Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Eliot Rosewater

(31,109 posts)
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:35 PM Nov 2018

So Hillary cant even CONSIDER running again?

Notice how Hillary and ONLY Hillary cant even consider running again, for president.

Why even just mentioning it will bring out such rage.

Lets play a game, which men CANT even consider running again? Either party...

Go...

218 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
So Hillary cant even CONSIDER running again? (Original Post) Eliot Rosewater Nov 2018 OP
I don't want her to run Just a Weirdo Nov 2018 #1
BULLSHIT!!!! bluestarone Nov 2018 #4
And people are entitled to their opinions. babylonsister Nov 2018 #52
I agree with you. metroins Nov 2018 #85
Another no Auggie Nov 2018 #101
Mine too... big time NO WAY!! InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #176
The poster is in no way Mariana Nov 2018 #89
TRUE and my post WAS NOT responding to the original poster? bluestarone Nov 2018 #91
Yes. Mariana Nov 2018 #95
Your right and i bluestarone Nov 2018 #100
I don't either, but she can consider it if she wants. The Velveteen Ocelot Nov 2018 #5
That's up to her, don't you think? lunamagica Nov 2018 #36
Jimmy Carter can't run again SCantiGOP Nov 2018 #83
I think the OP is silly but your answer is wrong Jim Lane Nov 2018 #189
The OP said SCantiGOP Nov 2018 #202
OK, I didn't distinguish it the way you did Jim Lane Nov 2018 #212
Your not wanting her to run.. NastyRiffraff Nov 2018 #126
Hillary Won the Election Last Time - What's Wrong with a Proven Winner? dlk Nov 2018 #208
I think she's probably... Mike Nelson Nov 2018 #2
I cant think of any who are ruled out, even the much older ones. Eliot Rosewater Nov 2018 #3
Even on DU, many have been unwitting victims Jakes Progress Nov 2018 #113
Or Sanders, or Biden. And neither of them ran a primary basically unchallenged, and a 3 million win. Wintryjade Nov 2018 #7
She's run for President and lost twice. Do we have any male candidates wanting to run who have the jalan48 Nov 2018 #6
Lost twice, plus she's getting older Zing Zing Zingbah Nov 2018 #9
The four top names usually mentioned here are all nearing 80. Bfd Nov 2018 #50
She's only 71. That's at least five years younger than two of the Democratic.... George II Nov 2018 #109
Thanks George. See! Hillary doesn't fit that "she's too old" bs afterall. Bfd Nov 2018 #154
Absolutely, lost not just twice, but twice in a row...her decision not to run again is a wise one. InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #182
Biden violetpastille Nov 2018 #14
Thanks for this info. I forgot he ran in 1987 jalan48 Nov 2018 #18
Biden Renew Deal Nov 2018 #16
Is twice needed? Bernie ran and lost even the primary treestar Nov 2018 #53
Hillary twice for President in eight years. Biden also. Kerry once and Bernie once I believe. jalan48 Nov 2018 #65
Many of those mentioned here (Biden, Sanders, Kerry, and Clinton).... George II Nov 2018 #111
I think every candidate deserves a second chance, like Hillary had. InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #183
If the thread was a former Kerry aide saying he was in, you would get the same negatives karynnj Nov 2018 #195
No, she lost once. You are counting her primary run. Uder that criteria, IIRC, Nixon lost lunamagica Nov 2018 #70
Biden ran in 1988 and 2008. n/t pnwmom Nov 2018 #86
She lost because of a very flawed system and Bob factors liberal N proud Nov 2018 #132
Shouldn't have been close against a candidate like Trump and California was the main reason for jalan48 Nov 2018 #136
Did you forget, trump had a little help? liberal N proud Nov 2018 #144
If we're going to win in 2020 we will need a very dynamic candidate. Not fair, but it's reality. jalan48 Nov 2018 #153
Very true... we need to pick a candidate who can inspire voters to overwhelmingly defeat InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #177
Biden EffieBlack Nov 2018 #171
Sounds like you just want to stir it up today Pisces Nov 2018 #8
I am sorry if openly supporting Hilary Clinton on Democratic Underground bugs you... Eliot Rosewater Nov 2018 #12
If Hillary were to run again I'd be behind her GWC58 Nov 2018 #39
Right elleng Nov 2018 #28
I see OPs here all the time mcar Nov 2018 #43
Good question. Somehow suggesting Hillary is stirring things up?? Bfd Nov 2018 #48
It's not really Newland56 Nov 2018 #125
Stir what up? The question is pretty simple Bfd Nov 2018 #46
You want a name? Here's one: Bernie 'Get off my lawn you damned kids' Sanders. elocs Nov 2018 #10
I would hope he wouldn't run again too. Zing Zing Zingbah Nov 2018 #13
Yeah and he's not a Democrat, he's an GWC58 Nov 2018 #41
She can consider it if she wants Lotusflower70 Nov 2018 #11
No. It's over for her Renew Deal Nov 2018 #15
Its over for bernie too. We have some amazing people to choose from Bfd Nov 2018 #71
+1 BootinUp Nov 2018 #80
I hope so Renew Deal Nov 2018 #108
I think so too... Hillary made a wise choice to bow out of politics gracefully. InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #180
I think it would be a stroke of genius for HRC to announce a bid for the Presidency. Aristus Nov 2018 #17
Except she doesn't deserve any more babylonsister Nov 2018 #88
I'll answer: Al Gore, John Kerry and Mike Dukakis... brooklynite Nov 2018 #19
Please point out the stories, talking heads saying they cant run or the Eliot Rosewater Nov 2018 #21
Hello Eliot Rosewater.... Small-Axe Nov 2018 #31
umm brer cat Nov 2018 #140
The point---if it wasn't obvious enough--was that HHH never ran for president again... Small-Axe Nov 2018 #163
So are you saying that IF any of those male individuals did run again LiberalLovinLug Nov 2018 #96
Not just tried twice and lost... twice in a row. InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #185
She didn't fucking lose 2016 and everyone saying so in this thread knows it. MrsCoffee Nov 2018 #197
It will be a short thread TheFarseer Nov 2018 #146
I disagree that Kerry lost because of badly run campaign. It was a tough year for us karynnj Nov 2018 #44
I worked on his campaign and I couldn't tell you what his message was... brooklynite Nov 2018 #115
I was blown away by one speech where he connected working to fight climate change karynnj Nov 2018 #128
You shut him good and proper. Thanks. John Fante Nov 2018 #139
Thanks to you and I agree he is very underrated karynnj Nov 2018 #147
Were they told to go away? mcar Nov 2018 #45
Poorly Managed?? That's the reason you give why the EC didn't vote her way? Bfd Nov 2018 #56
Yes I would... brooklynite Nov 2018 #117
What lost the election wasn't mismanagement, it was the unbalanced electoral college. George II Nov 2018 #131
See: Obama 2008, Obama 2012 brooklynite Nov 2018 #135
That's just silly FBaggins Nov 2018 #206
Beto and Stacy ran amazing campaigns .... so did Andrew down in Florida. LenaBaby61 Nov 2018 #124
I'd love to see Gore run again lunamagica Nov 2018 #72
Gore lost nine States won by Clinton; winning any one would have made FL irrelevant brooklynite Nov 2018 #123
I would love her to run again, and win, to stick it to the Republicans. The problem is if she runs OnDoutside Nov 2018 #20
I like the SoS idea. Put the fear of God in Putin. brush Nov 2018 #34
That would be revenge served nice and hot ! Putin would be crapping himself, 4 years of a world of OnDoutside Nov 2018 #47
YES! Hillary would be "great again" as S.O.S. maddiemom Nov 2018 #110
I doubt she would accept the nomination again karynnj Nov 2018 #129
who said she can't consider? qazplm135 Nov 2018 #22
Practically everyone says she cant, and almost NONE of them say that about the other person Eliot Rosewater Nov 2018 #23
She can consider all she wants qazplm135 Nov 2018 #152
Good question Takket Nov 2018 #24
Exactly, you notice her name isnt even brought up as possible candidates. Eliot Rosewater Nov 2018 #26
I'd love it if Bernie would not consider running again. NightWatcher Nov 2018 #25
+10000 ProudLib72 Nov 2018 #54
"Lets play a game, which men CANT even consider running again? Either party. " Jarqui Nov 2018 #27
Of course she can run again. It is just that Hillary has said she wouldn't. Does that mean she still_one Nov 2018 #29
I'm in: Biden, Sanders and trump. brush Nov 2018 #30
They're almost 80. If HRC is "too old" what are these guys. Bfd Nov 2018 #61
That's what I'm saying. We Dems have done well with candidates... brush Nov 2018 #74
Exactly. So bye to Biden, Bernie, Warren, Clinton ...etc Bfd Nov 2018 #81
Bernie and Joe's ages are frequently brought up, and not John Fante Nov 2018 #141
And the fact of the matter is that with age comes mental and physical decline. Garrett78 Nov 2018 #148
I don't think I have ever heard anyone say she can't run. Of course she can. dameatball Nov 2018 #32
You haven't heard anyone say it. Mariana Nov 2018 #92
I see your point. ananda Nov 2018 #33
Interesting ProudLib72 Nov 2018 #59
So if a candidate has run & lost the they are off the 2020 list?? Bfd Nov 2018 #66
I think she is phenomenal ProudLib72 Nov 2018 #73
Lol..damn the hypocrisy is waist deep out there ..wtf Bfd Nov 2018 #76
You're catching on! ProudLib72 Nov 2018 #79
Its exhausting to witness day after day. Bfd Nov 2018 #82
I see a lot of people saying Beto shouldn't run for President..including Beto. aikoaiko Nov 2018 #116
Sometimes our losers turn out to be winners! ananda Nov 2018 #209
Kerry & Romney can't run again. KWR65 Nov 2018 #35
They can, but likely won't. MarvinGardens Nov 2018 #160
Here is a lady who would win against Trump..Michelle Obama.. Stuart G Nov 2018 #37
I would be very happy to vote for her. In_The_Wind Nov 2018 #38
No question there... Michelle is an inspirational leader & would make a great 1st female President. InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #178
name for me please lapfog_1 Nov 2018 #40
And I'm convinced that Nixon would have lost for a second time to a man named Kennedy... Small-Axe Nov 2018 #64
Had Johnson succeeded in ending the war, even Humphrey would have won lapfog_1 Nov 2018 #67
very true borgesian Nov 2018 #78
true... but most were discouraged by their party from running again lapfog_1 Nov 2018 #87
Yup. That was my understanding as well. borgesian Nov 2018 #97
Right? mcar Nov 2018 #42
name the one who lost, ran again, and then won. lapfog_1 Nov 2018 #60
But that's not the issue, is it? mcar Nov 2018 #63
The facts are that the electorate doesn't like a "loser" lapfog_1 Nov 2018 #69
Who said she can't consider it? TCJ70 Nov 2018 #49
anyone who suggest Bernie, even older than Hillary treestar Nov 2018 #51
+1,000 NastyRiffraff Nov 2018 #127
Hillary Clinton is five years younger than Sanders, and women live five years longer than men... George II Nov 2018 #137
Love it treestar Nov 2018 #145
Not so FBaggins Nov 2018 #207
She'd get nowhere. TheCowsCameHome Nov 2018 #55
The decision not to run again has already been made. InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #187
I hope she does not Marrah_Goodman Nov 2018 #57
Of course she can consider running. Progressive dog Nov 2018 #58
She has already considered it. GoCubsGo Nov 2018 #62
I do and admire her bowing out gracefully. InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #186
I think she just didn't want to put herself through that again. GoCubsGo Nov 2018 #190
Yes, Hillary gave it her all the last two times she ran and lost to political newcomers. InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #193
If Hillary announces, she immediately gets $500 from me. All other Dems oasis Nov 2018 #68
Mee too! Bfd Nov 2018 #75
Of course she can, if she wishes. I doubt she will, though. MineralMan Nov 2018 #77
There's a difference between can and should Mr. Ected Nov 2018 #84
Depends on who you ask right? People have certainly said Sanders "wouldn't be allowed...." JCanete Nov 2018 #90
Harold Stassen Nasruddin Nov 2018 #93
Hillary can do whatever she wants to do but the truth is that it would give Trump the foil that r/o BlueInRedHell Nov 2018 #94
I don't want her to run for President. She should be appointed to SCOTUS. bitterross Nov 2018 #98
Hope she won't. zentrum Nov 2018 #99
It's not just her. Biden and Sanders need to forget about it too. BlueStater Nov 2018 #102
Biden was on a winning ticket twice as VP. Small-Axe Nov 2018 #114
We can do a lot better than a nearly 80 year old man. BlueStater Nov 2018 #121
Bad thinking on your part, methinks... Small-Axe Nov 2018 #156
Him dying in office isn't exactly a great selling point. BlueStater Nov 2018 #158
Bye now. Small-Axe Nov 2018 #159
You didn't like my answer, so now you're going to be rude and dismissive. BlueStater Nov 2018 #161
No are think you are being rude and dismissive and are absolutely dead wrong... Small-Axe Nov 2018 #162
You initiated this conversation and don't like that your opinion isn't shared. BlueStater Nov 2018 #165
Saying that "dying in office isn't a selling point" on JFK's death anniversary... Small-Axe Nov 2018 #166
Whatever, Mr. Been-here-for-a-month. BlueStater Nov 2018 #169
Post removed Post removed Nov 2018 #170
I hope you do figure it out. BlueStater Nov 2018 #172
Yes, Biden is a proven two-time winner and, for that, definitely deserves another InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #194
People don't vote for VP. Obama won those contests. Garrett78 Nov 2018 #201
Except that Bernie has more energy and vitality than most 50-year-olds. InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #213
"which men CANT even consider running again?" Tarc Nov 2018 #103
None of the following redixdoragon Nov 2018 #104
Oh. murielm99 Nov 2018 #142
Of course she can consider it, but she shouldn't run. SMC22307 Nov 2018 #105
Her trustworthiness ratings were absolutely abysmal GitRDun Nov 2018 #106
Bernie Could Have Won ConnorMarc Nov 2018 #215
Thanks. Your perspective isn't popular here, but LibDemAlways Nov 2018 #218
Of course Hillary can run again ... but jb5150 Nov 2018 #107
Gore went through this in 2004 zaj Nov 2018 #112
A lot of people have said Bernie and Biden shouldn't run. aikoaiko Nov 2018 #118
Anyone can run Andy823 Nov 2018 #119
Question To The OP ConnorMarc Nov 2018 #120
Good question melman Nov 2018 #134
Says who? DFW Nov 2018 #122
Ageism. Joe941 Nov 2018 #130
With age comes mental and physical decline. That's just a fact of life. Garrett78 Nov 2018 #149
It is what it is - Baby Boomers are no longer the biggest voting bloc. Algernon Moncrieff Nov 2018 #175
She can do anything she wants to Bettie Nov 2018 #133
Here are a few Separation Nov 2018 #138
Mike Dukakis Al Gore John Kerry. Voltaire2 Nov 2018 #143
The correct answer... clementine613 Nov 2018 #150
Anyone over 70 whistler162 Nov 2018 #151
Pretty much this Algernon Moncrieff Nov 2018 #174
Obama krawhitham Nov 2018 #155
Hillary has been running for president since 2000 Azathoth Nov 2018 #157
Michelle would represent women well... don't see how she would lose. InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #181
She would "lose" if she were elected Algernon Moncrieff Nov 2018 #196
I'm assuming you meant to say 2008. She didn't run in 2000 or 2004. Garrett78 Nov 2018 #188
No, she's been running since 2000 Azathoth Nov 2018 #211
Your description of her fine Senate career is incorrect. She ran for Senate to serve in the Senate. StevieM Nov 2018 #216
Do we really want to go through the whole Hillary / Bernie shit again? Initech Nov 2018 #164
She can run, but I doubt I will support her in the primary Marrah_Goodman Nov 2018 #167
She can, but probably should not, and probably won't. MarvinGardens Nov 2018 #168
Precisely!! Why Bernie deserves another chance, should he decide InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2018 #184
Anyone can consider running. Algernon Moncrieff Nov 2018 #173
Agreed. See post #148. Garrett78 Nov 2018 #179
Although I can understand someone wanting a new face, Hortensis Nov 2018 #191
I agree that Hillary Clinton is an excellent candidate Algernon Moncrieff Nov 2018 #198
:) Well, here's a counterargument to your counter. Hortensis Nov 2018 #210
I don't think this has anything to do with gender. Vinca Nov 2018 #192
SIGH. OK, if you insist - when T Barrett made noise about possibly running for a third time against Kashkakat v.2.0 Nov 2018 #199
Hillary Clinton has every right to consider running again Gothmog Nov 2018 #200
If anybody watched Murhpy Brown last night then realized this did NOT have to happen Eliot Rosewater Nov 2018 #204
again, vagina. n/t librechik Nov 2018 #203
She won the first time. I want her to run again sellitman Nov 2018 #205
Any American, male or female over the age of 35 can run for president and there is no Autumn Nov 2018 #214
I voted for her, I'd vote for her again. But I worry about the people that would vote against her. LakeSuperiorView Nov 2018 #217

Mariana

(14,854 posts)
89. The poster is in no way
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:05 PM
Nov 2018

preventing Hillary from running for whatever she decides too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [sic].

Mariana

(14,854 posts)
95. Yes.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:13 PM
Nov 2018

The poster you responded to is in no way preventing Hillary from running for whatever she decides too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [sic] by expressing an opinion here.

bluestarone

(16,886 posts)
100. Your right and i
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:17 PM
Nov 2018

Can very much DISAGREE with ( I don't want her to run again) their opinion and MY opinion!

 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
189. I think the OP is silly but your answer is wrong
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 04:28 AM
Nov 2018

Jimmy Carter is legally eligible to run again and to win another term as President.

Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, on the other hand, are Democrats who aren't legally eligible, barring an extremely unlikely amendment to the Constitution.

SCantiGOP

(13,867 posts)
202. The OP said
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:13 PM
Nov 2018

And I quote: “...which men CAN’T run again.”
Thus I mentioned Pres Carter as ineligible based on age, even though he does meet the constitutional test.

 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
212. OK, I didn't distinguish it the way you did
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 03:39 PM
Nov 2018

Carter isn't exactly "ineligible based on age" the way that, for example, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is (because she doesn't meet the constitutional age test).

Obviously, Carter isn't going to run, so it doesn't matter.

NastyRiffraff

(12,448 posts)
126. Your not wanting her to run..
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 06:53 PM
Nov 2018

..is different from her not being ALLOWED to run, which is the subject of the OP.

dlk

(11,528 posts)
208. Hillary Won the Election Last Time - What's Wrong with a Proven Winner?
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:48 PM
Nov 2018

She would make an outstanding president. The misogyny from the last campaign has never been truly addressed. We see it today in the calls for Nancy Pelosi to step down, as well. Seriously, what's wrong with experienced, successful women?

Mike Nelson

(9,949 posts)
2. I think she's probably...
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:39 PM
Nov 2018

… not going to... but she would change if she thought she would be the best bet to beat Trump or Pence in 2020. And, your thesis is correct as people don't seem to rule out many men, including Kerry and Romney.

Eliot Rosewater

(31,109 posts)
3. I cant think of any who are ruled out, even the much older ones.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:40 PM
Nov 2018

It isnt about age with Hillary, it is misogyny and 25 years of effective propaganda ALL of it lies.

Jakes Progress

(11,122 posts)
113. Even on DU, many have been unwitting victims
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:45 PM
Nov 2018

of that 25 year campaign. And when you throw that in with a little tamped down misogyny, you get a party that turns away from its best and finest.

I see no reason for her not to run. The RW propaganda machine will go after whoever does. And some on DU will even start to believe the bs.

But I don't see why she would. I know she won the popular vote, but the election shouldn't have been anywhere near close. The smartest and most moral and the most qualified candidate in decades lost to the worst candidate ever, one who shouldn't have gotten 10% of the vote.

So. I would campaign and vote for her in a heartbeat. But I don't begrudge her a more peaceful life after her service to others.

jalan48

(13,850 posts)
6. She's run for President and lost twice. Do we have any male candidates wanting to run who have the
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:42 PM
Nov 2018

same history? I think if she wants to run again she should be able to but I would hope we would have a large number of other Democrats to choose from in the primaries.

 

Bfd

(1,406 posts)
50. The four top names usually mentioned here are all nearing 80.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:00 PM
Nov 2018

Hillary's getting older?
Apparantly there's no age lmiit judging by the other names promoted as candidates.

So age isn't even a qualifier.

George II

(67,782 posts)
109. She's only 71. That's at least five years younger than two of the Democratic....
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:38 PM
Nov 2018

...men being touted RIGHT NOW (who are 77 and 76)

But, of course, she's a woman, who has a life expectancy five years longer, 81, than men! In fact, those two men have already reached the life expectancy of American men, 76.

 

Bfd

(1,406 posts)
154. Thanks George. See! Hillary doesn't fit that "she's too old" bs afterall.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 11:34 PM
Nov 2018

Thanks for making this clear.

violetpastille

(1,483 posts)
14. Biden
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:47 PM
Nov 2018

That time — actually, times — Joe Biden ran for president 02:03
Washington (CNN)As Vice President Joe Biden mulls another run for president, it's worth looking back at his two past bids -- launched in 1987 and 2007.

Biden's first campaign was derailed rather quickly in September 1987 after a plagiarism scandal culminated in an admission he lifted -- nearly verbatim -- a speech originally given by a British politician.
And his 2007 bid is likely most remembered for the gaffes the free-speaking Delaware senator let fly, including one in which he inartfully described his then-Democratic rival, Sen. Barack Obama, as "the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy."


I'm not a personal "fan" of Biden. I would keep an arm's length distance if I ever met him in person. But if he's the nominee I will not gripe about it.

We just need a decent, human Democrat up in there. I don't need to fall in love.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
53. Is twice needed? Bernie ran and lost even the primary
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:03 PM
Nov 2018

Kerry ran and lost; Biden ran and lost the primaries twice (though winning as VP). There are those who oppose these men; but it seems more pronounced for Hillary. Like the "twice" mantra is the standard. Because she can be distinguished for them on that.

jalan48

(13,850 posts)
65. Hillary twice for President in eight years. Biden also. Kerry once and Bernie once I believe.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:12 PM
Nov 2018

The more times a candidate runs and loses should be of interest I think.

George II

(67,782 posts)
111. Many of those mentioned here (Biden, Sanders, Kerry, and Clinton)....
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:41 PM
Nov 2018

....Clinton is at least three years younger than the others.

karynnj

(59,499 posts)
195. If the thread was a former Kerry aide saying he was in, you would get the same negatives
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 09:24 AM
Nov 2018

They happened in all the media speculating threads. Not to mention, he was thrashed here on DU when he considered running in 2008 with at least the intensity as the negativity now on a Clinton run. As to his comments, after a few where he pretty unambiguously said he was doing nothing to run, he intentionally repeated a comment that it was 2018 that should be talked about.

As to who might be more likely considering a run, google hillaryclinton.com, joebiden.com and johnkerry.com. Two are alive. Kerry shut down his when he started as SoS and has not restored it. In 2006, I thought Kerry could pull it off if it came down to just Hillary and himself. With Kerry/Feingold, he was better positioned on the issues and by far the best debater i've seen. I also thought his strength in meeting people one to one in Iowa and NH which made him the winner in 2004 could work again in 2008. Additionally, swiftboating had evolved to mean a disgusting lie that smears a person for political purposes and Kerry was seen as a very clean politician.

Though my respect has only increased, I doubt he will run and if he did, I assume he would not win the nomination. He is too old, even though he is as sharp as ever and likely more physically fit than people decades younger. I do hope that whichever Democrat wins uses these many elder statesmen to restore our country.

I think until one of the next generation catches fire, Biden and Sanders will poll on top because of name recognition. If Hillary Clinton were included, she likely would too.

I think for many Democrats, one other thing thing that works against her is that she is seen as the one heavily pushed by the PTB twice. You might remember in 2005 many here attacked Kerry as being the person they voted for only because he was seen as likely to win. This even though, Dean, Edwards and Clark all had more media support before Iowa.

I suspect that Sanders will drop as soon as Warren or Sherrod Brown or anyone else who could be seen as from the progressive wing enters. Biden is a proxy for Obama supporters. It is hard to imagine him staying that high as he is shown at rallies in NH and Iowa.

lunamagica

(9,967 posts)
70. No, she lost once. You are counting her primary run. Uder that criteria, IIRC, Nixon lost
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:19 PM
Nov 2018

more than once. And Biden? how many times has he ran for president?

liberal N proud

(60,334 posts)
132. She lost because of a very flawed system and Bob factors
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 07:49 PM
Nov 2018

She won the popular vote and would have won the EC if the some whos candidate lost in the primaries would have pulled up their shorts and not have a my way or the highway highway.

jalan48

(13,850 posts)
136. Shouldn't have been close against a candidate like Trump and California was the main reason for
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 08:17 PM
Nov 2018

the three million vote margin. Blaming voters is an odd way to win elections and says as much about the candidate as it does about the voters.

liberal N proud

(60,334 posts)
144. Did you forget, trump had a little help?
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 10:12 PM
Nov 2018

With republican Secretary of States and voter oppression and Russia, coupled with the my candidate or bust crowd, she was severely handicapped.

I hope one day we learn just how involved Russia was giving trump the office. We seen many examples this mid-term election of the voter oppression through voter purges, closed polling places and insufficient machines which many don't have paper back up.

The republicans cheat, but if everyone doesn't vote for the Democratic candidates, their cheating can't be overcome.

InAbLuEsTaTe

(24,122 posts)
177. Very true... we need to pick a candidate who can inspire voters to overwhelmingly defeat
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 01:58 AM
Nov 2018

the Fascist-in-Chief. We can't risk another close contest.

Eliot Rosewater

(31,109 posts)
12. I am sorry if openly supporting Hilary Clinton on Democratic Underground bugs you...
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:47 PM
Nov 2018

Wait, no I am not AT ALL fucking sorry.

mcar

(42,283 posts)
43. I see OPs here all the time
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:52 PM
Nov 2018

promoting various Democrats for 2020 runs.

Why the issue with one about HRC?

 

Bfd

(1,406 posts)
48. Good question. Somehow suggesting Hillary is stirring things up??
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:56 PM
Nov 2018

She can do whatever she chooses. Just like anyone else.

Newland56

(73 posts)
125. It's not really
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 06:51 PM
Nov 2018

It’s not really a post promoting Hillary
It’s a post complaint about people who don’t support Hillary running again.

 

Bfd

(1,406 posts)
46. Stir what up? The question is pretty simple
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:54 PM
Nov 2018

There's nothing to stir up.

No one has to answer the thread. There're a lot of topics on DU to choose from.


elocs

(22,556 posts)
10. You want a name? Here's one: Bernie 'Get off my lawn you damned kids' Sanders.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:46 PM
Nov 2018

That's my opinion and as such, it's not wrong.

Aristus

(66,303 posts)
17. I think it would be a stroke of genius for HRC to announce a bid for the Presidency.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:50 PM
Nov 2018

And then drop out at some strategically effective time before the primaries.

The repukes would get all geared up to hit her again with thirty years-worth of hatred and revulsion. Only to have to shelve the tactic once she drops out, and start from scratch trying to discredit an unplanned-for opponent.

BTW, dropping out before she takes a penny in contributions would be the best way...

brooklynite

(94,428 posts)
19. I'll answer: Al Gore, John Kerry and Mike Dukakis...
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:55 PM
Nov 2018

...who, like Hillary Clinton, ran poorly managed campaigns.

Eliot Rosewater

(31,109 posts)
21. Please point out the stories, talking heads saying they cant run or the
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:00 PM
Nov 2018

threads here.

Start a thread on one of them and see how big the reaction is.

sigh

 

Small-Axe

(359 posts)
31. Hello Eliot Rosewater....
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:20 PM
Nov 2018

Happy Thanksgiving, I always enjoy reading your posts and am generally in agreement.

On this issue (and as one who very badly wanted HRC to be president and who is convinced she would have been among the greats) I must agree with Brooklynite above.

Gore, Kerry, and Dukakis had their chances and lost. They were "done." To that list, I'd add Humphrey, Mondale, and the prospects of a non-sequential second run for Jimmy Carter.

Maybe it is a party memory of Adlai Stevenson, but no Democrat who has lost a presidential race at the top of a ticket has been renominated since 1956.

That's not misogyny. Just politics in America.

All the best.

brer cat

(24,538 posts)
140. umm
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 08:54 PM
Nov 2018

Humphrey has been dead for 40 years, so I think we can all agree that it would not be wise for him to run again.

 

Small-Axe

(359 posts)
163. The point---if it wasn't obvious enough--was that HHH never ran for president again...
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:35 AM
Nov 2018

after losing in 1968.


LiberalLovinLug

(14,165 posts)
96. So are you saying that IF any of those male individuals did run again
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:14 PM
Nov 2018

And because of name recognition, experience, etc.. they became the front runners, you are saying that they would be the best candidate for not just the Democratic party, and their voters, who would no doubt support them, but for support from enough small r Republicans and Independents, and the AA vote , and new young voters? Do you not think the GOP would have an advantage in that they could regurgitate and use all the old fake news swiftboating techniques on them, and that there wouldn't be a large group of voters that had already brainwashed and they had dismissed them as getting their vote? Then add new smears on top of that. I mean, if these individuals didn't win the first time, what makes you think that they'd do any better now? How has their images improved with those voters on the fence that we need to win over for 2020? How would they, this time, actually improve and get those extra votes they didn't get the first time?

Sometimes one has to concede that we will never give up the war, but we have lost battles. Battles that we can never fight over and win. Putin, McConnell, RW media, won the character assassination battles with those individuals. And it is partly the fault of our side for not fighting back against it hard enough.

And as hard it is to admit it, they won it against Hillary Clinton as well. I pains me to admit that, but its true. And Hillary has tried twice already and 'lost'.

I hope one day some great documentary film maker will make a documentary on the Clintons. The good and the bad. How the very real 'vast right wing conspircacy' slowly chipped away at their legacies. And how they successfully re-painted them into monsters. That politically engaged Republicans absolutely hate her, for reasons they can't even define anymore, but also the apolitical, who upon hearing her name, the only thing they know about her is, "emails", "Benghazi" etc...whenever her name is brought up, that she would not get any new traction with new voters either. But I'd like to see a documentary showing their work in the Clilnton Foundation, working in Africa and the AIDS epidemic and Hillary's work in the Senate for child healthcare. etc. etc. etc..

It is sad to say, though, its over for her. She could have, should have, would have been a fine President. And a great historical example as the first female President. But its not going to happen. It is far too risky. We need to win.

MrsCoffee

(5,801 posts)
197. She didn't fucking lose 2016 and everyone saying so in this thread knows it.
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 10:59 AM
Nov 2018

Fuck that bullshit narrative. The election was flat out stolen from her.

Damn this place can be so disgustingly toxic.

TheFarseer

(9,318 posts)
146. It will be a short thread
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 10:46 PM
Nov 2018

Because no one has even thought about any of those 3 for at least 10 years. Mention Bernie and you will have a longer thread with twice as much venom. She can run if she wants and people are free to vote for her or vote for someone they like better, man or woman.

karynnj

(59,499 posts)
44. I disagree that Kerry lost because of badly run campaign. It was a tough year for us
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:52 PM
Nov 2018

GWB was at 60 percent approval in December 2003. Had there been adequate voting machines in Ohio, he would have pulled off a major upset.

I suggest that his campaign was better run - by far - than Clinton's 1992 run. His primary campaign was decisive and he won all but 4 states. Clinton, at one point, was behind both Perot and Bush. Bush was below 40 percent all 1992.

In spite of this, Clinton was loved by much of the media, which helped him. Kerry was hurt by the cable media giving enormous free time to the SBVT liars, even after several of their charges were exposed as lies. Add in that, where the media called out the mean spirited 1992 Bush convention and praised the positive Clinton one, they mostly avoided condemning an even uglier 2004 Bush convention complete with band aids that mocked Kerry's purple hearts.

brooklynite

(94,428 posts)
115. I worked on his campaign and I couldn't tell you what his message was...
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:51 PM
Nov 2018

...other than “I’d handle Iraq more efficiently “

karynnj

(59,499 posts)
128. I was blown away by one speech where he connected working to fight climate change
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 07:02 PM
Nov 2018

Last edited Fri Nov 23, 2018, 01:57 AM - Edit history (1)

With cleaner air, cleaner water, thus better health at the same time it would create new good jobs and economic growth as the US created pioneering technologies. This while reducing our dependence on the unstable middle east.

In addition, he had a health care proposal that included the government insuring catastrophic coverage. This was a provision of ACA and it was the piece Marco Rubio defunded in 2016 with few noticing.

On climate change and the environment Kerry was stronger than any 2008 candidate. As to what he did when he had the power, you could see that he was an essential person for the Paris climate pact and he was the founder of the OUR OCEANS conferences that are happening each year. I watched his major speeches on CSPAN. His biggest problem was that other than CSPAN, his convention, and the debates, he got very little unfiltered coverage by the media.

As to Iraq, his NYU speech in September on the issue said far more. Additionally, his Pennsylvania speech on terrorism reflected that he expressed concerns with non state terrorism as early as the 1990s.

karynnj

(59,499 posts)
147. Thanks to you and I agree he is very underrated
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 10:51 PM
Nov 2018

There is no living American statesman I admire more than John Kerry. He was the best Secretary of State in my life time .. and I was born in 1950. Though Trump has attempted to destroy everything done under Obama, in addition to major domestic accomplishments like gay marriage and health care, both the Paris Accord and the Our Oceans conferences (the fifth one just happened in Bali) will survive Trump. The Nuclear Deal, which Trump pulled the US out of likely prevented a war. Even now, war is less likely than it was in 2013 through 2015 when other countries were pushing Obama to attack.

I loved his recent memoirs. The person seen in it is the same as the nominee who, as I read more about him, I found he was even better than he seemed. The norm for me was that a more detailed look usually exposed a more flawed, but acceptable, person than the hype. He really was the real deal. A very genuine American hero, a man of integrity, honesty and purpose.

mcar

(42,283 posts)
45. Were they told to go away?
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:54 PM
Nov 2018

Were they told to never even consider running again?

We're they told to go hiking or concentrate on their knitting?

brooklynite

(94,428 posts)
117. Yes I would...
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:55 PM
Nov 2018

Obama won PA, OH, WI, FL and WI. Clinton did not.

I’ve spoke to several Party Chairs and they tell me the same story of flawed electorate assumption, and corresponding poor tactical decisions, which make sense in light of my campaign work in Cleveland.

George II

(67,782 posts)
131. What lost the election wasn't mismanagement, it was the unbalanced electoral college.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 07:43 PM
Nov 2018

Specifically, California has 39 million residents and 55 electoral votes. The 22 LOWEST population states (including DC) has a combined population of 37 million residents but 95 electoral votes.

39 million people get 55 electoral votes
37 million people get 95 electoral votes

FBaggins

(26,726 posts)
206. That's just silly
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:29 PM
Nov 2018

It’s like complaining that you lost a football game because touchdowns count more than field goals... or you had twice as many yards from scrimmage but they had more points.

The system was created specifically so that one large state couldn’t bully a bunch of smaller states.

LenaBaby61

(6,974 posts)
124. Beto and Stacy ran amazing campaigns .... so did Andrew down in Florida.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 06:23 PM
Nov 2018

However, Beto was CHEATED OUT OF a Senator seat and Andrew/Stacey were cheated out of 2 governorships. Florida and Ohio are gone from the Dems for a long while IMHO due to all of the cooked-in GOP voter-suppression there in those 2 states. Georgia has a chance to come out of it sooner than those other two states, and so I believe that if Stacey wants to run again for Gov. it's hers, as she and Dems in Georgia/Congress will be assisting her in working on voting rights et al in Georgia. Something's going to befall that cheating, rotten, racist Kemp. Mark my words.

Hillary was cheated out of a presidency. In fact, NO Dem was going to win the 2016 presidency with all of that head wind, going against them. There was ruskie interference, wikileaks, voter-suppression, voter purging, voter cross check, gerrymandering, 30 years of LIES/corporate media hate going against her. Bush was GIVEN a damn presidency by the Supreme Court in 2000. So uh no, there were times when not even the BEST Dem running would have won whatever they were running for. The deck was stacked against them. The dye was cast, whatever analogy you want to use, NO DEM was going to win the 2016 General Election.

I agree with Stewart Safrin 1,000 percent Bfd

OnDoutside

(19,949 posts)
20. I would love her to run again, and win, to stick it to the Republicans. The problem is if she runs
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 02:56 PM
Nov 2018

again, and re-invigorates the Republicans and Trump, and ends up losing again (or being robbed of it again), the U.S. (and us in the rest of the West) will be fucked. The world needs a strong Democratic USA asap, it is so important. I would like the Primary process to play out, and I feel confident we will end up with a great Democratic candidate. Once there is a Dem win, I would love if Hillary was made SoS again, and screw the hell out of Putin.

OnDoutside

(19,949 posts)
47. That would be revenge served nice and hot ! Putin would be crapping himself, 4 years of a world of
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:55 PM
Nov 2018

hurt !

karynnj

(59,499 posts)
129. I doubt she would accept the nomination again
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 07:18 PM
Nov 2018

It is a gruelling job and she looked absolutely exhausted for the last year. By 2021, she will be 12 years older than she was when she had the job before.

However, there will be a huge amount of work to be done when a Democrat wins in 2020. Just as Obama had Holbrooke, George Mitchell, Dennis Ross and others as special envoys, there might be a place where Clinton would be the exact right person to deal with a problem. The same goes for Biden. Likewise, Kerry would be excellent leading our international environmental efforts, building on his work on the Paris Accord and his work on oceans.

Think of it as using elder statesmen, who are respected around the world to jump start reviving our reputation.

qazplm135

(7,447 posts)
22. who said she can't consider?
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:02 PM
Nov 2018

She can consider all she wants, so can Bernie, but neither of them is winning any more primaries.

Eliot Rosewater

(31,109 posts)
23. Practically everyone says she cant, and almost NONE of them say that about the other person
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:05 PM
Nov 2018

you mentioned.

Takket

(21,541 posts)
24. Good question
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:07 PM
Nov 2018

I can think of people like John Edwards but he actually committed a crime. So name a man who committed no crime but can’t run??? Honestly even someone like hastert would probably lose but would still do great with rethugs. Look at Roy Moore!!!

Eliot Rosewater

(31,109 posts)
26. Exactly, you notice her name isnt even brought up as possible candidates.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:09 PM
Nov 2018

It is so obvious and if we dont learn a lesson here, we are doomed to repeat some mistakes.

Personally at this point I would rather have Kamala Harris probably, but that isnt the point of this.

still_one

(92,091 posts)
29. Of course she can run again. It is just that Hillary has said she wouldn't. Does that mean she
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:14 PM
Nov 2018

couldn't change her mind? Of course she can



 

Bfd

(1,406 posts)
61. They're almost 80. If HRC is "too old" what are these guys.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:11 PM
Nov 2018

We need a couple a spring chickens..is what I hear when Hillary's name comes up.

Followed by , "How bout Bernie or Biden?"



brush

(53,751 posts)
74. That's what I'm saying. We Dems have done well with candidates...
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:23 PM
Nov 2018

around the ages that Kennedy, Clinton and Obama were when they ran.

The contrast between the slimy sleeze of the 70-something, unhealthy windbag deplorable that is trump vs a young, articulate, attractive Harris or Kennedy or Booker or Klobuchar will be visually stunning and to our advantage.

 

Bfd

(1,406 posts)
81. Exactly. So bye to Biden, Bernie, Warren, Clinton ...etc
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:31 PM
Nov 2018

But could they all run in 2020? Sure.

I just can't imagine what the 2020 primary is going to do to our heads.

Garrett78

(10,721 posts)
148. And the fact of the matter is that with age comes mental and physical decline.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 10:52 PM
Nov 2018

Plus, let's face it, a younger nominee is more likely to inspire greater turnout.

A Harris-O'Rourke ticket, for instance, would, I predict, produce the highest Democratic turnout in modern history.

Trump is the oldest person to ever take office as president. Do we really want to shatter his record with, say, Biden? To say nothing of Biden's history with the Thomas-Hill hearings in this Me Too era, and his penchant for gaffes. No thank you.

dameatball

(7,395 posts)
32. I don't think I have ever heard anyone say she can't run. Of course she can.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:23 PM
Nov 2018

Of course I have not read every single post on DU since November of 2016, so maybe I missed something. I also doubt that whatever decision she makes will be due to this discussion group.

Mariana

(14,854 posts)
92. You haven't heard anyone say it.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:11 PM
Nov 2018

We at DU do not have any magical mind control powers over Hillary. We can't force her to run or not run for anything.

ananda

(28,849 posts)
33. I see your point.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:26 PM
Nov 2018

So I also want to apply it to anyone who wants to run --

Just doi it! Let the fur fly where it may!

This, btw, includes Beto O'Rourke!

ProudLib72

(17,984 posts)
59. Interesting
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:10 PM
Nov 2018

I said Stacey Abrams should run and caught a lot of flak for it. The consensus was that she ran and lost, and we don't want losers to run for president. Yet, there is a lot of support for O'Rourke running for president. I think this goes some way in underscoring the OP's point.

I'm not implying anything about you, BTW. Just an observation.

 

Bfd

(1,406 posts)
66. So if a candidate has run & lost the they are off the 2020 list??
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:14 PM
Nov 2018

That eliminates a lot of names!

I love Abrams.

ProudLib72

(17,984 posts)
73. I think she is phenomenal
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:22 PM
Nov 2018

But the majority of people responding to my thread thought otherwise. You can take a look here: https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211441340

The point is, though, that no one seems to think Beto shouldn't run just because he lost the mid term. What's the difference?

ananda

(28,849 posts)
209. Sometimes our losers turn out to be winners!
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:59 PM
Nov 2018

For speaking out to our true liberal values and
nearly beating people who should have
smashed them!!!

And Abrams spoke out well and clearly about
our corrupt voting systems, hers being in
Georgia.

Florida is just as bad. And Gillum nearly beat
his opponent, and would have if there were
actually a free and fair election.

So whoever wants to run, run!!!

Just have the courage to speak out on what
ails us and what can help us!!!!

And it aint corporations!!!

MarvinGardens

(779 posts)
160. They can, but likely won't.
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:18 AM
Nov 2018

It's a modern tradition that once a candidate for president loses the general election, they do not stand for election again. This does not apply to primary candidates who did not advance to the general.

InAbLuEsTaTe

(24,122 posts)
178. No question there... Michelle is an inspirational leader & would make a great 1st female President.
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 02:02 AM
Nov 2018

lapfog_1

(29,194 posts)
40. name for me please
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:46 PM
Nov 2018

A major party candidate from either party (man or woman) who was nominated by the party, lost in the general election, then ran again and won.

working backward...

Romney - nope, at least not yet.
McCain - nope.
John Kerry - nope, not yet.
Al Gore - nope, not yet.
Bob Dole - nope.
Dukakis - nope.
Mondale - nope.
McGovern - nope.
Humphry - nope.
Goldwater - nope.
Nixon - ding ding ding... yup... you have to go back to 1960 and 1968 to find a candidate of a major party who was nominated twice, lost the first time and then won later.

And, btw, he had to "rig" the election by prolonging the Vietnam war to win.

So we simply shouldn't role the dice hoping for a Nixon/68 type win. Nominate someone else (man or woman) if we want a decent chance to win.

further back you have to go to Grover Cleveland... but he had already been President once... won in 1884, lost in 1888, won again in 1892.

we certainly don't need a modern day Adlai Stevenson or William Jennings Bryan.

 

Small-Axe

(359 posts)
64. And I'm convinced that Nixon would have lost for a second time to a man named Kennedy...
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:12 PM
Nov 2018

had RFK not been assassinated.

1968 was a strange year, to say the least.

lapfog_1

(29,194 posts)
67. Had Johnson succeeded in ending the war, even Humphrey would have won
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:15 PM
Nov 2018

and if RFK had not been assassinated, I do believe that you are right no matter what illegal shenanigans Nixon would have pulled.

borgesian

(52 posts)
78. very true
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:28 PM
Nov 2018

Also, I could be wrong, but, I don't think any of those names bothered to seek the nomination again after losing the general once.

lapfog_1

(29,194 posts)
87. true... but most were discouraged by their party from running again
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:53 PM
Nov 2018

because the party wanted to avoid the curse of Adlai Stevenson II (lost in 1952 and 1956).

The point remains that any sentiment for Hillary not to run is NOT unique to Hillary. And the history of losing the general an then running again is no replete with winners. In the modern era... only Nixon.

mcar

(42,283 posts)
42. Right?
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:48 PM
Nov 2018

All others who lost presidential races are allowed to run again - even encouraged. Wonder why it is that HRC seemingly isn't allowed.

mcar

(42,283 posts)
63. But that's not the issue, is it?
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:12 PM
Nov 2018

It's that "some" have been saying since 2016 that HRC should not, can not, run again.

lapfog_1

(29,194 posts)
69. The facts are that the electorate doesn't like a "loser"
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:17 PM
Nov 2018

no matter that she should have won... and did win the popular vote.

And the exact same thing can be said of Al Gore. Won the popular vote... should have won the electoral college, didn't and never considered running again and was actively discouraged from doing so.

TCJ70

(4,387 posts)
49. Who said she can't consider it?
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 03:59 PM
Nov 2018

Plenty don’t think she should...but who said she couldn’t consider it?

treestar

(82,383 posts)
51. anyone who suggest Bernie, even older than Hillary
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:01 PM
Nov 2018

can run again, has no credibility claiming Hillary should not.

George II

(67,782 posts)
137. Hillary Clinton is five years younger than Sanders, and women live five years longer than men...
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 08:22 PM
Nov 2018

....so in essence she's 10 years younger than him.

FBaggins

(26,726 posts)
207. Not so
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:35 PM
Nov 2018

There have been plenty of primary losers who went on to win a later primary and then the White House. For republicans it was almost required.

GoCubsGo

(32,078 posts)
62. She has already considered it.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:11 PM
Nov 2018

She said she does not wish to run again. I really don't understand why people refuse to believe her.

InAbLuEsTaTe

(24,122 posts)
193. Yes, Hillary gave it her all the last two times she ran and lost to political newcomers.
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 09:21 AM
Nov 2018

I think she realized it's time to step aside and pass the political "baton" to a new generation of Democrats who are more than capable of leading this country out of the demise created by the wretched shitstain currently occupying the White House.

oasis

(49,346 posts)
68. If Hillary announces, she immediately gets $500 from me. All other Dems
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:17 PM
Nov 2018

must go through the "process" before they get a dime.

MineralMan

(146,272 posts)
77. Of course she can, if she wishes. I doubt she will, though.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:27 PM
Nov 2018

If she does, however, there will be a long line of people here to scold her for it, no doubt.

The 2020 primary season looks like it's going to be a rocky, rutted road on DU. I can't say I'm looking forward to it, frankly.

Mr. Ected

(9,670 posts)
84. There's a difference between can and should
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 04:44 PM
Nov 2018

Certainly she can consider running. And many would say she should. I'm not one of them. Is she deserving? Hell to the nth degree yes. Is she the candidate with the best chance to unseat Trump? I don't think so.

 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
90. Depends on who you ask right? People have certainly said Sanders "wouldn't be allowed...."
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:09 PM
Nov 2018


Sanders "go away...", here on these boards....ALOT.


That said, I've never personally suggested Clinton shouldn't run. It does seem like once you lose in the GE, the path to the Presidency has historically been closed off for whatever reasons...or at least in recent history, whereas losing in the primary typically is allowed by people to account for building up to a future GE bid.




BlueInRedHell

(100 posts)
94. Hillary can do whatever she wants to do but the truth is that it would give Trump the foil that r/o
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:13 PM
Nov 2018

he desperately needs. He isn't happy unless he can complain about someone and turn that person into a cartoon monster for his base. Hillary running would get his base and even never-Trumpers quite energized.

 

bitterross

(4,066 posts)
98. I don't want her to run for President. She should be appointed to SCOTUS.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:16 PM
Nov 2018

I don't want her to run because it is so clearly apparent she is too divisive. I can see reality and learn from it. It has nothing to do with her being a woman for me. It has to do with wanting to put up candidates who can win.

If she wants to run for the senate again then more power to her. If she wants to run for just about anything but the Presidency then more power to her. I think it'd be great if she were appointed to SCOTUS. She's smart, fair, has the right background.

BTW, when you phrase the question about which "men" cannot run again you are being as sexist as the people who didn't like Hillary because she is a woman.

BlueStater

(7,596 posts)
102. It's not just her. Biden and Sanders need to forget about it too.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:19 PM
Nov 2018

Geez, you had your time in the sun. Are you still going to be running for president when you're 90? Move on and let the next generation of candidates have their shot.

 

Small-Axe

(359 posts)
114. Biden was on a winning ticket twice as VP.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:50 PM
Nov 2018

If we want to win, Biden should be our standard-bearer, especially as he's the absolutely perfect foil to Donald J Trump and would win not just the popular vote but also the Electoral College.

For the good of the nation, BS should not run.

BlueStater

(7,596 posts)
121. We can do a lot better than a nearly 80 year old man.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 06:16 PM
Nov 2018

Last edited Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:10 AM - Edit history (1)

Frankly, I'm not big on the future of the country being set by people who will be dead in 15 years.

 

Small-Axe

(359 posts)
156. Bad thinking on your part, methinks...
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 11:56 PM
Nov 2018

How many great presidents didn't live 15 years beyond their presidencies?

Think about the day we're memorizing today. JFK didn't survive his own first term. Neither FDR or Lincoln survived their presidencies. Washington was dead two years after finish his.

We need a person in the near-term to displace Trump. Biden is the best poised for the task IMO.


BlueStater

(7,596 posts)
158. Him dying in office isn't exactly a great selling point.
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:06 AM
Nov 2018

He's too old and I'm not interested in him. He'll be older at the beginning of his term than Reagan was at the end of his. That's just ridiculous.

BlueStater

(7,596 posts)
161. You didn't like my answer, so now you're going to be rude and dismissive.
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:25 AM
Nov 2018

I don't find the idea of 80-year-old men as presidents appealing in any way whatsoever. Sorry.

Bye-bye.

 

Small-Axe

(359 posts)
166. Saying that "dying in office isn't a selling point" on JFK's death anniversary...
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:48 AM
Nov 2018

is the sort of crap I'd only expect a Trumpist to say.

Good day.

BlueStater

(7,596 posts)
169. Whatever, Mr. Been-here-for-a-month.
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:55 AM
Nov 2018

Are you really arguing that JFK and other presidents dying in office was a positive thing? Seriously?

Response to BlueStater (Reply #169)

BlueStater

(7,596 posts)
172. I hope you do figure it out.
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 01:34 AM
Nov 2018

Because it will be no great loss on my end. Now you're just randomly accusing me of being a Trump supporter. I'm beginning to suspect you're a troll.

InAbLuEsTaTe

(24,122 posts)
194. Yes, Biden is a proven two-time winner and, for that, definitely deserves another
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 09:24 AM
Nov 2018

shot at being elected President. I hope he throws his hat into the ring.

Garrett78

(10,721 posts)
201. People don't vote for VP. Obama won those contests.
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:11 PM
Nov 2018

Biden would shatter Trump's record for oldest person to take office. It's a fact of life that with age comes mental and physical decline. No Biden. No Sanders (not that he could get nominated anyway). No Warren. No Clinton.

Furthermore, in this Me Too era, Biden's Thomas-Hill hearings past will come back to bite him.

And then there's his penchant for gaffes.

Tarc

(10,476 posts)
103. "which men CANT even consider running again?"
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:21 PM
Nov 2018

Sanders and Biden, for starters. Obviously of one of them did become the nominee, I'd heartily vote for them. But my litmus test for 2020 is

1. Old
2. White.
3. Male.

My desirable candidate should only hit at most one of those. In a dire pinch, if the field is just so abysmal, 2.

Not 3. We're done with 3.

redixdoragon

(156 posts)
104. None of the following
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:21 PM
Nov 2018

Bushes, Trumps, Obamas, Kennedys, Clintons.

NO DYNASTIES! I thought we were trying to escape this two hundred years ago.

SMC22307

(8,090 posts)
105. Of course she can consider it, but she shouldn't run.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:22 PM
Nov 2018

Let the Clinton era end. I say the same for Sanders in any bid for the presidency.

Why you tryin' to stir the pot?

GitRDun

(1,846 posts)
106. Her trustworthiness ratings were absolutely abysmal
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:24 PM
Nov 2018

She might well be a great public servant, but it would be political suicide to have learned nothing from the last election.

Doesn't matter what folks here think.

These Sanders and Hillary posts are so tiring.

Neither proved to be candidates WHO COULD WIN.

Let's move on!

 

ConnorMarc

(653 posts)
215. Bernie Could Have Won
Mon Nov 26, 2018, 01:41 AM
Nov 2018

He had the voters in the palms of his hands.

He had Trump numbers at his rallies at least 6 months before Trump did.

The media ignored them, then skipped over his rallies to cover Trump's.

Then double-backed and acknowledged Bernie's.

Bernie was sabotaged by the Clinton's and the Democratic party.

These are facts.

I didn't mind then, because I was in the Hillary camp, although I personally loved Bernie.

In rectrospect, Bernie was the man to beat Trump.

You don't run a bore and a snooze to go against a cultural juggernaut like Trump.

You run your own cultural juggernaut.

We had a cultural juggernaut with Obama, and Republicans ran bores and snoozes twice in row.

And got their asses handed to them twice in a row.

Learn from your mistakes folks.

All Hillary had was "I'm with her."

I was all with it at the time, but looking back now I'm like "WTF?!?!?"

It didn't mean anything.

Learn. from. your. mistakes. folks.

Somebody, please correct me if I'm wrong.

LibDemAlways

(15,139 posts)
218. Thanks. Your perspective isn't popular here, but
Mon Nov 26, 2018, 11:49 AM
Nov 2018

I agree with you. Like it or not, Bernie generated enthusiasm, had a populist platform, and could have won Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.....the states that mattered in the end.

jb5150

(1,178 posts)
107. Of course Hillary can run again ... but
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 05:29 PM
Nov 2018

I didn't support her last time, and I won't support her this time. Sure, I'll vote for her if she gets the nomination, but I won't vote for her in the primary.

aikoaiko

(34,165 posts)
118. A lot of people have said Bernie and Biden shouldn't run.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 06:04 PM
Nov 2018

Last edited Thu Nov 22, 2018, 06:34 PM - Edit history (1)

Stop playing a proxy faux victim.

 

ConnorMarc

(653 posts)
120. Question To The OP
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 06:15 PM
Nov 2018

Do YOU think it's a good idea for Hillary to run?
As in, do you think she has a chance TO win?

DFW

(54,321 posts)
122. Says who?
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 06:17 PM
Nov 2018

Anyone, including quite a few politicians I would have loved to see as President and plenty I would hate to see as president, can consider running. Not only that, they CAN run. Any and all of them.

However, I agree with Howard Dean (who, at age 70 as of last Saturday, is as sharp and dynamic as any of them). An incoming president should ideally be a smart, educated, well-traveled person around 50.

Garrett78

(10,721 posts)
149. With age comes mental and physical decline. That's just a fact of life.
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 10:58 PM
Nov 2018

And a younger nominee will likely inspire greater turnout.

Algernon Moncrieff

(5,782 posts)
175. It is what it is - Baby Boomers are no longer the biggest voting bloc.
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 01:51 AM
Nov 2018

In all likelihood, Trump is the last Boomer President.

Bettie

(16,081 posts)
133. She can do anything she wants to
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 08:00 PM
Nov 2018

but I don't have to say that I'd support her or that I want to see that.

It's called having an opinion and it is allowed.

ETA: I and others have also been saying that Bernie Sanders shouldn't run again as well, so it isn't "only" Hillary Clinton.

Separation

(1,975 posts)
138. Here are a few
Thu Nov 22, 2018, 08:27 PM
Nov 2018

Chris Kristie
Jeb Bush
John McCain

That was just a 5-second thought and obviously, McCain was said in jest.

There are more if you would like me to list a few out that would probably enrage half the country.

Algernon Moncrieff

(5,782 posts)
174. Pretty much this
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 01:49 AM
Nov 2018

I'll say this. If - for example - Kamala Harris won the nomination, I could maybe see Joe Biden for Veep to give the ticket gravitas.

Maybe.

I think I'd still like someone younger.

Azathoth

(4,607 posts)
157. Hillary has been running for president since 2000
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:01 AM
Nov 2018

I don't want to see Joe Biden, John Kerry, Barack Obama, or Michelle Obama (not a man, but still) run for president either.

Algernon Moncrieff

(5,782 posts)
196. She would "lose" if she were elected
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 10:47 AM
Nov 2018

Everything I've heard her say or read on the topic suggests she wants nothing to do with elected office ever again.

Garrett78

(10,721 posts)
188. I'm assuming you meant to say 2008. She didn't run in 2000 or 2004.
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 02:44 AM
Nov 2018

Clinton fell short of winning the nomination in 2008, won the nomination with ease in 2016, and then won the popular vote in the general election (in spite of Russia, a pitiful media, Comey, etc.).

I don't want or expect her to run in 2020, but not because she "lost" in 2016. Her age and her being so polarizing (thanks, sadly, to 30 years of vicious attacks) are the main reasons I don't want her to run in 2020. We don't need to try to break Trump's record for oldest person to take office. It's a fact of life that physical and mental health declines with age. No Biden. No Sanders (not that he'd get nominated anyway). No Warren. We have so many better options.

Azathoth

(4,607 posts)
211. No, she's been running since 2000
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 01:20 PM
Nov 2018

It was widely understood in 1999-2000 that the Clinton team were looking to place her in a safe national seat so she could build a credible resume to run for President. That's why the Arkansas First Couple suddenly became "native New Yorkers." Her entire Senate career (including her hawkish support for the Iraq war), was calculated groundwork for her inevitable presidential run. In 2003, the big speculation was whether she would hop into the race against Dubya with only 2.5 years of Senate experience.

For anyone who follows politics, Hillary has been overtly angling towards the White House for at least 16 years -- 24 if you include Bill Clinton's campaigns. And, as you say, that means the GOP have been able to run against her for nearly three decades straight. No one can survive that kind of relentless negative campaign.

I would be willing to consider Warren on the ticket this year, for the sole reason that she's still relatively new on the national stage and hasn't had a shot at the presidency yet, so it's kind of unfair to deny her the chance based solely on her age. Other than her, I'm hoping for younger, fresher faces who don't carry decades of baggage and who can speak to the younger generation (the people who actually vote Democratic).

StevieM

(10,500 posts)
216. Your description of her fine Senate career is incorrect. She ran for Senate to serve in the Senate.
Mon Nov 26, 2018, 01:47 AM
Nov 2018

And HRC was not considered a viable candidate for president when she first arrived on Capitol Hill. She gradually improved her standing and was considered a realistic candidate for the first time after Kerry lost. Before then it was just crazy comments on Fox News.

Initech

(100,053 posts)
164. Do we really want to go through the whole Hillary / Bernie shit again?
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:38 AM
Nov 2018

I know I don't! We need someone we can all unite behind. Going through the Bernie / Hillary debacle will almost guarantee another 4 years of Orange Shithead.

MarvinGardens

(779 posts)
168. She can, but probably should not, and probably won't.
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:51 AM
Nov 2018

As pointed out upthread, it has become a modern tradition that if someone stands for the general election for president as a major party candidate, and loses, they do not run again. I think there is a good reason. They tried their best to win, but lost. So let's not take the risk again on the same person. Let's let someone else take a shot.

This tradition does not apply to primary challengers who do not advance to the general. If Hillary Clinton had merely lost the primary twice, I'd say go for it.

InAbLuEsTaTe

(24,122 posts)
184. Precisely!! Why Bernie deserves another chance, should he decide
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 02:25 AM
Nov 2018

to run again... though a fresh face might be a better choice. Wish Michelle would change her mind and run... it wouldn't even be close like the last time.

Algernon Moncrieff

(5,782 posts)
173. Anyone can consider running.
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 01:45 AM
Nov 2018

That said: four should not run/ run again

Joe Biden
Hillary Clinton
Bernie Sanders
Elizabeth Warren


There are many younger, abler candidates out there.

e.t.a. ..add John Kerry and Al Gore.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
191. Although I can understand someone wanting a new face,
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 08:39 AM
Nov 2018

the same old ones being sooo boring, still! Should that rule? Shouldn't we look for stimulation elsewhere and go for character and ability to do the job well?

It's hard to establish "able" since no one starting a first term has ever done the job before. Still. Speaking of what goes into "able," beyond the ability to project youth to those who want that, maybe name to yourself someone you honestly think is both younger and abler than Hillary Clinton. You say there are many. Just grab any ol' one and think about it?

Fwiw, I believe ability absolutely at least requires intense preparation for the job beforehand. I didn't make up that one for Hillary. It was, though, the big reason I voted for her over Obama in the primary, even though I voted for him gladly in the GE.

But I don't for a moment believe Hillary would have wasted our congressional majorities in an attempt to end the dysfunctional division in congress. I rooted for Obama's attempt because it is a huge national problem and he very reasonably thought his election might signal big change, and maybe it might work. Hillary learned the hard way beforehand what today's Republicans have become, though, while youthful, inspiring Obama learned the hard way in the oval office.

Algernon Moncrieff

(5,782 posts)
198. I agree that Hillary Clinton is an excellent candidate
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 11:05 AM
Nov 2018

I supported her in the 2008 and 2016 primaries.

The reality, though, is that she's had two shots. She came oh-so-close in 2016. But she didn't make it.

The six people I mentioned are old. I don't just mean physically. We all wish Donald Trump would get the Hell off of Twitter, but his twitter rants underscore the need for a candidate who is social-media savvy. It's not just that the majority of voters are younger than the Boomers - they grew up in a very different world than the Boomers, and look to inherit a far more damaged world. I'll tell you another reason I want the old folks to step aside: while it's nice to hear them talk about doing things for their grandkids, we need leaders who have skin in the game of the post 2040 world - which, by the way, is going to get hot. We need leaders who will put their asses into the hard work of weaning this nation off of fossil fuels. The six candidates in my post will likely all be gone by 2040.

Just as the WWII Presidents gave way to the Boomers, it's time for the Boomers to give way to a new generation.

And yes, I feel the same way about Pelosi.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
210. :) Well, here's a counterargument to your counter.
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 01:13 PM
Nov 2018

First off, I don't believe ageist bigotry is so powerful that it inevitably will outweigh all other factors. Look at how beloved Notorious RBG is of all the younger generations, and Bernie Sanders' populist appeal to many young people even if his arthritic shoulders and neck didn't allow him to wave his fist in the air. In 2016 both parties, in fact, had younger candidates and passed them over.

I don't argue that the bigotry isn't real and effects growing. All these old people living longer than they used to are new, and our culture hasn't adjusted to this disturbing rise in the generations of old people who, instead of considerately retiring and then dying off and leaving everything to younger generations, actually think they should be able to keep the best jobs and authority away from younger, more deserving generations. It'll be some while before society adjusts to this new kind of diversity and competition. Right now ageism is as rampant and completely and righteously without shame as racism once was, and we're going to hear a lot of strident, even angry noise from people who don't feel any need for dog whistling.

So of course advancing age at the top will be a continuing political topic, and it's understandable that some younger politicians are pushing it as a negative for their own advantage. A person who feels he's ready at 35 or 55, has a great deal of heavyweight competition to get out of the way. But voters of all ages are going to have to decide, and any notion that they're going to simply slice off and discard everyone advantaged with an extra 20-30 years of experience and prestige is as unrealistic as imagining old people are going to do it to themselves.

And it's only going to get worse now that middle age extends through the 60s for healthy people and competition grows for positions held by those professionals who remain healthy and vigorous right through their 80s. We did away from mandatory retirement, though, both because old people needed to work longer to support themselves but also because growing numbers of old people who liked working and were good at it said the hell with that. Age power!

I think that the age range of prominent people in politics is going to widen as some of the current clusters of geriatrics leave, but ultimately end up wider in both directions, both younger and older reflecting their demographic power, but with older always dominating, reflecting their built-in advantages.

Of course the current judgement of the ageist doofuses among the electorate is going to be felt.
Many have no idea, and for most no interest in wondering, what 50 years of facing continual challenges and new situations requiring constant learning makes of high achievers. There really are people who can believe lots of younger members of congress can fill Nancy Pelosi's shoes. They have no more idea than Trump. During work lives, most people attain maybe 2 to 5 years of actual learning experience (in each line of work) and then mostly don't need to keep learning, until retirement. Voting lack of understanding is nothing new, though, and it seems likely some candidates in 2020 will make old age, not young, an issue.

Where I completely agree with you is that old views and knowledge that don't keep current and valid in a changing world, and don't allow fierce, insightful interest in understanding how to make the most of the future, are completely unacceptable, but those people we can and should weed out by examining every aspect of candidates, not their age.

As for no skin in the game? Really? These grandparents all know they're not going to have more decades to continue work on what they started, or to worry about their own careers and future endeavors. And, generally speaking, wouldn't you think that knowing their own will have to live with what they leave has to be far more real to them than it is to younger generations?

Oh, btw, our nation did choose Hillary to be our first woman president and I think we'd do it again and better in 2020 if she ran and became our nominee. But frankly, with the narrow electoral margins political scientists say are likely to be with us for a while, no matter who our candidate is I'll be afraid right up until the winner in the electoral college is called. I don't see anyone on the horizon who'll rescue me from that.

Vinca

(50,245 posts)
192. I don't think this has anything to do with gender.
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 08:45 AM
Nov 2018

Hillary doesn't want to be the Adlai Stevenson of the modern era. I'd be happier seeing a Democratic POTUS appoint her to the SCOTUS.

Kashkakat v.2.0

(1,752 posts)
199. SIGH. OK, if you insist - when T Barrett made noise about possibly running for a third time against
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 11:20 AM
Nov 2018

Gov walker here in WI - he swiftly got the message that it would NOT be a good idea.

Same thing with Al Gore and John Kerry. They lost once and weren't given a second chance. Apparently you don't remember that?

Is that enough, or do you want a bigger list?

Seems to me like you're just coming here to pick a fight. IMHO any losing candidate who can get people fired up again to mount a serious second or even third attempt should have at it - male or female. Its really up to them - can they inspire and excite people enough and get some traction? If they cant then they need to let it go.

Eliot Rosewater

(31,109 posts)
204. If anybody watched Murhpy Brown last night then realized this did NOT have to happen
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:17 PM
Nov 2018

but it did and I know WHY GOD DAMMIT

sellitman

(11,606 posts)
205. She won the first time. I want her to run again
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 12:18 PM
Nov 2018

Just to see the RW heads explode.

Then I'm hoping for a Kamila Harris run.

She's my top choice.

Autumn

(45,006 posts)
214. Any American, male or female over the age of 35 can run for president and there is no
Fri Nov 23, 2018, 05:31 PM
Nov 2018

age cut off. They can belong to any party and run as many times as they wish. So I'm going to say Hillary and any male or female can consider running for president.

 

LakeSuperiorView

(1,533 posts)
217. I voted for her, I'd vote for her again. But I worry about the people that would vote against her.
Mon Nov 26, 2018, 09:24 AM
Nov 2018

There are plenty of "lifetime" Republicans that are not that keen on Trump, but are dead set against Hillary. Mostly because of the right wing media, but they would vote for Trump again if it meant voting against Hillary.

I hope that the possibility of 4 more years for Trump is as low as winning the Powerball. I don't know what the US would look like if we don't quash the hate that he enables.


Latest Discussions»General Discussion»So Hillary cant even CONS...