I'm not in denial - I'm being realistic.
Hillary is simply too old and worn out to be electable. I'm sure if she announced she was running, she'd get the support of some of the 'grey ponytail' crowd, but she's ancient history to Dems in their 40s, 30s, and 20s. She was First Lady when a lot of those folks were in grade school.
A lot of Dems over 50 will probably roll their eyes demand a candidate who stands a real chance of beating the Republican (who we hope will be a dynamic and outspoken conservative). They're not going to be energized and enthused by a Hillary candidacy - again, because she's way past her sell-by date on the national stage.
Don't forget, that after January 2013, she's going to spend four years out of the limelight. How's she supposed to keep herself well positioned for a run at the presidency while she's out of office?
By 2016, Hillary will be old enough to be a great-grandmother. After eight thrilling years of their golden prince, Obama, do you really think they'll be falling over themselves to support an ancient hag for president? I don't.
Underestimate the beast at our peril. She is favored among people who don’t want to see her do this but who have better arguments for than yours against.
But that aside, and let’s put it aside as it is most unpleasant, to use one of their arguments (that they lament making), who, among these horrible wimpy excuses for defenders of the Constitution, do the Republicans have to run against her?
There is no strong candidate, personality, character nor politician among them. Every one of them has been groveling to be forgiven for being a racist who hates Mexicans.
that’s going to beat any one they sed up? After what we just saw?