Hillary Clinton for VP?

[redgreenandblue]

Just throwing things out there.

[RandiFan1290]

1. No

[TexasTowelie]

11. Why am I not surprised? nt

[demmiblue]

12. Why would you be surprised? It is a dumb and pointless idea. n/t

[USALiberal]

16. Because it is obvious! Nt

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. No. Absolutely not.

She's too much of a lightning rod, and anyhow the VP should be a good deal younger because that person would be the most likely candidate in 2024. Anyhow, the choice should probably be a PoC, maybe Harris or Rice.

[Hortensis]

24. I'd like to stick this lightening rod right up the butts

of all the mean-spirited troublemakers who have no shame and are completely unrepentant. I'd like to make them repent! They're getting away with inexcusable behavior that helped elect depraved, disordered Trump and the Republicans -- while pretending it was HER fault -- and we're supposed to pander to their malicious dishonesty?

There are a lot of good reasons why HRC'd make a fantastic VP. Agitating their spite would just be a particularly personally satisfying one.

Age is of course a real issue. I disagree about making race a criteria on top of gender. We've already cut out half the population from consideration. Adding AA would cut out another 87% of women.

[Celerity]

3. absolutely not nt

[elleng]

4. Interested in attracting all the Hillary haters?

Do NOT forget, there are MANY. We have to DIScourage such, not ENcourage it.

[Aristus]

5. And give the screeching, shit-flinging Trumpanzees another reason to get to the polls?

If they enjoyed voting against her once, they are going to fucking love the chance to vote against her a second time. Leave the poor woman alone. She has suffered enough.

[OhZone]

6. I'd love that myself, but -

not a good idea politically. :'(

[Captain Stern]

7. I'll take a hard pass on that.

She would have made an incredible President.

Our country would be 1000 times better off if she'd won in 2016.

But she didn't win. And a lot of the reasons she didn't win are still there. There is a large segment of this country that wrongfully dislikes her, and even hates her.

We're trying to win the 2020 election....not find ways to lose it.

[demmiblue]

8. Just stop. n/t

[Kingofalldems]

9. Cabinet member for sure.

How about AG?

[Happy Hoosier]

10. Nope. WE need a clean break from 2016. NT

[Caliman73]

13. Hillary Clinton is AWESOME.

She is the brightest, most qualified person to have run for president in the last 50 years. She has been an outstanding public servant and all of the ugliness that has been leveled at her is plain insanity.

That said, her presence in the 2020 race would be the spark that is needed to amp up a demoralized Trump base. Her name in the 2020 election would give Trump a shot in the arm where right now he has a shot in the dark.

She should definitely be considered for a top Cabinet position. Attorney General would be good for her if not Kamala Harris.

Not VP though.

[karynnj]

28. I would argue that either Al Gore or John Kerry were every bit as bright and as qualified

On bright alone, Obama beats her easily. There is hyperbole claiming that every time there is a nominee.

I KNOW there are people extremely committed to HRC for decades. That alone shows something, but it is certainly debatable to claim she was the best. She was actually, not even Obama's best SOS if climate change and the environment are important to you. The Paris Accord would not have happened if not for Kerry and he initiated the Our Oceans conferences that are still going on an annual basis and making progress on improving the oceans. Both of those accomplishments came out of work Kerry was involved in during his 28 years as Senator. They and other accomplishments as SOS suggest how his diplomatic, creative and intellectual skills would have served him had he become President.

As to Al Gore, like Biden, he was a very useful, valuable leader assigned important tasks by the president he served for eight years. His Earth in the Balance was an early call to act on climate change. I do not think you can easily claim that he was not as prepared and bright as HRC.

[Dem4Life1102]

14. No

Need someone without all her baggage.

[totodeinhere]

15. With all due respect to Hillary she would be much too controversial.

But there are plenty of other well qualified women including women of color. I do think that there are plenty of uses for her talents that President Biden will be able to draw on in some capacity however.

[Freedomofspeech]

17. Absolutely not...

Love her but now is not the time.

[Fiendish Thingy]

18. Nope nt

[thesquanderer]

19. We need a VP who will increase rather than decrease our chances of winning WI/MI/PA. (n/t)

[whistler162]

20. Plastic bag and pooper scooper

for the things, you threw out.

What is it with people and having two septuagenarians on the ticket?

No Warren
No Clinton

Val Demming
Tammy Duckworth
Stacy Abrams
and others YES

[jmowreader]

21. Trump would love that

He would get a second chance to run against her server closet.

I like Hillary. Three million more people than Trump like Hillary. But we really can’t give Trump an issue like that to campaign on.

[area51]

30. +1, n/t

[phylny]

22. No.

Loved her, donated to her, voted for her, and no.

[JustGene]

23. No, but

it would be fun to watch if they won.

[DFW]

25. She is not interested.

If it has been thrown out there, you can take it back now.

It will be a woman, Biden has said so. There is no logical reason to start limiting his options for him. It's not our decision. If a potential VP candidate says "I'm out, not me," such as Michelle Obama or Hillary Clinton, I think they are capable enough of stating their intentions and their preferences without needing any further interpretations from us. It will just be someone else, and it will be a person of Biden's choosing.

[Vogon_Glory]

27. Monstrously Unfair, But No

What was done to Hillary in 2016 and the two decades plus before then was monstrously unfair. She would have been a great President, and there would be far less suffering than what we have now.

That said, I think it’s time for our party to look to new faces, possibly Afro-American, possibly Latinos.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

29. No, she's not old enough.

Jimmy Carter, on the other hand, is well into his 90's, plus he has four years experience in the Oval Office.

I shouldn't need the sarcasm thingy.

But Hillary Clinton for VP is an incredibly bad idea. As others have already pointed out, she's divisive and her presence on the ballot would definitely bring out all the Clinton (both of them) haters.

And even though I seem to be the only person here who still thinks Biden is too old, it ought to be obvious to the most casual observer that a much younger person needs to be in the VP position.

Yes, I will vote for him.

[SoonerPride]

31. No. As much as I love her and am still with her, no. I don't want that fight again.

Leave her in peace.