HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Chelsea Clinton open to r...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Apr 8, 2013, 01:14 PM

Chelsea Clinton open to running for political office

Source: Washington Post

The daughter of former president Bill Clinton and former secretary of state Hillary Clinton says she is open to running for political office one day.

“Right now I’m grateful to live in a city, in a state and a country where I strongly support my mayor, and my governor, and my president, and my senators, and my representative,” Clinton told NBC News, where she is employed as a special correspondent. ”If at some point that weren’t true and I thought I could make a meaningful and measurably greater impact, you know, I’d have to ask and answer that question.”

Clinton has been raising her profile in the past few months, fueling speculation that she is interested in launching a political career. She helped her father put on this year’s Clinton Global Initiative University, a summit for college students and has moderated panels on non-profit work and climate change.

In a recent interview with Parade magazine, Clinton also left the door open to a political bid, if she “thought that I could make a disproportionately positive impact.” Asked if she could describe the circumstances that might bring her into politics, Clinton said, “No, but I’ve never thought too far into the future.” She told Vogue last summer that up until her mother’s 2008 presidential bid she was uninterested in a political career but was no longer sure how she felt.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/04/08/chelsea-clinton-open-to-running-for-political-office/

15 replies, 1769 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 15 replies Author Time Post
Reply Chelsea Clinton open to running for political office (Original post)
Freddie Stubbs Apr 2013 OP
In_The_Wind Apr 2013 #1
Stuckinthebush Apr 2013 #2
kestrel91316 Apr 2013 #3
Stuckinthebush Apr 2013 #4
GreenStormCloud Apr 2013 #5
awoke_in_2003 Apr 2013 #9
Bucky Apr 2013 #11
awoke_in_2003 Apr 2013 #13
winter is coming Apr 2013 #15
trublu992 Apr 2013 #6
Bucky Apr 2013 #10
madrchsod Apr 2013 #7
CK_John Apr 2013 #8
lib2DaBone Apr 2013 #12
olddots Apr 2013 #14

Response to Freddie Stubbs (Original post)

Mon Apr 8, 2013, 01:18 PM

1. That is wonderful! In my opinion she could accomplish a great deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Freddie Stubbs (Original post)

Mon Apr 8, 2013, 01:46 PM

2. Eh.

I love her mom and dad and I'm sure she is a great person but it feels too much like a dynasty. I'm not AGAINST it but I'm not jumping up and down over it either.

That could change.

Right now...just eh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stuckinthebush (Reply #2)

Mon Apr 8, 2013, 01:51 PM

3. She is as free to enter politics as any other American. If she wishes to

tackle it on her own merits, fine with me. She is intelligent and capable.

I hope you aren't suggesting that offspring of politicians should be prohibited from seeking office themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kestrel91316 (Reply #3)

Mon Apr 8, 2013, 01:53 PM

4. Of course not

and of course she can. I'm just saying that it doesn't make me happy or sad. Just "eh". I guess I can surmise her political philosphy. I guess I can assume that she will be a centrist Dem like her father and mother. But, until we see her rise on her own merits and philosophy then I can't say anything other than, "Eh."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Freddie Stubbs (Original post)

Mon Apr 8, 2013, 02:40 PM

5. The idea of a political dynasty does not thrill me.

Let her rise or fall on her own merits.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #5)

Mon Apr 8, 2013, 09:28 PM

9. as with all politicians...

she will rise or fall by who she sells out too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awoke_in_2003 (Reply #9)

Mon Apr 8, 2013, 10:10 PM

11. "Sells out to"

...as if she's one of us

I vote for the Dems because they manage the Empire more responsibly. But let's not self-fool into thinking those we place in high office are drawn from the ranks of the Plebes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bucky (Reply #11)

Mon Apr 8, 2013, 10:24 PM

13. "they manage the Empire more responsibly"

yeah, one has shown that the last week.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #5)

Mon Apr 8, 2013, 11:22 PM

15. +1. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Freddie Stubbs (Original post)

Mon Apr 8, 2013, 07:00 PM

6. OMG I'm so sick of this legacy nepotisim crap. What has she done that qualifies her to run?

Her last name is Clinton. Tired of wealthy people looking at public service as a to-do item on their bucket list.

New York has a fledgling public finance campaign initiative that gotten a good number of regular people elected to state government

and Congress. I hope it progresses. We need more people from the community who live work and struggle in it to run. Nope don't want

her not impressed.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trublu992 (Reply #6)

Mon Apr 8, 2013, 10:06 PM

10. Baron Montesquieu predicted this

You should remember Charles-Louis, Baron de Brede et Montesquieu (Chucky for short) as the guy who identified the three basic functions of government--legislative, executive, and judicial--and who had such a powerful pull on some conventioneers in Philadelphia in 1787. He's more important for the Constitution than John Locke is (Locke more inspired the Declaration). But Chucky had some other, more important observations about how men & the three types of government (Republic, Monarchy, or Despotism) interact. Yes, he always thought in threes.

In his view, a true republic requires a public and culture that has a love of virtue, that is, a society in which people (particularly leaders) put their love of country and the welfare of the community above their own personal needs. Think about everything we revere George Washington for and now compare it to, say, Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell, that clown from Alaska, or Rand Paul. But this character must exist among a nation as well. When a people lose virtuousness, they begin to lose their republican form of government. We pause now for this important commercial message.

Now back to Bucky's rant.

We're in post-democratic America. According to ol' Chuck Montesquieu, it's not just the character of the people, but also the size of the state itself, that encourages or prevents certain forms of government. A small state tends toward Republic because the rich and poor are neighbors; they see each other at the market or one works for the other, person to person. There is shared commonwealth because they see one another's person & thus one another's rights. A medium sized nation tends toward monarchy; when you lose neighborliness with your fellow countrymen, you lose common-feeling. You need a strong man to enforce the law so that all have an equality of (now reduced) liberty as allowed by the unifying state. But a large nation, an empire--a Russia or a China--will never be a true democracy. The size of state itself requires a despot to hold united all the conflicting interests of a vast land. Even with elections, Putin is still a strong man, a crowd manipulator and a godfather to racketeers who kill inconvenient journalists for him. An iron grasp has always unified Russia; when Gorbachev loosened that grasp, the factions tore the nation apart.

But let's look at the mote in Uncle Sam's eye. For two generations we've bemoaned the imperial presidency--tho mostly when there's a Republican in office. On the other talon, our compatriots at RedState.com only seem to gin up their love of the non-Second Amendments during the Clinton and Obama presidencies. These are two nice data points of what losing one's virtue looks like. Not as pretty as losing one's virginity, is it? When it's not the president taking over legislative functions, it's the Congress thrusting legislative decisions onto his desk. Remember all those pass-the-buck sequestration proposals the Republican caucuses came up with? They were dodging their responsibilities (just like with fobbing on the debt extension votes) because experience showed the members of Congress lacked the discipline, the capacity to compromise, in a word, the virtue, to pass a budget that split their differences.

Judges, too, demonstrate at least a check-and-balancing expression of despotism. Activist judges on the left and right assume more and more power... but this mostly happens when the most representative branch of the people, the legislative, fails to handle its core responsibilities. It is a failure of republican governance (small-r), demonstrating a failure of public virtue. Congress doesn't deliver it because the people don't demand it. And the people don't demand it because they want their MTV more than they want their communities serviced by their public servants.

We've not lost our republican yet, we may never lose it in full, but against Ben Franklin's possibly apocryphal advice, we're not really keeping it up to snuff lately.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Freddie Stubbs (Original post)

Mon Apr 8, 2013, 07:11 PM

7. she`d be a great corporate president.......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Freddie Stubbs (Original post)

Mon Apr 8, 2013, 07:46 PM

8. Of course she'll run for NY Senate seat to replace President Gillibrand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Freddie Stubbs (Original post)

Mon Apr 8, 2013, 10:15 PM

12. I hope she has more smarts then her mother and Father...

 

Both Hillary and Bill are caught up in screwing over the Amereican people,.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Freddie Stubbs (Original post)

Mon Apr 8, 2013, 10:39 PM

14. Yeah I'm thinking of making a run for some beer .

Yikes the Washington Post may be turning into US magazine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread