Unless Hillary slips or stumbles as she has in the past and Elizabeth Warren then enters the race, the 2016 election will depend on her ability to motivate the Obama base of the young and people of color to turn out. I, a silent generation grandpa, doubt that Grandma Clinton, a Baby Boomer, can inspire that kind of response unless she can win the women's vote by an overwhelming margin and she also chooses an Hispanic like Joaquin Castro as a running mate. That means she will have to take a very strong stand in support of President Obama's executive action on immigration along with women's issues like pay equity, removal of restrictions on reproductive rights that include access to contraceptives and abortions, paid maternity leave and increased access to affordable child care. Unfortunately, with little opposition, Secretary Clinton may never have to reveal her position on important policy issues and be vetted in the fierce debate that the primaries provide.
1
Elizabeth, please run!
3
With Hillary's announcement to run, we now see yet again the liberal contingent that is disappointed with her corporate friendly ties and looking for a Ralph Nader type candidate to satisfy the need for moral purity.
And if no such liberal Puritan is on the ballot then that percentage of disgruntled liberals will not dirty their hands with anything so foul as voting, thus setting up another repeat of the Bush/Gore fiasco. Their idea is that four or eight more years of right-wing extremism will be appropriate punishment upon the nation. That'll show 'em!
And if no such liberal Puritan is on the ballot then that percentage of disgruntled liberals will not dirty their hands with anything so foul as voting, thus setting up another repeat of the Bush/Gore fiasco. Their idea is that four or eight more years of right-wing extremism will be appropriate punishment upon the nation. That'll show 'em!
1
No press conference? No speech? I find this whole announcement puzzling and I wonder what the message people will take from it. It's so removed from her and so removed from any real message. It's so scripted and so sterile. I almost find it frightening.
4
If anyone is on the fence, ponder this: Are Hillary's shortcomings as dangerous as any of the Republicans'? She's will not destroy what the Republican's call "entitlements" to the average American, for which the people have paid for and which the GOP wants destroy. Yes, she's swimming with the sharks, but that's to see what she can get from them. Deep down, she's a decent person - shrewd, sometimes reckless, and she knows she can't destroy big money, but I'll vote for her in a heartbeat.
3
The adult Republicans with deep vested interests truly understand beating a unified Democratic party is a long-shot.
The Republican base has drifted so far from the nation in demographics and far right wing agenda that is increasingly unlikely that a Republican candidate will win national office for the foreseeable future.
If one looks at the past four presidential elections, Democrats start with an electoral advantage of 242 votes, just 28 shy of electoral victory. Republicans, meanwhile, have swept states that tally barely 179 electoral votes.
The margin favoring Democrats have grown with every 4 year election cycle.
So while the Republican clown car will unload a host of candidates each aiming at the most likely Democratic nominee, the Vested Interests understand the true objective is not the unlikely win of the White House.
Their true objective is to weaken the institution of the Presidency and of government. They don't mind spending a billion or so to do that if it saves them some key tax loopholes worth multiples of that, either.
Republicans have tried to tear down one of the greatest US President in our history, Barrack Obama, who rescued the country from the disaster they left.
Candidate Clinton must understand this, not repeat the fiasco of 2014, pull President Obama and our Democratic ideals close, and resist the Republican effort to weaken the foundation of the Presidency and government itself.
The Republican base has drifted so far from the nation in demographics and far right wing agenda that is increasingly unlikely that a Republican candidate will win national office for the foreseeable future.
If one looks at the past four presidential elections, Democrats start with an electoral advantage of 242 votes, just 28 shy of electoral victory. Republicans, meanwhile, have swept states that tally barely 179 electoral votes.
The margin favoring Democrats have grown with every 4 year election cycle.
So while the Republican clown car will unload a host of candidates each aiming at the most likely Democratic nominee, the Vested Interests understand the true objective is not the unlikely win of the White House.
Their true objective is to weaken the institution of the Presidency and of government. They don't mind spending a billion or so to do that if it saves them some key tax loopholes worth multiples of that, either.
Republicans have tried to tear down one of the greatest US President in our history, Barrack Obama, who rescued the country from the disaster they left.
Candidate Clinton must understand this, not repeat the fiasco of 2014, pull President Obama and our Democratic ideals close, and resist the Republican effort to weaken the foundation of the Presidency and government itself.
4
If the Democratic Party wants to make sure the Republican candidate is elected president in 2016, there is no better nominee than Ms. Clinton.
13
Please, Senator Warren, renege on your statement that you will not run for the presidency.
Since I reached the age of majority in the late 60's, I have voted for the Democratic candidate for President in all but the three elections: I didn't vote at all in 1968 while still in Army basic training when, though you were told you were allowed to vote, you had to do so on your own time. In 1968 trainees did not have such a thing as their "own time." Twice I voted for third party candidates. I have never voted for a Republican, and I have seen no reason to do so this election. But Hillary as President at this point worries me more than Rand Paul.
I saw Sen. Paul on Face the Nation this morning. He came across as rational and reasonable, but I have to say that Bob Schieffer softballed his questions to Paul, which was disappointing. Rand and Hillary are, first and foremost, politicians, with all the negative freight that word connotates. Rand can't shake his Tea Party connections; Hillary carries more baggage than a Titanic hold-full of steamer trunks. Twins separated at birth, peas from the same pod. Different parties, same old crap.
I have said before and I repeat it now: Warren and Webb, or Webb and Warren. I don't much care which order. I want a ticket to vote FOR, not two tickets to vote AGAINST.
Since I reached the age of majority in the late 60's, I have voted for the Democratic candidate for President in all but the three elections: I didn't vote at all in 1968 while still in Army basic training when, though you were told you were allowed to vote, you had to do so on your own time. In 1968 trainees did not have such a thing as their "own time." Twice I voted for third party candidates. I have never voted for a Republican, and I have seen no reason to do so this election. But Hillary as President at this point worries me more than Rand Paul.
I saw Sen. Paul on Face the Nation this morning. He came across as rational and reasonable, but I have to say that Bob Schieffer softballed his questions to Paul, which was disappointing. Rand and Hillary are, first and foremost, politicians, with all the negative freight that word connotates. Rand can't shake his Tea Party connections; Hillary carries more baggage than a Titanic hold-full of steamer trunks. Twins separated at birth, peas from the same pod. Different parties, same old crap.
I have said before and I repeat it now: Warren and Webb, or Webb and Warren. I don't much care which order. I want a ticket to vote FOR, not two tickets to vote AGAINST.
10
The difficulty of being president has only increased over the decades and the presidency of Hillary Clinton will be like nothing before it. She will face for the first time a true, organized army of psychopaths intent on destroying, not just America, but everything in their path. And she will find it difficult if not impossible to defend us against the them when the enemies within will do everything to stop her, even more so than with Obama, for money and greed and betrayal in her own "party" will drag her down. I don't envy her by any means. I look at her administration as the last in the history of America where there were possibilities, some semblance of hope and I'm afraid it will suffer an eight-year death, from which it will not recover.
9
It shouldn't be too hard to elect a Democrat after President Obama's 2 terms, when you consider that the GOP has been depending on its homophobes and racists to get out the vote.
Fortunately, in actuality, the Evangelicals are a small minority that happens to make a big noise.
Democrats have to take better control of the media and remind people of such stupidities as certain GOP politicians claiming that Mexican immigrants were going to bring Ebola over the border.
The young, the educated, the sexual, racial and cultural minorities, as well as most women will never accept a Republican as president so long as we work very hard to remind them what a GOP administration would look like.
We cannot be lazy. We're competing with FOX.
Fortunately, in actuality, the Evangelicals are a small minority that happens to make a big noise.
Democrats have to take better control of the media and remind people of such stupidities as certain GOP politicians claiming that Mexican immigrants were going to bring Ebola over the border.
The young, the educated, the sexual, racial and cultural minorities, as well as most women will never accept a Republican as president so long as we work very hard to remind them what a GOP administration would look like.
We cannot be lazy. We're competing with FOX.
14
Hillary has more skeletons in her closet than Harvard Medical School.
Does it really matter who's in office? They're all just about one and the same.
As if we really have a choice. It's all an illusion.
'If voting made any difference, they wouldn't let us do it.'-Mark Twain
Does it really matter who's in office? They're all just about one and the same.
As if we really have a choice. It's all an illusion.
'If voting made any difference, they wouldn't let us do it.'-Mark Twain
7
I may disagree. If the only candidates the Republicans can muster are those which they have displayed to us so far, then Hillary will be a shoo-in. Their clone factory will have to come up with a new design and stop simply shoving newer versions of George W. at the American public. Although, I do believe they have discontinued the Cheney model. Hopefully.......Or, the original Cheney model may simply be away on a hunting trip. DUCK!
5
So, the elites like her. That gets her the nomination, because people as a whole aren't thinking about it too hard.
Maybe in 2016. But not in 2020, after 4 more years of the many getting poorer so the few can grow rich. And most of the Baby Boom hitting retirement age with not enough money to make it.
What the elites think, won't matter much. Because people will be thinking about it, and hard. Look for "dangerous" candidates in 2020. Or so the oligarchy's media will name them.
Maybe in 2016. But not in 2020, after 4 more years of the many getting poorer so the few can grow rich. And most of the Baby Boom hitting retirement age with not enough money to make it.
What the elites think, won't matter much. Because people will be thinking about it, and hard. Look for "dangerous" candidates in 2020. Or so the oligarchy's media will name them.
3
Make no mistake statisticans, whatever I might think of Hillary she has my vote and my passionate support. The greatest threat to this country is the nihilistic neo-brutalist reckless GOP. I have no problem with conservatives, but this is entirely different. There is no participation in the national discourse to solve our problems, there is no thought of country over party, there is no interest in policy, this is an unprincipaled interest in economic power. The damage done already in incalcuable and will take decades to repair and this is even before we get to the deep deep immorality of their environmental position. Shield by hate media, speaking only to themselves, funding a huge misinformation campaign premised on a wave of corruption unequaled in a 100 years, I will do everything I can to support Hillary. I have never been more afraid nor more inspired.
16
Vote for Jonathan (JEB) Bush! America NEEDS to elect its first Hispanic president…
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
2
Stop covering the raw vote, which makes it look like a close "horse race." Good for pushing pages, exciting ignorant audiences, but it has little to do with likely electoral outcomes. No modern presidential campaign worth its salt takes national polls seriously, ever. The simple fact is that the Democratic candidate will start with such a huge electoral advantage that any Republican candidate will have few, narrow pathways to victory. It's not that a Republican can't win, but let's call it what it is: an uphill battle that substantially depends on Democratic errors. Of course, the good news for Republicans is that if any Democrat can stumble seriously, Hilliary can.
5
A Clinton II Administration? Really, is that the best we can do? Hill, like Bill, carried the endorsement of corporations that benefited mightily from such roaring successes as NAFTA, lavishing military equipment on police departments (SWATting, anyone?), and the astounding policy of reimbursing states so many dollars per day for every person held in jail or prison. Result? People are being arrested and jailed for minor offenses that used to be handled with a summons and often a fine, simply because it pays. Welcome to the Prison-Industrial Complex. When it comes to the number of people incarcerated in this world, We're Number One - far surpassing even China, a dictatorship with FOUR TIMES our population.
I've yet to hear of Hillary even commenting on any of these 'achievements', much less repudiating them. (I remember Bill Clinton expressing concern about NAFTA, the WTO and other 'free' trade pacts leading to "a race to the bottom" - his words - but he STILL pushed for them.) Then again, judging by the e-mail episodes, her taste for secrecy (so evident in her original health care plans back in '93) hasn't abated. And, as Secretary of State, her top job was to ensure the safety of our diplomats - does the name Benghazi come to mind?
So here we go again. Old geezer that I am, I still remember the Washington Post's Tony Kornheiser's assessment of her hubby as candidate in 1992: "He'll do. I think." Unfortunately, I can't even mount that much enthusiasm now. Pity.
I've yet to hear of Hillary even commenting on any of these 'achievements', much less repudiating them. (I remember Bill Clinton expressing concern about NAFTA, the WTO and other 'free' trade pacts leading to "a race to the bottom" - his words - but he STILL pushed for them.) Then again, judging by the e-mail episodes, her taste for secrecy (so evident in her original health care plans back in '93) hasn't abated. And, as Secretary of State, her top job was to ensure the safety of our diplomats - does the name Benghazi come to mind?
So here we go again. Old geezer that I am, I still remember the Washington Post's Tony Kornheiser's assessment of her hubby as candidate in 1992: "He'll do. I think." Unfortunately, I can't even mount that much enthusiasm now. Pity.
7
run away from a very effective two term democratic president and you run off a cliff. ask all the dems who used that strategy last year and were clobbered. there really isn't any democratic party.
9
All through 1967 LBJ was thought to be the "inevitable" Democratic nominee, even when Senator Gene McCarthy bravely entered the NH primary. "The rest is history."
Nineteen months before the 1992 election, President George (HW) Bush had a 90% public approval rating. Bill Clinton was relatively unknown at that time.
Nineteen months is a long time in which a lot of history can occur. Some things may be possible, even probable, but hardly inevitable.
Nineteen months before the 1992 election, President George (HW) Bush had a 90% public approval rating. Bill Clinton was relatively unknown at that time.
Nineteen months is a long time in which a lot of history can occur. Some things may be possible, even probable, but hardly inevitable.
8
But LBJ got on TV and announced he was not running, when he saw he could not win.
The chances of Hillary doing that? Close to zero.
The chances of Hillary doing that? Close to zero.
2
Mrs. Clinton will win the nomination and the 2016 general election, not on novelty or excitement, but on intelligence, competence and courage.
24
And dishonesty, disingenousness, insincerity, lack of real purpose beyond ambition and general fatigue with a lost eight years, incompetent foreign policy and a mediocre economy. Yup, a slam dunk for sure.
10
I remember the nominations of both Hubert Humphrey and John Kerry and other Democratic candidiates. They had positioned themselves in the game, were "entitled" and lost. Hillary will join this list. Many readers here say that if you don't vote for Hillary, you are effectively voting for whomever he Republicans nominate. However, many Democrats resent being given no choice. Hillary Clinton represents the 1% and is bought by Wall Street. She will promote a more "muscular" foreign policy and draw us into another war in the Middle East and more jobs will leave the U.S. She will reform absolutely nothing as a new member of the ruling class and the middle class will slowly disappear. Many friends, both male and female, have told me they may not vote in the next election, despite all having voted in more than twelve consecutive Presidential contests. They say we will have no real choice if it's Hillary and I agree with them. The media simply covers the show and allows the candidates to play to people's emotions rather than force them to discuss substantive issues. Democracy weeps.
15
That is ridiculous and irresponsible. Who are these "friends" who are willing sacrifice the Supreme Court to one of the republican candidates? No real democrat or patriot would allow a republican to gain victory by inaction, not for a minute.
8
Sit out the election then. If you and your Democratic friends all do, maybe Elizabeth Warren will be elected. Or maybe the tooth fairy. More likely, it will be the Republican nominee. Cruz, Bush III, Rubio, Huckabee, Christy, Paul. It doesn't matter. After all, there was no difference between Bush and Gore or Bush and Kerry.
5
I did not feel part of the audience she was addressing with her video, in part because it appeared to me that she was addressing people living certain kinds of lives with certain kinds of challenges, and mine were nowhere to be seen. My reaction reminded me of my reaction to President Obama's ideas to reform the tax code on behalf of the middle class, where it seemed to me there was an attitude that increasing the earned income tax credit will address all middle-class challenges; the similarity I see is that, once you go specific, you sound as though you are not addressing those outside the specified group. But I guess in contemporary politics it's more important to emphatically court certain groups, and leave less easily identifiable voters to tag along if they wish, than it is to find policies and concerns that voters in general relate to. Certainly Republicans pitch their arguments to certain groups too.
I often think back to Barack Obama's nomination acceptance speech the first time around, because I do feel that in effect I'm being told by this political approach, "You're on your own." That, of course, was what candidate Obama successfully campaigned against, not for.
I often think back to Barack Obama's nomination acceptance speech the first time around, because I do feel that in effect I'm being told by this political approach, "You're on your own." That, of course, was what candidate Obama successfully campaigned against, not for.
8
You're correct. We live in a time in which a lot of voters are simply taken for granted, as they give their votes away in advance (as evidenced by the poll cited in this article).
I often wonder if democracy fails when it gets too big. I don't expect to be truly represented by a politician ever again for the rest of my life--certainly not a viable presidential candidate.
Gilligan's Island didn't have a military industrial complex, but every vote (and voter) counted.
I often wonder if democracy fails when it gets too big. I don't expect to be truly represented by a politician ever again for the rest of my life--certainly not a viable presidential candidate.
Gilligan's Island didn't have a military industrial complex, but every vote (and voter) counted.
4
Vote Republican. They will address your concerns.
2
Pretty clear all the GOP venom has hurt her popularity some. The email garbage, and it was garbage, was not handled well. But I will vote for her or any Democrat over any GOP nominee.
That's true for the GOP base for their nominee. So it will come down to this. How does the GOP get to 270 Electoral College votes when the Democrats have almost 270 Electoral College votes locked up??
The answer= They don't, because they can't!
That's true for the GOP base for their nominee. So it will come down to this. How does the GOP get to 270 Electoral College votes when the Democrats have almost 270 Electoral College votes locked up??
The answer= They don't, because they can't!
10
Shared the announcement video of Hillary with my liberal, PAC worker , activist daughter who responded, "she's awful". I just think she's too old...but perhaps awful too.
10
This is all so depressing. It makes plain the oligarchical, undemocratic character of American politics. Had Hilary Clinton not hitched her wagon to that of a preternaturally talented politician--Bill, that is--she would now be contemplating retirement after a successful career as a senior partner of a big Chicago law firm or perhaps as a state supreme court judge, not running for president, this in the same way that George W Bush would, at best, have been a moderately successful local businessman and regional kingmaker in Midland, Texas.
Also, those primary poll numbers are a little misleading. Sixty percent of Democratic voters prefer Hilary Clinton to who? If viable alternatives to Clinton preset themselves--and they still might--that grassroots, intra-party support could decline seriously.
Also, those primary poll numbers are a little misleading. Sixty percent of Democratic voters prefer Hilary Clinton to who? If viable alternatives to Clinton preset themselves--and they still might--that grassroots, intra-party support could decline seriously.
8
"Sixty percent of Democratic voters prefer Hilary Clinton to who?"
To running no candidate at all, evidently, because no one is running but her.
I can't see this as a ringing endorsement; usually, you can't beat somebody with nobody.
To running no candidate at all, evidently, because no one is running but her.
I can't see this as a ringing endorsement; usually, you can't beat somebody with nobody.
7
Like all women, Hillary owes everything to her husband. Yeah right. And W was a successful businessman.
4
Well, I really don’t know what to do. There is not one single Republican that should get my vote. And I don’t really want to vote for Hillary. I don’t need to state reasons, most of the commenters already have. I don’t want my vote to be the lesser of two evils. I don’t want to sit out the 2016 election and not vote at all. This is a real dilemma. Do I choose a write-in? Who deserves my vote?
12
Bernie Sanders
2
Before we agonize over her weaknesses and connections tomWall Street let's focus on the fact that she is our best alternative to any one of the right wing wackos that the Republican Party is likely to nominate
20
The Clintons like a campaign song. I suggest "Right Back where We Started From" from the disco era.
4
After a long consideration, as an educated, gay liberal, I cannot see voting for her
8
Maybe Huckabee would be your logical choice. Or Cruz.
2
This is the attitude that has put Republicans in power at the state level throughout the country, and then at the congressional level through gerrymandering of the districts. 'Realpolitik' always means a distasteful choice, but to stay out of the game is to concede everything. Would any 'educated liberal' of whatever personal tastes find that a better alternative ?
3
Is it just me who thinks that another election with a Clinton on the ballot would be ridiculous?
11
First woman presidential candidate. But the GOP will roll out Kelly Ayotte as their vice presidential pick and that will nullify some of that energy.
Julián Castro for VP and the election will not be close enough for them to steal. Democrats need to remember their base and it is not older White guys like me!
(If Al Gore had picked John Lewis, like he should have, he would have won by 5+ points.)
(If Al Gore had picked John Lewis, like he should have, he would have won by 5+ points.)
3
A vote for Hillary is a vote for Wall Street and a vote for Monsanto … no thank you.
8
There has been no one more qualified to be President than Hillary for a long, long time. Go Hillary.
17
"She is not a natural politician in connecting with voters on the campaign trail, and some have grown tired of the Clintons and their controversies."
These two reasons may have contributed towhy Hillary lost to Obama the last time and may be why she does not win the general election this time around. A segment of voters have grown tired of the Bush's and Clinton's and their moral baggage. And we would hope for 'fresh candidates' that don't have a legacy of deception. Maybe too much to hope for....
These two reasons may have contributed towhy Hillary lost to Obama the last time and may be why she does not win the general election this time around. A segment of voters have grown tired of the Bush's and Clinton's and their moral baggage. And we would hope for 'fresh candidates' that don't have a legacy of deception. Maybe too much to hope for....
7
Now if she could get one of the San Antonio, TX Castro brothers to be her running mate.....
4
The Democrats have no bench. There are no well-known senators or governors under 60 who could challenge for the nomination. If Hillary gets the nomination and loses, what will the party do in 2020?
While the NY Times readers may not like the views of the GOP, you have to admit they have a large number of prominent candidates in the 40-60 age group, something the Democrats are utterly lacking.
While the NY Times readers may not like the views of the GOP, you have to admit they have a large number of prominent candidates in the 40-60 age group, something the Democrats are utterly lacking.
7
Large number of potential male candidates in the GOP. The only female considering a run in the GOP is Carly Fiorina, who has never held public office, (though she might be a fine candidate). The GOP can only go on for so long ignoring 50% of the population.
1
A Hillary candidacy could easily hand the presidency to the Republicans, a nightmare scenario. She is supported by Monsanto, Lockheed Martin, and Citibank. Voters who don't know those details sense her ties to big money and business as usual.
It's time for a leader, not yet another corporate puppet. That person has not emerged yet, but is out there. Let's be patient, since it's only the fate of the world that is at stake.
It's time for a leader, not yet another corporate puppet. That person has not emerged yet, but is out there. Let's be patient, since it's only the fate of the world that is at stake.
16
Corporate puppets and corporates lackeys are all your'e going to get in the future, Mike. YOu mean you didn't know that?
It's more than a year and a half until November. If the Republicans do not crown Jeb Bush very early in the game then the country may end up being more interested in their candidacy race than in the Democrats coronation. People like to bet on sure things but it's not at all certain that Ms. Clinton is sure to win the White House.
5
Whatever Ms Clinton's shortcomings as a candidate might be, they pale in comparison to her strengths and to the hate-filled, war-mongering, last-century relics that comprise the Republican's likely candidates. Go Hilary!
13
Notice no one is coming out in full support of Hillary. Most people are saying yes they will support Hillary but mostly to keep Republicans out or to vote in the new Supreme Court nominee.
Right now the Gop guns will be blazing to attract the republican seat but after that it could be a different game, where Jeb will most likely to court Mexican support and if R Paul is the RN then the has his libratanian agenda which a lot of democrats find naturally attractive.
And also when the can of worms open about Hilary's past performances it's not going to be so pretty.
The point is this is really the calm before the storm and yet Hillary is still treading in choppy waters. Not a very strong position as many think she is in.
Right now the Gop guns will be blazing to attract the republican seat but after that it could be a different game, where Jeb will most likely to court Mexican support and if R Paul is the RN then the has his libratanian agenda which a lot of democrats find naturally attractive.
And also when the can of worms open about Hilary's past performances it's not going to be so pretty.
The point is this is really the calm before the storm and yet Hillary is still treading in choppy waters. Not a very strong position as many think she is in.
10
Clinton is polling very well for so early in the election cycle.
6
I fully support Senator, Secretary, Madame Clinton. Her efforts for human rights for women is amazing. She is highly qualified. I liked two things about Bill Clinton's presidency- the peace and the prosperity. I also liked the budget surpluses, the global leadership, and stewardship of America's resources. I look forward to eight years of both If Hillary Clinton is elected.
2
It has been said that who is nominated is more critical than who is elected. One might assert that who does the counting is even more important. It is clear to most Americans that we are faced with two utterly corrupted political parties, and things here are no different politically than is Zimbabwe, Ukraine, Argentina, Russia or China.
There are 325 million Americans in our country. Could perhaps 10 million be qualified for all roles in government? How many more times are Americans going to sit back in front of their TV's and watch the Clintons defend a scandal, distract the nation's business, and corrupt the nation's affairs, while serving special interests?
This is no leader.
There are 325 million Americans in our country. Could perhaps 10 million be qualified for all roles in government? How many more times are Americans going to sit back in front of their TV's and watch the Clintons defend a scandal, distract the nation's business, and corrupt the nation's affairs, while serving special interests?
This is no leader.
7
You forgot to include India & Pakistan among countries listed in your first paragraph!
1
Let's see what "scandals" the Clintons have to defend. There's the movie pushed by that great patriot, Jerry Fallwell, that alleged the Clintons had killed 50 to 60 people and run drugs in Arkansas, Whitewater, Filegate, travelgate, pardongate, the "murder" of Vince Foster. It's all a bunch of baloney. Benghazi? Even Darrell Issa's committee found nothing on Benghazi. The right-wingers come up with outrageous stories and they echo through the right wing echo chamber until people actually believe there is something to them. Unfortunately, even some Democrats have believed some of this garbage and now the Clintons have to "defend against them." Emails? Did Colin Powell use his personal email account to do business as secretary of state? Yes, and he says he kept none of the emails and didn't have them to turn over to State. He also pointed out the obvious- that the emails he sent as Secretary of State were all unclassified, "benign" and probably not important if they could be found. Do people really think that a Secretary of State uses email to conduct any serious business when he/she has secure methods of communication? Did Jeb Bush use his private email account to conduct State business as Governor, including emails relating to security and military issues, troop deployments to the Middle East and the protection of nuclear plants? Yes, and he destroyed whatever he wanted to. Echo Chamber, where are you?
3
Yes, Hillary has vulnerabilities. But the Republicans, with their incessant negativity, vitriol and serial dishonesty are perhaps her best -- if unintentional -- assets on the road to the White House.
14
So an impersonal approach, with a litany of misjudgements that may or may not rise to scandals, is the front runner with potentially no opposition for the nomination? Where else could this happen? Oh wait, the monied people are behind her. When will the democrats admit they are not as opposed to Citizens United as they like to indicate they are. If money corrupts, is there any more proof necessary.
14
The Democrats should not raise any money from "monied people" and run a "pure" campaign. That way, the Republican President that is elected can appoint more right wing justices to make sure Citizens United lives forever and expanded, and voting suppression is further encouraged. That's really going to show 'em.
9
Please America, find a qualified, reliable, truthful and likeable opponent for this candidate. If it must be a female, then make sure she can attribute to the qualifications I have outlined. You need another good President.
Anyone care to speculate who could be her VP if she wins?
Anyone care to speculate who could be her VP if she wins?
8
The best Hillary can do is stay in the center, and ignore the claims that she is not liberal enough.. There are serious issues in the country and the world. Whether dealing with the US economy, Russia, China, ISIS, climate change, or Congress.. it will require a President who is realistic, pragmatic, experienced, and able to get thing done... not somebody spouting nonsensical slogans from Occupy Wall Street or an old Crosby Stills Nash concert..
3
Although I appreciate President Obama's civility, I'm looking forward to a good bare knuckles street fight. The GOP has not been called out on the issues nearly enough in my opinion.
8
The Republicans to not do "street fights" - they would get their invisible clothes dirty. They engage is name-calling, destroying reputations, lies, subterfuge and selling their country to the highest bidder, But their hands are always clean, and all activities are always "deniable"., and can be blamed on Obama. Without fear of contradiction.
1
There is no one more qualified for the office of President than Hillary. She has first and second hand experience governing at all levels, from the house of the governor in Arkansas, as First Lady, holding a Senate seat and then on to Secretary of State. Her opponents and the GOP machine will try, once again, to destroy her with distortions of the truth. Even before she formally declared her intentions, Rand Paul was busy twisting the facts on Meet the Press this morning. But, hopefully, she will prevail, and we will have our first female President.
Progress does not come easy to Americans. Perhaps it's because we've bought into the "American Dream" and we're reluctant to upset the apple cart lest we suffer when our ship comes in.
Progress does not come easy to Americans. Perhaps it's because we've bought into the "American Dream" and we're reluctant to upset the apple cart lest we suffer when our ship comes in.
6
Hope, if she is elected, she dumps two people first: Huma Abedin and pip-squeek Senator Schumer. Both have different agendas: She wants to bring in her disgraced hubby back in limelight, and Schumer wants to become ambassador to Israel. (Note, I said it here first!)
1
I'm with her all the way
10
That is just so great, Gary!
I didn't think I had a dog in this race because I gave up voting decades ago. Her nomination may change my thinking. Like any beltway politician she has a great deal of baggage. Unlike many of her opponents who have entered the race, she has a decided disadvantage--that of age. She is too old to take on the responsibility of leading this nation. Her time has passed. I seem to remember Ronald Reagan not recalling certain events and he was ridiculed. Later it became clear that he did in fact have severe memory loss and other conditions predictable in older people. Hilliary is in that group. I myself am in my late sixties and realize that I am not as alert and functional as I once was. This job is beyond her capability and her true supporters should make her come to her senses.
8
I beg to differ- my own life experience shows that mentally if not physically at 70 I am better than I was at 50 or 60. I attribute this state to the fact that my work is challenging and very interesting - and pursuing it produces happiness. I think she will find the presidency engaging and challenging.
2
I hear you, but it really does depend on the person. Jerry Brown ran for California governor four years ago, at 72; of course at that point he could still be regularly seen running up hills in public parks. Five years on, he's still doing a great job with a nation-sized state: engaged, active, controversial, respected. Though 77's too old for president no matter how fit you are; the odds are against. Too bad.
Everybody ages at different rates. I'm not a shoe-in to vote for Clinton, though I might. But if she seems to dodder in public, I wouldn't.
Everybody ages at different rates. I'm not a shoe-in to vote for Clinton, though I might. But if she seems to dodder in public, I wouldn't.
2
I would like to see, not just for Mrs. Clinton, but for any and all who hope to reside in The White House, a baseline mental status exam. Once elected, the yearly physical includes a repeat neuropsychiatric exam. If test results drop more than a specific amount (10%?) from baseline, consideration be given to having the vice president take over. This would relieve us of worry about competency in elder statesmen (who may be quite able to perform, but worry the electorate because of age) and also make the vice president's role (and nomination) more critical.
3
She off and running and, in the end, Americans will come to understand the most important fact confronting us…the next President will either entrench the current Supreme Court majority or reverse that majority and the damage it has done to our body politic. If you'd like to see 6/3 decisions that open the floodgates on money in politics or Hobby Lobby blurring the lines between church and state, then by all means vote against Hillary. But, if you think enough's enough of the activist Supreme Court majority we've got today, it's high time for another Clinton in the White House. Elizabeth Warren can wait until 2024.
21
I am one of many liberal Democrats here who will have a hard time supporting Hillary Clinton's run for the presidency because she voted for the invasion and occupation of Iraq. She did not even bother to read the intelligence (she was, instead, "briefed") but went where the winds of war carried her. Mistakes were made, is basically all she can say now.
When it comes down to November 2016, and it's between her and the so-called moderate Jeb Bush, I may not even bother to vote for the first time in my adult life. I hate that it has come to that in my country.
When it comes down to November 2016, and it's between her and the so-called moderate Jeb Bush, I may not even bother to vote for the first time in my adult life. I hate that it has come to that in my country.
18
just remember - ABB- anybody but Bush- and while I feel very strongly about Iraq- I am not going to help the GOP win by staying home. She may have voted for it- but the GOP liars- many on Bush's team got us there.
1
Go vote. Just put it elsewhere. Greens, Socialist Workers, anything. If protest votes affect the votes given to minor parties, it will be noticed. It's like voting "none of the above."
1
All that has happened so far is the entry of Hillary Clinton as a candidate along with Ted Cruz who has no possible chance of beating Ms. Clinton. Who do the Republicans have to match Ms. Clinton? Find a reasonable candidate to oppose Ms. Clinton, then we might have a competitive race but not till then.
1
Hilary Clinton has deficiencies in the policies she has supported.
But her positions are far far better than those of the GOP hopefuls.
The question is really about whether one should vote for "the lessor of two evils".
When Humphrey ran against Nixon in 1968 many Dems did not vote for Humphrey and we got Nixon, Watergate and about 5 more years of war and another 25,000 American dead.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/25/arts/25iht-bookthu.1.5432006.html
"Worse, the Nixon administration continued the war when it had ample evidence that the war was unwinnable.
The cease-fire the United States finally reached with North Vietnam in 1973 was not appreciably different from one that could have been reached four years earlier"
When Nader ran in 2000 he received in Florida about 97K votes, more than 437 by which Bush beat Gore in Florida.
Voting for Nader gave us Bush, Iraq War, Bush tax cuts, a doubling of the debt , Great Recession.
There are 4 Court justices over 70. The next president will probably have several Court nominations. Justices have life time appointments. Sitting out an election has [at least for the Court] long range consequences.
I hope Hilary is questioned about her views and I hope the liberal members of the Dems [like Warren and Sanders] move her left.
But even if Hilary does not satisfy on every issue consider the far reaching consequences of a Cruz or Paul or Walker etc. presidency.
In this case the greater of two evils is really really evil.
But her positions are far far better than those of the GOP hopefuls.
The question is really about whether one should vote for "the lessor of two evils".
When Humphrey ran against Nixon in 1968 many Dems did not vote for Humphrey and we got Nixon, Watergate and about 5 more years of war and another 25,000 American dead.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/25/arts/25iht-bookthu.1.5432006.html
"Worse, the Nixon administration continued the war when it had ample evidence that the war was unwinnable.
The cease-fire the United States finally reached with North Vietnam in 1973 was not appreciably different from one that could have been reached four years earlier"
When Nader ran in 2000 he received in Florida about 97K votes, more than 437 by which Bush beat Gore in Florida.
Voting for Nader gave us Bush, Iraq War, Bush tax cuts, a doubling of the debt , Great Recession.
There are 4 Court justices over 70. The next president will probably have several Court nominations. Justices have life time appointments. Sitting out an election has [at least for the Court] long range consequences.
I hope Hilary is questioned about her views and I hope the liberal members of the Dems [like Warren and Sanders] move her left.
But even if Hilary does not satisfy on every issue consider the far reaching consequences of a Cruz or Paul or Walker etc. presidency.
In this case the greater of two evils is really really evil.
18
It's kind of time to stop hating on Ralph Nader. Just because some of us don't make the most of our civic rights doesn't mean those who do deserve our scorn. If you remain so dissatisfied with GW Bush, here are the two groups I'd advise you to blame:
1. Those who voted for GW Bush.
2. Those (like Hillary) who voted with him.
1. Those who voted for GW Bush.
2. Those (like Hillary) who voted with him.
1
People are going to have to get used to being unhappy.
According to Nate Silver's www.fivethirtyeight.com, Hillary has lined up plenty of support -- 27 senators (a very high number) from across the political spectrum. And she is polling well very early. According to 538:
"Clinton is above 50 percent in Iowa, New Hampshire and nationally. No other non-incumbent in the modern era has done that in the first half of the year before the primaries began."
Donors aren't exactly looking for another option either.
*****
* "The Hillary Clinton Steamroller Rumbles To Life",
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-hillary-clinton-steamroller-rumb...
According to Nate Silver's www.fivethirtyeight.com, Hillary has lined up plenty of support -- 27 senators (a very high number) from across the political spectrum. And she is polling well very early. According to 538:
"Clinton is above 50 percent in Iowa, New Hampshire and nationally. No other non-incumbent in the modern era has done that in the first half of the year before the primaries began."
Donors aren't exactly looking for another option either.
*****
* "The Hillary Clinton Steamroller Rumbles To Life",
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-hillary-clinton-steamroller-rumb...
2
Unhappy about what? There are certainly others I'd prefer over Hillary, but none of them are Republicans.
1
She will appear flawed and vulnerable in the general election, right up until the time that the GOP picks someone from their usual clown show, then tacks on a Palinesque Veep. How does Cruz-Fiorina sound to YOU?
8
This is a bummer. No challengers = no testing until it is too late. Her Republican foes will be battle-tested come Iowa. Look for a Republican landslide victory with Democratic leadership/electorate regretting they weren't brave enough to insist upon Warren. When will we ever learn?
9
I'd like to have a woman President, just not this one. As a 65+ year old Democrat I will not vote for Clinton. It's got to be Senator Sanders or just stay home for me. With all the BIG money behind the candidates there's nothing for working people to consider anymore. Cuomo, Clinton,etc etc who cares.
18
Don't give up your vote. I'd say that if you give up your vote, you give up your right to complain, but that isn't the reason to vote.
2
Are you kidding? If there is one thing we know for sure and that is the GOP can always make things worse.
Democrats better wake up to the fact that if the GOP controls all 3 branches of government, their daughters won't remotely have the rights women of today will. To wish that on women is insane.
Democrats better wake up to the fact that if the GOP controls all 3 branches of government, their daughters won't remotely have the rights women of today will. To wish that on women is insane.
1
Hillary is a smart, savvy politician with more than a quarter century of experience in politics, in the public eye, has held several high profile political positions, has worked her way up, and (to me anyway) seems like she really wants to make a difference.
I think we'd be lucky to have her as President, and I'm grateful she's running.
Think about all LBJ got done simply because he had been around long enough.
When you compare her to the rest of the Democratic field, and to the true, almost frightening, low-common-demonitor choices the Republican Party has vomited forth, I can't understand any other emotion other than relief and hope that she could make it to the White House.
No one is perfect. They all have flaws. But Hillary is the cream of the crop, bar none.
I think we'd be lucky to have her as President, and I'm grateful she's running.
Think about all LBJ got done simply because he had been around long enough.
When you compare her to the rest of the Democratic field, and to the true, almost frightening, low-common-demonitor choices the Republican Party has vomited forth, I can't understand any other emotion other than relief and hope that she could make it to the White House.
No one is perfect. They all have flaws. But Hillary is the cream of the crop, bar none.
14
As I recall, LBJ gave us that lovely war.
2
She's also tough enough to fight the "vast right wing conspiracy".
She has them terrified.
She has them terrified.
1
Your recollection is, to say he least, flawed. The American war on Vietnam predates LBJ. Look to Eisenhower for that one.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
1
The Democrats will reap what they sow.
5
I sure hope so. For almost my entire life I have voted for old white men to be President. Then I voted for a middle age Black guy.Now I think its time for a woman to fix this mess of a country. Run, Hilliary run.
3
The Republican talking points presented on this comment page seem to be simply that she has no experience or skills? And that she is old? Or that Liberals don't like her?
They are going to have to do a lot better than that. Because there are a lot of people in this country who would love a Clinton economy right about now. And when it comes to "the economy stupid"... the Clinton's know how to deliver.
They are going to have to do a lot better than that. Because there are a lot of people in this country who would love a Clinton economy right about now. And when it comes to "the economy stupid"... the Clinton's know how to deliver.
12
The Clinton Economy? You mean the one that sent American manufacturing jobs elsewhere thanks to NAFTA. Ross Perot talked about that "giant sucking sound" of American jobs going overseas and south of the border that resonates to this day. Presidential candidates need to formulate a sound economic plan to promotes job creation here at home.
5
And that she has no integrity.
4
Sure, Democrats, go ahead ... nominate her ... make the GOP's day.
If the feckless Dem Party leaders allow this coronation to happen, they lose the general election to Jeb Bush. The youth vote will vanish rather than vote for this aging Queen Of Entitlement. Just simply moronic the way our primary system consistently gives We The People a "choice" between the Lesser Of Two Evils.
Here's one Independent who will write in his vote (yet again) as a matter of principle, rather than abide the apparent current "choices".
If the feckless Dem Party leaders allow this coronation to happen, they lose the general election to Jeb Bush. The youth vote will vanish rather than vote for this aging Queen Of Entitlement. Just simply moronic the way our primary system consistently gives We The People a "choice" between the Lesser Of Two Evils.
Here's one Independent who will write in his vote (yet again) as a matter of principle, rather than abide the apparent current "choices".
27
Me too.
2
Do you think the "youth vote" will then go to Jeb Bush, age 62? And should the boy-man Marco Rubio's ultra-right wing agenda appeal to 20-somethings because he is only 43?
Consider which candidate you want to nominate the next three or four aging justices as the retire or die away. If that does not register as significant it is better to not vote at all.
Consider which candidate you want to nominate the next three or four aging justices as the retire or die away. If that does not register as significant it is better to not vote at all.
2
It is people of "principle" like you who "chose" Bush over Gore and Kerry, with tragic consequences for the country. Hold your nose and choose the lesser of evils because the greater of evils will be just that.
1
Self-serving focus-grouped videos mean nothing to me. This is my absolute bottom-line: there is no way I will ever cast a ballot for any presidential candidate who voted to authorize the invasion of Iraq - which has created all the problems in that region we must now endure. Nobody who supported that reckless, ill-advised, and immoral invasion has what it takes to be the president. Period.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
37
Great vote for Jeb Bush then.
3
Fine-so vote for the Republican or sit out the election-read comment by David. I hope you will be happy when the next President has to nominate 2-3 Supreme Court Justices. If you will be happy with more Alitos-don't vote for Hillary
So, it's all about the past, huh? Try living in the past. It'll get you nowhere.
1
What has Sen. Clinton done?
1993-4 Health Care NO
2000-2006 Senator Invisible
2008 Campaign NO
2008-2012
Sec. of State MEDIOCRE
She will find a way to lose. Just watch.
Why are so many people sure that Obama will be able to replace Justice Ginsburg? The Republicans could make a massive effort to block any of nominees.
Worse yet:
God forbid if we need a new Vice President over the next 21 mos. The Republicans would be perfectly content to stall and have Boehner be next in line to either Pres. Obama or Pres. Biden.
1993-4 Health Care NO
2000-2006 Senator Invisible
2008 Campaign NO
2008-2012
Sec. of State MEDIOCRE
She will find a way to lose. Just watch.
Why are so many people sure that Obama will be able to replace Justice Ginsburg? The Republicans could make a massive effort to block any of nominees.
Worse yet:
God forbid if we need a new Vice President over the next 21 mos. The Republicans would be perfectly content to stall and have Boehner be next in line to either Pres. Obama or Pres. Biden.
11
The Democrats are the only sane choice for 2016 and they have decided to put all their eggs in one basket. Bad move.
As the piece notes, much can change politically between now and November 2016 and even between now and the Iowa caucuses. Putting one candidate forth who will apparently waltz more or less unopposed to the nomination is to put a candidate into the general who's possibly not ready for the pressure of the fall campaign. A credible Democrat would be doing her a favor by getting into the primaries. They would also be doing the party a favor just in case things head south for Mrs. Clinton, as well as putting some pressure on her to be substantive.
Unopposed, Mrs. Clinton will run a "Seinfeld" campaign -- one about nothing. The announcement video was a preview. It was pretty and slick and virtually devoid of substance.
As an aside, I found the campaign logo rather odd. The arrow is pointing to the right. If that's supposed to represent progress, the designer has been asleep for the past 35 years...
As the piece notes, much can change politically between now and November 2016 and even between now and the Iowa caucuses. Putting one candidate forth who will apparently waltz more or less unopposed to the nomination is to put a candidate into the general who's possibly not ready for the pressure of the fall campaign. A credible Democrat would be doing her a favor by getting into the primaries. They would also be doing the party a favor just in case things head south for Mrs. Clinton, as well as putting some pressure on her to be substantive.
Unopposed, Mrs. Clinton will run a "Seinfeld" campaign -- one about nothing. The announcement video was a preview. It was pretty and slick and virtually devoid of substance.
As an aside, I found the campaign logo rather odd. The arrow is pointing to the right. If that's supposed to represent progress, the designer has been asleep for the past 35 years...
8
She is not unopposed. O'Malley's in Iowa and New Hampshire big time. Both states have been known to shake things up quite a bit and O'Malley's definitely talking to the Elizabeth Warren wing of the Democratic Party. Personally, I think that is a winning message and I hope that Hillary will sign on to it with considerable strength and then actually mean it!
1
United States is now an old country and maybe Hillary Clinton can teach us some new tricks. Perhaps a woman president can bring some changes to our national attitude.
"The quality of your attitude is as important as the quality of your work." (Company slogan).
Run, Hillary, run!
"The quality of your attitude is as important as the quality of your work." (Company slogan).
Run, Hillary, run!
3
Hillary's dilemma is, as some commenters suggest, where to position herself on the spectrum. It will not be easy. if she is too far left, she may ignite passions among left wingers of the party who pine for Warren, but could also alienate the independent voters who decide elections. These independents may be even more crucial in this election, coming as it does after 8 years of the most left wing presidency in our history. A lot of the electorate east of the Sierra Madre and west of the Hudson are suffering from lefty fatigue. But given how narrow Obama's win was in 2012 (52% - 48% is not a landslide) if she fails to get out the lefty vote (which Obama effectively mobilized as a decisive bloc twice) she may also lose in a photo finish. As she would say, Hard Choices.
2
"The ascent of a new generation of Democratic-leaning young and nonwhite voters may have broken the electoral deadlock of the late 1990s and early 2000s, giving the Democrats a modest advantage WHEN these groups turn out in relatively high numbers, as they do in presidential elections."
I'll replace the WHEN with IF. It is in our hands. Let us never forget the wars and economic atrocities heaped on us for eight years when the President essentially abdicated his job to his vice and the neocons that included Karl Rove, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, and others.
I'll replace the WHEN with IF. It is in our hands. Let us never forget the wars and economic atrocities heaped on us for eight years when the President essentially abdicated his job to his vice and the neocons that included Karl Rove, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, and others.
21
4 Billion dollars in her campaign chest = inevitability.
Favorite neo-con foreign policy status = inevitability.
Anointed by Wall Street = inevitability.
Anointed by Corporate America = inevitability.
Anointed by Pentagon/Military Industrial and Prison Complex = inevitability.
Anointed by DAVOS Elites = Inevitability.
Anointed by Madison Avenue = inevitability.
Anointed by Nuclear Industry = inevitability.
Anointed by the GMO-pushing Monsanto Corporatists = inevitability.
She has recently re-branded her branding campaign by co-opting the populist meme of Elizabeth Warren - who has been warned off the campaign trail - a la Paul Wellstone.
She is testing her primary rhetoric of jobs + women's rights + equality to see how it plays out in mainstream America, and if she can win back the 99% - whom she rejected and disrespected with sneering condensation. Her new-found concern for the average American is disingenuous beyond belief and is a cunning ploy to disarm critics who see her elitist aspirations as diametrically opposed to her supporters needs and issues. She is no different than her opponents (who haven't a chance against her steamroller organization and monetary support) and her parsing her messages depending upon her audience is a typical political move.
Her Corporate, Wall Street, Neo-Con money-men know that what she says to her gullible constituents is pure pablum, and they have no fears that she will enact any legislation that will rein them in = inevitability.
Favorite neo-con foreign policy status = inevitability.
Anointed by Wall Street = inevitability.
Anointed by Corporate America = inevitability.
Anointed by Pentagon/Military Industrial and Prison Complex = inevitability.
Anointed by DAVOS Elites = Inevitability.
Anointed by Madison Avenue = inevitability.
Anointed by Nuclear Industry = inevitability.
Anointed by the GMO-pushing Monsanto Corporatists = inevitability.
She has recently re-branded her branding campaign by co-opting the populist meme of Elizabeth Warren - who has been warned off the campaign trail - a la Paul Wellstone.
She is testing her primary rhetoric of jobs + women's rights + equality to see how it plays out in mainstream America, and if she can win back the 99% - whom she rejected and disrespected with sneering condensation. Her new-found concern for the average American is disingenuous beyond belief and is a cunning ploy to disarm critics who see her elitist aspirations as diametrically opposed to her supporters needs and issues. She is no different than her opponents (who haven't a chance against her steamroller organization and monetary support) and her parsing her messages depending upon her audience is a typical political move.
Her Corporate, Wall Street, Neo-Con money-men know that what she says to her gullible constituents is pure pablum, and they have no fears that she will enact any legislation that will rein them in = inevitability.
58
A la Paul Wellstone? Really?
1
Hillary Clinton should not be the Democratic Party's choice. She voted for the criminal invasion of Iraq, has made no proposals to solve the inequality problem, has not advocated single payer medical, and has not advocated ending our military involvement in the middle East and ending the criminal concentration camp that we run in Guantanamo.
Would she be a better choice for president than the likely Republican candidates? Marginally. Hillary Clinton does not want to end low taxes on investment income like capital gains, compared to earned income, which Jefferson, Madison, Franklin and FDRoosevelt all advocated.
Also, Clinton does not advocate taxing inheritance, which the same people all felt was important. It was disappointing to see that Nate Cohn did not comment on this issue, especially since Piketty's best selling book shows that the rich will continue to get richer while the poor (in the words of the old song) get children.
We need someone like Elizabeth Warren. To see what should be done, what the real issues are, go to YouTube and Watch Comedy Party Platform (2 min 9 sec). Then invite me to speak to your group.
Would she be a better choice for president than the likely Republican candidates? Marginally. Hillary Clinton does not want to end low taxes on investment income like capital gains, compared to earned income, which Jefferson, Madison, Franklin and FDRoosevelt all advocated.
Also, Clinton does not advocate taxing inheritance, which the same people all felt was important. It was disappointing to see that Nate Cohn did not comment on this issue, especially since Piketty's best selling book shows that the rich will continue to get richer while the poor (in the words of the old song) get children.
We need someone like Elizabeth Warren. To see what should be done, what the real issues are, go to YouTube and Watch Comedy Party Platform (2 min 9 sec). Then invite me to speak to your group.
43
You can need Senator Warren all you want, but she isn't running. I think she's too smart to let her skeletons out of the closet. Plus, I think Hillary has an "agreement' that Warren will not oppose her, and in return, she will be appointed to a very cushy cabinet job as payment for not lousing up Hill's chances.
6
If Hillary runs as a cautious centrist candidate she will fail to ignite the enthusiasm necessary to beat her Republican challenger. Democrats,especially the young and minorities, will sit out the election if it's a choice between a right wing Republican and a center right Hillary Clinton. To set the country on fire, Hillary needs to run as an enthusiastic and proud progressive Democrat who is willing and able to stand up to that vast right wing conspiracy that is determined to slash the progressive programs that lifted millions into a thriving middle class so that they can cut taxes for their billionaire backers: Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. The Affordable Care Act. Education initiatives, including Head Start, Pell grants for college students, and the GI bill. Hillary is going to have to be a forceful and convincing advocate for programs to rebuild our crumbling infrasture and to develop a 21st C economy that focuses on education, R&D, curbing the influence of Wall St, and big money in elections, and getting Americans back working at jobs that pay a good,solid middle class salary for a hard day's work. Perhaps most importantly Hillary needs to assure the voters that she will not get the country involved in another bankrupting and bloody war of choice in the Mideast. This voter will be eagerly awaiting to see which Hillary will be running in 2016: the Wall St and military industrial lackey or the proud strong progressive candidate.
17
"Wall St and military industrial lackey" about sums it up.
23
Does this mean that Ted Cruz is right and that the Republicans must likewise run a candidate who will fire up the base while not necessarily appealing to the center. If "fire up the base" is the correct strategy for Democrats, it must be for Republicans as well, is that right?
2
I'm going with "Wall St and military industrial lackey."
Her announcement left me very preplexed.
What does her track record really tell us?
In the early 1990s working as a partner to her husband, then POTUS, she rolled out a healthcare plan that neither house of Congress would vote for.
As Secretary of State, she set the "reset" button with Russia, and Russia later invaded Ukraine? She also supported the regime change in Libya, which is today in a state of disarray.
When she left the White House, she took government property, that was later returned.
Recently she admitted that she didn't want to use government Internet servers because it was better to have only one device.
I ask myself what Mrs. Clinton hopes to tell the electorate about her accomplishments.
What does her track record really tell us?
In the early 1990s working as a partner to her husband, then POTUS, she rolled out a healthcare plan that neither house of Congress would vote for.
As Secretary of State, she set the "reset" button with Russia, and Russia later invaded Ukraine? She also supported the regime change in Libya, which is today in a state of disarray.
When she left the White House, she took government property, that was later returned.
Recently she admitted that she didn't want to use government Internet servers because it was better to have only one device.
I ask myself what Mrs. Clinton hopes to tell the electorate about her accomplishments.
41
First of all she is not a Democrat, but a right leaning a Republican beholden to the über wealthy, and forced by gender to be overly hawkish, yielding a pointless waste of trillions of our tax dollars, goodwill, and opportunity cost preventing us from solving the world's problems for another decade.
The correction will come, it's just when and how, the longer we put it off the more severe it will be. See France and Russia, under revolutions, for details.
Secondly the media loves to cover horse races, and ignores the real issues.
The good news is I will pay a lot less attention to the news media for the next twenty months. More time for other things.
The correction will come, it's just when and how, the longer we put it off the more severe it will be. See France and Russia, under revolutions, for details.
Secondly the media loves to cover horse races, and ignores the real issues.
The good news is I will pay a lot less attention to the news media for the next twenty months. More time for other things.
16
Garrett,
Yes,, but isn't it a nice change to see a faintly sane Republican?
-dlj.
You can 'like' Hillary or 'dislike' her, but she has not yet - to my knowledge - advanced any policy that seeks to deprive someone of some benefit. Unlike the GOP hopefuls, she doesn't want to take away a woman's right to decide what happens with her body, she doesn't want to make the US an old white men's club by restricting immigration and encouraging voluntary deportation, she doesn't want to take away whatever healthcare we have, she doesn't want to privatize Social Security, and more. I think she's learned a lot since she was Senator and it's time to recognize that - while she's far from perfect - she's infinitely better than any of the alternatives.
36
She certainly wants to take away the benefit one receives from spending one's own hard-earned money!
She voted for the Iraq invasion, thus depriving untold numbers of their lives.
1
She has dynastic baggage we could all do without...what applies as a criticism to Jeb Bush applies equally to her: that the USA is not ancient Egypt. People don't rule here because their forebears ruled.
6
You do realize that Hillary and Bill are only related by marriage, not blood. She has made a name for herself in her own right and deserves to be considered as a candidate. She can pull her own weight right here in the USA.
1
A poor personal decision on her part. She's a bit frazzled around the edges and has been around the track a few times too often. Mr. Biden, a few years older than Mrs. Clinton, but liked by almost everyone, would have been better.
7
I was sold on Hillary Clinton after the shoe-throwing incident. I thought she handled it extraordinarily well. I watched it on youtube because I wanted to see how she processed her reaction to something that must have been very surprising.
First, she sought a natural reason for the occurrence (she thought it was a bat), then she went right into a series of jokes that were spot on, she revealed a bit of humanity, and drew upon a lifetime of experiences to respond with utter personal strength. She responded the way a good leader should.
First, she sought a natural reason for the occurrence (she thought it was a bat), then she went right into a series of jokes that were spot on, she revealed a bit of humanity, and drew upon a lifetime of experiences to respond with utter personal strength. She responded the way a good leader should.
19
Media organizations will try their hardest to make the 2016 election seem like a nail-biter. It's a simple matter of them acting in their own best interest.
But Hillary Clinton will be the next president, like it or not. As Senator Lindsay Graham said, "We're not generating enough angry white guys." The GOP is a negative and backward-looking party with a shrinking demographic base amidst an improving peacetime economy, and they're up against a famous and shrewd candidate who's as qualified for the Presidency as they come.
But Hillary Clinton will be the next president, like it or not. As Senator Lindsay Graham said, "We're not generating enough angry white guys." The GOP is a negative and backward-looking party with a shrinking demographic base amidst an improving peacetime economy, and they're up against a famous and shrewd candidate who's as qualified for the Presidency as they come.
18
Except that they control both houses of congress and the vast majority of state houses. Seems like they ain't so dead. Don't underestimate them. If they can put a moderate and reasonable candidate forward - read Jeb Bush, then it will be a race. And before everyone here freaks out that Jeb isn't moderate and reasonable - he is just not reasonable to you. To a huge part of America is he absolutely reasonable and moderate.
It seems that the Press decided the day after the Nov. 2014 election that Hillary was the inevitable candidate and has bombarded us for so long with this message that it would be hard for anyone else to overcome that advantage even if Hillary did nothing and they got tons of $$.
Whatever one's opinion of Hillary Clinton, we would all be better served if there were other good candidates.
Whatever one's opinion of Hillary Clinton, we would all be better served if there were other good candidates.
23
How sad. What a shame it will be if the best our "democratic" political process can bring forward as a candidate to lead our country is an old politician with a checkered past, close ties to the corporate-financial elite that essential makes its own laws, and nothing positive to show for all her years in politics.
38
She is the candidate the American people deserve because they made such a mess of Congress by voting for so many clowns. Hillary is one of the few that can survive the loony bin that is the American government.
Hillary Clinton is not inevitable, has never been inevitable, and will not be inevitable until she has won the election and is sworn in. I say that as a supporter. There has never, ever been a woman candidate for president on a major party ticket. For her to get the nomination would be the longest of long shots.
In a country that loves underdogs, she is the most underdog of all. Don't take that away from her.
Also, everyone thinks they know everything there is to know about Hillary, they don't. Now is the time to give her the coverage that an unknown candidate would get. Who is she? What exactly has she done in this long career? Not the spin, the sneer, the rumors, but rather the facts.
I'm ready for us to join that list of progressive countries (like Pakistan) which have had female leaders.
In a country that loves underdogs, she is the most underdog of all. Don't take that away from her.
Also, everyone thinks they know everything there is to know about Hillary, they don't. Now is the time to give her the coverage that an unknown candidate would get. Who is she? What exactly has she done in this long career? Not the spin, the sneer, the rumors, but rather the facts.
I'm ready for us to join that list of progressive countries (like Pakistan) which have had female leaders.
7
Pakistan has real political parties - a lot of them. We have one party - Wall Street and those whom they anoint - and The Hillary Brand® comes as close to being anointed as they come. We have a duopoly, a Janus-like party that memes left or right based upon the circumstance and the audience, but serves the interests of the elite and supra-wealthy whose investment in the status-quo is all that they desire - and they will bless any candidate who promises them that there will be no changes made.
If we had more than the one party system and allowed real alternatives to the phoney DemoRepublicrat non-choice that we are spoonfed, then perhaps a woman might be elected. Elizabeth Warren would have been a good alternative to the Hillary Brand® but she was forced aside to make sure that Clinton got to co-opt her populist message to bamboozle mainstream America.
If we had more than the one party system and allowed real alternatives to the phoney DemoRepublicrat non-choice that we are spoonfed, then perhaps a woman might be elected. Elizabeth Warren would have been a good alternative to the Hillary Brand® but she was forced aside to make sure that Clinton got to co-opt her populist message to bamboozle mainstream America.
1
This election will ultimately be about who can sincerely advocate for the shafted middle class. Period. While that entails addressing a complex array of issues, party loyalty will not necessarily be foremost in many voters priorities.
Case in point: November 2014 when liberal working class voters in MD, sickened of the O'Malley Circus of Hypocracy (I don't even remember the name of his toadie who ran in Nov) in which corporate welfare, embrace of job-stealing illegal immigration, and fracking became his centerpices, said no more. Not that Larry Hogan will do any better. But a statement had to be made: yes, we are Democrats but you do not own us. Earn our vote. I like to think of myself as a Hillary Man; I simply like her grit, her steel & ruthlessness. The vision of the carnage she'll inflcit upon the Republican controlled houses of Congress (in contrast to Obama) would almost be enough to throw my lot in with her. But it's the same deal; earn my vote Hillary.
Case in point: November 2014 when liberal working class voters in MD, sickened of the O'Malley Circus of Hypocracy (I don't even remember the name of his toadie who ran in Nov) in which corporate welfare, embrace of job-stealing illegal immigration, and fracking became his centerpices, said no more. Not that Larry Hogan will do any better. But a statement had to be made: yes, we are Democrats but you do not own us. Earn our vote. I like to think of myself as a Hillary Man; I simply like her grit, her steel & ruthlessness. The vision of the carnage she'll inflcit upon the Republican controlled houses of Congress (in contrast to Obama) would almost be enough to throw my lot in with her. But it's the same deal; earn my vote Hillary.
6
The operating words are "sincerely advocate" - unfortunately any words expressed by the Hillary Brand® in this regard should be taken with many grains of salt, if not rejected outright. She has zero concerns for the shafted middle class. Like Bill, she can talk a good game - but the proof will be once she is (s)elected, she will return to those who paid and paved her way to the White House. And it won't be the shafted middle class.
1
Let's get a core issue on the table upfront and not dance around it. Much of the opposition to Mrs. Clinton will be based upon the fact that she is a woman. Her detractors will include almost all of those with sexist prejudices. Oh, these prejudices will be cleverly cloaked as opposition to her policies, but be prepared for the real war on women. As the Times so aptly pointed out today that opposition to Mr. Obama is often racist based, regardless of how it is expressed, so will opposition to Mrs. Clinton be based upon bigotry.
Let's talk about this now and keep talking about it. Perhaps her critics will be embarrassed into silence.
Let's talk about this now and keep talking about it. Perhaps her critics will be embarrassed into silence.
26
Let's talk about this now, indeed.
Opposition to Obama is "racist" despite the fact that he came to the job completely inexperienced and never grew into it.
Now opposition to Hillary Clinton is "sexist" despite the fact that she comes to the job with terrible baggage and a reputation for dishonesty and evasion.
If Biden runs, will his critics be accused of being ageists?
People categorize critics into these "-ist" categories because they see things through their "identity" filters, and they are programmed to respond with charges of bias. If you don't agree, it must be because of your issue with the "identity".
Opposition to Obama is "racist" despite the fact that he came to the job completely inexperienced and never grew into it.
Now opposition to Hillary Clinton is "sexist" despite the fact that she comes to the job with terrible baggage and a reputation for dishonesty and evasion.
If Biden runs, will his critics be accused of being ageists?
People categorize critics into these "-ist" categories because they see things through their "identity" filters, and they are programmed to respond with charges of bias. If you don't agree, it must be because of your issue with the "identity".
1
No, most of the opposition will come from her support of the invasion and occupation of Iraq without even reading the intelligence. This will make it very hard, still, for many like me to actively support her.
1
Progressives and liberals will vote for her because the Republican alternative is so crazy and pernicious, and the Supreme Court is at stake.
She knows that. So she will undoubtably make campaign promises to pacify them, that she won't keep.
Two things need to happen: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, irrespective of ageism and sexism, needs to step down out of a sense of duty, so that Obama can make an appointment now. And Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders need to step and hold Hillary's feet to the fire.
Otherwise, nothing really changes. Not in a material way.
She knows that. So she will undoubtably make campaign promises to pacify them, that she won't keep.
Two things need to happen: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, irrespective of ageism and sexism, needs to step down out of a sense of duty, so that Obama can make an appointment now. And Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders need to step and hold Hillary's feet to the fire.
Otherwise, nothing really changes. Not in a material way.
24
Well I am a progressive and I am not voting for her. She's a war hawk and bows to Wall Street. She supports out sourcing of jobs.
4
The GOP has a substantial majority in the Senate.
The Senate must confirm Supreme Court nominees.
If Justice Ginsburg retires now what type of nominee would get confirmed by a GOP controlled Senate.
The Senate must confirm Supreme Court nominees.
If Justice Ginsburg retires now what type of nominee would get confirmed by a GOP controlled Senate.
1
Oh, please, only crazy liberals believe all republican candidates are crazy.
1
Inevitable? What a laugh. Every progressive has been standing on a chair, for months, and chanting WARREN. We didn't want Clinton when we voted for Obama. We don't want her now. The world can't wait while we rechew Bill, Hill, emails, dresses like old oatmeal.
20
Understand your frustration. However, Warren has said she is not running.
Ask yourself would you rather see a Republican warmonger as President where social service budgets will get cut, defense budgets will balloon, we will be fighting somewhere new in the world within 6 months and the Supreme Court will shift to the right even further....
Yes we may have to settle but the alternative is too scary to contemplate.
Ask yourself would you rather see a Republican warmonger as President where social service budgets will get cut, defense budgets will balloon, we will be fighting somewhere new in the world within 6 months and the Supreme Court will shift to the right even further....
Yes we may have to settle but the alternative is too scary to contemplate.
12
Let's stop talking wardrobe right now.
4
Clinton is only slightly better than the Republican candidates. She's a war monger and will do what her Wall Street buddies tell her to do.
4
Mrs. Clinton is still running against Barack Obama. His remaining term will reflect upon her, for better or worse. The Republicans have no ideas, no plans, no vision. But none of that will matter, regardless of who they throw out in the general election, if she runs from the president, or if he finishes with deals with Iran and Cuba, and has his ACA validated by the Supreme Court. Whitewater, Benghazi, Monica Lewinsky, her failed health care plan during her husband's first term, and her vote to invade Iraq are chains on the anchor weighing her down. She's not likable and is an oligarch. Her gender may be less of an asset than her handlers think.
9
I think that Elizibeth Warren would make a stronger canidate; she would certainly come with less baggage as well as absent the loose cannon of a husband who is becoming steadily a charmless asset and an anchor to her ankle.
12
Unfortunately with way less money, too. When it comes to elections in this country, money talks, and progressive policies walk, all the way to the back of the bus. It's "make way for oiligarchs."
3
The whole point of the primary system and the elections is to avoid coronations. Any Democrat worthy of the name should consider voting Republican in protest if the Democratic primary is effectively nullified by one overly ambitious and overly connected megalomaniac.
2016 looks to be a potentially horrendous election for this country. If it winds up being Clinton vs Bush then of course a protest vote would be too late, the great experiment which started in 1776 will have ended with a new corrupt aristocracy.
2016 looks to be a potentially horrendous election for this country. If it winds up being Clinton vs Bush then of course a protest vote would be too late, the great experiment which started in 1776 will have ended with a new corrupt aristocracy.
14
HRC announces via a canned TV ad, focus grouped to within an inch of its life, packing as much sincerity as a breakfast cereal commercial. Nothing live, no Q&As from the press. Consistently vague, an insult to the brain. She's showing no more sense now than she & Bill did the last time around, when in a TV ad they played Tony & Carmela Soprano, that fictional pair of sociopath killers & thieves.
22
While Hillary might be the inevitable nominee, she is not the inevitable president. While Hillary might have a lot of appeal with a majority of liberals and many democrats, can she convince enough of the rest of them to vote for her. I'm not so sure. The general electorate (and this is true for republicans as well) is I believe larger than their bases, those being the voters who will vote for them no matter what. For a long time the Clinton name has been a bit checkered and a lot of people find Hillary questionable. The e-mail gate scandal is definitely not a help, not to mention Benghazi and you can be sure her opponents will hound her on that. If she's been planning on running for president, and it generally assumed that she has, then she should have shown better judgement in how she handled herself while Secretary of State. She knows how the Clinton name is perceived, and she should have known that something like this is exactly the kind of thing that can com and haunt you. These things make it too easy to question her credability, and suitability for office and my feeling is many independents will likely vote as moderately republican as possible, as well as dems that are not Hillary fans, or will sit this one out.
Its a shame the democratic party can not offer other high profile options.
Its a shame the democratic party can not offer other high profile options.
8
Ms. Hillary's platform: I am a women. Nothing else. How stupid and sad. America deserves better, or does it? Again, will we be sucked into a fog of activities, rather then accomplishments? Nowhere is trust and honesty on the horizon, so perhaps, America will get what it deserves, that being another dishonesty, untruthful politician. God, we will need to take sixteen months of 'crap' and see about $20 billion spent on nonsense. There must be a better way.
16
Not just "I am a woman." "I am pro-gay and pro-choice." These are the ONLY issues.
Hillary will run and Hillary will win. It's a done deal in my mind. Hopefully she will choose Elizabeth Warren for VP, which will not only be historic, but in them the country has the first politicians in two generations who have the skills to reform and rebuild in the mold of Teddy Roosevelt and the Progressive Era. Very exciting times ahead.
9
Nothing Hillary has ever done equal these purely republican fiascos:
Watergate,
Iran Contra,
The Charge of The Fools Brigade into Iraq,
Torture as USG policy.
Watergate,
Iran Contra,
The Charge of The Fools Brigade into Iraq,
Torture as USG policy.
47
Don't forget the inept response to Hurricane Katrina or the financial meltdown of 2008.
3
Hillary Clinton voted for (and spoke in favor of and continues to refuse to disavow) "The Charge of the Fools Brigade into Iraq", she has favored immunity for the Bush administration, military and CIA in torture cases (thereby setting no clear course against "torture as USG policy"), and her positions on FISA and NSA surveillance would promote "Watergate for EVERYBODY" -- here's hoping a strong progressive shows up and saves us from these blasted corporate candidates. If you're truly against what we did in Iraq and against torture, maybe push for Barbara Lee to run?
One citizen's advice to Hillary Clinton:
Invite Ralph Nader to dinner with Bill and Barack and listen carefully.
Invite Ralph Nader to dinner with Bill and Barack and listen carefully.
9
Hillary Clinton will win, Nate. And Elizabeth Warren is not a strong candidate. Ms. Warren is unelectable as President. Only fantasy-leftists believe otherwise. There are plenty of these people in Hollywood and New York City, too. They are who elected Mayor de Blasio, a lousy politician.
Polls, even ones 2 months before the election, are meaningless. People both change their minds after polls, and also purposely lie to pollsters. Plus, the margin of error in most polls is greater than how much Ms. Clinton will win by. It will be a very close race between she and Jeb Bush. The only person most Republicans want as President less than they want Jeb Bush is Hillary Clinton.
It's Hillary's and the nation's time to elect her. She has the name recognition, the ground swell, and the organization. It won't be a walk in the park, but she will triumph.
9
Bring on the right wing bullies!!
I am no great fan of Sen. Clinton but I shudder to think of how much worse our country could become under any of the Rs ... do we wish for more Scalias, Robertses, Alitos, Thomases, Anthony Kennedys? Thanks but no thanks. We are living with the mess that R Presidents brought us in these men and their warped views that have pretty much put our democracy on sale to the highest bidder ... Citizens United anyone?
I am no great fan of Sen. Clinton but I shudder to think of how much worse our country could become under any of the Rs ... do we wish for more Scalias, Robertses, Alitos, Thomases, Anthony Kennedys? Thanks but no thanks. We are living with the mess that R Presidents brought us in these men and their warped views that have pretty much put our democracy on sale to the highest bidder ... Citizens United anyone?
38
Guaranteeing Ms. Clinton "your vote" without hearing her stance on any of the issues guarantees nothing will change.
Why should Ms. Clinton cater to your issues when you guarantee her your vote? She has bigger fish to worry about--Wall Street & Corporations--rather than the average person.
If only 10% of progressives pledged not to vote for Ms. Clinton unless she agreed to push for a $15 minimum wage, single payer healthcare, debt free higher education, an end to endless war, etc., she would listen. She would have to in order to win.
But sadly, too many will give their votes for nothing in return, except for believing the Republicans will be worse, so why demand anything more.
Why should Ms. Clinton cater to your issues when you guarantee her your vote? She has bigger fish to worry about--Wall Street & Corporations--rather than the average person.
If only 10% of progressives pledged not to vote for Ms. Clinton unless she agreed to push for a $15 minimum wage, single payer healthcare, debt free higher education, an end to endless war, etc., she would listen. She would have to in order to win.
But sadly, too many will give their votes for nothing in return, except for believing the Republicans will be worse, so why demand anything more.
29
okay...assume "10% of progressives pledge not to vote for Ms. Clinton unless she agrees to push for" whatever the progressive agenda is at the time...and further assume that the loss of those votes results in a republican victory. are those oh-so-pure progressives better off for their actions? are the rest of us, who might not be such ideological purists, better off?
She has national recognition, the other suggested candidates do not have that advantage. Biden was undermined by a concerted right wing campaign to make him look ineffective. He is actually one of the best we could have but will not get the nomination.
The anti Clinton movement has already geared up as we can see from the most recent comments. The Wall Street issue is also a red herring. Just because she does not attack Wall Street like Warren does, does not mean she is their lackey. There is noting wrong with Wall Street support, it has its place, we do need financing, just try to buy a new car or a home without it. So be careful what you wish for.
The anti Clinton movement has already geared up as we can see from the most recent comments. The Wall Street issue is also a red herring. Just because she does not attack Wall Street like Warren does, does not mean she is their lackey. There is noting wrong with Wall Street support, it has its place, we do need financing, just try to buy a new car or a home without it. So be careful what you wish for.
14
Biden was not undermined by a "concerted right wing effort" that made him seem ineffective. Rather, he was undermined by his own gaffes and actions, which made him seem like an ineffective dope, and made him look like a genial, liberal verson of GWB.
And what makes Hillary seem like a lackey for Wall St. is not that she (and Shumer) fail to support any effort at regulation. Rather, it is the fact that she, Bill, and the CGI have been suckling at the teat of Wall St. and big banks for years.
But sure, now she's a populist. I know this because her video told me so. Riiiiiiiight......
And what makes Hillary seem like a lackey for Wall St. is not that she (and Shumer) fail to support any effort at regulation. Rather, it is the fact that she, Bill, and the CGI have been suckling at the teat of Wall St. and big banks for years.
But sure, now she's a populist. I know this because her video told me so. Riiiiiiiight......
1
I'm going to miss Joe Biden.
@GMooG
"Rather, it is the fact that she, Bill, and the CGI have been suckling at the teat of Wall St. and big banks for years."
Facts require proof. Where is your proof, not just who said what, but let us see some documentation.
"Rather, it is the fact that she, Bill, and the CGI have been suckling at the teat of Wall St. and big banks for years."
Facts require proof. Where is your proof, not just who said what, but let us see some documentation.
2
Hillary Clinton brings a suitcase full of potential problems to her campaign that range from her name and her husband to her personality to her ‘war fevers,” to her centrist, “business-friendly” views. At the end of the day however, most voters will consider her abilities and experience and think “who else is there to vote for?” The Republican parade of con men, religious fanatics, conservative bully boys, and inexperienced “not ready for prime time challenges” (such as Rand Paul’s inability to deal with questions from the media) demonstrate that irrespective of her “polarizing presence” both the nomination and the presidency are hers to lose.
18
When Hillary ran in 2008 she modeled her campaign on "The West Wing." For 2016, the model is "Game of Thrones."
6
At least it is not House of Cards.
2
There is plenty of time for the Democratic Party to re-discover just how unpopular any consideration of Ms Clinton as a nomination would ultimately be- so she can still "go away" with some of her integrity intact, and not subject us all Again, to her second-by-second orchestration/manipulation of everything she does just to get elected. .
16
Buy off, bully away any serious opposition, et voilà, inevitability. Sad days for US democracy, great days for billionaire owners.
11
I think if she plays up her gender in any way, she is unfit to lead a nation. To be presendential, she needs to rise above easy gender-victim platitudes.
17
You won't have to worry about Hillary playing up her gender. The conservatives of every ilk will use her gender as a negative, i.e. not a woman's place. Yes, there are still many folks who think like that.
1
Speaking to one's gender is in no way victimizing. Oxymoronic men's rights activists will say so, but they are mistaken.
2
Guess what? In many cases being female is an actual advantage. It would be kind of nice a little less testosterone toxicity in politics If men can play up their gender by being aggressive and confrontational, then women can play theirs up for being rational and compassionate.
Or did you think that being a woman is all about being an emotional wreck?
Or did you think that being a woman is all about being an emotional wreck?
2
The electoral map will disproportionately favor a Democratic Candidate, and in this case, no Republican candidate on the map can turn that. Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida--these will be the battle ground states. Scott Walker is probably the only one posing any serious challenge. Americans may love a working man, but they won't vote for a person who dropped out of college to represent their nation.
The media will try to make this into a horse race. It won't be. Any Republican who can survive the primary clown race will be so damaged that they will have no chance. Compared to the candidates this year, Mitt Romney was quite rational, and even he had to pretend to be crazy to win.
The only question in 2016 will be whether Clinton can help the Democrats win back the Senate, and narrow the Republican majority in the House.
The media will try to make this into a horse race. It won't be. Any Republican who can survive the primary clown race will be so damaged that they will have no chance. Compared to the candidates this year, Mitt Romney was quite rational, and even he had to pretend to be crazy to win.
The only question in 2016 will be whether Clinton can help the Democrats win back the Senate, and narrow the Republican majority in the House.
35
Walker will never be President. He's unashamedly mean and nasty (just like Cruz) and Americans won't vote for someone who revels in being mean.
1
" Americans may love a working man, but they won't vote for a person who dropped out of college to represent their nation."
It's not too hard to imagine people voting for someone without a college degree or 2, just not this guy. The more Walker talks, the more folks will notice he's really not presidential material.
It's not too hard to imagine people voting for someone without a college degree or 2, just not this guy. The more Walker talks, the more folks will notice he's really not presidential material.
2
I object to the prejudice inherent in putting Scott Walker down because he "dropped out of college". I or you might disagree with him on policy, but he picked himself up and moved on. Bravo to him for that.
I will vote for Hillary. Not 1 of the GOP candidates or potential candidates appeal to me at all and that includes Jeb.
56
Jeb was for Mike Pence's so-called religious freedom law which protects people's and corporation's right to discriminate against homosexuals, before he was against it.
Jeb personally intervened in stopping the "pulling of the plug" of the brain dead woman Terry Schiavo, and that caused a lot of real suffering for Schiavo's husband.
Jeb is for Florida's Stand Your Ground law, and he stands with those merchants of death, the NRA.
Jeb may look reasonable compared with the likes of Raphael "Ted" Cruz, but he is not.
We don't want Jeb.
Jeb personally intervened in stopping the "pulling of the plug" of the brain dead woman Terry Schiavo, and that caused a lot of real suffering for Schiavo's husband.
Jeb is for Florida's Stand Your Ground law, and he stands with those merchants of death, the NRA.
Jeb may look reasonable compared with the likes of Raphael "Ted" Cruz, but he is not.
We don't want Jeb.
3
Hillary Clinton will win the Presidency if she declines to take the tainted money offered by Wall Street and the 1 percent, and actually promises to deliver health care for all, a $15 minimum wage, real relief from crushing student debt (make it removable through bankruptcy,) strong environmental and consumer legislation, ahuge public works program to restore our crumbling infrastructure (jobs too!) and tax increases on the rich, among other populist programs.
Critics may say the Republicans won't let her do anything, but a President who actually works to solve problems in ways the public can understand. will find 75 per cent of the people behind her (e.g. abandon complex schemes like Obamacare that confuse people and give ammunition to the opposition in favor of single-payer). She needs to be clear and forceful: e.g. "We need to stop the drone program and bring our troops home because both make us more enemies and put us in greater danger."
She's got to be brave and risk a glorious campaign of, by and for the people. Her slogan could be "Let's really take back our country from the oligarchs who've stolen it!"
Of course it would help if newspapers like the New York Times made a moral decision to actually COVER the crucial issues facing our country rather than run articles on the horse race aspect of the campaign. (e,g., how should Hillary position herself vis-a-vis Obama, etc.)
Critics may say the Republicans won't let her do anything, but a President who actually works to solve problems in ways the public can understand. will find 75 per cent of the people behind her (e.g. abandon complex schemes like Obamacare that confuse people and give ammunition to the opposition in favor of single-payer). She needs to be clear and forceful: e.g. "We need to stop the drone program and bring our troops home because both make us more enemies and put us in greater danger."
She's got to be brave and risk a glorious campaign of, by and for the people. Her slogan could be "Let's really take back our country from the oligarchs who've stolen it!"
Of course it would help if newspapers like the New York Times made a moral decision to actually COVER the crucial issues facing our country rather than run articles on the horse race aspect of the campaign. (e,g., how should Hillary position herself vis-a-vis Obama, etc.)
35
The campaign you suggest Samsara would be glorious indeed, but I fear our politics will always be controlled by the Powers that Be.
Bill Clinton, immediately following his election, was invited to stay with Gerald Ford at his Colorado home. The visit, which was supposed to only involve a couple of days extended to six or seven. When he actually became President -- surprise of surprises -- he was no more than a centrist (remember his ridiculous attempt at reforming our medical care system using his wife and Ira Magaziner? They managed to produce an incredibly boring, altogether unreadable document that went nowhere: so much for Bill having promised that we would all have a government-issued plastic card insuring medical care.) Mr. Obama did a better job than Bill. While I agree that we should kick the insurance companies out of medical care, and go to a single-payer system, similar the ones employed by the civilized world, I doubt that issue will be on will be on Hillary Clinton's bucket list. And I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for her to seriously address our crumbling infrastructure, hike the minimum wage to $15. per hour (how's she supposed to pull that one off with a Republican-controlled congress?), relieve student debt or overhaul the tax system that favors the oligarchs.
I will vote for Hillary Clinton, because precluding a run by Elizabeth Warren, the alternatives are truly nauseating. Another Bush? Heaven forfend.
Bill Clinton, immediately following his election, was invited to stay with Gerald Ford at his Colorado home. The visit, which was supposed to only involve a couple of days extended to six or seven. When he actually became President -- surprise of surprises -- he was no more than a centrist (remember his ridiculous attempt at reforming our medical care system using his wife and Ira Magaziner? They managed to produce an incredibly boring, altogether unreadable document that went nowhere: so much for Bill having promised that we would all have a government-issued plastic card insuring medical care.) Mr. Obama did a better job than Bill. While I agree that we should kick the insurance companies out of medical care, and go to a single-payer system, similar the ones employed by the civilized world, I doubt that issue will be on will be on Hillary Clinton's bucket list. And I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for her to seriously address our crumbling infrastructure, hike the minimum wage to $15. per hour (how's she supposed to pull that one off with a Republican-controlled congress?), relieve student debt or overhaul the tax system that favors the oligarchs.
I will vote for Hillary Clinton, because precluding a run by Elizabeth Warren, the alternatives are truly nauseating. Another Bush? Heaven forfend.
2
I think Hillary Clinton has to show much more humility than she has in the past. I think she has to get away from the teleprompter and speak slowly and pause more. I think Hillary should credit sources and thank people who offer her advice, all the time.
I think if she remains humble and keeps laughing at herself, she is a shoe in.
Good luck, Hillary!
I think if she remains humble and keeps laughing at herself, she is a shoe in.
Good luck, Hillary!
9
Hillary proved herself to be inept as Secretary of State. Why would people want to elevate a person who has proven herself to be incompetent? What are her accomplishments other than her mendacious claim to have improved the lives of women around the world?
35
Because anything is better for this country than the Republican agenda?
77
Sadly, "accomplishments" appear to have little bearing on who wins the American presidential election. If Hillary wins, it will be an historic low for this country and raise questions around the world about democratic values and processes, i.e., can an electorate be trusted to identify competent leadership
in a modern capitalist society?
in a modern capitalist society?
13
Actually, she has improved the lot of women in some parts of the world. More than you and I anyway. And while you can fault her for many things, this is not one of them and it is not mendacious at all.
52
How to be even more "Ready for Hillary".
Forego the primaries, save money, hit the trail immediately, and make the following Democratic Party decision:
Either Warren or Sanders will make a very good and decent candidate for Vice-President.
Either one on the stump is formidable.
Bring back the smoke-filled room.
I can live with that because I want a WIN, inasmuch as our life as a viable country and a viable, reliable, and valid society depends on it.
Forego the primaries, save money, hit the trail immediately, and make the following Democratic Party decision:
Either Warren or Sanders will make a very good and decent candidate for Vice-President.
Either one on the stump is formidable.
Bring back the smoke-filled room.
I can live with that because I want a WIN, inasmuch as our life as a viable country and a viable, reliable, and valid society depends on it.
51
Sounds like you would have liked the Kentucky Men's Basketball team declared the champ and called off the tourney. After all, they were by far the best and strongest, right?
3
In addition to the smoke-filled room let's bring back an old fashioned, bare knuckled convention instead of the ghastly scripted nonsense that millions are wasted on now.
2
Warren and Sanders are much more effective where they are rather than as VP.
1
I will vote for Hillary if she's the Democratic nominee, but I think she'll lose to Jeb Bush. Her only chance to win would be against one of the sillier, scarier Republicans---but what if one of them won?
6
"but I think she'll lose to Jeb Bush."
Just what we need, another Clinton v. Bush.
Just what we need, another Clinton v. Bush.
1
In considering 2016, we should ask which states that President Obama won in both 2012 and 2008 will the latest Bush be able to take back? I agree with you, however, that the rest of the potential Republican nominees are even weaker.
3
Jeb is not well liked, not by conservatives and definitely not by liberals. He's bland, wishy washy and has way too many skeletons in his closet.
7
She has my vote if only to keep reactionaries like Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia off the Supreme Court.
149
I sincerely hope she can withstand the attempts at evisceration she is likely to face from the right wing in this country. As imperfect as she is, the thought of more of these men deciding what our country as a whole has the right to do/not do makes me shudder as it should anyone who believes in democracy.
62
Both Justice Scalia and Justice Thomas are orientalist meaning they follow the original intent of the constitution.
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonin_Scalia
Scalia is quoted as saying ""It's what did the words mean to the people who ratified the Bill of Rights or who ratified the Constitution."".
Please explain why you feel they are reactionary?
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonin_Scalia
Scalia is quoted as saying ""It's what did the words mean to the people who ratified the Bill of Rights or who ratified the Constitution."".
Please explain why you feel they are reactionary?
2
Our Constitution is a living constitution that evolves, changes over time, and adapts to new circumstances without being formerly amended. Our nation has changed in territory, population has multiplied several times, technology has changed, international situation has changed, the economy has changed, social mores have changed, words and idioms have changed. It's not realistic to expect the cumbersome amendment process to keep up with the swift changes as time goes by. The Constitution is in the custody of the living.
4
We are 19 months from the election and if hopefully the 19 months are uninteresting times Hillary should be an easy victor.
The GOP is party of pot stirrers reminiscent of MacBeth's three witches stirring up a mess of trouble. I am hopeful that with Obama's steady hand on the rudder we can steer clear of the icebergs. Thirty five years of declining belief in democracy is 35 years too many. Maybe the GOP can again be the party of quiet reflective conservatism and reactionary politics can again belong to the malcontents and social misfits. I am too old for another GOP President committed to interesting times.
The GOP is party of pot stirrers reminiscent of MacBeth's three witches stirring up a mess of trouble. I am hopeful that with Obama's steady hand on the rudder we can steer clear of the icebergs. Thirty five years of declining belief in democracy is 35 years too many. Maybe the GOP can again be the party of quiet reflective conservatism and reactionary politics can again belong to the malcontents and social misfits. I am too old for another GOP President committed to interesting times.
83
I am personally imagining it will be just days before one of them says something incoherently sexist, shoots his own feet off, and still has no clue.