I could not have said this better; I agree completely.

Thank You.

K&R

Because Hillary Clinton will be the nominee by then.

Sure, if we look back at 2008, Obama LOOKED more lefty than Clinton, and maybe he is, in his heart of hearts, by a smidge --

but the fact is, he's a caver, and she's a fighter.

And you want to talk about Madame Inevitable? She's Mrs. 60% right now. Unprecedented. And there's no way she's going to let herself get rolled by sharp practice in empty states with caucuses this time. You got the next African-American anti-Hillary set up? No? No. So this time, they'll come back to a Clinton. She IS 45.

She IS.

So if anything's right and fair in this world, you and all the other Hillhaters will have to recant in a few summers. Recant or become latest edition of PUMAs, with all that entails.

There's never been anyone so certain.

I kind of see her like President Monroe. An unchallenged two-termer in an Era of Good Feelings.

God grant us that at the end of it, the Republicans will die of irrelevancy, and the Democratic drift to the right will create a little space for a new party to it's left to become the next Loyal Opposition.

71%. Unprecedented.

Let me just say this about that:

This time, the title Madame Inevitable has no irony about it at ALL. Madame Inevitable? This time, as the kids say, "It is what it is."

she is proud to be from the right wing of the dem party

Or take.

A lot can happen between now and then, e.g., health issues, etc. Nothing is inevitable.

This is exactly it. Hillary was never to the right of Obama. They were nearly identical on policy. But she WAS a hard-ass fighter, and he's not.

She would've made a better President than him. I hope she gets the chance.

many of us got involved and fought for Obama in 2008 simply because he had the charisma and we knew he could win. At that point her numbers were not so good.

She can win this time if she wants it.

Hillary is a fighter .

She's a fighter and will FIGHT for Progressive principles...not give up!

She and Bill went through hell and back with the GOP, investigation after investigation, $40 million wasted on Watergate trying to get them caught with their pants down (with absolutely no connection), impeachment.

Back then, and even until 2008, when she ran a full term as a Senator and could prove that she could compromise and work with people on issues, I think she was still leaning partisan, and the American people chose the "bipartisan" President over the one that wanted to light a fire under the Republicans' asses. Go watch Bill Clinton's 2012 speech at Obama's nomination, he's still got the ideas, and he'd be in the White House telling Hillary 'em. Turns out, in fact, Bill Clinton told Obama he'd do that speech in return for him endorsing Hillary in 2016.

But she's been SoC for so long, her campaign sitters are going to say, "Look, you can't be a partisan, it doesn't sell to the American people." So it's a mixed bag. I know for damn sure if she's not a partisan I will be done with it.

and you can take your silly little threatening shit stirring spoon and....

Oh, and welcome to DU.

But calling a supportive post abt Sec. Clinton a " silly little threatening shit stirring spoon and.... " is certainly telling.

A lot can happen between now and then. It might be a bit premature to start talking 'inevitable' or 'ain't no effing way', but there *IS* a lot of hill hate rearing its head.

Shit stirring spoons notwithstanding

but that's not what was being talked about.

It was more than supportive...the fact you don't see this as shit stirring is telling..

And then want to explain a revisit to the primaries...

And don't think you're contributing...hmmmm

ANYONE that wants to run for office. That's a given.

Nice avoidance of everything I laid out.

Especially the part where I had supportive/positive things to say about Sec. Clinton. hmmmmm.....

Respectfully, President Obama can no longer run for the Office of POTUS. You laid a rehash of the primary (and I didn't avoid it, I pointed out that YOU'RE the one doing it)

You're welcome.

The primary of 2008 got REALLY fucking sexist, and I was an Obama supporter.

But it got out of hand, and there are some raw feelings about that.

Hillary might be our nominee. She might not be. Either way, we'll deal with FACTS. I'm a stickler for that sort of thing.

and I love the little racism in there
too sweet
got the bases covered you do
. You got the next African-American anti-Hillary set up?
that is precious

Here we fucking go again.

Clintons fight for their own damn interests.

Hillary was only a first lady when she went to the mat fighting for her own original idea. He held mucho power to fight, she held no such power but she damn well gave it a good try anyway.

just as Hillary will

Those who think he would have been successful with single payer on first try are delusional.

We in Canada didn't get our healthcare system in one swoop. It took a long time with opposition propaganda.

Opposition Propaganda.

Care to explain that comment?


Are you implying that the Obama election was some sort of conspiracy by the black community?

be another center-left on social issues center-right on economic issues and foreign policy mediocre Wall Street funded pro-status quo candidate whose actual policies are at best only marginally different than Hillary's.

I think I will skip following your position and support Clinton. I for one am tired of Democrats who won't fight like Hillary. Hillary/Warren 2016. I want us to fight and win.

yeah, neither do I.

Remember when she was fighting AGAINST raising the Cap on social security taxes?

Yep, there she was fighting to make sure taxes didn't go up on people making over $105,000 a year.

And "losers who won't fight?" Many of us are prepared to fight with everything we have to STOP Hillary from getting the nomination.

Just like we did in 2007.

This is a first!

Yep, there she was fighting to make sure taxes didn't go up on people making over $105,000 a year.

It's now at $113,700. It shouldn't be there AT ALL. I quadruple, triple, double, dog dare the Democratic Party to have me pay into SS the entire year. <----- Is a childish dare what it is going to take? It's shame if it does.

She's going to have to get out there on that issue if she wants me canvassing, making calls, and taking people to the polls for her.

I'm not a one issue voter - but SS is one of my top five.

Trust me - when you are in the solid six figure household income - that few hundred dollars every few weeks makes NO difference. We don't miss it . . . the first 6 months of the year.

going down into my tornado shelter.

This must be a sign of the apocalypse.

2016 is a long way off but I still feel uneasy about putting an Iraq war supporter back in charge.

my list is pretty blank, maybe you can help me.


And I mean fought For The People, not for her own and bill's pursestrings.

her life in so many ways has been an empowering
example for women around the world.

And frankly I'm still impressed by the dignity
with which they kept their marriage together,
and raised a great daughter.

It's also time for the US to have a woman
president though I'd rather see Elizabeth Warren.
Elizabeth is so pleasing to my brain, so
refreshingly smart and good.

After eight years of Hillary, we can have Chelsea, and by the time she's been in the White House for eight years one of the Obama daughters will be ready. Sixteen yeas for the two Obama girls and we can start on a third generation of Clintons.

Why do some "Democrats"^‡ continue to support candidates that advocate and continue war and tax policies from the worst Administration is recent memory? (bu$h, to be clear here.)

^‡ i.e., 3rd Way, DLC, DINO.
We need to move the Democratic Party back to the Left, where it not only belongs, but used to be.
If the Republicans want to continue their move to the Right, let them. There is no reason why we Liberals, progressives, Left of Center, etc., have to follow them over the cliff by supporting Right of Center candidates. Hillary is more of the same, so why back her? She is not the solution, she is part of the problem.

Some old guy making up a story about how they were under fire and shit, though, it'd be laughed about as a yarn, and no one would care. But because it was a women I knew the media would scrutinize the shit out of it and blow it up way bigger than it was.

Should have been honest.

Just like the coverup on her exit from her last job is now being revealed to have been a lie. She knew we were running guns and she knew she was intentionally misdirecting attention/lying about an anti-Muslim video.


Just remember she was on the board at Walmart during it major explosive growth and change to overseas low cost labor products. And that pesky Rose Lawfirm.

Yeah Hillary is not really a progressive but will claim it when needed for the votes.

Big time RW talking points proven false by your own special counsel.

Who they represented during that time.

Not right wing talking points. Hillary was not and is not a progressive. She is a corporatist who happens to be a woman.

The Rose Law firm was not a non profit or civil rights Lawfirm nor was most of their work for the "little guy". They were a Lawfirm for the .01%

It makes me wonder where people are getting their criticism from if they're using RW talking points.

People forget the level of investigation she and Bill went through in that time. The prosecutors spent 6 years and $40 million to try to figure out if they could nail something on the Clintons. Completely vindicated.

Mentioning the Rose Law Firm and saying it is a "firm for the 1%" is just so people look it up and start seeing the whole Vince Foster, Whitewater, and other conspiracy theories. It's not really critical of, well, the fact that all law firms are shady. Until you need a lawyer. Then law firms are awesome.

In fact, details from ones background are largely irrelevant. We see Glenn Greenwald getting slammed for defending Neo-Nazi's but that's just stupid and irrelevant. We see Obama had a near epic background where he was raised by a single mother then his grandparents, wound up being a nice wonderful community organizer, went to Harvard, worked his way up in a rags to riches sort of way. And yet he's a huge corporate President.

It's policy positions one should look at. While ones background can be instructive it's not necessarily going to mean squat.

You know, the little children who were like, all so totally saved or something because the Big Walmart she helped during the time of its most robust growth period, that WalMart effort must have been part of a Village, and it takes a village to raise a child!

Even though the children were destroyed along with their parents when the tens of thousands of small mom and pop businesses were run out of town so that WalMart could have the satisfaction of dong them in.

I think eventually her resume got scrubbed so that anyone who brings up her association with the Walton family is made to feel like a bug. Because you know, she is for the sake of the CHILDREN!

And sadly a lot of people will believe it, just like they did with Obama.

Wow.

I can't figure out if She was that Stupid to think she could get away wth that, or she thought the rest of Us were so stupid.

Either way, really bad judgement on her part. Atrocious judgement. So bad it's dark comedy stuff

She made so many slip ups that it was a joke.

And because women are seen as devious / conniving by the media culture at large (see almost any drama that has more than one woman, there's almost always the evil bad woman in there) she couldn't fix them if she tried. Once out of the bag, it was out.

It makes you feel secure.

I explained my position on Obama some time ago. A lot of people thought he was going to usher in a change in way politics was done.

If you believe politicians you make your first mistake. The first thing you should do is doubt them, doubt everything about them, and push them to keep their word on policy positions. That's all you can do.

She actually admitted to the Bosnia lie. All because she's a politician who wanted to inflate her position to make herself out to be bigger than she was. You know what lies I'd be more concerned about? The kinds of lies that politicians won't fess up to. Like how she was aware of the pardons that went on under Clinton (in particular the New Square Hasidic pardons, which were clear cut fraud) or how she claimed to have opposed NAFTA.

When Hillary livens up the liberal base with her progressive rhetoric, assuming she runs, it'll be disgusting to see.

I said that the biggest fallout from the contradiction between Obama's rhetoric of "hope and promise" and the reality which immediately ensued when he was elected, is that it might turn a whole generation of real and potential idealists into cynics. I don't know what my friend thought about it, about what I said. I was just getting something off my chest.

I didn't just mean your regular garden variety idealist, I meant the idealist whose sensibilities were tormented by G.W.Bush and whose souls were captured by some of the grandest rhetoric they've ever heard that spoke for change, not just any change, but change we can believe in.

About that issue I don't just say "OK, it was a politician saying it, so it's to be expected".
How the Dem leadership has acted in the last 5 years can't be blamed on the Rep's.
I'm talking about the contradiction between the grandiose rhetoric and the action.

Until then I'll wait patiently for that day to come and sit idly by. I haven't campaigned since 2004 for Dean. I only canvased for Obama twice because the first time I wanted to make sure our state didn't have an army base built and the second time I wanted to get marijuana legalized. Obama was a side effect of that, nothing more. If there wasn't big legislation out there or if the stakes for the state weren't high, I would've sat both of them out.

I helped turn Colorado blue (single handedly, without help from any party, GOTV 10% of the vote we won by) and helped legalize marijuana (I did work with the legalize group though). But I still take that as a compliment.

But you're wrong, because the politically lazy position is the only ethical position. Genuine supporters of Obama have blood on their hands. Those who did so reluctantly, not so much.

You show no intellectual curiosity.

I think it's a truly diabolical aspect of politics, myself.

"If only" our politicians could be held to a standard of truth or honesty.

Maybe we need to figure out how to make that happen.

Please get a dictionary.

the incessant bang bang bang of machine gun fire and plink plink plink as the bullets hit the runway, kicking up clouds of debris. But somehow she managed to keep everyone calm, and even smile through this entire ordeal.

to keep taxes from going up on people making over $105,000 a year. A group she called "the middle class". http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2618869

Chelsea supported her trumped up fantasy in public.

Now what does that tell you about the character of Mrs. Clinton?

oiy.

She is lawded as being an intelligent person but I call dumb as a bag of hammers if she thought her story was safe in secret and there was no actual tape of the reality of it in existence. What a doofus.

During the 2008 primaries I saw where someone was referencing Falwell's "Clinton Chronicles" as proof of how terrible the Clintons were.
Is that up next?

about her basic judgement and common sense, not to mention that it supposedly bolstered her claim to be able to handle the 3:00 AM phone call. And it wasn't just a one-time slip on a bad day, she used that story a few times before, according to the New York Times article:

Dumb move on her part. But that's more of a G.I Joe tale that the right wing can cause a constitutional crisis over at a later date.
I'm more concerned with an administration that has repeatedly caved and tried to reach "grand bargains" with lunatic right wingers who have NO intention of agreeing to anything and are absolutely determined to destroy any remnants of the New Deal, The War on Poverty, Social Security, Medicare, Food Stamps, unemployment and anything else that might help people in need. We should NEVER have gotten to this point.
I'm more concerned with getting a fighter to defend these basic Democratic programs.
You go ahead keep on worrying about "sniper fire".

> You go ahead keep on worrying about "sniper fire". <

I will. And all the ridicule the Repugs will heap on her in the 2016 campaign when she starts in on her 3 AM red phone ads again.

The big Security and Surveillance Programs that Ms Clinton and Pres Obama say are needed, we might not need money to be spent on education, right?

Our young'uns can simply sign up for Spy School 101 and start on spying.

I mean, how much education would it take for a young'un to snitch on neighbors for not having flag pins on their lapel, or refusing to watch only Gubmint Approved TV stations 24/7.

Yep, yep, it's all good. Secretary of State Clinton understands that education was a Twentieth Century idea, and now that it is Spy vs Spy, better to put the money into PRISM, SCHMISM, and last but not least, PRISON for them that won't adapt!

And as far as I can tell, no one needs an education if they are gonna be incarcerated.

Can we get some new ideas? And I don't mean a new president with all ex-Clinton/Bush/Obama advisers.

Perhaps a chance for the rest of us to get a voice in government, not Washington retreads.

There is someone who deserves worship :p

The god of beer!!!



Cheers!

nt

with one caveat:

Hillary, if you do plan to run, spend your clout, and run as an honest liberal, not a DLC, hell, not a Clinton liberal. I know you may think you have no reason to do that, but:

If you did, the left would crown you. You would even get a chance to drive that one last nail into Obama, by doing the things we elected Him to do, and voted against You because you would not.

I do not think you want to, and furthermore, Bill will not let you. It would be nice to see you throw him off, to let him know he needs to shape up or ship out, but you will not.

As far as personal mentions, I am sure beacool gets mad at me at times too, but, I know while we differ on Hillary, we will make great comrades once the guns turn on the GOP.

Not hatin' on Hillary but MD Gov is my choice
He fights with a smile

If he makes a compelling case to the primary voters, you never know what will happen.

between a Clinton or Warren or Grayson presidency in terms of policy---the important issue will be how effective they are in their nominations and getting an agenda through congress/senate. As far as the ability to ram things through congress, I think Clinton has what it takes (it's not just what you know, it's who you know).

Warren won't. Bernie Sanders won't.

I'm 52 years old, and the greatest time in America for me was under Bill Clinton. And I think Hillary's smarter than he is.

We are never going to get a super left-wing President. We can get a slightly left-of-center President who will marginally shift the country in that direction.

I'm constantly amazed that people who post on a political message board have so little understanding of politics.

Two of the greatest contributors to the collapse of 2008.

of the Clinton presidency, you're a bit myopic.

Also, I didn't mention other things like DADT and ending welfare because I didn't want to pile on.

You probably give him credit for the late nineties economic bubble, but of course you already know that he had nothing to do with it.

reading comprehension
I don't see anything in your reply that relates to the OP
just some left bashing and a list of names I never mentioned
are you replying here by accident?

I couldn't agree more.

.
.
.

It is very easy to point out deficiencies, but without offering a solution,

as in a viable candidate,

you are just blowing smoke.

Who possibly can expect to be elected at the end of Obama's term?

By the comments I've read in this thread, and the amount of recommendations I see,

I'm not surprised Idiot-Son reigned for 8 years.

(sigh)

CC

thanks for the input

I think she'll run, and it will be interesting to see if your theories are correct. But I'm a big believer in letting the voters decide.

By propagandizing the low information U.S. voters with incessant 30 second sound bites on all the cable stations, and daily high gloss political flyers delivered to our mailboxes. I think there's no question she'll run and it may well come down to her versus Jeb Bush, dog save us all!

I'm going to push hard for a true liberal candidate.

If the Democrats run any Turd Way candidate, I'll be voting 3rd party or write in.

It is one of the reasons I was not beside myself when Obama won the primary against her. I thought Obama would be something fresh and new. Ends up I was completely wrong. He is a NAFTA loving recycled version of Bill Clinton(whom I respect). I still think it is very much worth it to fight for upcoming and progressive politicians. I am truly tired of the last couple leaders of the Democratic party verbally promoting trickle down economics, damaging free trade agreements, low taxes and spending cuts, and much more.

I love Hillary, but new prospects are what we need. Good post about being against someone's possible future actions without displaying hate toward them.

are calling for her to drop out so they can have another mr. fresh.

damn, that's worse than the she should drop out 1/2 way through the primary. Pssst, we had mr new and he chose the old way, so go ahead and find another mr. new but that in no way means hillary should step aside for another mr/ms fresh that are going to fool you into thinking they're going to do something different.

with them again? I don't think any candidate will ever satisfy some on the far left, at least not one running for the Democrats.

and then come back to act like they know it all. and the group hate foaming at the mouth 2008 garbage too? Do they look back at that and are proud of themselves? (serious question, i was never a long-timer on any specific internet group although i used to be on a few of them for information, and wow, some of the most immature and hateful people i've ever seen.)

are so rigid and, well, rabid.

the people on the left, i figured, oh, they're smart, more intellectual, i realized after 2008 many of them are no better than the worst type of conservatives. That was a sad realization. The funniest part is conservatives are always rambling on about how hateful people on the left are, i was like, they're crazy, then low and behold. The next time i saw someone post it i actually had to pipe up and admit they were right. . Even in person you should have seen the scowls and sneers i got when i campaigned. (and fwiw, i wasn't going to campaign for H until i saw the treatment in the press, then i felt i had no choice. There was no way as a woman i could stand for that and do nothing).

Don't blame us because Obama pretended to be something he wasn't.

so i should sy that. And it was an exciting time and he gave a good speech. I get getting whipped up into a frenzy. Personally i did not think he was going to be much different than he was (okay, thought he would be a little closer to his talk but whatever), But for people to come back and so know it all is nuts, so know it all infact, that they have to foam at the mouth with the SAME EXACT ACT as 2008, does that not strike you as utterly rediculous? Why the same hate show from the same people who were obviously wrong? the left blogosphere foamed at the mouth over the clintons in 2008 (and at her supporters i'm sure you know) cuz she was supposedly...well, basically everything obama turned out to be...Why not just look into whomever seems legit and make sure they are, ya know? new m.o.. Why do the very same thing that was done in 2008 when it turned out to be collectively false. Maybe people should realize the mistake they made in 2008 and come out with some new M.O. People have said here about the posters they lost in 2008 here b/c of some of the ugliness, and yet they're doing the exact same thing that the left blogs did in 2008. ????

and candidates don't "step aside" because they are center to the left, that makes no sense. But so far here she's got to step aside cuz she's "too old" and "on the baord of walmart", i mean, these are people that clearly couldn't spot obama's deception, why would they come back so know it all they even know whose supposed to run, and ...i mean, this is so obvious i don't even know why i have to type it bcause i have a feelign you know it's ridiculous.

At least we can live with ourselves. And, I agree that we should be more careful about their creds next time. Remember, we were most concerned about taking back the Whitehouse; not just finding the best President.