Hillary's Next Move?

[kennetha]

Last edited Mon Nov 12, 2012, 11:50 AM - Edit history (1)

Personally, I'd love to see her run. One downside, is she'll be in her late 60's, pushing 70. If the Repugs were to run someone young and dynamic against her, it could look like the future vs, the past. But if our party were to follow up the first African American president, with the first female president, that would be something grand.

It’s more than two months until this inauguration. But the speculation is already roaring. On Friday, Politico reported that Public Policy Polling had a new survey showing that if the Iowa caucuses were held today — there’s a terrifying thought — Clinton would get 58 percent of the vote. Joe Biden limped in with 17 percent.

[link:http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/11/opinion/sunday/collins-hillarys-next-move.html?partner=rss&emc=rss|

[ancianita]

1. Big Deal. She's only 65 right now and will be just fine to run for president. McCain was 7 yrs older

when he ran against Obama. Let's stop all this 'she's-too-old' argument here.

[frazzled]

2. I feel somewhat the opposite

I love Hillary Clinton, and it has nothing to do with her age. But she's done this, and after a huge long primary season in which she was assumed to be the shoo-in, she did not win. I don't really think she should risk that scenario again. I don't think she is inevitable at all, and it would kill me to see her distinguished career marred by another primary or election loss.

Granted, I'm risk averse. So I'm probably wrong, and if she wants to risk being the perennial front-runner who loses, that's her choice. But I have another reason (which was my reason for not supporting her in the primaries last time around). Just as we don't want to see another Bush running for the White House, I'm not that keen to install another Clinton. Not because I don't think she would be a great president, but because I don't think America should be about family dynasties.

[Celebration]

4. also she seemed to implode during the primary run

She was very tired and then made a lot of strategic mistakes. I am not sure she has the stamina.

[Whisp]

7. she does not handle surprises well and can't think on her feet fast enough

the constant pressure she would be under would buckle her. Plus she's got some skeletons that will keep re-appearing and some things during the primary where she held two opposing views (as first lady I had first hand experience at presidentin', except that is when things weren't popular, then I had nothing to do with it) - when convenient for herself at any particular time. So her not being clean in her past would cause difficulty, for sure.

I just can't see her being good at that. I just can't see her handling what the President has been through, handling it as well as him.

But then no one else could handle it as well as Obama has.

Oh, and that Iraq war vote thing that a lot of people want to forget. I can't forget that she was so bad at such important decision making. That should be unforgivable right there. If I, a schmuck for noWhere along with millions others, knew the war was a sham, that Bush was a deceit, I can't accept she didn't know. She knew. But she had other things on her mind instead of the right thing, so she voted for the war. She owns a percentage of a lot of misery for that.

[kennetha]

8. Not about Dynasty at this point

Hillary Clinton has served in more relevant capacities than just about any candidate in recent memory. She's seen the Presidency close up. She was a fine Senator, on her way to becoming a great one, of Kennedyesque proportions. And she is a phenomenally good Secretary of State. In addition, she oozes warmth and humanity, when she is at her best. Finally, she is Margaret Thatcher tough. She would be a superb president -- superb. And that has nothing to do with her surname.

Moreover, I don't hold her age against her myself. I'm just saying that if I were the Republicans and she were the democratic nominee, I would not try to out gravitas her. I would try to out future her. I would put a Marco Rubio or somebody like that up against her. That risks the Republican nominee coming off like a callow shallow youth in comparison, to be sure. But it would also have its upsides for them.

Personally, I hope she rests up for a year. Takes a long nap, gets her mind and body clear and focused and then runs.

[DURHAM D]

12. +1

[ProudProgressiveNow]

13. +1 nt

[quinnox]

3. and she is female

Which makes her age that much more of a factor. Sad but true in our society.

[DURHAM D]

11. Only true in your world.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

5. She's been in the national spotlight for over 20 years straight now.

Let her relax for a bit. I'm sure she just wants a break.

[ancianita]

6. She definitely deserves a break.

But if she still wants to run, half this country will be behind her.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

15. I think so.

That said, I think she may not be as keen on running again as some other people think she is. And while I'm a big fan of hers, if she doesn't run, that's perfectly fine. We have plenty of other capable candidates.

[1-Old-Man]

9. Retirement.

[NoPasaran]

10. Drone strikes on people who misspell her name

You have been warned.

[mulsh]

14. Hillary keeps saying she wants to relax, stay out of politics, probably looks foreward to a grandkid

Maybe you should try believing she means what she says, wish her well and look for another candidate for 2016, That's what I've been doing.

[rock]

16. A long break

She's earned it!