential campaign and SOS she's been going non-stop for over a dozen years. That has to be hard. I couldn't do it and I'm younger.

I think she can continue to contribute in a very meaningful way helping with women's issues. Some people seem to poopoo that suggestion, but it is an issue she's always felt is important. If she can use her influence like Bill Clinton is doing I think it would be very successful.

The fact of the matter is 2016 will be an open primary, just like 2008 was. Whoever wins the nomination I'll support. As to who I'll support in the primary, I'm not worried about that until after the 2014 mid-term election.

People seem to forget we have one election before us and another one in which we may have the chance to increase the margin in both chambers two years from now. That could make a big difference in what things get done in Obama's last 2 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #25)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 09:41 AM

48. Hillary does not "look old," she looks great

How come no one ever says that about Biden, or mention how grey President Obama's hair is? Ridiculous reason, and a really gender-specific one, as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to obamanut2012 (Reply #48)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 10:20 AM

54. I agree completely that it's unfair.

But the last few photos of Hillary show her, IMO, looking as if she's aged more than Biden has. She no longer has that 'elder statesman' look that Elizabeth Warren has. Again, IMO.

Warren looks photogenic but doesn't quite resonate with some people. Others have mentioned here on DU that she is missing an 'X-Factor' that's hard to pin down.

We do not need politicians from the pre-Obama era to re-run for the nomination. Obama has reset the board. We need young, fresh faces out there.

We are headed into uncharted territory thanks to Obama. We're going to need new hands at the tiller.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #25)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 03:46 PM

106. She doesn't look old, but she looks tired...

And that's more damaging than looking old. Maybe four years off will refresh her and she can come back with a bit more energy ... but whenever I see her, I think she looks utterly exhausted. Her husband looked the same at the end of his second term and even Obama is looking a bit more tired than four years ago.

She's 64. Not terribly old for a presidential candidate, but older than most (68 on election day)...

Obama was 47 when he was elected.
Bush was 54 when he was elected.
H.W. Bush was 64 when he was elected.
Reagan was 69 when he was elected.
Carter was 52 when he was elected.

Hillary would tie William Henry Harrison as the second oldest president elected and would be only a year younger than Reagan ... who had to fight back age problems of his own. Tho, I'll give her credit, right now she looks infinitely better than Reagan's old and tired face when he won in '80.

Still, it is an issue. It was an issue for McCain four years ago (though, he was 70!) and it would be an issue for Hillary.

It's the realities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Reply #106)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 04:02 PM

107. If we could somehow combine Warren's looks with Clinton's personality, we'd really have something!

But it looks like Julian Castro is in the batter's box.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #107)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 04:39 PM

113. Warren's looks?

Warren is only 2 years younger than Hillary. Besides, have you ever seen Hillary in person? She's an attractive woman with a sharp wit, a winning smile and a great laugh.

Having said that, I don't vote for presidents based on their looks or age. Neither do I vote for them based on their race or gender. I supported Hillary in 2008, and will do so again if she chooses to run in 2016, because I think that she's the best candidate for the job. Period.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #113)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 04:46 PM

114. I'd say the same applies to most of us here on DU.

But DU isn't the world.

And ever since the invention of television, looks DO matter in politics. Warren's age isn't a factor. She LOOKS better than Hillary. IMO. It isn't fair and it's not something I want to be true but it IS true.

All of which is moot since Hillary has said she isn't running.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #114)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 04:51 PM

115. Well, you are entitled to your opinion.

But IMO, I don't see Warren as looking better than Hillary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #21)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 12:54 PM

69. What is she going to say, she is running for president in 4 years?

when she was looking at going back to the senate or especially after she agreed to be SOS?

She no longer has her senate seat and she is next in line for the party, and Bill clearly wants it for her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmocat (Reply #69)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 03:31 AM

130. She is next in line for the party?

Wow, that's a broad assumption. How did that work out before?

As popular as Bill is, he doesn't decide who nominates our candidate the people of the party do.

I think she's being honest that she believes it's she does other things.

Again, I believe she would still be involved in politics and the party in some way or another as a former Senator and SOS just as much as Bill Clinton does. In fact she can probably do more outside of politics then inside. Bill Clinton has proven that with his foundation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #130)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 06:48 AM

131. Cause she is

It is plain as day.

Nothing beats being POTUS, and while Bill has made his own project with his foundation that has a big impact, he would drop it in a heartbeat if he could be president.

Again, Hill took the tough loss, bit her lip, and said she was done, and has been a good soldier as SOS.

She got some tax barbs in yesterday, and Bill is ON FIRE working for BO.

They are being good Ds, but it is pretty clear they have their eyes on 2016.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmocat (Reply #131)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 07:35 AM

132. The person who gives the convention keynote speech is widely considered 'next in line'.

That was Julian Castro. Anything can happen between now and 2016 but it's doubtful Hillary wants to run again. She has said as much before.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #132)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 08:55 AM

137. LOL

You could be right.

But, the sitting SOS is not going to be the keynote speaker at convention, so that eliminates that as a rule out.

You and other person are being too literal with the point.

There is no official "next in line."

But, she IS going to have A LOT of big time people come to her and ask her to, she absolutely is a force, her and her husband LOVE doing the job, and there is no reason for her not to run.

She said she was not going to run right after a primary loss - 99 percent of pols say they are done at that point. They just need to clear the scrutiny and take time to let it settle. Since she has been SOS she HAS to say she is not running.

Seriously, not running for office has about as much credibility as a pol saying they will term limit themselves.

It is not as bad, but this complete denial that she will run is about on par with those people who were so dead set that BO would not seen reelection.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmocat (Reply #131)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 07:36 AM

133. If the primary is a coronation then why have it at all?

That's exactly the ignorant attitude in 2008 that hurt her candidacy. People can keep saying that, but it will play like a broken record.

As a loyal D, President Clinton should campaign for the nominee (obviously Hillary can not because of her position). If not, he'd be acting like the Republicans do. How many of the Republican candidates do you see out there day in and day out campaigning for Romney? Not many. Pawlenty did for awhile, but has now gone on to his own thing. It's possible a few other Republicans are a bit, but not much.

I suppose if people want to continue to live in their dream world, it's fine by me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #133)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 08:49 AM

136. You are all over the place

The tea leaves are there ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmocat (Reply #136)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 10:03 AM

144. So know you are getting this by smelling tea leaves?

Here is most of what I have said:

1) I believe she has indicated she wants to take a step back from politics and do something else.
2) She will have a lot of new found time in which to spend with family and her husband after she finishes as SOS
3) Her increase in popularity is partly because she's been working outside politics which gives her some good options for after she finishes as SOS.
4) When someone in the thread said she looked old, I defended her and pointed out that she has had a lot on her plate for 12+ years and that she has been very busy.
5) The primary of a political party is not a coronation but a time for the people of the party to figure out who can best lead them.
6) The media is foaming at the mouth for her to run.

Again, the primary is not a coronation where one person walks in and says I'm it. You are stating that Hilary Clinton deserves to be the nominee. Well, bub I hate to brake it you the nomination is earned. Which other people are running in the primary will have an impact and we don't know that yet.

I'm not completely against Hillary, I'd say I am closer to the middle. I am still willing to look at other candidates as they announce and figure out who I support from there. There's no way most people are going to start making their decisions for awhile.

Again, drop the arrogance and people would be more willing to what you are saying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #144)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 02:45 PM

151. they are doing the same thing they did in 2008 and they helped her lose the primary n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #133)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 09:39 AM

143. truly amazing, david, isn't it? The cheerleaders seem to be rather desperate, don't they? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #143)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 08:16 PM

155. Um, I'm going to go "no comment" on that one

lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 10:58 PM

24. I wonder if her memoirs are going to include her statements supporting outsourcing? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #24)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 09:42 AM

50. She is President Obama's SOS

I hope she will continue to be, as she is an effective, loyal SOS.

How are your statements helpful for the 2012 election?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to obamanut2012 (Reply #50)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 09:44 AM

51. How about addressing her statements on outsourcing? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #51)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 09:50 AM

53. Address how that pertyains to the 2012 Presidential Election?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to obamanut2012 (Reply #53)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 10:47 AM

60. The OP is about the 2016 election. The OP brought up 2016. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #51)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 01:55 PM

73. Would that there were at least one pure and righteous progressive with whom I agree with on every it

Would that there were at least one pure and righteous progressive with whom I agree with on every item. Alas, there is none with whom I find agreement with on every single issue.

Congratulations to all the dogmatists who have!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #73)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:11 PM

77. Congratulations to all those who think outsourcing is OK. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #73)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:16 PM

79. Pointing out Hillary's OWN WORDS ON OUTSOURCING doesn't make anyone a "dogmatist" n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #79)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:18 PM

80. I agree it doesn't make you a dogmatist.

But Hillary did try to tread a fine line with her comments. Like it or not, the issue of outsourcing doesn't matter to enough people to make a difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #80)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:22 PM

82. yes, outsourcing does matter to enough people to make a difference.

<edit to add> That's why Hillary would be a problem for 2016.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #80)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:22 PM

84. and thanks for the kick so everyone can read HER OWN WORDS on outsourcing n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #79)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:25 PM

86. Again, congratulations on finding a candidate with whom you agree with on every positions.

Again, congratulations on finding a candidate with whom you agree with on every positions. I've been unable to, and have found that those who infer as such, are at best dogmatic, and at worst, political hacks.

Regardless, I imagine this will simply reinforce a dogmatic faith that believing as such, makes one a fan of outsourcing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #86)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:46 PM

95. The Dems considered outsourcing a big enough issue at the convention.

They had former Bain workers speak at the convention.

The Dems have already acknowledged it's a big issue by letting the outsourced workers speak at the convention.

Hillary's statements are a liability.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #86)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:46 PM

96. but thanks for the kick so more people can read HER OWN WORDS ON OUTSOURCING n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #86)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:59 PM

98. Obama runs campaign ads against Romney's outsourcing at Bain

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/03/obama-bain-outsourcing-mitt-romney_n_1645559.html

The Obama campaign thinks outsourcing is a big enough issue to run attacks ads against Romney.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #98)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 03:03 PM

99. You made your point.

Since Hillary isn't running -she has said she isn't- then this entire dispute is moot.

But you made your point so please stop filling this thread with more and more of the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #99)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 03:06 PM

100. the OP is about the 2016 election. I didn't start it. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #73)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:19 PM

81. but thanks for the kick so more people can read HER OWN WORDS ON OUTSOURCING n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 11:05 PM

26. I believe that Hilary is pretty good, and if she were to run I would vote for her,


but are there any other possible candidates out there for POTUS without the name Clinton or Bush?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to R. Daneel Olivaw (Reply #26)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 11:07 PM

27. Yes. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #27)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 11:14 PM

28. Who would you lke to see run against Jebbie?


Who would you like to see as a possible lineup for Dem candidates?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to R. Daneel Olivaw (Reply #28)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 12:06 AM

29. I don't know if he's interested in another run for President, but if he's not,

I want Howard Dean back running the DNC. Possible candidates?

Biden
Warren
Klobucher
Wasserman-Schultz
DEAN (again, IF he would do it..I'm not convinced he would)
G. Newsome (He's not nationally viable yet, but a run at the top spot would change that real quick)
Patrick

On EDIT: If the GOP candidate is Jeb Bush, the ticket I want is Biden, Clinton, Dean, Warren in any combination. It will take someone truly FIERCE to counter the "Go ahead and forget about my idiot brother, I'm not him." message that will be coming from that Campaign, and since Rove will NO DOUBT be back at the helm, one nasty bit of SMART to manage that counter-message (again, Clinton or DEAN come to mind).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Volaris (Reply #29)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 11:23 AM

63. Whomever run on the Dem ticket


has to be FIERCE just as you say. Take no prisoners FIERCE. Fight hard and make the GOPiggies cry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 12:52 AM

31. I sure hope she runs, the Repukes don't have anyone that can beat her.

I'd also love to see Bill back in the White House as the first Husband. Talk about Repuke heads explode.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 12:55 AM

32. Think the candidates will be something like

For the democrats

Hillary Clinton (front runner)
Andrew Cuomo (contender)
Elizabeth Warren (dark horse)
Joe Biden (contender)
Deval Patrick (no chance)
Martin O'Malley (no chance)


For the Republicans

Ron Paul (no chance)
Fatbutt Chris Christie (contender)
Jed Bush (front runner)
Marco Rubio (contender)
Joe Scarbourgh (no chance)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mkap (Reply #32)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 12:14 PM

65. Only Biden and those in his circle thinks that he has a chance in 2016.

I like Joe just fine, but he could only muster a handful of votes in 2008 and his extemporaneous outbursts since becoming VP don't help his cause either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mkap (Reply #32)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 12:41 PM

67. It will either be Julian Castro or someone not on your list.

And why WASN'T Julian Castro on your list?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 01:39 AM

35. Easy win.

Stood by her man even though he lied. Protected our country with careful statesmanship and careful wording. Focused on working with a competitor under complicated situations. Showed her skill at every turn. Supported fully by a husband who wronged her and our country, but is still incredibly loved for what he did for us.

Amazing that she's got the energy to try again. I love it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 01:41 AM

36. I don't think that Hillary wants to deal with that question at the moment.

She is truly tired and wants a break. Let's see how she feels in a couple of years.

I'll keep my fingers crossed that she does choose to run. She would be a great president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:03 AM

37. Sounds great to me...

I can just see the repuke heads explode...first a person of color as a president then horrors! a woman!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 06:18 AM

42. It would be great

I do have some reservations about her but it would be fantastic having a woman in the White House

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 09:03 AM

45. isn't it absolutely AMAZING that DLC Hillary supporters won't address her outsourcing statements?

absolutely amazing, indeed.

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/ndtv-exclusive-hillary-clinton-on-fdi-mamata-outsourcing-and-hafiz-saeed-full-transcript-20759

Hillary Clinton: So you are talking about the outsourcing of US jobs to India. We know it's been going on for many years now and it's part of our economic relationship with India and I think there are advantages with it that have certainly benefitted many parts of our country and there are disadvantages that go to the need to improve the job fields of our own people and create a better economic environment so it's like anything like the pluses and minuses.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 10:43 AM

58. Woohoo; LOVE IT!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 11:32 AM

64. I supported Obama in 2008, but I'll support Hillary in 2016 if she runs.

She has earned my trust.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 01:40 PM

70. I'd be volunteering...where do I sign up? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:24 PM

85. Hilary has not performed admirably in her current post and that's a huge understatement.

I embrace the flames.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:27 PM

87. I'll be excited to see it, but can we PLEASE concentrate on 2012 first?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:33 PM

90. Too bad Hillary voted for Iraq war...

 

Blood on your hands babe...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to windowpilot (Reply #90)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 04:04 PM

109. Yes, I could only support someone who supports peace.

Hillary never has.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 02:44 PM

94. Hope so

Music to this musician's ears.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 03:07 PM

101. this would be awesome!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 03:16 PM

103. God bless her, but she's TOO OLD.

It's not that she "looks old", she would be the 2nd oldest person ever elected. If she's 64 now, she'd be 68 in 2016.

Reagan was 69. That was too old, and look what happened.
Willard Romney is now 65. That's too old.

I'm not going to argue that she isn't sharp as a tack, and that women don't live longer and age better than men. But generationally, I believe we need someone UNDER retirement age to do this job.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxsolomon (Reply #103)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 06:44 PM

116. the Warren groupie above didn't realize that Liz is just about the same age as Hillary

 

so I assume you think she would be too old too, which is a good thing as she needs to win in Mass. and then hold that seat for many, many years.

Trouble is, you always could pick Taylor Swift to be President, but ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
(snarky satire)
that would really suck, wouldnt it. She can't carry a note as it is and then only whines about getting messed up by someone (like a true republican would)

I think I will stick with Hillary, who has credentials. Age is irrelevant.

(unless Michelle Obama runs, but think she would run in 2024 after Hillary finishes her 2 terms.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #116)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 07:24 PM

117. It wasn't irrelevant when Reagan was senile.

And it's not irrelevant because women live longer. Presidentin' is a hard job, harder than campaignin'.

68 is old to start, and 76 is really old to finish. I prefer someone younger, and I prefer someone from my generation ("Late Boomers") from now on. I don't know who that is, but I have no issue with it being a woman. In many ways, I'd prefer it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxsolomon (Reply #117)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 07:32 PM

118. alzheimer's can strike 50 yr olds

 

and I have seen 20 year old drivers that shouldn't be allowed on the road.

A great President would be a great president and some of our best Supreme Court justices were much older. (age is only relevant for them because of the thought that a younger Scotus could mean a seated judge for 40 years. There are always exceptions.

70 today was 45 a few decades ago

and remember Golda Meir. (and forget Margaret Thatcher).

but would you rather have Christie O'Donnell or Sarah Palin or Hillary?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #118)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 08:52 PM

156. Hillary or an incompetent? Those aren't the options.

It's Hillary or someone younger than her. I said before, she gets the nomination, she gets my vote. Up till then, sorry, too old.

Thatcher was 54 when she took office, and 65 when she left it. Poor example. Golda Meir was 71 when she took office, served till she was 76. Better example for your argument, but running Israel up to the Yom Kippur War is not 8 years running the rolling calamity that is the contemporary USA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #116)

Wed Sep 26, 2012, 06:54 AM

158. You've pretty much called everyone who hasn't agreed with you a "Warren groupie"

Whether they mentioned her name or not. You did the same thing to me.

BTW Michelle Obama has also ruled out running.

Don't let that stop you from telling the truth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #158)

Wed Sep 26, 2012, 11:58 AM

159. Nobody ever rules out anything but only a fool announces 5 years early (or an also ran).

 

you must be naive if you think there was anyone in history that ever said it and kept to it.

When the nation calls, the person answers.

(Warren denied ever running for public office too btw.)

I'm an Obama fan, are you embarrassed to be a fan of someone?

Noone can announce years early(and for Michelle it would be 2024 anyhow). Makes one a sitting duck. (not a liar).

The only people who announce years early are fringe noones who know they will lose(not making them losers, just realists).

I cannot recall anyone who announced BEFORE the current election, for 5 years from now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #159)

Wed Sep 26, 2012, 08:29 PM

160. Michelle Obama said she would never run

and doesn't have the temperament to do so. Hillary Clinton has repeatedly said she won't run.

I am also a fan of Obama and have stated that in prior posts. So go ahead and continue to lie. You are making yourself look like a fool.

And again, you as an individual don't decide when people run or who's turn it is. I'm going based on what these people are actually saying, not your make believe world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 03:20 PM

105. definitely a viable candidate, but I will wait until 2016 and see who else is running ..

before I blindly support her now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 04:02 PM

108. No to a former first lady as our first woman president. I respect Hillary, but hope she doesn't run.

I don't expect her to run because of her age.

I'd like to see Janet Napolitano or Elizabeth Warren or Patty Murray make a run.

I've always been hesitant about supporting Hillary, just due to the message sent to girls and young women: 'You can grow up to be President! All you have to do is find and marry a man who will be president first.'

Of course, I recognize that as senator and secretary of state, Hillary has now created her own record aside from Bill. I would certainly vote for her if she is the nominee! But I'd prefer the first woman president not be a former first lady.

And as much as I respect Bill and his talents and contributions, I don't want him back in the White House as first spouse. No thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dems to Win (Reply #108)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 04:20 PM

112. No matter how beloved someone is, there comes a time when it's out with the old and in with the new.

Clinton fatigue would only be revisited if Hillary should run. And I think she's savvy enough to know that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 07:38 PM

119. I will happily cast my vote for Hillary in 2016 if she runs!

She was my choice in 2008. I think she will, at the very least, consider it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 11:19 PM

129. Ok, good and bad

On the one hand, Hillary would have the sheer name recognition and momentum. We will need that in 2016, asfolks like Jeb, Christie and others that sat out the 2012 tea party trainwreck will be fresh. The idea of Bill and Barack introducing her would be EPIC. As far as age,that does not mean much anymore,especially if she is smart enough to pick a sharp young candidate for a VP. I also have to admit, she would be loaded her bear,and agressive against Jeb, Christie or whoever else was offered by the GOP>

However, there have been two major problems I have always had with her

ONE: Leftie punching. You have to admit it, the Clintons are a part of the reason why the Democrats are a center party. Sadly,in her campaign, she did not go left, but instead seemed tolet Bill run his mouth and be attack dog. I love Big Dog, but even the best fans have to admit that sometimes he willlet stupid stuff come out of his mouth (like getting on Obama for attacking Bain Capital.) There may be many happpy to see her, but there will be many on the left who will be going "oh shit,not this again!" It will be the sort of scenario BEGGING for a Third party spolier.

TWO: War Hawk: Lookn at it this way, if you told anyone that not only wouldIraq and Afghanistan be hot will into Obama's admin, but that A) we would get into war with Libya and B) we should keep the kettles hot for Iraq and Syria, I would have thought you were nuts. And please stop the tired "she is only doing what Obama wants", everywhere that there are sabres beign rattled at is the same as when Bill was president,and back when W's dad was president. The sad fact is, Maggie Thatcher and Golda Meir are her models,which means she might very well wage a war to prove she is a leader, when another war is the last thing we need.

I will still vote for her, as frankly, the very very best the GOP offers is way too toxic. I could careless of the GOP nominated Kermit the Frog, I would wonder what the Koches were telling him behind our backs. However, do I think a lot of people, the Jane Hamshers, the Maureen Dowds, have a rude awakening when they find out that she was always at best, center with a hint of left? Yes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonCoquixote (Reply #129)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 07:51 AM

135. I agree with 95% of what you say but in 2016 a seemingly centrist will be needed to win

 

The republicans, who in 2012 were far right, and going to go middle with Jeb/Christie or whomever in 2016. Especially as it appears the teaparty/libertarian vote is being repudiated by most all in the US

IF the dems pick a way too left person, (or one the party considers or is perceived to be that), IMHO we shall lose.

therefore we need to politically pick a person more centrist than Obama
(we needed Obama on the left in 2008 to win against the seemingly moderate republican McCain)(though Hillary would have also won had she been the nominee and picked Obama as VP)

But Hillary will continue all of Obama's policies, and with 8 years more of Dems, will have more of the house/senate, and with people on the left leading the senate (like Warren), the abilitiy to move even more forward with everything will be there.

(the thought occurs to me that while seemingly doubtful, it would be something if Hillary picked Barack OR Michelle for Scotus during her 8 years.)Both are qualified beyond a shadow of a doubt and would easily pass and both are young enough to serve for decades.
Many have said President Obama is actually more suited for the high court than the day to day Presidency.(and he is a constitutional lawyer).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 02:53 PM

153. I voted for her for Senator, but voted for Obama

in the Primary. In the future? Sure, especially since she has served now as Secretary of State. Maybe the time was not right before. Maybe next time it will be for a woman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Original post)

Wed Sep 26, 2012, 09:27 PM

161. All that dreadful DU sexism from 2008 ...

Nice way to put it to rest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread