Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kpete

(71,986 posts)
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:28 PM Jan 2013

Hillary Clinton ‘not inclined’ to run for president in 2016

Source: Washington Post

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said on Tuesday that she’s “not inclined” to run for president in 2016 but left the door open for what is widely considered her likely return to politics after she steps down as secretary of state.

“I’m not thinking about anything like that right now,” Clinton smilingly told a questioner. “I am looking forward to finishing up my tenure as secretary of state and then catching up on about 20 years of sleep deprivation.”

Clinton, who steps down Friday as one of the best-known secretaries of state, is also among the world’s most admired women and the object of intense speculation about her future.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/clinton-not-inclined-to-run-for-president-in-2016/2013/01/29/abb63022-6a39-11e2-af53-7b2b2a7510a8_story.html?hpid=z4

95 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hillary Clinton ‘not inclined’ to run for president in 2016 (Original Post) kpete Jan 2013 OP
Of course she is going to run. She just doesn't want nor need a nearly 3 1/2 year campaign. eom Purveyor Jan 2013 #1
Actually they do to build up the base for their war chest. RC Jan 2013 #9
Well, the youngest person eligible for the next term should be born before 1/20/82. alp227 Jan 2013 #45
But she does need better people this time around. And she needs to control those people. Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2013 #86
Who is the youngest Liberal Libertarian we can run? nt patrice Jan 2013 #2
Given term limits what does age have to do with anything dsc Jan 2013 #4
I don't like how term limits ASSUMES everyone is the same & disposes of authentic value patrice Jan 2013 #5
I don't like them either dsc Jan 2013 #6
Fear and money Paulefresh Jan 2013 #82
given the fact that the only popular two term Presidents dsc Jan 2013 #83
....and FDR and Reagan (unfortunately) Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2013 #87
well I meant living dsc Jan 2013 #88
Liberal libertarian ?? What exactly is that karynnj Jan 2013 #73
Whatever it is that Noam Chomsky means when he self-identifies, in part, as Libertarian. nt patrice Jan 2013 #79
Actually, I'm a type of Libertarian myself, just not the Ron/Rand Paul type, but, generally, patrice Jan 2013 #80
Old will not be in, in 2016 lotsofsnowplease Jan 2013 #3
Wow, what a sexist, dickish thing to say. phleshdef Jan 2013 #8
Huh? lotsofsnowplease Jan 2013 #11
"The granny will be knitting Bill a sweater" Renew Deal Jan 2013 #14
That "granny" could hand most political opponents Aerows Jan 2013 #48
So, wait, we're not allowed theKed Jan 2013 #78
nah..."Way Old" is a relative term demwing Jan 2013 #12
Couldn't you at least have made a snide "baking cookies" reference? KamaAina Jan 2013 #16
Someone would have complained about that, too! randome Jan 2013 #22
Of course. KamaAina Jan 2013 #23
As they should, but sexist comments shouldn't surprise me. Beacool Jan 2013 #51
Agreed. And the saddest thing is that they don't even realize just how sexist their disgusting Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2013 #89
If they don't realize how sexist their comments are, then they are even more insensitive. Beacool Jan 2013 #92
Shame on you. 840high Jan 2013 #44
There is just something delightful and "look at me" about misspelled snark. libdem4life Jan 2013 #49
Oh! I was wondering what "all for not" meant Pool Hall Ace Jan 2013 #72
Love to play Grammar Police, but just on trolls with single digit posts. libdem4life Jan 2013 #84
Sexist, much? Beacool Jan 2013 #50
Let the woman rest for goodness sakes. dkf Jan 2013 #7
She's been saying this for quite a while now struggle4progress Jan 2013 #10
Exactly. She's not running ... period! Auggie Jan 2013 #15
Wait and see! LongTomH Jan 2013 #13
I think this describes Hillary SCVDem Jan 2013 #17
I love Madeline Kahn!!! Beacool Jan 2013 #54
After she gets much needed sleep & writes a book, she'll run, unless she runs into health problems. Auntie Bush Jan 2013 #18
The fall she took proved to be very serious. The double vision she's still experiencing blm Jan 2013 #19
Re: Biden...He sure looked like he was "going for the Media" at the Inauguration! KoKo Jan 2013 #31
Always avoid silly speculation. Bucky Jan 2013 #38
Pretty much the whole talk of who will run and win in 2016 davidpdx Jan 2013 #62
Re: Biden...He sure looked like he was "going for the Media" at the Inauguration! Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2013 #91
Now you're getting me worried. Maybe that's why Auntie Bush Jan 2013 #33
Perhaps he requested the interview because he didn't want her last public image as a cabinet member Samantha Jan 2013 #67
And then if she does run after recovering, alp227 Jan 2013 #47
Yeah, the country really cares about that crap. But thanks for your concern. aquart Jan 2013 #52
It's funny Cosmocat Jan 2013 #71
Totally TuxedoKat Jan 2013 #77
Yep Cosmocat Jan 2013 #93
Time will tell Sherman A1 Jan 2013 #20
It doesn't matter. We will get Hillary, or a clone of Hillary. woo me with science Jan 2013 #21
an alternative to a clone RILib Jan 2013 #25
You miss my point. woo me with science Jan 2013 #29
+1 KoKo Jan 2013 #32
and that starts with an acknowledgement of the damage the corporate Dems have caused. nt antigop Jan 2013 #59
Biden's in bed with the banks? Well, he does a shitty job of gaming the system, then, Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2013 #90
The "PTB" have been the "Deciders" for many Decades now. It's up to them. KoKo Jan 2013 #28
You're right. woo me with science Jan 2013 #34
I'm really not pleased with that comment. Auntie Bush Jan 2013 #40
no she wasn't "always left of Bill" RILib Jan 2013 #42
That was in her youth! I voted republican too (Raygun) when I didn't know better. Auntie Bush Jan 2013 #43
youth is no excuse RILib Jan 2013 #76
Her personality doesn't matter. woo me with science Jan 2013 #53
However, you were talking about Hillary in the post. Auntie Bush Jan 2013 #58
Here's my problem with her...she lost me on this: KoKo Jan 2013 #56
yeah, I hate that video. RILib Jan 2013 #74
oh, I love this - talk about an ignorant DU jury. RILib Feb 2013 #94
Auntie, don't waste your breath. Beacool Jan 2013 #57
That's good advice...I'll take it! I'm outta here. Auntie Bush Jan 2013 #60
Take care!!! Beacool Jan 2013 #63
Yeah, like Hillary Clinton is going to stay home and ''bake cookies''? YOHABLO Jan 2013 #24
Geez. Give the woman some WIDE space, please. Hard Assets Jan 2013 #26
It would only be a dynasty if Chelsea runs. Beacool Jan 2013 #55
Well...she's got PAC's Forming...but, I remember all of us and PAC's for Al Gore to run KoKo Jan 2013 #27
That works for me...I hope we try someone Progressive for a change. nt NorthCarolina Jan 2013 #30
On Jan. 29, 2013, she is saying YES, but not officially going to announce that today.Parse it. graham4anything Jan 2013 #35
sometimes I can't tell if your gushing is honest or what... snooper2 Jan 2013 #69
No, this is real. However, if I said this in 2008, it would not have been. But it is now. graham4anything Jan 2013 #70
I think they run this same article every six months or so. Bucky Jan 2013 #36
We need more duct tape Cynicus Emeritus Jan 2013 #37
Or maybe it's just deja vu Bucky Jan 2013 #39
OK, then. Russ Feingold is available! grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #41
Hillary rocks Aerows Jan 2013 #46
what Hillary REALLY said, translated from Clintonese DonCoquixote Jan 2013 #61
As usual, your tea leaves leave a lot to be desired. Beacool Jan 2013 #64
we will see come 2016 DonCoquixote Jan 2013 #65
DUers amaze me sometimes Ash_F Jan 2013 #66
Good decision! David__77 Jan 2013 #68
I think Hillary will run madokie Jan 2013 #75
That's Clinton-speak for..You bet your ass I'm runnin'. nt clarice Jan 2013 #81
Well... Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2013 #85
She deserves a long vacation with Bill marshall Feb 2013 #95
 

RC

(25,592 posts)
9. Actually they do to build up the base for their war chest.
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:49 PM
Jan 2013

We need to start looking around for someone, Center, or a little Left of Center and 20 to 30 years younger.

alp227

(32,020 posts)
45. Well, the youngest person eligible for the next term should be born before 1/20/82.
Reply to RC (Reply #9)
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:06 PM
Jan 2013

35 by inauguration day. So just 20 years younger than obama.

oh wait do you mean younger than clinton? Ok, let's name some potential candidates born from 1960s-1977.

 

Liberal_Stalwart71

(20,450 posts)
86. But she does need better people this time around. And she needs to control those people.
Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:12 PM
Jan 2013

Her campaign suffered from disorganization and internal personality conflicts. If she does run, she needs better people and a firmer grasp on campaign finance.

patrice

(47,992 posts)
5. I don't like how term limits ASSUMES everyone is the same & disposes of authentic value
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:41 PM
Jan 2013

without actually identifying it before throwing it out.

dsc

(52,160 posts)
6. I don't like them either
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:44 PM
Jan 2013

but they exist and will exist until at least Obama is too old or too unpopular to run, so the age of the candidate ends up being irrelevant.

Paulefresh

(1 post)
82. Fear and money
Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:07 PM
Jan 2013

In a world of citizens united and right wing fear mongering how would that work out. They stole a entire election and scared an entire country into a re-election Do we really want to take the chance no term limits?

karynnj

(59,503 posts)
73. Liberal libertarian ?? What exactly is that
Wed Jan 30, 2013, 08:32 AM
Jan 2013

My first guess is that it would simply be a libertarian. The liberal would come because on social issues there is a significant overlap between libertarian desire for government to stay out of the way.

However, on economic issues, a liberal is for all the safety net programs and many social justice programs that aim to help those at the bottom. The libertarian is against using government here. This is the dimension where liberal and libertarian may be at completely opposite ends of the spectrum.

Foreign policy is more complicated, but it to is different. Libertarians would be against any humanitarian interventions - which liberals would consider.

As to who is the youngest, the question should be who is the best in terms of both getting elected and doing the job. That may well be Hillary, who certainly is a someone who has shown she has the potential to do both. She could then pick a younger VP - as she likely would have done in 2008. (Biden would not have matched her as well as he did Obama. The rumor was always Evan Bayh.)

patrice

(47,992 posts)
80. Actually, I'm a type of Libertarian myself, just not the Ron/Rand Paul type, but, generally,
Wed Jan 30, 2013, 12:57 PM
Jan 2013

I think labels are really just a starting point for discourse, relatively useful, but NOT the be all and end all of anything.

 

lotsofsnowplease

(19 posts)
3. Old will not be in, in 2016
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:35 PM
Jan 2013

Hillary and all of her favorables will be all for not. She will be way old. The granny will be knitting Bill a sweater....

 

lotsofsnowplease

(19 posts)
11. Huh?
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:53 PM
Jan 2013

Hillary loves to knit. I knit. Hillary could run for president, I wish her the best, but her age will bring her down all because of the changing demographics. How will it look in 2016? Much younger. Sex has nothing to do with my post. Geez.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
48. That "granny" could hand most political opponents
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:23 PM
Jan 2013

their heads before breakfast. I respect Hillary, and those that don't do so at their political peril. She is a force to be reckoned with, and has been all of her life.

 

demwing

(16,916 posts)
12. nah..."Way Old" is a relative term
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:54 PM
Jan 2013

Women live longer than men , and Clinton has had a lifetime of quality health care. She'll be just fine.

Beacool

(30,247 posts)
51. As they should, but sexist comments shouldn't surprise me.
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:32 PM
Jan 2013

That's the one thing that it's bipartisan. There are as many sexist jerks on the left as they are on the right.

 

Liberal_Stalwart71

(20,450 posts)
89. Agreed. And the saddest thing is that they don't even realize just how sexist their disgusting
Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:15 PM
Jan 2013

comments are!

 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
49. There is just something delightful and "look at me" about misspelled snark.
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:25 PM
Jan 2013

Manners are taught in Kindergarten ... spelling comes in about 3rd grade...and respect? Hopefully, "all was not for naught".

 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
84. Love to play Grammar Police, but just on trolls with single digit posts.
Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:52 PM
Jan 2013

Oh, and those badmouthing HRC and "old ladies", too. LOL

Beacool

(30,247 posts)
50. Sexist, much?
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:28 PM
Jan 2013

Crappy comment. If you are lucky enough, some day you too will be her age and I doubt that you will think of yourself as "old".

 

SCVDem

(5,103 posts)
17. I think this describes Hillary
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:19 PM
Jan 2013


She's tired!

A little Schnitzelgruben and she'll be good as new!

blm

(113,052 posts)
19. The fall she took proved to be very serious. The double vision she's still experiencing
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:31 PM
Jan 2013

after the concussion probably has her more concerned privately. That type of fall is scary business for us 50+ folks. I had one around the same time and am still recovering, and, as far as I know, I didn't suffer the blood clot she did.

I think she will do her round of interviews and then disappear to recuperate - if her fall is still effecting her after some months she may decide against running altogether. It would be smart for Dems to be open to either a Biden or HRC run. Biden probably wouldn't be considering it right now if HRC was fully recovered, but, he probably knows a heckuva lot more about her actual condition than we do. She may not feel up to running as much as the media assumes.

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
31. Re: Biden...He sure looked like he was "going for the Media" at the Inauguration!
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:12 PM
Jan 2013

I think he really wants it. He did well in the Veep Debates and he's like Kerry in that he's "Entitled" to a certain extent.

We shall see. But, I think Biden really wants it. Maybe he will pick Hillary as VP. Even if she's not in good health....look at CHENEY who should have been off the planet by the time he ran with many Heart Attacks that killed early some that I've known in my lifetime. That his first attack was when he was 35 meant that there's no way he could have made it this far with PaceMaker for years and then Heart Transplant. Either he's the "UnDead" or he lied about the extent of his earlier heart attacks (if he had them) so he'd look like a VP who wouldn't make it out his term as VEEP to carry Bush.

The man is amazing. Having friends who are now dead and they had access to excellent health care ater their first early heart attack (good as Cheney's in the begnning) and studying the research when someone very close to me had his own heart symptoms ....I have to say it's that he's the "UnDead or he was Lying about much of it.)

Bucky

(54,003 posts)
38. Always avoid silly speculation.
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:26 PM
Jan 2013

Things like Biden picking Clinton as his Veep is just not how the real world works.

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
62. Pretty much the whole talk of who will run and win in 2016
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 10:05 PM
Jan 2013

is silly speculation at this point. People talking about "dynasties".

If I recall correctly we just had an inauguration 9 days ago. People barely waited 2 days after the election to start talking about who would replace Obama.

 

Liberal_Stalwart71

(20,450 posts)
91. Re: Biden...He sure looked like he was "going for the Media" at the Inauguration!
Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:30 PM
Jan 2013

I disagree. Biden was being Biden. He's always like that. Very energetic and playful. I didn't see him as playing the media...well...maybe just a little bit...

Auntie Bush

(17,528 posts)
33. Now you're getting me worried. Maybe that's why
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:17 PM
Jan 2013

Obama had that interview with her...he knows she's not going to be able to run and wants her to have a special opportunity to receive recognition, tribute and thanks. If she doesn't run...she won't have that opportunity. Please, please, please let that not be true...but it does make sense.

Samantha

(9,314 posts)
67. Perhaps he requested the interview because he didn't want her last public image as a cabinet member
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 10:47 PM
Jan 2013

to be her being smacked down by Rand Paul, et al. in that Benghazi hearing. If she does decide to run, clips of that hearing would make wonderful ads against her candidacy.

Considering all of the work and the many successes she has had, he might have thought the least she deserved was to go out with a positive public bang! Clips from their interview would much more effective and in the right direction for a woman campaigning for the Presidency. I think it just might have been one-ups-man ship!

Sam

alp227

(32,020 posts)
47. And then if she does run after recovering,
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:23 PM
Jan 2013

she would have to deal with a giant wave of right wing sh-- especially the claims that she faked her concussion to escape benghazi hearings. Then all the skeletons from the 90s such as Vince Foster, Whitewater, Lewinsky, Jones, etc. a group like crossroads gps could create a "standing by her cheating raping husband" with Lewinsky and the women who accessed bill of sexual harassment or rape. I say HRC should just enjoy her retirement at this point.

Cosmocat

(14,564 posts)
71. It's funny
Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:57 AM
Jan 2013

Part of the reason I supported Barrack Obama over Hill 5 years ago was this line of thinking - to an extent.

I was not naive.

I KNEW they would be asses to this President, too.

But, given all of the history of 15 years of them trashing her, and with BO being such a darn nice, even keeled guy with no baggage, I thought there was a CHANCE they would be LESS hysterical if he got elected.

But, somehow, they found a way to turn the country into shit for four years with him.

Fact is, there is NO democrat they won't destroy.

Gore, a decent, intelligent, honorable man, destroyed.
Kerry, a decent, intelligent, honorable man, destroyed.
Dean, a decent, intelligent, honorable man, destroyed.
Pelois, a decent, intelligent, honorable woman, treated like a joke while jackasses like Gingrich, Hastert and Bohner get the kid glove treatment.

It does not matter, the right wing, with a breathless and obedient "liberal" media will trash ANY democrat.

Hill has wanted to be President for decades now.

Given her exceptionally strong position, why would anyone who wanted to be the most powerful person on the planet be expected to just walk away from it?

TuxedoKat

(3,818 posts)
77. Totally
Wed Jan 30, 2013, 10:37 AM
Jan 2013

I felt the same way too, was worried that Secy. Clinton would be horribly villified like Pres. Clinton was. I thought they would be hard on Pres. Obama too, but not as much, since he was newer politically and figured since he was African American, they would be more circumpspect and not want to risk being perceived as possibly racist. NOPE, didn't both most of them one bit. If anything they are worse than they were four years ago towards him. I think Secy. Clinton would actually be stronger now as a candidate than she would have been back then as she has weathered so much criticism, it's just so much political noise that people tune out now. I hope she runs.

Cosmocat

(14,564 posts)
93. Yep
Thu Jan 31, 2013, 07:58 AM
Jan 2013

absolutely no reason for her not to.

Agree that she has been around so long now the country is likely to be very comfortable with her.

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
21. It doesn't matter. We will get Hillary, or a clone of Hillary.
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:46 PM
Jan 2013

We will get a corporatist and neocon with deep ties to Wall Street. It cannot be any other way with the system we currently have.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=384470





woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
29. You miss my point.
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:06 PM
Jan 2013


Biden is in bed with the banks, but that is irrelevant anyway, because you miss my point here. We don't even have a *chance* at real change unless we demand structural change....the corporate money out of the process... between now and then.

A non-corporate candidate cannot compete now, by design.

Nothing will change if we simply sit around talking about names, because as it stands, the one percent will have their pick either way. We have to demand the money out of the system first.

The only way some sort of change even has a chance of happening is if the people stand up and demand it.
 

Liberal_Stalwart71

(20,450 posts)
90. Biden's in bed with the banks? Well, he does a shitty job of gaming the system, then,
Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:24 PM
Jan 2013

because he was the least wealthiest senator behind Bernie Sanders.

I do agree with you on principle, however. The DLC (Hillary was a member, Biden was not) has done great damage to the Democratic Party.

I love how all the so-called liberals are in love with the Clintons. I like Hillary and Bill, but they were very much a part of the problem. Obama is only a little better, but not much. And again, I'd rather trust Biden who was a man of the people and didn't have much in the way of money, than I would these wealthy senators who support pro-Wall Street policies.

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
28. The "PTB" have been the "Deciders" for many Decades now. It's up to them.
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:05 PM
Jan 2013

Their WILL is the DEVINE...in the end it's all that matters.

Auntie Bush

(17,528 posts)
40. I'm really not pleased with that comment.
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:30 PM
Jan 2013

There is no other Hillary...she's irreplaceable. If she doesn't run we very well may have another Bush, Christy or Rubio. You think Hillary is a corporatist...how about one of them? That ought to scare the bejeesus out of you. She was always left of Bill and I'm sure she's even further left than she ever was. She cares about women & children, the poor and the economy. She'll do good! Not to worry!

 

RILib

(862 posts)
42. no she wasn't "always left of Bill"
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:54 PM
Jan 2013

Is that Hillary Clinton, former President of the Wellesley Young Republicans you're talking about?

Auntie Bush

(17,528 posts)
43. That was in her youth! I voted republican too (Raygun) when I didn't know better.
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:00 PM
Jan 2013

When she really got into politics...after marrying Clinton...she was left of him imho.

 

RILib

(862 posts)
76. youth is no excuse
Wed Jan 30, 2013, 08:38 AM
Jan 2013

I was out volunteering in Kennedy's campaign when I was in college.

I think Hillary "changed" to Democratic because it would have been uncomfortable for Bill to have a Republican wife while he was running for office. The change was pure opportunism on her part.

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
53. Her personality doesn't matter.
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:36 PM
Jan 2013

She is deeply, inextricably connected to the very same corporate money and connections that have driven policy for decades. She is Secretary of State in a corporate administration right now, and she would be backed by formidable corporate money when she ran.

Nothing changes until the system is changed. This is not about personalities. It is about a system drowned in and corrupted by corporate money at every level, so deeply that it's impossible to get elected without being a tool of that agenda.

Auntie Bush

(17,528 posts)
58. However, you were talking about Hillary in the post.
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:49 PM
Jan 2013

If you want to rant on corporate money...why not start a thread on that?

From what I gather...you're not for anyone. I think Dems take less corp money than ReThugs. As Obama pointed out...you have to take their money if you want to win and I want to win. We need to change citizens United! Good luck with that! Unfortunately, we'll have to take corp money until they do.

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
56. Here's my problem with her...she lost me on this:
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:43 PM
Jan 2013

"We Came, We Saw....He Died"....with a cackling laugh. The video is out there ...you must have seen it.

I was not with her views on American Imperialism. Left of Bill doesn't wash either since we know the legislation he allowed in his second term when he was battling Ken Starr that he allowed which helped cause many of the problems that allowed the 2008 Banking Implosion and more Media Consolidation. He started off with NAFTA and then Second Term the Banking/Media were deregulated.

So...Left of Bill....don't think so. He ended up not being who I thought I voted for and after the exhausting years of defending him against the Repugs...I found out what went on in the background during that time. Was willing to give Hillary a break...but, kissing up to AIPAQ and the Cackle put me over the edge. I am an Anti-Imperialism Democrat. Drones and more War isn't what I vote for if I can help it. I'm tired of being misled.

 

RILib

(862 posts)
74. yeah, I hate that video.
Wed Jan 30, 2013, 08:34 AM
Jan 2013

Not only sick, but now Libya is a far more dangerous mess than before, and chaos has spread to new regions of Africa because of that. Besides what it's done to ordinary people, it's already sucked in France and I see the U.S. is contemplating getting sucked in as well.

What did third world countries learn from the U.S. and Libya mess? The U.S.'s word is not to be trusted. Don't liberalize. Keep your nuclear weapons at all costs, because they are the only thing standing between you and destruction.

The total bonding to AIPAC and the Likud is yet another important reason to say No to Hillary.

Besides policy and character differences, also just look at Biden and Hillary. Joe looks fit as heck, and Hillary doesn't. This matters when an older person is being considered, and I say that as an older person.

 

RILib

(862 posts)
94. oh, I love this - talk about an ignorant DU jury.
Fri Feb 1, 2013, 07:52 AM
Feb 2013

I had a post hidden, and one juror's comment was "Nothing quite like throwing stink bombs as Hilary exits. She had exactly what to do with overthrowing Qaddhafi? Boy, these right wingers just can't tolerate Hilary - upsets their entire day!"

Talk about the uninformed.

Beacool

(30,247 posts)
57. Auntie, don't waste your breath.
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:44 PM
Jan 2013

It reminds me of 2008. There will always be some on the left who despise the Clintons as much as the right does. It's not worth fighting with them. Let them vote for someone else, for all I care.

We don't even know if Hillary will choose to run and people are already arguing about it.

 

Hard Assets

(274 posts)
26. Geez. Give the woman some WIDE space, please.
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:02 PM
Jan 2013

Even *I* am doubtful of a presidential run from Secretary Clinton. She had recent health issues, and need to be given time to recuperate.

The Hillary fanbois have to give them WIDE space for Ms. Clinton. It's already bad enough that someone started a super PAC for Sec'y Clinton.

We do not need to start a dynasty. You want a dynasty, see the Bush family and it is about a 50+ year dynasty that now need to end.

George P. Bush needs to fail in politics as he starts his campaigning for whatever he's running for in Texas. He needs to lose BIG.

This sends the messages that dynasties are not what we want. We want fresh ideas, we want a person who'll be truly for the people, and think for the people, and NOT for any lobbyist influencing decisions.

Congress should be making its first step by banning lobbyists from even being close with a Senator or a Representative. Not even for a restaurant seating arrangements.

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
27. Well...she's got PAC's Forming...but, I remember all of us and PAC's for Al Gore to run
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:03 PM
Jan 2013

in 2004 and that came to nothing.

I guess ...we shall see.

 

graham4anything

(11,464 posts)
35. On Jan. 29, 2013, she is saying YES, but not officially going to announce that today.Parse it.
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:23 PM
Jan 2013

This is the clearest indication yet, that Hillary45 has changed her statement to she is running.

the exact quote is-


"I do want to see more women compete for the highest positions in their countries. I will do what I can, whether or not it's up to me to make a decision on my own future -- right now I'm not inclined to do that -- to make sure women will compete at the highest levels around the world."

-- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, quoted by Capital New York.


right now(on Jan. 29, 2013, she is NOT inclined to give her decision on that.
parse it.

That means she is running, just saying on Jan. 29, 2013, she is not officially saying so,
and only a fool or a wontabee would officially announce what with the official rules of what that entails.

The best thing would be for Joe Biden to run for 2nd place, and be the VP again in her first term, and remove the oxygen for any other serious challenge, and focus on the general in 2016.

"It takes a Clinton to defeat a Bush&quot c)g4a IMHO feel free to disagree.

BTW, it will be many decades before any other SOS comes close to the SOS Hillary45 was.
May she win the Noble Peace Prize next year (or the year after, they have a sort of weird
nomination period, so it might be the year after). Hyperbole aside, has there been any other women that has done more for the world already in the last decade?

 

snooper2

(30,151 posts)
69. sometimes I can't tell if your gushing is honest or what...
Wed Jan 30, 2013, 12:18 AM
Jan 2013

LOL

You may be the master or just a true believer

 

graham4anything

(11,464 posts)
70. No, this is real. However, if I said this in 2008, it would not have been. But it is now.
Wed Jan 30, 2013, 06:21 AM
Jan 2013

I was NOT a fan in 2008. She earned my respect.
in fact, I was rather opposite in my posts elsewhere on her, but I evolved watching her
and watching the two become friends and realizing the sum is bigger than the parts so to say.

same with Bill.
I was a Jerry Brown fan and a Teddy fan.
While I was damn happy a democratic candidate became President(my views on the Bush's always were constant since I first heard of 41 decades ago,let alone the bums in the plaza)
my position evolved, especially how I welcome Bill campaigning.

It took a lot of courage for President Obama to say no to Hillary being VP, and even more courage to name her SOS and it took a helleva lot for Hillary to agree to do it.
Most people cut and run. Leave the arena, whine, spend four years plotting to run against him.

I don't think any of us could have imagined the scenerio that ended up happening.

And I as always credit President Obama for looking 10 steps ahead. He saw it, and then made it happen.
And not only allowing, but avidly letting Bill campaign (HIllary by law couldn't overtly campaign while SOS for him) but having Bill be part of the team was pure genius (even if there were ulterior motives involved, that is besides the point).

As I truly want a continuation of President Obama's two terms, and as Hillary and President Obama are in synch on most (not all) of the issues, it will be, and we will move, corny as it sounds, forward.

But if you asked me this in 2008, no I was not a fan, far from it.
It took one man (President Obama) and one woman (next President Hillary) to make the village.

But damn if Hillary wasn't correct all those years ago about a rightwing conspiracy.
Never before were such words mentioned, and she too saw it all those years ago.

And Hillary has that 10 step ahead too.
There is NO way, health being the only reason, that Hillary is not going to run and win in 2016.
And she has all those like me, and almost all of the core voters like me for Barack Obama, going to vote for her. The one thing she did not have in the primaries.
And had she been the nominee, she would have creamed McCain. It might have been closer, or a few states different, but she would have easily won too.
That is what alot of people miss when saying, well she lost in 2008.
She didn't lose, he won. He is not running next time, his agenda is. And she and him are on the same wavelength. The same voters will wait in line as long as possible(or vote early) for Hillary in 2016(and 2020).

IMHO

and btw, my being a fan of President Obama goes back far. I was wearing an elect Barack Obama button back in 2004.(that's not a typo-that is 2004). for President.

But in 2016, it has to be a woman President.

Bucky

(54,003 posts)
36. I think they run this same article every six months or so.
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:24 PM
Jan 2013

I've heard that "catch up on 20 years worth of sleep" line from her at least twice in the past year. Is this deja vu or does it just is this deja vu or does this just give a sense I've read this a sense I've just read this before about every six months or so or is it just deja vu?

 

Cynicus Emeritus

(172 posts)
37. We need more duct tape
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:25 PM
Jan 2013

to put over he mouths of the media hacks that promote this stuff only because their media bosses profit big time by promoting a very long 4 year Presidential campaign, and American voters burn out. It is the ultimate ruse by the media elite and it is being played out on us.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
46. Hillary rocks
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:19 PM
Jan 2013

I will vote for her if she runs. Old is relative. Some folks live to be 100 easily as a factor of genetics, and she is by no means old. She kicks more ass politically than many people half her age.

When she went before the Senate did she look incapacitated? Hell, no, she kicked ass.

DonCoquixote

(13,616 posts)
61. what Hillary REALLY said, translated from Clintonese
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 10:02 PM
Jan 2013

"Yes I am running, but I need to get my war chest up so I can blast both the progressive left and the GOP out of existence, so i can have my war with Iran that my friends in Israel will make me look tough, and Bill can finish destroying the left."

DonCoquixote

(13,616 posts)
65. we will see come 2016
Tue Jan 29, 2013, 10:24 PM
Jan 2013

when you cheer for her to run, and sadly,I may have to put down my vote to keep out a Rubio or Bush, but I will have NO delusions, anyoen who thinks Hillary is an FDR democrats is a fool; she will destroy the left, just like the other half of her did.

 

Liberal_Stalwart71

(20,450 posts)
85. Well...
Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:00 PM
Jan 2013

If she does run in 2016, I would like for her to run a better campaign than she did in 2008. How can people push for and support Hillary Clinton--claiming that she's the best candidate--when she can't even control her own campaign?

marshall

(6,665 posts)
95. She deserves a long vacation with Bill
Fri Feb 1, 2013, 10:31 AM
Feb 2013

Sitting by a pool and relaxing in the sun. They have both certainly given their all and deserve their happy golden years.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Hillary Clinton ‘not incl...