Her final ace in the hole is the propensity of the Republicans to put together a ticket that just can’t win. I expect a Cruz/Bachmann like ticket.
With a resigned sigh I have to say I don’t see anyone else (who’s likely to run) getting the nomination, nor do I think anyone else (who’s likely to run) would do as well against his/her Republican opponent. Not that this person would lose necessarily, I just think Hillary would do better.
Of those who aren’t running? The only person I think who’d give her a good run for her money for the nomination would be Al Gore. He’s got everything, both an impressive political service record, the experience of campaigning*, and yet he seems like an “outsider” having been out in the woods (sometimes literally) doing actual good for the world. His environmentalism now seems like visionary rather than pie-in-the-sky. He’s not tainted by having backed the Iraq war or any NSA bullshit. Importantly, he’s not the same campaigner/speaker he was back in 2000–that bullshit “wooden” comment won’t fly given how well he’s comported himself in the past fifteen years as a spokesperson and advocate. Despite his age (which is the same as Hillary’s) he’s admired by young people too. And I think many Democrats–and Independents–would love the chance to put him where he should’ve been in January 2001.
I would vote for him in a heartbeat, with an enthusiasm far exceeding that which I’d show for Clinton.
But he won’t run, and I understand why, for several reasons. Not the least of which is that the Clinton folks would feel betrayed and it would be a difficult, internecine battle that could cause some damage.
Don’t get me wrong, there is a lot to like about Hillary Clinton and I have always admired many of her stances. She will certainly have my support, as would any “D” candidate outside of… um… well, I can’t think of an option that would ever make me choose an “R” candidate, so I guess I’m Yellow Dog through and through. IMO there is no Democratic candidate worse than any Republican candidate.
Oh okay, I just thought of a scenario: Jim Cooper vs. Mike Bloomberg. 
In that case, yeah, I’d vote (R). Not a big Bloomberg fan but I’ve known for decades he’s a donkey in elephant’s clothing.
So Clinton or whoever the nominee is will have my loyalty. Nevertheless, my heart will always weep for what should’ve been in 2000. I want President Gore. 
- Likely one of the many reasons he doesn’t want to run again. After what he went through, I can’t blame him.
Like everything in political campaigns, it’s window dressing. You pick someone who will appeal to a demographic you don’t cover yourself and tell a good story. Two people from the mid-Atlantic states can get painted as being in the “East Coast liberal bubble”. A New York/Montana match covers east and west, urban and rural, blue and red.
That this is ultimately irrelevant doesn’t matter at all - it’s all about the perception.
Polls at this point are just name-recognition tests. Clinton and Warren are the two candidates most people are familiar with. I doubt one American in 100 could name O’Malley or Webb. I follow politics pretty closely, and I doubt even I’d recognize a picture of O’Malley.
Though as I said earlier, any low name recognition candidate probably needs to already be moving to lock up support, start sucking up to the National Press and get some pictures in the Iowa papers of them trying to eat some sort of local delicacy/greasy meat pile with a forced, queasy smile.
And for the love of god don’t make it a corndog.
I didn’t know all of that … sounds like inside party stuff. I still think the democrats have another dark horse (no pun intended) to run against Hillary.
Perhaps it’s VP Joe Biden who can garner more votes than the obvious front runner Hillary Clinton. He has the Catholic vote and the military vote and the Jews aren’t mad at him and most important of all he has the white man vote.
In these next few months all the eyes will be on Hillary Clinton. I bet the reality of a woman running for POTUS has not yet set into everyone’s subconscious minds.
This is where she will lose if not in the Democratic primaries then surely against the likes of Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio.
Like it or not in the end a man will win.
Hillary should go all the way in and name a woman as her VP ahead of time because it will be a male against female race anyway.
Eight years ago, were you sure a white would win?
Do you want Iowans to show up for the caucuses in some freezing high school gymnasium and go stand in your corner for a few hours? Then, by gum, you’re gonna *eat *that corndog for the cameras. All of it. And another one tomorrow, and the day after that …
You mean white guy … and there was only one and he had a woman VP by his side :eek:
Biden is a white guy.
Heh yeah, I can’t help remembering this exchange in 30 Rock back in 2007 between Liz and shallow Jenna:
As dim and ignorant as Jenna’s character is, she wasn’t alone to think the USA was not ready to vote in a non-white candidate. Maybe the same will be true for gender as well.
Maybe she’ll pick him as her veep. “Clinton-Gore '16: Remember how awesome the 90s were?”
Wait, didn’t the right wing promise us a third term of Obama? Where’s the dictator-for-life we wanted?
The same place as when the left wing predicted GWB would force a 3rd term for himself.
Tipper for Veep!
One assumes you have a cite.
Which left wingers were saying that, or is this just another example of wagging the finger and tut-tutting “I hate it when both sides do it” when in fact only one does?
Just so I understand, this means "banning the theft of private property during an emergency? "
You must be new around here.
So you withdraw the assertion then?