General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: This message was self-deleted by its author [View all]karynnj
(60,764 posts)It is long past when Hillary Clinton could have challenged Obama for the nomination. Your arguments don't make sense. On Afghanistan, Obama's "call" was actually LESS hawkish than the Clinton/Gates position. Clinton, Gates and McChrystal were the forces pushing for a mush larger escalation - while Kerry and Reed were arguing against that and Biden was arguing against COIN altogether. If your problem was Afghanistan, why not argue for a Biden run. Maybe it should be Biden who benefits from your embargo. That said, Biden would NEVER run against Obama.
As to "Obama's failures" that Hillary does not have - does that mean having actually passed healthcare reform, rather than not even getting the House and Senate to vote on your proposal?
Not to mention, you argue that the Republicans do not have a strong candidate in 2012 - and will in 2016. You then argue that we need the candidate you think stronger (Hillary) in 2012!
As to whether Hillary has anything to do with the calls - I would suggest that the probability is close to the probability of an ice cube remaining in the frozen state in Hell. Her public statements for years have been completely unambiguous - she is not running. (Not to mention, she has not raised money and many deadlines for getting on ballots are past. It is pretty undemocratic that you want a change that is not the outcome of a primary.)