Pelosi: 'I think the country is ready for Hillary'

[SecularMotion]

In an interview with NBC's Andrea Mitchell, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said she's fully aboard the Hillary Clinton for President train -- if Clinton runs in 2016.

"I think the country is ready for Hillary," Pelosi said. "I certainly hope that she will choose to run. I think if she does, she will win. I think if and when she does, I think she'll be the best prepared person to enter the White House in decades."

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/18/19543752-pelosi-i-think-the-country-is-ready-for-hillary

[djean111]

1. And, next paragraph......"What about Joe Biden?"

Pelosi's answer to Mitchell: "Joe Biden is a magnificent leader in our country. There is absolutely no question he would be a great president. He made that point when he ran for president himself... So we are very blessed to have many excellent choices and not just limited to those two.""

So Nancy is not endorsing Hillary, as yet. Be silly to tie herself to one candidate, this early on.

[polichick]

2. She also said that she usually supports the nominee. Nancy is no fool!

[djean111]

3. Yep! She will go with whoever the National Committee decides should run.

[brooklynite]

11. Who has the National Commiitte ever decided SHOULDN'T run?

...or is this just more sour grapes that your candidate disn't win?

[djean111]

19. No sour grapes at all.

Just being realistic. My preferred candidate in 2008 was Hillary. Was too aghast at Bush, McCain, and Palin to pay attention to the corporate crap in those days. Continuous learning process.
Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if the nominee isn't someone we aren't even thinking about right now; I will wait and see.

[brooklynite]

25. Political reality is, if you're thinking of running, we know it now...

I met a half-dozen prospective candidates as far back as last year in Charlotte. Dream all you want about "two month" campaigns they have elsewhere; it takes too much time to raise the money and organize the team to slip in at the last minute.

[Socal31]

43. A young Illinois Senator recently came out of nowhere it seemed like.

n/t

[brooklynite]

45. Do you seriously believe Obama wasn't reaching out to supporters before 2007?

[Beacool]

7. Nancy has repeatedly said that she wants Hillary to run.

She has even said that she "prayed" for Hillary to run, for whatever that's worth.

[dionysus]

48. no need to get frustrated Bea. it's cold here now, instead of 95 degrees. take this in case you need

it.

[Beacool]

50. It's hot over here, but I'll save this fluffy banky for the cold season.

It's very pretty. Hmmmm, maybe I'll let the little prince borrow it for a while. LOL!!

Thank you, my friend.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

28. Why not? They both voted for the Iraq War Resolution. And both voted to change the bankruptcy laws

[onehandle]

4. They were ready for her in 2008 too.

No matter who won the Democratic nomination, they going to be elected President that year.

[JimDandy]

5. Pelosi conflates 'woman president' with 'Hillary'.

The country is indeed ready for a female president... just not Hillary Clinton. Democrats need a candidate who will represent our values and not those of corporations and the military industrial complex.

As a liberal Democrat, I am not willing to add a 3rd link in the chain of Democratic Corporateering Presidents. Won't support her, won't vote for her, so let's get a liberal candidate like Elizabeth Warren to run instead.

[Beacool]

8. Speak for yourself.

If the country is ready for a woman president, that woman WILL be Hillary (if she chooses to run).

I like Warren and I think that's she's becoming a great Senator, and that's where she should remain. She can be far more effective there and for a longer period of time. Presidents only have 8 years at the most.

Aside from the Left, there's no call for Warren to run. She barely won her first ever election a few months ago. Running the country is far more involved than being against Wall St. At least Obama had been a state senator before he ran for president.

[Parable Arable]

12. I really feel like Warren would be a magnificent Senate Majority Leader.....

Reid should step down after 2014....

I can't say Clinton is my ideal candidate (that's probably Russ Feingold), but she has the resources to pull it off in 2016. I love Warren but I feel like change needs to come in the senate/house before we can have another FDR like some here are clamoring for.

[brooklynite]

13. Not even sure "the Left" wants Warren to run...

The only pro-Warren voices I've seen are here.

[RudynJack]

15. Indeed

Clinton is THE woman candidate to run.

I love Elizabeth Warren, but I think the calls for her to run for President are silly. She hasn't had 2 years in elective office. She's known for one issue and one issue only - and it's a GREAT issue. But has she accomplished much of anything on that issue? Will being President allow her to do so with an opposition congress? She's run exactly one campaign in her life. I'm not convinced her second one should be for President of the US.

Is she known throughout the US? I know Hillary is. Is she a liberal? No, she's not - she voted Republican until 1995, and has said she's voted for both parties since. Because she's awesome on banking doesn't mean she should be President.

And we've not had great success with Massachusetts candidates in a very long time.

[djean111]

17. I think the point is, Hillary is not really a "liberal", except as contrasted with any GOP

candidate.
She is a corporate creature. If she runs, this will be another lesser of two, what if Romney won, blah blah blah.
And being known throughout the US has a down side - Hillary seems like the devil to a great many people in the US.
As a woman, I have no intention of supporting a candidate merely because neither of us has a penis. That's not what feminism is about, to me.

[RudynJack]

20. I'm a man

and I love Hillary.

My point was Elizabeth Warren isn't a "real liberal". I can't think of a "real liberal" who could win a national election. I also think people overestimate what a President can do.

Elizabeth Warren being President wouldn't reinstate Glass-Steagal.

I'd rather have a left-leaning President who can get shit done than a full-blown liberal who can't accomplish anything. For example, if Hillary had been elected in '08, I believe she would've delivered a health-care-reform package that would've passed within months of her presidency. Instead, Obama, who was perceived as "more to the left" than her, dithered for a year and a half, allowed the ascendency of the Tea Party in the meantime, while in the end, we have a diluted, weak, half-effort at reform.

It's certainly better than what we had before, but I don't think it's nearly enough. The whole notion of running on health-care-reform, then saying "well let Congress work it out" was weak, imo, and he's hurt himself because of it.

I don't think Hillary would've done that.

[Beacool]

22. This.........

[AtomicKitten]

42. Right. Because she was so successful passing healthcare before.

If Hillary had been elected in '08, I believe she would've delivered a health-care-reform package that would've passed within months of her presidency.

She got zero Democratic votes and couldn't even move the bill out of committee. Probably the most profound reason it failed was the Clintons' inability to work within their own party to ensure passage.

[stevenleser]

49. I'm a big Hillary 2016 fan, but I was also in the trenches of the HCR fight including

head to head with conservative talking heads on multiple occasions. I can tell you that there is nothing any Democrat could have done on Healthcare Reform that would have made it easier or lessened the fight coming from Republicans on that issue.

Republicans recognized it for what it was, that allowing any Democrat to pass HCR unscathed without getting really beat up in the process would hurt Republicans for decades. Kristol, who I disagree with ideologically while recognizing his skill at doing what he does, knew that back in 1993 http://delong.typepad.com/egregious_moderation/2009/03/william-kristol-defeating-president-clintons-health-care-proposal.html :

But the long-term political effects of a successful Clinton health care bill will be even worse--much worse. It will relegitimize middle-class dependence for "security" on government spending and regulation. It will revive the reputation of the party that spends and regulates, the Democrats, as the generous protector of middle-class interests. And it will at the same time strike a punishing blow against Republican claims to defend the middle class by restraining government.

Republicans absolutely regarded this as one of the biggest potential threats to them politically and they have reacted thusly and would have under any Democratic President.

[Beacool]

21. Errrrr, no one said to vote for Hillary because she lacks a penis.

I support her because first of all, she's a terrific person. She's compassionate and cares about people. She's extremely smart and knowledgeable on a host of issues that presidents should be knowledgeable on. She also has no illusions about Republicans and will kick ass when she needs to.

Yes, I agree that Hillary is not the most liberal, but I'm fine with that. Center-Left is where most of the country is at anyway. I also think that 2016 is going to be tough for Democrats after holding the WH for 8 years. This is not 2008 when it was almost a given that the Democratic nominee would win the WH after 8 years of Bush, two wars and an economic collapse. I think that Hillary's candidacy will create enough excitement to give us an edge.

Besides, I can't think of one candidate who would be more qualified, regardless of party. Biden would be the exception, but the party is not going to nominate a 74 year old white guy with a propensity for gaffes.

[djean111]

23. There are OPs and posts that say that Hillary will be getting the female vote.

I know Graham is gone, he said that a lot, but I have seen that meme here, and I hate it.
I used to feel the same way about Hillary that you do.
But I am not a centrist, that implies saying okay to things I feel are harmful to people, and more and more it seems that there is no right or wrong, just compromise on the order of King Solomon or Sophie's choice.
I will vote, but not cheer-lead or contribute to candidates who already having been bought by corporate contributions. They don't need my paltry contribution.

[karynnj]

24. Did you say of Hillary in 2008

"I like Hillary and I think that's she's becoming a great Senator, and that's where she should remain. She can be far more effective there and for a longer period of time. Presidents only have 8 years at the most?"

Somehow, I don't think so. I know that Hillary had been a Senator for 8 years by 2008, but that only gives her more seniority than Warren now - so the statement - if true - would have been even truer for Hillary.

I am not saying that we should elect Warren or that we should not elect Hillary -- just that this is a dishonest statement. Someone who is President - even for 4 years - has FAR more impact than any Senator. You really need a pretty ineffective President to find a Senator who did more overall. The closest you can get to that is someone like Ted Kennedy who had a huge amount of seniority and was incredibly talented as a legislator. Even if Warren was as good as him, she would end those years as a second term Senator - and you know that in 2009, Hillary did not have enough seniority to chair any full committee - and, even with her position in the party, the Senate was unlikely to make special rules for her. Will they do more for Warren?

[Beacool]

27. You answered your own question.

Hillary had been a senator for 8 years by 2008. If she had been in the Senate for as little time as Obama and Warren, I would have said that she needed to wait (like she did in 2004). I still think that Obama was not ready in 2008. He has proven to be a so-so negotiator, not very effective at dealing with Congress.

Lightning will not strike again, Warren is not Obama. 2016 is going to be hard enough without the Left trying to push candidates who are as far off field as the Freepers pushing Palin and the other Tea party kooks.

[karynnj]

29. However, your argument was not that she had to wait, gain experience, serve the people of

Massachusetts etc. It was that she would have more impact as a one and then two term Senator than as President. Not to mention, Hillary waited in 2004 because in December 2003, Bush was at 60% approval. She knew that if she waited and the Democrat lost (considered a near certainty), she was a shoo in for 2008 which in all likelihood would be a Democratic year.

If THAT was really true, it would have been even more true for a YOUNGER Senator already in the second term as no one can deny that with seniority comes more power. Age matters because you could have hypothesized Hillary being a Senator for at least one more term than Warren. My point is that it is dishonest to say of another potential candidate that he/she would be more effective as a Senator than as President - especially when they have little seniority.

As to Obama being a so-so negotiator, he did get a stimulus package and the car bailout and healthcare through Congress. He also got the START treaty through. He looks very likely to get Immigration through. Hillary, on the other hand, was unable to get even one member of the Finance committee (including liberal Bill Bradley) to support her healthcare bill. I would hope that Hillary learned from Obama and will be better than she would otherwise have been.

[Beacool]

33. A little historic perspective, 1993 was not 2010.

When it comes to negotiating skills, Hillary doesn't need to learn squat from Obama. Please, what nonsense.

[karynnj]

35. Actually 1993 was no harder than 2009

In 2009, not one republican was brave (or fool hardy) enough to challenge the party discipline and vote for any healthcare bill. That meant Obama had to get every Democrat. In 1993, there are at least 10 Republicans who would have voted for a bill if they could have been involved in creating the program.

However, Hillary and Ira Magaziner created the bill behind closed doors - at one point arguing they did not even have to tell the Congress who they met with. They did not even include Ted Kennedy. When they showed outlines of the legislation to the Finance committee - NOT ONE member supported it. Note that over half the committee were Democrats. Had the same thing happened to Obama, his bill would have failed - as he could not afford to lose even one.

In 2008, Hillary herself spoke of having learned from that experience - however, there was nothing she could point to where she was credited with working with others and creating something that enough people could support. I hope that really has learned that skill as she very likely will be President and she needs it - or the humility to delegate legislative outreach to someone else.

There are many things that Hillary is great at - she is very intelligent, very quick witted, and she really does to care about women and children's issues. She knows her facts and is very organized. Given a good speech writer, she will be very well spoken. I suspect that leading something though a legislature may be where she is weakest. Maybe it is a result of her simply being quicker and smarter than many. Consider that some of the smartest people are horrible teachers even in areas where they are expert because they don't have the ability to explain things they got essentially automatically.

[dsc]

38. that is just plain not true

Clinton's budget got not one single, solitary GOP vote, despite him targeting Chaffee of RI. The GOP was just as obstructionist then as now and Clinton had fewer Dems.

[karynnj]

41. In case you missed it, Obama's budgets were passed by all Democrats too

You can look at graphs of number of filibusters. It was not as bad under Clinton. http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=&imgrefurl=http://www.tcf.org/blog/detail/graph-why-we-need-filibuster-reform&h=521&w=565&sz=30&tbnid=JrFnF5Br7-Q_KM:&tbnh=90&tbnw=98&zoom=1&usg=__D5h96k2RGOx3PxjfTz9B_m9MS80=&docid=XxykKJWnug_VnM&sa=X&ei=u9PrUdvzGJLC4APU4YDICQ&ved=0CDEQ9QEwAA&dur=4195

You did not counter that Hillary also lost all the Democrats on the Finance committee. She herself (in 2008) admitted that presenting a nearly full blown plan to the Congress which they had no input in creating was a mistake. It is true that the forces agaisnt it put out scary ads etc, but she never united the Democrats behind her plan.

The budget you speak of raised taxes - and that is why all the Republicans decided to vote against it. As to a healthcare bill, there were Republicans who were open to the idea.

[Niceguy1]

53. Clinton was the best president

In my lifetime and if Hillary can pull it off and give us ankther 8 years of that I will go knocking on doors for her.

[awoke_in_2003]

6. Vote for Hillary....

and more of the same.

[Rstrstx]

39. If more of the same means someone like Obama, I'm in

Short of a total economic collapse a "real" left candidate is not going to be electable - even many blue states would balk much less the critical swing states. Think of what a R victory in 2016 would mean for the SCOTUS, civil rights issues, immigration, etc. Unless there is some sort of bipartisan groundswelling of an uprise against the NSA and surveillance in general I don't think that issue is going anywhere any time soon unfortunately, the next president will not want to risk another 9/11 occurring on their watch (whether the NSA is effective is another matter).

I think Hillary is fine, she comes down on the side of most issues I care about that I believe are doable in the next 5-10 years. No, she won't turn us into Finland, but neither will she wreak the havoc a Republican could cause.

[Beacool]

9. Pelosi and McCaskill, two women whose opinion I couldn't care less.

In 2008 they made their choice clear. Why should a Hillary supporter give a rat's tail end what these two think?

[stevenleser]

10. I was going to say the haters will soon be here, but they got here before me.

Sad.

[djean111]

18. Oh, hey - I was a Hillary supporter in 2008.

Turns out I had not been paying much attention to Corporatism in those days. Eye-opener.

[JRLeft]

14. I rather have Elizabeth Warren or any other enemy of Wall Street but they cannot win.

[Kablooie]

37. I think she will be more effective fighting from the Senate.

As President her efforts would have to be watered down with all the other gazillion things she would have to manage.
As Senator she can focus on Wall Street and work on convincing whoever is president to support her.

[MannyGoldstein]

51. Yeah, remember when that noob from the Midwest ran in 2008

What was his name - Yomama or someting African... Black guy? Never had a chance.

[davidpdx]

16. I'm still ready to see who actually runs

Before making up my mind. Geesh, what a concept!

[AndyA]

26. Is anyone else concerned about the concentration of power the last three decades?

George H. W. Bush (VP) 1981-1989

George H. W. Bush (President) 1989-1993

Bill Clinton (President) 1993-2001

George W. Bush ("pResident" appointee by the SCOTUS) 2001-2009

Barack Obama (President) 2009-2017

Hillary Clinton (President) 2017-2026?

Some of the dates look wrong to me, but the more I look at them, the worse they look--but you can probably understand what I'm saying. Basically, just three families in the nation's top office over a period of 45 years...sounds more like a dynasty than anything else.

Perhaps some fresh blood would be better? Maybe we could truly get someone who leans more toward the left instead of the right for a change? The country seems to be moving in that direction, is a more progressive President possible when Obama leaves office, or do we still need another 4-8 years before that's possible?

[Socal31]

44. Thankfully Jeb has no chance of adding another "Bush" to the list.

However, it looks like George Prescott Bush is the one being groomed next.

[Whisp]

30. I just can't imagine Hillary under the kind of constant pressure that Obama has been under.

She just doesn't have that kind of jam.

She is not very good at unprepared statements and thinking on her feet.

[Beacool]

34. Sweetie, try not to repeat the same nonsense over and over.

[Whisp]

36. okay, cupcake. Go find some more Bachman insults against Obama

and be all aghast and shit.

[GlashFordan]

31. If Hillary and Bill can recreate the 90's

They would save this nation.

[MannyGoldstein]

52. By deregulating banks and blowing open free trade?

How do you figure that will help? It's already been done.

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

32. I'll be supporting her in the primaries and the general. nt

[Fearless]

40. I think the Democratic Party has passed her.

[Godhumor]

46. Cuomo or Clinton. Either of them gets my support in the primaries

They won't both run, but I am confident at least one will.

[Blue_In_AK]

47. Can't we try something different?