Should Hillary run again in 2020?

[gyroscope]

what say you?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. No.

[Pachamama]

2. No...

[fierywoman]

3. No. Basta.

[irresistable]

4. yes...

...and her slogan should be "lock him up".

[Meowmee]

185. 😹

Thanks for the laugh😹

[msongs]

5. no nt

[RockRaven]

6. No thanks.

While it is vital we choose a candidate who will win in 2020, I also want a candidate who will keep people excited and engaged in a 2024 re-election. I don't see her as being a good choice for that latter part.

[Crunchy Frog]

7. .

[TreasonousBastard]

8. Another no.

[regnaD kciN]

9. No

[unitedwethrive]

10. She would be my first choice, but I understand that she may not be the popular choice.

I'm committed, however, to fully support whoever is our nominee.

[ProudMNDemocrat]

11. NO. I would prefer Hillary campaign hard for whomever the nominee is.....

And beat the hell out of Donald Trump or whomever the GOP nominee is.

[Crabby Appleton]

12. No. nt

[Raine]

13. NO

absolutely not!

[RelativelyJones]

14. Yes

[Heartstrings]

15. No

[chowder66]

16. Should? She should do whatever she wants to. nt

[Hekate]

19. That's actually the right answer. nt

[chowder66]

117. Thanks. I thought so too. nt

[lunamagica]

122. This

[Baltimike]

182. + 1 million. nt

[Downtown Hound]

17. I think she should

I also know I'm in the minority. But I think this for two reasons. Number one is she would make a great president. Number two is her winning would be the ultimate fuck you to Trump and his Pod People followers.

[Stargazer09]

23. I'm with you

The choice is hers, obviously, but she worked really hard to earn the presidency.

I think she would be a great President, and I would love to have her come in and get our country back on track.

The big “fuck you” to Putin and Trump would be icing on the cake.

[lunamagica]

123. It would be justice

[Hekate]

18. Hasn't she suffered enough for our sins?

[librechik]

93. +++++

[pansypoo53219]

20. she had terrible ads. she picked a BAD VP. sorry. pick an actual hispanic.

[helpisontheway]

30. People don't vote for VP. Nt

[KPN]

105. Huh? So just discount, ignore, forget about the VP pick regardless? That makes no sense.

Not sure anyone can make the case that Hillary shouldn't have gotten their vote because of Tim Kaine, but ... I'll reserve that judgement (does the VP, i.e., potential P, deserve my vote) in the future for myself thank you.

[helpisontheway]

124. I can see how a despicable, unqualified person like Palin

would give people pause. Yes, then it can make a difference with many people. Most of the time for VP they check to see if they person is qualified. Jaime might not have been an exciting pick for Hillary but he is qualified.

[Fullduplexxx]

43. Well thank god we didnt get her bad vp pick in office that would have been a disaster

Oh yea those ads trump rallys were mych better than those ads

[StevieM]

99. She ran a good enough campaign that she would have destroyed her opponent had it not been for Comey.

That was his election, from start to finish.

[tblue37]

21. No. nt

[Freddie]

22. I'm sure she doesn't want to

I hope she enthusiastically supports whoever the candidate is.

[athena]

107. Do you feel the same way about, say, Bernie?

HRC is under no obligation to do anything to please you or anyone else. The people who were so full of hatred for her in 2016 and gave us Trump deserve to have her ignore them and their wishes. The rest of us are lucky that she’s not a spiteful person. I suggest you go out and “campaign enthusiastically” for the nominee yourself. That’s a better use of time and energy than posting comments online subtly criticizing one of the most selfless people in the country.

[Freddie]

121. No criticism of HRC intended

I’m a huge fan and supported her from day one.

[athena]

143. OK.

I’m still very bitter about how she was treated by the very people who should have been championing her. Honestly, if I were in her place, I wouldn’t campaign for anyone. But she’s a bigger person than I am.

It annoys me that no one is saying they hope Bernie will campaign enthusiastically for the nominee. (We all know he won’t. I just hope not too many people will listen to his inevitable criticism of our nominee.)

[Freddie]

145. This may get me flagged

But I wish Bernie would kindly stay home and STFU from here on out. His lukewarm support and (mainly) his followers who don’t have the brains to figure out how a 2-party system works are why we’re here now.

[trueblue2007]

146. i agree with you. he wants the limelight but he just needs to be a good senator and let it be

[RiverStone]

24. No

[Sherman A1]

25. Up to her

I have other preferences.

[Mike Nelson]

26. She's...

… not running, presently. If something really strange happens - and that is a possibility - she might enter. Something like an assassination, war... something that changes the mood... I really think she cares about the country and considers which candidate can win and would put the US on the correct path. There are several great candidates. So, the answer is a qualified no. And, I think that's what she has decided.

[Mr. Quackers]

27. Pelosi should embolden HRC

fuck the haters.

they've been hating Clintons forever, fuck the haters.

Clinton/Pelosi 2020!

that should make con heads explode!

[betsuni]

47. This is hilarious.

"Embolden" is a nice touch.

[oasis]

28. ImWithHer!

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

44. Me too.

She got robbed. We all make a big deal of victims of 'me too', but HRC doesnt get justice and don erdogan gets 4 years? No way. Suffer gop. We are.

[oasis]

94. She likely could do without the headache of another run.

But if the right situation arises and she decides to give it another shot, I'm all in.

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

176. If she got the last year of trums aristocracy, she'd be a good candidate

for the second 'term'. It's not like she just sat on her behind. She ran a good campaign. Nobodies perfect. And don the master of the insult made it twice as hard in my estimation.

[patricia92243]

29. No

[helpisontheway]

31. No...nt

[True Dough]

32. No

I have a great deal of respect for all that Hillary has accomplished, of course, but she is just such a polarizing figure. Like Bernie. I think it's best for the party if both allow other new, exciting candidates seek the leadership. The good news is there are so many to choose from.

[HopeAgain]

33. It's up to her, but I hope she doesn't.

She is unpopular, whether she deserves to be or not. People who argue that those further left should have been more practical and voted a certain way would need to heed their own advice.

[GitRDun]

34. No

[bluedigger]

35. No.

[MrsCoffee]

36. She won the last election. But please, start a thread so same folks can say how unelectable she is.

Same predictable crap gets spewed every time. Because people never get tired of showing ignorance and hate toward strong brilliant women.

She should do whatever the fuck she wants.

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

42. +1 Amen.

[zipplewrath]

67. Unfortunately, she didn't

It's hard when the deck is stacked against you, but I counted the votes several times and they all came out the same. No one had a gun to the electors heads.

[MrsCoffee]

70. I'm 99.99999999999999% sure you did not count all the votes even once.

I’m also 99.999999999999% sure that Republicans lied, cheated and committed treason.

What you counted was the fake numbers manufactured in areas controlled by Republicans to tilt the EC in individual 1’s favor.

But yeah, you go with your doctored version of reality.

[zipplewrath]

72. No one doctored the EC

Yes, the Trump Campaign committed treason. And the act we are discussing is cooperating with the Russians to make their efforts effective and convincing 80,000 people in about 3 states vote against their own interests. And goodness knows they've done an effective job of voter suppression.

But I did count all the EC votes, and it wasn't even close.

[MrsCoffee]

73. An act cooperating with other Republicans/Russian agents to make sure there were no recounts.

You have no idea what the real vote count was because we weren’t allowed to count the votes.

The act of cooperation with Russia was also to get the voting data to determine what numbers they were going to have to change and make up.

I laugh at anyone who believes that Trump legitimately won the EC or anything else.

[zipplewrath]

74. It was certified

There were chances at every step to make these challenges, including in congress. None were made. Not even by Hillary. I know exactly how many EC votes there were and those votes were not challenged by any democratic senator, nor by Biden.

Biden denied the objections one by one, at times jocular and apparently determined to finish the tally. “It is over,” he said at one point, to laughter from Republicans.

None of the representatives had the backing of a senator, which would have allowed them to suspend the joint session and allow the House and Senate to meet separately to debate the objections.

[MrsCoffee]

86. And if they knew what we know today, that wouldn't have ever happened.

Look... just because it was a successful theft, doesn't mean that the thief rightly owns the property he stole.

For fuck's sake.

[zipplewrath]

87. Not so sure

Especially Biden knew that the Russians had interfered and that the Trump campaign had been infiltrated.
It isn't theft until you find the crime. To date, no one has found the case of the altered ballot, and not even the democrats are looking.

[MrsCoffee]

89. Ok. You are probably the only Democrat in America that doesn't believe Donald Trump stole the

election or that it was theft.

I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you weren't a big Hillary supporter.

I'm also going to bet that Robert Mueller has the proof you are looking for.

[zipplewrath]

90. No there are alot of us

And I suspect Mueller won't have any proof of any ballots being changed.

[MrsCoffee]

91. A lot as in a handful.

You can come up for air anytime.

[zipplewrath]

92. Well, most of the senators

Truly, most of the political operatives in DC don't buy into that. Every election has irregularities, and yes, the GOP has been openly working on voter suppression. But no one has ever found the altered ballots, and that goes for the ones the GOP always claims the democrats have done too. Even in NC 9th, it is mostly an accusation of basically not counting them, which is why it hasn't been certified.

[MrsCoffee]

106. They found altered ballots in the primaries, can't imagine folks didn't do the same in the general.

By the way, you can’t find altered ballots if no one looks.

[zipplewrath]

112. No voter fraud

And yet the official democratic position is that there is virtually no voter fraud.

[MrsCoffee]

127. Because that is election fraud.

Not voter fraud.

[zipplewrath]

129. Not if the voter is involved in the fraud

Which in all the fraud that has been discovered over the years, tends to be how it happens. Voters sell/give/get duped into turning over absentee ballots or mail in ballots or whatever and they are used by various aggregators to fill them out, or alter them. The magnitude of this is minuscule and the Russians weren't involved in this. I'm dubious this is why HRC lost in Wisconsin. It tends to be more dangerous in local elections where 40 or 50 votes can turn an election.

[MrsCoffee]

134. We are talking about election fraud. Republicans talk about voter fraud.

Any attempt to alter election results is election fraud, not voter fraud.

Durham election worker was found guilty of running provisional ballots through multiple times and disappearing others. You really think that was limited to the primaries or NC?

But no recounts means we will never know, right? Why do you think the Republicans go to court to try to stop the vote counts?

[zipplewrath]

135. Not on the scale necessary

That kind of fraud is what affects local races, maybe state races. I'm dubious that kind of fraud was the reason for HRC's loss in the 3 critical states.

[MrsCoffee]

136. Russia hacked into at least 39 state voting systems.

I'm not dubious at all.

[zipplewrath]

139. Looks like they succeeded

Although the committee did not find any evidence that the hackers actually changed votes, it said it found "ample evidence" that the Russian government sought to undermine confidence in U.S. voting systems,.

From your response, I'd say they succeed it their goal.

[MrsCoffee]

141. So you have confidence in the U.S. voting system?

After what happened in Georgia and again in Florida just last year?

Well then, I guess we have nothing to worry about.

Me, I'll still advocate for hand counted paper ballots everywhere.

[zipplewrath]

142. On the national level?

Yes.

I do think it is prone to error, and in any close state election, any error can be problematic. Gore probably lost predominately because of a flawed design in one area that had jews voting for Buchanan. I do think there are problems with malfunctions that go undetected. I do think there is far too high a tolerance for "spoiled" ballots. I think there are offices that shouldn't even be elected positions.

I think we should use computers that assist in filling out a ballot such that it is not "spoiled" and then have it printed so the voter can check it. Then that becomes the official ballot. And they should be saved for some period of time afterwards.

[TSheehan]

162. "She won the last election." News to me.

[MrsCoffee]

164. Well now you know.

[TSheehan]

165. I'll be sure to write to her in the White House.

[MrsCoffee]

166. Wouldn't be the first time she got her mail there.

[TSheehan]

167. Maybe she should let others have a shot at that.

[MrsCoffee]

168. Maybe she should do whatever the fuck she wants.

[TSheehan]

169. I agree. Just don't count on my vote.

[MrsCoffee]

170. Did she get it last time?

[TSheehan]

171. Actually, yes. Twice.

[MrsCoffee]

172. Then I would definitely count on your vote.

[TSheehan]

173. I thought people can do whatever the fuck they want. Like Hillary. Or does she have special rights?

[MrsCoffee]

177. She doesn't need special rights to do whatever the fuck she wants.

[Crunchy Frog]

186. I don't like the way she's decorated the Oval Office. n/t

[Baltimike]

183. I love this. knr on a response if I could. nt

[ucrdem]

37. I don't see a compelling reason why she shouldn't.

If the stars align it could be her moment at last. If they don't she'll drop out. I don't think it would interfere with anyone else's campaign and people are free to work for or vote for whomever they please. So I would have no objections.

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

40. +1

Considering Bernie is waved right through, why not? Its a process.

[Locrian]

38. fuck no

clear enough?

[MrsCoffee]

45. Yes. Very transparent.

[athena]

144. Could have been so much worse, eh?

She could have been president. The horror!

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

39. YES! If she never gets to be dons replacement. She won. Since when does America cheat

it's winners? She won. remember that. America is fair and kind and just. She deserves to be president. Sets a bad precedent. If she were you? what would you expect? The biggest rip off in the world and she got cheated, and so did we. She knows where the bodies are buried, and the gop would tremble...again.

[lunamagica]

125. Exactly. I'm surprised there isn't a big outcry over this. She was cheated. Everyone who voted for

her was cheated.

Hillary taking her place as the legitimate POTUS would be the right, just end to the electoral mess

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

148. Thats a fact. "Everyone who voted for her was cheated" Should be a protest sign.

[Vinca]

41. No.

Sadly, there's a time for everyone and hers has come and gone. If there was any Constitutional way to install her in her rightly-won office, that should be done. But there isn't. I hope Don is eventually frog marched off to jail so she might get some satisfaction from that.

[betsuni]

46. I think this thread isn't fun for you.

No nutty conspiracy theories about bad bad bad Democrats like Hillary "controlled by corporate lobbyists and their money" taking "corporate bribe money." All is forgiven suddenly?

[brooklynite]

48. No, for two reasons

First, there were known flaws in her campaign strategy last time.

Second, setting up another Clinton-Trump fight means you're effectively telling voters to admit they made a mistake. Getting them to shift their vote to another Democrat is a much easier message to sell.

[EffieBlack]

50. "there were known flaws in her campaign strategy"

Translation: Hillary should not run because she failed to be the first candidate in history to not be perfect.

Gotcha.

[brooklynite]

51. No: Hillary should not run because her strategy was inadequate to get elected against Trump

I don't care that she got more votes, because, as much as we disagree, that's not how we run Presidential elections.

The bottom line is that she lost 5 critical States that Obama won twice

[EffieBlack]

53. Any Democrat's strategy to get elected would have failed in 2016

Because no matter what they did, the Russians and the other bad players would have adjusted their cheating to overcome it. That's how cheating works.

But, by all means, let's pretend that it was Hillary's fault that a foreign government stole the election.

[brooklynite]

55. Let's be clear, I supported Hillary, worked on her campaign and housed many of her Senior Staff

The mistakes that I saw, and that were confirmed by State Party Chairs that I know, had nothing to do with Russia.

[EffieBlack]

59. She would have won the election and become president, notwithstanding any mistakes (which EVERY

campaign has). No candidate ever runs a perfect campaign and local and state campaigns and others involved ALWAYS complain and second guess the national campaign - that's nothing new. Winning campaigns win despite their mistakes, never because their campaign was perfect.

The ONLY reason Hillary lost is that the election was stolen - otherwise, she would have won and would now be president. There is not one thing she could have done differently that would have changed the outcome. Even if she had run an absolutely perfect campaign - which no candidate in history has ever done - Trump STILL would have become president.

[brooklynite]

61. I've learned not to confuse my personal biases with reality...

My analysis is that Biden would have held the Obama states and won the Election, notwithstanding Russian interference.

[EffieBlack]

66. Riiight

Because: 1) Russian interference and GOP voter suppression had absolutely nothing to do with Hillary not holding some of the states that Obama won; and 2) if Biden had been the nominee, the Russians wouldn't have done anything differently, but would have used the exact same strategy they used for Hillary and wouldn't have tailored their tactics in any way to undermine Biden's strengths and overplay his weaknesses ...

[EffieBlack]

49. If she wants to, yes. If she doesn't, no.

[Botany]

52. You aren't trying to "stir up" some problems are you?

I like horses.

[brush]

54. No, and I worked on her campaign. She was the most qualified candidate ever...

and she correctly pegged trump as a Putin puppet to his face during one of the campaign debates.

Let's leave it at that.

We nor she needs her legacy sullied by running again with the possibility of not even getting out of the primaries and thus being forever remembered in history as a three-time loser.

No.

[Faux pas]

56. Oh please

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[WeekiWater]

57. I only want to see two people who ran last time jump in the race again.

O’Malley and Webb.

O’Malley, have you been practicing your public speaking?

Webb only for his passion of criminal justice reform. Our candidates need to pick up his ideas and passion in that area.

[demmiblue]

58. No. n/t

[DinahMoeHum]

60. No.

n/t

[Vogon_Glory]

62. No

No. As strongly as I believe that she would have made a good President, I fear that she would not be a good candidate next time around. The liars and dirt bags on the right have succeeded at dissing her, the gullibles’ and deplorables’ eyes would glaze over again, and we and the country would lose again. Our loss.

[TheCowsCameHome]

63. Hell no.

n/t

[Joe941]

64. The con should be removed in a straight jacket and she should be led into the white house.

I'm serious.

[triron]

113. Agree but won't happen. We are fucked.

[lunamagica]

126. That would be beautiful..

[ismnotwasm]

65. Why do you ask?

She’s made it very clear she is not running

[obnoxiousdrunk]

68. No.

[LexVegas]

69. Up to her. I would support her if she did, though I don't think she will. nt

[Takket]

71. No

She would make a great president but the media will never treat her fairly. They will make the entire primary about “her emails” and Dems will not be allowed to get any messaging out. They are already trying to make the primaries about Warren’s heritage so we are already handcuffed in messaging.

[Liberal In Texas]

75. No.

That ship has sailed. We need a new trajectory.

[bearsfootball516]

76. No. Why on earth is this a thread?

I happily supported and voted for her in 2016. But that was then and this is now.

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

149. Really? So you'd be ok with it if it were YOU?

Something tells me no.

[bearsfootball516]

159. This isn't about Hillary, it's abour what's best for the Democratic Party.

As I’ve said before, I happily supported her three years ago. But she’s stepped away from politics since then, and the best course of action for the party is to ultimately nominate someone new who can also attract new voters.

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

160. Unless she requests otherwise. If it was me i'd hope someone would

rescue my effort and encourage me. This OP and the threads don't sound like supporting our winner. But hey, that's just me.

[marmar]

77. No.

Quod erat demonstrandum.

[Demsrule86]

78. No

[Va Lefty]

79. No

[el_bryanto]

80. I think it's been a few days since we re-fought the 2016 election

I don't, but I think she'll have strong support if she does. So there's an argument to be made. The real problem with her running again is a) many Democrats' for her will be lukewarm and b) Republicans hatred of her gives them something to focus on rather than trying to defend Trump's record.

Bryant

[Hassin Bin Sober]

82. No way.

[tulipsandroses]

83. No

We need to move on

[Freedomofspeech]

84. No...

[AlexSFCA]

85. NO

[Charlotte Little]

88. Heavens NO

We didn't deserve her in 2016. No way should she object herself to that abuse again.

[Aristus]

95. No.

I was so proud to vote for her, and slipped into a deep, depressed daze when she was denied the office she won. But the repukes would kill for her to run again. They marshall all of their resources toward fighting her at every turn. They may not know exactly how to run against someone who is not Hillary Clinton. But recent events suggest they may use the same tactics. (Elizabeth Warren - 'unlikeable' ) Why make it easy for them?

[Proud Liberal Dem]

96. I would love to see a rematch

but I'd also be concerned that it would be a rehash of 2016- as unfair as that would be- with the outcome uncertain. A Trump/Hillary rematch would probably be just like "catnip" for the Trump base and would likely divide us. I have come to the sad but unmistakable conclusion that that 2020 should feature a new and clean slate of candidates (which also means no Bernie as well). Hillary, Gore, Kerry would have all been better Presidents than what we ended up getting in 2000, 2004, and 2016 but I feel that their time has, regrettably, come and gone. :-/

[triron]

97. She got cheated last time so it may be only fitting but I'm afraid

that between the media, republican propaganda and the Russians (etc.)
much PR damage was done. It is such a damn shame. She is so qualified.
But since when is "qualified" important to the majority of American voters?

[area51]

98. No. n/t

[StevieM]

100. This is silly, she is not running. And she deserves better than the way she was treated.

So I am glad that she won't be subjecting herself to that again.

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

150. Yeah...why should she get what she wanted right?

[democratisphere]

101. YES!

But she is too smart to put herself through the Presidential campaign BS again.

[tulipsandroses]

102. I have one other thing to say- Thank you Hillary- I don't see her campaign as such a failure now

Yeah we have the orange clown in office - But she gave strength to a lot of women- Look how many women we have in office- The orange clown himself angered a lot of women. No doubt. Hillary's strength and courage also helped and showed a lot of women they could be president or could be taken as serious candidates.

[JoeOtterbein]

103. No...

She will not demand recounts or audits like she should have in '16. We need a fighter. Not a concession speech.

[Trumpocalypse]

104. Up to her

But I would prefer someone else.

[SidDithers]

108. Nope...

none of the 2016 Dems should.

Sid

[ooky]

109. No. NT

[Eliot Rosewater]

110. Hell YES

[KPN]

111. I think it is a decision only she can make, not us. We can and should only vote in the primary.

Now whether her running again would be good for our party, that's another question. I tend to think not, however unfair that may really be to her. But if she did run and won the nomination, I can think of no reason why I wouldn't vote for her.

[vsrazdem]

114. No

[emulatorloo]

115. She said she isn't running. Multiple times. She's not running

[maxsolomon]

116. I question the need for this post,

and your motivation for posting it.

Next I expect a post from you asking the same for Sen. Sanders.

[Rene]

118. yes she deserves it

[0rganism]

130. but do we deserve her?

i think Americans in the upper midwest proved in 2016 that we are no longer fit to be a global superpower graced with competent leadership.

[MuseRider]

119. No, please no. n/t

[Blaukraut]

120. Anyone who wants to run, should run. Let the voters decide n/t

[vishnura]

128. NO!

[PufPuf23]

131. No.

HRC lost in 2008 and lost again in 2016. HRC would again be a risk to lose.

Like it or not HRC is an unpopular politician with many, even some long time dependable Democratic Party members.

This is reality.

There are many other qualitfied Democratic candidates for 2020. I am eager to see who will rise to the top of the Democratic candidates for 2020 and a new Democratic POTUS in January 2021.

[Recursion]

132. If she wants to, why not?

If the other candidates can't beat her in the Primary I'd have trouble believing they'd be a better candidate in the General.

[0rganism]

133. no, we had our chance to elect decency and competence in 2016, and we blew it

after all the bullshit she's endured over the decades and all the public service she's already done, Hillary deserves a rest.

[doc03]

137. NO!

[bdamomma]

138. no

she did warn voters, and she's being happy being a grandmother.

[Qutzupalotl]

140. No, and neither should Bernie.

And I say this as a former Bernie supporter who still likes a lot of his proposals. Of course I voted for Hillary in the general.

There is too much mistrust and bad blood in the waters, unfortunately. We need to be truly united behind the next nominee, and that means not setting ourselves up for a never-ending airing of grievances.

[hamsterjill]

147. Hell yes!

The presidency was stolen from her and she deserves a chance to set the record straight.

[ffr]

151. Yes absolutely. With an in-office approval rating of 69%, twice, who else can match her.

Nobody.

She brings the experience to office that we need. Her campaign message needs to change however to focus more on getting men to vote for her, instead of 90% of her ads focusing on every other demographic.

[hibbing]

152. Please, no

[dlk]

153. She Won the Last Time

[LenaBaby61]

155. "She Won the Last Time."

True that. However, that was her last time. She should be there for the party, but no more runs for her as unfortunate as that stealing of the presidency from her was. Bernie and Joe shouldn't run either.

[Lucca2]

154. No

She's a guide, a leader in the DNC, but we need younger peeps.

[Voltaire2]

156. Nope.

[CTyankee]

157. No. time for fresh talent.

Kamala is the future. Trust me. She is.

[scarytomcat]

158. No

no again

[TSheehan]

161. Past the expiration date, sorry.

[zonkers]

174. I love Hillary. But running for prez would kick th sh*t out of her. Stay home. Enjoy your family.

She stills make a difference just being the icon you are and doing all the public service you do.

[dmr]

175. I'd vote for her again, but I don't want that nasty GOP to even say her name

Who was it in 2016 that said they had about 5 years worth of bullshit to throw at her if she became our President? I can see him in my mind but can't remember his name.

There is only one thing I am thankful for her loss in '16, and that is not subjecting Hillary to the despicable behavior of each Republican in the Congress, and in the media.

Seriously, I have thought of this often. It's the only saving grace to her loss. She deserves our respect, but they had no plans for that.

Yea, we can just see how the GOP is full of Patriots.

[sellitman]

178. Pass

Been there done that.

[TJKatd]

179. No. nt

*

[bottomofthehill]

180. Voted for her in the primary in 08 and 16

Happily and proudly voted for President Obama in the general in 08 and happily and proudly voted for Secretary Clinton in 16 but I am over her now. I think she could win the primary in this field easily under a divide and conquer program, but I actually think she could loose again leaving us with 8 years of the Trump. I think Mrs Clinton is an amazing woman and would have made a great President! I don’t think it will ever happen and it is a shame but we need to look towards the future and do what is the best for the country.

[Baltimike]

181. YAS!!! Just like Pelosi should have been speaker! They know wtf they're doing. nt

[triron]

184. knr

[Meowmee]

187. She won't run again

She is easily the smartest and the best we have. What happened with the stolen election is such a tragedy for this country. Look at the nightmare we are in now. I always knew there were a large number of idiots/ fascists and so on here but after this I will never look at this country the same way again, disgust doesn’t even begin to describe it.