MSNBC Krystal Ball says to Clinton “Don’t Run Hillary, Don’t Run” (VIDEO)

[egbertowillies]

Given Hillary Clinton's chumminess with Wall Street bankers, a Libertarian like Rand Paul could easily run on an appealing populist message against her.

http://egbertowillies.com/2014/02/11/krystal-ball-hillary-clinton-dont-run/

[Proud Liberal Dem]

1. Respectfully disagree

Rand Paul? Really? Hillary may be more of a "centrist" Democrat but I would wager that more people would trust Hillary Clinton to fight for their interests than Rand Paul.

[egbertowillies]

2. I am concerned about the excitement I see

from the youth for him. Marijuana, prison, etc. He is attempting a progressive triangulation. We'll see.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

3. Wait till they hear the rest of his positions

Paul is presumably anti-choice and anti-LGBT, isn't he? Did he support immigration reform? I know that he hates ACA (and presumably has no other better solutions). I believe that he also believes in unfettered capitalism as well. Also, him trying to dredge up a decade+-old scandal that didn't even directly involve Hillary to smear her is probably not going to win him any brownie points with most people.

[egbertowillies]

4. I agree with you completely. My concern is that

an electorate that elected Reagan and Bush can be snowed again.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

6. I suppose that's something that we always have to be worried about

I think though that- in terms of things that would excite voters, particularly young ones, is the novelty of electing a woman President, particularly since she came so close in 2008. But I guess if the question winds up being, how important is it to smoke pot legally, then Paul *might* have an edge on that question but I doubt that the vast majority of the electorate are going to sway towards Paul mostly (or solely) on that issue, especially when his position on most other issues suck and are definitely un-progressive.

[juajen]

14. Yep, unfortunately they are brainwashed and easily led by the "leaders" of

their party (parties), etc. It's amazing to me that they are able to lead by default. Critical thinking is a fantasy in the US today. Those who do it are few and far between, and I am talking about all parties. I believe education is going downhill. While the internet is a wonderful learning tool, too many times, it is also turned on for entertaiinment, not enlightenment, and millions of brains are being dulled by repetitive gaming.

[Walk away]

5. I'm waiting for the Hillary haters to "rec" this for Rand Paul.

I'm sure many of them feel the same why but would never say it here.

[HappyMe]

7. It got 170 recs in GD.

I hate Rand Paul.

I didn't vote for Clinton the last time, and probably won't vote for her in the primary this time either. If that makes me a "hater", so be it.

[Walk away]

8. A Hater is someone who demomizes Democrats by...

constantly posting negative threads about them. A normal person might post positive things about the candidate they want to support instead. But that doesn't get any attention so haters will have to spend the next year acting like teabaggers so they can get their 170 recs.

[HappyMe]

9. I thought Krystal Ball made some good points.

I also don't see the point in having only the suzy sunshine type posts about a candidate. I can read the bad and good then decide for myself.

This place is for discussion, not mindless high fiving about a candidate.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

10. Clinton (if she runs) may lose to a more progressive Dem perhaps

but I doubt that she would ever lose to somebody like Rand Paul.

[HappyMe]

11. I would hope she would lose

to a more progressive Dem.

I doubt people are truly interested in voting for Paul in droves.

[Walk away]

16. Apparently, even less people are interested in voting for....

Warren or Saunders in droves either.

[HappyMe]

19. Neither of them are running.

[Walk away]

21. Neither is Hillary or any of the rebublicans mentioned. nt

[HappyMe]

22. Kind of makes all the "inevitable" talk

pretty damn pointless.

[Walk away]

23. Kind of makes all of the smears and attacks seem like petty...

bullshit and a cry for attention.

[HappyMe]

24. Meh.

Any criticism of Clinton will be called 'smears' and 'attacks', which is also a load of bullshit. The Clinton fans taking a stfu attitude toward those who won't fall in line doesn't bode well for them or her. I think that just may push those who are on the fence off into any other candidate's camp. Being called 'petty' and saying it's a 'cry for attention' doesn't get votes, it hardens people's resolve against Clinton.

[Walk away]

25. I think the people who spend so much time posting more negative threads about...

Hillary Clinton than republicans are pretty much set against her anyway. I doubt that my pointing out the futility of their work is going to make them spill less bile about her. This is going to become a frenzy here on DU. I wonder if it will be as tasteless and ridiculous as 2008. I'm betting far worse. It will be interesting to see how it escalates.

[NorthCarolina]

26. The problem arises when too much of the truth comes out that it

endangers the status quo. That is why the rah rah crowd seeks to shut down any non-sunshine postings.

[HappyMe]

27. It kind of shuts down any honest discussion.

I have a feeling that all criticism of Clinton will be labelled smears, anti-woman... or whatever.
Looking at GD on any given day there are plenty of OPs criticizing Obama - some are fair, some aren't. I have a feeling that the sunshiney heads will begin to explode as primary time draws closer.

As a woman, I find it insulting that most of the talk is along the lines of 'cuz woman!!'. She hasn't announced yet so we have no idea what the policies will be, and yet there's a stfu she's "inevitable" thing coming from women. I don't take kindly to that.

[NorthCarolina]

28. That's because discussion has a tendency to make people "think".

Critical thinking as opposed to blind partisanship truly endangers the status quo. That is why there is such a push to marginalize and shut down any critical posts that may cause the sheeple to examine the facts and make educated, informed choices.

[HappyMe]

29. Agreed.

[geek tragedy]

12. I'm sure Krystal Ball's plea will force Hillary out of the race nt

[Beacool]

13. This coming from the woman who lost an election for Congress in VA.

I don't give a flying fig about her opinion on anything.

[DFW]

15. I wouldn't hang that around her head forever

She knows she screwed up and hopes she is doing better.

Even Elizabeth Warren started out as a Republican, for Pete's sake, and no one here bashes her for that.

[HappyMe]

20. I would bet the farm she

feels the same about you.

[Beacool]

30. I'm not important in this equation, but neither is she.

Other than preaching to an echo chamber like this site, who out there who will be voting in 2016 gives a fig about this person's opinion on a potential Hillary run?

[HappyMe]

31. Well, if she had said

Go Clinton! Yay! - you would be giving figs about it.

[Beacool]

32. The point is not that she said that she preferred one person over another.

It's that she exhorted not to run the person who has the highest polls in Democratic modern history for a non-incumbent (even higher than Gore in 2000). That's just plain dumb. Aside from the fact that Warren has expressed zero interest in running and has said so repeatedly.

[HappyMe]

33. So what?

How DARE she have an opinion that doesn't fall into place with the Clintonians!

Polls don't mean shit at this point. So far, NOBODY is running.

[jenmito]

17. I saw that segment. K&R, NOT because of the Rand Paul comment, NOT because

I won't support her if she's the nominee (I WILL), but because I'm hoping for a more liberal Dem. (like Joe Biden, for example).

[kwolf68]

18. waste of time

No candidates on the Dems side have even put their hat into the ring. I know Hillary is another part of the anointed class, but perhaps people should wait to see WHO the candidates actually are before pitting this one versus that one.