There’s A Real Chance Hillary Clinton Won’t Run For President. Here Are Five Reasons Why.

[Purveyor]

Today on The Fix, Chris and I are exploring opposite sides of the same argument: Whether Hillary Clinton will run for president in 2016.

Chris is pretty sure she will. Longtime political analyst Charlie Co0k is considerably less certain, pegging it at 60 to 70 percent. Similarly, I tend to think we always overestimate how likely candidates are to run. It's a big decision, and lots of things need to happen to make it a "go." Even people who really want to run often decide not to, for varying reasons.

What might those reasons be for Clinton? Below are five conceivable hurdles. Let me qualify, though, that I still think it's much more likely that she will run than not. But any one of these things could be a significant obstacle in her decision-making process.

1. The prospect of losing

It seems like we've already discussed Clinton's inevitability ad nauseam, but that inevitability really only applies to the Democratic primary. Her odds in the general election are headed toward being a 50/50 proposition -- and getting worse.

Although Clinton's approval rating reached upward of 60 to 65 percent as secretary of state, her favorable rating in the days since she stepped down has steadily fallen -- so much so that most recent polls show her under 50 percent (although still more positive than negative). That's pretty middling territory.

more...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/12/02/theres-a-real-chance-hillary-clinton-wont-run-for-president-heres-5-reasons-why/

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

1. If we have a flood similar to that of the fictitious Noah story, maybe she doesnt run

Otherwise

[bravenak]

2. Here's to hoping for a rainy season..nt

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

3. LOL oh YOU

Wait, just saw your siggie, you bet, Paul for President

sign me up

[bravenak]

4. He's the only one that can handle congress.

I wish everybody else would just respect and get behind him.

[Douglas Carpenter]

7. I was juror # 1 BTW

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

Mail Message



On Wed Dec 3, 2014, 05:57 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

He's the only one that can handle congress.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=389313

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Rand Paul are you freaking kidding me? On DU? Have we stooped this low?

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Dec 3, 2014, 06:08 AM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No where does the signature say "Rand Paul for President"

IT SAYS PAUL MOONEY FOR PRESIDENT- Paul Mooney is a famous comedian and social critic. I assume it is meant ironically.

Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Erm...it's Paul Mooney (see bravenak's sig), not Rand Paul.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Paulbots are not in line with the TOS.

Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I completely disagree with this post, but I see no reason for it to be hidden.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

[bravenak]

8. Wow.

Where did they see Rand Paul? Rand Paul is my ememy.
Thanks.

[beerandjesus]

9. Ok, that takes the cake

The alerter and the two who voted to hide are officially the dumbest people on DU.


Seriously. Is there a "rank stupidity" clause in the TOS? Cuz I for one don't value the opinion of anyone who can't tell the difference between Rand Paul and Paul Mooney.

[Douglas Carpenter]

10. maybe impulsively defensive? After all Paul Mooney does have Paul in his name.

[beerandjesus]

12. More like pathologically defensive....

What's next, an alert for a Saint Paul quote in a sig?

[merrily]

27. Well, among the dumbest. (I've seen some bizarre juror comments.)

[LawDeeDah]

11. What a great jury system.

Lol. Some people can't even friggen read!

[HappyMe]

14. LOL!

That's funny. Where the hell did they see Rand Paul?

Back to Sesame Street......

-Everybody! I know that you know this tune!

One of these people is not like the other......

[LawDeeDah]

15. Better not saying anything about Paul McCartney

or Pope John Paul (is he the dead one?) cuz ya know those ace jurors...

[HappyMe]

16. Paul Prudhomme

for jambalaya chef!

[merrily]

28. Hail to the chef!

[beerandjesus]

18. Looks like a few people here have PDS.

[Mike Nelson]

5. Don't agree with the article...

I believe she is running. So, if she announces she is not, it will be a change of plans.

With that in mind, I tried to apply those reasons, and they didn't hold up - except for age/health, if there should be a change; it doesn't look likely to me.

I think she expects the other stuff and can re-amass any money spent.

[VanillaRhapsody]

6. still clinging to hope?

[Purveyor]

13. With every ounce of my being, indeed. eom

[VanillaRhapsody]

19. You will be disappointed....

she's running...

[Purveyor]

21. No, it will be you the disappointed one come 2016 if she runs as she will be defeated by either

Romney or Bush. So will I at the thought of a gov't controlled entirely by the GOP but I can't change reality. She is not 'likeable' and sadly, that is what wins presidential elections.

Bookmark this post for reference.

[VanillaRhapsody]

23. And she polls ahead of them both!

You think together that are moooore scary to Hillary Clinton?

A Bush and a Romney against "the Clintons"......you think that won't attract a voting crowd?

[Purveyor]

24. "the Clintons". That says it all indeed, with the hefty load of baggage those two

haul.

It will be ugly.

[karynnj]

43. The same Quinipiac poll that has her dominating the Democratic nomination, has her a few points

behind Romney.

I HOPE this is either an outlier, a bad poll, or reflects the current negative environment - which can, of course change by 2016. No other Democrat was polled head to head (including no generic Democrat), so there is no reason to think that any other Democrat will do better.

The point the article is making is that while there was a time where she seemed not only the inevitable Democratic nominee (which is still true), but the inevitable President unless something unusual happened. At this point, IF (and that is a big if) the Quinipiac poll is followed by similar results -- there may be signs that 2016 will be a close race.

I resent that they suggest this would keep her from running. She has demonstrated that she clearly wants to be President (the first woman) and it may be that when and if general election matchups for generic Democrat or specific choices vs Republicans, she may have the best shot of any Democrat. IF that is true and she runs what she knows will be a tough race, more power to her. It will obviously be the last chance she has given her age. In 2002/2003, she could pass on what seemed a very tough race with Bush over 60% then, because she could then be well positioned for 2008 --- passing if 2016 is a tough race means never being President.

[RBInMaine]

25. Then tell us please who CAN defeat Romney or Bush. Also, the WP is a right wing rag.

[RedstDem]

33. the Washington Post is a right wing rag?!!

Lol

They ain't liberal, but thinking its a right wing rag is way off.

[karynnj]

44. They have a new publisher --- a former Reagan guy - though that is pushed to the end of the article

Note - he is a true believer of Reagan who volunteered in 1980, worked in the WH, then worked to rehabilitate his image after he was President.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/new-post-publisher-strong-washington-ties-and-longtime-interest-in-the-news-business/2014/09/02/7c9690a4-32e0-11e4-9e92-0899b306bbea_story.html

Ryan, 59, is a political hand going back to his days as a recent University of Southern California law graduate volunteering as an advance man in Ronald Reagan’s 1980 presidential campaign. He followed Reagan to the White House in 1982 and stayed through the end of Reagan’s second term. In his time at the White House, he ran the president’s scheduling operation and served as the president’s liaison to the domestic and international business community.

Within the Reagan White House, Ryan’s reputation was that of an affable, efficient and politically astute taskmaster, former colleagues said. But his real power within the inner circle derived from his personal rapport with the president. (His informal duties included helping Reagan warm up for the opening pitch of the major-league baseball season.)

When Reagan left office in 1989, Ryan followed him home to California as chief of staff of the post-presidency. That phase of Reagan’s life got off to a bumpy start. When the former president made the then-novel move of giving a speech for money overseas, Ryan drew criticism from former inner-circle colleagues and was lacerated in a Newsweek article as “perhaps the weakest link in Reagan’s new chain of command.”

Reagan’s image recovered. Ryan was instrumental to overseeing that as chairman of the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Library and of the Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission. He was so dedicated that even after Reagan’s death, he personally bought a pub in Ireland that had been named for the president and shipped its contents back to the library in Simi Valley, Calif. He also procured Reagan’s Air Force One to be an exhibit in the library.

[RedstDem]

46. they do have new faces, I think they were bought by Bezo's as well

But I don't agree theyve sunk to the level of " right wing rag" just yet.
But give it time. Lol

[LawDeeDah]

17. It would be bittersweet if she didn't run

I am very much looking forward to her stumblings during the debates and how she defends her own past words (and some of them are hum dingers!) and deeds (those too!).

Then have her whimper off the stage and be comforted neither her nor her husband will see that WH again as residents.

[VanillaRhapsody]

20. Yeah YOU wish....Dream BIG I always say!

[merrily]

29. If there is no real primary, no one will challenge her on many of her past words.

IMO, that's the reason the PTB was trying so hard for over 2 years to sell everyone on the idea that, if Hillary ran, the nomination would be hers--no other Dem would even run in the primary.

[blkmusclmachine]

22. Hillary will run. To Obama's right. And lose.

It's what any Third Way Centrist would do...

[RBInMaine]

26. Third Way Third Way Third Way bla bla bla bla bla.... yawn ...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz....

It really is a broken record.

[MannyGoldstein]

40. A badly, badly broken record.

War and Wall Street. A terrible record indeed.

[merrily]

30. In the primary, she well may run to the left of Hillary 2008. Seems both she and the Party PTB

are getting the message that 1.2 way masquerading as 3rd way is not going to cut it with many Democratic primary voters--unless they are really desperate to elect a female.

On the other hand, the Republican performance in Congress and in the states in 2010 and 2012 may put her in a real quandary as to the primary (if indeed we have a genuine primary).

Either way, I think Democrats will lose the general if she is the nominee--much as they try to brainwash convince us that she is the only Democrat that can beat the Republicans and may even "wipe the floor" with them. (I haven't heard the latter as much as I did a year or so ago.)

Seriously, if that were so, what does it say about today's Democratic Party if Hillary were actually the only Dem capable of beating a Jeb or a Mitt?

[peacebird]

31. Yes, and like last time out her inevitability meme will be shown up as merely smoke & mirrors

[yeoman6987]

41. She only lost the primary because she

Didn't take the caucuses seriously. That won't happen again. President Obama won most of the caucuses which are small amount of voters, but adds up.

[joshcryer]

47. Uh, Clinton ran in 2008 to Obama's left.

Her platform will be the most left wing since Carter. Probably more so. It will bug so many people.

[BeyondGeography]

32. Benghazi?

That's not a reason. Some other real groaners in there too, like running will make her speech fees go away.

If this is the best they can come up with...

[concreteblue]

42. bENGHAZI?

It will definitely be used as a club by the R's, if only as a fund raising device used on the weak minded. But that will keep the issue alive in the bubble, and therefore it WILL be an issue. Your point as to if / how much it figures into HER thought process is well-taken.

[davidpdx]

34. As much as I'd love to believe she's not running

I don't think anyone except those close to her have any idea what she's thinking. At this point, it is a wait and see situation.

[tularetom]

35. Unfortunately, she's gonna run, get nominated, and lose in the general

She'll do this tightrope walking Clinton tap dance and the electorate won't be fooled. If your only choices are a closet republican and an actual one, why not vote for the one who has the guts to admit it.

She has zero personality, zero charisma. Even less than Romney and Jeb Bush. She just isn't a likable person, and she doesn't even seem to be all that smart.

It would be sort of fun to watch her crash and burn, because of all the shitty things she has done to Obama. Unfortunately, if she runs it will leave republicans in charge of all three branches of government and that's not good for most of us.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

37. She very nearly won the primary in 2008

Without Obama or a similarly strong opposition candidate, I can't imagine her not getting nominated. Winning the GE will depend on who the Republicans nominate but who might they nominate- other than, possibly, Jeb (if he could even get nominated)- who would present a serious challenge to her? And I also believe that most people would be enthused about a HRC candidacy for POTUS. We made history in 2008 by electing Barack Obama and we could make history in 2016 by electing Hillary Clinton. Whether she is "the candidate" to cure all of the ills of this country after being repeatedly ravaged by Republican policies/politics is one thing but most people I know would be excited to vote for her to elect the first woman POTUS.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

36. I honestly believe that she will run

If she knows she isn't, however, I sincerely hope that she lets us all know ASAP because if she doesn't, we need to know whom our alternatives are. I suspect that some Democrats are holding back from announcing to see what Hillary is going to do first.

[Sunlei]

38. Costs the other party billions to stamp down the 'approval rating' . I hope Mrs Clinton keeps them

'guessing & spending' for the next 2 years

[Frank Cannon]

39. Why the fuck would she even want to run?

She makes more in five minutes just sitting on her ass than I do in a year. Prestige? Power? She has all that already. Why would she want to reinvite into her life all the bullshit she endured during her husband's time in office and during her last attempt at running, except geometrically WORSE?

No one has convinced me that she even wants the fucking thing, least of all Hillary. The only ones who are hardcore about the idea of her running--can't seem to stop talking about it--are the bubbleheads at Fox News, and that should tell you something.

[mylye2222]

45. Maybe only personal ambition. ...