and the last seven years don’t count why?
I’m counting Clinton’s stint as Secretary of State as being involved with the White House.
People keep saying that in 2008 Clinton seemed inevitable, so there’s just no way to know! But as someone pointed out in another thread, in 2007 Clinton had a small lead over Obama. No one is even in the same state as Clinton right now, let alone being within shouting distance.
She did not run a bad campaign in 2007-8. Obama just ran a better one. Her totals were not far off his.
Lots of pluses.
Downsides - even his mayor stint doesn’t qualify as executive experience - San Antonio is run by the manager so he comes off as bit Palin or Quaylesque … the older candidate trying to offset his/her age with a young vibrant VP. And his urban focus writes off trying to appeal to rural swing voters (albeit they may be lost before the election starts no matter who is in VP)
Well, that’s just charming.
Yep! That’s me … I get that a lot lol
Here’s just one of the many qualifications listed in Hillary’s quest for the POTUS: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/04/12/clinton-announces-2016-white-house-bid/
“She advised her husband after he won the White House in 1992”
Well, I’m sure I will give all of your contributions in the thread the consideration they deserve.
I agree with nate. Hillary Clinton appeared to be the sure thing at this point back in 2007. There’s still plenty of time for some unexpected challenger to rise up and supplant her. Especially in the Democratic Party which is more open to unexpected candidates. (It’s the Republicans who are more inclined to nominate somebody because it’s their turn.)
As a Canadian, I’m going on the record right now to say that Ms. Clinton will win the Democratic nomination and the election.
I salute you President Clinton.
Not really. I have respect for Elizabeth Warren as she stands for something is isn’t a squeamish politician when confronted on it. Hillary has no backbone; a malleable, sycophantic dinosaur with little respect for ethics.
I would still vote for Hillary or Warren over a Cruz, Perry, or Santorum Republican nomination. As it stands, something like a Bush/Rubio (or preferably the reverse) ticket is more likely and would garner my vote.
Frankly, I’m considering becoming a Democrat again because I’m so disappointed with the Republicans. They are the “anti” party. They stand for nothing and have no soul.
The deck is stacked in favour of those at the top. That’s why you should vote for Hillary Clinton, so that come 2024 two families will have controlled the White House for 28 of the previous 36 years.
:smack:
Vote for Hillary, because the alternative would be much, much worse for both America and the world.
You’re not missing anyone, unless the 22nd Amendment has been repealed.
Leaffan, did you also go on record to say that the Leafs will win a playoff spot and the Stanley Cup this year? 
Seriously, I think the nomination for Clinton is inevitable, the general election somewhat less so. Republicans don’t even have a presumed nominee yet, let alone a developed campaign behind him. Hillary has to buck the odds of the traditional pendulum swing that makes this run statistically the Republicans’ turn. And the Republican spin machine is very effective at churning out malicious lies, like all the stuff that was thrown against Obama but failed to stick sufficiently, and the stuff that was thrown against John Kerry which did stick. I still think Hillary is going to win but it’s not going to be a slam-dunk.
Malia Obama for President, 2034!
Kerry’s statement on Clinton’s campaign announcement was: “I wish her well in this race and I look forward to being able to stay well away from it.”
Correct me if I’m wrong, but wouldn’t she have won the nomination in 2008 had it been based solely on the “pledged” delegates (i.e. the ones you get by campaigning), only to lose because of the “superdelegates”?
Be careful with that phrase before 1/20/2017 - Hillary threw a fit when somebody said that on one of her trips.
Okay, it was referring to her husband, and it was a mistranslation (at a press conference - somewhere in Africa, I think - somebody who didn’t speak English wanted to know what President Obama thought of one of her stands, but the translator mistakenly asked her what “President Clinton” thought of it, and she considered it an insult that somebody would think that she had to run everything through Bill first).
Yep, sitting here in my darkened office this evening, I’d say it is a done deal, and Hillary will be the next president.
Let us see how it actually unfolds over the next 18 months.
I believe Chelsea Clinton will be over 35 then…
I don’t think that’s true. Unless you’re already a really big name, you can’t really wait much longer to start getting in the press, raising money, hiring campaign staff and getting endorsements. In Spring, 2007 Obama had already appeared in Iowa and NH a bunch of times, lined up endorsements and announced his candidacy.
This year, there don’t seem to be many other people even laying the groundwork for a bid. Cuomo was, but seems to have decided to give up after his recent troubles in NY. So far as I know, that leaves just O’Malley and Webb as the only other two who are actually laying the groundwork, but its pretty hard to picture them leading an Obama-esque upset.
I think that’s true (though I’m not going to try to claim my memory is excellent). It was not a blowout. People remember it as a blowout because it was such an upset, but it wasn’t one.
And Clinton beat Obama in states like Ohio.