I've wanted her to be President since 2002 (wanted her to run in 2004). I gave a substantial amount of money to her in 2007. 2016 is finally her turn.
Hillary Clinton, our 45th President!
Does my butt look big?
Well, in all honesty, she would be the best Republican choice in 2016.
Just remember: she is not for marriage equality. I like her, too, but she has not evolved as much as she should.
NO, ladies, I'll be quite busy on my own then, with '
She will come out in favor gay marriage. She's made some very powerful speeches in favor of gay rights.
I have wanted Hillary to be president since she was First Lady. I wanted her in 2008. I even wanted her in 2012. And I want her more than ever in 2016. Make history, Hillary, and become the first woman president before you leave the political stage.
I'll support her, but only if she gets Biden to be her VP. I want Joe to be like a permanent fixture, the goofy old Uncle rattling around the White House until he's in his 90's.
Obama has won supporting gay marriage. All democratic candidates can now come out of the closet in their support now.
I'm in for Hillary. We need to find a great Hispanic VP to round out the ticket.
If she wants to do it, I think she could win, and I think the DNC would support her.
But, the DNC is going to want to know by the 2014 midterms (or earlier?), because if she's not going to run, then they need time to decide on competitive candidate(s).
If she doesn't run, I think it's possible that dems will lose in 2016.
Serfs need dynasties.
Hillary/Richardson? I would vote for that HARD!
Problem is Clinton is more polarizing than Obama. Yes, she's gotten a pretty good makeover from her Sec of State tenure but the minute she's steps back into elective politics--the gloves will be off once more. Remember how bruising and ultimately, unsuccessful, her 2008 campaign was. I can see her base being very loyal and supportive but her support will reach a hard ceiling and once again, the math will be against her.
Would it be better if she were on the Supreme Court?
she dropped the ball on Libya, don't think it's in the cards now.
Me too. It would make a wonderful end to a biopic...award worthy even....
I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.
I'm all for Hillary '16... would Obama support/campaign for her? If so, she absolutely could win.
she's too fat
R10, why do you think dems would lose in 2016? I thought we've all been agreeing there will never be another repub president! What's the concern in 4 years????
The Whigs are going to be making a comeback.
[quote]Problem is Clinton is more polarizing than Obama. Yes, she's gotten a pretty good makeover from her Sec of State tenure but the minute she's steps back into elective politics--the gloves will be off once more. Remember how bruising and ultimately, unsuccessful, her 2008 campaign was.
I think she would have been a great candidate against a Republican. Unfortunately, she was a terrible candidate in 2008 against another Democrat.
But I remember when she was the ultimate enemy of the GOP. A generation later, she was the centrist Democrat that centrist Republicans respected.
I'm a diehard Hillary supporter. And I believe she can win. But just consider that that the Repugs want the Latinos in their corner.
Sixty-nine percent of Latinos voted for Obama tonight. What if the Repugs nomninated Rubio? How would Hillary fare against that douchebag?
If Hillary wants it in 2016, I'll support her 100%. I doubt Richardson will be her running mate. He stabbed her in the back in '08, after the Clintons gave him his career.
She may have forgiven him but I doubt President Clinton has and I wouldn't trust Richardson as far as I could throw him. Other than that, I've always liked Bill Richardson.
Richardson is a diva and has grabby hands when it comes to the ladies. He wouldn't last a campaign that highlights his personal flaws relentlessly.
You go, gurl! But maybe you should take a little 'vacation' after your visit to a good 'dermatologist'. Just a little lift around the eyelids and neck region. It'll help you have a more 'ageless' appearance.
R27, lots of Latinos love Hillary. Even with Rubio on the ticket, I think we would break for Clinton.
Martin O'Malley/Martin Heinrich
Vote for the hot Martins!
I could see the 2016 Democratic ticket being Hillary Clinton/Julian Castro. He was one of the stars of the 2012 convention, he's young and would bring in the Latino vote that the party needs to preserve in order to decisively win elections.
I'd prefer Claire Danes.
She would be 69 in 2016. Is that not a little old to run for president? I don't think so but what would the general public think?
I know she wants it and I'd vote for her but if she ran, it'd be painful because I think she'd almost certainly lose. People would probably want a change of government and she's not as popularly appealing as Obama.
the USA is ruined now.... gone are the small business and the ones they employ, you fags have no clue what you've done
So many good possibilities.
Clinton / O'Malley
Clinton / Warren
Clinton / Biden
Clinton / Clinton (lol)
Clinton / Castro (Julian, the Convention speaker)
The list is literally endless.
Funny how many rising stars there are in the Democratic party, and absolutely nothing from Republicans. I love it!
The problem for Obama will be who he will throw his support behind.
He is MAJORLY beholden to the Clintons. Bill Clinton worked his ass off for Obama this election, and Obama owes him for that.
However, Biden has been a LOYAL, and in Obama's words "happy warrior" for Obama, and he also owes Biden.
This election was nothing, compared to the Democratic fight in 2016. The fight was wide open in 2008, and it'll be another dogfight in 2016.
We have to make the right choice, or a Paul Ryan or Marco Rubio or *gasp* Jeb Bush could swoop in and win the Presidency.
Interestingly, when MSNBC opened their election coverage, they said that there hasn't been a Bush or Nixon winning ticket for the Republicans, since 1928. Can you imagine if Jeb Bush runs in 2016? He could keep that fucking streak going, and America would vote for it.
Ahhh... politics is so much fun. But so stressful.
Hillary Clinton + Juan Castro = Oedipus Rex
Clinton/Clinton = Hillary + Bill
Clinton/Clinton = Hillary + Chelsea
[quote] Hillary Clinton + Juan Castro = Oedipus Rex
It's JULIAN Castro, the DNC speaker. And he would be perfect, because I think that he could mentor under Hillary for 8 years, and end up a very strong leader.
Plus it would GUARANTEE the Latino vote in 2016, which would be huge!
Clinton / Castro in 2016 would be a very smart move.
Her time has passed.
Chelsea would sink that ticket.
Clinton/Castro 2016 sounds mighty nice to me. :)
YAY FOR Obama/Biden 2012!!!
Hillary has already said a few weeks ago, she is not running.
It's okay; she said that in 2006 too.
She definitely will be running, I think. And she definitely will be winning!
I would love to think about the longterm advantages for America with 20 years of Democratic prezzes. REAL, FDR-like change to the structure of the United States. :)
Just happily fantasizing and still thrilled from last night.
I think she's playing it smart. She is going to let the party draft her, instead of the way it happened last time. I think it will be great to follow up Obama's 8 years with 8 years of our first female CIC.
I don't think Castro will be ready by 2016. He can't pass the "ready to be Commander in Chief" test. I know, a lot of VP's don't (I'm looking at you, Palin and Ryan). I just don't think Hillary would take on a running mate who doesn't pass that test. She takes it seriously and rightly so.
The one thing Mr. Castro doesn't have to worry about is his name. After electing Barack Hussein Obama TWICE we can elect anyone named anything. HA.
I would love NOTHING more than for Hillary to run and win in 2016.
But I fear she won't and we might be stuck with President Jeb Bush and Vice President Susana Martinez.
R49, I hope so. The party screwed her in 07-08, literally threw her under the bus. Not bitter but fascinated about it.
Up until I was last night, I was too cynical to believe that the US would vote in a woman for president. Now that I'm still giddy from the last night's results, I can see it happening, although I'm not sure it would be Hillary.
I think either Hillary or Elizabeth Warren for prez...and NM senator Martin Heinrich for vice prez
[quote]I'm a diehard Hillary supporter. And I believe she can win. But just consider that that the Repugs want the Latinos in their corner. Sixty-nine percent of Latinos voted for Obama tonight. What if the Repugs nomninated Rubio? How would Hillary fare against that douchebag?
Actually, wasn't the percentage in the low 70s? You're right, that Latinos* are not a given for Democrats the way African-Americans are. Dems have to be careful to continue to nurture that demographic or the Repubs could easily chip away at it if they start moving on immigration reform. That said, Latinos* LOVE the Clintons. In the primaries Hillary won CA and TX thanks to overwhelming Latino support.
*Cubans excluded of course
Fat ass biotch isn't getting my job.
I love Biden but he better not run.
I would absolutely support her, provided that, if opposed, she campaigns a lot better than she did four years ago.
I would love for it to be Hills. Would gladly take Cuomo or O'Malley for either VP or P if Hills didn't run.
I like Hillary C. too, but she has no more business beings es.mthan she has being sec of state or even senator. She lack the depth of experience needed. Obama doesn't belong in the White House ever, nor Romney or bush the second.we have to,stop,electing people we LIKE and elect people with hard skills who can do the job,
As much as you Hillary trolls love her, Joe isn't going down without a fight.
“You can vote for me in 2016″ he is quoted as saying last week.
Yeah, but it's unclear for what office. Could be his old senate seat or when is Delaware electing a new governor?
[quote]Interestingly, when MSNBC opened their election coverage, they said that there hasn't been a Bush or Nixon winning ticket for the Republicans, since 1928.
I think they (or you) mean 1948. Still, that's 64 years of Nixon or Bush. Amazing.
I might support her if she ended up the nominee, but I'd hope we'd get someone better, more liberal. The country is being destroyed by conservatism, on both sides of the isle. It can't go on much longer, even the planet itself is in jeopardy now with global warming.
All I have is big question marks in my mind when I read r62. Dear Lord...!
I agree with earlier poster - Supreme Court Justice might be a better fit with her legal background (Plus... she looks tired as hell lately from all the traveling she'd done for the last 20 years. Me thinks the ol' gal could use a slower pace & regular routine)
[quote]I agree with earlier poster - Supreme Court Justice might be a better fit with her legal background
I'd rather Obama nominate someone younger who will be on the court younger. Most of the justices on the court now were nominated when they were in their 50s.
R65 The Republicans won in 1948? Dewey Defeats Truman?
I think they did mean 1928, but the original poster was incorrect. There hasn't been a winning Republican ticket since 1928 [bold]that didn't have[/bold] either a Nixon (1952, 1956, 1968, 1972) or a Bush (1980, 1984, 2000, 2004) on it. A key word was missing.
If Hillary decides to run in 2016, I will do the same for her as I did in 2008: volunteer, canvas, knock on doors, phone bank, travel, anything my state Hillary campaign needs help with.
I'm the "Hillary for the Supremes" troll (for a couple years now), and I support all the folks who are suggesting it as well.
Though my dream ticket would be Clinton/Gillibrand: Blonde & Blonder!
I think Kirsten Gillibrand or Andrew Cuomo would be good candidates
" I want Joe to be like a permanent fixture, the goofy old Uncle rattling around the White House until he's in his 90's."
Isn't he already 87 or 88?
Cuomo wants it pretty bad but he can't run as Hillary's number two and neither can Gillibrand, nor could Cuomo and Gillibrand run together.
You cannot have two New York politicians on one national ticket. Well you can put them on it but they will lose.
If Hillary decides to run she will have to choose a male and he will have to be from either the West or the South.
"If Hillary decides to run she will have to choose a male and he will have to be from either the West or the South"
Kaine from VA?!
Gillibrand and Castro will not play as well as Clinton + Castro ticket would. However, Gillibrand + Richardson as VP would play remarkably well across the country.
Hillary & Cheryl
I would love a Hillary/Bill Richardson '16 ticket.
Isn't Bill Richardson too scandal-tainted?
I think Hillary - with gravitas - with a younger Latino male would be the perfect combination.
Jon Tester, the senator from Montana, would make an interesting pair with Hilary! City slicker and country bumpkin!
"She lack the depth of experience needed.'
She do, gurl. She do.
Why do people want Hillary so bad though? It can't be because she's so liberal, she and Bill are quintessential centrists. But people don't seem to care anything about policies, they just think she's a fabulous political star. Here we go again with a vapid American Idol approach to choosing the nominee. "It'd be so cool to have a woman next time!" No, it'd be so cool to have a strong progressive president next time. We can at least root for that before settling for a centrist if necessary.
Already talking about 2016 and President hasn't even started second terms. Ungrateful bitches in this thread. But I do like Clintion/Richardson ticket.
There is word in the Beltway that the very reticent, limelight averse Kirsten Gillibrand has some seriously big aspirations. She's already courting national women's and gay rights groups.
Hillary might face some (much younger) female opposition should she try another run at it.
"Why do people want Hillary so bad though?"
Because the right wing hates her so much. The idea of having her and Bill back in the White House on the heels of Obama is almost too delicious to contemplate.
Of course just like they're saying Republicans can't win without a Bush or a Nixon on the ticket, they'll say Democrats can't win without a Clinton or an Obama on the ticket.
[quote] She would be 69 in 2016. Is that not a little old to run for president? I don't think so but what would the general public think?
It would make her, I think, the 2nd oldest President on inauguration behind Ronald Reagan. And national leaders seem to be tending to be younger these days.
Apart from that, I don't see Hillary as having what it takes to be president and she seems to belong to a past generation of women.
Are you kidding, r 92?
America LOVES smart old broads.
[quote]City slicker and country bumpkin!
I'm a little bit country...I'm a little bit rock and roll...
[quote]I'm a little bit country...I'm a little bit rock and roll...
Please! No more Mormons!
W&W for R95.
Yeah, I agree with Betty White. Hillary is also quintessentially hip, imo.
So, clearly, OP, this thread is all about you.
R14, that was before her SoS work. She just has to surround herself with the right campaign people if she decides to run.
I was a strong supporter of her in the 2008 primary, but I hope she doesn't run for 2016. I think that ship has sailed and she should get involved in something else. I know she has little interest in the Supreme Court.
I'd love to see her on the Supreme Court.
And whether she has little interest or not she'd be a gift to the court. She should be in it to serve, not in it for what she prefers.
Then again, I believe this, she wants to be freed of the shackles of politics like Bill... she may want to lend her star power when it's needed but focus on good works and truly changing the world. I believe she has a great interest in strengthening the standing of women in the developing world and a job like that may be where she can do the most good.
I like Hillary for Supreme Court, too. Would congress ever vote her in??? I think she'll be too old to run for President in 2016.
She'll be too old for the SC too. We need YOUNG people who'll stay there for a LONG time.
Hillary does not want to be on the Supreme Court.
She's a much more public person than that. I'd love to see her as president. But if she decides not to run, she either wants to relax and enjoy life or do something that affects puplic policy in a much more visible way than the Supreme Court--even as prestigious as it is.
Agree with R104.
Supreme court??? LOL.
Hillary want to be where the ACTION is.
R90, the Republicans will hate ANY Democratic front runner in 2016. It doesn't have to be a Clinton.
As much as I'd love to see it, I think the age issue is going to be highly problematic. The last time we elected a president that old, he went senile while in office. Ever since Boomers and Gen Xers took over the electorate, the winning presidential nominees have been getting younger. And let's face it, society is harder on older women than they are on older men. Reagan was Big Daddy, but Hillary will be cast as Mean Old Mommy by the press.
Okay, if its not Hillary then I'm recommending Mark Warner and Gillebrand.
I can't see the Dems selecting an old white guy for the top of the ticket in 2016, can you? It actually wouldn't be a winning formula for the Democrats. But a competent woman and a Latino? That would definitely work. Especially if the Republicans nominate some arch conservative, like Paul Ryan or Mike Huckabee.
I like Hilary. I think she'd be good at working with Congress/Senate and actually getting things done, which Obama isn't so much.
Can't we spend a couple of weeks relishing Obama's victory and the prospect of him spending four more years in the White House before we begin talking about 2016? I love Hillary, but does EVERY political event have to be viewed through the lens of how it relates to Hillary?
To that end, in many respects Obama's initial election was a break with the past and the do si do of Bush Clinton Bush... maybe Clinton... theoretically Bush.
It's time to keep breathing new life into the political process. There's a place for both Clintons but it doesn't have to be center stage.
There was an interesting article in the New Yorker outlining Obama's possible second term. He will spend the next few months shaping out his main policies, then start working on them. By 2014, however, the focus of the whole country will be on the following primaries and the media will start defining Obama's legacy. So, Obama has roughly two years to do whatever he sets up to do in the next several months. Starting in 2014, the focus of both parties will be on what will happen in 2016. And we know how little gets done in the world of politics once campaigning gets going.
Imagine Bill Clinton as the very first First Man! Imagine Bill and Barak campaigning on Hillary's behalf. Imagine how popular the Dems will be once Obamacare becomes established and the unemployment numbers come down more than they already have. Imagine the Latino turnout if there happens to be a wise Latino as the VP.
Oh, while we are at it, imagine Scalia retired from the SC. Yeah, I know it won't happen, but he could die in the next 4 years and I won't shed a tear.