home

What's Next For Hillary

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 09:23:24 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The World Bank? Blanket denials of that rumor, which never made much sense to me, but maybe it is a more influential gig than I imagine. Clinton has made it clear she will not be Secretary of State after 2012. So what then? I saw this interesting exchange between wonky bloggers E. Klein, M. Yglesias and J.Cohn. Yglesias' tweet:

Call me old-fashioned, but I think H. Clinton should consider another presidential run in 2016[.]

I do not know if she would be the best person to be President, but I remain convinced that she would be the best candidate (defined as the person with the best chance of winning) for President the Dems could offer. How soon will it be time for a Draft Hillary movement after 2012?

Speaking for me only

< What If Weiner Does Not Go Quietly Into The Cold Dark Night? | What She Said >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    What's Next For Hillary | 121 comments (121 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Biden as SOS (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by Politalkix on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 09:52:13 AM EST
    would be like a bull in a china shop.

    Same rumor says it would be Kerry (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by nycstray on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 09:54:43 AM EST


    Parent
    Only in Kerry's mind (none / 0) (#13)
    by esmense on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 10:55:05 AM EST
    I'd be surprised if even his wife and family thought he made a good candidate in 2004. I'm pretty sure most Democrats, even those who were his initial strong supporters, were disappointed in how he performed. He wasn't able to put it over in a year when a Democrat really should have had some chance. Who knows how hard things will be for the Dems in 2016?

    Kerry's unfortunate speaking style made him seem like a relic from another political era in 2004. Being 12 years older certainly won't make him seem more up to date and ready for the job.

    Parent

    SOS not VP/P (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by nycstray on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 10:58:26 AM EST


    Parent
    How about Biden's speaking style? (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 02:37:58 PM EST


    Parent
    Open mouth, insert foot? (5.00 / 1) (#114)
    by BobTinKY on Sat Jun 11, 2011 at 09:44:15 AM EST


    Parent
    Naw. I think she's done with that one (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by nycstray on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 09:53:17 AM EST


    Don't think even Hillary can save him in 2012 (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by trillian on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 09:56:34 AM EST
    If she does want another crack at it, she'd best wait until 2016

    Did any of these wonky bloggers support (5.00 / 6) (#7)
    by oculus on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 10:20:15 AM EST
    Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama in 2008?

    They hated her so much back then (5.00 / 4) (#10)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 10:30:05 AM EST


    Parent
    What a difference 3 years makes (5.00 / 7) (#12)
    by Yman on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 10:54:24 AM EST
    From a race-baiting, kitchen-sink-throwing, lying, entitled, blah-blah-blah ..... to looking for her to run.  Makes me think they just want to kick her around again ...

    ... or maybe the hopium's worn off completely.

    Parent

    I think it's the hopium (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by sj on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 11:11:41 AM EST
    The shelf life wasn't what quite what they expected, and it's a little stale right now.  Looking at the leftovers, they think that a little bit of fresh Hillary might be just the thing.

    Parent
    Probably (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by Yman on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 11:24:10 AM EST
    But they'll never admit to being duped.

    Rationalization is so much easier.

    Parent

    [Insert The Expected Angry Black Guy Comment] (5.00 / 9) (#38)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:05:38 PM EST
    Right here.

    Parent
    hey AngryGuy (5.00 / 3) (#60)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 02:10:32 PM EST
    that was actually funny!

    Parent
    You left out the dog whistling ... (5.00 / 3) (#22)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 11:51:29 AM EST
    never leave out dog whistling. Bloggers were so proud of that decidedly stupid term back in '08.

    Parent
    Hopium (none / 0) (#103)
    by cal1942 on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 11:24:49 PM EST
    LOL.

    Love it, I'll have to remember that one.

    Parent

    Who would make a better President (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by masslib on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 11:19:54 AM EST
    than Hillary?  I don't see anyone standing, just as there wasn't anyone in 2008.  Or, 2004.  Best candidate, best potential President.  

    Hi, there (none / 0) (#18)
    by sj on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 11:28:54 AM EST
    Did something happen to Alegre's Corner?

    Parent
    I don't know... (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by masslib on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 11:31:20 AM EST
    too busy with my four month old.  :)

    Parent
    Oh congratulations! (none / 0) (#20)
    by sj on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 11:35:11 AM EST
    That's wonderful! Except for the sleep deprivation, of course.  Boy or girl?

    re Alegre's Corner, it's not very active these days so I don't go often, but it's not online right now.   Don't know if it was planned or not.

    Parent

    Thanks! A beautiful little girl. (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by masslib on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 11:45:01 AM EST
    I don't know about the corner.  I'm so out of touch these days.

    Parent
    Where do I start... (none / 0) (#24)
    by kdog on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 12:01:27 PM EST
    vast majority of the commenters here would make better presidents, my mailman would make a better president...up in the air about my dog.

    She is Obama with more political experience to make it look on the square to the rubes.  She is status quo corporate oligarchy, maybe one could argue a kindler gentler corporate oligarchy.

    Parent

    No one here is running for President. (none / 0) (#26)
    by masslib on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 12:08:52 PM EST
    Among the crowd of possibilities she'd clearly make the better President.

    Parent
    Jimmy McMillan... (none / 0) (#31)
    by kdog on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 12:29:36 PM EST
    is preferable...or someone who has announced, Gary Johnson from dreaded Brand R.  At least he's right on one very big issue, if lacking in most others....war on drugs=epic fail.

    Parent
    I thought 2004 was her best chance. (none / 0) (#54)
    by observed on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:51:26 PM EST
    At least she could have demonstrated for Obama what a fighter looks like.


    Parent
    if she were really (none / 0) (#64)
    by jondee on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 03:06:50 PM EST
    a fighter, she'd still be fighting. Sorry, I don't buy this her-greatest-weakness-is-her-loyalty-to-the-party meme; it has the distinct smell of some longsuffering helpmeet projection.

    How much money did she take from the insurence lobby, again?

    Parent

    Compared to Obama she is (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by observed on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 03:18:23 PM EST
    Genghis Khan.
    But actually, what I meant was her ability to fight back against smears, the way the pathetic Kerry didn't.

    Parent
    she should've kicked (none / 0) (#67)
    by jondee on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 03:41:06 PM EST
    that paranoid old goat scrotum Scaife right where he "lives", after what he tried to do to the Clintons in the nineties -- rather than having a sit-down with him during the primaries. THAT would've convinced me that she's a fighter. But obviously,that's just me.

     

    Parent

    His paper endorsed her (5.00 / 3) (#70)
    by loveed on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 04:50:54 PM EST
    And his editorial was magnificent.

    Parent
    Yeah, ... I'm sure ... (5.00 / 2) (#72)
    by Yman on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 05:19:31 PM EST
    ... that would've done it.

    Parent
    There's fighting (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Jun 11, 2011 at 09:39:51 AM EST
    and then there's thrashing around.

    One excellent fighting tactic is defanging, which is what happened in this case.

    I'll take somebody who knows how to pick battles over a thrasher any day.

    Parent

    About half ... (5.00 / 7) (#74)
    by Yman on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 05:46:06 PM EST
    ... of what they gave Obama.

    Why do you ask?

    Parent

    Hillary taking SoS was very smart ... (5.00 / 4) (#23)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 12:01:12 PM EST
    kept her in the game but away from defending Obama's domestic (especially economic) agenda.  This could be a really help if she makes a run in '16.

    I think she'll use the next four years to write a book and go on the lecture circuit.  And use that process to determine (a) if she has the fire in the belly for a '16 run, and (b) what her compelling argument will be if she does run.

    I'm sitting out this election.  But will have a ball kibitzing from the peanut gallery.  I'll give the Dems another look in '16.  But they'd have to run a convincingly progressive candidate to pull me back into the fold.  Sadly, I don't think Hillary will meet that standard.

    Her popularity has soared (none / 0) (#71)
    by loveed on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 04:58:41 PM EST
     The best thing about her being SOS?  She will not be forced to campaign for him again.
     She is like Bill, the presidency is to small for her now!!!!

    Parent
    Right, so some younger guy who's name (5.00 / 6) (#25)
    by ruffian on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 12:06:55 PM EST
    we don't even know yet can come along and present himself as the fresh charismatic voice of youth, and the Dem blogosphere can fall in love again? Sorry, seen that movie before. I hope Hillary stays out of it.

    meh (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by CST on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 12:25:21 PM EST
    I think you are underestimating both Obama and Hillary here.  I don't think it's as easy to replicate what Obama did as you think it is.  And I think Hillary is more than capable of beating someone in that scenario.

    I mean, whatever else anyone thinks about the 2008 primary it was incredibly close and could easily have gone either way.

    Parent

    It may be easier for someone to replicate what (5.00 / 3) (#33)
    by ruffian on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 12:42:33 PM EST
    Obama did, using his playbook. People are so attentive to the next shiny new candidate, the media is still following Sarah Palin around fergawdsake.

    The minute someone else took hold of the public imagination, Klein, Yglesias et al would drop Clinton as old news and whine about how 3 of the last 4 presidents were named Bush or Clinton.

    Parent

    the media might (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by CST on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 12:59:31 PM EST
    but I guess my point is I don't think the voters would.  Sarah Palin might be shiny but she isn't winning any elections.

    What "playbook" is there for motivating people to vote for you?  Again, I think you're underestimating the real personal appeal Obama had.  That's not something you can copy.  

    And yes, I'm going to go there - you can only have one "first black president".  For various reasons, I do not think a Hispanic/Asian/Whatever would have the same effect.  Being the first female president absolutely would.

    In other words, she would've crushed John Edwards.  In any event, if she wants the job, I think she should run, and stands a solid shot of winning - certainly as good as anyone else out there, although there are no guarantees in campaigning.  That's also part of the deal.

    Parent

    If (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:05:54 PM EST
    Sarah Palin might be shiny but she isn't winning any elections.
    .

    If she were MALE she might be...her philosophies aren't far from any of the other right wing candidates.  What she's done wrong is she accidentally chose the wrong sex.

    Parent

    No (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:21:19 PM EST
    She's just kind of an idiot. If she were a man we wouldn't be talking about her at all. She's just not very good at sounding like she knows what she is talking about.  Bachmann is the same way. Just not very slick.

    Conversely, I disagree with almost everything Nikki Haley says but the woman comes off very well.  That is the type of woman that conservatives concerned about gender equality should be rallying around.

    It is absolutely terrible for those of us who do care about gender issues that so much time and capital is wasted trying to pretend that Palin isn't a complete disaster. It's really an insult to people like Hillary Clinton who have real intellectual horsepower.  It's insulting to even mention Palin in the same sentence as Hillary.

    Parent

    Again (5.00 / 3) (#47)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:25:22 PM EST
    Three words for you:

    George W. Bush.

    Two words:

    Ronald Reagan.

    Men get away with being dolts.  Women don't.

    Parent

    No (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 02:36:04 PM EST
    W was not an idiot and neither was Bush.  They weren't rocket scientists but they weren't stupid either.  They just believed in BS policies.

    Palin is stupid. It is unfortunate that the least intelligent politician in the running is a woman, but that doesn't make it less true.

    Parent

    George W. Bush (none / 0) (#49)
    by CST on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:31:49 PM EST
    is a big part of WHY Palin wouldn't win today.  Among other changing demographics.  And he ran under the guise of being a moderate republican, something I really don't see Palin doing.  She is much more aligned with the right-wing fringe than he was at the time he was elected.

    Parent
    I agree about Nikki Haley (none / 0) (#53)
    by ruffian on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:43:37 PM EST
    she sucks me in...and then I have to remember I don't agree with anything she is saying. She has some real intelligence there, and I can disagree with her without thinking she is an idiot and/or nutcase like Palin and Bachmann.

    Parent
    at this moment, (none / 0) (#89)
    by the capstan on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 08:14:22 PM EST
    SC legislators are none too enamoured with her.

    Parent
    oh please (none / 0) (#40)
    by CST on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:08:08 PM EST
    what she's done wrong is she stopped running for office and started putzing around Fox News.

    In order to win an election you have to want the job.  And she isn't going to win the presidency, which is maybe the only one she wants.  And neither will any of the other right-wing clueless hacks, male or female.

    Parent

    Mmkay (none / 0) (#46)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:24:39 PM EST
    Believe whatever you want to believe if it helps you sleep at night.

    We've had plenty of clueless hacks win the presidency...can you say GW Bush?

    Parent

    Kind of my point - the press hangs on (none / 0) (#51)
    by ruffian on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:38:38 PM EST
    every move of a terrible potential candidate who is not even running, because she has some charisma and personal appeal.

    I don't think someone exactly like Obama will come along, of course that is impossible. But he does not have a corner on the market of charisma and personal appeal.

    I just think someone with the right attributes will make people remember what they did not like about Hillary 3 years ago.

    Parent

    or remember what they like about her (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by CST on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:51:29 PM EST
    the primary was incredibly close.

    Hillary is not exactly minced meat.  I think she has a lot of her own personal appeal.  And it's only grown since 2008.

    Good presidential candidates are not exactly a dime a dozen.  For whatever reason, there are a lot of cr@ppy politicians with highly inflated egos in politics.

    If she were up against a John Kerry, or even a John Edwards or something, I think she would crush them.

    Parent

    Could be. I hope you are right. (5.00 / 3) (#59)
    by ruffian on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 02:05:13 PM EST
    I just can't imagine going through it again, but it has already been proven that Hillary is a lot more resilient than I am.

    Parent
    One day the true history will be written (5.00 / 4) (#73)
    by loveed on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 05:32:41 PM EST
     Hillary won every large state except for Illinois,and Texas by double digits (she won Texas). She won 11 of 13 the last primaries, by extremely large margins. She had more votes than Obama.
     Do you  agree with giving Obama delegates from a race he never participated in (Michigan)? The first African-American  president disenfranchising so many Americans voting rights(Florida&Michigain. Incredible.
     She was robbed!!!  
     

    Parent
    Yes...she was robbed, loveed... (5.00 / 9) (#75)
    by oldpro on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 06:24:14 PM EST
    which is why the Democratic Party - for the first and only time in history that I know of - couldn't risk finishing the rollcall vote of the states on the first ballot at the convention.  At that moment I became an Independent.

    Parent
    me to (none / 0) (#84)
    by loveed on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 07:49:20 PM EST
    the democratic party revealed themselves in the 2008 primary season for the racist,women hating,betrayer of the working class,betrayer of the poor.The sad part, this is there base.
     Other than jealousy,I could never figure out what they had against the Clintons?

    Parent
    No (1.50 / 2) (#91)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 10:05:46 PM EST
    The black guy didn't steal the valuables from the innocent white woman.

    Sorry.  The hstory is not going down like that.  Too important an event for you to sh!t on it.  

    Obama won. Straight up.  Luckily ths weird alternative history will die with the people who concocted it.

    Parent

    Have you an explanation for the shifting (5.00 / 5) (#92)
    by oculus on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 10:08:43 PM EST
    of votes won by Ms. Clinton to Mr. Obama?  

    Parent
    Well it had to be because Ms Clinton (none / 0) (#102)
    by nycstray on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 11:04:53 PM EST
    was running on her husband's record, according to previous comments  ;)

    Don't even go down the experience route . . .  and other routes . . .

    Parent

    No (5.00 / 5) (#94)
    by Yman on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 10:10:45 PM EST
    The black guy didn't steal the valuables from the innocent white woman.

    ... the race card won't work anymore.

    But if it's all you got ...

    Parent

    agree, AngryGuy (5.00 / 5) (#104)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 11:56:23 PM EST
    Obama won the general election straight up

    that was nice after Jeb stole it for Dubya in 2000 & after Kerry's 2004 victory in Ohio fell off a truck

    but the primaries are another matter

    for many loyal Democrats, the 2008 primaries, & specifically the meeting of the Democratic National Commmittee's Rules & Bylaws Committee of May 31, 2008, constitute the same kind of watershed moment as the Supreme Court decision of December 13, 2000

    a fact that angry white misogynist fauxgressives who like to pose as civil rights warriors ignore at their peril

    Parent

    His playbook was his messaging strategy (none / 0) (#52)
    by ruffian on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:39:56 PM EST
    You don't have to be Obama to use it.

    Parent
    A draft "Bernie" movement (5.00 / 5) (#27)
    by MO Blue on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 12:20:01 PM EST
    would excite me more.

    She can't help (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 12:20:52 PM EST
    Obama. He's created his own mess and no one can get him out of it. If the voters think it's bad enough they won't reelect him no matter who the VP is.

    And why would Hillary want to (5.00 / 3) (#81)
    by oldpro on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 06:42:01 PM EST
    tie herself to Obama's domestic record?  Puhleeze.

    Parent
    She tied herself to his foreign policy (none / 0) (#99)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 10:15:57 PM EST
    And she didn't even think he'd be able to wake up at 3 AM to take an emergency call at one point.

    Just saying.

    Parent

    Ummmm...well now when he's (5.00 / 7) (#106)
    by oldpro on Sat Jun 11, 2011 at 01:47:01 AM EST
    awakened at 3 am to take the call, it's from Hillary.

    Just saying...

    Parent

    You may be blogging less (none / 0) (#115)
    by Towanda on Sat Jun 11, 2011 at 09:45:36 AM EST
    but you're making every word worth it!  Spot on.  Let's give Obama cred for listening well to that line.

    Parent
    Uh, no...it isn't that she didn't think he'd (none / 0) (#116)
    by Anne on Sat Jun 11, 2011 at 09:51:10 AM EST
    be able to wake up, for heaven's sake, it's that she didn't think he'd know what to do about the crisis that was the reason for the middle-of-the-night call.

    Didn't think he'd be able wake up at 3 am...jeeeez-a-weezu...sometimes I really can't believe the stuff you come up with.

    Parent

    apparently (none / 0) (#118)
    by sj on Sat Jun 11, 2011 at 12:51:50 PM EST
    it's not just reading comprehension...

    Parent
    "Call me old-fashioned"? (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by Towanda on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 12:24:47 PM EST
    So electing HRC already is passe?

    Or electing a woman at all already is passe?

    D*mn, did I look away for a minute and miss the accomplishment, at last, of the gender revolution?

    I think Hillary's moment for that job has passed (none / 0) (#35)
    by ruffian on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 12:57:14 PM EST
    I do think a woman will be president fairly soon, but it will probably be a Republican.

    Parent
    Although yesterday and NPR (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by oculus on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:04:51 PM EST
    commenter pointed out Newt Gingrich is 68 an this is his last shot re presidency.  Yes, I know it is different re a woman candidate and age.  Which is why I don't think Clinton will throw her hat in the ring again. Why would she want to hear all that crap again.

    Parent
    And Newt withstood the rigors of a campaign (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by ruffian on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:51:42 PM EST
    for two whole weeks before he went on vacation!

    Unfortunately, while I don't think there is an age limit on being able to BE president, I do think there is one on being able to RUN for president.

    Parent

    How about Romney saying he won't (none / 0) (#57)
    by oculus on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:57:16 PM EST
    tackle Iowa due to straw poll going against him?  

    Parent
    I actually don't have a problem with that (5.00 / 2) (#66)
    by sj on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 03:39:37 PM EST
    Most candidates actually don't participate in all caucuses/primaries for cost and/or strategic reasons.  Knowing you might get trounced comes under the heading of a strategic reason.

    As a sidebar, that's what was so infuriating about giving any of Hillary's delegates to Obama. It was far from unheard of to "not even be on the ballot" in a given state.  It was unheard of to then get delegates for that state.

    Parent

    Is the fellow who posted this diary (none / 0) (#69)
    by oculus on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 04:10:53 PM EST
    trying to stir up a furor?  It's working!  

    Parent
    You call this a furor?1? (none / 0) (#76)
    by oldpro on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 06:31:30 PM EST
    Boy...things HAVE changed!

    Parent
    Not much furor here lately. It's all (none / 0) (#77)
    by oculus on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 06:33:43 PM EST
    relative.

    Parent
    Remember how (none / 0) (#88)
    by loveed on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 08:02:35 PM EST
    Obama,Edwards,Richardson took there name off the Michigan ballot,and tried to make Hillary look bad? And the Obama campaign refused to let Florida & Michigan have another Primary?

     The post above is right. This bring up a lot of anger.

    Parent

    You claiming (none / 0) (#93)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 10:09:22 PM EST
    Obama stole the election is bringing up a lot anger. If this is going to devolve into folks telling us that Obama didn't legitimately win, we can all be some angry fighting commenters together because it didn't go down that way.

    Parent
    I guess it's not technically "stealing" (5.00 / 7) (#97)
    by Anne on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 10:14:30 PM EST
    if the rules are conveniently changed so you can win.

    History might be willing to overlook the obvious manipulation of the process so he could prevail, but for the fact that he has been a terrible president; that's going to cast all that rule-changing in an entirely different light.

    And it will not be kind.

    Parent

    Agree about Hillary, someone (none / 0) (#41)
    by brodie on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:10:08 PM EST
    I backed for years leading up to 2008 (on competing liberal boards,  but not here).

    But for 2016, I've got Kirsten Gillibrand as the best positioned to become our nominee and then on to becoming the first woman P.

    I can't think of a single female Gooper who's as well positioned or as able or scandal-free.  

    Of course, if things play out as current trends indicate, with a recession-plagued O lucking out again with a badly flawed 2012 R opponent, the GOP will fall short this next election, and go back to the old routine of asking a Bush to ride to the rescue for 2016.

    Thus, 2016 looks like the Jebster vs Gillibrand.


    Parent

    If I get my way ;) (none / 0) (#42)
    by nycstray on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:17:54 PM EST
    Hillary will be out campaigning hard for Gillibrand in 2016.

    Parent
    Gillibrand could get the nomination (none / 0) (#43)
    by Coral on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:20:11 PM EST
    She's very good candidate, too. Great with media, politically savvy. And with rise of Palin and Bachman, who so far have not been savaged by the media (despite really deserving to be), I think it will be easier for a female candidate for prez to be taken seriously.

    There are a couple of other women who could do it. Klobuchar comes to mind.

    Parent

    I agree with all of this (none / 0) (#45)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:24:16 PM EST
    The sooner we acknowledge that Hillary's time has passed, the sooner we can begin throwing support behind Gillibrand and others and building their brand.

    There are a ton of capable potential female candidates out there.

    Parent

    ABG - Hillary's time has passed (5.00 / 5) (#78)
    by oldpro on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 06:34:55 PM EST
    when SHE says it's passed...or when the voters say so.

    I wouldn't be in such a hurry to push her off the stage, if I were you.

    Parent

    ABG is always happy to push her (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by nycstray on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 08:00:34 PM EST
    off the stage. After all, she ran on her husband's accomplishments in his mind . . .

    how ya doing?

    Parent

    Doing better than expected, stray.... (5.00 / 4) (#105)
    by oldpro on Sat Jun 11, 2011 at 01:38:31 AM EST
    ...good report from my oncologist last month giving me some extra time on the 'calendar.'  Less and less energy, tho.  Sleeping more and blogging less.

    Parent
    Great news about the (none / 0) (#109)
    by MO Blue on Sat Jun 11, 2011 at 07:25:56 AM EST
    extra time on the 'calendar.'

    We miss you making comments on a more regular basis but you must do whatever your body needs you to do.


    Parent

    I'm very (none / 0) (#110)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jun 11, 2011 at 08:39:12 AM EST
    glad to hear that!

    Parent
    I (none / 0) (#95)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 10:12:43 PM EST
    Like Hillary a great deal but I detest dynasties. I think that there are families other than the Bushes and the Clintons that can supply us leadership.  If it balances it out, I'd hope that we don't see another Obama in the office after 2016 either.

    I'd love to see Hillary have a career like Bill's after she is done with the SOS though.  We need good people out there doing that stuff. I hope Obama does the same thing.

    Parent

    I fully expect Michelle Obama to run (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by oculus on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 10:15:24 PM EST
    for office and, eventually, the presidency.  

    Parent
    Gilibrand (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 06:59:24 PM EST
    won't even have finished a senate term by 2016 so she's not going to be ready to be President. I really can't think of any woman other than Gillibrand so if we're going to have a woman, it's probably going to be Hillary.

    She's certainly someone to look at after 2016 though.

    Parent

    She has more documented history (none / 0) (#85)
    by nycstray on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 07:58:57 PM EST
    of actual work than O did ;)

    Parent
    Or wait . . . . (none / 0) (#87)
    by nycstray on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 08:01:32 PM EST
    how about Clinton/Gillibrand 2016?

    Parent
    Gillibrand will actually have finished (none / 0) (#90)
    by brodie on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 08:37:15 PM EST
    7 yrs in the US senate by the time primary voting starts in 2016, as she was appointed in Jan 09.  She would thus have another year as senator under her belt by the time she was sworn in as prez -- so a total of 8 yrs as senator.  That plus about 3 yrs as US Congresswoman before that.  

    That's about the prior experience JFK had before being elected, just a little less on the House side.  Experience enough I should think as these things go.  And 8 yrs as senator, in addition to a few yrs in the House, is definitely more meaningful experience than what Obama had, which was only two years in the senate before he began campaigning full-time for the presidency in early 2007..

    In 2016 she'll still easily be in her prime too, age wise -- 50 y.o.  

    That will be her time to run as I see it.  Strike when hot and when the opportunity presents.  

    Parent

    I like (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jun 11, 2011 at 06:54:21 AM EST
    Gillibrand BUT you also have to realize that she's been in the Senate WHILE Obama has been President and that's going to be a huge problem for her in an general election. She's going to be tied to Obama's hugely negative economic policies. Maybe she's smart enough to side step that but I don't know. A governor might have a better chance because they won't be tied to Obama's abysmal economic record.

    Parent
    There are 2 capable potential female (none / 0) (#48)
    by tigercourse on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:30:10 PM EST
    candidates out there.

    Parent
    Gillibrand (none / 0) (#111)
    by Wile ECoyote on Sat Jun 11, 2011 at 09:38:13 AM EST
    will have to pull another 180 on guns in order to run nationally.  Maybe she will put the ones back in her house she took out.

    Parent
    Why? (none / 0) (#120)
    by Yman on Sat Jun 11, 2011 at 02:48:02 PM EST
    You have to be against gun control laws to run nationally?

    Someone should let the President know ...

    Parent

    Well (5.00 / 4) (#32)
    by Buckeye on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 12:34:38 PM EST
    How soon will it be time for a Draft Hillary movement after 2012?

    Well, it is already time for a Draft Hillary movement for 2012.

    Not gonna happen. She's (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by oldpro on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 06:36:24 PM EST
    not as dumb as Teddy Kennedy.

    Parent
    I, on the other hand (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by TJBuff on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 12:44:33 PM EST
    being a confirmed pessimist, and observing the onrushing problem trains of the economy, climate, wars, and everything else converging on our location, am pretty sure that 2016 is going to be so radically different that a Hilary rerun is not in the cards.  Besides, if she has any sense at all she'll buy an island somewhere away from it all.

    Clinton has made it clear several times that (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by tigercourse on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 01:34:10 PM EST
    she won't run for President in 2016. If people believe her when she says she will leave State after 2012, why don't they believe her when she says she's done with the Presidency?

    Now, somewhat surprisingly, Biden might not be done.

    Oh but he is with me (5.00 / 5) (#62)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 02:37:03 PM EST
    After what he did to Anita Hill he is done with me forever.  If someone wants to put him in a shut up and sit there spot I can stomach voting for a ticket with his name on it....just barely. I will never vote for him for President...ever...unless he gives me a Weineresque apology with Boehner tears.  And his wife cuddles him in public when he does it.  Then maybe.  If Obama had been older like John McCain, I don't know if I could have brought myself to be supportive of that ticket.

    Dear Joe, little future feminists were watching you on television when you too decided that it was okay to abuse Anita Hill.  That among many things is scorched into my brain.

    Parent

    You and me both, MT (5.00 / 3) (#68)
    by Towanda on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 03:58:49 PM EST
    and I engraved the names and faces of every member of that Judiciary Committee in my memory, and I have not forgotten nor forgiven -- nor ever will forget or forgive -- any and all of them.

    Parent
    Yup. And not s single female (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by oldpro on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 06:38:31 PM EST
    senator on the committee, if you recall.

    Parent
    Oh, yup backatcha. All the members (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by Towanda on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 07:20:53 PM EST
    of the committee had, um, male members, as they say on one of the networks reporting on Weiner's wiener.

    Many of us noted at the time the women who were in the room, other than Prof. Hill.  The Senators had some young, perky women staffers, appropriately seated about three paces behind their bosses and not allowed to a word, not a word.  It was classic.

    Parent

    I will always remember Sen. Ted Kennedy. (none / 0) (#101)
    by oculus on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 10:18:01 PM EST
    He looked like he wished he had a brown paper grocery book to put over his head.  Disappointing.  

    Parent
    Whatever Hillary does or doesn't do, (5.00 / 3) (#58)
    by Anne on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 02:05:08 PM EST
    it's hard to see her as not being capable; she's smart, works harder than most, has an insatiable desire for information and the prodigious memory for storing it, and the ability, no matter what she is asked about, to place it in the context of the totality of the issue and deliver a cogent and comprehensive answer.

    But I'm not sure I want to see her run in 2016.  Shoot, I'm just trying to wrap my head around the fact that we have another almost-two years left in the current administration, and given that the last two-plus years have seemed like an eternity, I just want to cry.

    I guess the question for me is, if the coming election and those that follow are just going to be more or less about who has the most money - as opposed to who is the best qualified - in every sense of the word - and are going to be driven, manipulated and engineered to ensure the nomination of the party-elite's preferred candidate, as opposed to doing something really revolutionary - like just letting people vote, abd then counting those votes - I'm hard-pressed to work up a whole lot of enthusiasm or interest.

    And I am, frankly, dreading an election season where we endlessly game how someone who has been a terrible president, on so many fronts, can prevail against a Republican who has nothing to offer that's any better.  I think it's a measure of just how bad Obama's been that this kind of discussion is even taking place; if he'd done a better job, that would not only speak for itself, but would be amply rewarded at the polls.

    He (none / 0) (#96)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 10:14:21 PM EST
    Is being amply rewarded at the polls.  If he was doing that bad a job his numbers would be far worse given the economy.

    Parent
    So, how long have you been (5.00 / 2) (#100)
    by Anne on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 10:16:11 PM EST
    doing comedy stand-up?

    I think your routine needs work; it used to be funny - now it's just kind of sad and awkward.

    Parent

    You write well enough (5.00 / 2) (#107)
    by sj on Sat Jun 11, 2011 at 02:03:20 AM EST
    although it's mostly nonsense imo, so I'm mystified as to why your reading comprehension is so ... odd.

    You do know the difference between the polls that hold voting booths and the ones that measure opinion, right?

    It does get kind of embarrassing to read.  And if it's that you think you're being clever... well, bless your heart for trying to make a joke.

    Parent

    Polls (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by MO Blue on Sun Jun 12, 2011 at 09:05:19 AM EST
    Daily Kos / SEIU poll: Obama back to pre-bin Laden levels

    07 JUN 2011

    Obama Job Approval (Economy)

    Approve 37.0%, Disapprove 56.0% TPM

    I agree his disapproval on the economy should be far worse than 56% of voters (Gallup has at 60%) disapproving of his performance.  

    Parent

    Like Obama, she's amply capable (none / 0) (#123)
    by BobTinKY on Sun Jun 12, 2011 at 04:06:05 PM EST
    of furthering the interests of, as Krugman put it, our ruling rentiers.  When it comes to pols these days, Dem or GOP, they're all supply siders now.

    Parent
    I don't see it (none / 0) (#5)
    by Demi Moaned on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 09:56:19 AM EST
    Biden has been a faithful handmaiden of the White House. To jettison him in the re-election would be signalling an admission of weakness. This would offset whatever advantages Clinton might bring to the ticket.

    Right, and as we've discussed (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by brodie on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 10:27:57 AM EST
    before, a Biden step down from Veep would have to be an organic, voluntary process starting with or with the full endorsement of JB himself -- desire to do something else, health reasons, etc -- otherwise the MSM will go wild with stories sympathetic to Biden about his being pushed aside, by some vicious Obama-Hillary cabal.

    Not sure someone like Hillary needs to be in the VP slot to be in a position for 2016.  Might even work against her, as the MSM would go snarky and constantly be running stories about her 2016 election prospects and positioning.  I think they would try to Gore her.

    Parent

    I' guessing (none / 0) (#8)
    by sj on Fri Jun 10, 2011 at 10:25:02 AM EST
    that your last sentence was very carefully structured.

    How soon will it be time for a Draft Hillary movement after 2012?

    Do you think it will work? :)

    Great (none / 0) (#113)
    by BobTinKY on Sat Jun 11, 2011 at 09:43:04 AM EST
    more wars and dutiful subservience to the bond markets.  Just what we need.

    Hear here... (none / 0) (#117)
    by kdog on Sat Jun 11, 2011 at 12:50:32 PM EST
    And this primary nostalgia debate is like arguing over if Goldman Sachs stole something from JPMorganChase...whats the difference except which glass ceiling broke first?

    Parent
    The difference is about (none / 0) (#121)
    by Towanda on Sat Jun 11, 2011 at 03:19:12 PM EST
    whether to have any faith in the Democratic Party anymore, and to some of us who are (or were, and for decades, and now watch the demise of our work) activists, that is about more than whether to call oneself a Democrat or an Independent.

    You deplore the decline of reason and how it has impact upon your causes, such as drugs.

    We deplore the decline of reason and how it has impact upon our politics, such as the party that many of us worked to change -- and we did.  But now that it has reverted, we who invested in it may feel differently than does someone who opts to be as detached from it all as do you.

    Parent

    World Bank is apolitical (none / 0) (#119)
    by diogenes on Sat Jun 11, 2011 at 01:32:48 PM EST
    Hillary could avoid taking positions on any controversial issue for four years and then let everyone think that she would have taken what in retrospect would have been the right one.  Sort of like what DSK was doing (although that didn't turn out so good...)

    What's Next For Hillary | 121 comments (121 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment