Is Hillary a quite too much "evident" next Dem nominee?

[mylye2222]

That question runs in me since a few times already.

I have no doubt she has qualities and she had accomplished good things in her public life, but, I really do wonder why, even before the Presidency's primaries had begun, everyone considers her as the certain and sure, and already secured- next Dem nominee.... Who knows? Yes, for the moment Warren said she wouldn't run, but time can changes. As well as for Joe Biden, even if he's a bit "old"....
And what about Bernie Sanders? ( although that, apart from being considered a "far lefty", he falso way less known to the average American than a Ms Clinton, or a Biden)

I really have high wonders, have the people being so much intoxicated by the whole promoting-HRC media campaign that they can't no more imagine that might exist others talented Dems men and women, and potential astonishing candidates?

Any ideas?

[The Traveler]

1. We've lost track of ideas

Seriously. We are so focused on the **people** who may (or may not) run in the primary season we seem to have lost track of the issues. Where does the Party actually stand on environmental policy, economic policy, foreign policy? How are we going to pursue the bleeding issue of women's rights and insure gains in LBGT rights are not eroded? How do we propose to deal with the festering wound that is campaign finance and the role of money in politics? Etc.

I see a wide range of positions within the Party on these topics. How do we hammer out the Democratic Party consensus without a vigorous primary season debate? If we cannot establish a consensus, how do we engage voters? (While I think pointing to the bizarre lunacy of the modern right wing is useful, I don't think it wins all by itself.)

We have a lot to talk about and work out. Accomplishing that may be more important than who actually gets the nomination.

Trav

[Michigander_Life]

2. She is as inevitable as she was in 2008

[bigtree]

3. Hillary's support isn't media-generated

. . .the idea that the media has buoyed Hillary's support is absurd. The folks who've signed onto her campaign before she's even announced have done so DESPITE the steady media drumbeat of criticism against her family.

It just sounds like sour grapes to carp about the support she's receiving compared to others. Where is their support? Where is their exploratory team? Where is their drafting group? Where is 'Ready for Bernie'? Where is 'Ready for Warren'?

[mylye2222]

4. They are people supporting Warren and Bernie.

They are just silented by the big noise from Hillary's team covering every other voices.

[bigtree]

9. then they'd better get busy setting up the same organization

. . . that Clinton has developed and maintained over the years. If they can't overcome her 'voice', and establish their own, how do they expect to convince and lead a nation?

[mylye2222]

10. The problem is like, unlike Hillary people,

they dont have the full Dem etablishment and most powerfull lobbying groups behind them.

[bigtree]

15. Hillary doesn't have 'the full Democratic establishment' behind her (yet)

. . . what she has now is a dedicated network of GRASSROOTS supporters willing to contribute to a potential run.

Name one Democrat establishment group or one 'powerful lobbying group' 'behind' her.

No, 'Ready for Hillary' isn't one of them. It's an independent organization made up of grassroots supporters.

[Little Star]

7. I donated to Ready for Hillary

I don't give a crap what all the purists say on DU. I'm ready for a democrat to break the glass ceiling and she is the only one who I can see doing it. Plus, she is the most qualified imo.

[Xolodno]

5. Oh look....

...yet another Hilary thread.

How about we wait past this years election and see next year who throws in their hat? For all we know, Hilary may not run and play king maker.....geez.

[mylye2222]

6. So if she will not run,

why this book tour?

why this " Ready for Hillary" PAC?

why all those interviews?

why those polls?


....;If she doesn't , at least she would have played to us the best roleplay of the incoming candidate!

[Xolodno]

12. How about...who gives a shit about another Hilary thread and give the GOP ammo if she does run?

...or allow them to tap into Democratic discontent (like they did against Gore)?

...or allow the GOP to create "Hilary fatigue"?




Oh and she could very well be doing this for the money and have influence on the next nominee. Until she says "I'm running"...probably should wait with speculation.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. "...have the people being so much intoxicated.."

The media doesn't have enough liquor to get me intoxicated enough to vote for Hillary.

[Nye Bevan]

11. Anyone who considers her "inevitable" is an idiot.

A week is a long time in politics. Two years is an eternity. Health problems, political tone-deafness about her vast personal wealth, new skeletons being dug up from her closet, there are any number of things that could prevent her from winning the nomination. She is simply the favorite at this point, nothing more.

[Puzzledtraveller]

13. People like to use the word "viable" when describing HC as

the candidate who can win. I like to think of it more as unoriginal and uninspiring. President Obama proved you did not have to be a brand name to win, prior to the 2008 election and runup he was quite unkown by most Americans that did not follow politics. If we wanted new blood in 2016 we could find it, with HC being the often named shoe in I believe the problem is that many of us don't.

[mylye2222]

14. Good statement

The same with all of those who think Warren isn't experimented enough. The expericence is not thereal propblem. This very real problem is just that her belifs goes again the corporate Dem etablishment. Hillary would better pursue their agenda than Warren, or even Obama.

[hamsterjill]

16. I hope she runs.

I hope she wins. But that is not written in stone. There is still a long time until election day and much can change, including priorities and goals.