# I voted for Obama & I don't think Hillary Clinton has prayer of being the next POTUS **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [February 15, 2014, 7:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404 "2014-02-15T07:26:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2014, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/81 "2014-02-18T22:27:32Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > You mean Terry McAuliffe has _fans?_ Who knew?? You mean, people who don’t hate him? That’s enough for a pol. For most of us too, probably. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2014, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/82 "2014-02-18T23:08:33Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > It’s funny – this board has existed since 1999, and not once has the prevailing mood here countenanced the election of a Republican president. According to the general tone and majority predictions of this board, Gore won in 2000, Kerry in 2004, Obama in 2008 and '12. The last time a republican won a presidential election with a clear electoral vote majority was 1988. Democrats won with large majorities in 1992, 1996, 2008 and 2012. Republicans haven’t won a presidential election with a clear majority in 20+ years. Bush won in 2000 and 2004 by thin margins in single states that had major improprieties (voter suppression, etc). So there is a valid assumption that democrats are at an advantage with presidential elections, especially if cultural and demographic changes continue to work in favor of the democratic party. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2014, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/83 "2014-02-18T23:13:47Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > You forgot drug dealing. > > For whatever it’s worth, that’s not what the polls say (though again, it’s very very early). Yeah, I forgot drug dealing. It was the 90s, I’ve forgotten most of it. As far as Elizabeth Warren, she has 8% of the democratic support already in a primary (Biden has 10%, Hillary has about 70%). Considering that a first term senator from MA who almost nobody who isn’t a political wonk knows about already has about as much support as the current VP means she already has a strong base of appeal. If Warren really wanted to run (and she doesn’t) I think she could easily get the netroots and labor unions behind her which would make her a very formidable opponent to Clinton. This is what the electoral map would’ve looked like based on polls of Obama vs McCain in October 2006. [![](https://www.surveyusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/b-ecv-map-from-october-2006-obama-mccain.JPG) ](https://www.surveyusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/b-ecv-map-from-october-2006-obama-mccain.JPG) But throw in a couple years of name recognition and Obama won easily. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2014, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/84 "2014-02-18T23:58:03Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > As far as Elizabeth Warren, she has 8% of the democratic support already in a primary (Biden has 10%, Hillary has about 70%). > > Considering that a first term senator from MA who almost nobody who isn’t a political wonk knows about already has about as much support as the current VP means she already has a strong base of appeal. This strikes me as a hopelessly optimistic take on this poll. Another way to look at it is this: practically nobody thinks Joe Biden is going to be president, and he’s polling a little better than Warren. The people who are predisposed to like Warren already know about her - and I’m not saying I don’t like her - because she’s a darling in liberal circles and her famous quotes are shared on Facebook pretty often, and she has about one-ninth the support that Hillary does. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/85 "2014-02-19T00:22:07Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > It’s funny – this board has existed since 1999, and not once has the prevailing mood here countenanced the election of a Republican president. According to the general tone and majority predictions of this board, Gore won in 2000, Kerry in 2004, Obama in 2008 and '12. Looking back at how the Bush administration turned out, I’d say the prevailing mood here has every reason to feel we nailed it in 2000 and 2004. It’s the people who thought Bush should be President who should be explaining themselves. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/86 "2014-02-19T02:02:34Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > It’s funny – this board has existed since 1999, and not once has the prevailing mood here countenanced the election of a Republican president. Of course not. My decree forbidding it went into effect in 1972. Umm . . . _officially._ ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/87 "2014-02-19T02:10:42Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > This strikes me as a hopelessly optimistic take on this poll. Another way to look at it is this: practically nobody thinks Joe Biden is going to be president, and he’s polling a little better than Warren. The people who are predisposed to like Warren already know about her - and I’m not saying I don’t like her - because she’s a darling in liberal circles and her famous quotes are shared on Facebook pretty often, and she has about one-ninth the support that Hillary does. Hopelessly optimistic is my middle name. Either way, I do think there is a massive undercurrent within both the democratic party but also among disillusioned voters and marginal voters who would respond to a true progressive who is honest about the state of the plutocracy. So Warren would do well. All Clinton really has is name recognition and she would not be able to tap into that. Obama pretended he was a progressive to win that support, but it has mostly evaporated. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 10:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/88 "2014-02-19T10:46:16Z")
I think at best Warren could play the role that John Edwards played in the 2008 cycle: forcing the leading candidate(s) to take concrete stands on issues (like universal health care and climate change in 2008, issues relating to economic inequality in 2016) that the leader(s) would have liked to stay vague on. (For instance, before Edwards got the ball rolling on UHC in 2007, the most Hillary would say was that she’d like to take that up sometime before the end of her second term.) I personally think we’re at a point in our politics where being reasonably concrete about what you’re for and against helps the Dems and hurts the GOP: the more the Dems highlight the real differences between the parties, the worse the GOP looks. Outside of their electoral strongholds in the South and interior West, the GOP depends on blurring the differences, appearing much more moderate than they are in general elections. Meanwhile, in the Dem primaries, Hillary would surely like to be vague, to be all things to all (Dem) people, and win the nomination virtually by acclamation. But I think it hurts the Dems to be vague and blurry about what they’re for. So I’d like to see Warren run, not because she can win, but to keep Hillary honest. ---
**Author:** ![marshmallow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 11:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/89 "2014-02-19T11:56:32Z")
I’m curious to see if the GOP continues their streak of nominating seemingly normal people you can find in your everyday life. Distasteful policies, sure, but Romney is any used car salesman. You can find Palins on the PTA or the church potluck. Bush was a frat boy. McCain is grandpa, always talking about the war and how better things were back in the day. It seemed like Christie would continue this tradition since there’s a hundred fat loudmouths like him at every sporting event, but now he probably won’t be it. Meanwhile, well…I’m not saying Hillary, Obama, Kerry, and Gore are lizard people from beyond the stars who are uncomfortable aping human behavior and haven’t quite debugged their language translators. I’m just saying if it turns out some politicians need to drink baby blood to maintain the elasticity of their artificial skin they’d be at the top of my list. I guess my thesis is the GOP should change their policies since they’re going to lose to what could actually be a bunch of squirrels in a human costume. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/90 "2014-02-19T14:43:56Z")
> [@marshmallow](#): > > Romney is any used car salesman. Most used car salespersons have a much keener grasp of the resources of the average American. No, Romney was a rich guy who thought he could pretend to be doing the rest of us a favor by kindly volunteering to be President of the United States. It’s amusing that he’s still smarting from his rejection by the voters, which he seems to be unable to grasp. The answer’s simple, Mitt: most of us noticed that your real aim was to turn America into even more of a plutocracy than it already is. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/91 "2014-02-19T17:08:55Z")
Because the current President has done such an excellent job of closing the wealth gap. Only one President has succeeded in making us all richer: Bill Clinton. So that’s a definite plus on Hillary’s resume, since she was part of the administration, if only informally. Of course, that means a rejection of Obamanomics and a return of Rubinomics. I’ll take that. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/92 "2014-02-19T17:23:47Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Because the current President has done such an excellent job of closing the wealth gap. > > Only one President has succeeded in making us all richer: Bill Clinton. So that’s a definite plus on Hillary’s resume, since she was part of the administration, if only informally. > > Of course, that means a rejection of Obamanomics and a return of Rubinomics. I’ll take that. Wrong. Obama and Clinton agree on pretty much all economic matters – they both want to raise the minimum wage, they both want Clinton-era tax levels on the rich, they both support universal health care, etc. Additionally, they both support increased infrastructure spending (and other domestic spending programs) to stimulate the economy during a downturn. “Obamanomics” is pretty much the same as “Clintonomics”. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/93 "2014-02-19T17:25:14Z")
Does Obama also support welfare reform, free trade, balanced budgets, and deregulation? ---
**Author:** ![nevadaexile](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/eb8c5e/32.png) [@nevadaexile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nevadaexile)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/94 "2014-02-19T17:39:33Z")
I’m a yellow dog Democrat and I don’t think Mrs. Clinton has a chance. Why? [ol] [li] **Health issues** - When is the last time that the American have knowingly elected a candidate with known health issues? FDR in 1944. Clinton’r recent brain scare is just enough to make her candidacy if weren’t for her:[/li][li] **Questionable sexual orientation** - Recent celebrity “coming outs aside”, the US isn’t progressive enough to elect a bisexual POTUS. Especially one who has pretended not to be for decades in the public spotlight. Even if this was ignored somehow, there’s the:[/li][li] **Boat anchor attached to her named William Jefferson Clinton** - He sank Al Gore against an obvious incompetent like George W. To think that his myriad foibles wouldn’t do the same to his own wife is to misread the tea leaves of American politics. But let’s say even that doesn’t hurt her, she’s:[/li][li] **Still a polarizing figure** - You either like Clinton or you don’t. She really doesn’t give you too much room for any neutral positioning on her. She’s an unpleasant person, she’s a grasping opportunist who makes no secret of her being as such. And she really seems to believe the press about her own intelligence. Frankly, unless you knew the “real her” the public “her” is so off-putting that it makes voting for her a questionable act.[/li][/ol] While the GOP has NO “world beaters” on deck for the 2016 POTUS election, even they can pull a win out if they have to face Clinton as the Democratic nominee. She just has too much baggage to have a serious chance. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/95 "2014-02-19T18:05:08Z")
[quote=“nevadaexile, post:94, topic:681404”] [li] **Health issues** …Clinton’r recent brain scare[/li][/quote] WTF? Biden has had aneurysms, but Clinton has no known major health issues. [quote] [li] **Questionable sexual orientation** [/li][/quote] Where the hell do you get that from? [quote] [li] **Boat anchor attached to her named William Jefferson Clinton** [/li][/quote] The most popular recent president, all that peace and prosperity … how’s that a problem? > [@](#): > > To think that his myriad foibles wouldn’t do the same to his own wife is to misread the tea leaves of American politics. Oh. You mean the blowjob stuff. How’d that work against him back then? :dubious: And how would it be a negative today? [quote] [li] **Still a polarizing figure** [/li][/quote] And the polarizers keep doing their best to keep it that way, don’t they? You’re right that not everyone is going to support her. So? Nobody has ever been elected to high office unanimously. > [@](#): > > She’s an unpleasant person, she’s a grasping opportunist who makes no secret of her being as such. And she really seems to believe the press about her own intelligence. Frankly, unless you knew the “real her” the public “her” is so off-putting that it makes voting for her a questionable act. Okay, are you talking about her or yourself? > [@](#): > > She just has too much baggage to have a serious chance. Funny how the polls, such as they are, don’t reflect that. How’s it gonna change? ---
**Author:** ![nevadaexile](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/eb8c5e/32.png) [@nevadaexile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nevadaexile)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/96 "2014-02-19T18:25:45Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > WTF? Biden has had aneurysms, but Clinton has no known major health issues. > > Where the hell do you get that from? > **[Clinton Out of Hospital After Treatment for Clot (Published 2013)](https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/03/us/politics/hillary-clinton-is-discharged-from-hospital-after-blood-clot.html?_r=0)** > > Doctors said Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton would make a full recovery after being treated for several days for a blood clot in a vein in her head. Did you happen to miss that? Or the months prior to this when it was clear that Mrs. Clinton was looking very tired and ill? I didn’t mention Biden; **you did.** > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > most popular recent president, all that peace and prosperity … how’s that a problem? > Oh. You mean the blowjob stuff. How’d that work against him back then? :dubious: And how would it be a negative today? > **[Monica Lewinsky’s sexy tape to Bill Clinton unearthed after 15 years](https://www.nydailynews.com/2013/07/31/monica-lewinskys-sexy-tape-to-bill-clinton-unearthed-after-15-years/)** > > Monica Lewinsky, in a never-before-heard audio tape recorded before her affair with former President Bill Clinton made headlines, attempts to seduce him by promising to take her “clothes off,… How much more of this is there out there?After 15 years, this should be a distant memory. And I haven’t scratched upon the fact that they went from nearly bankrupt to more than $150 million in personal assets in the time that he has been out of office. What happens when someone starts looking into who the donors were? > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > the polarizers keep doing their best to keep it that way, don’t they? > > You’re right that not everyone is going to support her. So? Nobody has ever been elected to high office unanimously. > > Okay, are you talking about her or yourself? > Funny how the polls, such as they are, don’t reflect that. How’s it gonna change? Here are groups and publications which SUPPORT Clinton and mention her ability to polarize: > **[The First Lady's Newest Role: Newspaper Columnist (Published 1995)](https://www.nytimes.com/1995/07/24/us/the-first-lady-s-newest-role-newspaper-columnist.html)** [http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1229053,00.html](http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1229053,00.html) > **[Hillary Clinton, Favorable/Unfavorable, 1993-2007](http://politicalarithmetik.blogspot.com/2007/01/hillary-clinton-favorableunfavorable.html)** > > (Click on graph for full resolution) Hillary Clinton has served in the Senate for only six years but she has one of the longest polling reco... [http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/27/us-usa-clinton-benghazi-idUSBREA0Q1O920140127](http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/27/us-usa-clinton-benghazi-idUSBREA0Q1O920140127) So clearly, I’m not alone in believing that there is no “middle ground” when it comes to her. If you like her, then bully for you. Unfortunately, one vote doesn’t win elections. PS: I DID say that I’m a Democrat. Did you “miss” that? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/97 "2014-02-19T18:29:14Z")
I think that’s an outdated view of Clinton. Her tenure as Secretary of State made her a much more acceptable figure to those who previously disliked her, and Obama has frankly made a lot of us right-wingers long for the Clinton days. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/98 "2014-02-19T18:31:36Z")
I don’t think Clinton’s blood clot problem (from a year ago) is too fresh in people’s minds, and it probably won’t be a big deal unless it happens again. But, uh, “questionable sexual orientation?” That’s some crazy shit. > [@adaher](#): > > I think that’s an outdated view of Clinton. Her tenure as Secretary of State made her a much more acceptable figure to those who previously disliked her That’s true - but it also comes with the caveat that Secretary of State isn’t an elected office. It’s a different kind of job and the SoS doesn’t have to get involved in partisan disputes the way the president and elected officials do. That’s helped her in the polls, but if she runs for president she can’t be above the fray anymore. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/99 "2014-02-19T18:38:11Z")
> [@nevadaexile](#): > > [http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/03/us/politics/hillary-clinton-is-discharged-from-hospital-after-blood-clot.html?\_r=0](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/03/us/politics/hillary-clinton-is-discharged-from-hospital-after-blood-clot.html?_r=0) > > Did you happen to miss that? Yes, I did. I thought you were referring to the National Enquirer story about a brain tumor. > [@](#): > > I didn’t mention Biden; **you did.** As a way of giving you an excuse, as you may have confused the two. > [@](#): > > How much more of this is there out there? As much as Fox and Friends can invent. > [@](#): > > After 15 years, this should be a distant memory. Yes. Now why isn’t it? > [@](#): > > And I haven’t scratched upon the fact that they went from nearly bankrupt to more than $150 million in personal assets in the time that he has been out of office. What happens when someone starts looking into who the donors were? Same thing that happens when any other former president gets his finances looked into. > [@](#): > > So clearly, I’m not alone in believing that there is no “middle ground” when it comes to her. You’re not addressing the \*why \*of her image being polarized. Or of why the polls don’t show it crippling her presidential prospects, in fact the opposite. You also fail to support or even address the sexual-orientation slur you made just a couple posts above. Would you please tell us where that comes from? :dubious: And, having done that, discuss how much traction it has politically? > [@](#): > > PS: I DID say that I’m a Democrat. > Did you “miss” that? Your \*concern \*is palpable. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404/100 "2014-02-19T18:43:57Z")
> [@nevadaexile](#): > > And I haven’t scratched upon the fact that they went from nearly bankrupt to more than $150 million in personal assets in the time that he has been out of office. What happens when someone starts looking into who the donors were? Donors? Those aren’t donations, they’re income. I seem to recall that Hillary ran for president in 2008 and the Clintons made their tax returns public, so if you want to know how they made their money, you can read them. Most of it came from his speaking fees and their book deals. The Clinton Foundation was seen as a potential complication at that time, but it didn’t become a huge issue and Bill continued to run the foundation throughout Hillary’s tenure as secretary of state. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-voted-for-obama-i-dont-think-hillary-clinton-has-prayer-of-being-the-next-potus/681404.md?page=6)