HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » So Hillary cant even CONS...

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:35 PM

So Hillary cant even CONSIDER running again?

Notice how Hillary and ONLY Hillary cant even consider running again, for president.

Why even just mentioning it will bring out such rage.

Lets play a game, which men CANT even consider running again? Either party...

Go...

218 replies, 8938 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 218 replies Author Time Post
Reply So Hillary cant even CONSIDER running again? (Original post)
Eliot Rosewater Nov 2018 OP
Just a Weirdo Nov 2018 #1
bluestarone Nov 2018 #4
babylonsister Nov 2018 #52
metroins Nov 2018 #85
Auggie Nov 2018 #101
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #176
Mariana Nov 2018 #89
bluestarone Nov 2018 #91
Mariana Nov 2018 #95
bluestarone Nov 2018 #100
The Velveteen Ocelot Nov 2018 #5
lunamagica Nov 2018 #36
SCantiGOP Nov 2018 #83
Jim Lane Nov 2018 #189
SCantiGOP Nov 2018 #202
Jim Lane Nov 2018 #212
NastyRiffraff Nov 2018 #126
dlk Nov 2018 #208
Mike Nelson Nov 2018 #2
Eliot Rosewater Nov 2018 #3
Jakes Progress Nov 2018 #113
Wintryjade Nov 2018 #7
jalan48 Nov 2018 #6
Zing Zing Zingbah Nov 2018 #9
Bfd Nov 2018 #50
George II Nov 2018 #109
Bfd Nov 2018 #154
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #182
violetpastille Nov 2018 #14
jalan48 Nov 2018 #18
Renew Deal Nov 2018 #16
treestar Nov 2018 #53
jalan48 Nov 2018 #65
George II Nov 2018 #111
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #183
karynnj Nov 2018 #195
lunamagica Nov 2018 #70
pnwmom Nov 2018 #86
liberal N proud Nov 2018 #132
jalan48 Nov 2018 #136
liberal N proud Nov 2018 #144
jalan48 Nov 2018 #153
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #177
EffieBlack Nov 2018 #171
Pisces Nov 2018 #8
Eliot Rosewater Nov 2018 #12
GWC58 Nov 2018 #39
elleng Nov 2018 #28
mcar Nov 2018 #43
Bfd Nov 2018 #48
Newland56 Nov 2018 #125
Bfd Nov 2018 #46
elocs Nov 2018 #10
Zing Zing Zingbah Nov 2018 #13
GWC58 Nov 2018 #41
Lotusflower70 Nov 2018 #11
Renew Deal Nov 2018 #15
Bfd Nov 2018 #71
BootinUp Nov 2018 #80
Renew Deal Nov 2018 #108
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #180
Aristus Nov 2018 #17
babylonsister Nov 2018 #88
brooklynite Nov 2018 #19
Eliot Rosewater Nov 2018 #21
Small-Axe Nov 2018 #31
brer cat Nov 2018 #140
Small-Axe Nov 2018 #163
LiberalLovinLug Nov 2018 #96
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #185
MrsCoffee Nov 2018 #197
TheFarseer Nov 2018 #146
karynnj Nov 2018 #44
brooklynite Nov 2018 #115
karynnj Nov 2018 #128
John Fante Nov 2018 #139
karynnj Nov 2018 #147
mcar Nov 2018 #45
Bfd Nov 2018 #56
brooklynite Nov 2018 #117
George II Nov 2018 #131
brooklynite Nov 2018 #135
FBaggins Nov 2018 #206
LenaBaby61 Nov 2018 #124
lunamagica Nov 2018 #72
brooklynite Nov 2018 #123
OnDoutside Nov 2018 #20
brush Nov 2018 #34
OnDoutside Nov 2018 #47
maddiemom Nov 2018 #110
karynnj Nov 2018 #129
qazplm135 Nov 2018 #22
Eliot Rosewater Nov 2018 #23
qazplm135 Nov 2018 #152
Takket Nov 2018 #24
Eliot Rosewater Nov 2018 #26
NightWatcher Nov 2018 #25
ProudLib72 Nov 2018 #54
Jarqui Nov 2018 #27
still_one Nov 2018 #29
brush Nov 2018 #30
Bfd Nov 2018 #61
brush Nov 2018 #74
Bfd Nov 2018 #81
John Fante Nov 2018 #141
Garrett78 Nov 2018 #148
dameatball Nov 2018 #32
Mariana Nov 2018 #92
ananda Nov 2018 #33
ProudLib72 Nov 2018 #59
Bfd Nov 2018 #66
ProudLib72 Nov 2018 #73
Bfd Nov 2018 #76
ProudLib72 Nov 2018 #79
Bfd Nov 2018 #82
aikoaiko Nov 2018 #116
ananda Nov 2018 #209
KWR65 Nov 2018 #35
MarvinGardens Nov 2018 #160
Stuart G Nov 2018 #37
In_The_Wind Nov 2018 #38
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #178
lapfog_1 Nov 2018 #40
Small-Axe Nov 2018 #64
lapfog_1 Nov 2018 #67
borgesian Nov 2018 #78
lapfog_1 Nov 2018 #87
borgesian Nov 2018 #97
mcar Nov 2018 #42
lapfog_1 Nov 2018 #60
mcar Nov 2018 #63
lapfog_1 Nov 2018 #69
TCJ70 Nov 2018 #49
treestar Nov 2018 #51
NastyRiffraff Nov 2018 #127
George II Nov 2018 #137
treestar Nov 2018 #145
FBaggins Nov 2018 #207
TheCowsCameHome Nov 2018 #55
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #187
Marrah_Goodman Nov 2018 #57
Progressive dog Nov 2018 #58
GoCubsGo Nov 2018 #62
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #186
GoCubsGo Nov 2018 #190
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #193
oasis Nov 2018 #68
Bfd Nov 2018 #75
MineralMan Nov 2018 #77
Mr. Ected Nov 2018 #84
JCanete Nov 2018 #90
Nasruddin Nov 2018 #93
BlueInRedHell Nov 2018 #94
bitterross Nov 2018 #98
zentrum Nov 2018 #99
BlueStater Nov 2018 #102
Small-Axe Nov 2018 #114
BlueStater Nov 2018 #121
Small-Axe Nov 2018 #156
BlueStater Nov 2018 #158
Small-Axe Nov 2018 #159
BlueStater Nov 2018 #161
Small-Axe Nov 2018 #162
BlueStater Nov 2018 #165
Small-Axe Nov 2018 #166
BlueStater Nov 2018 #169
Post removed Nov 2018 #170
BlueStater Nov 2018 #172
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #194
Garrett78 Nov 2018 #201
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #213
Tarc Nov 2018 #103
redixdoragon Nov 2018 #104
murielm99 Nov 2018 #142
SMC22307 Nov 2018 #105
GitRDun Nov 2018 #106
ConnorMarc Nov 2018 #215
LibDemAlways Nov 2018 #218
jb5150 Nov 2018 #107
zaj Nov 2018 #112
aikoaiko Nov 2018 #118
Andy823 Nov 2018 #119
ConnorMarc Nov 2018 #120
melman Nov 2018 #134
DFW Nov 2018 #122
Joe941 Nov 2018 #130
Garrett78 Nov 2018 #149
Algernon Moncrieff Nov 2018 #175
Bettie Nov 2018 #133
Separation Nov 2018 #138
Voltaire2 Nov 2018 #143
clementine613 Nov 2018 #150
whistler162 Nov 2018 #151
Algernon Moncrieff Nov 2018 #174
krawhitham Nov 2018 #155
Azathoth Nov 2018 #157
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #181
Algernon Moncrieff Nov 2018 #196
Garrett78 Nov 2018 #188
Azathoth Nov 2018 #211
StevieM Nov 2018 #216
Initech Nov 2018 #164
Marrah_Goodman Nov 2018 #167
MarvinGardens Nov 2018 #168
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #184
Algernon Moncrieff Nov 2018 #173
Garrett78 Nov 2018 #179
Hortensis Nov 2018 #191
Algernon Moncrieff Nov 2018 #198
Hortensis Nov 2018 #210
Vinca Nov 2018 #192
Kashkakat v.2.0 Nov 2018 #199
Gothmog Nov 2018 #200
Eliot Rosewater Nov 2018 #204
librechik Nov 2018 #203
sellitman Nov 2018 #205
Autumn Nov 2018 #214
LakeSuperiorView Nov 2018 #217

Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:38 PM

1. I don't want her to run

 

She deserves retirement from active politics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Just a Weirdo (Reply #1)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:40 PM

4. BULLSHIT!!!!

She can run for whatever she decides too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestarone (Reply #4)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:02 PM

52. And people are entitled to their opinions.

Mine is also a no.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Reply #52)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:47 PM

85. I agree with you.

I was pro Hillary last cycle.

I don't want her to run again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to metroins (Reply #85)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:19 PM

101. Another no

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Reply #52)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 01:55 AM

176. Mine too... big time NO WAY!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestarone (Reply #4)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:05 PM

89. The poster is in no way

preventing Hillary from running for whatever she decides too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [sic].

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mariana (Reply #89)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:10 PM

91. TRUE and my post WAS NOT responding to the original poster?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestarone (Reply #91)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:13 PM

95. Yes.

The poster you responded to is in no way preventing Hillary from running for whatever she decides too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [sic] by expressing an opinion here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mariana (Reply #95)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:17 PM

100. Your right and i

Can very much DISAGREE with ( I don't want her to run again) their opinion and MY opinion!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Just a Weirdo (Reply #1)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:41 PM

5. I don't either, but she can consider it if she wants.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Just a Weirdo (Reply #1)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:36 PM

36. That's up to her, don't you think?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Just a Weirdo (Reply #1)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:40 PM

83. Jimmy Carter can't run again

There, answered your question, now you can delete your post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SCantiGOP (Reply #83)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 04:28 AM

189. I think the OP is silly but your answer is wrong

 

Jimmy Carter is legally eligible to run again and to win another term as President.

Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, on the other hand, are Democrats who aren't legally eligible, barring an extremely unlikely amendment to the Constitution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Reply #189)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:13 PM

202. The OP said

And I quote: ď...which men CANíT run again.Ē
Thus I mentioned Pres Carter as ineligible based on age, even though he does meet the constitutional test.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SCantiGOP (Reply #202)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 03:39 PM

212. OK, I didn't distinguish it the way you did

 

Carter isn't exactly "ineligible based on age" the way that, for example, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is (because she doesn't meet the constitutional age test).

Obviously, Carter isn't going to run, so it doesn't matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Just a Weirdo (Reply #1)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 06:53 PM

126. Your not wanting her to run..

..is different from her not being ALLOWED to run, which is the subject of the OP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Just a Weirdo (Reply #1)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:48 PM

208. Hillary Won the Election Last Time - What's Wrong with a Proven Winner?

She would make an outstanding president. The misogyny from the last campaign has never been truly addressed. We see it today in the calls for Nancy Pelosi to step down, as well. Seriously, what's wrong with experienced, successful women?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:39 PM

2. I think she's probably...

Ö not going to... but she would change if she thought she would be the best bet to beat Trump or Pence in 2020. And, your thesis is correct as people don't seem to rule out many men, including Kerry and Romney.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mike Nelson (Reply #2)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:40 PM

3. I cant think of any who are ruled out, even the much older ones.

It isnt about age with Hillary, it is misogyny and 25 years of effective propaganda ALL of it lies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Reply #3)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:45 PM

113. Even on DU, many have been unwitting victims

of that 25 year campaign. And when you throw that in with a little tamped down misogyny, you get a party that turns away from its best and finest.

I see no reason for her not to run. The RW propaganda machine will go after whoever does. And some on DU will even start to believe the bs.

But I don't see why she would. I know she won the popular vote, but the election shouldn't have been anywhere near close. The smartest and most moral and the most qualified candidate in decades lost to the worst candidate ever, one who shouldn't have gotten 10% of the vote.

So. I would campaign and vote for her in a heartbeat. But I don't begrudge her a more peaceful life after her service to others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mike Nelson (Reply #2)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:42 PM

7. Or Sanders, or Biden. And neither of them ran a primary basically unchallenged, and a 3 million win.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:42 PM

6. She's run for President and lost twice. Do we have any male candidates wanting to run who have the

same history? I think if she wants to run again she should be able to but I would hope we would have a large number of other Democrats to choose from in the primaries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jalan48 (Reply #6)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:46 PM

9. Lost twice, plus she's getting older

It just doesn't make sense for her to try it again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zing Zing Zingbah (Reply #9)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:00 PM

50. The four top names usually mentioned here are all nearing 80.

 

Hillary's getting older?
Apparantly there's no age lmiit judging by the other names promoted as candidates.

So age isn't even a qualifier.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bfd (Reply #50)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:38 PM

109. She's only 71. That's at least five years younger than two of the Democratic....

...men being touted RIGHT NOW (who are 77 and 76)

But, of course, she's a woman, who has a life expectancy five years longer, 81, than men! In fact, those two men have already reached the life expectancy of American men, 76.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #109)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 11:34 PM

154. Thanks George. See! Hillary doesn't fit that "she's too old" bs afterall.

 

Thanks for making this clear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zing Zing Zingbah (Reply #9)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 02:18 AM

182. Absolutely, lost not just twice, but twice in a row...her decision not to run again is a wise one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jalan48 (Reply #6)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:47 PM

14. Biden


That time ó actually, times ó Joe Biden ran for president 02:03
Washington (CNN)As Vice President Joe Biden mulls another run for president, it's worth looking back at his two past bids -- launched in 1987 and 2007.

Biden's first campaign was derailed rather quickly in September 1987 after a plagiarism scandal culminated in an admission he lifted -- nearly verbatim -- a speech originally given by a British politician.
And his 2007 bid is likely most remembered for the gaffes the free-speaking Delaware senator let fly, including one in which he inartfully described his then-Democratic rival, Sen. Barack Obama, as "the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy."


I'm not a personal "fan" of Biden. I would keep an arm's length distance if I ever met him in person. But if he's the nominee I will not gripe about it.

We just need a decent, human Democrat up in there. I don't need to fall in love.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to violetpastille (Reply #14)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:52 PM

18. Thanks for this info. I forgot he ran in 1987

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jalan48 (Reply #6)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:50 PM

16. Biden

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jalan48 (Reply #6)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:03 PM

53. Is twice needed? Bernie ran and lost even the primary

Kerry ran and lost; Biden ran and lost the primaries twice (though winning as VP). There are those who oppose these men; but it seems more pronounced for Hillary. Like the "twice" mantra is the standard. Because she can be distinguished for them on that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #53)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:12 PM

65. Hillary twice for President in eight years. Biden also. Kerry once and Bernie once I believe.

The more times a candidate runs and loses should be of interest I think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #53)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:41 PM

111. Many of those mentioned here (Biden, Sanders, Kerry, and Clinton)....

....Clinton is at least three years younger than the others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #53)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 02:19 AM

183. I think every candidate deserves a second chance, like Hillary had.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #53)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 09:24 AM

195. If the thread was a former Kerry aide saying he was in, you would get the same negatives

They happened in all the media speculating threads. Not to mention, he was thrashed here on DU when he considered running in 2008 with at least the intensity as the negativity now on a Clinton run. As to his comments, after a few where he pretty unambiguously said he was doing nothing to run, he intentionally repeated a comment that it was 2018 that should be talked about.

As to who might be more likely considering a run, google hillaryclinton.com, joebiden.com and johnkerry.com. Two are alive. Kerry shut down his when he started as SoS and has not restored it. In 2006, I thought Kerry could pull it off if it came down to just Hillary and himself. With Kerry/Feingold, he was better positioned on the issues and by far the best debater i've seen. I also thought his strength in meeting people one to one in Iowa and NH which made him the winner in 2004 could work again in 2008. Additionally, swiftboating had evolved to mean a disgusting lie that smears a person for political purposes and Kerry was seen as a very clean politician.

Though my respect has only increased, I doubt he will run and if he did, I assume he would not win the nomination. He is too old, even though he is as sharp as ever and likely more physically fit than people decades younger. I do hope that whichever Democrat wins uses these many elder statesmen to restore our country.

I think until one of the next generation catches fire, Biden and Sanders will poll on top because of name recognition. If Hillary Clinton were included, she likely would too.

I think for many Democrats, one other thing thing that works against her is that she is seen as the one heavily pushed by the PTB twice. You might remember in 2005 many here attacked Kerry as being the person they voted for only because he was seen as likely to win. This even though, Dean, Edwards and Clark all had more media support before Iowa.

I suspect that Sanders will drop as soon as Warren or Sherrod Brown or anyone else who could be seen as from the progressive wing enters. Biden is a proxy for Obama supporters. It is hard to imagine him staying that high as he is shown at rallies in NH and Iowa.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jalan48 (Reply #6)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:19 PM

70. No, she lost once. You are counting her primary run. Uder that criteria, IIRC, Nixon lost

more than once. And Biden? how many times has he ran for president?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jalan48 (Reply #6)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:53 PM

86. Biden ran in 1988 and 2008. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jalan48 (Reply #6)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 07:49 PM

132. She lost because of a very flawed system and Bob factors

She won the popular vote and would have won the EC if the some whos candidate lost in the primaries would have pulled up their shorts and not have a my way or the highway highway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal N proud (Reply #132)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 08:17 PM

136. Shouldn't have been close against a candidate like Trump and California was the main reason for

the three million vote margin. Blaming voters is an odd way to win elections and says as much about the candidate as it does about the voters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jalan48 (Reply #136)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 10:12 PM

144. Did you forget, trump had a little help?

With republican Secretary of States and voter oppression and Russia, coupled with the my candidate or bust crowd, she was severely handicapped.

I hope one day we learn just how involved Russia was giving trump the office. We seen many examples this mid-term election of the voter oppression through voter purges, closed polling places and insufficient machines which many don't have paper back up.

The republicans cheat, but if everyone doesn't vote for the Democratic candidates, their cheating can't be overcome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal N proud (Reply #144)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 11:17 PM

153. If we're going to win in 2020 we will need a very dynamic candidate. Not fair, but it's reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jalan48 (Reply #136)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 01:58 AM

177. Very true... we need to pick a candidate who can inspire voters to overwhelmingly defeat

the Fascist-in-Chief. We can't risk another close contest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jalan48 (Reply #6)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 01:22 AM

171. Biden

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:43 PM

8. Sounds like you just want to stir it up today

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pisces (Reply #8)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:47 PM

12. I am sorry if openly supporting Hilary Clinton on Democratic Underground bugs you...

Wait, no I am not AT ALL fucking sorry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Reply #12)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:44 PM

39. If Hillary were to run again I'd be behind her

100%! 👌🏻👍🏻🤔

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pisces (Reply #8)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:14 PM

28. Right

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pisces (Reply #8)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:52 PM

43. I see OPs here all the time

promoting various Democrats for 2020 runs.

Why the issue with one about HRC?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mcar (Reply #43)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:56 PM

48. Good question. Somehow suggesting Hillary is stirring things up??

 

She can do whatever she chooses. Just like anyone else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mcar (Reply #43)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 06:51 PM

125. It's not really

Itís not really a post promoting Hillary
Itís a post complaint about people who donít support Hillary running again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pisces (Reply #8)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:54 PM

46. Stir what up? The question is pretty simple

 

There's nothing to stir up.

No one has to answer the thread. There're a lot of topics on DU to choose from.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:46 PM

10. You want a name? Here's one: Bernie 'Get off my lawn you damned kids' Sanders.

That's my opinion and as such, it's not wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elocs (Reply #10)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:47 PM

13. I would hope he wouldn't run again too.

I would like to see a different assortment of people in 2020.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elocs (Reply #10)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:46 PM

41. Yeah and he's not a Democrat, he's an

Independent that caucuses with Dems.🙃

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:46 PM

11. She can consider it if she wants

But she is still having an impact whether she does or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:49 PM

15. No. It's over for her

At least as president

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #15)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:20 PM

71. Its over for bernie too. We have some amazing people to choose from

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bfd (Reply #71)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:30 PM

80. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bfd (Reply #71)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:37 PM

108. I hope so

He did the Russians business in 2016 whether he knew it or not

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #15)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 02:07 AM

180. I think so too... Hillary made a wise choice to bow out of politics gracefully.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:50 PM

17. I think it would be a stroke of genius for HRC to announce a bid for the Presidency.

And then drop out at some strategically effective time before the primaries.

The repukes would get all geared up to hit her again with thirty years-worth of hatred and revulsion. Only to have to shelve the tactic once she drops out, and start from scratch trying to discredit an unplanned-for opponent.

BTW, dropping out before she takes a penny in contributions would be the best way...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aristus (Reply #17)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:55 PM

88. Except she doesn't deserve any more

wrath or negativity from anyone. She's had more than enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:55 PM

19. I'll answer: Al Gore, John Kerry and Mike Dukakis...

...who, like Hillary Clinton, ran poorly managed campaigns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #19)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:00 PM

21. Please point out the stories, talking heads saying they cant run or the

threads here.

Start a thread on one of them and see how big the reaction is.

sigh

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Reply #21)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:20 PM

31. Hello Eliot Rosewater....

 

Happy Thanksgiving, I always enjoy reading your posts and am generally in agreement.

On this issue (and as one who very badly wanted HRC to be president and who is convinced she would have been among the greats) I must agree with Brooklynite above.

Gore, Kerry, and Dukakis had their chances and lost. They were "done." To that list, I'd add Humphrey, Mondale, and the prospects of a non-sequential second run for Jimmy Carter.

Maybe it is a party memory of Adlai Stevenson, but no Democrat who has lost a presidential race at the top of a ticket has been renominated since 1956.

That's not misogyny. Just politics in America.

All the best.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Small-Axe (Reply #31)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 08:54 PM

140. umm

Humphrey has been dead for 40 years, so I think we can all agree that it would not be wise for him to run again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brer cat (Reply #140)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:35 AM

163. The point---if it wasn't obvious enough--was that HHH never ran for president again...

 

after losing in 1968.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Reply #21)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:14 PM

96. So are you saying that IF any of those male individuals did run again

And because of name recognition, experience, etc.. they became the front runners, you are saying that they would be the best candidate for not just the Democratic party, and their voters, who would no doubt support them, but for support from enough small r Republicans and Independents, and the AA vote , and new young voters? Do you not think the GOP would have an advantage in that they could regurgitate and use all the old fake news swiftboating techniques on them, and that there wouldn't be a large group of voters that had already brainwashed and they had dismissed them as getting their vote? Then add new smears on top of that. I mean, if these individuals didn't win the first time, what makes you think that they'd do any better now? How has their images improved with those voters on the fence that we need to win over for 2020? How would they, this time, actually improve and get those extra votes they didn't get the first time?

Sometimes one has to concede that we will never give up the war, but we have lost battles. Battles that we can never fight over and win. Putin, McConnell, RW media, won the character assassination battles with those individuals. And it is partly the fault of our side for not fighting back against it hard enough.

And as hard it is to admit it, they won it against Hillary Clinton as well. I pains me to admit that, but its true. And Hillary has tried twice already and 'lost'.

I hope one day some great documentary film maker will make a documentary on the Clintons. The good and the bad. How the very real 'vast right wing conspircacy' slowly chipped away at their legacies. And how they successfully re-painted them into monsters. That politically engaged Republicans absolutely hate her, for reasons they can't even define anymore, but also the apolitical, who upon hearing her name, the only thing they know about her is, "emails", "Benghazi" etc...whenever her name is brought up, that she would not get any new traction with new voters either. But I'd like to see a documentary showing their work in the Clilnton Foundation, working in Africa and the AIDS epidemic and Hillary's work in the Senate for child healthcare. etc. etc. etc..

It is sad to say, though, its over for her. She could have, should have, would have been a fine President. And a great historical example as the first female President. But its not going to happen. It is far too risky. We need to win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalLovinLug (Reply #96)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 02:28 AM

185. Not just tried twice and lost... twice in a row.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to InAbLuEsTaTe (Reply #185)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 10:59 AM

197. She didn't fucking lose 2016 and everyone saying so in this thread knows it.

Fuck that bullshit narrative. The election was flat out stolen from her.

Damn this place can be so disgustingly toxic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Reply #21)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 10:46 PM

146. It will be a short thread

Because no one has even thought about any of those 3 for at least 10 years. Mention Bernie and you will have a longer thread with twice as much venom. She can run if she wants and people are free to vote for her or vote for someone they like better, man or woman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #19)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:52 PM

44. I disagree that Kerry lost because of badly run campaign. It was a tough year for us

GWB was at 60 percent approval in December 2003. Had there been adequate voting machines in Ohio, he would have pulled off a major upset.

I suggest that his campaign was better run - by far - than Clinton's 1992 run. His primary campaign was decisive and he won all but 4 states. Clinton, at one point, was behind both Perot and Bush. Bush was below 40 percent all 1992.

In spite of this, Clinton was loved by much of the media, which helped him. Kerry was hurt by the cable media giving enormous free time to the SBVT liars, even after several of their charges were exposed as lies. Add in that, where the media called out the mean spirited 1992 Bush convention and praised the positive Clinton one, they mostly avoided condemning an even uglier 2004 Bush convention complete with band aids that mocked Kerry's purple hearts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #44)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:51 PM

115. I worked on his campaign and I couldn't tell you what his message was...

...other than ďIíd handle Iraq more efficiently ď

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #115)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 07:02 PM

128. I was blown away by one speech where he connected working to fight climate change

Last edited Fri Nov 23, 2018, 01:57 AM - Edit history (1)

With cleaner air, cleaner water, thus better health at the same time it would create new good jobs and economic growth as the US created pioneering technologies. This while reducing our dependence on the unstable middle east.

In addition, he had a health care proposal that included the government insuring catastrophic coverage. This was a provision of ACA and it was the piece Marco Rubio defunded in 2016 with few noticing.

On climate change and the environment Kerry was stronger than any 2008 candidate. As to what he did when he had the power, you could see that he was an essential person for the Paris climate pact and he was the founder of the OUR OCEANS conferences that are happening each year. I watched his major speeches on CSPAN. His biggest problem was that other than CSPAN, his convention, and the debates, he got very little unfiltered coverage by the media.

As to Iraq, his NYU speech in September on the issue said far more. Additionally, his Pennsylvania speech on terrorism reflected that he expressed concerns with non state terrorism as early as the 1990s.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #128)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 08:51 PM

139. You shut him good and proper. Thanks.

Kerry remains criminally underrated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to John Fante (Reply #139)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 10:51 PM

147. Thanks to you and I agree he is very underrated

There is no living American statesman I admire more than John Kerry. He was the best Secretary of State in my life time .. and I was born in 1950. Though Trump has attempted to destroy everything done under Obama, in addition to major domestic accomplishments like gay marriage and health care, both the Paris Accord and the Our Oceans conferences (the fifth one just happened in Bali) will survive Trump. The Nuclear Deal, which Trump pulled the US out of likely prevented a war. Even now, war is less likely than it was in 2013 through 2015 when other countries were pushing Obama to attack.

I loved his recent memoirs. The person seen in it is the same as the nominee who, as I read more about him, I found he was even better than he seemed. The norm for me was that a more detailed look usually exposed a more flawed, but acceptable, person than the hype. He really was the real deal. A very genuine American hero, a man of integrity, honesty and purpose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #19)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:54 PM

45. Were they told to go away?

Were they told to never even consider running again?

We're they told to go hiking or concentrate on their knitting?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #19)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:06 PM

56. Poorly Managed?? That's the reason you give why the EC didn't vote her way?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bfd (Reply #56)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:55 PM

117. Yes I would...

Obama won PA, OH, WI, FL and WI. Clinton did not.

Iíve spoke to several Party Chairs and they tell me the same story of flawed electorate assumption, and corresponding poor tactical decisions, which make sense in light of my campaign work in Cleveland.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #117)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 07:43 PM

131. What lost the election wasn't mismanagement, it was the unbalanced electoral college.

Specifically, California has 39 million residents and 55 electoral votes. The 22 LOWEST population states (including DC) has a combined population of 37 million residents but 95 electoral votes.

39 million people get 55 electoral votes
37 million people get 95 electoral votes

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #131)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 08:15 PM

135. See: Obama 2008, Obama 2012

You go to war with the Constitution you have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #131)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:29 PM

206. That's just silly

Itís like complaining that you lost a football game because touchdowns count more than field goals... or you had twice as many yards from scrimmage but they had more points.

The system was created specifically so that one large state couldnít bully a bunch of smaller states.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bfd (Reply #56)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 06:23 PM

124. Beto and Stacy ran amazing campaigns .... so did Andrew down in Florida.

However, Beto was CHEATED OUT OF a Senator seat and Andrew/Stacey were cheated out of 2 governorships. Florida and Ohio are gone from the Dems for a long while IMHO due to all of the cooked-in GOP voter-suppression there in those 2 states. Georgia has a chance to come out of it sooner than those other two states, and so I believe that if Stacey wants to run again for Gov. it's hers, as she and Dems in Georgia/Congress will be assisting her in working on voting rights et al in Georgia. Something's going to befall that cheating, rotten, racist Kemp. Mark my words.

Hillary was cheated out of a presidency. In fact, NO Dem was going to win the 2016 presidency with all of that head wind, going against them. There was ruskie interference, wikileaks, voter-suppression, voter purging, voter cross check, gerrymandering, 30 years of LIES/corporate media hate going against her. Bush was GIVEN a damn presidency by the Supreme Court in 2000. So uh no, there were times when not even the BEST Dem running would have won whatever they were running for. The deck was stacked against them. The dye was cast, whatever analogy you want to use, NO DEM was going to win the 2016 General Election.

I agree with Stewart Safrin 1,000 percent Bfd

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #19)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:22 PM

72. I'd love to see Gore run again

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lunamagica (Reply #72)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 06:20 PM

123. Gore lost nine States won by Clinton; winning any one would have made FL irrelevant

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:56 PM

20. I would love her to run again, and win, to stick it to the Republicans. The problem is if she runs

again, and re-invigorates the Republicans and Trump, and ends up losing again (or being robbed of it again), the U.S. (and us in the rest of the West) will be fucked. The world needs a strong Democratic USA asap, it is so important. I would like the Primary process to play out, and I feel confident we will end up with a great Democratic candidate. Once there is a Dem win, I would love if Hillary was made SoS again, and screw the hell out of Putin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OnDoutside (Reply #20)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:27 PM

34. I like the SoS idea. Put the fear of God in Putin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #34)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:55 PM

47. That would be revenge served nice and hot ! Putin would be crapping himself, 4 years of a world of

hurt !

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #34)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:39 PM

110. YES! Hillary would be "great again" as S.O.S.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maddiemom (Reply #110)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 07:18 PM

129. I doubt she would accept the nomination again

It is a gruelling job and she looked absolutely exhausted for the last year. By 2021, she will be 12 years older than she was when she had the job before.

However, there will be a huge amount of work to be done when a Democrat wins in 2020. Just as Obama had Holbrooke, George Mitchell, Dennis Ross and others as special envoys, there might be a place where Clinton would be the exact right person to deal with a problem. The same goes for Biden. Likewise, Kerry would be excellent leading our international environmental efforts, building on his work on the Paris Accord and his work on oceans.

Think of it as using elder statesmen, who are respected around the world to jump start reviving our reputation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:02 PM

22. who said she can't consider?

She can consider all she wants, so can Bernie, but neither of them is winning any more primaries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to qazplm135 (Reply #22)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:05 PM

23. Practically everyone says she cant, and almost NONE of them say that about the other person

you mentioned.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Reply #23)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 11:11 PM

152. She can consider all she wants

But running would not be good for her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:07 PM

24. Good question

I can think of people like John Edwards but he actually committed a crime. So name a man who committed no crime but canít run??? Honestly even someone like hastert would probably lose but would still do great with rethugs. Look at Roy Moore!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Takket (Reply #24)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:09 PM

26. Exactly, you notice her name isnt even brought up as possible candidates.

It is so obvious and if we dont learn a lesson here, we are doomed to repeat some mistakes.

Personally at this point I would rather have Kamala Harris probably, but that isnt the point of this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:09 PM

25. I'd love it if Bernie would not consider running again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NightWatcher (Reply #25)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:03 PM

54. +10000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:10 PM

27. "Lets play a game, which men CANT even consider running again? Either party. "

Donald Trump.

I win !!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:14 PM

29. Of course she can run again. It is just that Hillary has said she wouldn't. Does that mean she

couldn't change her mind? Of course she can



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:18 PM

30. I'm in: Biden, Sanders and trump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #30)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:11 PM

61. They're almost 80. If HRC is "too old" what are these guys.

 

We need a couple a spring chickens..is what I hear when Hillary's name comes up.

Followed by , "How bout Bernie or Biden?"



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bfd (Reply #61)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:23 PM

74. That's what I'm saying. We Dems have done well with candidates...

around the ages that Kennedy, Clinton and Obama were when they ran.

The contrast between the slimy sleeze of the 70-something, unhealthy windbag deplorable that is trump vs a young, articulate, attractive Harris or Kennedy or Booker or Klobuchar will be visually stunning and to our advantage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #74)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:31 PM

81. Exactly. So bye to Biden, Bernie, Warren, Clinton ...etc

 

But could they all run in 2020? Sure.

I just can't imagine what the 2020 primary is going to do to our heads.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bfd (Reply #61)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 08:55 PM

141. Bernie and Joe's ages are frequently brought up, and not

positively either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to John Fante (Reply #141)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 10:52 PM

148. And the fact of the matter is that with age comes mental and physical decline.

Plus, let's face it, a younger nominee is more likely to inspire greater turnout.

A Harris-O'Rourke ticket, for instance, would, I predict, produce the highest Democratic turnout in modern history.

Trump is the oldest person to ever take office as president. Do we really want to shatter his record with, say, Biden? To say nothing of Biden's history with the Thomas-Hill hearings in this Me Too era, and his penchant for gaffes. No thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:23 PM

32. I don't think I have ever heard anyone say she can't run. Of course she can.

Of course I have not read every single post on DU since November of 2016, so maybe I missed something. I also doubt that whatever decision she makes will be due to this discussion group.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dameatball (Reply #32)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:11 PM

92. You haven't heard anyone say it.

We at DU do not have any magical mind control powers over Hillary. We can't force her to run or not run for anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:26 PM

33. I see your point.

So I also want to apply it to anyone who wants to run --

Just doi it! Let the fur fly where it may!

This, btw, includes Beto O'Rourke!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ananda (Reply #33)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:10 PM

59. Interesting

I said Stacey Abrams should run and caught a lot of flak for it. The consensus was that she ran and lost, and we don't want losers to run for president. Yet, there is a lot of support for O'Rourke running for president. I think this goes some way in underscoring the OP's point.

I'm not implying anything about you, BTW. Just an observation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudLib72 (Reply #59)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:14 PM

66. So if a candidate has run & lost the they are off the 2020 list??

 

That eliminates a lot of names!

I love Abrams.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bfd (Reply #66)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:22 PM

73. I think she is phenomenal

But the majority of people responding to my thread thought otherwise. You can take a look here: https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211441340

The point is, though, that no one seems to think Beto shouldn't run just because he lost the mid term. What's the difference?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudLib72 (Reply #73)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:26 PM

76. Lol..damn the hypocrisy is waist deep out there ..wtf

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bfd (Reply #76)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:30 PM

79. You're catching on!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudLib72 (Reply #79)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:34 PM

82. Its exhausting to witness day after day.

 

ick.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudLib72 (Reply #73)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:54 PM

116. I see a lot of people saying Beto shouldn't run for President..including Beto.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudLib72 (Reply #59)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:59 PM

209. Sometimes our losers turn out to be winners!

For speaking out to our true liberal values and
nearly beating people who should have
smashed them!!!

And Abrams spoke out well and clearly about
our corrupt voting systems, hers being in
Georgia.

Florida is just as bad. And Gillum nearly beat
his opponent, and would have if there were
actually a free and fair election.

So whoever wants to run, run!!!

Just have the courage to speak out on what
ails us and what can help us!!!!

And it aint corporations!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:30 PM

35. Kerry & Romney can't run again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KWR65 (Reply #35)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:18 AM

160. They can, but likely won't.

It's a modern tradition that once a candidate for president loses the general election, they do not stand for election again. This does not apply to primary candidates who did not advance to the general.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:38 PM

37. Here is a lady who would win against Trump..Michelle Obama..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stuart G (Reply #37)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:39 PM

38. I would be very happy to vote for her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stuart G (Reply #37)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 02:02 AM

178. No question there... Michelle is an inspirational leader & would make a great 1st female President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:46 PM

40. name for me please

A major party candidate from either party (man or woman) who was nominated by the party, lost in the general election, then ran again and won.

working backward...

Romney - nope, at least not yet.
McCain - nope.
John Kerry - nope, not yet.
Al Gore - nope, not yet.
Bob Dole - nope.
Dukakis - nope.
Mondale - nope.
McGovern - nope.
Humphry - nope.
Goldwater - nope.
Nixon - ding ding ding... yup... you have to go back to 1960 and 1968 to find a candidate of a major party who was nominated twice, lost the first time and then won later.

And, btw, he had to "rig" the election by prolonging the Vietnam war to win.

So we simply shouldn't role the dice hoping for a Nixon/68 type win. Nominate someone else (man or woman) if we want a decent chance to win.

further back you have to go to Grover Cleveland... but he had already been President once... won in 1884, lost in 1888, won again in 1892.

we certainly don't need a modern day Adlai Stevenson or William Jennings Bryan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapfog_1 (Reply #40)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:12 PM

64. And I'm convinced that Nixon would have lost for a second time to a man named Kennedy...

 

had RFK not been assassinated.

1968 was a strange year, to say the least.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Small-Axe (Reply #64)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:15 PM

67. Had Johnson succeeded in ending the war, even Humphrey would have won

and if RFK had not been assassinated, I do believe that you are right no matter what illegal shenanigans Nixon would have pulled.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapfog_1 (Reply #40)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:28 PM

78. very true

Also, I could be wrong, but, I don't think any of those names bothered to seek the nomination again after losing the general once.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to borgesian (Reply #78)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:53 PM

87. true... but most were discouraged by their party from running again

because the party wanted to avoid the curse of Adlai Stevenson II (lost in 1952 and 1956).

The point remains that any sentiment for Hillary not to run is NOT unique to Hillary. And the history of losing the general an then running again is no replete with winners. In the modern era... only Nixon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapfog_1 (Reply #87)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:15 PM

97. Yup. That was my understanding as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:48 PM

42. Right?

All others who lost presidential races are allowed to run again - even encouraged. Wonder why it is that HRC seemingly isn't allowed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mcar (Reply #42)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:11 PM

60. name the one who lost, ran again, and then won.

hint. it's been a while.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapfog_1 (Reply #60)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:12 PM

63. But that's not the issue, is it?

It's that "some" have been saying since 2016 that HRC should not, can not, run again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mcar (Reply #63)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:17 PM

69. The facts are that the electorate doesn't like a "loser"

no matter that she should have won... and did win the popular vote.

And the exact same thing can be said of Al Gore. Won the popular vote... should have won the electoral college, didn't and never considered running again and was actively discouraged from doing so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:59 PM

49. Who said she can't consider it?

Plenty donít think she should...but who said she couldnít consider it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:01 PM

51. anyone who suggest Bernie, even older than Hillary

can run again, has no credibility claiming Hillary should not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #51)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 06:54 PM

127. +1,000

Yet there are those who want him to run, while calling Hillary "too old."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #51)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 08:22 PM

137. Hillary Clinton is five years younger than Sanders, and women live five years longer than men...

....so in essence she's 10 years younger than him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #137)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 10:20 PM

145. Love it

So true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #51)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:35 PM

207. Not so

There have been plenty of primary losers who went on to win a later primary and then the White House. For republicans it was almost required.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:05 PM

55. She'd get nowhere.

She did a fine job but it didn't work out.

I hope she does not choose to run again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #55)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 02:32 AM

187. The decision not to run again has already been made.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:08 PM

57. I hope she does not

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:09 PM

58. Of course she can consider running.

Personally, I would lean towards supporting Hillary again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:11 PM

62. She has already considered it.

She said she does not wish to run again. I really don't understand why people refuse to believe her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoCubsGo (Reply #62)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 02:29 AM

186. I do and admire her bowing out gracefully.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to InAbLuEsTaTe (Reply #186)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 08:36 AM

190. I think she just didn't want to put herself through that again.

Can't say I blame her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoCubsGo (Reply #190)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 09:21 AM

193. Yes, Hillary gave it her all the last two times she ran and lost to political newcomers.

I think she realized it's time to step aside and pass the political "baton" to a new generation of Democrats who are more than capable of leading this country out of the demise created by the wretched shitstain currently occupying the White House.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:17 PM

68. If Hillary announces, she immediately gets $500 from me. All other Dems

must go through the "process" before they get a dime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oasis (Reply #68)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:24 PM

75. Mee too!

 

HRC 2020

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:27 PM

77. Of course she can, if she wishes. I doubt she will, though.

If she does, however, there will be a long line of people here to scold her for it, no doubt.

The 2020 primary season looks like it's going to be a rocky, rutted road on DU. I can't say I'm looking forward to it, frankly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:44 PM

84. There's a difference between can and should

Certainly she can consider running. And many would say she should. I'm not one of them. Is she deserving? Hell to the nth degree yes. Is she the candidate with the best chance to unseat Trump? I don't think so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:09 PM

90. Depends on who you ask right? People have certainly said Sanders "wouldn't be allowed...."

 



Sanders "go away...", here on these boards....ALOT.


That said, I've never personally suggested Clinton shouldn't run. It does seem like once you lose in the GE, the path to the Presidency has historically been closed off for whatever reasons...or at least in recent history, whereas losing in the primary typically is allowed by people to account for building up to a future GE bid.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:12 PM

93. Harold Stassen

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:13 PM

94. Hillary can do whatever she wants to do but the truth is that it would give Trump the foil that r/o

he desperately needs. He isn't happy unless he can complain about someone and turn that person into a cartoon monster for his base. Hillary running would get his base and even never-Trumpers quite energized.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:16 PM

98. I don't want her to run for President. She should be appointed to SCOTUS.

 

I don't want her to run because it is so clearly apparent she is too divisive. I can see reality and learn from it. It has nothing to do with her being a woman for me. It has to do with wanting to put up candidates who can win.

If she wants to run for the senate again then more power to her. If she wants to run for just about anything but the Presidency then more power to her. I think it'd be great if she were appointed to SCOTUS. She's smart, fair, has the right background.

BTW, when you phrase the question about which "men" cannot run again you are being as sexist as the people who didn't like Hillary because she is a woman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:17 PM

99. Hope she won't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:19 PM

102. It's not just her. Biden and Sanders need to forget about it too.

Geez, you had your time in the sun. Are you still going to be running for president when you're 90? Move on and let the next generation of candidates have their shot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStater (Reply #102)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:50 PM

114. Biden was on a winning ticket twice as VP.

 

If we want to win, Biden should be our standard-bearer, especially as he's the absolutely perfect foil to Donald J Trump and would win not just the popular vote but also the Electoral College.

For the good of the nation, BS should not run.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Small-Axe (Reply #114)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 06:16 PM

121. We can do a lot better than a nearly 80 year old man.

Last edited Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:10 AM - Edit history (1)

Frankly, I'm not big on the future of the country being set by people who will be dead in 15 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStater (Reply #121)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 11:56 PM

156. Bad thinking on your part, methinks...

 

How many great presidents didn't live 15 years beyond their presidencies?

Think about the day we're memorizing today. JFK didn't survive his own first term. Neither FDR or Lincoln survived their presidencies. Washington was dead two years after finish his.

We need a person in the near-term to displace Trump. Biden is the best poised for the task IMO.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Small-Axe (Reply #156)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:06 AM

158. Him dying in office isn't exactly a great selling point.

He's too old and I'm not interested in him. He'll be older at the beginning of his term than Reagan was at the end of his. That's just ridiculous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStater (Reply #158)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:12 AM

159. Bye now.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Small-Axe (Reply #159)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:25 AM

161. You didn't like my answer, so now you're going to be rude and dismissive.

I don't find the idea of 80-year-old men as presidents appealing in any way whatsoever. Sorry.

Bye-bye.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStater (Reply #161)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:27 AM

162. No are think you are being rude and dismissive and are absolutely dead wrong...

 

so bye-bye.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Small-Axe (Reply #162)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:42 AM

165. You initiated this conversation and don't like that your opinion isn't shared.

Sorry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStater (Reply #165)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:48 AM

166. Saying that "dying in office isn't a selling point" on JFK's death anniversary...

 

is the sort of crap I'd only expect a Trumpist to say.

Good day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Small-Axe (Reply #166)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:55 AM

169. Whatever, Mr. Been-here-for-a-month.

Are you really arguing that JFK and other presidents dying in office was a positive thing? Seriously?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStater (Reply #169)


Response to Post removed (Reply #170)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 01:34 AM

172. I hope you do figure it out.

Because it will be no great loss on my end. Now you're just randomly accusing me of being a Trump supporter. I'm beginning to suspect you're a troll.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Small-Axe (Reply #114)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 09:24 AM

194. Yes, Biden is a proven two-time winner and, for that, definitely deserves another

shot at being elected President. I hope he throws his hat into the ring.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to InAbLuEsTaTe (Reply #194)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:11 PM

201. People don't vote for VP. Obama won those contests.

Biden would shatter Trump's record for oldest person to take office. It's a fact of life that with age comes mental and physical decline. No Biden. No Sanders (not that he could get nominated anyway). No Warren. No Clinton.

Furthermore, in this Me Too era, Biden's Thomas-Hill hearings past will come back to bite him.

And then there's his penchant for gaffes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Garrett78 (Reply #201)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 05:23 PM

213. Except that Bernie has more energy and vitality than most 50-year-olds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:21 PM

103. "which men CANT even consider running again?"

Sanders and Biden, for starters. Obviously of one of them did become the nominee, I'd heartily vote for them. But my litmus test for 2020 is

1. Old
2. White.
3. Male.

My desirable candidate should only hit at most one of those. In a dire pinch, if the field is just so abysmal, 2.

Not 3. We're done with 3.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:21 PM

104. None of the following

Bushes, Trumps, Obamas, Kennedys, Clintons.

NO DYNASTIES! I thought we were trying to escape this two hundred years ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redixdoragon (Reply #104)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 09:14 PM

142. Oh.

This again.

Dynasties.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:22 PM

105. Of course she can consider it, but she shouldn't run.

Let the Clinton era end. I say the same for Sanders in any bid for the presidency.

Why you tryin' to stir the pot?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:24 PM

106. Her trustworthiness ratings were absolutely abysmal

She might well be a great public servant, but it would be political suicide to have learned nothing from the last election.

Doesn't matter what folks here think.

These Sanders and Hillary posts are so tiring.

Neither proved to be candidates WHO COULD WIN.

Let's move on!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GitRDun (Reply #106)

Mon Nov 26, 2018, 01:41 AM

215. Bernie Could Have Won

 

He had the voters in the palms of his hands.

He had Trump numbers at his rallies at least 6 months before Trump did.

The media ignored them, then skipped over his rallies to cover Trump's.

Then double-backed and acknowledged Bernie's.

Bernie was sabotaged by the Clinton's and the Democratic party.

These are facts.

I didn't mind then, because I was in the Hillary camp, although I personally loved Bernie.

In rectrospect, Bernie was the man to beat Trump.

You don't run a bore and a snooze to go against a cultural juggernaut like Trump.

You run your own cultural juggernaut.

We had a cultural juggernaut with Obama, and Republicans ran bores and snoozes twice in row.

And got their asses handed to them twice in a row.

Learn from your mistakes folks.

All Hillary had was "I'm with her."

I was all with it at the time, but looking back now I'm like "WTF?!?!?"

It didn't mean anything.

Learn. from. your. mistakes. folks.

Somebody, please correct me if I'm wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ConnorMarc (Reply #215)

Mon Nov 26, 2018, 11:49 AM

218. Thanks. Your perspective isn't popular here, but

I agree with you. Like it or not, Bernie generated enthusiasm, had a populist platform, and could have won Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.....the states that mattered in the end.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:29 PM

107. Of course Hillary can run again ... but

I didn't support her last time, and I won't support her this time. Sure, I'll vote for her if she gets the nomination, but I won't vote for her in the primary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:42 PM

112. Gore went through this in 2004

It's about losing... not about gender

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 06:04 PM

118. A lot of people have said Bernie and Biden shouldn't run.

Last edited Thu Nov 22, 2018, 06:34 PM - Edit history (1)

Stop playing a proxy faux victim.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 06:07 PM

119. Anyone can run

It's up to the voters to pick the best person.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 06:15 PM

120. Question To The OP

 

Do YOU think it's a good idea for Hillary to run?
As in, do you think she has a chance TO win?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ConnorMarc (Reply #120)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 08:12 PM

134. Good question

 

Last edited Thu Nov 22, 2018, 10:50 PM - Edit history (1)

but don't hold you breath waiting for an answer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 06:17 PM

122. Says who?

Anyone, including quite a few politicians I would have loved to see as President and plenty I would hate to see as president, can consider running. Not only that, they CAN run. Any and all of them.

However, I agree with Howard Dean (who, at age 70 as of last Saturday, is as sharp and dynamic as any of them). An incoming president should ideally be a smart, educated, well-traveled person around 50.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 07:38 PM

130. Ageism.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joe941 (Reply #130)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 10:58 PM

149. With age comes mental and physical decline. That's just a fact of life.

And a younger nominee will likely inspire greater turnout.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joe941 (Reply #130)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 01:51 AM

175. It is what it is - Baby Boomers are no longer the biggest voting bloc.

In all likelihood, Trump is the last Boomer President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 08:00 PM

133. She can do anything she wants to

but I don't have to say that I'd support her or that I want to see that.

It's called having an opinion and it is allowed.

ETA: I and others have also been saying that Bernie Sanders shouldn't run again as well, so it isn't "only" Hillary Clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 08:27 PM

138. Here are a few

Chris Kristie
Jeb Bush
John McCain

That was just a 5-second thought and obviously, McCain was said in jest.

There are more if you would like me to list a few out that would probably enrage half the country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 09:36 PM

143. Mike Dukakis Al Gore John Kerry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 11:09 PM

150. The correct answer...

Barack Obama
George W. Bush
Bill Clinton

These men can't even consider running again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 11:09 PM

151. Anyone over 70

I would say can consider but should forget it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to whistler162 (Reply #151)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 01:49 AM

174. Pretty much this

I'll say this. If - for example - Kamala Harris won the nomination, I could maybe see Joe Biden for Veep to give the ticket gravitas.

Maybe.

I think I'd still like someone younger.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Thu Nov 22, 2018, 11:42 PM

155. Obama

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:01 AM

157. Hillary has been running for president since 2000

I don't want to see Joe Biden, John Kerry, Barack Obama, or Michelle Obama (not a man, but still) run for president either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Azathoth (Reply #157)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 02:13 AM

181. Michelle would represent women well... don't see how she would lose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to InAbLuEsTaTe (Reply #181)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 10:47 AM

196. She would "lose" if she were elected

Everything I've heard her say or read on the topic suggests she wants nothing to do with elected office ever again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Azathoth (Reply #157)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 02:44 AM

188. I'm assuming you meant to say 2008. She didn't run in 2000 or 2004.

Clinton fell short of winning the nomination in 2008, won the nomination with ease in 2016, and then won the popular vote in the general election (in spite of Russia, a pitiful media, Comey, etc.).

I don't want or expect her to run in 2020, but not because she "lost" in 2016. Her age and her being so polarizing (thanks, sadly, to 30 years of vicious attacks) are the main reasons I don't want her to run in 2020. We don't need to try to break Trump's record for oldest person to take office. It's a fact of life that physical and mental health declines with age. No Biden. No Sanders (not that he'd get nominated anyway). No Warren. We have so many better options.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Garrett78 (Reply #188)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 01:20 PM

211. No, she's been running since 2000

It was widely understood in 1999-2000 that the Clinton team were looking to place her in a safe national seat so she could build a credible resume to run for President. That's why the Arkansas First Couple suddenly became "native New Yorkers." Her entire Senate career (including her hawkish support for the Iraq war), was calculated groundwork for her inevitable presidential run. In 2003, the big speculation was whether she would hop into the race against Dubya with only 2.5 years of Senate experience.

For anyone who follows politics, Hillary has been overtly angling towards the White House for at least 16 years -- 24 if you include Bill Clinton's campaigns. And, as you say, that means the GOP have been able to run against her for nearly three decades straight. No one can survive that kind of relentless negative campaign.

I would be willing to consider Warren on the ticket this year, for the sole reason that she's still relatively new on the national stage and hasn't had a shot at the presidency yet, so it's kind of unfair to deny her the chance based solely on her age. Other than her, I'm hoping for younger, fresher faces who don't carry decades of baggage and who can speak to the younger generation (the people who actually vote Democratic).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Azathoth (Reply #211)

Mon Nov 26, 2018, 01:47 AM

216. Your description of her fine Senate career is incorrect. She ran for Senate to serve in the Senate.

And HRC was not considered a viable candidate for president when she first arrived on Capitol Hill. She gradually improved her standing and was considered a realistic candidate for the first time after Kerry lost. Before then it was just crazy comments on Fox News.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:38 AM

164. Do we really want to go through the whole Hillary / Bernie shit again?

I know I don't! We need someone we can all unite behind. Going through the Bernie / Hillary debacle will almost guarantee another 4 years of Orange Shithead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:49 AM

167. She can run, but I doubt I will support her in the primary

I want someone new to inspire me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:51 AM

168. She can, but probably should not, and probably won't.

As pointed out upthread, it has become a modern tradition that if someone stands for the general election for president as a major party candidate, and loses, they do not run again. I think there is a good reason. They tried their best to win, but lost. So let's not take the risk again on the same person. Let's let someone else take a shot.

This tradition does not apply to primary challengers who do not advance to the general. If Hillary Clinton had merely lost the primary twice, I'd say go for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MarvinGardens (Reply #168)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 02:25 AM

184. Precisely!! Why Bernie deserves another chance, should he decide

to run again... though a fresh face might be a better choice. Wish Michelle would change her mind and run... it wouldn't even be close like the last time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 01:45 AM

173. Anyone can consider running.

That said: four should not run/ run again

Joe Biden
Hillary Clinton
Bernie Sanders
Elizabeth Warren


There are many younger, abler candidates out there.

e.t.a. ..add John Kerry and Al Gore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Algernon Moncrieff (Reply #173)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 02:05 AM

179. Agreed. See post #148.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Algernon Moncrieff (Reply #173)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 08:39 AM

191. Although I can understand someone wanting a new face,

the same old ones being sooo boring, still! Should that rule? Shouldn't we look for stimulation elsewhere and go for character and ability to do the job well?

It's hard to establish "able" since no one starting a first term has ever done the job before. Still. Speaking of what goes into "able," beyond the ability to project youth to those who want that, maybe name to yourself someone you honestly think is both younger and abler than Hillary Clinton. You say there are many. Just grab any ol' one and think about it?

Fwiw, I believe ability absolutely at least requires intense preparation for the job beforehand. I didn't make up that one for Hillary. It was, though, the big reason I voted for her over Obama in the primary, even though I voted for him gladly in the GE.

But I don't for a moment believe Hillary would have wasted our congressional majorities in an attempt to end the dysfunctional division in congress. I rooted for Obama's attempt because it is a huge national problem and he very reasonably thought his election might signal big change, and maybe it might work. Hillary learned the hard way beforehand what today's Republicans have become, though, while youthful, inspiring Obama learned the hard way in the oval office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #191)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 11:05 AM

198. I agree that Hillary Clinton is an excellent candidate

I supported her in the 2008 and 2016 primaries.

The reality, though, is that she's had two shots. She came oh-so-close in 2016. But she didn't make it.

The six people I mentioned are old. I don't just mean physically. We all wish Donald Trump would get the Hell off of Twitter, but his twitter rants underscore the need for a candidate who is social-media savvy. It's not just that the majority of voters are younger than the Boomers - they grew up in a very different world than the Boomers, and look to inherit a far more damaged world. I'll tell you another reason I want the old folks to step aside: while it's nice to hear them talk about doing things for their grandkids, we need leaders who have skin in the game of the post 2040 world - which, by the way, is going to get hot. We need leaders who will put their asses into the hard work of weaning this nation off of fossil fuels. The six candidates in my post will likely all be gone by 2040.

Just as the WWII Presidents gave way to the Boomers, it's time for the Boomers to give way to a new generation.

And yes, I feel the same way about Pelosi.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Algernon Moncrieff (Reply #198)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 01:13 PM

210. :) Well, here's a counterargument to your counter.

First off, I don't believe ageist bigotry is so powerful that it inevitably will outweigh all other factors. Look at how beloved Notorious RBG is of all the younger generations, and Bernie Sanders' populist appeal to many young people even if his arthritic shoulders and neck didn't allow him to wave his fist in the air. In 2016 both parties, in fact, had younger candidates and passed them over.

I don't argue that the bigotry isn't real and effects growing. All these old people living longer than they used to are new, and our culture hasn't adjusted to this disturbing rise in the generations of old people who, instead of considerately retiring and then dying off and leaving everything to younger generations, actually think they should be able to keep the best jobs and authority away from younger, more deserving generations. It'll be some while before society adjusts to this new kind of diversity and competition. Right now ageism is as rampant and completely and righteously without shame as racism once was, and we're going to hear a lot of strident, even angry noise from people who don't feel any need for dog whistling.

So of course advancing age at the top will be a continuing political topic, and it's understandable that some younger politicians are pushing it as a negative for their own advantage. A person who feels he's ready at 35 or 55, has a great deal of heavyweight competition to get out of the way. But voters of all ages are going to have to decide, and any notion that they're going to simply slice off and discard everyone advantaged with an extra 20-30 years of experience and prestige is as unrealistic as imagining old people are going to do it to themselves.

And it's only going to get worse now that middle age extends through the 60s for healthy people and competition grows for positions held by those professionals who remain healthy and vigorous right through their 80s. We did away from mandatory retirement, though, both because old people needed to work longer to support themselves but also because growing numbers of old people who liked working and were good at it said the hell with that. Age power!

I think that the age range of prominent people in politics is going to widen as some of the current clusters of geriatrics leave, but ultimately end up wider in both directions, both younger and older reflecting their demographic power, but with older always dominating, reflecting their built-in advantages.

Of course the current judgement of the ageist doofuses among the electorate is going to be felt.
Many have no idea, and for most no interest in wondering, what 50 years of facing continual challenges and new situations requiring constant learning makes of high achievers. There really are people who can believe lots of younger members of congress can fill Nancy Pelosi's shoes. They have no more idea than Trump. During work lives, most people attain maybe 2 to 5 years of actual learning experience (in each line of work) and then mostly don't need to keep learning, until retirement. Voting lack of understanding is nothing new, though, and it seems likely some candidates in 2020 will make old age, not young, an issue.

Where I completely agree with you is that old views and knowledge that don't keep current and valid in a changing world, and don't allow fierce, insightful interest in understanding how to make the most of the future, are completely unacceptable, but those people we can and should weed out by examining every aspect of candidates, not their age.

As for no skin in the game? Really? These grandparents all know they're not going to have more decades to continue work on what they started, or to worry about their own careers and future endeavors. And, generally speaking, wouldn't you think that knowing their own will have to live with what they leave has to be far more real to them than it is to younger generations?

Oh, btw, our nation did choose Hillary to be our first woman president and I think we'd do it again and better in 2020 if she ran and became our nominee. But frankly, with the narrow electoral margins political scientists say are likely to be with us for a while, no matter who our candidate is I'll be afraid right up until the winner in the electoral college is called. I don't see anyone on the horizon who'll rescue me from that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 08:45 AM

192. I don't think this has anything to do with gender.

Hillary doesn't want to be the Adlai Stevenson of the modern era. I'd be happier seeing a Democratic POTUS appoint her to the SCOTUS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 11:20 AM

199. SIGH. OK, if you insist - when T Barrett made noise about possibly running for a third time against

Gov walker here in WI - he swiftly got the message that it would NOT be a good idea.

Same thing with Al Gore and John Kerry. They lost once and weren't given a second chance. Apparently you don't remember that?

Is that enough, or do you want a bigger list?

Seems to me like you're just coming here to pick a fight. IMHO any losing candidate who can get people fired up again to mount a serious second or even third attempt should have at it - male or female. Its really up to them - can they inspire and excite people enough and get some traction? If they cant then they need to let it go.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:01 PM

200. Hillary Clinton has every right to consider running again

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gothmog (Reply #200)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:17 PM

204. If anybody watched Murhpy Brown last night then realized this did NOT have to happen

but it did and I know WHY GOD DAMMIT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:15 PM

203. again, vagina. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:18 PM

205. She won the first time. I want her to run again

Just to see the RW heads explode.

Then I'm hoping for a Kamila Harris run.

She's my top choice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Fri Nov 23, 2018, 05:31 PM

214. Any American, male or female over the age of 35 can run for president and there is no

age cut off. They can belong to any party and run as many times as they wish. So I'm going to say Hillary and any male or female can consider running for president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2018, 09:24 AM

217. I voted for her, I'd vote for her again. But I worry about the people that would vote against her.

 

There are plenty of "lifetime" Republicans that are not that keen on Trump, but are dead set against Hillary. Mostly because of the right wing media, but they would vote for Trump again if it meant voting against Hillary.

I hope that the possibility of 4 more years for Trump is as low as winning the Powerball. I don't know what the US would look like if we don't quash the hate that he enables.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread