Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hillary Clinton to run for US president's office in 2016?
Times of India ^ | 10.17.10 | Press Trust of India

Posted on 10/17/2010 5:39:06 PM PDT by libh8er

LONDON: Speculation is rife that Hillary Clinton may run for the US president's office in 2016, as her husband Bill is back on the campaign trail -- offering thanks to those who backed her in 2008 against Barack Obama, a media report said.

According to Britain's 'The Daily Telegraph', former President Bill Clinton has been laying the foundations for the Secretary of State's another try in 2016, by campaigning for Democratic politicians who helped his wife Hillary run for the president's office against President Obama two years back.

In fact, Bill, now a globe-trotting philanthropist, went to Española, New Mexico, the site of the first European colony in America, last week to campaign for Diane Denish, the Democratic candidate for the governor.

Denish had supported Hillary against Obama in 2008 and Bill was back to repay the debt; he made crystal clear who he was representing on the campaign trail -- and it wasn't Obama, the report said.

"I planned to do about one stop for everybody that helped Hillary run for president because she's one of only two members of the president's cabinet who cannot participate in politics," he told a gathering of 4,000 people.

As Secretary of State, he reminded people, is not permitted to campaign. "Then I got out here and started stirring around and realised that a lot of people were mad and even more confused and I didn't want it on my conscience so I just loaded up and started strolling around," Bill said.

Bill's energetic reappearance on the campaign trail comes just as rumours, some of them eagerly fuelled by the Clinton camp, swirl that Hillary might replace the hapless Joe Biden as Obama's vice-presidential running mate in 2012 or even challenge the President for the Democratic nomination if his popularity continues to slide.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2016; clinton; hillary
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-106 next last
To: libh8er

Sheesh! I hope not. I want her and that deviant pervert of a husband to ride off into the sunset.....and ride, and ride and ride.


51 posted on 10/17/2010 6:40:10 PM PDT by Dawgreg (Happiness is not having what you want, but wanting what you have.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libh8er
2008 was HRC's best opportunity and she came perilously close. As much as a disaster as BO has been, it would have been even worse with HRC as she and her minions would have been much more ruthless in ramming a socialist/marxist agenda down our throats. Bodies of enemies would be piling up like Germany in the early 1930s and no, I'm not kidding.

Believe me, we are much better off with this incompetent moron that is Obama. Let's put it this way, Hillary would not be wasting her time playing golf and licking ice cream cones.

I believe 2016 is out of the question for HRC for the reasons described above. However, consider this scenario for 2012 which I believe is very feasible:

The GOP takes control of Congress next month and Obama continues to slide out of favor with the Democratic powers-that-be. Sarah Palin announces her candidacy in the spring and opens up a double-digit lead on Obama. Sometime next summer, Obama is told by his handlers that his re-election chances are virtually nil.

Behind the scenes, a face-saving reason for Obama deciding not to run for re-election is invented (i.e. health problems) and he is out of the race. Enter HRC and Obama throws his enthusiastic support to her, nullifying the potential "angry black vote" that would otherwise come out against her. With two women in the 2012 race (HRC and Palin), the women vote is split along ideological lines and at least 2/3 of the women's vote goes to HRC by default because, let's face it, most women are in favor of big government and socialism. It will be up to the men to tilt the balance to Sarah Palin and it will be very close...

52 posted on 10/17/2010 6:43:08 PM PDT by SamAdams76 (I am 44 days away from outliving Curly Howard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: null and void
...odds are good she’ll run as an incumbent in 2012.

The Dems won't do that, because they know that blacks will (rightfully) believe that the party power brokers have forced Obama out, so that they can run Hillary instead.

If the Dems were to pull something like this, black voters would boycott the 2012 election in protest, which of course, would lose them the election. It would also spell the end of the Democrat lock on that demographic.

Let's hope they're dumb enough to try it!

53 posted on 10/17/2010 6:47:19 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: libh8er
My feeling is Hussein will cite family reasons among others if any, for stepping down.

He can do that, but black voters are going to believe that he's being forced to say that, and that he's really being taken out by the Clintons.

It'll rip the Democrat party to shreds.

54 posted on 10/17/2010 6:50:48 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: libh8er

Hill will run in ‘12, perhaps because she can get the nomination, or maybe she can get 0 to step aside with some dirt she has on him.

In 2016, Bill will be on a coin or stamp (if you get my drift, health-wise) and Hill with be an unelectable prune (not only will people not want to hear her voice, they won’t want to look at her face).


55 posted on 10/17/2010 6:51:40 PM PDT by Atlas Sneezed (Congressmen should serve two terms: One in Congress and one in prison.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libh8er

With the MSM firmly behind him, the Stupids scared to name names, and the populace still in the throes of racism guilt, Osambo will sail to re-erection, just watch it!


56 posted on 10/17/2010 6:53:34 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Let us prey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

No bet. Hillary won’t run if Sarah’s in it. She knows down to her bones that Sarah has her beat in every single department, and will crush her like a bug.


I think Hill is Palin’s toughest opponent. It denies Palin the “historic” angle.


57 posted on 10/17/2010 6:55:13 PM PDT by Atlas Sneezed (Congressmen should serve two terms: One in Congress and one in prison.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: libh8er
Enough of them might, if Hussein steps aside and strongly endorses Hillary.

I come from a large family of black Democrats. Trust me. They won't believe a word of it, and will boycott the election. It'll create a war within the party like nothing you've ever seen.

There's only one scenario under which blacks would overwhelmingly give Hillary their support in 2012, but I'll leave it to you to fill in the blanks.

58 posted on 10/17/2010 6:56:37 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

“I come from a large family of black Democrats. Trust me. They won’t believe a word of it, and will boycott the election. It’ll create a war within the party like nothing you’ve ever seen.

There’s only one scenario under which blacks would overwhelmingly give Hillary their support in 2012, but I’ll leave it to you to fill in the blanks.”

Absolutely correct.


59 posted on 10/17/2010 7:00:02 PM PDT by Luke21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: libh8er

No thanks. Don’t want a liar, crook, thief of rapist back in the WH.


60 posted on 10/17/2010 7:03:02 PM PDT by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libh8er

Well in this case please let us all die on Dec 21,2012! No more Clintons!!!!!


61 posted on 10/17/2010 7:11:37 PM PDT by crazydad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: luv2ski
Wow! I sure hope you’re right!

Well, it doesn't take a genius to read this ball game, but I appreciate the props.

I should re-state one thing, though, and that is, if Hillary were to challenge Obama in the primary, and won, she'd still face daunting odds against the Republican challenger.

She can't beat The One in the primary unless he and his agenda have been thoroughly rejected and disowned by the Democrat base. If that's the case, then the majority of the country will not give the White House back to the Democrats under (almost) any circumstances.

The way I see it, the Obama agenda has no chance of maintaining any credibility until 2012. In fact, it's already dead, as proven by the coming Democrat defeat in November.

Some questions: Will the Democrat base actually reject and disown the Obama agenda in great enough numbers to hand the nomination to Hillary in 2012? Can she successfully position herself far enough to the right to be believable?

That remains to be seen.

As I said, the Dems have a very tough road ahead, no matter how you look at it. I really wouldn't want to be one of their chief strategists at the moment. I'd probably become an alcoholic .. LOL

62 posted on 10/17/2010 7:14:46 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 144

While Hillary remains popular, and has ambitions, will it really happen? There was no enthusiasm for a defeated Al Gore or a defeated John Kerry to ever run for president again. People are always looking for new faces, in both major parties. Would Hillary really have a good chance, especially if some unknown charismatic Democrat, not unlike Obama in ‘08, captures the imagination of the Democrat voters and caucus goers and minorities and young people???? Just asking the question. Hillary could well be perceived as yesterday’s news if she ran again.


63 posted on 10/17/2010 7:16:18 PM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: libh8er

The only contest Hillary will be running for in 2016 is the Madeline Albright look alike contest. This filly has the inside track.


64 posted on 10/17/2010 7:21:44 PM PDT by DaxtonBrown (HARRY: Money Mob & Influence (See my Expose on Reid on amazon.com written by me!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Luke21
Hillary's shot was last time. She is old news, not a rising star.

Totally agreed. I've been saying that since Obama ripped the nomination away from her. Not only is she "old news", she's old. We've never had a woman president before, and I don't think America is going to elect some puffed up old biddy who's already passed her freshness date on the national stage.

Hillary would get her clocked cleaned by Sarah, if it came to a head to head match-up. Sarah represents a new and exciting future of great promise, while Hillary represents more of the grinding misery of progressive government we're already suffering under. That is already being strongly refudiated by the people, and Hillary cannot disown those politics, no matter how hard she tries.

We thought Clinton was dead meat after 1994. He beat the snot out of us the next two elections. Each electoral cycle is different.

Yes, each electoral cycle is different. This one will be one for the history books. Obama has made such a shambles of everything he's touched, that there's no way he can be re-elected. He's Jimmy Carter revisited, on steroids.

Make no mistake about it. The coming Democrat wipe out in November is a referendum on Obama and his agenda. Because of him (and Pelosi+Reid), the Dems will limp through the next two years and thank their lucky stars that they even survived to tell the tale. I think they'll be happy to get yoke of the presidency off their neck in 2012.

65 posted on 10/17/2010 7:30:52 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: libh8er

How will Hillary whine “They’re picking on the Girl”... When she’s running against Palin and her successfull 1st term in 2016....


66 posted on 10/17/2010 7:31:40 PM PDT by jakerobins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76
Sometime next summer, Obama is told by his handlers that his re-election chances are virtually nil.

Behind the scenes, a face-saving reason for Obama deciding not to run for re-election is invented (i.e. health problems) and he is out of the race. Enter HRC and Obama throws his enthusiastic support to her, nullifying the potential "angry black vote" that would otherwise come out against her.

I'm sorry. I was born and raised in that community, and I can tell you that they will not buy this lie. They are going to deduce that Obama has been thrown under the bus by the Clintons, and they will boycott the elections in droves. That, of course, will guarantee a Republican win.

If the Democrats have any last vestige of fight (or sense) left in them by 2012, they won't try this. On the other hand, if the real movers and shakers conclude that they're out in 2012 anyway, they just may support this to get rid of Obama and the Clintons in one fell swoop.

Of course, they'd have to convince black voters that it was all a plot by the Clintons, in order to keep them on the plantation.

67 posted on 10/17/2010 7:42:03 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

“What they’re really going to need is a conservative, who’s willing to roll back the worst of that party’s abuses. I don’t see any such animal in their party, and I highly doubt that one even exists.”

Could they bring Lieberman back in from the cold, and fake it with him? Or is he too old?


68 posted on 10/17/2010 7:51:14 PM PDT by Psalm 144
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba
I think Hill is Palin’s toughest opponent. It denies Palin the “historic” angle.

You think so? Alright. Here's your assignment.

Come up with a campaign statement that creates the impression in voters' minds that Hillary Clinton is "historic", and not just "history".

Further, convince voters that Palin is not, and cannot be that "historic" individual.

I'm afraid that the "historic" angle only works if Hillary is running against a white man, and frankly, I don't think that voters are going to be all that much in the mood for another "historic" president. However, they will be very ready for a president who has the right (i.e., conservative) ideas, and the track record to back them up.

Hillary doesn't have the right credentials to win the 2012 election.

69 posted on 10/17/2010 7:55:01 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
Thank you for the analysis! I hope your right, as the Rats need to be driven from the political landscape - forever.

Being a Democrat from 2010 onward, is going to be a whole new ballgame. I hope the new ballgame is akin to the "Christians vs. Lions" matinees they used to have at the Colosseum.

As far as Hilly goes, it's 2012 or bust for her. If a large constituency of the Rats, such as the black voter shuns them, then she'll do worse than either McGovern or Mondale. Personally, I like the sound of that.

70 posted on 10/17/2010 8:01:11 PM PDT by GOPsterinMA (Support and vote for Sean Bielat (MA-4)! MA-4 is Barney Frank's district.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego
Hillary could well be perceived as yesterday’s news if she ran again.

I don't think there's any way around it. She's already perceived as yesterday's news. Think about it. By 2012, she'll have been on the national stage for 20 years.

If she'd been moving steadily toward the top of the party apparatus as an elected official during all of those years, it might be perceived that the presidency is her next logical step, but that's not the case with her political career.

She hasn't tread the tried and true path to the White House that most presidents have. With the exception of Obama, most presidents have been Governors or Senators (of long tenure). The country is now experiencing what happens when you hand the presidency over to a relative novice with little to no executive experience. They're not likely to repeat that mistake any time soon.

Short analysis: I think Hillary has already been consigned to the same dustbin as other failed Democrat presidential hopefuls.

71 posted on 10/17/2010 8:08:51 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76

That’s one Hell of an interesting scenario!!! Very interesting to consider!


72 posted on 10/17/2010 8:14:44 PM PDT by GOPsterinMA (Support and vote for Sean Bielat (MA-4)! MA-4 is Barney Frank's district.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 144
Could they bring Lieberman back in from the cold, and fake it with him? Or is he too old?

I don't think Lieberman would even accept the offer, if tendered, even though he's the closest thing they have to a real centrist.

He'd be a bad pick because he's simply not inspiring, nor does he seem like much of a leader. I'd say that he's their McCain. It would be an admission of abject failure for them to run him, after having stormed the galaxy with The One Light Worker.

73 posted on 10/17/2010 8:16:26 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: GOPsterinMA
As far as Hilly goes, it's 2012 or bust for her.

I really hope that Hillary and her advisors are smarter than that. 2008 was really her last, best shot at the presidency.

1. She's already been on the national stage for nearly 20 years.
2. She was already Bill Clinton's "co-president".
3. She's already lost one presidential bid.
4. She's got the same political agenda as the current president (which is being soundly rejected as we speak).
5. She's old, and she wears it badly (unlike say, Lady Thatcher).
6. She's already lost much of the PUMA vote to Sarah Palin, who exemplifies the feminist ideal 1,000% better than Hillary does (she's ridden her hubby's coat tails her whole career).
7. She's the ultimate Democrat, which is a negative in the current political climate.

For these reasons, and others, she stands little chance of winning the Democrat nomination, or the 2012 election.

74 posted on 10/17/2010 8:35:09 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

Good points, and all of your analyses are solid and interesting. One factor which would throw a lot of initiative back to the Democrats however, is if the GOP runs another cull. Specifically, Mitt Romney.

If 2012 was Romney v. Rodham, with social conservatives and black Democrats deciding it was a perfect day to stay home and watch the shadows lengthen . . .

Someone would win with a plurality of the vote.


75 posted on 10/17/2010 8:38:13 PM PDT by Psalm 144
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
2008 was really her last, best shot at the presidency.

I totally agree. That's why 2012 would be the last shot she'd take. In 2016, she'll be 4 more years removed (and older). She'll be the Rat John McCain.

76 posted on 10/17/2010 8:46:27 PM PDT by GOPsterinMA (Support and vote for Sean Bielat (MA-4)! MA-4 is Barney Frank's district.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: libh8er

First of all, RCP has Obama at 44% approval rating and not a truly disastrous 30% or lower. It’s still mid-term.

Obama will have to step aside and endorse Hillary in order for her to succeed in 2012.

With IA and NH (ugh..) voting in early Jan, 2012, the presidential primary season starts in just months.

We haven’t even seen the results of 2010 yet.

The economy could improve enough in 2011 to get Obama reelected.

The economy could drag on and Reps could take the blame when the media screeches about “the party of no.”

Sarah Palin is releasing a new book in late Nov of this year. I think this is her “campaign book” like Obama and Dean each had. Certainly looks like she is running for president.


77 posted on 10/17/2010 8:57:37 PM PDT by Aglooka (Posting from New Hampshachusetts (Formerly New Hampshire))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 144
One factor which would throw a lot of initiative back to the Democrats however, is if the GOP runs another cull. Specifically, Mitt Romney.

I wholeheartedly agree.

There is only one person in the GOP who can make the Democrats throw in the towel, and that's Sarah Palin. No matter what anyone thinks of her, she is the 800 pound gorilla in the room, and the person with the greatest momentum and support going into the primaries. There's no one, including Romney, who even comes close to her standing on the national stage.

It's also been said by many observers that Michael Steele's strong validation and indication of support for Sarah at her October 13th Anaheim speech is strong evidence that the Republican party establishment has seen the light, and are now lining up behind Sarah for 2012.

It's become glaringly apparent to many, that all of the stars are aligned for Palin to capture the nomination, then go on to take the White House in 2012.

I honestly don't believe that the other hopefuls stand a chance, at this point. I'm pretty sure that the party insiders have read the Tea leaves, and have realized that they will lose the presidency again, if they DON'T run Sarah Palin.

78 posted on 10/17/2010 9:00:18 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76
Yes, These are the events that would have to stack up:

I believe 2016 is out of the question for HRC for the reasons described above. However, consider this scenario for 2012 which I believe is very feasible:

The GOP takes control of Congress next month and Obama continues to slide out of favor with the Democratic powers-that-be. Sarah Palin announces her candidacy in the spring and opens up a double-digit lead on Obama. Sometime next summer, Obama is told by his handlers that his re-election chances are virtually nil.

Behind the scenes, a face-saving reason for Obama deciding not to run for re-election is invented (i.e. health problems) and he is out of the race. Enter HRC and Obama throws his enthusiastic support to her, nullifying the potential "angry black vote" that would otherwise come out against her.

79 posted on 10/17/2010 9:03:57 PM PDT by Aglooka (Posting from New Hampshachusetts (Formerly New Hampshire))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: libh8er

Obama will have a challenger in 2012. He is just doing to bad of a job. It will be like Ted Kennedy running in 1980.


80 posted on 10/17/2010 9:04:41 PM PDT by KC_Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GOPsterinMA
That's why 2012 would be the last shot she'd take.

If 2008 was Hillary's last, best shot, how does it follow that she'll try again in 2012? She had her chance, and she lost. It's over for her, for all of the reasons I laid out.

Now, she might launch an exploratory campaign, just to see what her odds for 2012 look like. I'd say that's a possibility. However, events would have to align perfectly for her to have a real second chance. It's very hard to see that happening, given the trajectory of events now.

81 posted on 10/17/2010 9:09:18 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: libh8er

She could seriously win in 12 if we don’t put up the right candidate. No poop. Democrats would WELCOME her after Obama. If she runs against him, tracking to the right will still leave her in Deep Socialist territory from the cold Marxist place Obama has us now.

And Obama’s polling may tell him to step down anyway. I am not convinced he’d go for another 4. I don’t even think he could qualify in all 50 states, because surely some of them are going to ask for documentation he refuses to provide. He may already know Hillary will be next.

Most Republican leaders do not have the cojones to truly take her on, so we are sunk if we don’t choose wisely.


82 posted on 10/17/2010 9:12:06 PM PDT by Yaelle ( I donated double. We need FR running smoothly this fall. Join me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KC_Conspirator
Obama will have a challenger in 2012. He is just doing to bad of a job. It will be like Ted Kennedy running in 1980.

Agreed, but I still don't think it's going to be Hillary. What's her campaign slogan going to be? "How you like me now?" LOL

83 posted on 10/17/2010 9:13:15 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

I sincerely hope you are right!

Enjoyed the conversation -very- much. Off to sleep. Take care.


84 posted on 10/17/2010 9:19:55 PM PDT by Psalm 144
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

See my previous for what I think might happen. I am stunned at how different our predictions are. I think his lack of documentation for state party eligibility to run might really hurt him here, and might be an additional reason (besides a sure shellacking) for Obama not to run at all.

I think Hillary is a formidable enemy because she is so experienced at knowing how to tack to the center, and she has SO MUCH SPACE betwen where Barack took this country and the Actual Political Center that she needn’t even approach it. She knows how to control the mainstream news cycle, which I hope can now be overcome with all the other sources of info...

Do you really think there will be an outcry that she stole anything, when he has done so much bad for us all, black, white, blue, and striped?

My fear is of the male Repub leaders who are scared to take her on, if she is the nominee. We would be so better off if he was our opponent, it’s not funny.

(I totally get you on him needing to be propped up - check out the photo of him today in the back of the limo looking like he is holding an imaginary, comforting, little crack pipe...)


85 posted on 10/17/2010 9:22:10 PM PDT by Yaelle ( I donated double. We need FR running smoothly this fall. Join me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

I dunno, Windflier. I think Hillary has 2 advantages over Sarah. Hillary will fight dirty. If you want to know how dirty she is willing to fight, go to Ft. Marcy Park and ask old Vince. And second, Hillary’s negatives are SOMEHOW less than Palin’s.

But Sarah has one shining thing on her side, if it came down to a race between them. Sarah has the truth. I am hopeful that the truth can win. It will NOT be easy.


86 posted on 10/17/2010 9:36:38 PM PDT by Yaelle ( I donated double. We need FR running smoothly this fall. Join me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

I actually wish you were right. But I fear that Hillary in 2012 would be formidable and would probably win, against ANYONE but possibly Palin.


87 posted on 10/17/2010 9:42:35 PM PDT by Yaelle ( I donated double. We need FR running smoothly this fall. Join me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Luke21

Clinton won in 1996 because he moved to the center as a result of the 1994 elections, and he was able to co-opt credit for the Republican agenda.

Obama will never, ever move to the center. He’s an ideologue, not a politician.


88 posted on 10/17/2010 9:49:53 PM PDT by scott7278 ("...I have not changed Congress and how it operates the way I would have liked." BHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle
I am stunned at how different our predictions are.

Oh, don't be. I think you and I probably agree on most of the calculus for 2012. We're just concentrating on different points of it tonight.

I think his lack of documentation for state party eligibility to run might really hurt him here, and might be an additional reason (besides a sure shellacking) for Obama not to run at all.

I'm with you, there. At least a few states are liable to tighten up their filing requirements, which will be an automatic full stop for Obama. He dare not reveal his documentary past at this late date, after having defied the public for so long about it. In all likelihood, he can't anyway, which is why he's defied us for so long.

I think Hillary is a formidable enemy because she is so experienced at knowing how to tack to the center...

Bubba was a master at tracking to the center, but Hillary has no experience or tact with that at all. A lexis-nexus search will bring up innumerable Marxist/Commie statements of hers, which will be used by opponents to pin her firmly to the hard left.

The country is now in rebellion against the Socialist agenda, and the people aren't going to back off anytime soon. Obama, Pelosi, and Reid have ensured that the pain of that agenda will be with us for at least a decade. Democrats are now running away from it as fast as their feet will carry them.

Hillary is well known for pushing for a nationalized health care system, which is one major Socialist position she can't run from. The tie to ObamaCare is unbreakable, and it will hurt her badly.

Do you really think there will be an outcry that she stole anything, when he has done so much bad for us all, black, white, blue, and striped?

If Obama steps aside, and Hillary runs, blacks and the far left will deduce that it's a set up, and that the Clintons are responsible for it. They will not buy the narrative from Obama and the Democrats, and will revolt against the party.

As I said above, most Americans have rebelled against the Socialist agenda, but remember that there are around 20% to 25% in this country who are true believers. Despite the abysmal failures of Obama's progressive agenda, they will press ahead, and will demand that the party continue to run in that direction.

How will Hillary hope to gather them into the fold, if she has to track to the center? If she tries to track left to appease them, she loses the center. If she attempts to hold some nebulous middle ground, she'll lose the hard left and especially blacks.

The problem for Hillary, and for any prospective Democrat hopeful, is that the progressive agenda has failed. This presents a host of problems for Democrats across the political landscape, no matter how strongly, or how weakly they've supported it. The fact is, they're all glued to it, and Obama, Pelosi, and Reid, no matter how much they'd like to dis-entangle themselves.

Like I've said upthread, I wouldn't want to be one of their strategists right now. They've got an impossible minefield to navigate.

My fear is of the male Repub leaders who are scared to take her on, if she is the nominee.

Fortunately, we won't have to worry about that for 2012, because a fearless woman from Alaska will be leading the charge.

89 posted on 10/17/2010 9:51:00 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

Barry is going to step down “for the good of the party” and because America is “so rasis and not ready for a black president”. Hillary will be at the top of the ballot in 2012. The ‘RATS have used Barry up. They don’t need him anymore.

Right


90 posted on 10/17/2010 9:59:34 PM PDT by DontTreadOnMe2009 (So stop treading on me already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Forward the Light Brigade

Hillary may well be president a lot sooner than 2012.

A) Obama is forced to resign. B) Biden picks her for VP, C) Biden resigns (for reasons of health). Hillary is President.

OR

A) After Obama and the Dems suffer a beating in the election of 2010, Hillary has a big dust up with Obama over some issue. B) She resigns in early 2011, C) Runs against Obama D) Beats him in the primary and faces Sarah Palin or Mitt Romney and wins. E) She is president in January 20, 2012. (She appoints Bill Clinton as Sec. of State,)

Very very likely


91 posted on 10/17/2010 10:03:34 PM PDT by DontTreadOnMe2009 (So stop treading on me already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle
I think Hillary has 2 advantages over Sarah. Hillary will fight dirty. If you want to know how dirty she is willing to fight, go to Ft. Marcy Park and ask old Vince.

If Hillary was such a dirty fighter, she should have kicked Obama's butt in the primary. I honestly was betting that she would, but she never rose to the occasion, which caused me to conclude that our side built her up to be bigger and badder than she really is. I came away believing that she's a pathetic lightweight after watching her in the 2008 campaign.

I mean, she couldn't figure out how to beat down a radical community organizer with no past? Meh...she's way over-rated.

And second, Hillary’s negatives are SOMEHOW less than Palin’s.

Hillary's negatives only SEEM smaller than Palin's because she's been out of the limelight for so long, and the fact that neither Obama, nor McCain were willing to throw them in her face. Sarah would do that in a heartbeat without blinking.

Sarah Palin is a fearless fighter. We haven't seen her real fury unleashed yet, but if and when we do - look out. That fury will ignite libtard moonbats on sight. Hillary doesn't have half the skill and brilliance of Sarah, which is why I don't think she'll even consider running for office if Sarah's in the mix. A whole lot of other wanna-be hopefuls will also stand down as soon as they find out she's running. The lady is formidable, and is the real deal.

Sarah has one shining thing on her side, if it came down to a race between them. Sarah has the truth.

And therein lies her power. It comes from a core grounding in timeless principles of right and wrong, as well as our fundamental American basics.

Hillary, like all Socialists, has core 'values' that are based upon lies and unworkable theories. Those lies are being revealed for what they are as we speak. The Obama agenda is an historic failure that has brought this country to the brink of collapse.

Hillary is in the worst position in time to be a liberal Democrat in our history. Her way is being rejected, while Sarah's is being embraced.

I'm sorry, but Hillary doesn't stand a chance against Sarah. She'd be a fool to even try.

92 posted on 10/17/2010 10:12:08 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: biggredd1

And then there was Monica, Paula, and Juanita.

The msm is pushing that trailer trash piece of garbage on us and making him a hero.


93 posted on 10/17/2010 11:54:14 PM PDT by Carley (For those who fought for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

I agree with you that this lack of documentation thing is real fire behind the smoke. It has gone on so long that it’s no set up (Obama pulling out his long form BC for all the world to see at this point to prove the “Birthers” are idiots); even some mainstream press has mentioned this crucial legal issue. This issue is not “nothing.”

I suspect he attended one or more of his universities as a foreign student and thus actually checked a box marked NO for “Are you an American citizen?” on his application.

It is true that Hillary hasn’t personally tracked toward the center, but with Barack before her, she certainly would not have to force herself to go very close to the actual political center! I think that as socialist and Alinskyite as she is, she is perceived to be more Democrat mainstream.

I would like you to be right, that the country will reject her for what she is. I’m not completely convinced of that, because I think she will own the media. It feels like that has already begun, and I don’t focus on much mainstream media. Just my little ears to the ground tell me she’s working on it...

Those 25% of true believer liberals, those who think Obama didn’t go far enough, will probably not want Hillary. But if she is up against Sarah, sadly, to a lot of Joe and Jane Q.s, Hillary appears more palatable. It’s abhorrent and they are wrong, but it will be a fight to show these apoliticals the truth.

Do you really think that the Anointed (Thomas Sowell’s term) will dump Progressivism just because (as they believe) Barack didn’t get the word out right? Unh-unh. They will still want more of it. Yes, Democrats are in shambles, not knowing what will get them elected in the near future, but it will still be some form of Big Gov, Elitist, We are here to help kinds of pathetic pandering.

And remember, if we win big next month, we then have to fight our own new winners in order to keep them on the right track, as when everyone gets into office, they fall prey to that power syndrome. We will be needing to hold their feet to the fire, AND to help them through the bad press they might not be used to hearing about themselves.

I like your line of thinking, though, and I hope I am over-pessimistic.


94 posted on 10/18/2010 2:16:51 AM PDT by Yaelle ( I donated double. We need FR running smoothly this fall. Join me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
If Hillary was such a dirty fighter, she should have kicked Obama's butt in the primary. I honestly was betting that she would, but she never rose to the occasion, which caused me to conclude that our side built her up to be bigger and badder than she really is.

I was waiting for it too. The Clintons were always so evil with the dirt on their opponents. We KNOW Hillary is a racist and anti-semite, so maybe she was cowed because Obama is black, or maybe, just maybe, the poop HE had on HER was just as bad. I think I believe the latter. That they ended up being in a Mutually Assured Destruction situation!

Hillary doesn't have half the skill and brilliance of Sarah, which is why I don't think she'll even consider running for office if Sarah's in the mix.

Your lips to G-d's ears. I think Hillary WOULD take on Sarah, but I too think Sarah is the one to beat Hillary.

Look at the fact that Ms. Super Feminist got everywhere she got by RIDING ON THE COATTAILS OF A MAN! Not Sarah. In fact, Hillary got her Senate seat out of PITY for the scorned woman (and of course pandering to various ethnicities including the terrorist group).

The Obama agenda is an historic failure that has brought this country to the brink of collapse.

Wow, the way you say that makes me almost glad it happened, if it really has taught the average Americans the truth about socialism and the racism of low expectations. As much as his Presidency has hurt me and mine personally, it was all worth it IF we never have to entertain such idiocy again.

If you think Sarah Palin would whup Hillary, you must think her beating Obama would be a walk in the park.

95 posted on 10/18/2010 2:27:58 AM PDT by Yaelle ( I donated double. We need FR running smoothly this fall. Join me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
The Clintons are addicted to the limelight, and they'd sell their mothers to remain there.

The more I think about this (and read the insight you and others offer) perhaps this is just posturing for Hilly to get a SCOTUS nomination or Bill named as UN Sec Gen. Something to keep the “Clinton” name going.

Two years is an eternity in politics. Who knows, especially with this cabal in power what could happen, and what the events will be come the next presidential election.

96 posted on 10/18/2010 5:46:08 AM PDT by GOPsterinMA (Support and vote for Sean Bielat (MA-4)! MA-4 is Barney Frank's district.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Windflier; GOPsterinMA

Windflier, thanks for your insights and there is only one tiny little thing I disagree with from what you said. I don’t know how old you are and if you remember the huge “unusual deaths” list from the Clinton regime starting way back when they were the governor of Arkansas.

IMO Hillary would kill her own family and best friends if it would get her the presidency. I think the reason she couldn’t remove Obama by hook or crook or shocking death was exactly what you have laid out for us, and she could NOT have won with the black community against her. If she’d tried it then, she’d never overcome the loss.

GOP, I think you came very close to what I suspect is in the works when you referred to Bill or Hill becoming the head of the UN.

Windflier, what do you think would be the reaction if the Clintons applied their well-used “final solution” to Ban Ki Moon and there arose a draft Obama movement to replace him as the “Messiah” who could save the UN and thus the world.

What if he and Hillary appeared together as she said he’s the only one who can save us and he said he’d be willing to make the sacrifice of giving up the presidency because it’s just so important. More important than one crappy country...

He gets out of what’s turning into a really bad place for him and into a place with just as much glory, public speeches, adoration etc., and almost no work compared to the presidency with no organized opposition (Jesse Helms is long gone).

Hillary gets the best set up she can. Biden appoints her VP and, after a short time, steps down for health reasons. Now she’s an incumbent which is usually an advantage.

She’s smart enough to hide her real goals (same as Obama’s) and cuts taxes, turns the taken over businesses and financial institutions back to private ownership and voila the economy improves and she takes the credit. She can reverse course after she’s elected on her own and go back to the slower, steadier path to death and destruction that her party was following before Obama turned the water right up to full boil and the frogs started jumping out of the pan.

It would give Sarah a much more nebulous target if Hill ran as Sarah except just a little bit more “compassionate” and she wouldn’t even have to wink very hard to tip off her base that she’s really still with them. The journOlistas would certainly be in full campaign mode for her and the 5 minute hate for Sarah would be turned up full blast.

Could she get away with that IYO, especially if Obama appeared pleased with the transition and actually campaigned for her? I ask because I think we (including her) all know she can’t get elected without the black vote and yet she and BJ seem to be proceeding. Thanks in advance for your answer.


97 posted on 10/18/2010 6:53:52 AM PDT by Sal (Obama maxed out the Race Card, awakened the Sleeping Giant and filled it with a terrible resolve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Sal; Windflier
What analysis we have going on!

I'll say this: We live in interesting times.

98 posted on 10/18/2010 8:59:28 AM PDT by GOPsterinMA (Support and vote for Sean Bielat (MA-4)! MA-4 is Barney Frank's district.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Luke21

99 posted on 10/18/2010 9:08:11 AM PDT by jslade (People who are easily offended, OFFEND ME!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Luke21

100 posted on 10/18/2010 9:08:22 AM PDT by jslade (People who are easily offended, OFFEND ME!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-106 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson