Ready for Hillary?

ready for hillary weigel 3 apr 13
.
Of course it’s too soon, and yet: Barring a constitutional amendment, President Obama will be vacating the Oval Office in 2017, and I for one would really like another Democrat to take over when he’s done. And whatever might happen in a saner society, the 2016 race is already starting in this one. Dave Weigel (who took the pic, and a bunch more) on “an intrepid bunch“:

About 35 people showed up Tuesday night outside Washington’s John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, where Hillary Clinton was making her first public appearance since stepping down as Secretary of State. Coincidentally, it was also the first public appearance for the Ready for Hillary PAC, which you can and should read more about here. I asked a few of the group’s members what brought them out on a chilly April evening two years and eight months ahead of the Iowa caucuses….

Charlie Pierce with some background info for people who weren’t paying attention in the 1990s, or who may have chosen to put the whole tawdry goat rodeo out of their beautiful minds:

There is nobody who more people want to run for president than Hillary Clinton. This does not merely include the people who want her to run because they think she’d make a good president, though I think she would, too. This includes people — inside the news business and out — for whom the carnival of nonsense surrounding the Clinton presidency — Impeachment? Over a blowjob? Honky, please. — was the formative political experience of their lives. Some of us had the civil rights movement. Some of us had Vietnam. Some of us had Watergate. Some of us even had the mock-turtle pageantry of the Reagan years. (Far too few of us had Iran-Contra, but that’s a different kettle of lye.) For an entire generation of the politically aware, the Great Penis Pursuit was the time when politics was the most exciting and the most fun. Many of these youngsters are now influential in the news business.

And Hillary Clinton was most assuredly a main character in that. She was the crafty lesbian whose heterosexual wiles snared poor Vince Foster, whom she then had to have killed because he knew what was in The Billing Records. She was the Oval Office dominatrix — thanks, Spy — who fired the poor career grifters in the White House travel office. She was the Hildebeast, the howling haunt of a million rightwing fever dreams, and a woman who scared the tingle right out of Chris Matthews’s leg…

What is largely lost, of course, is that the entire years was an extended exercise in hysteria, unreason, and weaponized malarkey. Whitewater was a joke. Kenneth Starr was a hack… With a few notable exceptions, the elite news industry was completely manipulated and completely cowed by a network of low-rent ratfkers, most of whom are still working the field today. (David Bossie, the founder of Citizens United, and an early anti-Clinton fanatic, now has had his ratfking blessed by the Supreme Court.) The Great Penis Pursuit was the precursor of the media malpractice that led to the inexcusable coverage of Al Gore’s campaign, the equally inexcusable coverage of the theft of the 2000 election, and the ultimately inexcusable coverage of the run-up to the Iraq war. The credulity over Whitewater leads in a direct line to the credulity over WMD’s and Mohammad Atta’s sipping coffee in Prague…

Argument in favor of Hillary running: Republican David Frum, one of Dubya’s lead enablers/lampreys, is already warning against the idea.

Alex Pareene invents the Mark Penn Test, which I agree is a useful metric:

The question for someone considering whether or not to support Clinton in 2016 is, will a Clinton 2016 campaign pass the Mark Penn Test? The Mark Penn Test, which I just invented, determines whether or not a person should be trusted with the presidency, based solely on one criterion: Whether or not they pay Mark Penn to do anything for their campaign. Paying Mark Penn means you’ve failed the Mark Penn Test.

Mark Penn is a pollster and political strategist and amoral P.R. creature who is generally wrong about everything. To find out how incompetent Mark Penn is at campaign strategy and how personally toxic he is in a campaign working environment go to your local library and check out literally any book about the 2008 presidential race. For the basics, check here and here. In short, he had no clue how the primaries actually worked and constantly pushed for the campaign to go as nasty and negative as possible, and everyone hated him and he was bad at his job and eventually he was fired…

Personal disclosure: I never thought Hillary would run for President at all, because I’d spent years watching Teddy Kennedy flinch at every sudden noise, and I remembered the hatred directed against the Clintons and the weirdly personal hatred directed at ‘the Hildebeast’ in particular. My original choice in 2008 was John Edwards, because he was the only one talking about “two Americas”, so you can see just how well I judged the permissible boundaries of modern American politicking. I will support whoever ends up as the Democratic candidate in 2016, but I’d kind of like to see a female president in my lifetime, and right now I don’t see a more likely candidate than Hillary Clinton on either end of the political spectrum.

Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
Share On Google Plus
Share On Pinterest
Share On Reddit






182 replies
  1. 1
    FedSec says:

    I wish Elizabeth Warren was ready. I would vote for her over Hillary in a heartbeat.

  2. 2
  3. 3
    C.J. says:

    As long as she has a better campaign strategy than “I’m the frontrunner, I’m going to win,” she has my attention.

  4. 4
    Alex S. says:

    Hillary – the last and greatest hurrah! of the boomers, more specifically, the early boomers, i.e. the hippies, Vietnam War protesters, civil rights activists, feminists, secret Nixon first-time voters and disenchanted middle-class-becoming-Reagan-Democrats-and-wondering-where-it-all-went-wrong-and-curse-Bob-Dylan-for-going-electric voters. Let’s dust off the old playbook for one final time.

  5. 5
    MikeJ says:

    Is going to campaign on telling us how she was right to vote for invading Iraq?

  6. 6
    the Conster says:

    Would Bill just larry around the White House all day long, taking phone calls from old FOBs? Hillary would have to hire hit squads to keep all of Bill’s ladyfriends quiet, and as much as the Monica thing was a red herring, it wasn’t nothing, especially for the DC corpses who want nothing more than to chase shiny objects.

  7. 7
    Ben Franklin says:

    Hillary has a tremendous public service self-obligation. However, she does track conservative on National Security, just as Obama does, and that is a worry for me. The sense of service she obtains, could be a disqualifying factor. She is tired and needs a long rest.
    Her sense of serving competently could be subsumed by her desire to do her duty.

    Sometimes you need to preserve your health for yourself and everyone else.

  8. 8
    Gin & Tonic says:

    She’s old. If she runs and wins she will be just barely the second-oldest POTUS, behind Reagan.

    I’m old, too, so I can say this.

  9. 9
    MattF says:

    FWIW, I think professional conservatives hate Hilary because they see her as a mortal threat. She’s the one Democrat who could really put the Republican Party to the knife– and I think she would.

  10. 10
    MikeJ says:

    All I can think of with the title of this post is this.

  11. 11
    mouse tolliver says:

    Ew, I just had a flashback. I’m remembering the day a neighbor came to my house to borrow something and we started talking about politics for some reason. And she breathlessly informed me that Hillary and Tipper were secret lesbian lovers and the Clintons and Gores were having swinger parties in the White House. She also told me I should start listening to Rush Limbaugh. That’s where she got all her news.

    A few weeks after this happened, this same woman accidentally burned off her bangs and eyebrows while lighting a gas grill. The next time I talked to her she looked like a Cardassian.

  12. 12
    DougJ, Friend of Hamas says:

    @C.J.:

    That strategy will probably work this time.

  13. 13
    Shalimar says:

    When Lanny Davis is something like your 50th biggest staffing mistake, you have serious problems picking quality subordinates.

  14. 14
    Ben Franklin says:

    Fuckers just want to appear consistent….assholes.

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/.....n/2058031/

  15. 15
    Bruce S says:

    “Barring a constitutional amendment, President Obama will be vacating the Oval Office in 2017”

    I’m not so sure. I mean, is gun control at the top of his second term agenda just a coincidence?

  16. 16
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    I think there’s a lot of good strategic reasons for supporting Clinton. She’s got the money, the name recognition, the supporter base, the experience, and so forth. I don’t know how much things have changed, but the Clintons had lots of supporters in the Appalachian states until recently, so maybe she’d help bring at least a few of them back.

    At the same time, I can’t help but think “Oh God, are we really going to rehash all the same damn fights?” Course, it’s not like I have someone else I’m dying to vote for and I think is actually going to be running.

  17. 17
    Keith G says:

    With her book soon to come out and Bill’s intervention in “Kantuck” it sure seems like they are doing those things that one does.

    FWIW, my intuition leads me to feel that despite the smashing success of the SoS gig, a bitter taste still remains for both of them. I mentioned in an earlier thread that the organization and effort these two could put together combined with the lessons learned (assuming the right ones were learned) would be fearsome.

    These are two of the smartest and most competitive beings that our politics have produced. Assuming there is no physical or cognitive defect, I can’t see her saying no.

    edit: To clarify, her book comes out in 2014.

  18. 18
    Alex S. says:

    @mouse tolliver:

    Well, when these stories were around, the Cardassians were still on television.

  19. 19
    Loneoak says:

    I will support whoever ends up as the Democratic candidate in 2016, but I’d kind of like to see a female president in my lifetime, and right now I don’t see a more likely candidate than Hillary Clinton on either end of the political spectrum.

    You probably could have said the same thing about black presidents until August 2004. You never know who will pop up.

    I tried to explain the Mark Penn test to Hilbot friends in 2008 but it was hopeless. I hope HRC has enough standing and experience on her own now that she has already booted all those fools.

  20. 20
    Baud says:

    There’s is hardly any Democrat I wouldn’t support in the general election. If you’re talking about the primary, it’s way too early to tell.

  21. 21
    dance around in your bones says:

    One of the reasons I thought Hilary would not be a great candidate/President would be the Resurrection of Clinton-hatred Insanity. I just didn’t want to go through that again. (Of course, we’ve got it now with the Obama hatred, so what do I know).

    She’s gained a lot of credibility after her Senator/SecState service, but I still think the above ^ would be a factor. I’d love to see a woman President before I shuffle off this mortal coil, however.

    I do wonder what Bill would be doing in the background – lotsa advice? “Don’t do the interns and give Them the rope to try and hang you with”?

  22. 22
    Higgs Boson's Mate says:

    Any woman who faced sniper fire in Bosnia is more than ready to cross the Commander in Chief threshold.

  23. 23
    Trakker says:

    I really admire Hillary, but after eight years of “bipartisonship” I’m ready for someone who will unabashedly fight for the poor and middle class, and common sense. Someone who takes Charles Pierce and Paul Krugman seriously. Warren?

  24. 24
    Lolis says:

    I will support her because I think she would win easily. I just hope she starts off the campaign as feisty Hillary and then keeps it that way as president. I think she is a political opportunist which is good because the country is going more liberal even though it doesn’t feel that way now. I think if she runs and wins she will end up completing Obama’s agenda and maybe doing some good stuff on women’s issues.

  25. 25
    JGabriel says:

    Gin & Tonic:

    She’s old. If she runs and wins she will be just barely the second-oldest POTUS, behind Reagan.

    I like Hillary, and if she were 7-10 years younger I’d definitely want her to run. And win.

    But G&T is right. Hillary would be 69 years old when she took office. And, historically, everyone who has taken office over the age of 62 has done somewhere between a mediocre and crap job in the office. In descending order, that would be: Ronald Reagan, 69 years, 349 days; William Henry Harrison, 68 years, 23 days; James Buchanan, 65 years, 315 days; George H. W. Bush, 64 years, 222 days; and Zachary Taylor, 64 years, 100 days.

    Also, Hillary already experienced health problems during her last few months as Sec’y of State. I’m not sure she’s eager to push her luck on that front with another four-eight years in one of the most stressful jobs on the planet.

  26. 26
    Tonal Crow says:

    In addition to Hillary’s suspiciously-close relationships to many very religiously intoxicated wingnuts (see my cite to Mother Jones, above), she’s too eager to go to war (e.g., Iraq), she’s too “Third Way”, she’s too afraid of what Republicans think, and she’s a poor manager (e.g., Mark Penn).

    We can do better, and we should do better.

  27. 27
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @dance around in your bones: The haters will hate whoever we put up, without the race angle, and the ‘strangeness’ the Clintons had in the 90s– the Vietnam questions, pot was still almost a deal breaker, her Tammy Wynette comment– it will be harder to gin that stuff up than it was for Bill or Obama. The thirty-ish plus percent will hate them all over again, and find reasons old and new to do so– Benghazi has a lot of resonance in Limbaugh/Fox circles, I gather– but I tend to think the Clintons have been around so long that the stuff that caused a lot of problems in the 90s will just sound goofy now.

  28. 28
    Tonal Crow says:

    @Higgs Boson’s Mate:

    Any woman who faced sniper fire in Bosnia is more than ready to cross the Commander in Chief threshold.

    Oooo! And that’s good news for John McCain!

  29. 29
    TFinSF says:

    I’m not sure if she can win the workinghardworkingAmericanswhiteAmericans.

  30. 30
    Tom Q says:

    Assuming the Obama administration leaves behind a defensible economy — about which we can’t know for sure till two years from now — the most significant element in whether a Democrat takes over in 2017 is the ease of succession. Incumbent parties that have natural, easily-chosen successor candidates (Bush the Father and Gore for obvious recent examples, as opposed to Humphrey in ’68 or Steveson in ’52) tend to win, whatever the media blather about voters getting an 8-year itch (and, yes, in this argument, I’m considering Gore as the winner, because I can count). That’s among the best arguments for a Hillary candidacy: that she can settle the succession contest way early.

    I think Hillary could be a far better candidate than she was in ’08, and, if she chooses, a far better president than she would have been if elected then. She’s now had a “real” job — that didn’t rely on her husband’s popularity — and shown significant chops, which makes me (a non-supporter from ’08) inclined to go her way. As for governing — I think, contra Pierce, she’ll be helped by the fact that the “Clinton Scandals!” era is so far in the past that the press won’t be able to reflexively return to it (as I think they would have in ’09); that Bill has been turned in a Beltway savant will also limit the amount of Horndog Watch we’d have otherwise seen.

    Also, during the past four years, the political center of gravity has moved far enough left (despite the skepticism of True Progressives) that the Mark Penn triangulation/innoculation mode will not be the automatic choice for policy direction. I’ve always thought of Hillary as an instinctive liberal with terminal caution. In 2009, based on her husband’s experience, she’d have had no evidence that anything but the caution was politically wise. With the growth of the Democratic coalition, I could see her indulging that liberal side far more extensively.

  31. 31
    Bruce S says:

    My main qualm about Hillary is that the Clinton’s have shown unusually bad judgement – cynicism even – in choosing consultants and advisors – although I’m guessing that Hillary has much better antennae for that now, given that Mark Penn pretty much singlehandedly blew her 2008 nomination chances. But the trifecta of Dick Morris, Lanny Davis and Mark Penn are about as low as a Democrat can go…

  32. 32
    sparrow says:

    @FedSec: President Warren would be fcking awesome. But she is 63 now, so not exactly too young.

  33. 33
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @Bruce S: My impression has always been that the Clintons really like the professional ass-kissing class, and Obama doesn’t.

  34. 34
    Mr Stagger Lee says:

    Frankly I want some new blood, but I will vote for her in a pinch. I think though by 2016, it will be a race to see who can get the base there the most, with a bigger majority of people saying f-ck it to the whole thing.

  35. 35
    efgoldman says:

    I still feel, with her age, with the exhaustion last year, and Bill’s age and heart disease, its better odds that she won’t run. I have no more indsidery knowledge than anyone else around here, but I’m the same age, and I know how I feel!

  36. 36
    Keith G says:

    @JGabriel: George H. W. Bush did not do a crap job as an active president. He got a lot of stuff done including many things that I totally disagree with, but that is another matter and not related to an age-based evaluation.

  37. 37
    Morzer says:

    If not Hillary, who?

    I don’t see the Democrats having any better alternatives, if we want to keep the White House. Our bench of governors isn’t great and I don’t see many of our Senators looking ready for prime time.

    FWIW, I think Hillary will run and, barring economic disaster in the next four years, be elected.

  38. 38
    Irish Steel says:

    How come no one’s talking about Deval Patrick? That was a barnburner of a speech he gave last fall.

  39. 39
    Ben Franklin says:

    @sparrow:

    President Warren would be fcking awesome. But she is 63 now, so not exactly too young.

    Age has less to do with it than does, sucking on kneecaps.

  40. 40
    dance around in your bones says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    but I tend to think the Clintons have been around so long that the stuff that caused a lot of problems in the 90s will just sound goofy now.

    Well, that’s what I think about the Obama Derangement Syndrome, too – goofy as fuck, and yet……it tends to get the ‘Bright Shiny Object Award’ almost every week. I hope I am wrong, if in fact she runs which I am not too sure about.

    Jeez, if I were her and Bill, I’d think I deserve a rest from all this crap. I think I deserve a rest from all this crap, and I have never run for office nor even played a politician on TV!

  41. 41
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @Morzer:

    I don’t see many of our Senators looking ready for prime time

    In April of 2005, one B. H. Obama was a relatively obscure junior senator from Illinois, having been in that office all of three months, and best known for having given a good speech at the Democratic convention about 8 months earlier. I doubt anyone would have termed him “looking ready for prime time.”

  42. 42
    Morzer says:

    @Irish Steel:

    He’s a possibility, but might be hampered by the Massachusetts liberal thing. I am not sure he’s going to have a big constituency outside of New England. He’s done a decent job as governor here, but hasn’t overseen an economic miracle or anything obviously spectacular.

  43. 43
    efgoldman says:

    @Irish Steel:

    How come no one’s talking about Deval Patrick?

    I like Deval, a lot. But a third ex-MA governor in 9 cycles? And the first two didn’t do so hot? I dunno’.

  44. 44
    Ben Franklin says:

    @Gin & Tonic:

    In April of 2005, one B. H. Obama was a relatively obscure junior senator from Illinois, having been in that office all of three months, and best known for having given a good speech at the Democratic convention about 8 months earlier. I doubt anyone would have termed him “looking ready for prime time.”

    Yes. We’re much better acquainted with him now.

  45. 45
    Morzer says:

    @Gin & Tonic:

    Yes, but Obama had youth, charisma and a fairly clean record on his side. That’s not something you can say for many of our Senators.

  46. 46
    Baud says:

    @dance around in your bones:

    I wonder if the hatred will look sillier in light of her age. I mean, who attacks grandma?

  47. 47
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @Morzer: Gillibrand?

  48. 48
    Irish Steel says:

    @Morzer:

    @efgoldman:

    Ah, right. The Mass gov thing. Not a thing to ignore. Still, I was impressed with his ability to connect. Looked like a good campaigner.

  49. 49
    JGabriel says:

    Keith G:

    @JGabriel: George H. W. Bush did not do a crap job as an active president.

    I agree. Bush the elder was the only reason I stretched the characterization of their presidencies to include mediocre. Of the other four eldest presidents, three were actively harmful to country, and the other died a month into office.

    I didn’t like Bush pere as president, but, in retrospect I can respect that he raised taxes when it was necessary, and that he got us out of Iraq before it became a quagmire.

  50. 50

    I wish Elizabeth Warren was ready. I would vote for her over Hillary in a heartbeat.

    Elizabeth Warren will be ready, and would rock–and I think she’d win; I think she already appeals to a much broader swath than the GOP believes and with a little coaching could extent that even further. I mean, look, the Democrats have learned how to fight in ways unimaginable just a few years ago, and here they’ve got a woman born working class (right?) in Oklahoma. Yeah, Harvard professor…born working class and growing up in Oklahoma.That’s going to play really well in places Dems haven’t be competitive in a long time.

    The biggest problem with her is, as others have mentioned, she’s just a few years older than would really be ideal. (And, ideally, she’d have another two years in the senate first. But better now than next time around.)

    Too bad I doubt she’s going to run. She’d be my first choice by a country mile and a lightyear.

  51. 51
    Tom Q says:

    @Gin & Tonic: I think people definitely thought ’08 was too early for Obama, but I think it undersells it to say people thought of him only as someone who gave “a good speech”. Deval Patrick and Julian Castro last summer gave “good speeches”; Obama gave a career-making amazing speech. Right from the start people thought Obama was something very special (people in IL had been telling us that from the time of the primary). I like alot of the up and coming Dems, but i don’t see any of them matching that “once a generation” profile that was on Obama from the start.

  52. 52
    Morzer says:

    @Baud:

    You don’t need to attack her directly, if you are a Republican. Just express concern about her age, national security issues, etc etc.

    Maybe Paul Ryan can run on the mantra of Change, Sparkling Blue Eyes and Very Short Budgets Without Pesky Things Like Facts In The Biggest Possible All-American Font You Can Believe In.

  53. 53
    JGabriel says:

    @scott (the other one):

    Too bad I doubt [Warren’s] going to run. She’d be my first choice by a country mile and a lightyear.

    Seconded on both counts.

  54. 54
    22over7 says:

    Yeah, no chance that Hillary would get a rest from the non-stop hatred directed at her for the past twenty years. But, no chance that any democratic candidate would escape the crazy. The right has become more radical, not less, and if Hillary or any other democrat wins the White House in 2016, they will have a universal nutty.

    Hillary has a leather hide and huge approval numbers. If she wants the abuse, she’s going to be able to take and deflect it better than most.

  55. 55
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @Morzer: As far as governors, tell my why Malloy or O’Malley (or maybe even Hickenlooper) couldn’t become serious candidates?

  56. 56
    Baud says:

    @Morzer:

    You don’t need to attack her directly, if you are a Republican. Just express concern about her age, national security issues, etc etc.

    No doubt. But that’s standard political fare. I’m talking about the batshit insane stuff we’ve been subject to with Obama and Clinton I.

  57. 57
    Morzer says:

    @Gin & Tonic:

    Possible, but you’d agree, I think, that she’s one of the very few possibilities. Basically, we just don’t have a strong bench because we haven’t been fighting the good fight effectively enough at state level in too many states.

  58. 58
    dance around in your bones says:

    @Baud:

    Well, good point, but I just think of how it would unleash Limbaugh and Hannity/Fox and the 27% and then it snowballs from there.

    I think Hillary has gained significant gravitas in the years since the 90’s, but I still have this paranoia about it. I guess we’ll see, or not.

  59. 59
    efgoldman says:

    Staying in New England, how about Jeanne Shaheen? Former NH governor, now Senator, overwhelmingly elected multiple times in a sometimes red, sometimes purple state, a terrific politician. And, if we’re lucky, CosmoBoy will move North and challenge her next year for the Senate, and have to run away with his tail ‘tween his legs.

  60. 60
    RobertDSC-PowerMac 466 says:

    No. Stay home. End this Clinton nonsense.

  61. 61
    Bruce S says:

    Reegarding the age and “exhaustion” thing, I think the Secy of State job was actually more physically demanding than the Presidency.

  62. 62
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    I’d crawl over broken glass to vote for Liz Warren. I also think there’s an argument for her to serve 2-3 terms in the Senate and keep kicking ass/taking names as the head of the banking or finance committee.

  63. 63
    JGabriel says:

    @Gin & Tonic:

    As far as governors, tell my why Malloy or O’Malley (or maybe even Hickenlooper) couldn’t become serious candidates?

    I’ve no comment on Malloy or O’Malley, but Hickelooper sounds like the name of someone who should be a popcorn magnate (because with a name like Orville J. Hickenlooper, it’s gotta be good!).

    On the other hand, we just re-elected a man named Barack Hussein Obama, so maybe that’s irrelevant.

  64. 64
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Morzer: You don’t need to attack her directly, if you are a Republican. Just express concern about her age, national security issues, etc etc.

    They can’t help themselves. I can’t diagnose it, but an schoolyard bully quality seems part of the modern GOP make-up. Reince Preibus is constantly trying to be “funny”, according to RW talk radio standards; one of the Morning Zoo boobs on Fox has already speculated about HRC’s facelift, Mitch McConnell was quite proud of his Golden Girls joke, even though he was, surprisingly, smart enough to try and correct in mid-stream.

  65. 65
    efgoldman says:

    @Bruce S:

    I think the Secy of State job was actually more physically demanding than the Presidency.

    Well, the traveling sure is. But its clear that the stress if being the person with whom the buck stops is really hard.

  66. 66
    Keith G says:

    @Morzer:

    I don’t see the Democrats having any better alternatives, if we want to keep the White House. Our bench of governors isn’t great and I don’t see many of our Senators looking ready for prime time

    I really think that this is the essence.

    2010 weakened the party. Cuomo might have an inclination, but I bet he is too regional as is Malloy. I love Sherrod Brown, but he has no natural base or portfolio.

    In football terms, I see HRC as the tough ‘ol warrior QB that we are fortunate to have around. I want a younger left-of-center firebrand to fight the battles we need fought; the ones Obama shied away from; the battles this country must confront if we are to move on.

    But I doubt anyone so described will be able to take the lead in 2016, so Hillary, though imperfect, will hopefully be there.

  67. 67
    Morzer says:

    @Gin & Tonic:

    Tell me why they should. I suspect O’Malley has ambitions, although I have yet to be convinced of his charisma. Malloy I think is handicapped by the New England liberal thing to some degree and I must admit to not having heard much about him either way.

    If I had to pick one of the three you mention, I’d choose Hickenlooper for geographical/cultural reasons. I think ‘going West’ might just be a good strategy for Democrats over the next decade or so.

    I might add Brian Schweitzer’s name to your group, but I am not sure that Montana is a particularly good base to start from. FWIW, I know people close to him who speak highly of his work ethic and determination, with strong hints of presidential ambition thrown in.

    We shall see in about three years, I suppose.

  68. 68
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @Morzer:

    The history of failed Vice Presidential candidates is, shall we say, not good. I predict a Joe Lieberman-like finish to Ryan’s career: Keeps a seat warm in congress/Meet the Press until someone else offers him more money, then leaves amid hoots of derision.

  69. 69
    Morzer says:

    @Keith G:

    You’ve just given me an alarming vision of Hillary as Brett Favre.

    Troubling isn’t the word for this mental image.

  70. 70
    Goblue72 says:

    Given the 2012 election is barely past and we still have the mid-terms over a year away, how about we focus on the governing for a change?

  71. 71
    rda909 says:

    @scott (the other one): Warren is beyond ready, and because of her age, needs to run for 2016. She can’t wait for next time. In fact, I think a lot of the Hillary pumping by the media (and tacitly by the Clintons themselves) is to scare Senator Warren from getting any funny ideas and running.

    Hillary cannot win a national election. It was obviously over after South Carolina in 2008 to anyone who really studies presidential campaigns, and she dragged that thing on for months, and basically created this whole PUMA thing by doing so, which is plaguing us still today and in building for 2014 midterms. She and her husband are willing agents of the billionaires, and have always been and are currently happy to play along with their divide and conquer roles. If she runs, I will do everything I can to make sure she isn’t the Democratic nominee.

    The only one who can stop her is Senator Warren, and if she ran, she could absolutely stop the Clinton Machine. Run, Senator Warren, run!!!

  72. 72
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @JGabriel:

    Fun fact: 10 presidents’ surnames have ended in either ‘ton’ or ‘son.’ (11 if you count Nixon).

    We as a country have passed the four-syllable glass ceiling with Eisenhower, so that shouldn’t be a problem.

  73. 73
    rda909 says:

    @RobertDSC-PowerMac 466: I hear ya. Can’t believe this is all happening once again. I thought we were done with nonsense after 2008. Starting to think it was a mistake President Obama picked her for SoS. I wonder if he calculated she wouldn’t try this shit again and thought it was safe to give her the chance to rehab her image and unite the party more, but she and Bill seem to be enjoying their coy little games doing it anyway. The Clinton Machine must be stopped…yet again…

  74. 74
    Shrillhouse says:

    I highly doubt Hillary will run. She’s too old.

    I’m on board for Elizabeth Warren, but is she actually interested in running?

  75. 75
    JGabriel says:

    @Keith G:

    Cuomo might have an inclination …

    As a New Yorker, I can tell you: No Cuomo.

    Cuomo screwed the unions and then he screwed the Dems in the lege by tacitly supporting the GOP in a particularly nasty leadership battle.

  76. 76
    Keith G says:

    @Morzer: With or without facial hair?

  77. 77
    rda909 says:

    It’s feeling like this made-up poutrage about President Obama complimenting a friend is part of a larger, planned roll-out campaign, and phase 2 is to make sure posts like this pop up everywhere. Hillary is “inevitable” after all, right?

  78. 78
    Morzer says:

    @Shrillhouse:

    I doubt it. I think she’s perfectly happy being a Senator and intends to be a strong advocate for her causes at that level for the rest of her political career.

  79. 79
    Keith G says:

    I’m on board for Elizabeth Warren

    At great personal risk I will state that I would have a handful of nagging concerns about a Warren candidacy for president – very nagging concerns.

  80. 80
    Morzer says:

    @Keith G:

    I wish you hadn’t started me thinking about how Favre moved to New York late in his career and proceeded to lose out on what should have been a triumphant season by staging an inexplicable collapse.

    Some of the parallels are starting to worry me.

  81. 81
    Morzer says:

    @JGabriel:

    I really, really hope we don’t end up with Cuomo.

  82. 82
    efgoldman says:

    @Morzer:

    …staging an inexplicable collapse.

    It was completely explicable. He was then an NFL QB who’s age started with “4.”

  83. 83
    liberal says:

    @scott (the other one):
    What do we really know about Warren? AFAICT she’s great on the banksters and probably economic issues, but ISTR her uttering standard plablum about Iran fairly recently.

  84. 84
    liberal says:

    @Keith G:
    Overall, I didn’t like him at all, but there were two good things about him:
    (1) Most critical of Israel of any president I can recall
    (2) Compromise with Congressional Democrats led to the Budget Enforcement Act, a reasonable and actually workable deficit reduction plan (that of course wasn’t renewed in 2002 or so).

  85. 85
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @rda909:

    You may be a touch paranoid.

  86. 86
    rda909 says:

    @liberal: Yes, and Hillary is just dandy on all that, and whole host of other issues. Riiiiiiight.

  87. 87
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @Morzer:

    Well, that ‘s just because the Jets exude a dark voodoo that prevents any quarterback since Namath from being any good. Perfectly logical.

  88. 88
    Morzer says:

    @efgoldman:

    Plus, he was with the Jets.

    Still, it was a pretty epic collapse that left their season in ruins, even by the standards of Old Man Dither The Semi-Unretired.

  89. 89
    Morzer says:

    @Spaghetti Lee:

    I feel that you are butt-fumbling for an explanation here…

  90. 90
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    I don’t think that either Warren or Clinton will be the Dem candidate in ’16. And I am fine with it. Warren will do well where she is, and Clinton has had a damn good career. I would not be surprised if the Dem candidate is a straight white guy from a conventional religious background.

  91. 91
    liberal says:

    @rda909:
    Where did I state, and how did I insinuate, that Hillary is any better?

    Just between you and me, you’re a douchebag.

  92. 92
    eemom says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    I would not be surprised if the Dem candidate is a straight white guy from a conventional religious background.

    I’ll vote for you!

  93. 93
    rda909 says:

    @Spaghetti Lee: It’s paranoid to think that the few people who own all the mainstream media collude to control what the masses are talking about and thinking about? And you know Rupert Murdoch has long been a supporter of Hillary, correct?
    http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-250_162-1600694.html

    Yes, I realize it sounds that way, but I’ve been in this game a long time and have seen how these games are played before.

  94. 94
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @eemom:

    I’ll vote for you!

    I wouldn’t. I want to stay pretty.

  95. 95
    Maude says:

    @rda909:
    Hillary is on a non campaign campaign.
    What isn’t said is that she wasn’t offered any position since she said she would leave State. That is a tell.
    The Clinton myth is like the Reagan myth.

  96. 96
    Ruckus says:

    @Gin & Tonic:
    I’m old as well and I really don’t want someone my age running for pres. On the other hand she does show an immense amount of class in dealing with the “major” issues that have plagued her. But she did vote for Iraq. And hire the worst hacks for her presidential campaign. So I’m quite a lot worried about her having an actually rational thought process. A small point but still.

  97. 97
    MikeJ says:

    If the Dem candidate is not an active practitioner of Vodun I’m staying home.

  98. 98
    rda909 says:

    @liberal: Awwww, that’s so sweet.

  99. 99
    Maude says:

    @Ruckus:
    Hillary made a lot of goofs as SoS. I don’t think people were paying attention. The White house smoothly covered the mistakes and so she didn’t look bad. She would speak out of turn and cause another correction that had to be made by Obama.
    There have been at least 6 PR pieces in the NYT about her over the past year and a half.
    One thing is that Obama had to get people to help pay off her campaign debt last year. If her support is so strong, why didn’t her supporters pay it off.

  100. 100
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    What about Gillibrand?

  101. 101
    askew says:

    If progressives are smart, they’ll unite behind the most progressive candidate likely to run for president – O’Malley.

    As governor, he has:

    Passed Same Sex Marriage
    Repealed the Death Penalty
    Passed a strong gun control bill
    Passed a progressive budget which includes stimulus
    Passed state DREAM Act

    He has proven experience as an executive both as Mayor of Baltimore and Governor of Maryland. He has charisma and is a loyal Dem.

  102. 102
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @rda909:

    I can buy the idea that powerful people want Clinton elected, but the idea that it’s also an anti-Obama conspiracy is a bit nutty. It’s not like Clinton’s going to seize the presidency before Obama’s term is up. And I also don’t see how her getting elected would be bad for Obama’s image, except by the standards of inside-baseball blog war nuttiness.

  103. 103
    askew says:

    @Maude:

    Hillary made a lot of goofs as SoS. I don’t think people were paying attention. The White house smoothly covered the mistakes and so she didn’t look bad. She would speak out of turn and cause another correction that had to be made by Obama.
    There have been at least 6 PR pieces in the NYT about her over the past year and a half.
    One thing is that Obama had to get people to help pay off her campaign debt last year. If her support is so strong, why didn’t her supporters pay it off.

    She was an average SoS. She had some major screw-ups like Honduras. Her fans seem to think just because she looked tired and traveled a lot, it made her a good SoS. Clinton has a top notch PR team but almost no real accomplishments to speak of. Kind of like her Senate career, where she did absolutely nothing in the 8 years she was there.

  104. 104
    Ruckus says:

    @efgoldman:
    This.
    I have been a person where the dime stops for 2-3 decades and even the stress level of that is much higher than just a job, even one where perfection is part of the makeup. A job where the buck stops and is very, very public, where your every move and utterance is questioned by both sides? That’s a lot shit pot level of stress.

  105. 105
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @askew: I see O’Malley as one of the frontrunners. (Gillibrand and Patrick as well) Let’s see how they do under pressure once the maneuvering starts.

  106. 106
    gelfling545 says:

    @Gin & Tonic: This is what worries me. I’m old too and can see the difference between the things I could do with no problem in, say, 2008 and what I can do now. I am also worried because I don’t see any really strong younger Dems who are up to the challenge. Maybe Warren in future. I don’t know. I keep hearing good things about O’Malley but that’s because I really pay attention. To someone who just looks at the headlines & turns on the 5pm news he doesn’t exist. Democrats need to get to work on seeking out and promoting (vigorously) their younger talent.

  107. 107
    Svensker says:

    @Morzer:

    I wish you hadn’t started me thinking about how Favre moved to New York late in his career and proceeded to lose out on what should have been a triumphant season by staging an inexplicable collapse

    He became a Jet because he couldn’t go directly from the Packers to the Vikes. He didn’t give a shit about NY so he didn’t care how he played for them — he was just bedding down with the ugly girl from AV until he could get the prom queen he wanted. I used to really like Favre but now? Pfft. Wadda douche.

  108. 108
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @gelfling545: It is still early 2013. I know campaigns keep getting longer, but it is too soon (IMO) to start gravitating toward anyone simply due to name recognition.

  109. 109
    gelfling545 says:

    @JGabriel: Also a New Yorker here. Cuomo was lucky he ran against Paladino whose campaign largely consisted of saying a bunch of stupid stuff & hoping for the best. No Cuomo.

  110. 110
    askew says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    @askew: I see O’Malley as one of the frontrunners. (Gillibrand and Patrick as well) Let’s see how they do under pressure once the maneuvering starts.

    Gillibrand won’t get in, if Hillary does. I think O’Malley is running no matter what. Patrick sure seems done with politics after his 2nd term as Governor.

    In a dream world, I’d like to see an O’Malley/Klobuchar ticket. But, I’d just settle for a real primary and not a coronation for Hillary.

  111. 111
    efgoldman says:

    @askew:

    He has proven experience as an executive both as Mayor of Baltimore and Governor of Maryland.

    Which means any minute now, they’re going to indict some guy that gave him satchels of ca$h for one reason or another.

  112. 112
    Joseph Nobles says:

    I’m really the first person at comment #112 to mention Joe Biden?

  113. 113
    askew says:

    @efgoldman:

    Which means any minute now, they’re going to indict some guy that gave him satchels of ca$h for one reason or another.

    They’ve been digging for dirt on O’Malley for years now and haven’t found much of anything. Either he’s clean or he covers it up a lot better than Clintons do. I doubt anyone we run in 2016 will be as squeaky clean as Obama, but I’d rather them not covered in mud like the Clintons.

    I’m really the first person at comment #112 to mention Joe Biden?

    I think it is taken as a given that if Hillary runs Biden won’t. I don’t think that is the case though. Biden sure seems like he’s maneuvering to run. The Dems who back Clinton have been tearing Biden (and Obama in some cases) for years now though.

  114. 114
    Ruckus says:

    @Maude:
    I was trying a little tongue in cheek there. I’m no Hillary fan. Wasn’t the last time, not in the future either. Haven’t we had enough heirloom candidates? It’s a big country, maybe, just maybe there might be a better candidate? Don’t care if it ends up a he or a she or the amount of pigment or has a weird name that kids can make fun of, or once had sex, I just want a good, solid Democrat, a true liberal, to run. I want once in my voting life to vote for someone, not against their opponent.

  115. 115
    efgoldman says:

    @Svensker:

    …he was just bedding down with the ugly girl from AV…

    Hey! I coulda’ liked an AV girl, but there weren’t any, in my day. :::adjusts belt onion:::

  116. 116
    efgoldman says:

    @Joseph Nobles:

    I’m really the first person at comment #112 to mention Joe Biden?

    Too old. Not at all practical.

  117. 117
    gelfling545 says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: Too early to gravitate but by far not too early to promote. What I am saying is the hopefuls have got to get out there and be seen.

  118. 118
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @efgoldman:

    Hey! I coulda’ liked an AV girl, but there weren’t any, in my day. :::adjusts belt onion:::

    Aw, come on, someone was in charge of the papyrus scrolls.

  119. 119
    Joseph Nobles says:

    @efgoldman: He still ought to be mentioned! I mean, he is the sitting vice president.

  120. 120
    Anne Laurie says:

    @askew:

    Patrick sure seems done with politics after his 2nd term as Governor.

    His wife’s been hospitalized for depression, and he’s said many, many times that he promised her he wouldn’t run for a third term as governor. He didn’t explictly say that he wouldn’t run for president, but that’s a far more demanding job and we can reasonably predict that the Repubs will not be too decent to play the Eagleton/Dukakis card if (when) he does. Almost anything is possible at this point, but 2016 wouldn’t be a slam dunk for Deval Patrick, and he’s young enough to wait until 2020 if he chooses.

  121. 121
    mai naem says:

    Okay, I haven’t waded through all the posts in this thread but are you people all out of your mind? You are talking about Hillary Clinton with approval numbers in the 70s(yeah,i know she hasn’t been political etc. but 70+ is 70+.) Her husband who beat the teevee ratings of opening night football season, is probably the most gifted politician gabster of our time. You are talking about a woman who can attract elderly whites, white women especially middle aged white women who would vote for her based on getting the first woman in the WH, blacks, young women, Hispanics, and educated women. Also, give Hillary a little credit. You don’t think she’s learned anything from her past mistakes? You think she didn’t learn anything in the Obama admin? I know this is a tiny little example, but how many 60+ year old people do y’all know in your lives who text?
    BTW, I was not a Hillary supporter in 08. In fact I went as far as calling the ND Hillary office(it was the only one which answered the phone when I called) towards the end and told the poor woman who answered the phone that Hillary had no chance numerically and just needed to drop out to heal the Dem party and to save resources.

  122. 122
    trollhattan says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Being from the opposite coast I don’t see her much, but have the impression she’s very sharp and likable. Don’t know about her bona fides beyond that.

    And I’ll raise you Kamala Harris, only because of the Obama Bump.

    Things are pretty dull here, politically, but I suspect both Feinstein and Boxer are in their last terms, so their replacements will perhaps be California’s next high-profile national figures.

  123. 123
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Anne Laurie: Another thing with Patrick is that he will be seen by some of our less sophisticated fellow citizens as too much like Obama, if you know what I mean.

  124. 124
    David Koch says:

    I laugh, and laugh, and laugh when I read the very people who criticize Obummer for not being liberal enough swoon over DLC-BlueDog-ConservaDem-Corportist-AIPAC-NAFTA-GoldwaterGirl Hillary.

    I can’t wait until she appoints her dear friend Jamie Dimon to the cabinet and invades Syria– just to read all the apologists.

  125. 125
    Morzer says:

    @mai naem:

    I know this is a tiny little example, but how many 60+ year old people do y’all know in your lives who text?

    Bah! Trivialities!

    Anyway, my parents have an iPad, so there!

  126. 126
    efgoldman says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    …someone was in charge of the papyrus scrolls.

    Nerd AV guys, with glasses thicker than mine and plastic pocket protectors. Guys who pretended actually to like math.
    Myself, I was a band nerd. No pocket protector, and actually attracted a girl or two who wanted to mine my knowledge of music.

  127. 127
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @askew: Kind of like her Senate career, where she did absolutely nothing in the 8 years she was there.

    The refusal of her supporters to acknowledge her willfully passive and lackluster Senate career was one of the things that made me craziest about the ’08 blogwars, that and her own temerity, and success, in posing as “a “fighter”.

    I think there’s a damn good possibility she won’t run– I’ll be suprised but not shocked if that happens. If she doesn’t: I don’t like Cuomo, Patrick strikes me as having the charisma of a hunk of Velveeta, and O’Malley needs a lot of work in handling the media, based on what I saw of him as a surrogate in 2012. A lot. Biden, I like him, but I just don’t see it, though a lot of my extended family– working class professionally ethnic Irish– like him a lot. They’d still probably vote for a Republican who promised to “lower their taxes”, which s/he wouldn’t, of course. They might vote for a D named O’Malley almost in spite of themselves.

  128. 128
    Ruckus says:

    @Joseph Nobles:
    I like the VP. He had that something that makes him likeable, even if he is screwing you, and not in the fun way. I like his openness and his people skills. I appreciate his life story, many with his levels of loss turn bitter.
    All of that aside, he would be 73-4 when taking office. Let’s get the younger generation involved. We are, after all leaving this mess for them to live with, maybe they might think about THE future, not just their legacy.

  129. 129
    Ruckus says:

    @mai naem:
    Winning isn’t everything. The person has to work and work hard if they win. I’d rather a good person won by the slimmest of margins than someone with a pretty varied at best track record win in a landslide.
    The win proves little. The work proves everything.

    Oh and BTW, me. I have used computers since the 70’s and have had a cell for over 15yrs and have used texting in my business a lot.

  130. 130
    askew says:

    @Anne Laurie:

    His wife’s been hospitalized for depression, and he’s said many, many times that he promised her he wouldn’t run for a third term as governor. He didn’t explictly say that he wouldn’t run for president, but that’s a far more demanding job and we can reasonably predict that the Repubs will not be too decent to play the Eagleton/Dukakis card if (when) he does. Almost anything is possible at this point, but 2016 wouldn’t be a slam dunk for Deval Patrick, and he’s young enough to wait until 2020 if he chooses.

    I knew his wife was against Patrick continuing his political career, but didn’t know about the depression.

    The Clintons would play that card in the primary. The GOPs attacks against Obama were nothing compared to the ugliness Clintons used in the primary.

  131. 131
    David Koch says:

    I @Svensker:

    he was just bedding down with the ugly girl from AV until he could get the prom queen he wanted.

    Maybe it’s just me, but Jenn Sterger wasn’t ugly.

  132. 132
    Morzer says:

    @David Koch:

    Just for you:

    She is currently living in New York City and authors one of the most widely-read personal entry blogs on the Web.

    http://www.jennsterger.com/

  133. 133
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @David Koch: No, but the Jets were.

  134. 134
    David Koch says:

    @rda909:

    And you know Rupert Murdoch has long been a supporter of Hillary, correct?

    Oh! I forgot about even the liburel Hillary Clinton is BFF with Rupert

    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_T8Kw....._tango.jpg

    Can you imagine the ugliness by the Progressive Betters if Rupert was one of Obummer fundraisers.

  135. 135
    David Koch says:

    @Morzer: Thanks!

  136. 136
    askew says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    The refusal of her supporters to acknowledge her willfully passive and lackluster Senate career was one of the things that made me craziest about the ’08 blogwars, that and her own temerity, and success, in posing as “a “fighter”.

    I think there’s a damn good possibility she won’t run– I’ll be suprised but not shocked if that happens. If she doesn’t: I don’t like Cuomo, Patrick strikes me as having the charisma of a hunk of Velveeta, and O’Malley needs a lot of work in handling the media, based on what I saw of him as a surrogate in 2012. A lot. Biden, I like him, but I just don’t see it, though a lot of my extended family– working class professionally ethnic Irish– like him a lot. They’d still probably vote for a Republican who promised to “lower their taxes”, which s/he wouldn’t, of course. They might vote for a D named O’Malley almost in spite of themselves.

    I thought I was going to lose my mind in 2007-08 when I couldn’t get 1 supporter of Hillary to admit that she had done nothing in the Senate. They just kept repeating she has more experience than Obama. What does that matter if she just occupied space in the Senate?

    I think Patrick has got crazy charisma. Did you see his 2012 convention speech? O’Malley has a rougher East Coast personality but he’s got charisma and a real record to run on. The media is going to hate our nominee no matter what, so I am not too concerned with his media skills. If he was as bad as Howard Dean, I’d be worried.

    It’s going to come down to where Obama’s campaign people end up. Axelrod is retired, but watching where Plouffe, etc. end up. They ran circles around Hillary’s inept team and if they line-up behind O’Malley or one of the other dark horses, Hillary won’t be inevitable.

  137. 137
    David Koch says:

    President Barack Obama rejected calls from four of the most senior members of his foreign policy team to arm the rebels fighting to overthrow the Syrian regime, it emerged on Thursday night.

    Leon Panetta, the US defence secretary, disclosed that he and the Pentagon supported a proposal by Hillary Clinton before she stood down as Secretary of State last week to supply rebel forces with weapons,

    Mr Obama resisted pressure from his colleagues, rejecting their plan at the height of his re-election campaign last year. He has said that the risk is of American weapons being obtained by radical elements of the rebel forces, who are linked to al-Qaeda, was too great.

    So there you have it. Obomber had to stop Hillary Strangelove from starting another elective war in the Middle East.

    If Queen Hillary loves war so much she should get her daughter and her Goldman Sachs son-in-law to enlist and join the first wave. Atleast Queen Elizabeth’s idiot grandsons are combat vets.

  138. 138
    Vince says:

    Can’t believe the support for Hillary in these comments. Someone who tacks to the right of Obama on nearly every issue, who’s been in the highest levels of government for 20 years and doesn’t have a single accomplishment to her name, and ran a trainwreck of a campaign 4 years ago. I’m stunned right now.

  139. 139
    askew says:

    Can’t believe the support for Hillary in these comments. Someone who tacks to the right of Obama on nearly every issue, who’s been in the highest levels of government for 20 years and doesn’t have a single accomplishment to her name, and ran a trainwreck of a campaign 4 years ago. I’m stunned right now.

    She has the best PR team in politics and most of the Dem operatives in the media spinning for her. Plus, if you dare to ask about why she has no accomplishments, you get told you are sexist or bitter about 2008.

  140. 140
    David Koch says:

    @Vince:

    Can’t believe the support for Hillary in these comments. Someone who tacks to the right of Obama on nearly every issue

    It would be one thing if the people supporting Hillary were centrists or conservative Democrats, and in tune with Hillary, but no. They constantly attack Obummer from the left. How can you say you’re to the left of Obummer but wildly support someone who is to Obummer’s right? Of course the blatant hypocrisy just exposes them as the PUMA-Firebagging frauds they’ve always been.

  141. 141
    eemom says:

    @David Koch:

    Know what other causes celebre near and dear to AL’s heart that Hillary would totes have championed, at any and all cost, had she been Prez instead of Obama? Bradley Manning’s. And the prisoners at Gitmo.

  142. 142
    patrick II says:

    @Svensker:
    Favre and the Jets started the 2008 season 8 — 3. Brett tore the tricep muscle in his throwing arm and they finished 9-7 and Favre was terrible. I don’t think Favre ever played a game where he didn’t care about winning, but unless he had no backup at all, he should have been sitting down those last five games.

  143. 143
    James E. Powell says:

    Kirsten Gillibrand will be candidate if and only if Hillary Clinton does not run and acts as her sponsor.

  144. 144
    David Koch says:

    @eemom: Why even the liburel New Republic Hillary Clinton opposes closing GITMO:

    “You do not have to let people go,” she told a Senate hearing. “These are enemy combatants, prisoners of war, whatever we want to call them. I mean, we had Nazis in prison camps in our country for years. And then the hostilities ended and they were let go.”

    Too bad Obummer isn’t a True Progressive like Dear Leader Hillary.

  145. 145
    DougJ, Friend of Hamas says:

    @TFinSF:

    Heh indeedy.

  146. 146
    David Koch says:

    The Bible tells us: “For PUMA/Firebaggers sow the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind.”

  147. 147
    ChrisNYC says:

    @David Koch: This is also largely due to just party power politics. The Clintons have that huge machine with, as noted, scads of talkers and story planters with pretty powerful megaphones. Part of what Obama (knowingly) took on was a party dominated by friends of Bill. Those are the people that tamped down lefty criticism of Bill and of Hillary and the lack of a similar octopus doing that service for Obama played into the non-stop bitchfest. The internet likes to tell itself it sees through the MSM but it gets led by the nose as often as not. Had there been a cadre of Dems out on tv and in the papers saying how awesome Obama was doing the bitching would have been less.

  148. 148
    Splitting Image says:

    Personally, I’m holding out for a matchup between Brian Schweitzer and Brian Sandoval. As John Cleese once said, Brian is one of the funny names.

    Regarding the lack of a deep bench, I would argue that the Democrats’ first priority is to fix that, and take back as many of the swing states as possible in 2014. By my count, there are at least 10 purple states with rotten GOP governors that the Democrats ought to put time and money into flipping. If the party has to nominate a potential one-termer like Clinton or Biden in 2016, at least it will have a deeper bench to choose from in 2020.

    On the other hand, it’s worth noting just how much the GOP’s determination to lower turnout in 2012 is going to cost them in the next election. Their bench is not much to speak of either, but imagine what the Democrats would be facing if any of the governors elected in 2010 in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin, Virginia, or Arizona had done their jobs properly instead of focusing on vote suppression and abortion bans. The only people in that class who didn’t wreck their chances of advancement in the effort to put Mitt Romney in the White House were Sandoval and Susanna Martinez.

  149. 149
    mclaren says:

    @FedSec:

    Yeah, I feel you. Not a big Hillary fan, she’s far more neocon-hawkish than Obama and he’s real bad on foreign policy…but when it comes right down to it, I’ll vote for Hills if the choice is some batshit insane Republican.

    Besides, about time we had a woman president. Now if we can work on a black lesbian woman president, we’ll be getting somewhere…

  150. 150
    ChrisNYC says:

    I actually think the Dems DO have a good bench. They can field a completely credible bunch of candidates for 2016 and they’ve done a hell of a lot better than the GOP in raising new faces up. I think the shallow bench line is pure RNC memo nonsense. Except, you know, for that firecracker Jindal.

    And, of course Hillary is running! It’s a foregone conclusion.

    My fav is O’Malley. He beat the crap out of the VA gov in an extended one-on-one thing they did on healthcare last year. It was great.

  151. 151
    mai naem says:

    @James E. Powell: From what I remember, Gillibrand is even more married to Wall Street than the Clintons. Also, I think Gillibrand wants to do more in the Senate. There’s a good possilibity that there will be a female Senate Dem leader post-Reid. Ofcourse it could be Patty Murray and not Gillibrand.

  152. 152
    Anya says:

    @mai naem: Me and my 76 year old grandpa Facetime each other all the time. He’s very smart, very liberal, ran a huge corporation but maintained his humanity. Can we elect him now? Also, too, he raises a lot of money for liberal causes all the time.

  153. 153
    gvg says:

    Hillary has flaws but the GOP is insane so if it happens I will vote for her. I would prefer a younger more liberal choice. I do think she is to old but think if when it’s time if there isn’t a better choice she’ll run for the same reasons I’ll vote for her. Biden is older but hasn’t shown the health problems she has and Bill’s health is a factor too. In some ways I’d prefer him.
    I had not really heard of Obama long before he ran and when I did hear, I thought he seemed too young and his promoters too optomistic. I also hadn’t heard of Clinton. Carter wasn’t exactly well known…looking back the Dems future candidates have not been that obvious early. The GOP has been otherwise although I think now they are really in new territory there. I’m expecting to be surprised and only want to make sure a bad surprise like Edwards doesn’t get near it next. He was Kerry’s pick as VP too…think of that.

  154. 154
    mai naem says:

    @Splitting Image: I really like Schweitzer – I think he’s smart in brains and politics but I just wonder if he’s too quirky to win the presidency. I wish the Dems would nominate somebody from the west(there is whole wide country beyond the NE and Upper Midwest) – Schweitzer/Hickenlooper/Inslee/Kitzhaber – I don’t know much about Gregoire except that she seemed to just barely win her elections – why do people not talk about her national prospects – why didn’t Obama appoint her to something? Also too, Sebelius as Veep if Obamacare is implemented well enough. I think she would make the Repubs spend money in Kansas fergawdsake.

  155. 155
    Anya says:

    @ChrisNYC: I am a huge fan of Governor Martin O’Malley. I don’t understand why he’s not on the top of the list for liberals? He’s my first choice.

  156. 156
    Anya says:

    @James E. Powell: There are two things Gillibrand loves more than anything in the wide world: Israel and Wall Street.

  157. 157
    Baud says:

    Let’s face it. No one is good enough to be our nominee.

  158. 158
    gvg says:

    @Vince: Hillary support here is not enthusiastic, it’s pragmatic. We fear the GOP and need a sure bet. Not many comments actually say she’s done great or would do great. The primaries are going to be important. If someone younger, with a better record IMO is in, they’ll get may vote. But almost any dem who gets the nomination will get my vote even if my first choice doesn’t get to run. This thread is a bunch of people admitting their going to settle-we don’t hate Hillary compare to the whole GOP. It’s also a chance for various other names to come up that we can start hoping for.

    The age is a big concern for all of us. We don’t want to have to risk that. Which brings up something. If either Hillary or Biden run, their VP choice is going to be taken very seriously by all of us. Both of them may have to announce their pick before the nomination is sewn up, to reassure us in the primary. VP vetting really ought to start sooner than it does anyway.

  159. 159
    BillinGlendaleCA says:

    @Anya: Those two things are required from a US Senator from New York. Also Gillibrand does have some west coast roots, she’s a UCLA Law grad.

  160. 160
    Anya says:

    @BillinGlendaleCA: I agree with you . But her questioning of Hagel soured me on her. She couldn’t find anything else to ask him other than “do you love Israel, as much I love Israel?” “do you promise to be faithful and to love Israel for ever and ever.” Not to mention calling Iran an “existential threat” to the United States. That just turned me off.

  161. 161
    mai naem says:

    @Anya: Because O’malley was a pretty poor surrogate for Obama last year – one of the Sunday shows he did was horrible(FTN or MTP) and his DNC speech did not display charisma. I am actually liking Dannel Malloy. He’s been pretty impressive on the gun control stuff(ofcourse we have to then worry about the Dems being portrayed as gungrabbers.)

  162. 162
    Morzer says:

    @Anya:

    To be fair, her questions were probably aimed at helping Hagel out, because the wingnuts were trying hard to suggest that Hagel was somehow anti-Israel (and, of course, soft on Iran).

  163. 163
    rikyrah says:

    @C.J.:

    As long as she has a better campaign strategy than “I’m the frontrunner, I’m going to win,” she has my attention.

    she doesnt. haven’t you seen her leeches pushing her as inevitable.

    I will only remind folks that she’s never said she was wrong about Iraq.

  164. 164
    fuckwit says:

    +1 for Elizabeth Warren. I would knock my ass out campaigning for her if she ran.

  165. 165
    sparrow says:

    @efgoldman: I don’t know O’Malley well, having just moved to B’more. But a lot of seemingly reasonable liberal types around here reeeeally don’t like him. I’m suspicious.

  166. 166
    Xenos says:

    @Anya:

    There are two things Gillibrand loves more than anything in the wide world: Israel and Wall Street.

    And guns. Wait a minute…

    I meant the Catholic hierarchy. Wait a minute…

    I agree she could use more seasoning. But her growth in the last couple years has been promising. She would be an excellent VP pick, or she could get out to Iowa and get some recognition a few years early.

  167. 167
    askew says:

    @sparrow:

    @efgoldman: I don’t know O’Malley well, having just moved to B’more. But a lot of seemingly reasonable liberal types around here reeeeally don’t like him. I’m suspicious.

    Are you sure they are liberal? Because passing strong gun control, DREAM Act, Same Sex Marriage and repealing death penalty is pretty much a wish list for any liberal.

  168. 168
    NobodySpecial says:

    I’m sorry, but I don’t see anyone from the Do-Nothing Congress on either side getting elected, their popularity is just too damned low.

    Hopefully either Patrick or Castro raise their profiles a lot between now and 2015.

  169. 169
    Yutsano says:

    @mai naem: Gregoire is 66. She’s also more or less a centrist marshmallow, the signing of the gay marriage bill notwithstanding. Inslee was just elected guv here so him leaving suddenly would put a very bad taste in mouths up this way. I think Schweitzer would make a helluva VP.

  170. 170
    MrQA says:

    Nope, sorry… Not voting for any more Neo-Libs.
    Barry O fooled me twice, either I vote for a real liberal/progressive, or I don’t vote.
    The Dems have lost me. Obamma finally pushed me over the top w/ this last “grand bargain” ScoSec stunt!

    HRC, is just more of the same if not worse..

    NFW!

  171. 171
    Alex S. says:

    @mclaren:

    Condi! :D

    Good morning by the way! There’s a lot of dreaming in this threat, I am surprised. If Hillary runs, she’ll win, and too many people want her to run, too many people want her to win. Obama was a once-in-a-generation politician. As a candidate he was stronger than Hillary who was stronger than anyone else. The Hillary of 2013 is also almost a once-in-a-generation politician (but only because life made her one, not by natural talent). Obama had ‘president’ written all over him. His successor will be a little more ordinary. And there is a real chance that the republican candidate will be more capable than Romney (whose strength as a candidate I’d compare with John Edwards of 2004). Jeb Bush and especially Chris Christie would be stronger, and the next Dem will be weaker than Obama. And let’s face it:
    Warren is not going to be president. She’s too rough, too left, too inexperienced, too old. Bad combination.
    Deval Patrick is black and no, there won’t be a second black president in a row. In fact, the next president will be a little boring, except if it is Hillary…
    Martin O’Malley is a possibility, but he’ll need a lot of personality building. He’s not universally known. People know Christie, they know Hillary, they know Jeb Bush and probably Rubio. O’Malley is one of those base-appealing outsider candidates like Scott Walker on the republican side.
    It also depends on whom the Clinton camp and the Obama camp (!) are going to support, and this is where it gets interesting. The Obama team likes liberal-leaning technocrats. So get used to names like Tim Kaine or Mark Warner. The Clinton camp likes ‘centrist’ power politicians, like Cuomo.
    Who else but these names could credibly run a national campaign? Schweitzer? Hardly. The governors’ and congressional bench is thin at the moment, there’s no next Obama. And the Obama cabinet: Joe Biden, too old. Geithner, is gone. Kerry, did it already. Eric Holder, no. Sebelius, no (though I like her, and if Obamacare is off to a good start, her resumée surpasses Hillary’s by far, but she’s too… plain). Napolitano wants to, but no…
    Hillary is the big question mark, and without her, the next candidate will not match Obama, there is no second Obama right now. It’s going to be Cuomo/Warner, or O’Malley/Schweitzer or something like that. Hillary would make things a lot easier… a Hillary/Warner ticket is unbeatable in my opinion.

  172. 172
    liberal says:

    @rda909:
    You’re still a douchebag; in particular, one who apparently has no reading comprehension skills.

  173. 173
    Tom W. says:

    1. It should begin to be obvious to close observers who President Obama’s choice of successor is – and it’s pretty clearly the potential candidate who is the subject for this post. That matters a lot.

    2. Everybody here will probably vote for her if she runs. No one has a better chance of total demolition of the Republicans.

  174. 174
    lol says:

    @askew:

    I’m ready for President Carcetti.

  175. 175
    stonetools says:

    What Alex S. said. AS for those who will only vote for the perfect liberal, please review the years 2000-12 and then think how you would like it if President Bob McDonnell is sworn in 2017. The Number One requirement for the 2016 Democratic candidate will be can they win the general election.In fact its numbers 1-10.
    Hillary meets that prerequisite in spades.The others, not so much. That’s why I’ll vote and work for her if she is the nominee. And I say that despite my wish that she not run, and that a younger generation candidate step up.
    I personally like O’Malley, but if we don’t go with Hillary, it would be best to get a candidate from Real ‘Murica- South, West, or Midwest somewhat.

  176. 176
    Full Metal Wingnut says:

    @Keith G: yeah, the age comment has the rigor of “some of our worst presidents had blonde hair” or some such nonsense. Reagan was basically drooling while debating Mondale in ’84. He was an awful president, and would’ve been just as destructive if he were Kennedy or Teddy Roosevelt’s age, but the early stages of Alzheimer’s had a noticeable effect on him, especially in the second term. The other presidents listed sucked, but just happened to be old. I don’t see the connection

  177. 177
    Full Metal Wingnut says:

    @Full Metal Wingnut: and granted one did die in office, but that was in the 19th century. Point being that I don’t think there’s any intellectually honest or rigorous way of saying that Buchanan sucked because of his age. Reagan would’ve sucked at at 40, but age exacerbated it, it was not the proximate cause of Reagan’s suckitude.

    And I say this as someone who vehemently disliked Clinton in ’92 and through most of the 90s, as I hated the whole Third Way crap. AEDPA, NAFTA, DOMA, Gramm-Leach-Bliley. With a damn near unforgivable record of shit legislation, is it any wonder so many voted for Nader in 2000. I personally voted Gore (in Florida no less!) but many of my lefty friends absolutely loathed Clinton (and not for bad reason) and hence Gore. Maybe a Third Way Democrat is the best we can do in a post-Reagan age. I’ll vote Clinton, but I wouldn’t be surprised if a 2000 retread occurred. Obama leaves the economy in good shape, mouth-breathing independents decide after 8 years of Dem to give a charismatic Republican a shot, and the type of person who voted Nader votes third party again when they see another Clinton.

  178. 178
    Full Metal Wingnut says:

    @Full Metal Wingnut: And I voted for Bush in 92 and I am not in the least bit ashamed. One of only two Republicans I’ve ever voted for. And what am I complaining about, I got a republican anyway!

  179. 179
    Full Metal Wingnut says:

    @askew: I honestly don’t see what’s so much better about Clinton than Biden. I want Biden to run: first because the VP is generally the presumptive nominee so he at least deserves consideration, and two, I can’t fucking stand the Hilbots who think that Clinton by rights deserves to sit on the Iron Throne. I want a competitive primary with Biden and O’Malley at least. I have a feeling Hil wins it but nobody deserves a presidential nomination, I want her to fight for it.

  180. 180
    Full Metal Wingnut says:

    @mai naem: Yeah she’s popular. I can think of a number of politicians over the years who were very popular whom I didn’t like. There’s a lot more to it than that.

  181. 181
    Full Metal Wingnut says:

    @askew: I really hope Obama’s key campaign people don’t just fall in with Hil. She actually might have the hubris to not think she needs them though.

  182. 182
    Full Metal Wingnut says:

    @askew: Lol! People actually say that?! Why would I be bitter about 08? My guy won.

Comments are closed.