General Discussion

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)

76. How long is it between now and 2016?

Reply to and-justice-for-all (Reply #74)

Tue Nov 13, 2012, 02:17 AM

Nov 2012

How much can happen in that time?

As long as I've been on DU I keep on getting crazy when 20 minutes after all the polls close in one election, people here are predicting who will be the next nominee four years down the road.

If you have the stamina, go look at what everyone was predicting in 2001. And in November of 2004, and in November of 2008.

Look back at even earlier elections. I like to point out that in 1991, after the first Gulf War, all the major Democrats decided it wasn't worth running for President, that it was not remotely possible that a Dem could win in '92. Remind me about the second George HW Bush term.

Please save all of your energy that you are currently expending on hyperventilating about 2016, and work on the problems we have in front of us right now.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

89 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Wanna make Rush Limbaugh crazier than he already is? [View all] Playinghardball Nov 2012 OP

Clinton/Warren in '16 madokie Nov 2012 #1

Nah. Warren has much more work to do in her new position before she runs on the WH ticket. HopeHoops Nov 2012 #4

It is 2016 or never for Warren, she would be 71 in 2020 krawhitham Nov 2012 #82

She doesn't look NEARLY old enough for that! HopeHoops Nov 2012 #85

madokie Diclotican Nov 2012 #34

Diclotican, Warren will be 67 in 2016. So might be the same situation. I'm hoping that freshwest Nov 2012 #47

freshwest Diclotican Nov 2012 #58

My bad madokie Nov 2012 #61

madokie Diclotican Nov 2012 #63

If the republiCONs don't get into a war amongst themselves madokie Nov 2012 #65

madokie Diclotican Nov 2012 #67

I would love to see Hillary run with a great young VP candidate.... Walk away Nov 2012 #2

Check your math. Hilary is currently 66. She will be 70 in 2016. kestrel91316 Nov 2012 #9

Life expectancy of white American women with college degrees is 83.9 years..... Bigmack Nov 2012 #14

Life expectency is not the same as being SheilaT Nov 2012 #21

This is true. Life Expectancy isn't the issue. nt Honeycombe8 Nov 2012 #53

Biden is 69. deurbano Nov 2012 #57

Easy answer... Hilary ain't Raygun! He was a taco short of a combination plate on his best day! nt Bigmack Nov 2012 #64

+1 nt ProudProgressiveNow Nov 2012 #46

Actually, she'll be just turning 69 during the 2016 election louis c Nov 2012 #27

8 years of Obama, 8 years of Hillary, and 8 years of her VP after that? Ter Nov 2012 #72

Sorry, I have no desire to see any Clintons in the WH........ kooljerk666 Nov 2012 #3

How about Chelsea? TlalocW Nov 2012 #8

Chelsea, ehh don't know her or anything about her........ kooljerk666 Nov 2012 #24

No dynasties! Not Hillary, not Chelsea truebluegreen Nov 2012 #42

How 'bout one of the Bush Twins if they were a democrat TlalocW Nov 2012 #60

No. truebluegreen Nov 2012 #66

time for new blood, the bush and clinton dynasty days are over. Whisp Nov 2012 #5

Limbaugh? SeattleVet Nov 2012 #6

clinton-michelle obama would certainly be an interesting combination JanT Nov 2012 #7

Yeah, but I doubt she'll run. progressoid Nov 2012 #10

How about Warren-Castro jimlup Nov 2012 #11

Love the sentiment, but Aldo Leopold Nov 2012 #12

Sorry, but the dynastic aspect of another Clinton in office just stops me Lionessa Nov 2012 #13

If she would run she would win...nt and-justice-for-all Nov 2012 #15

Just like in 2008. Fuddnik Nov 2012 #17

Circumstances are different now... and-justice-for-all Nov 2012 #74

How long is it between now and 2016? SheilaT Nov 2012 #76

You made a very good point Turborama Nov 2012 #80

I have been on DU since 2002, and I have watched this idiocy SheilaT Nov 2012 #83

Thinks SheliaT for your snark on the matter and-justice-for-all Nov 2012 #87

The way people here are always speculating SheilaT Nov 2012 #88

Yeah she got beat by an unknown in 2008 krawhitham Nov 2012 #84

Cuomo/Kane Kyad06 Nov 2012 #16

Cuomo vs Christie would be very interesting Kyad06 Nov 2012 #19

Christie will not be the Repub nominee. nt Honeycombe8 Nov 2012 #55

Anti Union Cuomo -no thanks n/t n2doc Nov 2012 #25

Consider my Vote already cast for 2016 and beyond!!! Liberal In Red State Nov 2012 #18

Sure, Elizabeth Warren TroubleMan Nov 2012 #20

Clinton/Castro 2016 ancianita Nov 2012 #22

You beat me on this one ... Julian is a perfect VP choice. libdem4life Nov 2012 #33

Nah, put her on the Supreme Court . . . that'll really get his knickers in a twist. :) n/t ET Awful Nov 2012 #23

She's too old, now, many say. She'd be better in a position to nominate a Scalia replacement. ancianita Nov 2012 #35

Let's not put anyone much over 50 on the Supremes. Gidney N Cloyd Nov 2012 #36

Actually, since Supreme Court Justices are elected for life, SheilaT Nov 2012 #77

I do think we're better off if _Repubs_ put old folks on the court but our guys should stay awhile. Gidney N Cloyd Nov 2012 #86

You can't put two first ladies on a ticket. how about a Latino? craigmatic Nov 2012 #26

Why not? It's not as if there won't be two qualified ladies available. Is this some rule? ancianita Nov 2012 #37

No it's not a rule but it seems like political overreach to me. I like them both but it might seem craigmatic Nov 2012 #41

Why not? SheilaT Nov 2012 #68

It's not a matter of gender it's a matter of giving some new people a chance. craigmatic Nov 2012 #69

My point is that no one thinks there's anything wrong SheilaT Nov 2012 #71

I meant 2 first ladies. I don't care if 2 women democrats were the ticket next time. It'd probably craigmatic Nov 2012 #75

I think we cross posted. SheilaT Nov 2012 #78

Yeah, but when a first time comes (woman nominee), you can't do it twice Ter Nov 2012 #73

The one thing I can almost guarantee SheilaT Nov 2012 #28

+1 nt ProudProgressiveNow Nov 2012 #48

A woman, yes. Island Blue Nov 2012 #29

Clinton-Devaul Patrick!!! 2016 Heather MC Nov 2012 #30

You want a serious ticket for 2016? how about Drew Richards Nov 2012 #31

Dean has withdrawn from national politics, doesn't want the job. ancianita Nov 2012 #39

I love Dean but he'd be 68 before he was sworn in. Gidney N Cloyd Nov 2012 #40

Elizabeth Warren 2016 Jackilope Nov 2012 #32

He would jump around his studio flinging shit at the rafters Rex Nov 2012 #38

Hilarious! I remember Rushbo's obsession with Hillary in the 90s. LongTomH Nov 2012 #43

K&R nt ProudProgressiveNow Nov 2012 #44

No. Warren in 2016 because.... zentrum Nov 2012 #45

I don't know about that.It's the stuff they're made of..and I don't mean skin & genitalia.They r tuf judesedit Nov 2012 #52

I would love to see either scenario. They would be great for this country's future. judesedit Nov 2012 #49

Two words Anthony McCarthy Nov 2012 #50

Works for me! nt Honeycombe8 Nov 2012 #51

Why should Democrats choose a Presidential candidate based in any way on what Rush Limbaugh thinks? PoliticAverse Nov 2012 #54

I was thinking the same thing. Loved reply #38, though Turborama Nov 2012 #81

I'm not sure Hillary is the right choice.... Wounded Bear Nov 2012 #56

Yes to Warren, but no to Hillary. Arugula Latte Nov 2012 #59

My gut says she won't run michigandem58 Nov 2012 #62

IF Rush survives 4 more years..... yellowcanine Nov 2012 #70

I am all for Hillary and will support her 100%! I voted for her in 2008 so I am hoping NYC Liberal Nov 2012 #79

think bigger! Angela Davis, Christiane Amanpour 2016! NuttyFluffers Nov 2012 #89