Salon published an interesting article:
What do you guys think? I for one am completely convinced. Hillary 2020! It’s her turn (for reals this time)!
Sure, it would be a redemptive story, and who doesn’t like that.
But I don’t buy the idea that Hillary won the popular vote “convincingly.” She beat Trump by 2% in the popular vote when by all conventional logic she should have been crushing him by an utterly lopsided, devastating margin. She herself asked, “Why am I not 50 points ahead?”
Saying that Hillary beat Trump “convincingly” in the popular vote would be like Michigan bragging about eking out a 2-point win over Appalachian State. Goliath shouldn’t be bragging about a narrow victory over David.
Edit: I’m not saying **HurricaneDitka **claimed Hillary won “convincingly,” but rather, that the cited source did.
It will be a very different environment in 2020. The problem will not be continuing and expanding the accomplishments of a Democratic administration; it will be one of salvaging another horrible mess left by another Republican one. A different skill set will be required.
That’s exactly the sort of thinking that got us President Trump. When you get your talking points from Eric Cartman, you should re-examine your argument.
That’s a hard case to make, even for her most zealous supporters. Hillary Clinton is guilty of the most unpardonable sin of all. By her inept campaigning she cost the Democrats a Presidency that was theirs for the taking. She lost to Donald fucking Trump! And she may well be the only Democrat in the entire country that is capable of losing to him again. I think people could be forgiven for being extremely reluctant to give her the 2020 candidacy. She had her chance and she blew it. Time to move on.
Welllllll, since one of the prime motivating forces of the Right for the last 30 some years has been to destroy Hillary Clinton, if she were to run, and even win, the Right wing Orc armies would be re-energized like never before. As this nonsense has occupied a majority of the span of my adult life, I think it would be understandable if I were to say, no thanks.
Democrats don’t vote for someone to ‘piss off’ the other side. I can’t say the same for Trump voters
If I were alive in 2020, here is how I would vote:
Any man, woman or robot* but Trump
*Except Hillary
The only one I agree with is 4, and you can’t be a good president if you don’t win. She got her shot at Trump, she blew it.
No matter how good you might think it would be if she won, it doesn’t matter, because we already know she wouldn’t. She’s already lost to Trump, and how the heck is that even possible?
Plus, of course, there are a lot of Democrats who don’t think it’d be all that great if she won (except, possibly, by comparison with the Republican candidate). Despite all of the support she got from the establishment of the party (which I do not consider to have been “cheating”, or “unfair”, or anything of the sort), Sanders still managed to put up a strong primary challenge to her, and there are probably a lot of other Democrats who would have done they same if they’d run. And a lot of support she got over Sanders, for that matter, was based not on the premise of how good she’d be, but that she was more electable (and we all saw how well that turned out).
Not a single scrap of actual evidence to back up this claim.
Please no. Hillary would make a fine president, but thirty years of propaganda have made her a very polarizing figure.
She also doesn’t excite liberals, who now make up half the democratic party.
But Sanders didn’t really put up a strong challenge. The media loves their horserace and underdog stories, but Sanders was all but mathematically eliminated after Super Tuesday and he’d need divine intervention after his crushing loss in New York. All Democratic primaries and caucuses use a proportional allocation of delegates, so most of Sanders ‘wins’ in small white states meant he’d get a couple extra delegates than Hillary did and that’s not counting superdelegates. Sanders was scoring safeties and kicking field goals in his wins while Hillary was getting touchdowns and topping them off with two point conversions.
Any self respecting candidate would have dropped out after the embarrassing crushing defeat in New York. Sanders has no respect and continued to wage his holy war against the Democratic Party with a narcissistic tilting at windmills.
Sanders would have been a better candidate than Clinton was, and he would have made a better president too. He was far more relatable than either Clinton or Trump.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Karl Rove and the Kremlin would have *destroyed *poor Bernie.
He would have lost badly.
I forgot that now we have to take the…ah… “external” factors into account as well.
Yeah. He wouldn’t have gotten anywhere near the number of votes Hillary did.
(Amazing the way people manage to assume that because someone who wasn’t the candidate didn’t get attacked, then they wouldn’t have been attacked if they had been the candidate. Amazing and disturbing, the way people manage to ignore the obvious.)
ETA: I would assume the ‘Hillary in 2020’ idea is one that’s being pushed by the Russian troll factories. Because it’s a way to keep Trump–imperfect though he is for their purposes–in power past that 2020 election.
While I might find accusations against Salon for being a ‘Russian troll factory’ plausible, I don’t think there’s a lot of evidence for it.
I’m willing to go with, ‘over-zealous HRC spokes person’.
Do you think it’s anything more than that? Do you think HRC and surrogates are floating a trial balloon on Salon, in 2017?