I along w/ many others out there are convinced that Hillary is using the NY Sennt seat as a stepping stone for a pres run in 2004 if GW gets in. But under the current circumstances it seems that Algore might use the popular vote ‘win’ (if he keeps it) as a mandate to get back into the whitehouse in 2004.
Anyone else out there see this as happining
I have no doubt Hillary is using the people of NY to serve herself. She’s never lived there, has no ties to the state, and only chose New York because of the loose election laws. Even though she says she’ll serve all 6 years, I’m sure in four years she hear a “mandate” from the people to go for the big house.
As for AlGore using this year’s election results in four years I doubt it. Americans have the attention span of a ferret on a double espresso. He’ll be lucky if anyone even remembers who he is, let alone that he won the popular vote. I don’t even think he’ll run again. He’ll realize that there are lots of companies out there that will pay him huge money to be on their Board of Directors and show up for two three meetings a year.
But that just MHO.
2008, maybe, but I don’t know if she’d be running for the nomination as early as 2004. She won’t even have finished one term in office - not that that’s significant to whether she’s qualified, but I think it would make a bad impression on people to quit partway through, especially considering the time she’d have to take to campaign. Her opponents would go after her for “abandoning” the people of NY and use it to say that she’s only after what’s right for herself, not the people (regardless of whether this is true). I think she’d have a much better shot at getting the democratic nomination if she serves out her full Senate term and then runs for the 2008 election.
Agreed. She’d have a much better shot if she served at least one full term in the senate in order to build a record on issues and gain experience. If she’s smart, she’ll wait until at least 2008.
I think that this belongs over in Great Debates, so I’m moving it.
I’d be surprised if Hillary ever runs for president. She’ll probably content herself with the Senate for a while, and then move on to a cabinet position in a future Democratic president’s administration. But I doubt she’ll leave the Senate before two terms have elapsed.
I guess she could ride as someone’s vice presidential candidate in 2012, but who can say for sure? At any rate, I think the speculation that she’s doing this to step up to the presidency is groundless. I doubt she’s even interested.
Robert F. Kennedy moved to NY, ran for the Senate and won in 1964. He then ran for Prez in '68. So there’s precedent. I guarantee you that if Gore loses this election, Gore and Hillary will be duking it out for the Democratic nomination in 2004. If Gore wins, she’ll attempt it in 2008.
She’s not going to run in 2004. She promised that she wasn’t going to run for President then (sorry, I don’t have a cite, but I saw it on CNN a few days ago…I think…) and of course she’ll stay true to her word.
[/sarcasm]. But I still think she’d at least wait until 2008 or 2012. How old is she, anyone know?
Hillary is about 52 years old, I think. Early fifties, anyway. I don’t think she’s seriously considering the presidency; realistically, she doesn’t have a crack at it. I think the speculation on Hillary’s proposed presidential bid comes from those who wish to paint her as greedy, power-mad and ruthless with a streak of megalomania. Sure, she’s a strong woman, but this is taking the fear of strong women a bit too far. This same argument was used to put down Eleanor Roosevelt’s social activism, as well as Shirley Jones’ character on The Partridge Family. We’ll never hear the end of this ridiculous, flimsy criticism from those who can think of no better reason to oppose Hillary’s political career.
Take it from a sort of insider, the issue of Gore in 2004 is moot. The DNC has no intentions of backing Al Gore in a bid for the candidacy in '04 (obviously that could change in 4 years, but from what they’re saying now, I doubt it). So it’s now or never for Mr. Gore.
I agree, Chance, she’s way too polarizing to be elected President, and that Bob Novak and co. are overreacting about much over her mere existence.
Does anyone think the DNC will back someone who couldn’t beat Dubya with the advantages of the Vice-Presidency, great economy, etc etc that Al had? This was his shot. He blew it (assuming FL goes for Bush). What makes people think he’d have a better chance four years from now?
He won’t be viewed as a “shadow president”, he’ll be ignored. He might TRY to run in 4 years, but people will ignore him. Sure, Bush might run the country into the ground, but that doesn’t mean that Gore should replace him…there are lots of other Democrats who could do better. We just never saw them this race because Gore, as the VP, scared them all away except Bradley. There are many D Governors and Senators who’d make good presidents, why would the DNC dig up Al after he blew it big time last election?
Hilary will never run for president. She’s WAY to divisive. Maybe you Hillary-supporters don’t realize exactly how unpopular this woman is. You have to be able to reach out to the other side’s moderates. Reagan got all the moderate Ds, Bill got lots of moderate Rs, Gore got many moderates who thought Bush was too stupid to be president. But there is not a single republican in the country who would vote for Hillary.
Hillary does have a political future like other extremist/divisive politicians, but only in safe district. Nationally she doesn’t have a chance.
There is no way this country can advance far enough in four years to even consider a female President. 2012 is even a long shot, I’m afraid.