Hillary Clinton is going to run for President in the US, I hear on NPR. I checked her website but couldn’t locate the announcement.
I have to say, this is making the Democratic race very, very interesting, even for a Canadian like myself. I was living in the US during the Bill Clinton race and win, and so remember his presidency with much clarity. I have very strong feelings about the Bush administration as well, and think change is needed.
But Hillary… Me? I like her. I can see why a lot of people don’t, and didn’t, during her husband’s presidency, but I think it would be a very, very interesting place with her as leader.
So many other countries have had a woman heading government… is it time for the US? Is she right person?
If any woman’s going to win the Presidency, it’ll be Hillary. She has the experience of two New York Senate races against campaigns totalling $70,000,000 and she was by her husband’s side during his eight years in the White House. I’d argue as far as experience against the GOP goes, Hillary’s got the advantage over Obama and others.
And this will probably take a turn into the **Great Debate ** forum.
True, and she has someone to give her good advice.
I don’t think she has the ability to get folks who generally don’t vote Democratic, and that will be needed. I also believe the “redneck factor” for lack of a better term, will vote against a woman or a candidate of color, just because.
There’s no way I’ll vote for her, and I’m a registered Democrat so that means I will be voting someone else in the primary.
I’ll very likely be going for Barack Obama. He’s more moderate and politically more likable than Hillary.
She’s very polarizing, and you’re going to find that there are even a lot of Democrats who don’t like her. I wonder why she didn’t run for the Senate in Arkansas?
Oh, and it’s not that I wouldn’t vote for her because she’s a woman. I wouldn’t vote for her if she were a man, either.
George Bush wins through being polarizing, though.
But I think that there’s a difference between simply not caring what anyone else thinks, and being an iron-pantied tough broad. Certainly being seen as mean and evil isn’t the best there is, but I don’t think that people would view her as being unwilling to compromise or listen to the other side like Bush does.
One thing that you need to realise is that elections aren’t decided by Democrats or Republicans. The swing voters are the ones you need to grab, and so I’m not sure that it matters much that Republicans hate her; they’re going to vote Republican either way.
I have a cousin who was in the cabinet of a Central American government in the 90s. He and his wife met Hillary at a conference. Keep in mind that these are very conservative people. They said that she was charming and one of the most charismatic people they’d ever met. Everyone who met her on that occasion was in awe of her (or so my cousins reported).
I haven’t watched the video on her Web site yet, but in the NPR story, they made a big point of the setting and tone. They said it looked like she was in her living room and that her tone was much different than her standard political speech tone (which I’ve never cared for). I wonder whether it’s still possible for her to change her image.
I thought it was because she would have to run against Dale Bumpers, but he left the Senate in 1999 and she was elected in 2000. Perhaps it is because she went to college in New England.
If she won the primary, would you vote Democratic, Republican, third party or abstain?
I just voted in GD that she couldn’t win. I have two reasons and I stand beside them both.
A liberal female can’t be POTUS in the near future although a conservative female might be able to. The U.S. trends conservatively and having a female buck both obstacles at the same time would be close to impossible.
The Southern states control the Presidency. It does not matter in the least how excited voters get in NYC, LA, or Chicago. That is like a pep-rally but it has no bearing whatsoever on who finally gets elected. That gets controlled by the Southern states first and by the other interior states secondly.
I pass no value judgement but it can’t happen based on those factors and it won’t happen.
If she were a guy, I’d say she was “just a suit.” She’s too calculating for me to trust her. She won’t say that her vote to invade Iraq was wrong. This week she staged a visit to Iraq so that when she returned she could make some watered-down comments about troop caps. Well anyone in his/her right mind knows that Iraq is a mess and we shouldn’t have ever invaded and we should ge the hell out.
And her position in favor of an anti-flag-burning amendment? That is so blatantly right-wing pandering.
BTW, I’m female and “liberal” and it has nothing to do with her being female. If she were more open and honest I’d love to vote for her.
Anybody but her. I’d go for the Republican candidate running against her because then at least I’m voting for someone who has a chance of beating her.
I do not want her running the country. She’s a snake, a liar, a socialist, and a cold, calculating crook. Her whole ‘it takes a village’ bullshit, her Hillary-care, her chameleon-like posture in her Senate role, playing to whatever she thinks is popular or will get her votes, is just as disgusting in her as it is in any man. She doesn’t have opinions of her own; she waits to see which way the wind blows, just like her husband. She’s an opponent of firearms rights, and that’s automatically a tick against her in my book.
So yea, I’m voting against her in the primary, and if she manages to win that, I’ll vote against her in the general election too.
I’ve always seen her as a bit of an “ice queen”. Is that sexist? Maybe, but I like my leaders to have some semblance of humanity. I don’t want a robot, I want a person dammit!
I’ll vote for the first person who says “Well, I had self-esteem issues in high school. I might be slightly bi-polar, but in general I have that under control. I’ve made some mistakes in my past, which I don’t regret because they helped me shape into the person I am today. All around though, I have some good friends and I’m a fairly likable guy”. So far, Obama has my vote.
Riding the Moon Worm and inventing the internet get you bonus points.
Everybody says she’s “polarizing,” and perhaps she is, but the only reason I can find for this is that her husband is Bill Clinton–who drove Republicans crazy, even though he constantly moderated his position. All of this hype about the Democratic candidates is ad hominem. Ms. Clinton is pretty centrist, and Mr. Obama is pretty…well, it’s not clear.
What exactly does “I’m in!” mean here? From her website, she’s starting an exploratory committee (as Obama has done). Does this mean “I’m officially running” or “I’m officially exploring the possibility of running”? The latter, of course, is somewhat equivocal.
Seriously, I’m not trying to be snarky here.
Not to discount this, but this is not unexpected. You won’t get to that level without being like that. Gore comes across as wooden in public, but isn’t like that one-on-one. I’m sure President Bush is like that. Even popes Pius XII and Paul VI, who seemed rather remote in public, are reputed to have had enormous charisma privately (in a different way from politicians, of course).
I am currently reading Barack Obama’s book, and even he states that one-on-one, Bush is a very likeable person.
I say stand back and watch what happens. Hillary is nobody’s fool, and now that she has jumped into the fray, she is going to do very well.
I also like Obama. And Gore seems to be a whole new person, and I could see him suddenly getting the spotlight.
This should be one very interesting primary, and I am quite happy to be living in Nevada, now that our state has moved up the ranks and will be the second caucus (after Iowa) in 2008!
As a screaming, liberal Democrat, the most important thing for me is to select someone who will win the General Election. I am not casting any votes just yet - let’s see who can handle the heat and make it through the primaries first.
Will soon see how good a politico she really is. Likely to be pretty damn good, even though I personally am not a fan. Bill Clinton figured out the democratic machine, spent years positioning himself, and then ran to great success. Hillary certainly alienates a % of the population, whatever that may be, but does she bring in the swing voters?
What about a Hillary/Obama ticket? Combine the Clinton machine with the (relatively) young Obama? Get a female minority ticket going + antipathy to the Bush years…
Where’s everyone going off on she ain’t southern? Okay, raised in Chicago, some eastern ivy league school and now she’s a New Yorker, but how long was she in Arkansas? Would “southerners” really say she’s always been and always will be a yankee? Thoughts? I got no dog in this fight as I know very few southerners.
If so, mods, please move.