2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIf Hillary runs for the Presidency...
she will win the Presidency by a landslide that the U.S. has never seen before. I honestly don't understand why the Republicans are wasting their time on this issue of Benghazi. This will be a backfire of epic proportions if this is their focus from this point forward. Not only will the U.S. economy strengthen when the debt ceiling no longer is the hot topic issue, but Obama will be able to lay the groundwork for changes he can accomplish with the remaining term while in office. By doing so, Hillary can walk into a good situation unlike Obama did with the mess Bush left behind.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)every bit of negativity helps Hillary win another million votes.
and the greatest thing is, her haters reveal themselves and it makes it easier and easier
And President Obama said from day one this will take longer than just his term, it is an ongoing process started that cannot be reversed.
RudynJack
(1,044 posts)and hope she runs and wins.
But your over-the-top declarations make me cringe. It's embarrassing to real Clinton supporters. It comes across as trollish.
DJ13
(23,671 posts)Dont jinx it, that was what was being said before the 08 election.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)Deep13
(39,154 posts)I'd love to see her in the top job, I just wonder how she would get there and how effective she would be given the Rs exist.
CTyankee
(63,903 posts)election by appealing to Independents and they sure aren't doing that.
I really don't know what the R party will even look like by 2016. But they continue to headlong rush in decline, heedless that they are soon to go over the cliff to oblivion...
xtraxritical
(3,576 posts)BlueDemKev
(3,003 posts)No way he'd be able to serve two terms. Hillary isn't exactly young either. She'll be 69 in 2016.
We need to be ready with some alternative candidates just in case Hillary falls thru. Back in '88 we all presumed that Gary Hart was a cinch for the nomination (which he was), but when his candidacy fell thru, there were no strong candidates in the remaining pool.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Both served the country great in their respective offices (and as Senators). 2016 is going to be an open primary with no clear favorite for our side. I think there are plenty of candidates who can run and win.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)No one I know thought Gary Hart was anything worth liking.
and no one I know thought Hart was anywhere near the top.
Gary Hart is much like John Edwards.
Both are clones and tried to say they were JFK or RFK.
JFK was the original JFK.
Not the imitator like Hart or Edwards
That is what is great about Barack Obama.
Generations from now, others will say they are the next Barack Obama.
Being the first Barack Obama is the historic.
Hillary Rodham is the first.
Historic.
The one others will grow up saying they want to be Hillary.
Jesse Jackson I voted for twice.
Jerry Brown I voted for three times.
The haters tore down Jesse Jackson like they attempt to do to President Obama and both President Clinton and President Hillary Rodham45.
btw(to NO ONE specific) those that say no more Clinton's do a terrible disservice to women everywhere.
Hillary could have been in other countries, the President back in 1992.
But it was NOT possible in the USA, a country where like blacks, women were not treated as equal under the words Thomas Jefferson wrote.
To say a woman can't do something, is just well, wrong, wrong wrong.
To say a woman can't do something, because her husband did? That is just so sexist and unenlightened here in 2013. What are we in the dark ages?
Why do people always say this person or that person can't?
What does that say to kids?
Don't marry because your husband might be successful?
What year is this?
everyone told Dr. King, he couldn't.
everyone told Gandhi, he couldn't.
everyone told Edison he couldn't
everyone told Golda Meir she couldn't
everyone told President Obama he couldn't.
everyone is trying to tell Hillary she couldn't.
The great ones do, in spite of the 1000s of extra obstacles tossed in their way.
It is time to tear down that wall.
Proud Public Servant
(2,097 posts)She'll win, probably, though only a fool would call it this early. But it won't be an historic landslide. At best she'll match Obama '08 in the electoral college -- and that will leave her with fewer electoral votes than he got, because our states lost population (and therefore votes) in the 2010 census. But that means she's take IN and NE-2, both of which seem unlikely. Really, you're probably looking at Hillary 347 - GOP 191 as an absolute best-case scenario (that's the Obama '12 vote plus NC). Thrown Schweitzer on the bottom of the ticket and maybe you get to 350. But 475? Y'all need to put the crack pipe down.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)If she does run (and as I have said repeatedly I don't think she will), there is no way she'd break 400 EVs. There maybe some potential to pick up a few states as they are turning purple (including possibly reclaiming NC). Yes, put down the crack pipe indeed.
illegaloperation
(260 posts)Reagan won 49 states. That would be very very hard for Hillary to beat.
kitt6
(516 posts)Hillary 2016.
DFW
(54,358 posts)Corsi will be out there Swiftboating away, and Fox will become "Benghazi News" until the day after the election.
But Hillary will be 69 then. She would be the oldest president to take office except for Reagan, and it's not like she would be able (or willing, knowing her) to take Republican-style of down time. First she would have to want it. Right now, I don't think she has decided, but as the time draws near, I think she will reluctantly pass. Of course, this will not stop her from deflecting Republican attention, and let them think they are running against her until the last second before declaring her non-candidacy, and laugh at them for wasting a quarter billion of Koch-Adelson-Murdoch money on smearing her for nothing.
Of course, if she DOES run, she'll win, and all the smearing will still have been for nothing.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)CTyankee
(63,903 posts)other, more pressing and recent disclosures of whatever on either side.
LeftInTX
(25,258 posts)They aren't supposed to know this
CTyankee
(63,903 posts)Zorro
(15,740 posts)WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)In what may be the most serious allegation ever made against the former Secretary of State, Fox News Channel reported today that Hillary Clinton was involved in the conspiracy to murder President Abraham Lincoln.
The latest charge against Mrs. Clinton was reported by Fox host Sean Hannity, who said that the evidence of her role in the Lincoln assassination came mainly in the form of e-mails.
According to Mr. Hannity, If its true that Hillary Clinton killed Lincoln, this could have a major impact on her chances in 2016.
The accusation against Mrs. Clinton drew a strong response from Sen. Lindsey Graham (R.S. Carolina): Theres been a concerted effort by Hillary Clinton to cover up her role in President Lincolns murder. She has said nothing about it. This is bigger than Watergate, the Cuban missile crisis, and the Second World War put together.
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2013/05/fox-new-evidence-hillary-killed-lincoln.html#entry-more
NoPasaran
(17,291 posts)Congress better get investigatin' soon.