Most Democrats Want Clinton to Run in 2016

[onehandle]

Source: New York Times

More than 8 in 10 Democrats say they want Hillary Rodham Clinton to run for president in 2016, showing a level of interest in her that no other potential candidates – Democrat or Republican – come close to matching among their party’s voters, according to a New York Times/CBS News Poll.

The potential candidates drawing the most interest after Mrs. Clinton are Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., Former Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida and Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky. For each of them, about 40 percent of self-identified members of their party said they hoped the person would run.

As for Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey — the man who many had once thought to be an early Republican favorite, but who is struggling with the George Washington Bridge traffic scandal — more in his party say they do not want him to seek the presidency (41 percent) than say they do (31 percent).

The election, of course, is far off. But the level of enthusiasm among voters for candidates in their own party still matters, as those potential candidates are already deciding whether to run and beginning to plan campaign and fund-raising strategies.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/27/us/politics/most-democrats-want-clinton-to-run-in-2016.html

[Hoppy]

1. I don't want her to run.

Pro-Iraq war vote, anyone?

[L0oniX]

27. TPTB will make sure that who ever wins will be a war monger ...as usual.

It's a jobs thing ...making bullets, drones, ships, aircraft and bombs.

[yurbud]

91. it's a profits thing. If they could do it without people and make even more money, they would

[L0oniX]

94. They are doing it somewhat ...drones ...spy sats.

[closeupready]

47. I've been informed, here, that she has 'atoned' for that vote.

Which you and I know she did not. But that will be the spin the media puts on it.

[Stuckinthebush]

2. I want her to run

But...we have a bit before the primaries so it will be interesting to see who else throws their hat in the ring. Whoever wins needs to appeal to both the base and independents. Hillary can do that.

[Rowdyboy]

3. Consider me one of them. But then I want several good Democrats to run

so the nomination fight will actually be interesting. Coronations are boring. Whether I get my wish remains to be seen.

[meegbear]

4. +1

[TBF]

5. I could support Hillary -

but I'm very torn. She is a great candidate to pull the Latino vote in Texas, but that may be a wash if Jeb Bush runs (with George P Bush campaigning hard for him here as well). Could go either way.

The thing that bugs me is that there are more families in this country than just Bush and Clinton.

I'd like to see Warren and O'Malley in the primary just for a change of pace. They would both be excellent potential candidates and they are a bit younger.

[totodeinhere]

6. I agree. That last thing we need is another Bush/Clinton election.

But having said that if Clinton gets the nomination we will all need to support her because her alternative will be unacceptable.

[Cal33]

95. Grayson is younger still. I'd vote for O'Malley. I think Warren is the best of all, but

she won't be running.

[TBF]

96. Clinton has been to TX

and met with Julian Castro. I would think that he and O'Malley are very high on the potential VP lists whether or not they are candidates in their own right. Grayson and Warren also excellent candidates. Hillary is the most conservative of the bunch but I've got to believe she'd have a great sounding board with either Castro or O'Malley in the VP seat. Although I have my favorites I'd vote for anyone I've listed here.

I'm starting to get excited about 2016.

[Cal33]

108. I'd also vote for Sanders, even though he is an Independent. I'm not really excited yet.

[bowens43]

7. yes just what we need another clinton/bush/obama presidency......

if hillary is the best we can do, win or lose, we are totally fucked

[groundloop]

9. Yeah, so let's all sit out 2016 and see what happens

I'll add that there are other candidates I'd prefer to Hillary, but if she gets the nomination I'll enthusiastically support her, as she's a far cry better than anything the GOPers will throw out there.

[L0oniX]

24. ...and Chelsea will be next. For some voters name recognition is necessary.

[arikara]

69. Sure, why not?

Then Jenna Bush. The possibilities are endless.

[Capt. Obvious]

89. That's just insane

It's one of the Bush twins' turns next.

[L0oniX]

90. Don't matter as long as it is a female it's all good...

according to some here. It really doesn't matter to me anymore because I know that TPTB will pick someone who will keep the military and us in a never ending war against terror ...and of course help those poor millionaires become billionaires.

[KeepItReal]

8. In other words pay no attention to those congressional races THIS YEAR

Did the survey ask people if they wanted the current president to have a Democratic House and Senate?

Of course not.

[Cal33]

97. Why can't we do both? The emphasis now should be on Congress, of course.

[TheCowsCameHome]

10. That's fine with me.

n/t

[joshcryer]

11. If you assume the Progressive Caucus makeup...

...you can extrapolate that 10% of progressives want her to run, since Progressive Democrats make up 50% of the Democratic Congress.

Unless you have an argument that the third way / DLC / conservative Dems wouldn't want her to run.

[Enthusiast]

12. I do not want her for President.

We are in a crisis fomented by the action or inaction taken by President Clinton—NAFTA, the Telecommunications Act and Gramm-Leach-Bliley.

Hillary would be more of the same destructive policies continued. The nation has already been transformed to where it is unrecognizable. We sure don't need more of the same.

It is little wonder that 8 in 10 Democrats don't understand this, considering the nature of our media.

[cosmicone]

16. You think a wife will do exactly what her husband did?

Guilt by marriage? So progressive of you!

[Enthusiast]

21. We know where she stands on trade agreements.

We know how she feels about raising the FICA cap. We know her position on the too big to fail banks.

[Adam051188]

32. google search psychological projection

Or maybe just simple?

[cosmicone]

44. It is not psychological projection

but just "projection" as a defense mechanism. I'm not uneducated and ignorant as you may have tried to imply.

My prior post stands. If you want to sit home and not vote for Hillary, you deserve Jeb Bush or Rand Paul - will that make you happy?

[Beacool]

49. That's why some here seem to prefer.....

Fortunately, all the naysayers are a tiny fraction of the party.

[Scootaloo]

79. Well, she did back up king Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifah's brutalization of protestors

Along with the savage Mubarak regime's response to Egypt's protestors

Plus she authorized war with Iraq

So I guess I can see why she's got your vote.

[cosmicone]

82. So you are on the side of anarchy?

Letting a dozen splinter groups of "rebels" run over the civilization with the only agenda to destroy the status quo but no clear plans for governance? This invariably leading to the rebels fighting each other over power as the economy crumbles and thousands of ordinary working people get hurt.

Support for the stabilizing albeit harsh regimes is prudent until the opposition can come up with a workable and peaceful plan for transition without rabid religiosity where women get oppressed.

Anyone can protest but very very few have the skills to govern. Just because someone is protesting doesn't mean they are right. Hell, the tea partiers have been protesting against Obamacare from the get go and I wish some of them were shown water cannons!

[Scootaloo]

83. I... actually don't know what to say to this...

Hell, the tea partiers have been protesting against Obamacare from the get go and I wish some of them were shown water cannons!

Wow.

[DonCoquixote]

85. NAFTA, the Telecommunications Act and Gramm-Leach-Bliley.

if she wanted to oppose those three things, now is the time. Speak now or forever hold thy Peace.

[RC]

13. No, we don't. Not at all.

This is just more of our Overlords telling us what we want. Don't listen to them. We need to tell then what WE want, loud and clear.
What I want is a real Democrat, not beholden Wall Street or the Big Banks, or hand picked by the DLC leadership.
Someone that will do the peoples work and not the upper few percent's bidding.

[BBR Esq]

17. I sure wish Elizabeth Warren would run.

[RC]

19. She can do more to help the proletariat from where she is at now.

[antigop]

18. "overlords telling us what we want"... it's the "inevitability meme". nt

[L0oniX]

23. ^^^this^^^

[Scootaloo]

80. Clinton / Romney 2016: "It's THEIR TURN, dammit!"

[L0oniX]

86. ^^^this^^^ too

Perfect!

[navarth]

20. this.

[Beacool]

54. No, these are actual people saying who they prefer.

As opposed to a tiny fraction of the party who may disagree on an internet site.

[RC]

63. I am usually suspicious of people who claim to be in the majority,

especially when the evidence also points in the opposite direction.
Too many people are having a problem with another DLC member as front runner.

[blackspade]

14. I guess I'm one of the two in ten, then.

Clinton holds no interest to me as a candidate.
But the focus at this point should be the 2014 elections.
This story is just another media distraction from this year's election.
TPTB do not want Congress under control or the Democratic Party.

[mopinko]

15. i'm ready for the first woman pres.

but yeah, this year means a whole lot more right now. i wish they would but this shit out.

[L0oniX]

22. Bullshit.

[hack89]

25. It's time for a woman in the White House. nt

[L0oniX]

28. Is that the best reason you got?

[hack89]

31. No. There are many reasons

I just think that following up a black man with a woman is important in permanently destroying the pervasive cultural belief that white men are the only people that have what it takes to be president. Sixteen continuous years without a white man in the White House would fundamentally change politics in America.

That's why I think it is important. I also like Hillary.

[L0oniX]

34. It's a presidency not a game show. Race and gender should have nothing to do with it.

[hack89]

35. For changing a racist and sexist political culture, it has everything to do with it.

Making American culture and politics more open and inclusive is important to me.

[L0oniX]

40. Let me know when the POTUS can change congress.

What's important to me is honesty, integrity, leadership skills, etc ...quality and skills of the person. We had stupid, now we have a smooth talker. When are we going to care about getting what we need (not want) first? Let me know when the war on terror stops and the constitution gets restored ...and when we spend the money on our people , not weapons of war ....and none of that has much to do with "changing a racist and sexist political culture". That agenda is worth pursuing but IMO is not primary.

[hack89]

41. We want to change the American culture that elects Congress.

it is not complicated.

[Beacool]

51. Yeah, because either one didn't matter an iota in 2008........

[Borchkins]

30. I agree, but not Hillary.

[hack89]

33. No other Dem woman will step forward to challenge her

they are all falling in place behind her.

[MADem]

26. I want her to run, and I want her to win. nt

[Tarheel_Dem]

37. +1

[Beacool]

57. Hear, hear!!!

Apparently so do most Democrats, not that it matters to a small fraction here on DU. It's who they want, damn it, and to hell with the majority of Democratic voters. Who do they remind you? Two words, first one starts with the letter T......

[Borchkins]

29. I don't want her to run.

[Tarheel_Dem]

36. And what matters is what "DEMOCRATS" want. Ignore the noise from the clown car.

[LittleGirl]

38. Not me

And I don't want the media telling me who I should vote for because I'm liberal.

I'd much prefer Warren or Sanders to be the next president.

[tatum37]

39. The lack of enthusiasm for HRC in this thread is surprising....

I don't want her to run, either, but I am surprised how many people here share my view.

[whatthehey]

42. Couldn't give a crap if she runs or not

I will support whomever the nominee is wholeheartedly, with not a fraction more or less commitment whether it's Hillary or Biden or Schweitzer or yes a little yellow dog.

People way too often think that the ideal is the only thing worth supporting. Personally I recognize that as long as only two people have a chance in hell of winning the presidency and that one of them will likely nominate two more Scalitomases and appoint dozens more Brownies, I couldn't give a tinker's shit who the other one is - they have my vote, money and time.

Vacuous predictable blatherings about the lesser of two evils never explain what is wrong with lessening evil even if that idiocy is accepted as true. Who, when faced with only two choices of either being kicked in the face by a linebacker with steel capped boots or being pinched on the forearm by a 5 year old with wool mittens, would not call vigorously for the 5 year old? Hoping instead for a white knight on a unicorn to magically save you from both, which is as likely as a 3rd party POTUS, is asinine. Pretending to be purer and more noble in wishing for the impossible white knight and refusing to make a choice between the inevitable "evils" is borderline insane, and literally working towards the steely boot.

[Adam051188]

46. condecention much?

Yes change is impossible and people should stop talking about it.

[TalkingDog]

50. I'm pretty sure that a dictionary would solve a lot of the world's problems.

That was gentle mockery and not at all condescending.

[Adam051188]

52. oOoOoO....your so smart

An example of gentle mockery would seem to me like "I can't believe someone pays for this quality of writing".

[whatthehey]

64. None at all; please by all means talk about and even enable change

But a few thousand or tens of thousands of protest votes will not make a President.

They might however, as in 2000, tip the balance to the candidate with the boot instead of the mitten.

When 3rd parties can win and not just be spoiler candidates, it will be sensible to vote for them in swing states. Until then it's asking for the boot.

How then can change be brought about? Couple of ways possibly. You could groom a Ventura style celebrity with about 80 more IQ points and much thicker skin who could raise the billion or so needed through star power alone, and then hope they can succeed with no party machinery support in the legislative branch, or you could build that change from local races on up either by a third party or pushing the Dems leftward, getting council seats then mayors then Reps then governors etc.

I'm fine with either. I could very easily be persuaded to support either. But don't waste my time asking for support or dollars for spoilers who have zero chance of actually achieving whatever wonderful policies they come up with. Plenty of barroom philosophers have great policies. Heck I flatter myself into thinking I have a few myself, but I have zero chance of being elected and therefore zero chance of making them happen. I'd much rather have Obama or Clinton or Schweitzer who all are to my right but actually can get something done where that something is far preferable to Romney or McCain or Rubio who are much further to my right and the only other choice.

[tatum37]

48. A bowl of sh*t looking at itself in the mirror.

That's what Lewis Black calls the two party system.

[whatthehey]

66. He's a comedian. If he can't tell the difference he's either an insane comedian or a stupid one.

Change the two party system if you don't like it. IRO at a few local levels might be a start. The Presidency isn't.

[closeupready]

43. Yawn.

[Capt. Obvious]

45. But this is LATEST BREAKING NEWS!!!

[L0oniX]

87. Yeah it's broken alright.

[Beacool]

53. The comments are par for the course.

DU, the LW version of Free Republic. Same vitriol, different focus. It means squat.

As much as it pains the Right AND the Left, Hillary is very popular with Democrats and Independents. As a matter of fact, she's the highest polling non-incumbent in the history of the Democratic party. And no, she didn't poll this high in 2008; and again no, there's no other Obama in the shadows.

So yes, people DO want her to run. That does not mean that other people won't be in the running too. No one is saying that she should run uncontested.

Gee........

[Rowdyboy]

55. Actually, a lot of the focus is the same too....They both despise Hillary Clinton

though with somewhat different justifications. At least I haven't seen the ugly nicknames they use for her on FR here......yet.

I want her to run and I also want others to run. Then, if she wins, she'll be a stronger candidate and more prepared to win the general election.

[Beacool]

72. What I meant is that they have different perspectives.

To conservatives, she's a Socialist and a Marxist. To the Left, she's a corporate shill. I ignore both extremes.

As for other people running, of course there'll be more running. We don't do coronations of non-incumbents. There will be some people who will throw their hat in the ring, and that is as it should be in a democracy.

Besides, we don't even now whether she will decide to run.

[Rowdyboy]

76. Absolutely. We agree on pretty much all points except one.....

I'm convinced that she will run. She may not even know it yet but as the pressure builds she will be hard pressed to say no. Unless she has health issues we know nothing about I believe she will give in for one last shot at making history.

Just try to imagine how difficult it would be to turn down the opportunity?

[JoePhilly]

56. The perpetually disgruntled are upset ... what's new.

You'd think they take some of this outrage induced energy and use it to develop some national candidates.

Nope.

They've hated Obama for 5 years .... will hate him for 3 more ... and then they'll be pissed when Hillary runs and wins.

They'll probably hate her for 2 terms too.

[Beacool]

73. I don't know if they dislike Obama, but I sure know how they feel about the Clintons.

Since their opinion does not reflect what is going on in the real world, it doesn't worry me.

[gussmith]

58. Speak for Yourself

No more family dynasties.

[LonePirate]

59. I want her to run because she can win the House for us.

With Dems in control of Congress and the White House, we might get something done, depending on what Reid does with the filibuster.

[wocaonimabi]

60. I do not know a single Democrat IRL who wants Hillary to run

According to the poll...
They talked to 1,644 people

515 Democrats
519 Republicans
550 Independents

Who are the "Democrats" they are talking too?

Pretty lame sample size for such a definitive statement.

[antigop]

62. it's just another stupid poll pushing the "inevitability" meme. nt

[HappyMe]

67. That is pretty lame.

[CFLDem]

61. It's good to know most Dems are Winners!

Hillary/Warren 2016!

[Capt. Obvious]

65. BREAKING: MOST DEMS WANT HILLARY AND ANOTHER DEM TO RUN

?hash=cb5a082b5b7df4e24af94b09403e1f34

[Whisp]

92. Has there ever been only one candidate in a primary?

somehow I doubt that very much.

More yap yap illusion of how Clinton already has the job if she wants it which is Bollocks.

[Ash_F]

68. There are plenty of other female Dems closer to center

Americans are tired of big money in politics.

Americans want financial fraud punished.

Americans are tired of warmongering.


No thanks.

[HappyMe]

70. I'm kind of tired of

the closer to the center crowd too.

Somebody a bit further left would be good, male or female.

[Ash_F]

74. That works!

We don't need someone to the right of Obama in any case.

[HappyMe]

75. Sometimes if you say you want somebody a

bit more left around here, people will start howling about the crazy left wingers!!11. They are just as bad as the tea party!!1 Never thinking for a minute that if we get stuck with Clinton, they might just need our votes too.

[Ash_F]

77. I define center as where most Americans poll on most issues

Which apparently makes America a land of "crazy left wingers!!11" according to some posters and the TV bobbleheads that instruct them on what to think.

[Beacool]

71. Yes, because women are interchangeable.

How well did that work out for the GOP in 2008?

[SheilaT]

78. That's scary.

HRC would be such a bad choice for many reasons. Mainly that she's same old same old and would bring absolutely nothing new to this country or the presidency.

As for the argument for her that she's been through this and all her dirty laundry has been aired already and so she's bullet proof, my answer is that you can't even imagine how thoroughly the right wing will go after her if she gets the nomination. Nominating her would almost guarantee a Republican win in 2016.

Plus, that election is well over two years away. Why can't we all just relax, worry about the election this year, and wait and see what happens in the next couple of years before we commit to a candidate?

[Beacool]

84. Nonsense, mere supposition.

"Nominating her would almost guarantee a Republican win in 2016."

[sadoldgirl]

81. Was there a similar poll in 2006?

I don't know; however I remember very well that we were told that 2008 was THE year for Hillary. Rather presumptuous then, just as now. First 2014, then a real primary showing differences, and then at last a presidential campaign . I don't see why anybody wants to jump ahead while 2014 may make things better or worse.

[Gothmog]

88. I want Hillary Clinton to run

I am also hoping that she campaigns for Wendy Davis in Texas

[Xithras]

98. I want her to run. And I want her to lose in the primary.

I want to send a message to the DLC that pro-trade, pro-war, pro-corporatist hacks don't always win.

[onehandle]

99. Who can beat her?

Seriously. I'm not committed to her, but would vote for her in the general.

President Obama was a known commodity in 2008... in 2004, actually.

Everyone pretty much knew he would be President one day.

Elizabeth Warren isn't running.

Who can beat her?

[Xithras]

100. We have two years to find out.

We have quite a bit of time until the campaigning starts ramping up. The polling numbers from this early really doesn't mean much.

At the moment I'm nominally supporting Bernie Sanders. Is he electable? Probably not, but he's certainly the most palatable of the potential candidates who have expressed interest thus far.

There are some indicators that Brian Schweiter may run, and I may end up supporting him. He is a former U.S. Senator, a former state Governor, supports single payer, increased educational spending, minority rights, lived and worked outside of the U.S. for years and has practical international experience, supports alternative energy investment, etc. Some of his positions aren't so liberal (he loosened a number of Montana gun laws and supports coal mining and other extractive industries), but the practical part of me tells me that those positions make him more attractive to the political middle and increase his electability.

But we'll see. It's a long road to the primary.

[onehandle]

103. Sanders will never run and Schweiter has become an MSNBC commentator.

Signaling the end of his political career.

Anyone else?

[Xithras]

105. The MSNBC commentator gig doesn't sway it one way or the other.

He took a position as a commentator, not an anchor or a reporter. He may simply be trying to make his name familiar to a wider base of voters. He's been out of office a year, and has two years until the next Presidential election, so he needs to do something to keep his name recognizable to the public. Regularly appearing on television to comment in support of Democratic positions and policy is NOT a bad way to accomplish that.

But, as I said, we have time. I try not to bet on races until all of the competitors have been identified.

Hillary may well end up being the nominee. Or maybe she won't. Any statements beyond that are simply speculation and wishful thinking.

[Rowdyboy]

104. Good luck convincing Bernie to join the Democratic party. He's been very clear in the past

that will never happen and Bernies not the kind of guy to waffle on things like principle.

[Xithras]

106. Oh I know. Bernie has no hope.

He's just my ideological "default" until someone better comes along.

[Mike Nelson]

101. We need to KEEP the Presidency with...

...the most electable candidate possible.

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

102. How about we work on making the President

we have, do what he needs to do and let 2016 take care of itself when it gets here?

[struggle4progress]

107. It's too early