HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » The case against Hillary
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:33 AM

The case against Hillary


An admirer explains: A campaign based on her inevitability and entitlement would crash and burn like it did in 2008

BY JOAN WALSH


As November’s election results sink in and the size of President Obama’s victory becomes clearer – he won 332 electoral votes and more than 51 percent of the popular vote — Democrats are uncharacteristically giddy about 2016. Not only is demography on the party’s side, with the share of the young, female and non-white vote rising almost every year, but destiny seems to be, too. Our first black president could be succeeded by our first female president, since the party’s star, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, would immediately become the frontrunner for the nomination, and for election, if she decides to run.

I supported Hillary Clinton in 2008. Smarter people than me believe she will run in 2016, despite her protests, and I mostly hope she does. Chances are I would support her again. There is no other strong certain candidate in the field. Vice President Biden and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo are likely to stay out of the race if she runs. Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley probably would, or should, too. He doesn’t have the stature to successfully challenge her. And there’s no obvious liberal or progressive star to date. Talk about a run by, say, Massachusetts Senator-elect Elizabeth Warren seems premature to me, as much as I admire her: Let’s give her a little bit of time in the Senate to make a difference before pushing her on the national stage. Of course, it’s still quite early, and an inspiring figure may well emerge that could give Clinton an energetic run from the left. Almost nobody was betting on Sen. Barack Obama on Dec. 4, 2005. So we’ll see.

I understand why some Democrats are giddy over the chance of a Clinton candidacy; I’ve gotten caught up in it occasionally, too. She’s the most popular political figure in the country, on either side of the aisle. And if Obama could pass her the baton in 2016, we’d get a chance at a 21st century New Deal, a 12 to 16 year Democratic era (maybe even more) that could eventually rival Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s in accomplishments. It would be powered by an electorate that polls say is more liberal than at any time in modern history, with an appetite for activist domestic government.

But it’s not just those with a bent for activist domestic government who see the thrill of a Hillary race. The activist national security wing of the Democratic Party seems high on a Hillary run, too. The New Yorker’s David Remnick took their temperature at big donor Haim Saban’s annual forum over the weekend, and found participants swooning over Hillary 2016. “Everyone had a theory of which they were one hundred percent certain. There wasn’t much doubt about the ultimate direction. 2007-8 was but a memory and 2016 was within sight. She’s running,” Remnick wrote Monday. He described a fawning video tribute to Clinton that summed up the case for her 2016 candidacy:

read more:
http://www.salon.com/2012/12/04/the_case_against_hillary/

111 replies, 8325 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 111 replies Author Time Post
Reply The case against Hillary (Original post)
DonViejo Dec 2012 OP
Jackpine Radical Dec 2012 #1
antigop Dec 2012 #5
AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2012 #51
antigop Dec 2012 #54
AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2012 #56
JDPriestly Dec 2012 #83
onehandle Dec 2012 #2
davidpdx Dec 2012 #34
WI_DEM Dec 2012 #3
antigop Dec 2012 #4
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #8
sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #28
ReRe Dec 2012 #80
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #6
davidpdx Dec 2012 #36
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #38
leveymg Dec 2012 #7
Jackpine Radical Dec 2012 #12
antigop Dec 2012 #13
leveymg Dec 2012 #14
MjolnirTime Dec 2012 #9
antigop Dec 2012 #11
davidpdx Dec 2012 #37
MjolnirTime Dec 2012 #70
antigop Dec 2012 #77
LukeFL Dec 2012 #23
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #94
Myrina Dec 2012 #10
LukeFL Dec 2012 #24
Beacool Dec 2012 #15
antigop Dec 2012 #17
ieoeja Dec 2012 #19
Beacool Dec 2012 #20
davidpdx Dec 2012 #39
Beacool Dec 2012 #43
davidpdx Dec 2012 #47
marlakay Dec 2012 #16
antigop Dec 2012 #22
LongTomH Dec 2012 #55
Jennicut Dec 2012 #18
Beacool Dec 2012 #21
Jennicut Dec 2012 #74
Beacool Dec 2012 #89
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #96
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #95
Beacool Dec 2012 #99
libdem4life Dec 2012 #25
customerserviceguy Dec 2012 #31
antigop Dec 2012 #32
libdem4life Dec 2012 #58
antigop Dec 2012 #60
libdem4life Dec 2012 #61
antigop Dec 2012 #68
libdem4life Dec 2012 #102
antigop Dec 2012 #107
DonCoquixote Dec 2012 #26
antigop Dec 2012 #35
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #27
customerserviceguy Dec 2012 #29
antigop Dec 2012 #33
customerserviceguy Dec 2012 #40
antigop Dec 2012 #42
customerserviceguy Dec 2012 #49
antigop Dec 2012 #52
bluestateguy Dec 2012 #30
Proud Public Servant Dec 2012 #41
bluestateguy Dec 2012 #44
Cha Dec 2012 #45
HeavenTim Dec 2012 #46
Drunken Irishman Dec 2012 #48
antigop Dec 2012 #53
Drunken Irishman Dec 2012 #57
antigop Dec 2012 #59
Drunken Irishman Dec 2012 #64
antigop Dec 2012 #69
MjolnirTime Dec 2012 #71
antigop Dec 2012 #76
Drunken Irishman Dec 2012 #82
antigop Dec 2012 #84
antigop Dec 2012 #86
Drunken Irishman Dec 2012 #73
antigop Dec 2012 #75
Drunken Irishman Dec 2012 #81
antigop Dec 2012 #85
libdem4life Dec 2012 #106
struggle4progress Dec 2012 #50
libdem4life Dec 2012 #63
struggle4progress Dec 2012 #67
libdem4life Dec 2012 #62
Marsala Dec 2012 #65
libdem4life Dec 2012 #66
Beacool Dec 2012 #72
antigop Dec 2012 #78
Beacool Dec 2012 #87
antigop Dec 2012 #91
antigop Dec 2012 #93
antigop Dec 2012 #92
libdem4life Dec 2012 #103
antigop Dec 2012 #104
libdem4life Dec 2012 #108
antigop Dec 2012 #109
Deep13 Dec 2012 #79
Beacool Dec 2012 #88
Deep13 Dec 2012 #90
Sunlei Dec 2012 #97
grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #98
antigop Dec 2012 #100
JustAnotherGen Dec 2012 #101
Whisp Dec 2012 #105
Beacool Dec 2012 #110
Whisp Dec 2012 #111

Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:38 AM

1. Anybody got a clue re: the source for this comment from Walsh?:

"an electorate that polls say is more liberal than at any time in modern history, with an appetite for activist domestic government"

What polls, when? I'd love to see that data!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 10:26 AM

5. hey, joan...a 21st century New Deal from Hillary would mean more jobs outsourced. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 08:50 AM

51. If there is a better way to destroy what is left of the middle-class in this country, I don't

 

know what it is.

Some will support it and whatever that she wants to do, however, because of the name recognition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #51)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 09:21 AM

54. many will support simply it because they want a female prez soooo badly. Believe it. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #54)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:52 AM

56. And ironically, some gender-influenced supporters will call non-supporters "sexists".

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 02:49 AM

83. Hillary seems to have a lot of ties to India and outsourcing to India.

There are good things about her, but I think she has too many problems.

Remember all the baggage that Romney had. Hillary Clinton has a lot too.

The Republicans could have a heyday with her when it comes to ads. I think we need to look elsewhere for our candidate in 2016.

I say that knowing that Hillary Clinton has a lot of support in politics. At this point, she will probably poll well. I don't think that will hold.

I could be wrong, but I think we should try to find a younger candidate, someone strong but idealistic and liberal enough to appeal to young people and what used to be called minorities.

Hillary's Walmart ties, her ties with India, her support for the Iraq War, her temper and her age are some of the big problems she would have if she ran. She and Bill Clinton have made a lot of money since they left the White House. That too would put who she is and her past into the limelight in a way that could muddy her way to the White House.

Hate to be so negative, but we need to choose our 2016 candidate very carefully. Hillary may be the best we can get, but I hope not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:43 AM

2. She's being cautious. She supported Hillary in 2008 and wants her to run again.

She said so yesterday on Hardball.

She just doesn't want Hillary, or her supporters to get cocky.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 10:58 PM

34. They won't listen though

It will be the inevitability factor if she runs again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 10:07 AM

3. The problem with her 21st Century New Deal assertion is that FDR

had pretty big Democratic majorities and Obama and whoever his successor is doesn't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 10:16 AM

4. what nonsense...she says to be wary of "inevitability and entitlement"

And then says, " There is no other strong certain candidate in the field." Ah, yes, inevitability...there's no one else...it's hers if she wants it.

And the idea that we would get a a 21st century New Deal is absolutely ridiculous.

We need a progressive for that to happen...not a DLCer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #4)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:27 AM

8. Great point!! She says that Hillary shouldn't have this sense of entitlement, then she turns around

and says that there is no one in the Democratic Party field who can beat her. HUH?

I didn't catch that until you pointed out the contradiction. Thanks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #4)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:47 PM

28. Yes, DLC and supporter of the MIC. I will never support Hillary.

Will never support war mongers with or without a D after their names. Or anyone who declared that Torture can be justified under certain conditions.

She is liberal on the usual issues expected of Liberals, but this is no Progressive Democrat.

Didn't support her for all those reason in 2008 and won't be doing if she runs again. Not to mention the 'dynasty' aspect of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #28)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 01:55 AM

80. The DLC sure stays out-of-sight-out-of-mind...

...doesn't it? Do they just convene once every 4 yrs at election time and then slink back off into the populace or to the Caymans to be with their money? Just wondering... Off to see the wizard for me... totally exhausted. Y'all be nice to each other..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 10:27 AM

6. I agree with Joan, but you can't say that around DU, it seems. I like Hillary and will vote

for her if she is the nominee. There's no question about it. However, I feel very uncomfortable with this sense of entitlement. It was there in 2008 and still is. I don't think it's Hillary's fault. It's the fault of *some* of her supporters and the Establishment Democrats who see her nomination as inevitable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:03 PM

36. My advice is to keep an open mind

it's way too early to say who will run. I know it's politically correct to say "I support Hillary" because you'll be attacked by the mob if you don't. It was the same way with the 2008 campaign when Obama was an underdog. There may yet be other good candidates who run.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #36)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:06 PM

38. I agree with you. I will support Hillary if she is the nominee, but she may not be my top choice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 10:40 AM

7. "The activist national security wing of the Democratic Party seems high on a Hillary run"

Thanks for Libya, Syria and Iran, Hillary. You deserve more than just a little of the credit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 01:48 PM

12. Oh, go ahead, say it.

The Neocon Wing.

Old enough (2009) to be prophetic:

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2009/050409c.html

Does the long-term demise (and maybe extinction) of the GOP leave the neoconservatives up the creek without a paddle? Not necessarily.

The neoconservatives started out as liberals and socialists in the Democratic Party. They were never really that conservative on economic policy, only belligerent in foreign and defense policies. And in those two latter policy areas, the Democratic Party is still dominated by their close cousins, the liberal Wilsonian interventionists.

Although the liberal Wilsonians — such as Hillary Clinton, Richard Holbrooke, and Madeleine Albright — are less unilateralist than the neoconservatives and are much more in love with international organizations, they share the neoconservatives’ passion for armed social work and nation-building.

Besides, when you’re deep in the wilderness and your horse is dying, you can’t be too concerned with pimples on your new steed.

The neoconservatives will probably eventually realize that the Republican Party is dying, and will seamlessly re-infest the Democratic mother ship to preserve themselves. And again, they will probably severely debilitate their host.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #12)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 01:56 PM

13. thanks for posting that. Had not seen it. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #12)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 01:58 PM

14. Neocons = Donkeypox. That's a compelling image.

Where do the Saban Center types fall on the liberal Wilsonian through PNAC Neocon scale? How does one distinguish them? One has to ask.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:35 PM

9. Hillary will run, and she will win. and I will be on her side this time because she has earned it.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MjolnirTime (Reply #9)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:40 PM

11. there will be a primary in 2016, not a coronation. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #11)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:05 PM

37. These are the same people that thought 2008 was going to be a coronation

I think you are wasting your time talking to the deaf.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #37)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:08 PM

70. I was vehemently anti-Hillary in 2008. No longer. She will do a good job.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MjolnirTime (Reply #70)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:09 AM

77. a Dem PRIMARY in 2016 will decide who gets the nomination. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MjolnirTime (Reply #9)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:13 PM

23. I will stand by he side too. She has

Demonstrated to be a good supporter and great ally of the Peesident. She has earned my future vote. I very much respect her intelligence.

Hispanics for Hillary!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MjolnirTime (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 01:56 PM

94. She will not have "earned it" until she gets through the primaries. The people will decide.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:39 PM

10. I love the Clintons but

I wish they'd retire from politics & let their legacies speak for themselves.

IMHO she runs the risk of being too "Lady McBeth" -ish in the eyes of history.

Time for a new generation of Dems to take the reins, thanks.

Please see my sig line. Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Myrina (Reply #10)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:15 PM

24. I like her with Julian Castro

Who is a rising star and young DEM.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 02:07 PM

15. That tired old meme: inevitability and entitlement.

That media created meme was B.S. in 2008 and even more so now. Hillary, did not think of herself as inevitable. She worked her butt off and gave it her best shot. She did not expect a coronation. Neither did she expect one when she first ran for the NY senate and went to every county in the state asking for people's votes.

We can agree that Hillary was not well served by the top people of her campaign (mainly Penn as others have indicated), but also Patti Solis Doyle. The campaign's other big mistake was not effectively handling the caucus states.

Having said that, the Clintons are known for learning from their mistakes. Furthermore, after 8 years of having the WH, it will be difficult enough for a Democrat to hold it for another term. I believe that Hillary is the one candidate who can overcome it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #15)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 02:32 PM

17. the inevitability/entitlement meme was pushed by many of her supporters. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #15)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 03:43 PM

19. You "children" just keep telling yourselves it was a media meme, "dearie".


Hope you don't mind my "quoting" your condescension of those who doubted Hillary's inevitability during the 2008 primary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ieoeja (Reply #19)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 05:12 PM

20. I said that Hillary didn't herself believe it.

And I should know since I was there for the long haul.

You are the condescending "child", "dearie".........

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #15)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:14 PM

39. I agree with you she never said that

Her supporters did act like that even if it didn't come from the campaign. Many of them said they wouldn't vote for Obama after the primary.

My advice is a change of tactics this time around. This isn't necessary directed at you, but at other people on DU. Until she says she's going to run, let the chips fall where they may. Really nothing can be done until she makes that decision. When (and if) she does run remind people of her accomplishments. Leave the "she earned it" out of the discussion. That only pisses people off. People are already starting with that crap. I think it is a crying shame they'd use such an argument.

You seem to be pretty respected around here and I think you are one of the people that could influence others to try to rally support instead of rally opposition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #39)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:35 PM

43. The 2008 election was unique.

Two historical candidates were running and one prevailed over the other. I don't think that 2016 will be another repeat of 2008. Frankly, I think that it'll be hard enough for a Democrat to win the WH after having it for 8 years. The Republicans managed it with Bush Sr., but he lost to Clinton 4 years later. I think that Hillary is the one candidate that transcends party lines. She has won the respect of many who would not have voted for her in the past, including some Republicans.

Thanks for the advice. We'll see what happens in a couple of years and whether she changes her mind about running.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #43)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 05:56 AM

47. I agree with you on the historic nature, but there are still many firsts that haven't happened

I also agree that a 3rd D term is going to be very tough. We have to stay focused ad at the same time hope the self-destruction of the Republican Party continues. The Florida debacle robbed us of a possible Gore presidency which might have been two terms (though having Lieberman as Vice-President would have been like stabbing yourself in the back every half-hour)

It is possible for Rubio to run, which would mark the first Cuban-American nominee if he won in the primaries (granted we know there is no chance he'll win the Hispanic vote and the Cuban vote (and even if he won half of the Cuban vote it wouldn't help him much). He'd lose women's votes by a larger margin than Romney and there is no way African American's would vote for him. In a way he might be the better one to go up against especially if Clinton were to win the nomination. She'd put a fork in him and throw him in the oven. Two words: burnt toast.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 02:25 PM

16. I sincerely hope we don't have Hillary

fights for the next 3 years…

I will vote for her if she is our parties choice, but she is not my choice. I want someone without her baggage. Last time she ran I will never forget the huge amount of hate from the other side, not just we don't agree with your issues but we hate you!

I am hoping Brian from Montana does well. I like the way he appeals to the rural crowd while promoting single payer at the same time. Has Hillary ever promoted that? no…

I am worried even with a woman running because of their baggage we could lose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marlakay (Reply #16)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 06:04 PM

22. her "baggage" includes remarks about the "advantages" of outsourcing

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/ndtv-exclusive-hillary-clinton-on-fdi-mamata-outsourcing-and-hafiz-saeed-full-transcript-207593

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 #22)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:23 AM

55. Agreed! There are pictures on the net of her in a sari talking to Tata, the outsourcing company!

I once labeled her: "The senator from India;" I think she worked to gain that label. One of her big donors was Rakesh Gangwal, an Indian born multi-millionaire. Gangwal was a 'turn-around CEO' who wrecked companies for fun and profit. He did it to US Airways, forcing workers to take pay and benefit cuts while trying to get the company ready for a buyout. According to one source, he left US Airways with a cool $15 million in his piggy bank.

Then he came to my old company, Worldspan, with the same modus operandi. We were forced to take 5% paycuts, which we were told might be temporary. At the same time we were learning that the pay cuts would be permanent, someone Googled up SEC documents listing the enormous bonuses Rakki and his friends were getting.

At the same time, he was eliminating pensions for new hires and freezing pensions for 'grandfathered' employees (Those who still had pension benefits accrued!). He was also reducing headcount, first in preparation for an IPO, which tanked when the market wouldn't pay what Rakki wanted per share, then to get the company ready for a buyer. He started with across-the-board cuts, 5% at a time, then with slow, stealth cuts that wouldn't attract the attention of local authorities or the media. I had to watch friends and co-workers marched out the door, sometimes in tears; these were people with families, people with health problems, all of them people who had worked for Worldspan for years.

My turn came in 2005. A few years later I got the chance to come back on a contract for a year, with few benefits. By that time, the company had been bought out by a larger company, Travelport. One of the things I noticed was the young people; when I had worked there in the 90s and early '00s, most of the young people were American. When I was allowed to come back in 2008, almost all the young people were from India, China or the Philippines.

Yeah, Hillary has a dark side, and some of us aren't going to forget it! I will work for anyone who opposes her in the 2016 primaries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 03:11 PM

18. I agree with a lot of what Joan Walsh wrote.

Don't run because people expect you to or you are the inevitable candidate. Run for President because you have a real passion to.

I like Hillary, just not some of the people that backed her. The PUMAS and establishment types like Lenny Davis. And some of the people that worked for her were a turn off like Mark Penn. But if she is the nominee I will totally back her.

I am totally uncomfortable with anyone being seen as inevitable and a shoo-in. This is a democratic republic, we do not have royalty. One must earn the nomination of the Dem Party for me to vote for them. Lay out specifics, let me see what you believe. I felt this way about Obama in 2007/2008 as well even after he won the Iowa caucus. I wanted to get to know him as a candidate before I backed him. I eventually felt Obama was closer to where I was in my beliefs.

But I greatly respect and like Hillary, I respect Joe Biden, I really like Deval Patrick, I like Martin O'Malley. There are tons more great Dems that would be viable candidates in 2016. I want to hear what all of them have to say. But the media is already turning this into a Hillary-fest and it is not really her fault.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jennicut (Reply #18)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 05:22 PM

21. The problem is not Hillary.

Where has she once said that she thinks that she would be inevitable in 2016? So far, she's been telling everyone that she's not running. Once again the media is pushing that idea; on TV, on the radio, in print and on the blogs, they are saying it everywhere.

As for 2008, Hillary lost by a hair to the "hope and change" candidate, but that does not mean that her supporters stopped believing that she would have been the better choice and hope that she will give it another shot in 2016 and make history.

Nice seeing you online.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #21)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:52 PM

74. Hey Bea!

I agree, it is not her fault at all. I really do like Hillary and she actually has grown on me even more in the last 4 years. I truly feel that no matter who ends up as the Dem candidate they will be a great one, we have such a deep bench of Dems. And the Repubs have Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and Santorum. I think Christie will be seen as too moderate for the nutty tea party wing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jennicut (Reply #74)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:11 PM

89. Yeah, Christie is too moderate for the RW.

So was Mitt Romney, for that matter. Their best candidate was Huntsman and he got no traction in the primaries. They wanted kooks like Bachmann, Gingrich or the Pizza guy. Choosing someone too far right is as much of a death knell as choosing someone too far left. Neither extreme could get elected in a general election. One more reason why I hope that Hillary runs in 2016. She has by now wide appeal, even among some Republicans; she's a left to center moderate and her celebrity status is an added plus, just as it is as SOS. It will be hard enough for a Democrat to win in 2016 after 8 years of a Democrat in the WH. I think that Hillary can overcome that barrier.

It's great seeing you. I hope that all is well in CT.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #89)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 02:04 PM

96. The Republicans only pretended to like Hillary in 2008 because they wanted to keep the discord

between Obama and Hillary supporters going in 2008. Sadly, they succeeded in some Democratic circles because there are still bad feelings from 2008. Please don't fall for that "even some Republicans" like her. They don't. They only pretend that they like Hillary Clinton because they hate Barack Obama. They hate the Clintons. They have always hated the Clintons. You know that. I don't care who they are. If Hillary is the nominee, those "some Republicans like her" Republicans will show their true colors, just as they did when her husband was in office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #21)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 02:00 PM

95. His name is Barack Obama, Beacool. And he is our president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #95)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 03:34 PM

99. Yes, it is and so he is.

What's your point?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:37 PM

25. All these dismissive terms are tiresome...inevitability...entitlement...too old

Nonsense. She lost the primary. She and Barack got over it and learned to pull together and respect each other...thankfully.

She's paid her dues...twice over...once with Bill and for herself. She has performed her duties pretty much flawlessly, no matter what hand she was dealt. That's what builds political power...that's the proper reference.

So, where are the competitors...those willing to throw in their hat? Few, if any, make it to the top of any political heap without "baggage". Assuming Jeb ascends, as well, no shortage of baggage there. Other than the ageist thing, the rest could arguably be said about him.

I was not a supporter as she is too conservative and hawkish for me, but admire her greatly...as does most of the world. She has earned it old-fashioned way, IMHO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #25)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:49 PM

31. And she's smart enough

to make sure that she's out of the office of SoS before the fruits of Arab Spring start to look really ugly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #25)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 10:22 PM

32. nope. not "tiresome" -- the truth. What, exactly, has she "EARNED"? nt

Last edited Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:02 PM - Edit history (1)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #32)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 05:11 PM

58. What has any political personage earned? I think it's widely called political power..and without it

you go back to the private sector. She's spent her life in public service while being vilified by sexists across the board who made fun of an early female power person. She's earned her stripes while serving intelligently, appropriately and cooperatively.

I was not one of her supporters...again...but yes, she has earned the right to move forward.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #58)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 05:50 PM

60. ah, yes...people who didn't support her were "sexists". A 2016 PRIMARY, not a coronation. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #60)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 06:02 PM

61. No, just the ones who called her names, made fun of her, and generally made asses of themselves

around anything Hillary and her gender.

That defines a sexist in my book...not a "non supporter", of which I was one. She was the recipient of shameless pundit butts/jokers more than any nominee in my 5 decades watching politics. I hope she wins the Presidency...just to be in the face of all the idiots from Rush/Hannity/O'Reilly Righties to the slackjawed Democrats.

Why so sensitive? The world community pretty much agrees with me...get over it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #61)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 08:56 PM

68. my, my, struck a nerve, did I? There will be a PRIMARY in 2016, not a coronation. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #68)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 03:50 PM

102. Uh, no...not a nerve, just a habit I have of often using more than 10-12 words to say on a subject,

in some cases.

This was in the thread that discusses the sad fact that there are no other qualified Democrats of any leaning showing up to the proverbial party. You seem to forget that I also clearly stated I was not a supporter of hers in the LAST primary.

So what about some critical thinking. Who do you suggest? It's easy to just be "against".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #102)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 04:16 PM

107. and there it is again.. the same meme..."there are no other qualified Democrats" n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:42 PM

26. why oh why

Do peoplethink she is so liberal?


if Obama could pass her the baton in 2016, we’d get a chance at a 21st century New Deal, a 12 to 16 year Democratic era (maybe even more) that could eventually rival Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s in accomplishments.

We can also get that war with Iran that certain of Hillary;s friend have had on back order for years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonCoquixote (Reply #26)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:00 PM

35. because they want a female president soooooo badly. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:45 PM

27. Elizabeth Warren will be the first woman to become US President

The Third Way is in its twilight, soon it will return to the acrid swamp.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:47 PM

29. Hillary's going to run again, I'd bet on it

I cannot think of anyone on our side who is even close to this frontrunner, we're probably stuck with her.

Her protests mean nothing, I remember when she said she only wanted to be the senator from NY. Twice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to customerserviceguy (Reply #29)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 10:23 PM

33. A "frontrunner" ?She hasn't even announced she's running. Too funny. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #33)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:31 PM

40. Ok, then help me out

Who's the frontrunner for 2016? And if you say Biden, you will see me laugh my ass off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to customerserviceguy (Reply #40)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:35 PM

42. Obama hasn't even started his second term. That's the point. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #42)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 07:23 AM

49. And my point is

We look like the Rethugs in 2004, just won two elections with no heir apparent to carry on. They were stuck with Darth Cheney in the spot where their future belonged, and they ended up with two successive free-for-alls that cost them both general elections.

I don't feel as comfortable with that as you do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to customerserviceguy (Reply #49)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 09:14 AM

52. For crying out loud, you totally missed the point. Obama hasn't started his second term yet

and you're declaring a "frontrunner" for 2016. The race hasn't even started yet.

Tell you what, follow davidpdx's advice on this thread. Wait and see who throws their hat in the ring. Stop telling people that there's no one else...stop saying that SHE'S the one.

The Dems will decide in 2016 who THE ONE is via a PRIMARY.


I repeat: there will be a PRIMARY, not a coronation in 2016.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:49 PM

30. All the other Democrats who have been mentioned for 2016 look like lightweights

ONLY Obama and Hillary have the talent, the skill, the gravitas, the charisma and the fundraising ability to win in a post-Citizens United landscape.

Julian Castro, BTW, is a nice young man with some good ideas. He also is not ready yet.

Andrew Cuomo, Martin O'Malley are both good men, but they have Mondale and Dukakis written all over them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestateguy (Reply #30)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:34 PM

41. Now there's some irony for you

"Julian Castro, BTW, is a nice young man with some good ideas. He also is not ready yet. "

Pretty much exactly how Obama was dismissed by Hillary & Co. in 2008.

In 2004, Howard Dean represented the future of the Democratic Party while John Kerrey represented the past. The past won, then lost. In 2008, Barack Obama represented the the future of the Democratic Party while Hillary represented the past. The future won and kept on winning. In 2016, we need to keep on moving -- dare I say it? -- Forward. Nominating a corporatist hawk from the DLC wing of the party is not how we do that, even if she's been a great SecState.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Reply #41)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 12:43 AM

44. Tell you what

If Julian Castro can break the Democrats 18 year losing streak in Texas and get elected to a statewide office, I'll be more than willing to concede that he is electable.

And note that I never said he was forever unelectable and not ready. Just not in 2016.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 02:15 AM

45. A Lot can happen in four years.. but, if Hillary does

run.. maybe she's learned her lesson? It certainly was a hard fought lesson. And, especially the Lesson about having Mark Penn as the advisor and face of the campaign. $6 million worth.

Which reminds me..wonder how much mittLies was paying Stuart Stevens?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 03:06 AM

46. OK

 

re it so hard. omg, unbelieve, the 5th is C, and it's R ll.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 06:16 AM

48. If Hillary is a lock in 2016, I don't see how you don't go with her.

I was not a Hillary supporter in 2008. In fact, if you go re-read my posts from then, you'll probably see I had a decidedly anti-Hillary tone. Even so, I know the next big job for Democrats in the coming years is going to be preserving Obama's legacy domestically. That's what I want and that's what 2016 will be all about. So, as a Democrat, a liberal, and an Obama supporter, I'm of the idea that the candidate who has the best chance at winning should get the nod. I don't think Hillary would be near the reactionist some on DU believe - though I'll readily admit you could probably find more liberal candidates out there.

I guess the question comes down to this: do you want to run a liberal, say, someone like Gillibrand or Warren, even though they may be an underdog - or do you want to run a left-leaning Hillary who is almost definitely a lock? It's a tough choice and I'm actually not going to berate people who feel we should go with a liberal ... or someone else. That's what the primaries are all about. But from my perspective, I'm going to be looking at a few things entering 2016.

Democrats will have held the White House for eight years. Rarely, especially in modern times, has a party held the White House more than eight years. In fact, going back to Hoover's loss in 1932, only twice has the same party held the WH for more than two consecutive elections - FDR-Truman (a total of 20 years, five terms) and Reagan-Bush (a total of 12 years, three terms). Now, Bush won solely because of running as Reagan's third term. Had Bob Dole or Pat Robertson won the primaries that year over Bush, and it's likely Dukakis is the 41st president. But because Bush was associated with Reagan, as his vice-president, and had immense visibility, he had an advantage of overcoming Republican fatigue. Similarly, in 2000, had Gore decided not to run for whatever reason, and Bradley won the nomination, it's likely Bush wins that election by a far wider margin than Gore. Gore, even if he removed himself from the Clinton administration, still had connections to it and nearly won (did win) - but most any other Democrat probably would have lost to Bush that year... though that would make for an interesting debate.

My point? Hillary is unlike any potential candidate we've ever had because her name alone attracts a huge amount of support. Yes, she has her detractors and certainly could fire up the Republican base ... but I see no one, at least this election cycle, that could go up against a Bush or Christie and win. In an election this important, we need a sure-thing.

Then again, polls may change my mind. In 2006, most everyone felt Obama stood little chance of beating John McCain.



But right now? Hillary in 2016.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Reply #48)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 09:19 AM

53. sigh...here we go again..."Hillary... almost definitely has a lock"...we will have a primary in 2016

got it yet?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #53)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 04:16 PM

57. Sigh. Did you even read what I wrote?

I guess the question comes down to this: do you want to run a liberal, say, someone like Gillibrand or Warren, even though they may be an underdog - or do you want to run a left-leaning Hillary who is almost definitely a lock? It's a tough choice and I'm actually not going to berate people who feel we should go with a liberal ... or someone else. That's what the primaries are all about.


Got it yet?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Reply #57)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 05:48 PM

59. and there you go again..."almost definitely a lock"...yep, there's that inevitability meme again

You are so transparent, aren't you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #59)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 06:23 PM

64. No. But you are.

I'm offering up my view. I believe Hillary Clinton is about as close to a lock as you can get in presidential politics. If you don't agree, fine, but don't hound my ass because I think differently than you. God, some of you people can be so insufferable sometimes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Reply #64)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:06 PM

69. she's hasn't even said she's running. There is "no lock" for someone who isn't even running. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #69)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:10 PM

71. It's going to be her. I know it like I knew it was going to be Obama in 2008.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MjolnirTime (Reply #71)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:04 AM

76. ah, yes.. the "inevitability" meme... it's hers..there is no one else. It's "inevitable." nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #76)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 02:31 AM

82. Are you a robot?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Reply #82)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 08:58 AM

84. just pointiing out the same meme Because the meme keeps getting repeated. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Reply #82)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:14 AM

86. tell you what...how about following davidpdx's advice and WAIT until you see who's running

before you form an opinion about 2016?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #69)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:35 PM

73. If she runs, she wins. That's my view.

She would've won in '08 had Obama not run and I don't see any Democrat who has near the firepower to knock her off. Obama was a once in a lifetime politician...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Reply #73)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:03 AM

75. ah, yes.. the "inevitability" meme... it's hers..there is no one else. It's "inevitable." nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #75)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 02:31 AM

81. Ah, yes, no one dare have a different opinion.

Look, I don't know what game you're trying to play, but whatever. I believe Hillary stands the best chance of winning in 2016. History seems to back me up on this. If you don't, great, but I've yet to see any candidate who's got near the built-in support that Hillary does right now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Reply #81)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 08:59 AM

85. and there you go again...you do know what a "meme" is, don't you? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #85)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 04:13 PM

106. A meme? Hmmm. How about we just agree that it will be "a PRIMARY and not a coronation in 2016"

...even though that meme "don't hunt"...or was it "that dawg don't hunt", but who remembers.

Who else do you have in mind...inquiring Progressive minds want to know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 08:37 AM

50. HRC won't run. She said in 2008 she wouldn't run again. And recently

in speaking about stepping down as SoS, she said she had spent enough time in public service now and wanted to try something else

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to struggle4progress (Reply #50)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 06:22 PM

63. I'd guess she will be drafted. It does seem strange that no Democrat has come forth.

The Democratic Party is in a world of hurt, so it seems, with such a vaccuum of candidates who can actually or are willing to do the job...raise the funds...get out the voters...put their reputations and families and history on the line.

If it comes to that, she will do her duty rather than let Jeb waltz into the Oval Office. More than can be said for some on this board.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #63)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 06:49 PM

67. The chance of JB being elected President in a fair election is nearly zero


Nobody wants another Bush in the Oval Office, so to get JB "elected" would require enormous shenanigans, well beyond the stunts the GOP pulled in 2000 or 2004

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 06:17 PM

62. Other than her gender and her age and her party, what sets her apart from Jeb?

...and the first two don't count ... I don't see him having to dodge significant elements of his party based on his political or family DNA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #62)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 06:24 PM

65. Jeb's last name is nationally toxic and his party has moved away from him to the right

Hillary's last name is nationally golden and her party has moved towards her over the past four years. Most of the objections to her in 2008 don't matter as much now, and will be even less meaningful in 2016.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marsala (Reply #65)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 06:32 PM

66. I agree she's made it with dignity and hard work. She's respected all over the world.

But Jeb still gets top Republican billing...seems...it will be an interesting four years. Maybe he's just kind of holding the space or planning to serve as power broker? Additionally, a family fluent in Spanish can't hurt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #62)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:21 PM

72. Hillary is not Bill's daughter. It is not a dynasty.

Now, if Chelsea chooses to run, then it'll be a dynasty. Besides, what's the problem? I don't hear any complaints from Democrats about all the Kennedys that have been cashing on their political name since JFK was president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to antigop (Reply #78)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:58 AM

87. antigop, you are no Hillary supporter.

You crap on any and every Clinton post. So forgive me if I don't give a flying fig what you have to say on the subject.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #87)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 01:24 PM

91. telling the truth about her support for outsourcing is not "crapping". Did I strike a nerve?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #91)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 01:29 PM

93. telling the truth about her support for increases in h1-b visas is not "crapping" either.



Thanks for the opportunity to post this again, Bea!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #87)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 01:26 PM

92. and once again, I will post HER OWN WORDS on the "advantages" of outsourcing

http://ww.ndtv.com/article/india/ndtv-exclusive-hillary-clinton-on-fdi-mamata-outsourcing-and-hafiz-saeed-full-transcript-207593

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.


Thanks for the opportunity to post this, Bea!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #92)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 03:59 PM

103. Feel free to vote for that other party. Until we can get a Grayson or someone else

qualified, capable, willing and electable...we do the best we can. Sniping and carping isn't helpful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #103)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 04:04 PM

104. so now postng Hillary's OWN WORDS is "sniping" and "carping"? Gee, don't DUers want the truth? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #104)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 04:26 PM

108. Wow...Hillary is not a Liberal. Most of us understand that. Sniping and carping, in this case,

refers to critical words and bad attitude...yours. Overly repetitive comes to mind, as well.

So now you brought out the grammar police...capitalization, spelling, spacing and verb tense errors. Nobody's perfect.

Peace out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #108)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 04:35 PM

109. so posting HER OWN words is a "bad attitude"? It's called the truth. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 01:03 AM

79. My concern is that she may be too old for it.

Frankly I think Reagan was too old. McCain would have been too old.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Deep13 (Reply #79)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:02 PM

88. Was Golda Meir too old?

She was 71 years old when she became president of Israel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #88)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 01:24 PM

90. *shrug* nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 02:49 PM

97. I think Mrs. Clinton will retire from serving in American politics fulltime.

She will have the freedom to do more global humanatarian work. Probably do some future diplomatic missions for President Obama, as a team with a new SOS. I could see her in a position in the UN.

I think she really means it about not wanting to run for President again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 03:09 PM

98. Since she was on the Walmart Board of Directors, I'd vote for Fiengold or Elizabeth Warren.

"An ABC News analysis of the videotapes of at least four stockholder meetings where Clinton appeared shows she never once rose to defend the role of American labor unions.

The tapes, broadcast this morning on "Good Morning America," were provided to ABC News from the archives of Flagler Productions, a Lenexa, Kan., company hired by Wal-Mart to record its meetings and events.

A former board member told ABCNews.com that he had no recollection of Clinton defending unions during more than 20 board meetings held in private.

The tapes show Clinton in the role of a loyal company woman. "I'm always proud of Wal-Mart and what we do and the way we do it better than anybody else," she said at a June 1990 stockholders meeting." - ABC

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #98)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 03:41 PM

100. goes hand in glove with her statement about "advantages" of outsourcing US jobs. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 03:50 PM

101. Well thought out article

But in my mind - VP Biden is the natural front runner . . . I would support Biden over Hillary - but he was my number 2 pick in 2008. I started out wanting him or Edwards. So - I'd have to support Biden - and it would be a bloody Primary battle.

Wonder why she thinks Biden would just step aside if Hillary declares she is running?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 04:07 PM

105. the massive lies she gave during the primaries

I'm surprised so many can get over that, so easily.

why she did that, who knows. but she can't blame it on bad campaign managing or anything like that.

I guess it was the last desperate effort to win at all costs. If that is so, then she is not running again this time - the bridges are aflame that she set on fire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #105)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:59 PM

110. Oh, please.............

Give me a break!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #110)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 12:56 AM

111. Lies are lies, Bea. Whether they come from a Romney or anyone else.

I know you don't want a list, so I'll back off of doing that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread