When it comes to elections and stuff like that, usually anything he says is the reverse of what actually will happen.

I don't expect much from the guy whose only real credits are concession speeches.

Sorry to say, but maybe he has a point, but in general I don't put much stock on his opinion.

In regards to winning with Kerry and his other Presidential hopefuls.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9895-2004Sep9.html
http://howlinglatina.blogspot.com/2007/04/bob-shrum-wrong-as-usual.html

In regards to Obama not winning with using his record.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/dem-strategist-bob-shrum-i-dont-think-the-president-could-win-a-referendum/
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/06/04/shrum-if-obama-runs-on-his-record-hes-toast/

I guess I am still a bit miffed with him with the quick concession from Kerry through his recommendations.

I actually have nothing against Clinton. I'd vote for her if she becomes the nominee.
However, I tend to think it is still too early, and Shrum tends to be wrong more often than not.

I thought it was his screwiness during the Kerry campaign but couldn't recall if it was him or not; I was living out of the country at the time. Thanks for responding Xyzse, much appreciated

I just don't see how his opinion matters when he gets so much wrong.

If she's going to be the nominee then we need to keep pushing her ideals to the left and get her away from the centrist positions that are not good for the middle class and poor.

We need to stop looking for saviors who come out of the blue and what can possibly go wrong?

I haven't signed on to her campaign. I am waiting and seeing. I do strongly believe we need a woman president, a Democrat. While I'd prefer Elizabeth Warren, I can see real problems with her making it to the White House. I have no doubt that Hillary could make it.

I believe she'll go willingly if she feels there is support for her to do that. Just my opinion.

I wouldn't have half the opposition to her I have if I thought she was anything approaching flexible on any major issue. She's running because she has an agenda and I suspect she'd opt to not run before she'd move an inch on her fiscal or trade policies. She's a RW Democrat and we don't need any more fucking RW Democrats masquerading as moderates. She's not a moderate, she's a charter member of the DLC.

Her policies are why I feel she's fundamentally not fit to be President.

she is who she is and it seems to suit her and her rich family fine.

she may lie through her teeth during the primaries with promises promises, that won't be a surprise, but she will not be turning left.

Let's just inaugurate her right now!

You and the rest of the ineviablity crowd make me sick, Shrum.

You hit it on the head. She's the worst candidate we could nominate, and it's sickening to hear about her being the only choice blah blah blah.

Good things in American politics always have to be fought for, protected, shepherded, and fussed over every step of the way, and Mrs. Clinton's struggle will be no different, if she does it.

I think it's crazy to call the nomination this far out. It's crazy because our opponents have long since shambled into criminal territory, and they have resorted to traitorous tactics designed to undermine and destabilize the government itself.

You can depend upon Republicans to continue that. So we can depend upon the early Democratic front-runner to be savaged at every turn. Can Mrs. Clinton survive it? Probably. But not without a hell of a lot of help. That's not a sure thing.

I know there are a lot of people who aren't willing to call the nomination and want some alternatives to her. We'll see what happens, but I won't vote for her in the primary.

He and many others stated last year they were behind Clinton. The inevitability drum beats yet again. Can't blame this one on the press.