No, Hillary shouldn't run in 2020. The reasons are simple:

[DetlefK]

1. Trump is basically begging her to run again.

2. She's the boogeyman of the Republicans. Too much baggage, too many conspiracy-theories about her.



If Hillary runs, the Democrats will spend the 2020 campaign refighting 2016 and troubleshooting every single lie that's being told about her, every single accusation, every single conspiracy-theory.

Amid all these neverending corrections, what would the Democrats not have time for? Talking policies and facts.

What's the biggest weakness of the Trump-administration? Talking policies and facts.



If the Democrats run Hillary, the Republicans will turn the election into a vulgar mud-slinging contest.

If the Democrats run somebody else, the Democrats can pin the Republicans down to talk about actual politics.

[Va Lefty]

1. Paraphrasing from another post

If we run anybody over 60 we need to have our heads examined

[Me.]

3. Please Don't Start With The Ageism Again

[Me.]

17. 60 Is Not Old Age

and how old is too old...60/1/2 ....59 3/4. Why don't we just focus on the best and most capable person to do the job. At 35 JFK was considered too young (ageism in reverse). I think we need to stop ruling people out with these huge requisites.

[WhiteTara]

20. Hillary won't be 60, she'll be 73 or 74.

two terms, she' be 82! Yikes I am 70. Please. We need someone closer to the real world than us. We aren't even tech savvy, for heaven sake.

You see how this job ages a real president. Of course she dyes her hair, so that won't change, but it exhausts one, even if they aren't trying and you know she would. Her path lies in a different direction. I'm sure she will find it.

[Me.]

25. I Think Whether Or Not She Runs Is Up To Her

to determine her own future and then we'll let the people decide. But just as an aside there's been a push for Biden recently on this board and a smaller one for BS but nowhere is the 'too old' meme repeated as much as it is for HRC and both of them are older than she.

And the post I originally responded to set 60 as the base line.

[Hortensis]

49. +100. And remember, Hillary was sweeping the election in 2016.

Her coattails were expected to lead to Democratic control of the senate and, once considered totally impossible, even conceivably the house, plus the flip of perhaps hundreds of state offices. Democrats have been mourning what we lost with that stolen election ever since.

Like you, I'm waiting to see who runs. But failing a rival of her quality, I'd love to put her in the White House to fulfill what really is the agenda of the vast majority of both Democrats and Sanders supporters.

Itm, I thank DetlefK and others for putting Hillary forward for discussion. Much more to come. Even if she chooses not to run, her experience and agenda will set a standard those of us who mourn the loss of her residency will of course be looking for another to meet.

[Me.]

52. +1000

[Ken Burch]

89. She has said that she doesn't want to run again.

What concerns a lot of us about having ANYBODY who ran before run again is the belief that, if any former candidate does run again, it freezes us as a party. It means new thinking and open discussion of the future are silenced.

It would leave us saying "we're just gonna do the same exact thing ONE MORE TIME".

I've never seen that as a healthy choice for any party anywhere trying for a comeback.

[mcar]

75. There are many on this board who

support the idea of Sanders or Biden running. They both are older than HRC.

[Ken Burch]

88. Most of those who think HRC shouldn't run think those two shouldn't either.

It's time for the next generation.

[Ken Burch]

86. At 35, JFK probably WAS too young.

He didn't run until he was 42.

[oberliner]

32. Thank you for this comment

The discrimination against older Americans is frustrating.

[Me.]

35. It Is As Much A GOP Meme As Anything

They're going to use up all your money with their demands for SS. No healthcare for you after all those feeble, sickies use it up. Yep, you're going to have to work hard your entire life to support those oldies.

And, just for the record Oprah is 64, which immediately disqualifies her.

[Freddie]

14. Or at least under 70

Historically Dems have won with a young candidate - JFK, PBO, Bill Clinton in 92. PLEASE let's stop recycling the same people and get some fresh faces and ideas.

[sfwriter]

55. Agreed

I’ve come around to this.

[TexasProgresive]

2. It is a sad and true.

The baggage she carries is not her own but that our enemies have piled on her. I have serious doubts that she would been able to get anything through congress if she had won. Once again a sad state of affairs in our nation.

[OnDoutside]

47. It would be the perfect 2 fingers to Republicans, Trump, Russia and Putin, but it's time for a new

generation to step up, and a bonus that there's no clear Dem leader, it reduces the time for the Republican slime machine to get their work done.. I would like her to be offered the Secretary of State again....Putin would shit himself.

[MyOwnPeace]

79. I supported and voted for her...........

but I agree, we need a newbie! Other than the grand theft of her rightful place in the White House, she IS a lightening rod for a large number of voters. Not saying that is right - its just a fact and we'd be foolish to handicap ourselves before the elections begin.
We can't go back and fix the mess that cost her (and us) the Presidency, but we do need to be smart, look at the opposition, and find a way to clearly beat them, no matter who tries to help them, legally or otherwise!

[OnDoutside]

84. Yes, nothing would give us greater pleasure, but this is just too important

to hand a lifeline to the Repugs.

[DURHAM D]

4. There is no chance Hillary will run again.

She has given enough.

Also, what is the point of your OP?

You typed this: "2. She's the boogeyman of the Republicans. Too much baggage, too many conspiracy-theories about her."

All right wing framing.

Do you work on a farm?

[Eliot Rosewater]

26. It is a crazy dilemma, who is the most qualified human being alive

to be prez who has not already been?

Clearly Hillary, by LEAPS and bounds.

But age will be used against her. She doesnt want the headache anyway, we HAD our chance, WE blew it.

[Kentonio]

65. To be fair to the poster

It's not right wing framing to correctly call them conspiracy theories.

[Me.]

5. Odd How Many Threads There Are

telling us why HRC shouldn't run again. Did I miss the announcement?

[Eliot Rosewater]

27. It is an agenda, we know about it.

Some folks are sincere liberals speaking their mind, some are not.

[Me.]

28. Bingo!

[Eliot Rosewater]

29. Hey, truth be told if I could have my pick of anybody, I would pick

hmmm...I was trying to think of a young liberal, and I cant think of a single one with half of Hillary's qualifications.

[RandomAccess]

43. I doubt you'd ever find anyone with her qualifications, but --

we don't elect people based on their qualifications, do we?

[Fullduplexxx]

31. The russians are here too. Not saying this poster is

[Me.]

36. They Don't Care About Age In Russia

Comrade Putin is 65 and they will vote him in, willingly , for the next hundred years.

[Fullduplexxx]

54. Putin will make sure of that

[Ken Burch]

90. It's most likely in response to the large number of threads popping up

insisting that we should nominate her again.

If those threads weren't appearing, threads that rebut the idea wouldn't appear either.

The far better tribute to HRC's qualifications would be to elect someone else president and then have that someone else nominate her to the Supreme Court. She's in excellent health and could easily spend twenty years on SCOTUS.

Plus, on the bench, she wouldn't have to try to squeeze anything through Congress.

[uponit7771]

6. 1. Trump is stupid, 2. George Washington would be boogyman of GOP if he ran as a dem

... not good reasons IMHO.

She doesn't want it would be the number one reason as of now

[MrsCoffee]

7. Here we go again.

If she wants to run she will. If she doesn’t want to, she won’t.

If she does and you don’t want to vote for her in the primaries, fine.

But let’s not start a new round of negative bullshit. I will lose my mind if people just start attacking and making cases against her again.

[kentuck]

8. I suppose if people did not find this an interesting topic...?

Then it would sink and be gone?

[DURHAM D]

15. You failed to consider that we are pissed.

Rightwing drivel does not belong on DU but yet...it has been here for years.

[kentuck]

19. Everybody is pissed.

about something.

[DURHAM D]

21. Seems you don't like the push back on Hillary trashing so

what is your point?

[kentuck]

22. I don't support Hillary trashing...

But I don't think she should run again either. Sometimes it's just a difference of opinion.

[DURHAM D]

23. She is not going to run again but

bring it up on DU is a great opportunity to trash her again, and again, and again. Some really enjoy it. I am sick of it and them.

[kentuck]

24. I understand your position.

Why would anyone think she was going to run again? Has she given any hints that she might??

[demmiblue]

9. It would be an unmitigated disaster.

However, she is not running... I don't know why people are even entertaining the idea.

[Doodley]

10. Trump and the GOP defined who Hillary was to the electorate. She was not able to

stop that, despite having approval numbers in the sixties just a few years before as Secretary of State. She was probably America's most popular politician. They knew she was very popular and the favorite to run in 2016, and so they destroyed her reputation. She was not savvy enough to prevent that. That disqualified her from being given another opportunity.

[Demsrule86]

60. If she chose to run, I would vote for her. Fuck the GOP, and we now know the Russians handed Trump

the election and rendered aid to Sen. Sanders as well.

[bigtree]

11. those aren't 'simple reasons'

...and it's highly debatable whether Democrats should care about either 'reason,' even if you take Hillary out of the equation.

[unblock]

12. If the media comes around to the view that she was cheated out of a victory,

Then she could win in a landslide

[kentuck]

39. That is an interesting point...

...and probably true.

[lunamagica]

69. This is the best post of the day. You hit the nail on the head. It all depends on the media,

and their power to create and destroy

[joshcryer]

16. Only way she could run is if she went full on populist.

She tried to shy away from cameras and questions and the media and it didn't work to her favor.

Even though in the end she was perhaps one of the most honest candidates to run since they've been tracking lies told by politicians.

Even though her grasp of geopolitics and domestic policy is probably the best of anyone who could run.

I don't see her pulling the populist rhetoric though, because that in itself is a lie, we saw it with Obama who didn't even once put on his walking shoes.

Kayne West will probably run in 2020 and be the next President. That's how ridiculous our Presidential podium has become.

[NCTraveler]

18. Preemptive strikes against democrats are dreamy. nt.

[NurseJackie]

34. Whew! So, you're seeing the same thing I'm seeing! Glad it's not "just me" or...

... just my imagination.

[Demsrule86]

58. you have a point...I don't think she want to run anyway. And I do think some who do this want Sen.

Sanders to run. I hope he doesn't...free faces.

[mcar]

77. This!

[Fullduplexxx]

30. Lol thanks for your concern but

"If the Democrats run Hillary, the Republicans will turn the election into a vulgar mud-slinging contest.  "

Lol.... as if they run someone else they wont ?

[Me.]

42. Haven't They Already?

[Fullduplexxx]

53. Yeah that's my point they're already doing it so don't worry about what they say

They all belong to the idiot monkey Brigade they're going to fling their feces no matter who we put up

[democratisphere]

33. ANY Candidate the Dems nominate will be subjected to the vast RW

conspiracy machine and the fox propaganda alternative universe hammering. Wouldn't it be better to have a candidate that has fought it for more than 30 years and still won the popular vote. Paper ballots are a must and I believe HRC can still win. No one on Earth is more qualified than HRC.

[lunamagica]

71. ICAM

[Shemp Howard]

37. If Hillary runs again, she will win.

One of the main reasons Hillary lost in 2016 was simple over-confidence. If she runs in 2020, she will not make that mistake again.

Having said that, I'd rather see someone new in 2020. That also goes for Bernie, whom I supported in the 2016 primaries.

[Turbineguy]

38. Indeed.

Unfortunately, she is extremely qualified and could do a lot of good for the country.

All this while republicans are looking for a cross between Charles Manson and Sarah Palin for their next selection.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

40. + 1 Gazillion!

[LexVegas]

41. Da, Comrade! nt

[left-of-center2012]

44. Time to pass the torch to the new generation

As a young friend told me,
when he voted in 2016,
it was like choosing between grandparents.

[doc03]

45. If Hillary would win and we don't control congress it would be endless

investigations.

[still_one]

46. What a bullshit thread. Hillary has made it very clear she will not run, and frankly I don' t blame

her. After the lies, vulgar slurs, harassment, and outright sexism that has been thrown at her since she introduced a healthcare proposal in the 90's by the media, a good number on the left, the right, and those lemmings who don't have a capacity to think critically about anything.

The country is getting exactly what it asked for.

We will see what happens in 2018, but I am not optimistic at all

[nini]

48. Hillary talked policies and facts last time

AND she did win an election stolen from her.

And since when didn't the repukes turn elections into vulgar mud-slinging contests? That's all they've got since positive policies aren't part of their makeup.

And if for one minute you think any other Dem candidate won't be trashed you haven't been paying attention to history.

[stonecutter357]

50. nice hitjob but it was a fail like the last one .......

[Gothmog]

51. I will support Hillary Clinton if she decides to run again

[CanonRay]

56. She's a crappy campaigner. I love her dearly, but there is is, flame away.

She should have won in 2008 and lost. She should have won by a ton in 2016, and lost. Russian shit not withstanding, she ran a terrible campaign. Too much reliance on paid professional idiots. She had her shot(s), she lost.

[Kentonio]

67. Yup

[nini]

81. She didn't lose 2016.. why can't people just admit that?

The indictments of last week pretty much shoot holes in this tired ass theory that she lost the election.

[CanonRay]

83. OK, It shouldn't have been close enough to steal.

[Demsrule86]

57. I agree ...and don't run Bernie either...neither should run ...new faces needed.

[Ken Burch]

91. New faces.

And a blend of ideas.

[Demsrule86]

94. I honestly think we already have that...we win with a big tent which means the left left has to

tolerate moderates and the centrists have to tolerate socialists. If we want a majority...it has to happen. It is no accident we lost our majority when we stopped having a big tent.

[pandr32]

59. Whoever runs in 2020 will be subject to a "mud-slinging contest"

Look what they did to Al Franken. We are in uncharted territory now. Nothing is normal anymore and the lies and smears no longer need to have any basis in reality whatsoever. Repubs are only limited to their and Putin's imaginations.

At least we know their arsenal against HC. Not only that but in spite of having every kitchen sink thrown at her, it is becoming more apparent that she actually won. She should be in the White House now with all her detailed plans. She is the most prepared and intelligent candidate we have by miles.

[MineralMan]

61. 2018! 2018! 2018!

Let's focus, please. Once we deal with that, we can start looking at 2020.

If we don't focus on that, it all may make very little difference. Really.

[kurtcagle]

70. Agreed

This is part of it. We have three years until 2020. One issue is setting priorities. I personally would prefer that we take Congress in 2018 even if means losing the White House in 2020. It was the obsession with putting Hillary Clinton into the White House in the first place that resulted in 2016.

[MineralMan]

72. Thanks!

[CrawlingChaos]

62. Shocks me that the idea even gets floated... by anyone

Hillary running again is obviously the worst idea in the history of bad ideas.

Of course Trump wants her to run again!

[Demsrule86]

63. I would argue the same is true for Sen. Sanders .

[CrawlingChaos]

85. And I would disagree

[Demsrule86]

95. His age is against him, his wife is in legal jeopardy, he did not release his taxes, there is no

doubt that some blame him for 16 (not saying it is true) and he has supported anti-choice candidates since 16. Please notice I did not mention Mueller's indictment because I do not believe Sen. Sanders colluded with the Russians period end of story. The GOP and their Russian buddies will have a field day if Sen. Sanders is the Democratic nominee. Although, they will go after any Democrat

My final reason or not wanting him to run is that Sen. Sanders is not a Democrat. He agreed in 16 to remain a Democrat but did not do so. He had every right to do this. But I want a Democratic nominee. Don't misunderstand, I would vote for him if he won the nomination in a general...but not in a primary. Also, It is time for a new generation to step forward and take the reins.

I hope Sen. Sanders does not run. I truly think he will not win and we don't need division. It is so important we win in 20. He is a great Senator. His legacy will be found in the House and Senate: not in the White House.

[CrawlingChaos]

98. Your post only underscores how clean he is

After Bernie's long distinguished political career, that sad handful of manufactured non-issues is the best you can come up with to smear him. That's it! And that is remarkable.

He's incredibly popular. He would unify voters like we've never seen before.

[kurtcagle]

64. Yes, aging is a factor

I voted, proudly, for HRC. I thought she was uniquely qualified. However, I had reservations about her age in 2016 and I would have real reservations about her age in 2020. I had the same reservations about ALL of the candidates, to be honest.

This from someone who is in his late 50s, and is in tech, where late 50s is considered Methuselah territory.

Age brings with it medical complications. You don't think as quickly, your sight and hearing diminish. You take longer to recover from injuries, even from injuries due to exercise to keep you fit. Blood pressure is often a problem, cancer risks go up considerably after 70. These aren't that obvious at 71, but by 75 or 76 stress takes its toll, and there is no job more stressful than POTUS.

I would be far happier to see Hillary Clinton in the role of elder stateswoman. Someone whose endorsement opens up the pathways for younger people like Kamala Harris. I could also see her on the Supreme Court, which I don't see Obama on, largely due to the precedent that a previous president has never been appointed to the SC. She'd make a damn good judge, and it would be nearly as much of a black eye to her enemies as being POTUS.

Another point. The presidency is THE popularity contest, more than any other elected official. Hillary Clinton ran a good campaign, but not a great one, and she gave her opponents far too much ammunition (Deplorables? Ouch).

Also, Bill Clinton has become a liability, now more than ever. Even though I am quite sure that they have come to term with that period in their lives, Hillary Clinton's credibility in the #meToo era will now be questioned wrt Bill. If she were to run again, maybe it's time to question whether she needs to divorce her husband (the Tarmac incident did not help the campaign at all).

So, yes, I voted for Clinton, I would vote for her again, but I think that ship has sailed.

[phleshdef]

66. 3. She is done with that shit

[GoCubsGo]

68. Here's the biggest reason: SHE SAID SHE ISN'T RUNNING.

Or, do you think she's lying?

Trashing this thread after I post this...


SMGDH.

[Blue_true]

73. I really love Hillary, but I agree with you 100%, she had her chance.

I also feel that if Biden or Bernie run, they should make an ironclad promise to serve only one term if they win.

As far as Trump versus Hillary. Trump had the advantage of being unknown politically, while Hillary had to fight the baggage of 30 plus years of lies being told about her and what she stood for. In 2020, Trump will have baggage, which may include a charge of treason hanging over his head. Republican candidates underperforming in strong republican districts indicate that even a lot of republicans are having serious doubts about Trump and the Republican Party, it would be wise for us to harness that doubt instead of nominating Hillary and give those people a reason to go back into a safe republican shell when they vote. While I think Hillary would beat Trump in 2020 because of some of the reasons given above, I also think we have many potential nominees that will beat him, I think we should give one of them a chance.

[coeur_de_lion]

74. I love her but

I agree. Too polarizing. Never thought she should run but she's an excellent politician and should have a place in our government where she can put her talents to good use.

Plus, I just flat worry about her, I think the Republican mud slinging is so vicious it affects her health.

[mcar]

76. You actually believe this?

If the Democrats run somebody else, the Democrats can pin the Republicans down to talk about actual politics.

[delisen]

78. More advice to Dems to keep running scared? Person up!

I am so tired of Dems running scared.

When our candidate are unfairly attacked fight for them instead of rolling over !

Cowardice doesn't build democracy. Stop letting vicious mad -dog Republicans decide our candidates for us!

No Democratic candidate is going to not be attacked.

We are in a war-need to fight and get the message out.

If the general is under propaganda attack by the opposing army, do the troops ask the general to quit because the attacks are going to hurt morale?

[redstatebluegirl]

80. I love Hillary, to the moon and back.

With that said, we need new blood. She is so easy for the Republicans to target, so is Bernie. New blood people or we are toast.

[jmowreader]

82. The Republicans are going to sling mud regardless

With this in mind, we need a candidate who will attack Trump with his or her all. Our candidate’s logo needs to be a jail door key...the one that will be used to lock Trump’s entire administration away for life.

Eric Schneiderman has a proven track record of convicting Trump. He’s young. He looks good. He is very smart. And Trump fucking hates him with every fiber of his being. I think it’s worth a shot.

[Ken Burch]

93. That is a truly interesting idea.

And his presence in the race would probably provoke Trump into saying something OVERTLY anti-Semitic, which might be the one thing that could break voters in the less-virulent wing of the GOP into breaking with him...of not to vote for us, at least to split the right-wing vote by supporting Kasich as an independent.

[TreeStarsForever]

87. But everything is already baked in with Hillary.

Who knows what they will come up with against Sanders or someone else.

[Lil Missy]

92. She's not running.

[Cha]

96. This is all MOOT.. Hilary has already

said she NOT running.

[renate]

97. I would love to see her as SoS again

I can't imagine anybody more qualified, even if she hadn't done it (so capably) already.

But not so much as a presidential nominee. I think it's time for someone newer and with less of a complicated history with a third of the population.

I don't know who that president would actually be, though. Details, details....