# Run, Hilary, Run!!!! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 16, 2003, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/run-hilary-run/213591 "2003-11-16T21:40:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/13edae/32.png) [@Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Cheatem_Undhow)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2003, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/run-hilary-run/213591/21 "2003-11-17T14:52:07Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > \*\*One other possibility that never gets mentioned is that Hillary could wind up on the ticket this time - as Vice President. \*\* The first rule of picking a running mate: don’t select someone who will overshadow you. Who on earth would want to have a media magnet like Hillary as their VP? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2003, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/run-hilary-run/213591/22 "2003-11-17T15:27:05Z")
Wesley Clark? Chin-jutting tough guy, military demeanor for the testosterone-impaired, “Stand By Your Man” health care/PTA Hilary. Bonus: The Big Dog will campaign for the ticket in exchange for a bit of slack on the chain around his…“naughty bits”. Who loses? Chelsea. Poor baby. ---
**Author:** ![BrotherCadfael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@BrotherCadfael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrotherCadfael)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2003, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/run-hilary-run/213591/23 "2003-11-17T15:38:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > **One other possibility that never gets mentioned is that Hillary could wind up on the ticket this time - as Vice President.** In political circles, this is called a “kangaroo ticket”, ie: the hindquarters are bigger than the forequarters. It is generally considered a Bad Thing. Of course, in Hillary’s case, the “bigger hindquarters” remark… ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2003, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/run-hilary-run/213591/24 "2003-11-17T16:09:34Z")
[Tim Noah updates the GOP-porn fantasy, right on time](http://slate.msn.com/id/2091277/): > [@](#): > > For awhile, the winger line (as laid down by Fox News {link in linked column - EL}) was that Hillary was waiting too long to file for the primaries, which only demonstrated that she didn’t know the first thing about running a presidential campaign. How much nastier was this going to get? Chatterbox began to worry that Republicans would boycott her imaginary inauguration, and then (inevitably) would call for her make-believe impeachment. > … > Safire explained (repeating some delusional analysis from an earlier column), Hillary had been using Wesley Clark as a stalking horse: > > [L]et Dick Gephardt slow Dean down in Iowa, then push Clark hard enough to upset Dean in New Hampshire, or at least attract enough of the isolationist vote from Dean to let John Kerry squeak through. … \*f the national economy had gone south, Hillary would have gone South with Clark on her ticket to take on an unemployment-ravaged Bush herself. But with the economy surging and Democrats robbed of their central issue, Hillary can wait till 2008. Ah, well, it’s no more of a GOP-porn fantasy than the Iraq war justifications, except with nobody getting killed, so go enjoy yourselves, guys. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2003, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/run-hilary-run/213591/25 "2003-11-17T18:33:39Z")
> [@](#): > > But she still outpolls all the other Dems by a huge margin. Only if you count [three percent](http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-3360734,00.html) as a “huge margin”, and that will likely vanish as the actual candidates get more name recognition. Besides which, there still is that annoying fact that Hillary isn’t going to run in 2004, and she isn’t going to run in 2008, and she isn’t going to run in 2012… Once Hillary dies, I wonder what conservative radio show hosts will use as a tactic to keep their audiences riled up. Will they start insisting that now it Chelsea who’s orchestrating everything as a plot to run for the White House at some point in the future, or will they insist that Hillary is planning to use necromancy and rise from the grave to run again? Either way, the dittoheads will sooner believe it then admit that they were wrong about Hillary’s plans. ---
**Author:** ![AHunter3](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ahunter3/32/368_2.png) [@AHunter3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AHunter3)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2003, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/run-hilary-run/213591/26 "2003-11-17T19:44:19Z")
My prediction is Hillary in '12. Unless she has health problems she won’t be too old. If she can rack up a decent Senatorial track record and keep from being forgotten, time may even be on her side (I’m under the admittedly uncited and unreferenced impression that the electorate likes older women better than younger ones). ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2003, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/run-hilary-run/213591/27 "2003-11-17T20:49:50Z")
I think **AHunter3** has a point. Hilary has to do something in the Senate, or every time she runs it will be as “former co-President”, and the Republicans will beat her to death on her and her husband’s record. Reagan forever put complaints about age as a disqualification off the Republican table, unless Hilary develops some noticeable health problems over the next few years. Possibly not even then, since Cheney is VP, even with his heart problems. She simply can’t run this cycle. She can’t attack Bush about Iraq, or they will trot out all the times she is on record as saying that Saddam had WMD. The economy is recovering, so that probably won’t be an issue. Health care she already gave her best shot, and failed. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2003, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/run-hilary-run/213591/28 "2003-11-18T06:01:11Z")
Y’all keep saying 2012. What about Hillary in 2008? If she can’t defeat Bush in 2004 and he wins then the field is wide open in 2008. But then there is his brother in Florida. Wow, 3 Bushes in the Whitehouse. by that time one of W’s daughters would be old enough and sober enough to run. It would be a Monarchy. 3…2…1… ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2003, 6:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/run-hilary-run/213591/29 "2003-11-18T06:34:46Z")
God doesn’t hate America that much. Frogs, boils, locusts, that sort of thing, standard biblical plagues. But not that. ---
**Author:** ![Sterra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8c91f0/32.png) [@Sterra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sterra)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2003, 6:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/run-hilary-run/213591/30 "2003-11-18T06:58:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by AHunter3 \* > \*\*My prediction is Hillary in '12. Unless she has health problems she won’t be too old. If she can rack up a decent Senatorial track record and keep from being forgotten, time may even be on her side (I’m under the admittedly uncited and unreferenced impression that the electorate likes older women better than younger ones). \*\* I think that the main problem with that idea is the fact that she would not have gone into the Senate if she wanted to run for president. She would have ran for governor somewhere. Though I think the constant Republicans wanting her to run show a difference in between what Republicans and Democrats want in a leader. Republicans love the idea of family members of a president running for president. It used to be the Kennedys then of course now we have both the Clintons and the Bush family. I have no idea why. ---
**Author:** ![Vezer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b38774/32.png) [@Vezer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Vezer)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2003, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/run-hilary-run/213591/31 "2003-11-18T22:59:58Z")
She stands a brilliant chance of winning if only because she is the most remarkable liar in existance. Filegate Travelgate VinceFostergate Whitewatergate-RoseLawFirm Cattlefuturesgate Communist Medical Care Carpetbaggate FALNgate (remember those P.R. Terrorists released for the P.R. Vote?) Please for the love of all that is good and hopeful for the future, do not vote for her. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2003, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/run-hilary-run/213591/32 "2003-11-18T23:07:19Z")
Y’all keep saying 2012. What about Hillary in 2008? If she can’t defeat Bush in 2004 and he wins then the field is wide open in 2008. But then there is his brother in Florida. Wow, 3 Bushes in the Whitehouse. by that time one of W’s daughters would be old enough and sober enough to run. It would be a Monarchy. 3…2…1… ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2003, 7:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/run-hilary-run/213591/33 "2003-11-19T07:59:53Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sterra \* > Though I think the constant Republicans wanting her to run show a difference in between what Republicans and Democrats want in a leader. No, the Republicans want her to run because she’d make an easy target – they’d just have to dust off all the old Bill Clinton smears, change a few names, and _viola!_ Instant disinformation campaign! > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Vezer_ > She stands a brilliant chance of winning if only because she is the most remarkable liar in existance. > > Filegate > Travelgate > VinceFostergate > Whitewatergate-RoseLawFirm > Cattlefuturesgate > Communist Medical Care > Carpetbaggate > FALNgate (remember those P.R. Terrorists released for the P.R. Vote?) See what I mean? Poor **Vezer** here believes Hillary has no chance in hell because of all these past controversies, yet _conveniently ignores_ the fact that both Clintons were ultimately proven innocent on all charges. Scandal-screaming headlines beat out over mundane truth seven days a week. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2003, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/run-hilary-run/213591/34 "2003-11-19T13:36:33Z")
See? _Even in this short thread_, essentially all the speculation about her running is from the righties - who nevertheless maintain a claim to realism. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/run-hilary-run/213591.md?page=1)