General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums"Why Hillary Clinton could bury the Republican presidential field"
Why Hillary Clinton could bury the Republican presidential fieldBy Neil Macdonald, CBC News
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/why-hillary-clinton-could-bury-the-republican-presidential-field-1.2549950
"SNIP....................................
There are other possibilities, most of them in the same league. That makes Clinton the highest-rated Democratic front-runner ever.
These days, she's writing a memoir, keeping her public appearances to a judicious minimum, and making the odd policy speech; in other words, creating distance between herself and a president whose popularity ratings are, frankly, awful.
Her four years as secretary of state earned her even greater global fame than she took into the job, which was already considerable. And leaving when she did was good timing; the potentially curdled-milk files like Syria, Iran and Israel-Palestine now belong to her successor.
Within her own party, she's like the Borg in Star Trek. Resistance is futile. And at this point, the Republicans don't appear to be much of an obstacle, either.
...................................SNIP"
mike_c
(36,213 posts)The lessor of the lessor of evils, at best. No thanks.
Evergreen Emerald
(13,069 posts)If so, I suggest you do your homework before you simply regurgitate the lies and distortions that are so prominent here of late.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)If she brings back the Mark Penn crowd, yeah barf.
Paulie
(8,462 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Beacool
(30,244 posts)Morris has been bad mouthing the Clintons since the mid 90s, when he was caught with a prostitute and was fired from Bill's reelection campaign.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Picking Mark Penn was a pretty good sign she deserved to lose.
Will 2016 Clinton (if she runs) be closer to 1992 Clinton or 2008 Clinton?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)I think she would surprise us all in a good way.
I never felt this way before.
There's nobody as powerful as she is, and she's a woman.
And despite the middle way and wall street, she is a powerful
advocate for human rights and I believe she will blow through
Republican bullshit as president in a way Obama can not and
nobody else can.
I don't believe she will have problem standing up to anybody
in the world looking them in the eye and setting them straight.
I think her fundamental values are good ones and nobody
owns her.
Maybe this is a pipe dream but it's a vision I like.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)I know
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Nah, there's like a soggy marsh with some dog doo, I wouldn't call it much of a 'field'
tblue37
(64,979 posts)FSogol
(45,355 posts)Cha
(295,899 posts)Neil McDonald is making a big mistake and so would Hillary if she's counting President Obama out.
Obama's "ratings awful"? I don't believe that and even if they were low.. they won't stay that way. count on that. "Potentially curdled-files like Iran? Peace negotiations going on.. a Win for the President when the hard liners wanted more sanctions. Syria.. so what? And, her "successor", SOS John Kerry is do a hellava job.
This isn't for you .. but, people who don't appreciate the President.. really don't even know what he's done.
I don't think Hillary would be stupid enough to run away from the President when and if the time comes. Pull a Gore so to speak.
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)look at the success in preaching "failed stimulus".
When I think about how Bush could beat 8 years of Clinton peace and prosperity running against Clinton's successor Gore....I don't put anything past the Repukes.
Cha
(295,899 posts)and I still don't think about it yet. But, if she runs I will bet you right now she won't be running from President Obama. I think she's smarter than that.
She was my Senator while I lived in New York. I met her once and talked to her.. I took her picture.
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)she would not run from Obama, I don't think. But she may want to use this period to create some perceptual distance from herself and what was a low point for the president.
I suspect good things for 2014 economically and otherwise.
Cha
(295,899 posts)of the Obama Presidency in spite of an unprecedented amount of hate and obstruction.
Follow
Working for the Best President Ever... @BarackObama
10:17 AM - 25 Feb 2014 24 Retweets 22 favorites
Reply
Retweet
Favorite
TOD
applegrove
(118,008 posts)for the hard things since she is no longer SOS is a good one. And if Kerry succeeds around the world it will benefit Hillary Clinton too. Stopping being SOS is a win win for her. But yeah. I don't think Obama will stay down for long. I didn't agree with that part of the article. But I thought the article did have much to say. Sort of a look at Clinton from the outside the US and how formidable she is. But no. I prefer to follow Obama rather than speculating about Clinton too. He still can rock the world. And Kerry may just be a better SOS than Clinton. If he gets peace in Israel/Palestine.
Adam051188
(711 posts)run virtually unopposed that is.
I hope Obama rocks that world. the world seems to be doing a lot of rocking lately.
Cha
(295,899 posts)been a little protective of the President.
Good analysis, applegrove~
Adam051188
(711 posts)I think things will improve overall with her in office. The republican party won't be able to count on the blind hatred and condescension that manifests itself as a willingness to believe that all the problems in life are to be blamed on the president and not cohesive right wing obstructionism/sabotaging, at least among certain demographics. They will be forced to fall somewhat into line or become hated as traitors.
Also the fact that she is not viewed as being "liberal" will coax a little more cooperation out of the private sector oligarchs. It will be back to business as usual, and i don't personally believe most of the genuinely powerful people in the world have an interest in the economic failure of the u.s. so things will have to improve somewhat.
yay for business as usual
lets hope things don't get too ugly here at home before 2016.
krawhitham
(4,634 posts)And she lost to an unknown black man
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Adam051188
(711 posts)i am actually sure a very low percentage of Americans would know that.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)His talents were widely known.
There isn't a Barack Obama waiting in either party's wings.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)Born: October 26, 1947, age 66 already, will turn 70 during the election.
That was Reagan's age and he was incompetent well before it was over.
This is why Biden should not run either.
February 25, 2014,
Joe Biden on 2016: I'm uniquely qualified to be president
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/joe-biden-on-2016-im-uniquely-qualified-to-be-president/
Appearing on ABC's "The View," Biden said his experience working in the White House makes him a strong presidential contender who could successfully follow through on the agenda of President Obama.
"I think my knowledge of foreign policy, my engagement of world leaders, my experience uniquely positions me to follow through on the agenda Barack and I have of bringing world peace that is real and substantive," Biden said.
Biden said Mr. Obama trusts him to deliver on major tasks -- like the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq -- and that he has been an influential vice president.
Pressed by Barbara Walters, Biden would not rule out a bid for the Democratic Party nomination ..........
Beacool
(30,244 posts)And is way behind Hillary in every single poll.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)Beacool
(30,244 posts)Biden is not, although I like him a lot. I think that he wants to remain relevant, but he knows that he wouldn't win the nomination in 2016.
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)With the exception of Reagan vs. Carter, younger candidates have won when pitted against the candidates who were significantly older.
Kennedy vs. Nixon
Carter vs. Ford
Clinton vs. Bush then Dole
Obama vs. McCain then Romney
It is no doubt a factor. And, you can bet republicans have done the math and will run a young candidate- especially if Hillary runs.
Rand Paul, Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio... Everyone they're talking about is well under 60.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)Clinton is an insider, not a good choice when the R's have spent 8 years making government unfavorable! Part of that strategy is to head off insiders like Hillary, Biden, and other party leaders.
One of the things that helped Obama was that he could not be tied to the DC establishment (just to the world's largest corporate law firm, which is far worse!).
Beacool
(30,244 posts)And he was a historic candidate, just like she was. Also, she also lost by a hair, not a country mile. Neither one had enough pledged delegates to win the nomination outright without the super delegates.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)... his 2004 keynote speech.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Democratic_National_Convention_keynote_address#Reception
Immediately after the speech MSNBC host Chris Matthews admitted, "I have to tell you, a little chill in my legs right now. That is an amazing moment in history right there. It is surely an amazing moment. A keynoter like I have never heard."[26] He added later in the night, "...I have seen the first black president there. And the reason I say that is because I think the immigrant experience combined with the African background, combined with the incredible education, combined with his beautiful speech, not every politician gets help with the speech, but that speech was a piece of work."[28] Commenting the next day, Pat Buchanan, while complimentary towards Obama, was more critical of what he called a centrist speech: "He is hiding what he truly believes. What does Obama believe about this war?"[29] On PBS, columnist David Brooks responded positively, "This is why you go to conventions, to watch a speech like this," while Mark Shields said, "A star is born."[30]
Former Jimmy Carter speechwriter Hendrik Hertzberg considered it slightly better than Mario Cuomo's 1984 keynote address, stating, "If he wrote that speech, then he should be president, because it's such a great speech. If he didn't, he should be president because he found such a great speechwriter."[31] Martin Medhurst, a professor of rhetoric and communications at Baylor University, disagreed about it being better than Cuomo's, even if it was an exceptional performance. Stressing that it was too early to make any predictions, he noted that new political stars were not normally created because of keynote addresses.[32]
.
.
.
Obama's fellow Illinois Democrats praised him after the speech. Illinois Speaker of the House Michael Madigan reacted by saying, "He is a star...For Barack, the sky's the limit," while Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley said, "He hit a grand slam home run." Senate President Emil Jones responded, "It was such a moving speech that I had tears in my eyes...It was electrifying. When I looked around the room, all across the people were so emotional, tears in their eyes. They're crying. A great individual, a great Illinoisan." Governor Rod Blagojevich stated, "After the speech last night, I would think that even if he had an opponent, he might get 100 percent of the vote."[41] Former Illinois Senator Carol Moseley Braun said, "Obama represents the best of what we brought from our generation...he represents a kind of division within the Democratic Party. It's not the old left."[42]
New York Senator Hillary Clinton was quoted saying, "I thought that was one of the most electrifying moments that I can remember at any convention."[42] Alabama Representative Artur Davis pushed the idea of Obama running for president, stating, "If anyone can do it, Obama can...Obama may help break down the stereotypes that an African-American politician is someone only for other blacks...When Obama runs for the White House, he will run not as a candidate for blacks. He has the capacity to run as a candidate for everyone."[32]
For anyone to say that few people knew him or were impacted by this speech, you would have to not have read any newspaper or watched any political show for three weeks after the Democratic convention ended when the 2004 Presidential campaign was just officially underway, i.e. at a time when everyone is starting to tune in.
Beacool
(30,244 posts)DonViejo
(60,536 posts)the wing nut diatribe against Hillary:
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)"In 2012, Barack Obama carried women voters by a margin of 11 percentage points. You can bet Hillary Clinton's margin would be a lot bigger than that."
DonCoquixote
(13,615 posts)Because Obama HIRED her as SoS. Let's be honest here, if Obama skipped her over, and put in someone further to the left, there are many in the party that would have cheered. Yes, many in the party would have booed, but he could have very easily said no to her and many other Clinton era people, like Larry Summers, like Tim Geitner, like Robert Gates.
Hell, there are many of us who are frankly angry at him precisely because he did not do JUST that. In the Primary, I voted AGAINST Clinton. I wanted an end to the Clinton policies which almost did as much damage as the Republican ones.
And for those that say "Hillary is not her Husband!" I offer this challenge. Where has she diverged?
If Hillary was to oppose the TPP she helped make, I would cheer her.
If Hillary was to oppose the Trans-Canada Pipeline she helped make possible, I would cheer her.
If Hillary was to apologize for her saying "Assad must go!" I would cheer her.
But we know those things are as likely as a comet landing in the backyard.
And let's not even talk about things where she could genuinely pillory Obama, the sort of stuff that would get Jane Hamsher and Maureen O Dowd giddy, such as making a pledge not to entertain ANY Social Security cuts, including the chained CPI.
And to those that say "she ain't runnin yet!" I offer this, even if she knew she was not running, I mean to the point where the Iron Fingers of God could not bend her will, then, I say, what would she have to lose by saying these things? Her Husband is making a tidy living making speeches and acting like a firebrand liberal, now that he is not running.
And if she is thinking of running, and so secure, what does she have to lose by saying something actually to the left? If she is so inevitable, she should have the most freedom to say something. She can even offer something wild, such as, supporting Medical Cannabis, or that she would sign a constitutional amendment to keep Abortion legal in all 50 states. She knows that she could fail at both, but if she sounded forceful, that alone would whet the appetites of those of us who get tired of Obama trying to play Chess with people who are too dumb for tic-tac-toe.
DonCoquixote
(13,615 posts)There is one ugly thing. As Margaret Thatcher proved, just because someone happens to be a female does not mean they cannot be as much of an arrogant jerk as a male. The GOP has plenty of would be presidents to prove that point. As easily as that lady from Alaska comes to mind, there are people like Susanna Martinez, Nikki Haley, Connie Rice and others all to ready to hop into the Veep Slot. If that happens, these ladies will know how to turn Jane Working Class against Hillary, by pointing out she looks like the ladies that hire and fire them.
Welibs
(188 posts)She's rich like the rest of them & she attended a Bilderberg meeting in 2008 with Obama! She'll finish what Reagan started, what Bush, Clinton & Bushco contributed to and what Obama can't finish!
Only a fool would vote for Hilary Clinton!
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)2banon
(7,321 posts)Coyotl
(15,262 posts)I'd love to see a Dem take a big chunk of the Iowa caucus vote from the wingnuts. Who do we have for that job?
exboyfil
(17,857 posts)The Republican will have to hold Romney's states (NC will be the only one in real doubt) and also pick up FL, VA, OH, and one other (probably Wisconsin, Iowa, or Colorado). I frankly think Jeb Bush is the only Republican that could pull this off, and the curse of his name will be telling. He helped steal the state for his brother who will go down as the second worst president since at least Hoover.
Mr.Bill
(24,103 posts)Supreme Court Nominations.
Hillary is not perfect, but we could own the Supreme Court for decades.