Clinton in 2016

The Silent Majority ^ | 09-11-12 | J.D. Longstreet

[Lexluthor69]

I'm afraid King Henry II's remark concerning Thomas A'Beckett: "Won't somebody rid me of this troublesome priest!?" rang inside my cranium as I watched Bill Clinton address the conclave of Democrats in Charlotte last week. Sorry. I couldn't help myself.

The Clintons are (to conservatives) akin to a repetitive venereal disease on the body politic that just continues to recur. No matter what one tries, it stubbornly returns time after time. It can be beaten back into remission for a while, but soon it will be back wreaking vengeance on its host.

I thought from the very first report that the Obama cabal was making an effort to coax Bill Clinton into appearing at the Democratic Convention that they must have lost their collective minds. Then we learned he had been formally asked to place Obama's name in nomination as the official candidate of the Democratic Party for President of the United States.

My jaw dropped.

We have known for sometime that the Obama campaign was in trouble. More trouble, in fact, than the campaign -- or the mainstream media -- let on. But we had no idea Obama was so unsure of victory that he would call in an old adversary to try to rally the troops, the democratic base, that is, to come to his (Obama's) aid. But that, dear reader, was exactly what happened.

Now, right here, I'd like to make an important observation. The fact that a rogue like Bill Clinton is still held in such high regard by the Democratic Party tells you everything you need to know about that political party.

For the record, Bill Clinton, a Democratic Party President, was only the second President of the United States TO BE IMPEACHED! Got that?

[napscoordinator]

He has a 69 percent approval rating. That is not all from Democrats. I think nastalgia and the second worst President (after Carter) in the history of the United States has something to do with it. He doesn’t deserve it, but he gets a huge amount of credit for the economy in the 90’s because he was the President and they get credit and blame regardless of what is going on. Always has been that way.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Oh for crying out loud.

We haven’t even had 2012 yet.

Get a grip.

[The Sons of Liberty]

It amazes me how an impeached, rapist, liar is worshiped! Of course this is from a party that has forsaken GOD - a bunch of devil worshipers!

[Eric in the Ozarks]

“...repetitive venereal disease...” That about covers it.

[Sivad]

There is nothing I could imagine more pleasing then to have
Bill Clinton write the rulebook for my position....anything goes!
I agree he did a favor for BO to extract support for a 2016
campaign for Hillary but by then I don’t think Hiillary will have
the health or energy to make the run. And I wouldn’t expect a
BO endorsement to be worth 2 dead flies anyway.

[Wallace T.]

Hillary Clinton will run in 2016 irrespective of whether or not Obama is reelected, as long as she is healthy. Unlike Romney or for that matter Bill Clinton, Obama was not looking for a successor when he chose Biden as his running mate. Biden was chosen because he is a white Catholic, a segment of the Democrat electorate that favored Hillary Clinton in 2008. If Romney wins and the economy has a double dip recession in 2013 or 2014, the Democrats will run against Romney as the Herbert Hoover of the 2010s. If Obama wins and the same double dip recession occurs, the Clintons can play the nostalgia card for the 1990s. They are pragmatists to the core, unlike Obama, who has not shaken loose of his academic liberalism. Additionally, the Democrats do not have a strong “bench” of younger politicians who can enter the national stage. Obama and the Clintons have cast too large a shadow on lower level Democrats.

[mountainlion]

Do you suppose that Bill Clinton made a deal to support Obama for a guarantee of Hillary for president in 16?

[TomGuy]

Similar assessments could be made of ‘several’ political families, both parties, who think it is their inherent right to hold power [keep political seats in Congress and/or the White House].

That was one failing of the Founding Fathers in not inserting term limits into The Constitution. They thought men (& women) would be elected, serve a few years, and then return to their homes. The Founders apparently did not realize the seductive nature of political power.

Any politician who has served in Washington 12 years or more has been there too long.

[ScottinVA]

Do you suppose that Bill Clinton made a deal to support Obama for a guarantee of Hillary for president in 16?

Spot on! The Clintons do NOTHING for anyone unless they get something in return. What better "favor" could it be than dumping Biden (for "health reasons," you know) midway through his second term and bringing on Hillary as the VP for a smoother transition as she preps for 2016.

[DefeatCorruption]

Bill needs Obama in the White House for the next four years and here’s why. If Romney is elected and is hugely successful with the economy,foreign policy, jobs, etc., Hillary stands a snowball’s chance in hell to ever get the presidency in 2016. Bill needs obama to continuing destroying our nation so by 2016 Hillary will be the hero to save the nation...Mitt will be over and done so she would face a newbie and win easily. After all obama was a newbie and look what happened. Just my humble opinion.