Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
37 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Will Hillary Clinton be the next President of the United States? (Original Post) Gravitycollapse Apr 2013 OP
Yes! shenmue Apr 2013 #1
me 2 MFM008 Apr 2013 #31
No. Please no more Clintons or Bushes doc03 Apr 2013 #2
More importantly... silverweb Apr 2013 #3
An interesting question. The Republicans keep fucking up so badly. Gravitycollapse Apr 2013 #7
That is my hope. silverweb Apr 2013 #23
Maybe Kenny913 Apr 2013 #4
If she runs, yes. Lil Missy Apr 2013 #5
No Jamastiene Apr 2013 #6
Maybe. But, I certainly hope not. Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2013 #8
I'd like to see that glass ceiling busted madokie Apr 2013 #9
I'd like to see the glass ceiling busted too. Gravitycollapse Apr 2013 #11
very true. Whisp Apr 2013 #19
Warren 2016 cbrer Apr 2013 #10
I'd support her. But that feels like a truly uphill battle. Gravitycollapse Apr 2013 #14
No. Blue_In_AK Apr 2013 #12
According to one poster here she already is. hobbit709 Apr 2013 #13
No doubt she will be the Democratic candidate should she decide to run. Cleita Apr 2013 #15
Both parties are capitalist. And both parties have very similar foreign policies. davidn3600 Apr 2013 #28
Not with my vote Xithras Apr 2013 #16
I'm with you RedstDem Apr 2013 #21
Not with my vote either. She was way too comfortable with American interventionism as SoS. byeya Apr 2013 #35
No. Whisp Apr 2013 #17
Warren for President 2016. nt NYC_SKP Apr 2013 #18
looks like yes but hopefully no RedstDem Apr 2013 #20
No Bryn Apr 2013 #22
Still to early to tell. Lady Freedom Returns Apr 2013 #24
It was a good idea 5 yrs. ago loyalsister Apr 2013 #25
Yes. It takes a Clinton to defeat Jeb Bush. graham4anything Apr 2013 #26
that remains to be seen Spider Jerusalem Apr 2013 #27
I hope so NotThisTime Apr 2013 #29
Forget politics - statistics make it obvious that the answer is "probably not". Donald Ian Rankin Apr 2013 #30
I don't know. RudynJack Apr 2013 #32
NO! madrchsod Apr 2013 #33
Answer hazy, ask again later (nt) muriel_volestrangler Apr 2013 #34
I REALLY hope not. BlueStater Apr 2013 #36
Probably. JaneyVee Apr 2013 #37

silverweb

(16,402 posts)
3. More importantly...
Fri Apr 12, 2013, 07:25 PM
Apr 2013

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]Will we win a full Democratic majority in 2014?

I really don't care about 2016 just yet.

Gravitycollapse

(8,155 posts)
7. An interesting question. The Republicans keep fucking up so badly.
Fri Apr 12, 2013, 07:28 PM
Apr 2013

And they are looking more and more like a circus freakshow. I think their power is waning and hopefully by 2014, they will become irrelevant to the point where they can no longer maintain control of the House.

Kenny913

(4 posts)
4. Maybe
Fri Apr 12, 2013, 07:27 PM
Apr 2013

If the Republicans can't get it together and the Democrats can't nominate someone better, I could see Clinton at least running in the race.

Jamastiene

(38,187 posts)
6. No
Fri Apr 12, 2013, 07:27 PM
Apr 2013

She has said repeatedly that she will not run again for president. She won't be the next POTUS if she doesn't run. It is truly as simple as that.

Gravitycollapse

(8,155 posts)
11. I'd like to see the glass ceiling busted too.
Fri Apr 12, 2013, 07:33 PM
Apr 2013

I wonder though whether or not Clinton is the right candidate to support for the progressive cause.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
15. No doubt she will be the Democratic candidate should she decide to run.
Fri Apr 12, 2013, 07:34 PM
Apr 2013

No I don't think she will be President. With the powerful Democrats tacking to the right these past eight years, they blew it. We will have another Republican asshole in the White House because historically, when a Democrat runs as a Republican everyone will vote for the real Republican. It looks like our party doesn't learn from its mistakes. The only reason Obama got elected was because he appeared to be what he turned out not to be and the country was so fed up with Bush/Cheney that they would have voted for anyone that wasn't a Republican.

Now after eight years of a new Republican President, again everyone will vote for another DINO because they will be so fed up with this new President and the wars in Iran and Korea. Of course, I won't be around. I will have died a ditch like the feral cats because chained CPI would have rendered me homeless and unable to get the care I would need as an octogenarian.

 

davidn3600

(6,342 posts)
28. Both parties are capitalist. And both parties have very similar foreign policies.
Sat Apr 13, 2013, 05:23 AM
Apr 2013

You wont see much change in those issues no matter who is elected.

Social issues are really the only major difference between the parties.

Xithras

(16,191 posts)
16. Not with my vote
Fri Apr 12, 2013, 07:39 PM
Apr 2013

Spent too many years protesting against her husbands anti-union trade policies, and protesting against her own bloodthirsty pro-war positions, to ever vote for her. I won't vote Rethug, but it wouldn't be the first time I've left part of a ballot blank. I tend to choose "none of the above" over "lesser of two evils" 9 times out of 10.

My hope is that she won't even run. If she does, I'll pour everything I have into the progressive candidate running against her. If she wins the nom, I'll shut up about it to avoid breaking DU rules, but won't support her in the polling booth. That would be a betrayal of many of my core beliefs.

 

Whisp

(24,096 posts)
17. No.
Fri Apr 12, 2013, 07:40 PM
Apr 2013

She is just having her surrogates make it sound likely. But it's all for attention to her new book and their sales, and her speaking fees. She doesn't care that her fans are being used for this. This is how the Clinton's roll.

No. And Thank Gawds For That.

Lady Freedom Returns

(14,120 posts)
24. Still to early to tell.
Sat Apr 13, 2013, 12:21 AM
Apr 2013

The top runners have yet to really take form. Their is just to much speculation on who is and who is not running.

loyalsister

(13,390 posts)
25. It was a good idea 5 yrs. ago
Sat Apr 13, 2013, 03:06 AM
Apr 2013

She would have made a good president if she had won.

But, she will be 69 in 2016. I know some consider it ageist, but it is an undeniable fact that humans lose physical agility and mental acuity with age. Obviously, the presidency is a very demanding job. I think it's not very compatible with the natural winding down that accelerates with age. From a practical perspective, I hope she doesn't run. She has done a lot for us, I say she deserves some down time.

 

graham4anything

(11,464 posts)
26. Yes. It takes a Clinton to defeat Jeb Bush.
Sat Apr 13, 2013, 05:02 AM
Apr 2013

The Democratic party will never again make the mistake they made in
1968 1980 1984 1988 2000 2004
and the five greatest most popular Democratic politicians and players of the game will be standing together every step of the way

Because to get the agenda that Barack Obama has laid forth to move even more forward for all times sake, it takes keeping the Presidency in the hands of the Democratic party

And 2013-2023 is the decade of the women and no one else in the history of the United States is more qualified to lead to become the new Golda or the new Indira.

Imagine if only it was Eleanor instead of Harry, how great the US would have been possibly never having the originator of Reagan/Thatcher ever ascend to power, that being Ike.

Had Eleanor Roosevelt had 10 years as President (the end of FDR, then her own two terms) we never would have begun Vietnam like Ike did (and I don't like Ike) and never would the worldwide Ronald Reaganconjob have begun at all.

To advance all the social issues that give people actual freedom in the United States,
Hillary Rodman Clinton is needed.

Remember something, those that say things about dynasties what dynasty?
Are those people saying a spouse should not be able to be their own person?
How sexist that would be, akin to what has happened to women historically in the past,
and that is in 2013 so disrespectful and so 1950s thinking.

Not to mention, if one were using that archaic coded language just in general, we would then be going back to the actual words Thomas Jefferson said, whcih the tea party believes in-
all MEN are created equal.
Thomas Jefferson did NOT say all people are created equal.
With every fiber of his body, he made sure to create a separate America for himself and those like him.
He went out of his way to EXCLUDE all women, and all minorities and anyone not like him, and remember Thomas Jefferson owned slaves.

And some people want to exclude spouses from running for President??????????? WTF?????

also, those that say no to dynasties- well, if that were the case, we never would have
been able to have President JFK or people run for president like Bobby, like Teddy, like Al Gore like Jerry Brown like FDR(his family already had a president OMG).
Imagine how less the world would be if Jerry Brown had been told he could not enter politics because his father already was in it.

Imagine if that were the case.

Say yes to INDIVIDUALS being allowed to run for President AND WINNING.

How demeaning for people to imply Hillary would be a puppet of Bill.
I think we all know, Hillary is Hillary.
When I say I want Hillary, I am not saying I want Bill. I want Hillary.

Hey, I voted for Jerry Brown and Jesse Jackson in 1992 in the primary.
It's a shame that they didn't win, because some in backwards America felt Jesse Jackson shouldn't be allowed because of the color of his skin to be President or VP.(I voted for Jesse two time earlier and he should have been on the ticket both of those times too)
And I voted proudly for Bill Clinton in November in 1992 and was damn happy he won.
because I wanted him to win. Did anyone here want George Herbert Walker Bush41 to win?

Hillary has done something almost no one thought possible after 2008.
I wanted and worked very hard in 2008 for Barack Obama, and actually, I wanted and entertained thoughts of how great it would be to elect Barack Obama back in 2004.
Long before the convention of 2004. I first heard of Barack Obama in 2003.

Barack Obama had the wisdom of Lincoln and foresight of Lincoln, to see that his agenda is going to take longer than 8 years. And he against logic, asked Hillary to join his team and she accepted, and she EARNED my vote 100 times over.
If I had a company and was hiring, I would look for 3 things.
One, the resume.
Hillary has the single best resume of any person to run for President since LBJ.
Two, her vision.
Damn right it takes a village. President Obama has said things like that himself.
Three, her ability to win.

Hillary is a winner. She would have devasted McCain/Palin in 2008 had she been nominated.
She will run the same race Barack Obama ran in 2008 and win the same way.
Only this time there will be almost no challenge and from day one she should focus on Nov. 2016 and focus on her vision of continuing what President Obama started, and focus on reminding people what would happen if Jeb Bush (who is going to be her opponent in Nov. 2016)brought his family back.

And the five most popular democratic people working hand in hand
President Obama-Michelle Obama-Hillary Clinton- Bill Clinton-Joe Biden

and come the evening of the convention when Hillary is announced as the first female on a major ticket to lead a ticket, you can bet that Kirsten GIllibrand and Elizabeth Warren and Chelsea Clinton and Janet Napolitano and Kathleen Sebelius, Janet Reno,Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Deval Patrick, Corey Booker, The Castro Brothers, Jerry Brown, Dick Gephardt, Tom Daschle, Jimmy Carter, Caroline Kennedy & John Schlossberg, Sahsa and Malia Obama, etc.will all be standing next to them on stage. Also standing next to them, if you look real close will be
FDR & Eleanor Roosevelt, JFK, RFK, Dr. Martin Luther King, Lyndon & Lady Bird Johnson, Paul(Senator) Simon, and Abraham Lincoln.

And come Nov. 2016- Hillary will be President Hillary Rodham Clinton 45, and receive well over 450 electoral votes including Texas, Kentucky, Arkansas, Georgia, South Carolina and some other states plus all the blue states of 2008 and 2012.

President Hillary Clinton to continue the agenda of President Obama in his two terms, then to nominate and put on the US Supreme Court Barack Obama, who will then reside whilst his dream is fully coming to fruition, because it takes more than 8 years for goals to be reached and forever in stone done...it takes decades.


 

Spider Jerusalem

(21,786 posts)
27. that remains to be seen
Sat Apr 13, 2013, 05:14 AM
Apr 2013

she'll be 68 (which is old for a first term President); she is still a very divisive figure who is not overwhelmingly liked within her own party; a lot of Democratic primary voters, just like 2008, would very likely not thrilled with the idea of the nomination process as the coronation of a predetermined candidate. If she runs, she'll probably win the nomination, but it'll be a fight.

Donald Ian Rankin

(13,598 posts)
30. Forget politics - statistics make it obvious that the answer is "probably not".
Sat Apr 13, 2013, 05:24 AM
Apr 2013

There are a great many people who could be the next president.

Hillary is probably more likely than any of the other candidates.

But there are so many possible candidates that the odds on any one of them are far, far less than 50%.

Four years before an election without an incumbent, the answer to "will X win it" is *always* "probably not".
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Will Hillary Clinton be t...