Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

In Hillary Clinton, many women see a female candidate who could win the presidency

[quote]Hillary Clinton 2016? Women Look Ahead To ‘History In the Making’

Jan 16, 2013

[quote]After Hillary Clinton left 18 million cracks in the glass ceiling, supporters anticipate that she can smash through it in 2016. Paul Alexander reports. Women see in Clinton a female candidate who could not only run for but win the presidency.

The day after she returned to her job as secretary of state following a month-long medical leave, Hillary Rodham Clinton held a press conference, her first since she had sustained a concussion, due to a fall, that lead to her absence. When one reporter asked if she was going to retire once she left the State Department, Clinton countered: “I don’t know that that is the word I would use, but certainly stepping off the very fast track for a little while.”

For Clinton watchers who parse each of her comments for any clues about a possible 2016 presidential bid, this one delivered. “Hillary Clinton Rules Out ‘Retirement,’” one headline read. “Onwards to the White House?” another asked. By the end of the week, despite her recent health problems, a poll showed Clinton the prohibitive frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination and a formidable challenger to Chris Christie, the Republican governor of New Jersey, in a possible general-election match-up.

Friends close to Clinton say that her longstanding plan has been to take a break after leaving her post as secretary of state before laying the groundwork for a second run for the presidency. Her recent medical episode underscores her need for a sabbatical. At the same time, though, rarely has there been such a palpable groundswell of anticipation for a politician’s potential run for office.

The reason is simple: Women see in Clinton a female candidate who could not only run for but win the presidency.

“When we look at 2016,” says Stephanie Schriock, president of Emily’s List, a group devoted to electing Democratic women to office, “we see this very much as a time to have a woman on the ticket for The White House. The jobs she has done as secretary of state, senator from New York, and first lady make us believe Hillary Clinton would be an excellent president. There would be massive energy surrounding a Clinton presidential campaign.”

Betsy Gotbaum, the former New York City public advocate who knows Clinton through New York political circles, agrees. “Women will be galvanized by her candidacy,” she says. “So many women will be excited, it would create a wave of support nationally she can capitalize on. Right now, she’s the one woman who has the chance of breaking the glass ceiling. We don’t want to miss this opportunity to make history.”

Indeed, the political stage seems to be set for a second Clinton run. “The last election resulted in historic numbers of women elected to Congress,” says Schriock, pointing out that for the first time 20 women serve in the United States Senate (16 of them Democrats) and 81 in the House of Representatives (61 of them Democrats). “We see the last election as a mandate for women leadership.”

In fact, Clinton’s presidential bid in 2008 may have contributed to these record numbers. “Women were inspired to run for the House and the Senate by her first presidential campaign,” Schriock says. “That’s why breaking the glass ceiling would be such a big deal.”

For Hillary Clinton, a second presidential bid would look much different than her first. In 2007, as the strategy for her campaign was taking shape, a decision was made, generally attributed to her chief political architect Mark Penn, for Clinton to run on her qualifications and downplay her gender and the groundbreaking nature of her campaign.

“There is an age-old problem women candidates have,” says Terry O’Neill, president of the National Organization for Women. “Which is: ‘Do I run as the best person for the job and ignore my anatomy or do I run as a woman?’ There is no clear-cut answer.”

[More at link]:

by Anonymousreply 7001/19/2013

I normally don't read Hillary threads because all the deranged Clinton haters gravitate towards them

Since I'm first to post, I hope she does run in 2016. I supported her in 2008 and will support her once again. Not just support, volunteer my time.

by Anonymousreply 101/17/2013

I hope she runs. She is brilliant, gutsy, savvy, and has extensive international experience.

I can imagine her striding into a republican caucus and saying, don't FUCK WITH ME boys!

She knows how evil and stupid republicans are and she isn't gonna take their shit after the 8 years of their nonsense.

by Anonymousreply 301/17/2013

Exactly, R3. Hillary (and Bill's) numerous detractors, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum come to mind, are all political has-beens. She and her husband are the ultimate survivors and have gone on to bigger and better things.

by Anonymousreply 401/17/2013

Hillary 2016: The "I've fallen and I can't get up" candidate.

by Anonymousreply 501/17/2013

Retread

by Anonymousreply 601/17/2013

I agree with R3 - she would be great.

by Anonymousreply 701/17/2013

She can't run for election with a blood clot in her head. Sorry.

by Anonymousreply 901/17/2013

[quote]She deserves to the be the first woman President

I hope she gets exactly what she deserves.

by Anonymousreply 1001/17/2013

Supported Hillary well before she ran the last time, then in the primaries... And then, the Democrats literally threw the woman under the bus. Mercilessly.

I can't blame her if she doesn't run and frankly am amazed she even talks to Democratic party leaders.

I've never seen anything like I saw in 2008 and while I voted for Obama both times, it was only because I had no other choice. The Democrats not only knocked her down, but they shit on her.. And NOW they want her to come back and keep us in the White House? No fucking way she's going to do it. She gave all she had and I just don't think she has another campaign left in her, but I could be wrong.

by Anonymousreply 1101/17/2013

She's the only female I can think of that can win the presidency.

by Anonymousreply 1201/17/2013

"I can imagine her striding into a republican caucus and saying, don't FUCK WITH ME boys!"

You mean like when she went to the middle east last month and told Hamas to knock it off or she'll kick their ass?

by Anonymousreply 1301/17/2013

[quote]while I voted for Obama both times, it was only because I had no other choice. The Democrats not only knocked her down, but they shit on her..

I also worked on Hillary's 2008 campaign and am a huge supporter. However, I don't know what you mean by knocking her down and shitting on her. There was a campaign and Obama's was better. He was even the more attractive candidate on a superficial level. I believe she was more qualified but there's more to winning that nomination than qualifications.

I don't think making here Secretary of State was a sign of disrespect on the part of Democrats.

by Anonymousreply 1401/17/2013

[quote]No more Clintons: one DOMA supporting Democrat in the White House was enough.

What an absolutely stupid comment.

by Anonymousreply 1501/17/2013

R14, there were a number of people in the Democratic establishment who were nasty to Hillary at the time, even though many of them are now relying on her to run. Nancy Pelosi, while she claimed to be officially neutral, was working for Obama behind the scenes. So was Harry Reid.

And Obama himself was disrespectful to Hillary on several occasions, including with the infamous "You're likeable enough Hillary" moment during the New Hampshire debate. That ticked off a lot of women and cost him that primary. Obama's campaign also tried to falsely accuse Hillary and Bill of racism. It took them a while to get over that one, but they put it behind them and helped him win in 2008 & 2016.

Now Nancy Pelosi says that "Hillary is our shot in 2016" and she and many other people are relying on her to run. We'll see whether Hillary is up to it and whether she has it in her.

by Anonymousreply 1601/17/2013

Hillary couldn't win in 2008 because she was a compulsive liar tied to the failed economic policies of a) the Clinton years; and b) her ghost-written autobiography. None of those things has changed. It would be suicidal for the Democrats to run her in 2016.

by Anonymousreply 1701/17/2013

I think our definition of "nasty" is at variance. They just saw an opportunity with Obama that they didn't see in Hillary. How often does a party have such great choices?

The Clintons were hurt because they believed it was Hillary's nomination, it was her turn, she deserved it etc. She wanted to be anointed. Democrats, unlike Republicans don't like that. Obama's campaign out-hustled hers, much like they did to Romney in 2012.

There was nastiness on both sides. It wasn't just the Obama campaing. Read "Game Change".

I'm looking forward to her running and winning in 2016.

by Anonymousreply 1801/17/2013

She and Joe Biden, as much as we love them, are too old. Look at how much the job has aged Obama. She'll be pushing 70 and Joe will be pushing 75 in four years; it would kill them and/or be bad for us.

by Anonymousreply 1901/17/2013

R17 is a Republican nut.

Hillary was atop the polls and would have easily won the election had she been the nominee. And 'failed economic policies' of the Clinton years?! Is this a joke, or are you really a Bush lover? I think you've gotten your Presidents and their economic records mixed up, you moron.

by Anonymousreply 2001/17/2013

I would have voted for her in 2008 if she had won the nomination, but she will be too old in 2016. We have already lived through eight years with Reagan suffering from senile dementia, and that was more than enough. If the Democrats are foolish enough to nominate Biden or Clinton, then they will not get my vote.

by Anonymousreply 2101/17/2013

You sound like an asshole, R21.

Unless there is evidence that Hillary or Biden are senile, why the heck wouldn't you vote for them? Someone can't be older and be President? The vast majority of people are totally with it at their ages, and in case you haven't noticed, there are a large number of Senators and Congressmen who are a lot older - sometimes in their 80's and 90's.

by Anonymousreply 2201/17/2013

R20, it was under Clinton that Glass-Steagall was repealed. It was under Clinton that big donors were allowed to sleep in the White House. And Hillary C. in her autobiography, said she favored a "Third Way" between conservatism and traditional liberalism - at exactly the time it became obvious that the country needed traditional liberalism, and that conservative Democrats were Republican lite! Indeed, Hillary C. bent over backwards to work in a bipartisan way with the GOP all along. Sound familiar? It's not working for Obama, and it wouldn't work for Hillary C. We need a progressive revolution in both parites! Anything less is just handing the GOP the country on a silver platter.

And no I'm not a Republican.

by Anonymousreply 2301/17/2013

R14, I think there is a LOT you're not remembering.

I remember Pelosi saying clearly "Hillary Clinton will NOT be our party's nominee" while Clinton was still fighting (and had a chance of winning) the nomination.

Harry Reid, the DNC, all of them. Almost everyone abandoned the woman before the Obama locked up the nomination. They at least owed her enough respect to humor her even if they felt winning wasn't an option late in the game; but they didn't. They turned like a pack of wild, hungry dogs as is Obama was a god.

Ironically, I seem to recall many in the Congressional Black Caucus being among the last to abandon her. I also remember vividly dumb fuck Keith Olbermann's nasty, much ballyhooed 'special announcement' on his show that everyone was waiting for with mouth foaming anticipation where he eviscerated her for not dropping out. (And look where that asshole is today. Safely, justly in hated obscurity).

I'm really not trying to be a bitter Hillary supporter but the truth is the truth and I'm sure it's a insulting to her that so many of these same people now are calling for her to begin campaigning again.

Leave the woman in peace.

by Anonymousreply 2401/17/2013

With regard to Joe Biden, I agree there will be some questions raised about his age, but I don't believe in writing off the idea completely the way R21 is trying to do.

Having said that though the question is whether he would indeed be able to become the oldest President in history. Biden would not only be older than Reagan when he got elected, but would also be older than McCain was when he was the nominee, I believe.

And Biden performed very badly when he ran for President in 1988 & 2008. In both cases he got nowhere in the primaries and didn't win a single one as far as I know.

Not even sure if he plans to run yet, or whether the media is just assuming he will. I think there's respect for Biden because of his good debate performance and campaigning in 2012, but I'm not sure where it will ultimately go.

by Anonymousreply 2501/17/2013

R21, who would rather have Jindal or Rubio over a 70 year old Clinton, should be denied the cock.

by Anonymousreply 2601/17/2013

I'm 59, R22, and I am already noticing that my abilities are deminished. When I speak to the doctor about it, he says "me, too", and insists that it is normal aging. I watched my parents, their friends, other elderly relatives, and the parents of my friends live out their lives, and I know that it is very common to have some level of dementia even if there is no diagnosis of alzheimers. It is unfortunate that the Constitution did not specify an upper age limit in the same clause that sets 35 as the minimum age. Of course it is not PC to say that the elderly are not qualified to be President. But being politically incorrect does not keep it from being true.

by Anonymousreply 2701/17/2013

[quote]"Hillary Clinton will NOT be our party's nominee"

Most of the delegates had been chosen. Even though there were several big states left, Obama had, for the most part, locked up the nomination. He was far enough ahead that she couldn't realistically win with pledged delegates. Pelosi did not want the superdelegates to decide the nomination.

Insulting? That's ridiculous. She wants it and we want her. She put aside whatever bitterness she may have harbored and went on to be one the greatest Secretaries of State ever.

You should take a page from her book and act with the same graciousness.

by Anonymousreply 2801/17/2013

[quote]I'm 59, [R22], and I am already noticing that my abilities are deminished.

Well, that speaks for itself.

However, the rest of us aren't you.

by Anonymousreply 2901/17/2013

[quote]I'm 59, [R22], and I am already noticing that my abilities are deminished.

And your spelling as well, it seems.

I don't think you should be judging others based on your own situation. There are many politicians in many countries who are in power in their 60's, and even some in their 70's.

Don't forget that Mitt Romney is nearly 66, and was the Republican Nominee. You're fooling yourself if you think that no one over 60 can be President.

by Anonymousreply 3001/17/2013

[quote]I also worked on Hillary's 2008 campaign and am a huge supporter. However, I don't know what you mean by knocking her down and shitting on her. There was a campaign and Obama's was better.

How refreshing for you to admit you sucked at your job.

by Anonymousreply 3101/17/2013

As long as her mind is sharp, who cares how old she is? If she's not up to the task, that will be made clear in the debates and on the campaign trail. Otherwise, it's a silly reason to dismiss her.

by Anonymousreply 3201/17/2013

What are your thoughts on Biden, R32? He's several years older. Is HE too old?

by Anonymousreply 3301/17/2013

R30, I did not say no one over 60, but I am thinking that no one over 70 should serve in that capacity. Wasn't Mrs. Clinton born in 1946, meaning that she will already be 70 years old if she becomes President on 01/20/2017? You can usually depend on old people to refuse to step down when they become disabled, and they likely do not realize their disability. They certainly keep driving cars long after it is safe for them to do so. We need a mandatory retirement age for federal judges also. I do humbly and profusely apologize for misspelling a word.

by Anonymousreply 3401/17/2013

[quote]Don't forget that Mitt Romney is nearly 66,

Well....maybe not the BEST example. LOL.

[quote]How refreshing for you to admit you sucked at your job.

We won our state. It was the national campaign that really screwed up (oh, we don't have to bother with those small states)>

by Anonymousreply 3501/17/2013

I suppose my reasoning would apply to him as well, r33.

by Anonymousreply 3601/17/2013

No, Hillary would be 69 if she were to be sworn in during the month of January 2017.

She was born on October 26, 1947.

by Anonymousreply 3701/17/2013

I really don't care who runs on the Democratic ticket in 2016.

All I really care about is the Santorum/Bachmann "The Nuts Have Finally Taken Over the Asylum" ticket 2016.

by Anonymousreply 3801/17/2013

Hillary is that desperate old you at R37, R33, R30, R25, R20, R16, R15, and the OP?

You really know how to suck the life out of a thread, dear!

by Anonymousreply 3901/17/2013

At least she can get a book sold, R39.

by Anonymousreply 4001/17/2013

I am a great admirer of Hillary and would welcome her seeking the nomination. She's smart, she's tough, she's reasonably liberal minded.

That said, nobody deserves the presidency. They should earn it, based on their ideas. I'll wait to see what she has to say about how she'd propose to lead the country in the context of where the country is at the time. God knows what things will be like in four more years. We're electing the president of the United States, not the president of the student council.

Some of you seem to be confusing politics with the People's Choice Awards.

by Anonymousreply 4101/17/2013

R41 -- that was the problem with her 2008 campaign. She went into it with an attitude that her nomination was inevitable. When that turned out not to be the case, she and her staff made desperate, disastrous strategy decisions.

by Anonymousreply 4201/17/2013

I basically agree with you, R41. And I think one of the reasons Hillary is atop the polls and so popular with Democrats as the top 2016 choice is because they feel she probably deserves it more than in 2008. She has now been Secretary of State for 4 years and has put in more time than she had when she first ran.

by Anonymousreply 4301/17/2013

She will be an amazing candidate.

Yes, I am the poster who also fantasizes about Bill as her VP or Obama. There is no law that prohibits ex-presidents from being on the ticket.

by Anonymousreply 4401/17/2013

There's no law that prohibits it, but it's not likely to happen.

by Anonymousreply 4501/17/2013

The reason the Dem pundits wanted Obama so badly was the same reason the Repubs wanted George W. Bush in 2000 -- because they thought HE COULD WIN.

That's it, I said it.

by Anonymousreply 4601/17/2013

R46, the irony is that Bush only won by stealing in 2000 - he actually lost to Al Gore, and they now regret giving Bush the Presidency since he ended up destroying the Party and sending them into the political wilderness.

Incidentally, exit polling released on Election Day in 2008 showed that Hillary Clinton would have won by a larger margin than Barack Obama.

by Anonymousreply 4701/17/2013

In Hillary We Trust.

by Anonymousreply 4801/17/2013

[quote]"At least she can get a book sold, [R39]." -- R40

So could Lurleen Wallace.

by Anonymousreply 4901/17/2013

She has a duty to run. America needs her.

by Anonymousreply 5001/17/2013

Why would she be an amazing candidate?

by Anonymousreply 5101/17/2013

[quote]Yes, I am the poster who also fantasizes about Bill as her VP or Obama. There is no law that prohibits ex-presidents from being on the ticket.

Clintonistas never were very good with details. There is a law that prevents Bill Clinton from from becoming Vice President: the US Constitution.

The 12th Amendment states:

"... But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."

And the 22nd Amendment reads:

"No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. ..."

Assuming Obama completes at least two years of his second term, he will be ineligible to run for another term as President of Vice President.

by Anonymousreply 5201/17/2013

If she runs in 2016, she needs to surround herself with some fresh blood and not the tired old hacks who managed and advised her campaign in 2008. Hillary may have had to endure a lot of unfair shit in 2008, but a big part of the reason she lost the nomination to Obama was that her campaign was a poorly managed mess. Hopefully, she learned from the mistakes and would do things much differently in 2016.

by Anonymousreply 5301/17/2013

R53, I'm pretty sure that IF Hillary decides to run in 2016, Mark Penn will be allowed no where near the campaign.

by Anonymousreply 5401/17/2013

R47, do you think that is NEWS???

by Anonymousreply 5501/17/2013

I love hil, but she's older and older and sick now

by Anonymousreply 5601/17/2013

[quote]I love hil, but she's older and older and sick now

MARY!

She's expected to make a full recovery and make end up getting a clean bill of health and outliving most of us as Bill Clinton said this week.

by Anonymousreply 5701/17/2013

The Democrats are blowing it bigtime with this war against millions of law-abiding gun owners in response to a lone madman murderer. They are not likely to retain the White House, no matter who they nominate. But if they are foolish enough to nominate a person of such a divisive reputation as Secretary Clinton, not to even mention her advanced age by 2016, then they are sure to lose.

by Anonymousreply 5801/17/2013

R58, is that meant to be a joke? Because if not, you overplayed your hand in your Republican trolling?

The Democrats are way ahead of the Republicans in the polls right now.

by Anonymousreply 5901/18/2013

[quote]She's expected to make a full recovery and make end up getting a clean bill of health and outliving most of us as Bill Clinton said this week.

that's not saying much

by Anonymousreply 6001/18/2013

I've spent my adult life championing the Clintons (in a red state no less) but I hope her health improves, one more incident and it won't happen. I want to see it so bad.

by Anonymousreply 6101/18/2013

R47, she would have lost in 2008. The only reason she survived intact was that the GOP wasn't targeting her. Duh.

by Anonymousreply 6201/18/2013

Is R62 being serious?

by Anonymousreply 6301/18/2013

[quote]I've spent my adult life championing the Clintons R61

But have the Clintons spent their adult lives championing you?

Weren't the Clintons' support for DOMA and Don't Ask enough to convince you that the only thing the Clintons have ever stood for is their own access to power?

by Anonymousreply 6401/18/2013

I'm not American, but I always favored Hillary over Obama. I think she has more experience and was more suited for the job. She also has more balls than Obama and isn't afraid of going against the repugs. Obama is a coward with his "run down the centre" policy. I think Hillary would have been a better president, unfortunately people got blinded by Obama's inspiring speeches, all about "hope" and less about actual substance.

by Anonymousreply 6501/18/2013

Another reason she would lose if she ran: Hillary carries more baggage than a Boeing 787.

by Anonymousreply 6601/18/2013

That's what the Democrats and left leaning media thought in 2008, r66. So instead they championed a candidate 2 years as a mediocre US senator and a one page resume.

by Anonymousreply 6701/18/2013

[quote]Obama is a coward with his "run down the centre" policy.

You need to learn more about American political history before getting involved with these threads, dear.

Start by researching the term 'triangulation' in Google.

by Anonymousreply 6801/18/2013

[quote]they championed a candidate 2 years as a mediocre US senator and a one page resume. --R67

Do you mean that same candidate who won two terms as President while Hillary was still learning that not all state primaries weer winner-take-all?

by Anonymousreply 6901/18/2013

Watch R67 at the link below:

by Anonymousreply 7001/19/2013
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.