General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsQ: Should Hillary return to the Senate in 2018?
If so, in what type of state should she make her run?
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)JTFrog
(14,274 posts)Kentonio
(4,377 posts)That's what I thought.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)Sanders has spent many years in congress. Hillary spent two terms and then left to do other things. Presumably you want to parachute her into a seat somewhere right? Why?
You will always have a reason.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)I'm just confused by why. There appears to be absolutely no connection here, so why bring it up?
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)that would make you say Clinton should.
Your one word "No" was dismissive and insulting to the woman's entire career.
I would say that's also her decision to make. We don't deserve her anyway.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)And I don't really understand the desire some people have to push Hillary back into politics when she's made it quite clear she's retiring.
kerry-is-my-prez
(8,796 posts)Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)You also left out HRC experience as Secretary of State.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)More qualified than one term as SOS personally. I understand your opinion is different however.
I didn't leave it out though, we were talking about someone running for senate. Bernie has a senate seat in a state he's worked in for many decades. Hillary doesn't have that kind of tie to any one state. She was parachuted into New York, and stopped representing them after 2 terms because she wanted the Presidency. It's not a true home state to her.
Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)He's not a Democrat, and any of the 3 are spoilers.
janterry
(4,429 posts)La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)was an activist citizen
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Blue_Adept
(6,430 posts)How long did the draft Warren campaign go on in the last couple of years when she repeatedly said no?
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)their complete opposition to her doing so, doesn't it?
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)And a great woman go by?
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)nikibatts
(2,198 posts)L. Coyote
(51,129 posts)You don't nominate an old person for a lifetime post. And you select a qualified jurist.
choie
(4,390 posts)Enough already with the Clintons
OrwellwasRight
(5,209 posts)And nepostism. And the DLC. No Mrs. Sanders. No Chelsea Clinton. No 10th generation Kennedy. No Bush, Shrub, Tree, or Weed. No Trump or Kushner. No Gore. No Reagan. No Shriver. No Schwarzenegger. How about a new person who is not the son, daughter, mother, wife, brother, sister, husband, cousin, or grandchild of any current or prior office holder?
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)JNelson6563
(28,151 posts)He works hard and is quite impressive yet seems rather humble. I think he could go where he wants on his own merit. Wouldn't want to see him disqualified cause he's a Kennedy.
OrwellwasRight
(5,209 posts)How many unconnected no-name nobodies with just as much smarts and work ethic get passed by because someone with a name is assumed to be better and more competent? It's the same issue as legacy admits to private schools.
This country has gone too far with promoting connected people up the chains of power, IMO. I'd rather have someone who had no connections to the existing plutocracy, and frankly someone who went to public school.
JNelson6563
(28,151 posts)Your closed mindedness is unfortunate.
OrwellwasRight
(5,209 posts)You mean thinking that someone from a non-elite family is capable of running the country is closed minded? Ok, yeah, that's closed minded. Hysterical. Love to hear your views on affirmative action.
JNelson6563
(28,151 posts)Where oh where did I say anything remotely resembling what you claim? Nowhere. I am open to people from ALL walks of life to run for office. I don't think anyone should be excluded because of where they come from.
YOU do.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)However will they cope with not being chosen to run for the highest job in the land..
OrwellwasRight
(5,209 posts)How many people never got the chance to enter public service because there was a Kennedy in the race who got the backing and the money? It's not mental gymnastics; it's reality. The fact that you can't see it means you are blind to the privileges of being a Kennedy and a Bush and a Clinton and all the rest.
JNelson6563
(28,151 posts)I will put it as simply as I can.
I believe no one should be barred from running for public office based on where they come from.
No one is superior to anyone else.
You want to make elections more fair? Public funding of campaigns and the end of gerrymandering would be the way to go. Not excluding certain people. That is wrong from any angle.
OrwellwasRight
(5,209 posts)You should try out for the Olympics! Where did I use the word "excluded"? What I said was I don't want any retreaded dynastic candidate to be President. That is not the same as excluding them. I didn't want Trump to be President either. Clearly he wasn't excluded. Words have meaning. Let's stick to what's said. You work for yet another dynastic candidate and I'll work for a a new up and comer. I don't need to be told that's wrong. It's isn't. Get over yourself.
JNelson6563
(28,151 posts)you're looking for a fight and soapboxing opportunity. Please proceed, I have had enough.
Seriously. omg.
mhw
(678 posts)Bright & compassionate.
https://m.
kerry-is-my-prez
(8,796 posts)magical. Sorry if it's against "the rules" according to some here to have someone from a dynastical family run for office. Personally, I think that is just a convenient "excuse."
mhw
(678 posts)Short sighted & empty slander.
I'll take Joe K over any challenger in his lifetime. His head & heart are in the right place. Smart, educated & "the best for humanity" drives his decisions.
We should have more like him, but we will be grateful with the good fortune of just this one.
Joe K lll, should someday be our President.
Alice11111
(5,730 posts)who have served before.
Lotusflower70
(3,082 posts)No Bush, Shrub, Tree, or Weed. That's hilarious. But we might need the weed. Just sayin.
OrwellwasRight
(5,209 posts)Lotusflower70
(3,082 posts)I couldn't resist. But more and more states are going that way regardless of Jeff Sessions.
Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)Still In Wisconsin
(4,450 posts)ENOUGH ALREADY with the Clintons.
Alice11111
(5,730 posts)Doubtful anyway. Unfair, but too much Hillary Hate, by irrational deplorables pounding in the propaganda for 30 years. So, I'm hoping we have other options.
JOE KENNEDY sounds good. We will see.
Still In Wisconsin
(4,450 posts)If HRC was/were our best option, I would absolutely back her 110% Thing is, I really doubt that she is, and largely not her fault. She should be President now, no doubt about that.
oasis
(51,394 posts)StevieM
(10,531 posts)will be running for re-election.
HRC is retired following an outstanding career in which she served our country with honor and distinction.
She will continue to do her part to make the world a better place.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)and primary her.
awesomerwb1
(4,453 posts)Jacquette
(152 posts)no. No. NO. NO
Don't even ask the question.
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)Hillary should take on whatever path she sets for herself. Contrary to popular belief, you aren't automatically dead because you've lived a few decades. I support her choice and her right to make. She has undoubtedly contributed to society many time over what any of us here have.
kristopher
(29,798 posts)I'd just seen parts of the speech she gave today and I was wishing she were contributing directly to the Senate's process.
And in my mind, New York wouldn't be the best choice as it is a safe state. I'd like to see her directly take on the policies of the Trump administration and campaign in an R leaning state. I believe such a direct charge would have a genuine chance of breaking the back of the full Republican agenda.
I also think the person I saw on stage today could unquestionably succeed.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Think you could have seen that coming
R B Garr
(17,339 posts)made it even more obvious where this was supposed to go.
onecaliberal
(35,244 posts)Including running for office if she chooses.
Tiggeroshii
(11,088 posts)Kentonio
(4,377 posts)american_ideals
(613 posts)Watch her recent speech at Wellesley and tell us you refuse to put her on the Supreme court.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)Supreme Court justices are supposed to be picked from the finest legal minds in the country, people who have spent their careers serving in law and on the bench. It's not supposed to be a runners up prize for a charismatic politician.
american_ideals
(613 posts)She's a lawyer and one that knows what average Americans need, based on her speeches. We need some non-appellate, non prosecutors on SCOTUS.
http://abovethelaw.com/2010/05/you-dont-need-no-stinkin-law-degree-to-be-on-the-supreme-court/
The Supreme Court Needs a Justice Who Isn't a Lawyer
http://bigthink.com/experts-corner/the-supreme-court-needs-a-justice-who-isnt-a-lawyer
And
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/03/17/supreme-court-merrick-garland-diversity-column/81834920/
But when the Supreme Court is composed of narrowly specialized former judges from elite schools, the likelihood that the law will be comprehensible to ordinary people and non-lawyers seems pretty small. (In addition, a recent book by my University of Tennessee colleague Ben Barton makes a pretty strong case that lawyer-judges systematically favor the sort of legal complexity that, shockingly, makes lawyers rich. He, too, recommends non-lawyer judges, which, as he notes, are common in other nations and were common in colonial America.)
book_worm
(15,951 posts)we want somebody who will last decades.
crazycatlady
(4,492 posts)Her replacement (Kirsten Gillibrand) is a very effective senator and a keeper
kristopher
(29,798 posts)Sorry about that.
Here is the list of 2018 states with Senate seat elections.
4.1 Arizona
4.2 California
4.3 Connecticut
4.4 Delaware
4.5 Florida
4.6 Hawaii
4.7 Indiana
4.8 Maine
4.9 Maryland
4.10 Massachusetts
4.11 Michigan
4.12 Minnesota
4.13 Mississippi
4.14 Missouri
4.15 Montana
4.16 Nebraska
4.17 Nevada
4.18 New Jersey
4.19 New Mexico
4.20 New York
4.21 North Dakota
4.22 Ohio
4.23 Pennsylvania
4.24 Rhode Island
4.25 Tennessee
4.26 Texas
4.27 Utah
4.28 Vermont
4.29 Virginia
4.30 Washington
4.31 West Virginia
4.32 Wisconsin
4.33 Wyoming
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_2018
I think she could potentially win a seat we probably wouldn't otherwise get. Tennessee would be my intuitive pick.
crazycatlady
(4,492 posts)I remember her senate campaign. That was my first major election. I also grew up in the area she now calls home and remember all the road closures when she was in town.
The only time I ever voted GOP was against her in 2000. My reason was I thought she was using NY to further her career instead of wanting to represent the people of NY.
kristopher
(29,798 posts)I'd like to see her put her celebrity status to work in the Senate. She can, in word and deed, lead the resistance.
YMMV
karynnj
(59,831 posts)as they do not "bridge" earlier years. I seriously doubt that they would vote her Senate minority/majority leader instead of Schumer. In 2000, she was a backbencher, but there was always the expectation that she would be President in a future year. Though that can not be ruled out, I seriously doubt the party would push her as the nominee again.
What seems clear is that she has started an organization that will raise money for many progressive/left leaning groups. I can imagine it expanding to become another Democratic think tank that will look into policy issues and maybe host conferences - on issues that Clinton would select. This would give her an organization to back her efforts. Her own celebrity can get her time on TV where she will be treated respectfully whenever she wants.
It is not clear how she would be more effective - at this point - in the Senate. PS - to avoid anyone thinking this is an attack - I doubt that President Obama, VP Biden, or SoS John Kerry would want to be in the Senate at this point either. All of them - and HRC - have interesting opportunities that do not involve running for office.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)crazycatlady
(4,492 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Hassin Bin Sober
(26,629 posts)A guy that would caucus with the Trent Lot, Rick Santorum and Bill Frist?
crazycatlady
(4,492 posts)At that point in my life, I didn't follow politics at all and had no idea who any of those guys were.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)How any woman votes for the GOP is beyond me. It's not as if there's no history. Jeeze. But to do it and blame Hillary? Fuck that. You were a young uneducated person who made a mistake. You're the one who owes fellow voters an apology, not HRC.
crazycatlady
(4,492 posts)Has everyone on this forum voted straight Democratic since they came of age?
(For the record, she won without my vote). I regret that vote. My Democratic aunt voted for Trump this year (in a state that flipped). I think she owes an apology more than I do.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)It would have been a bit more honest if you'd come clean about being so informed in the first post on this- instead of knocking HRC for being "ambitious". It galls me that anyone can say a single one of them is not ambitious- why is this a thing?
crazycatlady
(4,492 posts)People didn't like that she chose a state that she had no prior ties to (I don't think the same would have been said about Arkansas, where she lived pre First Lady days). It is not the same as if Michelle Obama ran for the Senate seat in IL (hypothetical as it won't happen). The fact is that she ran 5 points behind Al Gore.
There are (young) male politicians I think should run for national office but their red states are holding them back (Jason Kander, Mayor Pete who ran for DNC chair). As much as I am a fan of both of them, I would not like it if they moved to New Jersey (where I live now) to run for office.
I'd rather people run for office in their local communities no matter where it is. I don't like anyone moving to another state just to run for office--- male or female.
Voltaire2
(14,527 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,995 posts)I would take a lie detector test.
lapucelle
(19,501 posts)and she served the people of NY quite well, including my husband, an FDNY 9/11 survivor who has medical monitoring and at-cost, life prolonging medication because of Senator Clinton's efforts.
I would never waste my vote in order to punish a candidate for an imagined transgression. That's one of the reasons why Trump is in the White House.
HarmonyRockets
(397 posts)if this is a troll post or not.
nkpolitics1212
(8,617 posts)California is an open primary state. Hillary and DiFi will likely finish in 1st and 2nd place in the open primary. In a 2 person race in November, Hillary defeats DiFi. Another thing could happen is Feinstein steps aside for Hillary like Orrin Hatch stepping aside for Romney.
Hekate
(93,840 posts)...get rid of an extremely powerful high-seniority Senator (Diane Feinstein) in exchange for a 70 year old freshman Senator with no seniority whatsoever.
Why would we do that?
In addition, former Secretary of State Clinton has repeatedly stated that she is NOT running for an elective office again, and that she IS now a citizen activist.
Why would you not believe her?
Is this another variation on the theme of how Hillary still "owes" us something, despite having already given decades of her life to social justice causes, and having been beaten bloody for her efforts?
Or what?
book_worm
(15,951 posts)she is running, stepped aside that would change things. But I still don't think it is likely to happen. She would also not challenge somebody who is a friend and worked and supported her in 2008 and 2016 as Feinstein did.
SMC22307
(8,090 posts)And how badly did Donnie Two Scoops beat her in Tennessee?
book_worm
(15,951 posts)already have incumbent democrats who are already running--she will not challenge a sitting Democratic Senator, so what state do you think she would run in?
California[edit]
Main article: United States Senate election in California, 2018
Four-term Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein won a special election in 1992 and was elected to full terms in 1994, 2000, 2006, and 2012. She will be 85 years old in 2018. She is running for re-election (I wish somebody would run against Feinstein given her age, but it won't be HRC).
Connecticut[edit]
Main article: United States Senate election in Connecticut, 2018
One-term Democratic Senator Chris Murphy was elected with 55% of the vote in 2012. He will be 45 years old in 2018. He is running for reelection
Delaware[edit]
Main article: United States Senate election in Delaware, 2018
Three-term Democratic Senator Tom Carper won re-election with 66% of the vote in 2012.
Florida--which she lost to Trump in 2016:
Main article: United States Senate election in Florida, 2018
Three-term Democratic Senator Bill Nelson was re-elected with 55% of the vote in 2012. Nelson will be 76 years old in 2018. He has strongly hinted he will seek re-election to a fourth term in office
Indiana--a state she would lose big especially as a carpet bagger
Main article: United States Senate election in Indiana, 2018
One-term Democratic Senator Joe Donnelly was elected with 50.04% of the vote in 2012. He will be 63 years old in 2018. He is running
Massachusetts[edit]
Main article: United States Senate election in Massachusetts, 2018
One-term Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren was elected with 54% of the vote in 2012. She will be 69 years old in 2018. She is running.[24]
Shiva Ayyadurai[25] and Allen Waters[26] are running for the Republican nomination.
Michigan[edit]
Main article: United States Senate election in Michigan, 2018
Three-term Democratic Senator Debbie Stabenow was re-elected with 59% of the vote in 2012. She will be 68 years old in 2018. She is running.[27]
Minnesota[edit]
Main article: United States Senate election in Minnesota, 2018
Two-term Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar was re-elected with 65% of the vote in 2012. She will be 58 years old in 2018. She is running
Missouri[edit]
Main article: United States Senate election in Missouri, 2018
Two-term Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill was re-elected with 55% of the vote in 2012. She will be 65 years old in 2018. She is running.
Montana[edit]
Main article: United States Senate election in Montana, 2018
Two-term Democratic Senator Jon Tester was re-elected with 49% of the vote in 2012. He will be 62 years old in 2018. He is running
New Jersey[edit]
Main article: United States Senate election in New Jersey, 2018
Two-term Democratic Senator Bob Menendez was re-elected with 59% of the vote in 2012. Menendez was originally appointed to the seat in January 2006. He will be 64 years old in 2018. He is running
New Mexico[edit]
Main article: United States Senate election in New Mexico, 2018
One-term Democratic Senator Martin Heinrich was elected with 51% of the vote in 2012. He will be 47 years old in 2018. He is running.[34]
New York[edit]
Main article: United States Senate election in New York, 2018
One-term Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand was elected with 72% of the vote in 2012. She had previously been appointed to the seat in 2009, and won a special election to remain in office in 2010. She will be 51 years old in 2018. She is running
Ohio[edit]
Main article: United States Senate election in Ohio, 2018
Two-term Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown was re-elected with 51% of the vote in 2012. He will be 65 years old in 2018. He is running
Pennsylvania[edit]
Main article: United States Senate election in Pennsylvania, 2018
Two-term Democratic Senator Bob Casey, Jr. was re-elected with 54% of the vote in 2012. He will be 58 years old in 2018. He is running
Rhode Island[edit]
Main article: United States Senate election in Rhode Island, 2018
Two-term Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse was reelected with 64% of the vote in 2012. He will be 63 years old in 2018. He is running.
Virginia[edit]
Main article: United States Senate election in Virginia, 2018
One-term Democratic Senator Tim Kaine was elected with 53% of the vote in 2012. He will be 61 years old in 2018. He is running.[87][50]
Washington[edit]
Main article: United States Senate election in Washington, 2018
Three-term Democratic Senator Maria Cantwell was re-elected with 61% of the vote in 2012. She will be 60 years old in 2018.
West Virginia[edit]
Main article: United States Senate election in West Virginia, 2018
One-term Democratic Senator Joe Manchin was elected with 61% of the vote in 2012. He originally won the seat in a 2010 special election. He will be 71 years old in 2018. Manchin is running for re-election.
Wisconsin[edit]
Main article: United States Senate election in Wisconsin, 2018
One-term Democratic Senator Tammy Baldwin was elected with 51% of the vote in 2012. She will be 56 years old in 2018. She is running
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)I guess I could ask if Bernie should run for congress in 2018.
Makes as much sense. But then you would be giving all the people who have issues with Bernie a chance to "reply" in a way that indicates just how much they think Bernie should not be running.
Amirite?
Iggo
(48,138 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Last edited Sat May 27, 2017, 07:50 PM - Edit history (1)
SMC22307
(8,090 posts)WHUT?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)SMC22307
(8,090 posts)but it was pretty amusing.
samnsara
(18,165 posts)..and she has more time to devote to US!
Squinch
(52,203 posts)Tatiana
(14,167 posts)and the restoration of our democracy.
Demsrule86
(70,703 posts)She won't run for office again.
Response to kristopher (Original post)
Post removed
LenaBaby61
(6,991 posts)No more than tRumputin's destroying this country real time by foisting Crooked Jared & his daughter-wife complicit Ivanka onto us
lapucelle
(19,501 posts)LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)Next....
Akoto
(4,268 posts)I think she does well with it, too. Her most recent speech showed a lot of humor, a good personality, and political awareness. She seems to be at her best when she's not constrained by the expectations of a political candidate's image.
Progressive dog
(7,190 posts)so no.
mhw
(678 posts)Step forward Sec Clinton.
Her wisdom & global humanitarian lifelong commitment will always be a valuable asset to this nation.
Women's Rights are Human Rights ~ First Lady Hillary Clinton, Bejing 1993
Ahead of her time & brave enough to speak for women's rights when & where they weren't so accepted.
A speech that empowered women throughout the world.
https://m.
lapucelle
(19,501 posts)continue to live the meaningful and significant life of public service and leadership that she has led up to now.
Anyone who thinks that Hillary would try to reclaim her NY seat out of a misplaced sense of entitlement or randomly run in some other state doesn't know her very well.
Calista241
(5,595 posts)She'd have to run against Kirsten Gillibrand to win her way back into the Senate.
democratisphere
(17,235 posts)HRC is fearless against the redumbliCON party.
aintitfunny
(1,422 posts)mhw
(678 posts)making theie voices heard every chance they get.
Hillary has a great wisdom of experience to offer.
Super smart & enormously popular & loved world wide
She has the experience to speak on foreign affairs & where the world succeeds in the future as well as poverty & health of family & children.
Hillary is an amazing voice for all.
YES.
book_worm
(15,951 posts)because almost all of the GOP Senators up for re-election are from Red states that she would lose as she lost them in 2016.
mhw
(678 posts)indomitable Hillary Clinton will find a place to be heard again & influence her commitment to global human rights.
bluecollar2
(3,622 posts)Too much of a distraction and too polarizing a candidate
mhw
(678 posts)But since when do Dems & the wise among us take the word of traitors & dictators?
Hillary didn't cause the smear campaign.
That was the coup of thuggery.
ATL Ebony
(1,097 posts)However, if she showed an interest I'd like to see her run in New York. She's experienced and would be a strong candidate. We already know she's not a wimp and would be a fierce fighter for democratic values.
onenote
(44,053 posts)book_worm
(15,951 posts)they think she could run in and actually win without challenging another Democratic Senator (which she won't) or running in a red state she would likely lose.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,995 posts)Thank you in advance.
Bradical79
(4,490 posts)Running an anti-Trump campaign, and running one of the most successful charities in the world, among other things. New York already has two Dem senators anyway. It also makes Trump and Republicans look extra petty still attacking someone that already "lost" their last election, and is no longer running for anything.
book_worm
(15,951 posts)There is an incumbent democrat running for re-election in 2018 in New York. That is the logical state. Illinois, her birth state, has no election. Arkansas, where she was First Lady, has no election, and besides she wouldn't win there. Any other state than those three are out of the question. Furthermore if you look at the other states that are up in 2018 most, if not all, incumbent dems are running again. The states where there isn't an incumbent dem are Red states that she lost in 2016 and would not be likely to win in 2018 as a carpetbegging candidate for the Senate.
trueblue2007
(17,841 posts)book_worm
(15,951 posts)I think anybody who thinks yes, should back it up by stating what state she should run in? Challenge The Democratic Senators in NY, MA, CT, DE, CA, WI, OH, PA, NJ, MI, WI, MN, WA? or run in a red state where most certainly she would lose. First, in my opinion, she would never challenge an incumbent Democratic Senator and all of these Dems have already said they are running again. Second, she would not change another loss by running in a red state.
mhw
(678 posts)You are right that she would never challenge another Dem.
She is greater than that..
She has loyalty to country & constitution.
onenote
(44,053 posts)And she's not going to run in a state she couldn't win as a presidential candidate.
.."she's not going to run in a state she couldn't win as a presidential candidate."
Considering who challenged her all along the way, I'm betting she'd have no problem winning NY. Knowing what we know now about the Trump/Putin massive smear campaign against her.
NY would elect her just to piss off Donald Trump.
Plus she's super smart on policy & global affairs. Her experience is unmatched.
She's npt going away no matter how hard anyone against her wishes it.
She will always emerge stronger & the world will be better for her presence.
She will be heard & admired once again.
onenote
(44,053 posts)Really? Pretty clear you don't know the slightest thing about Clinton.
mhw
(678 posts)mhw
109. Hillary will find a place that allows her to speak freely & finally be heard
You are right that she would never challenge another Dem.
She is greater than that..
She has loyalty to country & constitution.
Did you read this before assuming ?
As for this hypothetical OP that had everyone acting like the old days of the primary..
So yes hypothetically speaking, If Hillary hypothetically were to run in NY they would elect her "just to piss off Trump."
Its a hypothetical question & the really weird thing about it is how it invokes a rather uneasy primal primary-like edge.
I assure you, my opiniom nor any here on DU will have an iota of influence on Hillary Clinton's future political decisions.
Oye.
onenote
(44,053 posts)and then I read how you responded to my post that she wouldn't run in a state where she lost the race for president by suggesting she could win in NY.
So excuse me for being confused by your posts.
And thanks for clarifying, I think, that you agree she won't run against a Dem and won't run in a state she lost in 2016. Which leaves her, I believe, exactly nowhere to run.
mhw
(678 posts)..what if, just suppose now if Bill & Hillary BOTH decided to run for Senate or Congress from, oh say some state other than NY, & just suppose they ran in..oh say Vermont or Maine or Colorado or Ohio or Hawaii or Nevada maybe.
How would these hypotheticals figure. Would any State meet your approval or do you just not want Hilary or Bill to ever be involved in politics again.
I'm not getting why some get so fearful of a hypothetical like HRC running for Senate.
Relax, she's not saying anything about running for any seat.
Someone threw out a hypothetical OP & all fking hell broke loose.
Some posters just aren't taking it that serious because SOME OF US KNOW HILLARY WELL ENOUGH TO KNOW SHE WILL NEVER RUN AGAINST HER FRIEND KRISTEN GILIBRAND.
She has too much respect for her & knows there is no reason to challenge her.
And Yes, I believe at this point I certainly know far more about Sec Clinton than you.
So heave that condescending insult where it belongs.
Thank you DU for the Ignore Feature..
This is the most bizaar thread I have ever seen.
Peace.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(26,220 posts)succinct and to the point analyses of why she shouldn't run (where there are Democratic incumbents who'll be running) or why she wouldn't win (where there are Republican incumbents who'll be running and who she couldn't possibly beat).
Plus, there were a lot of complaints about her being a carpetbagger when she did move to NY to run for the Senate. It's also important to recall that she actually faced rather weak opponents in both of her Senatorial elections: Rick Lazio in 2000 and John Spencer in 2006. In fact, one of the concerns many people had about her running for President was that her track record of winning elections simply wasn't that strong.
And more to the point, she can do what she wants at this point in her life. Make speeches, earn money, play with her grandchildren, support whatever causes and candidates she chooses to support.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,995 posts)mhw
(678 posts)I think Bill should run for NY Senate!!
How bout that!!
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,995 posts)She was born in Illinois and moved to Arkansas, Washington D.C, and then New York. That means two of the three places she moved to were because of her husband's job.
mhw
(678 posts)It took a massive propaganda & corrupt electoral campaign organized against one woman who emerged in spite of it all, still strong, still wise, still smiling & still speaking the truth..yet millions more favored her than any other.
Everyone who challenged HRC had to fking lie about her & cheat to keep her from becoming our President.
Bunch of bully hacks purchased so we could have the s.o.b in the WH today.
I admire her more every day.
She will forever be admired cheered & loved wherever she goes forward from here.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,995 posts)I fail to see how somebody who holds him or herself out as a person of the left can take a shot at her when there are so many worthy targets.
mhw
(678 posts)Enjoy the day. You know Hillary is!
Her Wellsley Commencement Speech tells us precisely of the greatness & unstoppable Hillary Rodham Clinton.
How fortunate America would have been.
The nation would have emerged stronger, more secure, kinder & more admired around the world, just like her own solid qualities.
We all could have walked into a more promising & brighter, positive future.,
Her words & wisdom will always remain a guiding force.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,995 posts)I can't imagine the pain she is in and the regret and guilt she must be feel. Was she perfect? No, none of us are until we get to heaven, but she was a competent public servant who wanted to do well.
mhw
(678 posts)..figure for a free society. And that goes against all they stand for.
Human rights & all that, ya know.
They damn well know what good she will accomplish for this world if she is ever allowed the chance.
Its a continuation of the same bs that was organized pre-2016. There were many players in the game to silence her voice for America's future. And their fear of her popularity is what's still driving this today in such a venemous way.
We know. We saw that fear of her popularity & strength morph into something so despicable & anti-american.
And in spite of all their deceitful efforts, she still stands as the President chosen by the American people.
Remarkable woman isn't she!
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,995 posts)mhw
(678 posts)This is the Hillary we know so well.
This is the voice they organized to silence.
As the scandal of Trump becomes known it is obvious why they feared her.
She is everything they are not.
Good vs Evil.
*******************************
What Hillary Clinton wanted for America:
SNIP
The key to her speech was the four fights. She outlined what those will be, but said that said will outline specific policy changes in the coming weeks. Nevertheless, her vision is clearly outlined by the four fights:
Economy:
Clinton outlined a number of changes that would serve to strengthen the economy including strengthening the middle class, increasing the minimum wage, providing equal pay for women, making it illegal to discriminate against LBGT workers, rewriting the tax code, and focusing on lifelong learning that will allow works to adapt to a changing workplace. She also called for more affordable college for everyone and improving the infrastructure by creating an infrastructure bank that would sell bonds to help fund improvements roads, bridges, power grids, and broadband Internet. She called for protecting the environment by investing in clean energy and ending the denial of climate change. All these changes, which she will continue to outline in the coming weeks, will create jobs and improve the lives of American workers.
Family:
Families have struggled since the recession and Clinton believes that more attention needs to be paid to helping families by guaranteeing paid sick days, paid family leave, pre-school and child care. She also wants to focus on the uneven incarceration polices and provide help to those suffering with mental health issues and addiction.
Americas Leadership:
America has long been the leader in the world, but for America to maintain its leadership and influence, Clinton argues that we have not only show strength in our military, but we have to create economic and diplomatic partnerships across the globe. At the same time, we have to stand up to our adversaries and stand by our allies. We need to be better prepared against cyber attacks and provide better services to our veterans after they have served our country.
Governmental Reform:
Clinton argued that now is the time to take government out of corporate hands and back into the hands of Americans. She called for stopping the flow of unaccountable campaign funds, undoing Citizens United, and improving government technology so it is more open to the pubic. She also called for improvements to voting including universal registration, longer early voting periods, and ensuring that voting rights are protected despite the Supreme Courts recent decision.
***********************
And Here:
Scrolling down you will find a link for every issue confronting America & how she addressed each one.
She covered everyone.
https://hillaryspeeches.com/tag/four-fights/
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,995 posts)mhw
(678 posts)What kind of person objects to what she wanted America to become?
One either embraces the America she wanted for us all, or one wanted the America we now see being stripped clean.
Those were the choices on Nov 8 2016.
You see why they stilll shove their propaganda on us.
Just in case she steps out to speak again.
This is the Hillary they never bothered to know.
Only thing that was important was to keep her quiet.
And they're still in fear of her as evidenced by what they still repeat.
Right now is when we need her voice, more than ever before. People/families are being hurt..devastated, & that is soundly against everything she stands for.
Much love to you DemocratSinceBirth.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)What state should she buy a house in?
GBizzle
(209 posts)And I have yet to see a convincing rationale as to what other state she'd run in.
The Clintons have lived in New York for 17 years now, and I remember when she was called a "carpetbagger". Where else could she go, without making that charge much worse?
Surely you don't mean she should run in Arkansas - the state that gave her 33.65% of the vote in 2016. That's doomed to failure.
This idea is ridiculous. We might as well be asking if Gore, Kerry or Obama are returning to public office.
Let's make room for the next generation of talent in the party - we have plenty of good, younger elected officials who deserve the spotlight.
Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)Maybe Supreme Court, but I don't think she wants that kind of a role. She's best as an activist right now.