John Podesta says Hillary Clinton is not running in 2020, rejects reports as 'media catnip'
Source: New York Daily News
The Democratic 2020 primaries just became a little less crowded.
John Podesta on Tuesday refuted reports that Hillary Clinton is considering a bid to challenge President Trump in the next general election.
Media catnip, the former Clinton campaign chairman told the Daily News in an email.
During an earlier appearance on CNN, Podesta was more expansive.
Read more: https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-pol-podesta-clinton-2020-trump-20190129-story.html
RandiFan1290
(6,221 posts)Achilleaze
(15,543 posts)corporate wankers
DemKittyNC
(743 posts)and I am sad she got so screwed over in the 2016 election but I am glad she is not running this time. We have a lot of very good people running so far (and a few we could definitely do without) so I think we are in a much stronger position than we were in 2016 now.
DirtEdonE
(1,220 posts)Hillary has the experience and the knowledge to rid us of the nasty infection we're suffering. Just like Nancy has the experience and knowledge to handle the agent of that infection, trump.
I'd love to see Hillary have the opportunity to exact revenge on trump and putin and the entire GOP. I'd make a big bowl of popcorn for that show.
But we're past that time now, I fear. We can't risk another loss. trump 2020, oh lordy to borrow a phrase, we can't survive that. We have to win this time. Losing is no longer an option.
TheCowsCameHome
(40,167 posts)There are plenty of good possibilities out there.
DirtEdonE
(1,220 posts)If the winner had actually won. But then I get too depressed when I realize where we actually are instead.
Hillary Clinton was one of the most qualified candidates, if not the most qualified candidate, to ever run for President of the United States. And just look at what we have instead. putin's puppet. A useful fool running errands for an evil dictator he aspires to become.
President Obama told us not to take our way of life for granted before he left office but it looks like we did just that.
still_one
(92,061 posts)are alive and well, and they are not going away, nor will they be forgotten, which is why the Democratic party will be selecting a nominee who was NOT in that race I believe.
BlueMTexpat
(15,365 posts)I really like most of those who have already declared. But some need to bow out soon as they don't have a chance.
I'd also like to see Biden quit sitting on the fence and bow out entirely. He still has a lot of residual anger against him among women because of his role in dissing Anita Hill and getting Clarence Thomas onto SCOTUS. That is not simply my opinion; it is fact.
I also believe that Hillary still has a LOT to contribute to the world.
But I never believed that she would run in 2020. What some never realized was that it took a LOT of persuasion to get her to run in 2016. She knew exactly what she would face. If anything, she had underestimated the vitriol.
And none of us had considered how Russian troll farms were driving the narrative, unchallenged by our so-called "liberal" media.
still_one
(92,061 posts)is sure not a positive attribute regarding his decision making capabilities in my view. He has been thinking about this for decades. It is understandable his hesitation in 2016 because of his son. No one should be harsh on him for that, but this is for 2020, and it is time for him to commit or not.
There is no doubt his role in the Anita Hill hearings will be an issue, however, if he decides to run, whether that is an issue or not will be decided by the nomination process, and how he deals with it. For instance, if he doesn't recognize how Anita Hill was treated, and acknowledge that he did not protect her as was his obligation by presenting her witnesses, which he neglected to do, I think he will have a difficult time achieving the nomination.
BlueMTexpat
(15,365 posts)he had an opportunity to apologize to Anita Hill during the Kavanaugh hearings and he chose not to. So this issue will NOT go away easily.
He has also always been a bit too wishy-washy for me.
Now more than ever, I think that we need leaders who say what they mean and mean what they say! No equivocations!.
Also - my name may be misleading. I'm actually from MT. The "expat" signals that I mostly live abroad, not in TX
still_one
(92,061 posts)a dollar short for others:
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/9/21/17886484/joe-biden-anita-hill-brett-kavanaugh-christine-blasey-ford
He is a politiccal animal, and that contributes to his being wishy-washy.
One would think after what we have been through though, Democrats in general would be more direct instead of giving ambigious answers.
Sorry I assumed because of your alias you were from Texas.
I think we are mostly on the same page, an want to see new faces representing the Democrats in 2020
BlueMTexpat
(15,365 posts)And don't worry about the alias mistake ... others have made it too.
Polybius
(15,334 posts)Who would run against her? Trump again?
BootinUp
(47,078 posts)still_one
(92,061 posts)She said quite some time ago that she would NOT run, and frankly I don't blame her. The way the left, the right, and the media lied, distorted, and treated her was a disgrace.
It would be well advised if those who were part of 2016 smelled the coffee, and didn't run either, but I suspect that won't happen either
hamsterjill
(15,220 posts)I know thats not a popular choice, but I think the election was stolen from her and I would like to see her get her shot - fairly.
I know thats not going to happen, but I cant think of anyone better qualified to get us out of the Trump depression.