Hillary Clinton's Circle Isn't Sure She Should Run for President in 2016

[question everything]

A Hillary Clinton presidential candidacy looks like a sure thing, with marquee Democratic donors and activists mobilizing for what they see as her inevitable entrance into the 2016 race. Yet some of Mrs. Clinton's closest confidants and allies aren't sold on the idea that she should run. Their cautions add an unpredictable element as Mrs. Clinton weighs whether to seek the presidency again, a decision she says she plans to make later this year.

One of Mrs. Clinton's top advisers and former aides, Cheryl Mills, believes she should stay out of the contest and has told her as much, according to people familiar with her views. But Sen. Barbara Boxer (D., Calif.) says she encourages Mrs. Clinton to run every chance she gets. Others close to Mrs. Clinton worry that another campaign would test her stamina as she moves into her late 60s and would revive scandals from Bill Clinton's White House that could prove personally painful.

(snip)

As Mrs. Clinton travels the world giving speeches, she often makes overtures to young people, minorities and other groups that were building blocks of recent winning Democratic electoral coalitions. She also keeps a schedule that routinely puts her in contact with the Democratic fundraisers and establishment figures who would form the spine of a future presidential campaign. Several groups are organizing and raising money for a potential campaign.

In the hierarchy of Mrs. Clinton's charitable and political activities, there are tiers of advisers, friends and supporters. At the highest point is Ms. Mills, who represented Mr. Clinton in his Senate impeachment trial and was Mrs. Clinton's chief of staff at the State Department, as well as counsel to her 2008 presidential campaign. Ms. Mills has told at least three people that she doesn't believe Mrs. Clinton should run, questioning why she should do so when she has freedom to pursue projects of her choosing, people familiar with the matter said.

Mike McCurry, a press secretary in the Clinton White House said that such a commitment, would mean giving up "two and a half years of your life when you're moving on up into your 60s, so that you can crawl around coffee shops in Iowa and New Hampshire. I joke with people that I'm the last man in Washington" who would be willing to bet that she won't run. Mrs. Clinton will be 69 years old on Election Day—only eight months younger than Ronald Reagan in 1980. He was the oldest president to assume office.

(snip)

It was unclear whether friends cautioning Mrs. Clinton about a campaign have lingering concerns from her 2012 health scare. Mrs. Clinton was hospitalized that December after doctors discovered a blood clot in her head. Doctors treating her said it had caused no stroke or neurological damage... A warier view comes from Clinton supporters who foresee a grueling campaign that holds no guarantees of success. Mrs. Clinton would likely face questions about a range of matters from her time in public life, among them questions about her personal finances raised during her husband's first term and about the terror attack in Benghazi, Libya, while she was secretary of state... At the same time, some Democrats fear the party would be left ill-prepared for the 2016 election should Mrs. Clinton bow out, as her potential candidacy has made it hard for other Democrats to draw the money and staff needed to gain a foothold in the race.

(snip)

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303287804579447503174026472

(If you cannot open by clicking, try to copy and paste the title onto google)

[NYC_SKP]

1. I like Cheryl Mills. I hope she is convincing because we need a progressive candidate, and soon.

Every ounce of energy spent on SOS Clinton is an ounce that could have gone to draft Warren or some other true progressive and Peoples' Democrat.

[question everything]

2. Warren will be the worst candidate

We've seen what happens when we elected a fresh, articulate Senator with great agenda and with zero executive experience.

(And hoping that this concept will be used against Cruz and Randy Paul).

I supported Hillary in 2008 but afraid that her time has passed.

I like Brian Schweitzer and I think that Marylan's O'Malley is worth a look.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

4. Brown (Sherrod), then.

Although we have so few good progressives in Congress, you hate to lose even one to another job. Maybe one or both of the Castro brothers. (Are they old enough?)

[Splinter Cell]

24. ....

"We've seen what happens when we elected a fresh, articulate Senator with great agenda and with zero executive experience. "

Yeah, he's been a great president.

[question everything]

27. I think that I will let history judge

He galvanized many, especially the young and he meant, still means, well.

But we may lose the Senate because launching the ACA has been a miserable failure and he constantly changes it. He does not have any "czar" - remember when the administration used to have "czar" for this and "czar" for that? This project should have had a dedicated "czar" or a CEO - whatever - to baby this project and to follow it at every step. Starting with, I don't know, hiring some brains from Silicone Valley instead of that Canadian outfit?

He set a "red line" with Syria and when it came, he said: never mind. No, I don't think we should have intervened in Syria, but he shouldn't have talked "tough" without anticipating the outcome.

Yes, we have McCain and others who would love us to intervene in many countries of the world and he and the Fox crowd have succeeded in painting Obama as "weak." I would love to see the White House reacts to every fart that comes from McCain and challenges him - oh, which division would you now send to Ukraine? To Syria? Back to Iraq?

True, most of us - Republicans and Democrats - are tired of intervening in far away crises and he should have mentioned this again and again. We cheered the exit from Iraq, but look at the mess right now. And we still have a huge expensive monstrosity in the form of our embassy there.

We cheered him concentrating on domestic policy - ACA, recovery, pumping funds into the economy - but it appears as it he kinda left foreign policy behind.

This, by the way, is where Warren's strength is, domestic policy.

A seasoned executive, like a governor, on even a general would make sure to cover all areas, to appoint strong executives to implement decisions and to keep on top of them.

Sigh..

[blkmusclmachine]

3. HRC's ego won't let her NOT run.

[Beacool]

5. Yeah, sure, it's all about ego.

Do you say the same about the rest of the crowd that are chomping at the bit to run?

[Evergreen Emerald]

9. Every negative trait they can think of they pile on her.

Ms. Clinton is apparently evil incarnate. I wish these haters would actually get past the bull they have been fed for decades and actually look at her record.

I wonder if in part is because she is female and therefore held to a higher standard than her male counterparts.

Edited to add: And, why is there never a story about how a run for President would affect Biden at his age?

[Beacool]

10. After a while those kinds of comments come off as sexist.

Hillary is deemed as overly ambitious, it's all about her ego, blah, blah, blah...... They never give her credit for wanting to serve and thinking that she can contribute something to the conversation. Never mind that she would be the most experienced candidate to run for president in many years. Also dismissing the fact that people do like her and do want her to run.

What then can they say about a first term senator, only on his second year of service when he ran for president? He didn't have a big enough ego to think that he could do the job?

How about these men in their 70s who think nothing of running (McCain, Biden, Sanders, etc.)? I guess they don't have an ego, right?

Male ambitions and egos are OK, women's not so much.

[karynnj]

13. Biden has been all but ruled out due to his age since he was nominated to be VP

I think Clinton has been gotten both extremes. Since 1992, there have been serious articles that pushed her as a potential President. However, at the same time, there have been articles that have attacked her for very little objective reason.

I think that at different times, the negatives have come from different places. They have consistently come from the right.

However, in 2007, many were sincere efforts by the left of the party to regain control that they lost in 1992 - or even 1976. In parallel, there was the view that Clinton people (ie Carville and Begala) to name two, were not happy when the Kennedy aligned Kerry won the nomination in 2004 - and came close to winning. Many of their comments in 2004 negatively cpomparing Kerry to Bill Clinton were unhelpful. The 2007 negative comments were valid in the fight for the nomination. The hard thing was that because HRC was married to BC, Obama and anyone running in 2007 was forced to point out negatives of Clinton's administration. As, in some measure, HRC ran in part on those years, how could this NOT happen? It is important to see the difference in RW attacks and valid differences within the Democratic party.

[question everything]

15. Probably will be, if an when he will emerge as a credible candidate

On the one hand, Obama won with the youth votes against the ossified Republicans. So it can appear as if we are moving backwards with either Hillary or Biden (Hey, I am closer to their age than to Obama's). And yet, if all polls are correct and she is beating each and everyone of them, then we cannot afford to let the presidency slip away from us. Not with the Senate now in danger of changing hands.

Sigh..

[Whisp]

22. Her supporting the Honduas coup is not a 'Negative Trait'

It is what she is and did with the help of Lanny DAvis and his weasel greedy brain. There is no other interpretation to it as unecessary aggression most likely to further the interests of the Clinton Foundation - and it sure the hell doesn't make one sexist to bring that up.

The Honduras atrocity is just one of many negatives on her record. Her record is hers, she owns it and it's in writing. It's not fantasy, it's not made up to be mean because she's a woman.

If you think her resume is something to be proud of fine, but why am I not hearing those accomplishments? This is Why she would be a great President and list the qualities and achievements but no, what I am hearing is Bertrand Russell's teapot out in space. Those great qualities she has for President are really there honest, and I don't have to show you or prove it. Just because you can't see it and the teapot doesn't mean it isn't there! You are looking in the wrong spot, it's there honest. Look harder.

[NYC_SKP]

6. "the friends camp definitely has concerns about her running."

Linda Bloodworth-Thomason, a longtime friend of the Clintons who has made films for their past campaigns, said she thinks Mrs. Clinton would like to run, and that she would like to see her friend do what makes her happiest.

She added: "I'm not in the political camp; I'm in the friends camp. And the friends camp definitely has concerns about her running.''

The cautions show a gulf between friends and aides attuned to the personal toll of presidential campaigns and the much larger circle of activists and admirers who are cheering for her to run without hesitation.

It's not clear how much weight Mrs. Clinton is giving to the warnings. Many in Mrs. Clinton's camp said she is determined to run despite the costs, lured by the chance to make history as the nation's first woman president, among other reasons.

[JayhawkSD]

7. Why is it about Hillary's happiness?

"...she would like to see her friend do what makes her happiest." How about wanting to see her friend do what is best for the nation? The occupancy of the highest office in our nation is not about someone's personal happiness, for God's sake.

[NYC_SKP]

8. Well, I think that "what is best for the nation" is a subjective thing.

Imagine the differences:

As Mrs. Clinton travels the world giving speeches, she often makes overtures to young people, minorities and other groups that were building blocks of recent winning Democratic electoral coalitions. She also keeps a schedule that routinely puts her in contact with the Democratic fundraisers and establishment figures who would form the spine of a future presidential campaign. Several groups are organizing and raising money for a potential campaign.

In the hierarchy of Mrs. Clinton's charitable and political activities, there are tiers of advisers, friends and supporters. At the highest point is Ms. Mills, who represented Mr. Clinton in his Senate impeachment trial and was Mrs. Clinton's chief of staff at the State Department, as well as counsel to her 2008 presidential campaign.

or:

...that a campaign would be grueling and force Mrs. Clinton to suspend work on issues that are important to her, such as women's empowerment and childhood development.

Such a commitment, Mr. McCurry said, would mean giving up "two and a half years of your life when you're moving on up into your 60s, so that you can crawl around coffee shops in Iowa and New Hampshire. I joke with people that I'm the last man in Washington" who would be willing to bet that she won't run.

Mrs. Clinton will be 69 years old on Election Day—only eight months younger than Ronald Reagan in 1980. He was the oldest president to assume office.

Who is to say that deciding not to run wouldn't be the better thing for the nation and for the causes she now supports?

[JayhawkSD]

12. I didn't say she should or shouldn't run

I said it wasn't about her. The office of President of The United States of America was not created two centuries ago, and mainteined at the cost of millions of lives, for the sake of Hillary Clinton's happiness. Her decision about running, and her friends' engouragement about her running, should not be based on "will it make her happy." It should be based on "is she the person for the job at this moment in history?"

Nobody should ever be elected to any office because they want that office. In fact, the fact that they want the office is a dangerous signal that they might be the worst possible choice. Why do they want it? Do they simply want to become the "most powerful person in the free world?" I'm not saying that such is Hillary's reason, but merely that someone wanting the office is not a vaild reason to give it to them.

The best choice is someone like Thomas Jefferson, who emphatically did not want the office, but who was the best man for the job at the time. I will repeat myself and hope you get it this time. The highest office in this land is not about the happiness of a person who wants to hold that office.

[Beacool]

11. Because these are her friends, the key word here is "friends".

Hillary has been through hell and back since her early days as first lady. Her friends wish her to have a happy and fulfilling life. Some of them think that the presidency is not worth the sacrifices that she would have to make. Look what Obama has been put through in the last 5 plus years.

Hillary is under tremendous pressure to run in 2016. Her close friends want her to see that she has choices and should end up doing what she wants to do, even if it means not running for the presidency.

[Whisp]

25. I understand what you are saying. I think most here do.

The Oval Office isn't some goody little prize to make Hillary happy on Christmas morning. I doubt very much it was meant that way in the opening article, at least I hope not, because it's selfish and ridiculous to think it's about Hillary first and the nation second.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

14. If she's going to run, she's going to run

Love the WSJ "concern trolling" about it.

[davidpdx]

17. I don't necessarily think it is trolling

The one issue that is legitimate is whether she wants to go through all of that again. No one can answer that except her. I wouldn't blame her if she didn't want to. The issues about the past scandals and other stuff are over-hyped I agree.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

18. What I hate about articles about this is that they rely on gossip and innuendo

when they, you know, could go right to the source and ask her themselves. It got me to thinking, however, why do so many people want other people up there in years to be managing one of the busiest, most stressful, and most demanding job on the planet?

[davidpdx]

16. I think it will come down to the choice of whether she really wants to go through all that

or concentrate on being an advocate for important issues from the public sector. Certainly I can see why she might do the latter. She and Bill have said they look forward to being grandparents. If she's on the campaign trail or in office there is little or no flexibility for spending time with her family.

I don't think Biden will run either. My guess is both are going to walk off the public stage along with President Obama and the torch can be passed to someone new.

[polichick]

19. "so that you can crawl around coffee shops in Iowa and New Hampshire" - lol

[Rosa Luxemburg]

20. Hillary is a 'spring chicken'

they are portraying her as old, unwell etc. She is not old or unwell. She has the experience. I think voters are tired on Benghazi and the Monica thing.

somebody did say if not Hillary then who?

Michelle Obama could do the job extremely well.

[Beacool]

23. I think that your last sentence was in jest.

[tularetom]

26. She has to run, she can't deprive the country of her awesomeness

What a great day it will be when Hillary makes her triumphant entry into the Oval Office.

Birds will sing, the sun will shine, a chorus of angels will descend from heaven to greet her arrival and a herd of flying unicorns will fart rainbows across the skies.

What a shame we have to wait until 2016 for this wonderful day. We should just force Obama to resign and give her the job now. We don't need no stinking election where Hillary is concerned.