Dianne Feinstein encourages Hillary Clinton to run in 2016
WASHINGTON, Jan 27 (Reuters) - One of the most prominent women in the Democratic Party on Sunday encouraged outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to mount a White House run in 2016 to try to become the first woman president.
"I am a fan," California Senator Dianne Feinstein said on CNN's "State of the Union" program. "I would love it if she would run."
Feinstein was asked whether President Barack Obama's decision to have a joint interview on the CBS show "60 Minutes" - airing on Sunday - indicated the president's preference for his successor.
"Well, I'm not as concerned with that as I am with what Secretary Clinton is thinking about 2016," Feinstein said. "I think she's accomplished an incredible record. I think she has really unbridled popularity. She has a total knowledge of all of the issues. She has served in the Senate. She has been first lady."
Obama was sworn in for a second four-year term last week but speculation already has begun on who will run in 2016, with Vice President Joe Biden's name also frequently mentioned among Democrats.
Clinton, 65, is stepping down as the top U.S. diplomat after four years as Obama's secretary of state. She ran for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination but was edged out by Obama, who became the first black president.
Clinton has played down any chances she will run again, commenting in December: "I've said I really don't believe that that's something I will do again. I am so grateful I had the experience of doing it before."
|by Anonymous||reply 76||04/10/2013|
Diane Feinstein supported HRC during the Primary in 2008 but when it became clear that Obama was headed for victory, she threw her support for him.
Barbara Boxer, on the other hand, declared that she would stay neutral. She publicly stated that whoever wins CA Primary will get her support. After HRC won CA overwhelmingly, Box remained uncommitted.
What do you expect from politicians? There's really very few who know the meaning of loyalty.
Honestly, Feinstein is 79 and Boxer 72. I seriously doubt that in 4 years either will have the health to even care if HRC runs in 2016.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||01/28/2013|
[quote]I seriously doubt that in 4 years either will have the health to even care if HRC runs in 2016.
They're not quite THAT ancient, dear. There are much older Senators in the Senate.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||01/28/2013|
I'm with Dianne on this one. Hillary '16!!!
|by Anonymous||reply 3||01/28/2013|
Hillary in 2008, 2012...and finally at last as it always should have been--in 2016!
|by Anonymous||reply 4||01/28/2013|
I was for Barack in 2008.
I totally want Hillary to run in 2016.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||01/28/2013|
It seems the big name women in the Democratic Party are all lining up behind Hillary.
Nancy Pelosi and Kirsten Gillibrand have also said they want Hillary to run.
I think the women's vote will have a bigger impact in 2016 than it did in 2008.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||01/28/2013|
Gays will support her totally.
Latinos will support her totally.
Blacks will support here totally.
She has an unbeatable coalition.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||01/28/2013|
I want Hillary too...but can she beat any of the following because that's who she'll be up against:
Chris Christie, Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush. Paul Ryan, etc., etc. Name your Repug here.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||01/28/2013|
If Chris Christie continues this popularity trend, he will be a formidable candidate. Everyone else I think HRC will easily trump. Seniors are very wary of Paul Ryan because he basically wants to dismantle Social Security as we know it. Moreover, his attempt to redefine rape and anti-choice stance will hinder his chances amongst women. Whether the GOP want to believe it or not, the majority of Americans want to keep abortion legal.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||01/28/2013|
yes, actually, R9. In fact, right now she is pretty much the only Democrat who is beating all of those guys in the polls.
Recent poll has Hillary beating Jeb Bush & Marco Rubio in Florida.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||01/28/2013|
So was old man McCain and that didn't stop him from running. He's still kicking more than 4 years later.
The difference between the old man and our HRC is she's viable as a candidate. He was DOA. Miss Piggy could have beaten him if she ran.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||01/28/2013|
I am DYING for her to run in 2016 and I'm betting she goes for it.
R9 didn't list anyone she'd have a problem beating.
Chris Christie is charismatic but much too fat to run. He's got a problem with the Southern religious base and the baggers and has no foreign policy experience of any kind.
Marco Rubio looks too young, will still look too young in two years and his policies won't pull enough women, latinos, blacks, GLBTs and young people to win. His foreign policy experience is minimal.
Jeb Bush is actually the strongest candidate but his brother fucked the Bush brand and he will never be president. Also there are some family/personal issues in his marriage that will hurt him in the Bagger primaries.
Paul Ryan is toast - he ruined his career by hooking up with Romney. Like Rubio, Ryan's policies are way too conservative to win a national majority. Add to that the new "balance the budget in ten years" plan Ryan's going to be putting out soon and he is well and truly fucked. Seniors will be gathering outside his office with pitchforks and torches.
Bachmann and Palin are both non-events. Huckabee prefers bitching and whining on Faux. Susanna Martinez isn't ready and Bobby Jindal trashed his national chances the first time he had a national platform in responding to the President's State of the Union. Also, his past as a freelance exorcist won't help him. Rand Paul will run and he will be viciously humiliated. The destruction of Rand Paul's national career may be the most enjoyable part of the 2016 election cycle.
I don't see anyone who can beat Hillary on the Republican side. Biden could give her a fight in the Democratic primaries but I don't know that he will. I think he'll only run if she doesn't but he'd sure like to give it a shot.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||01/28/2013|
I wouldn't be surprised if Chris Christie switches his party affiliation. He might then be her VP pick. Except for the weight issue - the Rethugs know he can't get elected without a major weight loss.
Anyway, Hillary would defeat them all. I don't think they have a candidate she couldn't defeat - and unfortunately, since women have not been their priority, they have no woman on a national level that they could run against her.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||01/28/2013|
Vice President Biden is a devout Catholic, R16.
Or did you already know that and you're just one of our inane racist anti-semitic trolls?
In any event, I'd be perfectly happy for Biden to run, I just like Hillary more.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||01/28/2013|
I'll support Biden if Hillary doesn't run, but she is my first choice.
But right now it doesn't look like Biden does as well in the polls against the Republicans.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||01/28/2013|
Biden is as much a loser as Gore was....Jewish, Catholic, Muslim...I don't give a fuck which sky fairy he pretends to believe in, I don't want him for Pres.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||01/28/2013|
R19, in fairness to Gore, he did actually win the popular vote
|by Anonymous||reply 20||01/28/2013|
I don't think Chris Christie could beat a former First Lady, former Senator and former Secretary of State. No way. Plus, she'd finally break the highest glass ceiling in the world by becoming the first female President of the United States.
Of course, she's going to run. She's unbeatable.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||01/28/2013|
I would support Biden over Hillary any day of the week.
Her support is wildly inflated.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||01/28/2013|
R24=deluded Republican, living in his own, insulated fantasy world.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||01/28/2013|
She has the support of a lot of people across the spectrum: Democrats, independents, and even Republicans. If she runs, she will win.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||01/28/2013|
Some people are DELUSION. What would Marco Rubio have to recommend him for the job of POTUS over anybody much less Hillary Clinton? What's he ever done?
|by Anonymous||reply 28||01/28/2013|
She could fall on her head a 1000x and still be more qualified than anything on the right.
Speaking of falling on their heads...
R25 and R26? Sometimes, you might want to keep reading to the very, very end.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||01/28/2013|
I don't trust Hillary. I hope dems can do better.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||01/28/2013|
[quote] Kirsten Gillibrand
SHE will be president one day.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||01/28/2013|
I stand corrected. I thought you were a parody, R24. But I see @R30, you don't like her.
Personally, if it were down to Hillary or Andrew Cuomo, I'd prefer him. But I'd rather he remained governor. He's too good to share with the rest of the country.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||01/28/2013|
Why is R23 so hostile towards California's 2 women Senators? They are both pro-gay, and while not perfect, much better than you will get with most other Senators, I can tell you.
And Feinstein stayed with Hillary until the last day of the 2008 primaries - she did not abandon her during the Obama wave. She waited until the day of the last 2 primaries to cross over to Obama to send the same message the rest of the party was sending - that it was time to unify behind Obama because he had WON.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||01/28/2013|
I was rooting for Hillary like crazy in 2008. I think she would have been a great President. I don't trust her now. Cant put my finger on it.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||01/28/2013|
She'll make a great president. This makes me happy! :)
|by Anonymous||reply 35||01/28/2013|
R32 Thanks for posting again, "Chef" Lee.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||01/28/2013|
We have to wait and see if she runs though, R35. We don't know whether she will yet. I'm cautious about not getting my hopes up until she decides.
|by Anonymous||reply 37||01/28/2013|
She doesn't want Hillary to our first woman imperialist president?
|by Anonymous||reply 38||01/28/2013|
People on this thread forget Obama who was an unknown beat her handily in 2008. Christie may be an issue. Think of the electoral college. He will carry NJ and PA. FL is always a toss up. I can see Ohio going his way as well. Very interesting.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||01/28/2013|
[quote]People on this thread forget Obama who was an unknown beat her handily in 2008.
Hillary only lost because of the once in a lifetime remarkable candidacy of Barack Obama, and he didn't beat her handily - it took him until May to beat her and he lost multiple big states to her along the way.
[quote]He will carry NJ and PA.
Supporting evidence? Christie was polling below Obama in New Jersey last year and would probably not have even carried his own state. And where does your info on PA come from?
|by Anonymous||reply 40||01/28/2013|
His poll numbers are through the roof. Where have you been? I live in PA and he is very popular.
|by Anonymous||reply 41||01/28/2013|
R41, what evidence do you have that Chris Christie can win in New Jersey and Pennsylvania in a general election? Neither of those states has voted Republican since the 1980's.
Yes he is popular in New Jersey and will win re-election this year. But whether he can beat a Democrat in 2 states that haven't voted Republican since 1988 remains to be seen.
Btw, we don't even know whether Christie will run in 2016, or whether the right-wingers will let him win the nomination.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||01/28/2013|
R40. Thank you for the explanation. I was going to comment similarly about Obama beating Hillary "handily," which he did not. If Obama hadn't won most of the caucus states, he would have lost the primary. On the other hand, Hillary beat Obama "handily" in most of the big states.
|by Anonymous||reply 43||01/28/2013|
The last thing Obama wants is for Hillary to suceed him.
|by Anonymous||reply 44||01/28/2013|
[quote]The last thing Obama wants is for Hillary to suceed him.
Some say that just by appearing with Hillary on 60 Minutes this past weekend he may be giving a signal that he wants her to win in 2016.
|by Anonymous||reply 45||01/28/2013|
If Biden runs and Heaven forbid wins, I will be checking out real estate options in Canada, Europe or Mars for that matter.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||01/30/2013|
Hillary can not answer a question better than anyone I've ever seen.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||01/30/2013|
Mrs. Clinton will be too old to serve 4 years by January 2017, much less 8 years. Biden is even older. I am certainly not prejudiced against the elderly, as I happen to be one. I lived through the era of the elderly senile Reagan being president, and it would be worse with Clinton because she would be expected to actually do the job, rather than to be a figure head or a puppet on a string like Reagan. Obviously the Republicans would have to come up with someone more electable than McCain or Romney in order to win over Clinton, but it appears that they have learned their lessons, and even the far right-wing Jindal here in Louisiana is talking like a moderate when he is on the national stage.
|by Anonymous||reply 50||01/30/2013|
First of all, I think Biden is too old. I also think he is a buffoon and a hypocrite.
He is not charitable (cheap is an understatement) and I don't trust career politicians
|by Anonymous||reply 51||01/30/2013|
DiFi passing the blood-filled chalice to Hillary.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||01/30/2013|
Biden will be too old. What's more, he's had a brain aneurysm, and so did his son at a pretty young age, which implies it is genetic and could happen again. Hillary has had two clots, one in the leg and the recent one. I've read that means she is more prone to having another. I'm also concerned she is too old. Being Secretary of State has really aged her, and I can't imagine being President is easier. Look at Obama. He's aged tremendously in 8 years and he's pretty young.
I also lived through Reagan. He was way too old and there were stories about him falling alseep at cabinet meetings. Other stories and rumors implied that he was becoming senile, which we now know he was. I've read that some of Reagan's later decisions were probably influenced by Azlheimer's.
I'd like to see the Democratic Party find somebody younger. It's never good to make a decision this early. A least put a young up-and-comer on the bottom half of the ticket.
Biden was a good VP for a young man with little experience. He has been around a long time and had a lot of connections in Congress and all over he world. A smart move by Obama. However, he's risen to the level of his competence where he is. He should be glad to retire as VP, knowing he will have his place in the history books. His ego is getting in the way here.
|by Anonymous||reply 53||01/30/2013|
[quote]Mrs. Clinton will be too old to serve 4 years by January 2017, much less 8 years.
She would be younger than Reagan was, and definitely younger than McCain was when he ran.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||01/30/2013|
Hillary will run and Hillary will win.
And it's about fucking time.
|by Anonymous||reply 55||01/30/2013|
R55, if Hillary is running in 2016, then why did she say in her exit interviews this week that she has no plans to run?
|by Anonymous||reply 56||01/30/2013|
I think she is going to send out a lot of feelers and have tons of focus groups. She wants this in the bag.
|by Anonymous||reply 57||01/30/2013|
If Hill runs, she will get trounced and we will have 8 years of a republican presidency. Need new people.
|by Anonymous||reply 58||01/30/2013|
R55, welcome to America. Here in our country, politicians all deny that they are running for president at first. It's just part of the political ritual we enjoy. Also, as a sitting Secretary of State, Mrs. Clinton is forbidden from participating in politics. It's just another one of our American political customs, you'll get used to them the longer you stay here.
Hillary will run and Hillary will win. There is no one in the Republican Tea Party who can touch her. She will crush them all.
|by Anonymous||reply 59||01/30/2013|
[quote]If Hill runs, she will get trounced and we will have 8 years of a republican presidency.
That's ridiculous. Hillary is the only Democrat who is pulling up good numbers against Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio & Chris Christie right now.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||01/31/2013|
Can not is two words, r49.
|by Anonymous||reply 61||01/31/2013|
Depends on how it is used, R61:
|by Anonymous||reply 62||01/31/2013|
Perhaps you ought to have corrected yourself then r62. Just because people spell it in such a way, does not make it grammatically correct.
r48 use of "can not" was correct and you're wrong. Simple as that.
|by Anonymous||reply 63||01/31/2013|
Either way, we are probably going to have a Republican President in 2016 anyway. The public is going to want a change after 8 years of a Democratic President.
|by Anonymous||reply 64||01/31/2013|
R64, you can't just jump to that conclusion.
The Republicans won 3 back-to-back terms between 1980 & 1992. The public will go for another Democrat if the candidate is better than the Republican and the country is in decent shape.
What about the demographic issues the next Republican will face? They can't win as easily anymore.
|by Anonymous||reply 65||01/31/2013|
65. After Obama we may never see another dem in the White House.
|by Anonymous||reply 66||02/02/2013|
Republicans don't want to admit it, but the Democrats/liberal policies have become mainstream.
Given the right candidate, the public will vote for another Democrat.
|by Anonymous||reply 67||02/02/2013|
Senator Finestein, age 84 in 2017, urges Hillary Clinton, 70 in 2017, to run for President. You go, grannies!
|by Anonymous||reply 68||04/10/2013|
R68 if you live long enough, you'll be 70 one day. Cut the ageist crap.
In 2008, John McCain was 72 and everyone said he's too old, he might die in office. Four years later, he's still very healthy and quite alive.
Most of the Supreme Court Justices are in their 70s.
It's odd that you revive a 2 month old thread just to make a throwaway ageist remark.
|by Anonymous||reply 69||04/10/2013|
Passed 70 some time ago R69. Thanks so much for the advice though. Really. R68 :) :)
|by Anonymous||reply 70||04/10/2013|
So you're an old guy who is making ageist jokes? What's wrong with you?
|by Anonymous||reply 71||04/10/2013|
Ageist is not a word, idiot.
|by Anonymous||reply 72||04/10/2013|
Current demographics do not support the prediction that we'll have a Republican in 2016. Young people, women, gay people, Asian Americans, Indian-from-India Americans, Latino/s all swung Democratic last election. Hillary would do well with all those groups, AND: working class straight white guys like her, too.
If Hillary runs, the Republicans are toast, even if they throw up a Bush to run against her.
|by Anonymous||reply 73||04/10/2013|
I'm not even going to bother with you. You're not 70; you're just a bitter GOP hack. Saw that lovely post in the Ashley Judd/McConnell thread.
Now I know the person I'm dealing with.
|by Anonymous||reply 74||04/10/2013|
Think so? I can be anybody.
|by Anonymous||reply 75||04/10/2013|
We are only three months into Barack H. Obama's second term. Like the way things are going? Think they can only get better, and will?
I spoke with a close friend today who happens to be the exact opposite of me, politically - I'm a reactionary, he's liberal to the core.
I was shocked to see he's already slipping. To be completely truthful, I found it a little sad, because he really believes. A lot of you guys are slipping too, and you know it.
Unless the Rep's nominate a disaster like an Ayn Rand cultist or religious wacko, they cannot possibly lose. But, recent history shows that's likely what will happen.
|by Anonymous||reply 76||04/10/2013|