General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumshillary 2016?
This thread was inspired in part by this one:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1251&pid=283518
Though we have seen many others.
Look, let me get this down straight off: Yes, if Hillary becomes the nominee in 2016, I will vote for her.
Now for a good many people, they will leave it at there and say "OK, when we get her up there, shut up and follow orders.", There will also be a hidden subtext of "like you should have done in 2008."
I will also admit that Hillary can be a juggernaut, especially with 8 years of being SoS, and Bill ready to do whatever it takes so he can die in his old White House, making it his house.
So, why does this talk of Hillary as anointed one annoy me?
Yes, it does rip open all the old wounds of the 2008 campaign, where people insulted me because I was young, and accused me of being a sexist because I preferred both Obama and Edwards over Hillary. People who I counted on as friends during the American dark ages (aka the reign of Bush Jr.) all of a sudden insulted me, and talked about how they would screw me over. Even Smirking Chimp, that old solace, offered no relief.
Of course, at the 11th hour, that favorite hour, Hillary threw her weight towards Obama, and I was grateful. However, I do not forget why I did not vote for her, namely because neither she nor her husband admit that the stuff they gave away has cost us, from NAFTA, to the telecommunications act, to killing Glass-Steagall.
Those three measures alone cost us.
Now,if she were to come out saying that she would undo ONE, merely ONE of those mistakes, and admit they were MISTAKES, I would be joining the Draft Hillary 2016 club.
And let us not forget that she is a war hawk. Israel has been yelling at us, demanding that war with Iran, as if we were servants that were too slow. Hillary seems too eager to follow that old recipe for a Woman to get respect, act more ruthless than a man, which means, like Meir and Thatcher, you need to start killing people, preferably of the brown variety that stand in the way of whatever you wish to take.
I could be wrong, and yes, I will support whoever runs. I am a true Yellow Dog democrat. But do not think that i will forget who moved this party sol;eft that our choices seem to be between Center Right and Galt's Gulch.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)let us not forget that Bill Clinton sanctioned Iraq for his whole presidency. Poppy Bush got in on Desert Storm, Bill weakened Iraq for 8 years, then Dim Son came in with his PNACer liar friends and finished the place off.
This was not disconnected. This was a plan. This is why Hillary voted for the war.
cynatnite
(31,011 posts)all just so they could go to war in Iraq after 9/11?
Gotcha.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)okay.
cynatnite
(31,011 posts)BlueStater
(7,596 posts)The fact that we seemingly can't, in a country of 300 million people, is just pathetic.
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)It's pathetic and lazy.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)She's said so more than once.
And even though I admire her and she did a fantastic job of Secretary of State, she's old and tired. And I mean old in not just her age -- although she'll turn 69 in 2016 and I honestly think being President is a job for a younger person -- but she's been out there long enough. She was considered The Annointed One in 2008, and oddly enough, that didn't do the trick.
I'm also incredibly frustrated by all these Hillary Is The One threads. I keep on pointing out that in 2004, no one, but no one, even thought Barack Obama would run four years later, let alone win. The conventional wisdom at that point was how his time would come in 2012 or 2016.
And I also point out that in 1991 it was obvious to the most casual observer that George H. W. Bush was riding so high because of the success of the Gulf War that all the other potential Democratic candidates at that point one by one dropped out of the race. Remind me again about his second term? Oh, wait. Some guy, a governor of some small state in the south decided to run.
We just have no way of knowing at this point what's going to happen over the next four (well, three anyway before the next campaign really heats up) years, and who will be a likely candidate at that point. Really. Honestly.
BlueStater
(7,596 posts)dsc
(52,161 posts)My grandmother was able at 97 to be me at bridge and my aunt, who is a Phd and writes for a living at scrabble. 69 is hardly old.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)Bernie sanders and Al Gore are old, and I would rather vote for them
Matariki
(18,775 posts)Truly curious as to what that means?
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)dsc
(52,161 posts)SheilaT
(23,156 posts)Do think maybe there just a tiny little bit of difference between helping you at bridge and being President? Maybe just a little?
You didn't say how old your aunt is, but great that she has her PhD, however, while I'm not entirely sure exactly what you mean by "writes for a living at scrabble", I'm sure she's quite good at what she does. How many hours a day is she currently working? 10, 12, 16?
I'm 64 myself, so I know that 69 isn't all that old for many people, but everywhere I look there are people over the age of 50 who are in declining health, struggle to maintain a full-time job and so on. Yeah, the president always has access to much better health care than the vast majority of us, but the simple fact is 60 is NOT the new 40, 70 is NOT the new 50. There's a reality about the passage of time that needs to be acknowledged. Plus, quite frankly, my biggest gripe about Obama is how he has pulled in far too many from past administrations to serve in his. We need genuinely new blood and new ideas in running this country.
dsc
(52,161 posts)somehow I think you knew that but decided to be snippy instead. so frankly I refuse to give you anymore answers.
Jennicut
(25,415 posts)My parents are quite youthful at 65 and get mistaken for younger but some of their friends seem old. McCain was an old 72, Biden seems to not be as old despite being 70. Hillary seemed very active until her health scare.
I would need to see the people running in debates and on the campaign trail to decide.
I'm in my 30's so pretty much everyone running is older then me. Paul Ryan was a Gen Xer like me and pretty abysmal. I worry more about ideas then age.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Three No Trump!
antigop
(12,778 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)This is like setting up the Christmas displays before the 4th of July.
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)2014 comes before 2016.
greatauntoftriplets
(175,735 posts)Let me join you in that
DURHAM D
(32,609 posts)That damn Hillary signed NAFTA, the telecommunications bill, and Glass Steagall. She should definitely NOT be President again.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)but back away from unpopular stuff like NAFTA.
She picked and chose which would benefit her more and Bill will be back in the WH to influence policy way more than she influenced his.
DURHAM D
(32,609 posts)it seems to be your thing. I do find it odd given that you are supposed to be a feminist and even more interesting because you can't vote in our elections.
As regards NAFTA - during the primary Obama and Hillary both said that some things needed to be changed in the agreement. However, immediately after Obama made his comments he had Samantha Power contact members of your government to tell them he was "just kidding" and not to worry.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)is like the history of voting for someone just because they were a white man. I've had quite enough of that.
It's the character that counts, or should. And, being a feminist of the kind you apparently don't approve , I won't be supporting anyone who voted for the phoney mass murder of Iraq or who continually has her people say how 'tough' she is - that is a red flag waving all over for aggression to prove something. The IWR vote was a terrible, terrible judgement and really should be considered very closely of one who is to be CiC.
Sorry if this is offensive to you.
DURHAM D
(32,609 posts)It was about your gratuitous trashing. Proceed...
ETA: Well, it was about voting given the fact that you can't vote.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)lol.
I see where this has gone, too bad.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)I'm glad that I'm not the only one who noticed it.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)but that isn't going to happen - it's just too gosh darned uncomfortable.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)You assume that what you don't like is what others don't like too. You don't like Hillary, that's fine. You can't vote in the US, so why do you even care who will be the nominee in 2016?
Whisp
(24,096 posts)really now?
isn't that just too interesting.
Want me to take back what I said against Bush Jr?
Beacool
(30,247 posts)I just wouldn't be that worked up about candidates of a country I don't even live in.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)and alround the world and have over all it's history.
so yah, I feel I have a right to get a bit worked up about who is behind that wheel and what their intentions may be.
lordy.
datasuspect
(26,591 posts)MineralMan
(146,307 posts)We have a Congressional election coming up in 2014. Let's focus on one election at a time and start finding suitable candidates for the congressional districts and state where we live. Let's find Democrats who can win those elections and work to get them nominated.
We can hold off on fighting about who should run for President after that election. It's very likely that it may be someone we're not even mentioning right now. Four years is a long time.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)clintons surrogates are all over talking about her inevitability and that the office if hers if she just nods - and she's even more powerful than Cleopatra! omg lolz.
so sure, I am sick of this too - but tell the Rendells and other minions to stop with the silliness. If they want to start silly talk, there is no reason why opposition has to be silent about it.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)votes, and good Senate floor speeches, and then gets in touch with the Two Davids about a national campaign strategy in late 2014.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)yeh, I think Elizabeth is close enough to Obama's vision and integrity that her using the David's software could be very effective. I don't believe that can work for everyone, but for Warren, I do.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)I always forget him, but he was a champ this last go-round. I think any of them could do for Warren what they did for Obama.
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Beacool
(30,247 posts)1. It is not Hillary who is pushing it. The media is the one who keeps beating this to death.
2. Hillary probably doesn't know herself whether she wants to run again or not.
3. If she does decide to throw her hat in the ring, there will be a lot of us out there making sure that this time around she does get the nomination.
4. It's still a free country, vote for the candidate of your preference.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)she is allowing this to happen, don't for a minute think she has no control over her people and what they are supposed to say.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)As long as people are not claiming to represent her, she's not going to stop them from saying whatever they please. And no, she doesn't control Ed. He doesn't work for her.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)that this time around she does get the nomination. "
Yes, and if the democrats have anyone to the left of her, we will vote for them.
And if she wins, some of us will give Hillary the same level of respect Arianna H and Jane H give Obama: golf claps at best, scorn at worst.
and if she does go to war with iran to make her friends in Tel Aviv happy, then all bets are off, including whether or not this nation will survive a war which will get the Russians and Chinese involved.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)Unlike many of you in 2008, I don't believe in anybody being forced to vote for someone they don't like. Vote for the Republican, vote third party or stay home. Your life, your choice.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)and you know damned well votign GOP or third party are the same thing...Like I said, if she wins the primary, I will vote for her, and then spend the next four years keeping her and Bill away from the right wing stuff they love so much.
Magic word, Primary.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)according to some here, if you are not American you have no business talking US politics or at least criticizing a Clinton!
Yes, here on DU there are people that don't want to discuss some very uncomfortable things when it comes to the Crowning of Hillary and her qualifications and her decisions in the past - but what they want to do is shut you up.
Maybe Skinner should go through the logs and just dirt nap all us furiners?
Beacool
(30,247 posts)Calm down and let's have a drink, neighbor to neighbor.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)and trying to avoid it any way possible can bring up some drama, sure.
don't you?
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)Gawd.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)then I should shut up.
I think you missed something but I am happy to fill you in.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)So, state your business and tell the idiots to piss off.
Works for me.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)ha.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)I love margaritas.
Here's something Canadian.
A Crown Royal whiskey sour.