HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Hillary Clinton ‘not incl...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 05:28 PM

Hillary Clinton ‘not inclined’ to run for president in 2016

Source: Washington Post

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said on Tuesday that she’s “not inclined” to run for president in 2016 but left the door open for what is widely considered her likely return to politics after she steps down as secretary of state.

“I’m not thinking about anything like that right now,” Clinton smilingly told a questioner. “I am looking forward to finishing up my tenure as secretary of state and then catching up on about 20 years of sleep deprivation.”

Clinton, who steps down Friday as one of the best-known secretaries of state, is also among the world’s most admired women and the object of intense speculation about her future.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/clinton-not-inclined-to-run-for-president-in-2016/2013/01/29/abb63022-6a39-11e2-af53-7b2b2a7510a8_story.html?hpid=z4

95 replies, 6949 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 95 replies Author Time Post
Reply Hillary Clinton ‘not inclined’ to run for president in 2016 (Original post)
kpete Jan 2013 OP
Purveyor Jan 2013 #1
RC Jan 2013 #9
alp227 Jan 2013 #45
Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2013 #86
patrice Jan 2013 #2
dsc Jan 2013 #4
patrice Jan 2013 #5
dsc Jan 2013 #6
Paulefresh Jan 2013 #82
dsc Jan 2013 #83
Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2013 #87
dsc Jan 2013 #88
karynnj Jan 2013 #73
patrice Jan 2013 #79
patrice Jan 2013 #80
lotsofsnowplease Jan 2013 #3
phleshdef Jan 2013 #8
lotsofsnowplease Jan 2013 #11
Renew Deal Jan 2013 #14
Aerows Jan 2013 #48
theKed Jan 2013 #78
demwing Jan 2013 #12
KamaAina Jan 2013 #16
randome Jan 2013 #22
KamaAina Jan 2013 #23
Beacool Jan 2013 #51
Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2013 #89
Beacool Jan 2013 #92
840high Jan 2013 #44
libdem4life Jan 2013 #49
Pool Hall Ace Jan 2013 #72
libdem4life Jan 2013 #84
Beacool Jan 2013 #50
dkf Jan 2013 #7
struggle4progress Jan 2013 #10
Auggie Jan 2013 #15
LongTomH Jan 2013 #13
SCVDem Jan 2013 #17
Beacool Jan 2013 #54
Auntie Bush Jan 2013 #18
blm Jan 2013 #19
KoKo Jan 2013 #31
Bucky Jan 2013 #38
davidpdx Jan 2013 #62
Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2013 #91
Auntie Bush Jan 2013 #33
Samantha Jan 2013 #67
alp227 Jan 2013 #47
aquart Jan 2013 #52
Cosmocat Jan 2013 #71
TuxedoKat Jan 2013 #77
Cosmocat Jan 2013 #93
Sherman A1 Jan 2013 #20
woo me with science Jan 2013 #21
RILib Jan 2013 #25
woo me with science Jan 2013 #29
KoKo Jan 2013 #32
antigop Jan 2013 #59
Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2013 #90
KoKo Jan 2013 #28
woo me with science Jan 2013 #34
Auntie Bush Jan 2013 #40
RILib Jan 2013 #42
Auntie Bush Jan 2013 #43
RILib Jan 2013 #76
woo me with science Jan 2013 #53
Auntie Bush Jan 2013 #58
KoKo Jan 2013 #56
RILib Jan 2013 #74
RILib Feb 2013 #94
Beacool Jan 2013 #57
Auntie Bush Jan 2013 #60
Beacool Jan 2013 #63
YOHABLO Jan 2013 #24
Hard Assets Jan 2013 #26
Beacool Jan 2013 #55
KoKo Jan 2013 #27
NorthCarolina Jan 2013 #30
graham4anything Jan 2013 #35
snooper2 Jan 2013 #69
graham4anything Jan 2013 #70
Bucky Jan 2013 #36
Cynicus Emeritus Jan 2013 #37
Bucky Jan 2013 #39
grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #41
Aerows Jan 2013 #46
DonCoquixote Jan 2013 #61
Beacool Jan 2013 #64
DonCoquixote Jan 2013 #65
Ash_F Jan 2013 #66
David__77 Jan 2013 #68
madokie Jan 2013 #75
clarice Jan 2013 #81
Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2013 #85
marshall Feb 2013 #95

Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 05:31 PM

1. Of course she is going to run. She just doesn't want nor need a nearly 3 1/2 year campaign. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Reply #1)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 05:49 PM

9. Actually they do to build up the base for their war chest.

 

We need to start looking around for someone, Center, or a little Left of Center and 20 to 30 years younger.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RC (Reply #9)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:06 PM

45. Well, the youngest person eligible for the next term should be born before 1/20/82.

35 by inauguration day. So just 20 years younger than obama.

oh wait do you mean younger than clinton? Ok, let's name some potential candidates born from 1960s-1977.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:12 PM

86. But she does need better people this time around. And she needs to control those people.

Her campaign suffered from disorganization and internal personality conflicts. If she does run, she needs better people and a firmer grasp on campaign finance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 05:33 PM

2. Who is the youngest Liberal Libertarian we can run? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #2)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 05:37 PM

4. Given term limits what does age have to do with anything

all one cares about is 8 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #4)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 05:41 PM

5. I don't like how term limits ASSUMES everyone is the same & disposes of authentic value

without actually identifying it before throwing it out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #5)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 05:44 PM

6. I don't like them either

but they exist and will exist until at least Obama is too old or too unpopular to run, so the age of the candidate ends up being irrelevant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #6)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 12:07 PM

82. Fear and money

In a world of citizens united and right wing fear mongering how would that work out. They stole a entire election and scared an entire country into a re-election Do we really want to take the chance no term limits?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Paulefresh (Reply #82)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 12:17 PM

83. given the fact that the only popular two term Presidents

are Clinton and Obama, Hell yea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #83)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:13 PM

87. ....and FDR and Reagan (unfortunately)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #87)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:14 PM

88. well I meant living

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:32 AM

73. Liberal libertarian ?? What exactly is that

My first guess is that it would simply be a libertarian. The liberal would come because on social issues there is a significant overlap between libertarian desire for government to stay out of the way.

However, on economic issues, a liberal is for all the safety net programs and many social justice programs that aim to help those at the bottom. The libertarian is against using government here. This is the dimension where liberal and libertarian may be at completely opposite ends of the spectrum.

Foreign policy is more complicated, but it to is different. Libertarians would be against any humanitarian interventions - which liberals would consider.

As to who is the youngest, the question should be who is the best in terms of both getting elected and doing the job. That may well be Hillary, who certainly is a someone who has shown she has the potential to do both. She could then pick a younger VP - as she likely would have done in 2008. (Biden would not have matched her as well as he did Obama. The rumor was always Evan Bayh.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #73)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 11:52 AM

79. Whatever it is that Noam Chomsky means when he self-identifies, in part, as Libertarian. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #73)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 11:57 AM

80. Actually, I'm a type of Libertarian myself, just not the Ron/Rand Paul type, but, generally,

I think labels are really just a starting point for discourse, relatively useful, but NOT the be all and end all of anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 05:35 PM

3. Old will not be in, in 2016

 

Hillary and all of her favorables will be all for not. She will be way old. The granny will be knitting Bill a sweater....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lotsofsnowplease (Reply #3)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 05:48 PM

8. Wow, what a sexist, dickish thing to say.

Enjoy your short stay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to phleshdef (Reply #8)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 05:53 PM

11. Huh?

 

Hillary loves to knit. I knit. Hillary could run for president, I wish her the best, but her age will bring her down all because of the changing demographics. How will it look in 2016? Much younger. Sex has nothing to do with my post. Geez.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lotsofsnowplease (Reply #11)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 05:59 PM

14. "The granny will be knitting Bill a sweater"

What sex is a granny?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #14)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:23 PM

48. That "granny" could hand most political opponents

their heads before breakfast. I respect Hillary, and those that don't do so at their political peril. She is a force to be reckoned with, and has been all of her life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #14)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 10:03 AM

78. So, wait, we're not allowed

to identify a female as a female now?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lotsofsnowplease (Reply #3)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 05:54 PM

12. nah..."Way Old" is a relative term

Women live longer than men , and Clinton has had a lifetime of quality health care. She'll be just fine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lotsofsnowplease (Reply #3)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:17 PM

16. Couldn't you at least have made a snide "baking cookies" reference?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KamaAina (Reply #16)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:49 PM

22. Someone would have complained about that, too!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #22)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:52 PM

23. Of course.

But at least it would have been more competent Hillary-bashing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #22)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:32 PM

51. As they should, but sexist comments shouldn't surprise me.

That's the one thing that it's bipartisan. There are as many sexist jerks on the left as they are on the right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #51)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:15 PM

89. Agreed. And the saddest thing is that they don't even realize just how sexist their disgusting

comments are!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #89)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 09:11 PM

92. If they don't realize how sexist their comments are, then they are even more insensitive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lotsofsnowplease (Reply #3)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:03 PM

44. Shame on you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lotsofsnowplease (Reply #3)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:25 PM

49. There is just something delightful and "look at me" about misspelled snark.

Manners are taught in Kindergarten ... spelling comes in about 3rd grade...and respect? Hopefully, "all was not for naught".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #49)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:10 AM

72. Oh! I was wondering what "all for not" meant

Thank you for the interpretation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pool Hall Ace (Reply #72)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 12:52 PM

84. Love to play Grammar Police, but just on trolls with single digit posts.

Oh, and those badmouthing HRC and "old ladies", too. LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lotsofsnowplease (Reply #3)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:28 PM

50. Sexist, much?

Crappy comment. If you are lucky enough, some day you too will be her age and I doubt that you will think of yourself as "old".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 05:45 PM

7. Let the woman rest for goodness sakes.

 

If she wants to run she probably has it in the bag.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 05:49 PM

10. She's been saying this for quite a while now

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to struggle4progress (Reply #10)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:01 PM

15. Exactly. She's not running ... period!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 05:56 PM

13. Wait and see!

It's all we can do, until Sec. Clinton makes up her mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:19 PM

17. I think this describes Hillary



She's tired!

A little Schnitzelgruben and she'll be good as new!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SCVDem (Reply #17)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:39 PM

54. I love Madeline Kahn!!!

Thanks for the clip. She was so talented and died way before her time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:23 PM

18. After she gets much needed sleep & writes a book, she'll run, unless she runs into health problems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:31 PM

19. The fall she took proved to be very serious. The double vision she's still experiencing

after the concussion probably has her more concerned privately. That type of fall is scary business for us 50+ folks. I had one around the same time and am still recovering, and, as far as I know, I didn't suffer the blood clot she did.

I think she will do her round of interviews and then disappear to recuperate - if her fall is still effecting her after some months she may decide against running altogether. It would be smart for Dems to be open to either a Biden or HRC run. Biden probably wouldn't be considering it right now if HRC was fully recovered, but, he probably knows a heckuva lot more about her actual condition than we do. She may not feel up to running as much as the media assumes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #19)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:12 PM

31. Re: Biden...He sure looked like he was "going for the Media" at the Inauguration!

I think he really wants it. He did well in the Veep Debates and he's like Kerry in that he's "Entitled" to a certain extent.

We shall see. But, I think Biden really wants it. Maybe he will pick Hillary as VP. Even if she's not in good health....look at CHENEY who should have been off the planet by the time he ran with many Heart Attacks that killed early some that I've known in my lifetime. That his first attack was when he was 35 meant that there's no way he could have made it this far with PaceMaker for years and then Heart Transplant. Either he's the "UnDead" or he lied about the extent of his earlier heart attacks (if he had them) so he'd look like a VP who wouldn't make it out his term as VEEP to carry Bush.

The man is amazing. Having friends who are now dead and they had access to excellent health care ater their first early heart attack (good as Cheney's in the begnning) and studying the research when someone very close to me had his own heart symptoms ....I have to say it's that he's the "UnDead or he was Lying about much of it.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #31)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:26 PM

38. Always avoid silly speculation.

Things like Biden picking Clinton as his Veep is just not how the real world works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bucky (Reply #38)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:05 PM

62. Pretty much the whole talk of who will run and win in 2016

is silly speculation at this point. People talking about "dynasties".

If I recall correctly we just had an inauguration 9 days ago. People barely waited 2 days after the election to start talking about who would replace Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #31)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:30 PM

91. Re: Biden...He sure looked like he was "going for the Media" at the Inauguration!

I disagree. Biden was being Biden. He's always like that. Very energetic and playful. I didn't see him as playing the media...well...maybe just a little bit...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #19)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:17 PM

33. Now you're getting me worried. Maybe that's why

Obama had that interview with her...he knows she's not going to be able to run and wants her to have a special opportunity to receive recognition, tribute and thanks. If she doesn't run...she won't have that opportunity. Please, please, please let that not be true...but it does make sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Auntie Bush (Reply #33)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:47 PM

67. Perhaps he requested the interview because he didn't want her last public image as a cabinet member

to be her being smacked down by Rand Paul, et al. in that Benghazi hearing. If she does decide to run, clips of that hearing would make wonderful ads against her candidacy.

Considering all of the work and the many successes she has had, he might have thought the least she deserved was to go out with a positive public bang! Clips from their interview would much more effective and in the right direction for a woman campaigning for the Presidency. I think it just might have been one-ups-man ship!

Sam

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #19)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:23 PM

47. And then if she does run after recovering,

she would have to deal with a giant wave of right wing sh-- especially the claims that she faked her concussion to escape benghazi hearings. Then all the skeletons from the 90s such as Vince Foster, Whitewater, Lewinsky, Jones, etc. a group like crossroads gps could create a "standing by her cheating raping husband" with Lewinsky and the women who accessed bill of sexual harassment or rape. I say HRC should just enjoy her retirement at this point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Reply #47)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:35 PM

52. Yeah, the country really cares about that crap. But thanks for your concern.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Reply #47)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 06:57 AM

71. It's funny

Part of the reason I supported Barrack Obama over Hill 5 years ago was this line of thinking - to an extent.

I was not naive.

I KNEW they would be asses to this President, too.

But, given all of the history of 15 years of them trashing her, and with BO being such a darn nice, even keeled guy with no baggage, I thought there was a CHANCE they would be LESS hysterical if he got elected.

But, somehow, they found a way to turn the country into shit for four years with him.

Fact is, there is NO democrat they won't destroy.

Gore, a decent, intelligent, honorable man, destroyed.
Kerry, a decent, intelligent, honorable man, destroyed.
Dean, a decent, intelligent, honorable man, destroyed.
Pelois, a decent, intelligent, honorable woman, treated like a joke while jackasses like Gingrich, Hastert and Bohner get the kid glove treatment.

It does not matter, the right wing, with a breathless and obedient "liberal" media will trash ANY democrat.

Hill has wanted to be President for decades now.

Given her exceptionally strong position, why would anyone who wanted to be the most powerful person on the planet be expected to just walk away from it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmocat (Reply #71)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 09:37 AM

77. Totally

I felt the same way too, was worried that Secy. Clinton would be horribly villified like Pres. Clinton was. I thought they would be hard on Pres. Obama too, but not as much, since he was newer politically and figured since he was African American, they would be more circumpspect and not want to risk being perceived as possibly racist. NOPE, didn't both most of them one bit. If anything they are worse than they were four years ago towards him. I think Secy. Clinton would actually be stronger now as a candidate than she would have been back then as she has weathered so much criticism, it's just so much political noise that people tune out now. I hope she runs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TuxedoKat (Reply #77)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 06:58 AM

93. Yep

absolutely no reason for her not to.

Agree that she has been around so long now the country is likely to be very comfortable with her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:31 PM

20. Time will tell

One can imagine a few days off would be nice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:46 PM

21. It doesn't matter. We will get Hillary, or a clone of Hillary.

We will get a corporatist and neocon with deep ties to Wall Street. It cannot be any other way with the system we currently have.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=384470





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #21)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:56 PM

25. an alternative to a clone

 

Biden would make a fine President. Hillary'd have us in endless war.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RILib (Reply #25)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:06 PM

29. You miss my point.



Biden is in bed with the banks, but that is irrelevant anyway, because you miss my point here. We don't even have a *chance* at real change unless we demand structural change....the corporate money out of the process... between now and then.

A non-corporate candidate cannot compete now, by design.

Nothing will change if we simply sit around talking about names, because as it stands, the one percent will have their pick either way. We have to demand the money out of the system first.

The only way some sort of change even has a chance of happening is if the people stand up and demand it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #29)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:16 PM

32. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #29)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:54 PM

59. and that starts with an acknowledgement of the damage the corporate Dems have caused. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #29)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:24 PM

90. Biden's in bed with the banks? Well, he does a shitty job of gaming the system, then,

because he was the least wealthiest senator behind Bernie Sanders.

I do agree with you on principle, however. The DLC (Hillary was a member, Biden was not) has done great damage to the Democratic Party.

I love how all the so-called liberals are in love with the Clintons. I like Hillary and Bill, but they were very much a part of the problem. Obama is only a little better, but not much. And again, I'd rather trust Biden who was a man of the people and didn't have much in the way of money, than I would these wealthy senators who support pro-Wall Street policies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #21)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:05 PM

28. The "PTB" have been the "Deciders" for many Decades now. It's up to them.

Their WILL is the DEVINE...in the end it's all that matters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #28)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:19 PM

34. You're right.

That's not something that will just change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #21)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:30 PM

40. I'm really not pleased with that comment.

There is no other Hillary...she's irreplaceable. If she doesn't run we very well may have another Bush, Christy or Rubio. You think Hillary is a corporatist...how about one of them? That ought to scare the bejeesus out of you. She was always left of Bill and I'm sure she's even further left than she ever was. She cares about women & children, the poor and the economy. She'll do good! Not to worry!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Auntie Bush (Reply #40)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:54 PM

42. no she wasn't "always left of Bill"

 

Is that Hillary Clinton, former President of the Wellesley Young Republicans you're talking about?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RILib (Reply #42)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:00 PM

43. That was in her youth! I voted republican too (Raygun) when I didn't know better.

When she really got into politics...after marrying Clinton...she was left of him imho.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Auntie Bush (Reply #43)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:38 AM

76. youth is no excuse

 

I was out volunteering in Kennedy's campaign when I was in college.

I think Hillary "changed" to Democratic because it would have been uncomfortable for Bill to have a Republican wife while he was running for office. The change was pure opportunism on her part.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Auntie Bush (Reply #40)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:36 PM

53. Her personality doesn't matter.

She is deeply, inextricably connected to the very same corporate money and connections that have driven policy for decades. She is Secretary of State in a corporate administration right now, and she would be backed by formidable corporate money when she ran.

Nothing changes until the system is changed. This is not about personalities. It is about a system drowned in and corrupted by corporate money at every level, so deeply that it's impossible to get elected without being a tool of that agenda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #53)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:49 PM

58. However, you were talking about Hillary in the post.

If you want to rant on corporate money...why not start a thread on that?

From what I gather...you're not for anyone. I think Dems take less corp money than ReThugs. As Obama pointed out...you have to take their money if you want to win and I want to win. We need to change citizens United! Good luck with that! Unfortunately, we'll have to take corp money until they do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Auntie Bush (Reply #40)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:43 PM

56. Here's my problem with her...she lost me on this:

"We Came, We Saw....He Died"....with a cackling laugh. The video is out there ...you must have seen it.

I was not with her views on American Imperialism. Left of Bill doesn't wash either since we know the legislation he allowed in his second term when he was battling Ken Starr that he allowed which helped cause many of the problems that allowed the 2008 Banking Implosion and more Media Consolidation. He started off with NAFTA and then Second Term the Banking/Media were deregulated.

So...Left of Bill....don't think so. He ended up not being who I thought I voted for and after the exhausting years of defending him against the Repugs...I found out what went on in the background during that time. Was willing to give Hillary a break...but, kissing up to AIPAQ and the Cackle put me over the edge. I am an Anti-Imperialism Democrat. Drones and more War isn't what I vote for if I can help it. I'm tired of being misled.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #56)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:34 AM

74. yeah, I hate that video.

 

Not only sick, but now Libya is a far more dangerous mess than before, and chaos has spread to new regions of Africa because of that. Besides what it's done to ordinary people, it's already sucked in France and I see the U.S. is contemplating getting sucked in as well.

What did third world countries learn from the U.S. and Libya mess? The U.S.'s word is not to be trusted. Don't liberalize. Keep your nuclear weapons at all costs, because they are the only thing standing between you and destruction.

The total bonding to AIPAC and the Likud is yet another important reason to say No to Hillary.

Besides policy and character differences, also just look at Biden and Hillary. Joe looks fit as heck, and Hillary doesn't. This matters when an older person is being considered, and I say that as an older person.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #56)

Fri Feb 1, 2013, 06:52 AM

94. oh, I love this - talk about an ignorant DU jury.

 

I had a post hidden, and one juror's comment was "Nothing quite like throwing stink bombs as Hilary exits. She had exactly what to do with overthrowing Qaddhafi? Boy, these right wingers just can't tolerate Hilary - upsets their entire day!"

Talk about the uninformed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Auntie Bush (Reply #40)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:44 PM

57. Auntie, don't waste your breath.

It reminds me of 2008. There will always be some on the left who despise the Clintons as much as the right does. It's not worth fighting with them. Let them vote for someone else, for all I care.

We don't even know if Hillary will choose to run and people are already arguing about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #57)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:57 PM

60. That's good advice...I'll take it! I'm outta here.

and thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Auntie Bush (Reply #60)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:08 PM

63. Take care!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:53 PM

24. Yeah, like Hillary Clinton is going to stay home and ''bake cookies''?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:02 PM

26. Geez. Give the woman some WIDE space, please.

 

Even *I* am doubtful of a presidential run from Secretary Clinton. She had recent health issues, and need to be given time to recuperate.

The Hillary fanbois have to give them WIDE space for Ms. Clinton. It's already bad enough that someone started a super PAC for Sec'y Clinton.

We do not need to start a dynasty. You want a dynasty, see the Bush family and it is about a 50+ year dynasty that now need to end.

George P. Bush needs to fail in politics as he starts his campaigning for whatever he's running for in Texas. He needs to lose BIG.

This sends the messages that dynasties are not what we want. We want fresh ideas, we want a person who'll be truly for the people, and think for the people, and NOT for any lobbyist influencing decisions.

Congress should be making its first step by banning lobbyists from even being close with a Senator or a Representative. Not even for a restaurant seating arrangements.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hard Assets (Reply #26)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:41 PM

55. It would only be a dynasty if Chelsea runs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:03 PM

27. Well...she's got PAC's Forming...but, I remember all of us and PAC's for Al Gore to run

in 2004 and that came to nothing.

I guess ...we shall see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:10 PM

30. That works for me...I hope we try someone Progressive for a change. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:23 PM

35. On Jan. 29, 2013, she is saying YES, but not officially going to announce that today.Parse it.

 

This is the clearest indication yet, that Hillary45 has changed her statement to she is running.

the exact quote is-


"I do want to see more women compete for the highest positions in their countries. I will do what I can, whether or not it's up to me to make a decision on my own future -- right now I'm not inclined to do that -- to make sure women will compete at the highest levels around the world."

-- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, quoted by Capital New York.


right now(on Jan. 29, 2013, she is NOT inclined to give her decision on that.
parse it.

That means she is running, just saying on Jan. 29, 2013, she is not officially saying so,
and only a fool or a wontabee would officially announce what with the official rules of what that entails.

The best thing would be for Joe Biden to run for 2nd place, and be the VP again in her first term, and remove the oxygen for any other serious challenge, and focus on the general in 2016.

"It takes a Clinton to defeat a Bush"-(c)g4a IMHO feel free to disagree.

BTW, it will be many decades before any other SOS comes close to the SOS Hillary45 was.
May she win the Noble Peace Prize next year (or the year after, they have a sort of weird
nomination period, so it might be the year after). Hyperbole aside, has there been any other women that has done more for the world already in the last decade?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #35)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 11:18 PM

69. sometimes I can't tell if your gushing is honest or what...

LOL

You may be the master or just a true believer

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Reply #69)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:21 AM

70. No, this is real. However, if I said this in 2008, it would not have been. But it is now.

 

I was NOT a fan in 2008. She earned my respect.
in fact, I was rather opposite in my posts elsewhere on her, but I evolved watching her
and watching the two become friends and realizing the sum is bigger than the parts so to say.

same with Bill.
I was a Jerry Brown fan and a Teddy fan.
While I was damn happy a democratic candidate became President(my views on the Bush's always were constant since I first heard of 41 decades ago,let alone the bums in the plaza)
my position evolved, especially how I welcome Bill campaigning.

It took a lot of courage for President Obama to say no to Hillary being VP, and even more courage to name her SOS and it took a helleva lot for Hillary to agree to do it.
Most people cut and run. Leave the arena, whine, spend four years plotting to run against him.

I don't think any of us could have imagined the scenerio that ended up happening.

And I as always credit President Obama for looking 10 steps ahead. He saw it, and then made it happen.
And not only allowing, but avidly letting Bill campaign (HIllary by law couldn't overtly campaign while SOS for him) but having Bill be part of the team was pure genius (even if there were ulterior motives involved, that is besides the point).

As I truly want a continuation of President Obama's two terms, and as Hillary and President Obama are in synch on most (not all) of the issues, it will be, and we will move, corny as it sounds, forward.

But if you asked me this in 2008, no I was not a fan, far from it.
It took one man (President Obama) and one woman (next President Hillary) to make the village.

But damn if Hillary wasn't correct all those years ago about a rightwing conspiracy.
Never before were such words mentioned, and she too saw it all those years ago.

And Hillary has that 10 step ahead too.
There is NO way, health being the only reason, that Hillary is not going to run and win in 2016.
And she has all those like me, and almost all of the core voters like me for Barack Obama, going to vote for her. The one thing she did not have in the primaries.
And had she been the nominee, she would have creamed McCain. It might have been closer, or a few states different, but she would have easily won too.
That is what alot of people miss when saying, well she lost in 2008.
She didn't lose, he won. He is not running next time, his agenda is. And she and him are on the same wavelength. The same voters will wait in line as long as possible(or vote early) for Hillary in 2016(and 2020).

IMHO

and btw, my being a fan of President Obama goes back far. I was wearing an elect Barack Obama button back in 2004.(that's not a typo-that is 2004). for President.

But in 2016, it has to be a woman President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:24 PM

36. I think they run this same article every six months or so.

I've heard that "catch up on 20 years worth of sleep" line from her at least twice in the past year. Is this deja vu or does it just is this deja vu or does this just give a sense I've read this a sense I've just read this before about every six months or so or is it just deja vu?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:25 PM

37. We need more duct tape

 

to put over he mouths of the media hacks that promote this stuff only because their media bosses profit big time by promoting a very long 4 year Presidential campaign, and American voters burn out. It is the ultimate ruse by the media elite and it is being played out on us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:27 PM

39. Or maybe it's just deja vu

whoa

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:33 PM

41. OK, then. Russ Feingold is available!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:19 PM

46. Hillary rocks

I will vote for her if she runs. Old is relative. Some folks live to be 100 easily as a factor of genetics, and she is by no means old. She kicks more ass politically than many people half her age.

When she went before the Senate did she look incapacitated? Hell, no, she kicked ass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:02 PM

61. what Hillary REALLY said, translated from Clintonese

"Yes I am running, but I need to get my war chest up so I can blast both the progressive left and the GOP out of existence, so i can have my war with Iran that my friends in Israel will make me look tough, and Bill can finish destroying the left."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonCoquixote (Reply #61)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:10 PM

64. As usual, your tea leaves leave a lot to be desired.

Projecting much?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #64)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:24 PM

65. we will see come 2016

when you cheer for her to run, and sadly,I may have to put down my vote to keep out a Rubio or Bush, but I will have NO delusions, anyoen who thinks Hillary is an FDR democrats is a fool; she will destroy the left, just like the other half of her did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:30 PM

66. DUers amaze me sometimes

She doesn't want to run. Let it go for God's sake.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 10:19 PM

68. Good decision!

I fully support her decision not to run.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:36 AM

75. I think Hillary will run

and I think I'll vote for her

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 12:03 PM

81. That's Clinton-speak for..You bet your ass I'm runnin'. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:00 PM

85. Well...

If she does run in 2016, I would like for her to run a better campaign than she did in 2008. How can people push for and support Hillary Clinton--claiming that she's the best candidate--when she can't even control her own campaign?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Feb 1, 2013, 09:31 AM

95. She deserves a long vacation with Bill

Sitting by a pool and relaxing in the sun. They have both certainly given their all and deserve their happy golden years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread