Should Hillary Run For President in 2004?

Just wondering the opinions of other DUers. Two questions:

1) Should Senator Clinton (NY) run for President in 2004?

2) If she did decide to run for President in 2004, how many of you who have already decided who you want to support would abandon that candidate in order to support Senator Clinton instead?

(Being new here, I hope I am not covering territory that's already been discussed.)

Thank you for your consideration.

The Democratic party needs to be the DEMOCRATIC Party, not the Clinton Party - as I fear it is becoming.

Bad idea.

fantasy.

and bring it up, and bring it up, and bring it up, and bring it up, and bring it up, and bring it up, and bring it up, and bring it up, and bring it up,

I don't think that she should run in 2004.

Not at this late point.

She's said repeatedly she isn't running, and promised to serve out her Senate term. For her to get in now would not be good for her or for the party.

will, nor do I believe that she should.

I'm very happy to say this is my 1000th post!!!!

nm

:D

Go for it! On this thread. Let's make it a double.

BTW, I live in Asheville, NC too.

I hope she doesn't run. People would flay her alive anyway, but what she'd hand them as an issue would be "ha-ha-ha, a broken promise, she's a liar" and other such crap. I wouldn't want to give the bad guys ANY ammunition. She DID say she wasn't going to run, and I hope she stands by that. Especially for New Yorkers, whom she seems to be serving and representing quite well. I hope she stays where she is for now. There are always other elections, and her star will not fade anytime soon.

on edit - It NEVER ceases to astound me - the reaction she generates. It just floors me to think how many people are SOOOOOOOO threatened by a powerful, intelligent, influential, articulate woman. Just WHAT IS THE DEAL???? Seems to me that tells you more about those who hate her than it does about the lady herself.

Promise I'll answer, but at this time I'd really like to hear from others and their opinion. I'm someone who listens a lot before I chime in. That's just me.

in this country, a whole host of reasons that 2004 is not the right race at the right time. This freakin' country is so backwards we probably won't have a female president until the next century, if then...

Supported the War in Iraq. Voted for the Patriot Act. Botched up heatlhcare reform.

Three strikes & you're out. The Democratic Part is not a toy of the Clintons.

2) If she were dumb enough to try it, of course not. And she's not that dumb! (Of course, if by some miracle she actually were to become the nominee, I would support her whole-heartedly against Bush.)

Her presence in the race would galvanize the GOP/radical right forces beyond reason. Any disgust or dismay with Bush would evaporate like ice in a blast furnace. If she wants to run in 2008, and can beat an incumbent Democrat in the primary, fine and dandy. All her entry in this race would do is all but guarantee Bush's reSelection.

Anyway, she's said no enough times for even the hardiest Clintonite to get the message.

Get the message?

She would destroy her credibility after the pledges she has made, and play right into all the "ruthless selfish" stereotyping the Right trys to pin on her. It would hurt her, it would hurt us.

2004 is not her year. We have several candidates who are more than qualified in this election cycle.

I'm becoming increasingly troubled by the anger and bickering amongst our Democratic candidates and their supporters. Every charge levelled by one against another (re: the Dean Confederate flag flap, Wesley Clark & Waco, Kerry and Skull & Bones, etc...) will only hurt us all come 11/04. My point being whomever becomes the nominee deserves all of our support, even if it's Joe Leiberman (God forbid) or Hillary.

"Enter" key must be bouncing...

And you're gonna be accused of not-nice things, too.

Not in '04. Maybe in '08.

There's too many people out there who go spastic at the mention of the name "Clinton" still, and she knows it.

why would someone as smart as Hill is supposed to be do something stupid like run when assholes like Leno are still making money off of dissing her and her hubby?

1. I believe she is a political capable as anyone in the country, but first I'd like her to show she can be successful in her own right.

2. She's a magnet for RWer's angst and I'd rather she serve where she can irritate them.

successful Democratic nominee to serve two terms as president.

She would disappoint many in her camp if she were to change and this late date.

I think Hillary would be a wonderful candidate and would make a much better president than her husband. She really cares about people and she's open to new ideas. Dennis would be her best possible running mate because he is honest, principled, and a visionary, and after two terms as Hillary's VP he'd be a shoe-in! Clinton/Kucinich could be the ticket for the future of America!

and No.

and I would NOT vote for her if she did enter the race.


The Democratic Party is about to have a NEW leader in Dean.



The days of the moderate Clintonites is over. We see where that centrist ruling led us :eyes:

I've seen a number of polls of Democratic primary voters showing her WAY ahead of the other candidates if she decided to get in the race (three times what the #2 guy got).

It's amazing that such a high percentage of DU respondents say "heck NO!".

I'm not a big Clinton fan myself (I just lok at where the party was in '92 and where it is now and ask the "are we better off" question), but I'm always for running the candidate with the best chance to win.

To stoke the fire, I ask this question because several good friends of mine tell me they are a supporter of one of the top tier candidates (as polling goes), but that they would jump on the Hillary bandwagon in a second should she throw her hat in the ring.

No. They're rather active in politics and the Democratic Party in my state. That's not the issue.

Too soon. She has only been an elected representative of gov't for a third of a term.

Secondly, i have a problem with the concept of political legacy. Look what that thinking got us in the White House, now!

Her being a Senator in NY, while her husband was Gov. of Ark. and President is a different path, so the legacy is a little more distant, and she working as a legislator and not as a gov't executive.

I think the whole thing smacks a little too much of divine right. I'm uncomfortable with it.

So, i'd rather she not run, even in 2008. Maybe '12 or '16, but not before she has a serious, personal, legislative track record. And, BTW, i respect her knowledge, and her skills, but i think it would be a bad idea for her to pursue the presidency.

Besides, being a senator from New York is a pretty important role.
The Professor

her nomination would bring out every right wing nutjob against us...

the rightwingers and most moderate repubs are all over confident of bush*, all thinking he'll win in a landslide...if hillary stays out of it they might stay home...


and besides....
SHE ISN'T RUNNING, STOP TALKING ABOUT IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You sound like a Republican. The only people I've ever known who thought a Hillary campaign was a good idea were Republicans. The only people I've ever known who even thought it was a remotely possible idea were Republicans.

I think you're a Republican, or a Freeper even.

I never indicated whether I thought it was a good idea or not. I just asked a question. If you read the whole thread, you'll see why I asked it. Stop being so paranoid.

And you still haven't answered my question.

Seriously, I have yet to meet a single Democrat or person who identifies with the Democratic party, let alone anyone higher up in the Dem party, who thinks a Hillary campaign is a good idea.

That you a) brought this thread up, and b) claim to have friends in the state Dem party who would support Hillary seems to me to be very suspicious.

It's like an Encyclopedia Brown mystery...

I believe I caught you making a lie.

The Ipsos-Reid/Cook Political Report Poll for November asked primary voters essentially "who would you support if Hillary got into the race": Hillary was WAY out in front.

If people here argue about Dean vs.(pickacandidate) and talk about Dean's "soaring" numbers... look at this:

Hillary 41%
Dean 11%
Clark 11%
Gephard/Kerry/Lieberman - Tied at 6-7%

what does YNGW stand for?

maybe Y not GW?

or You're No GW?

She is a lightning rod for RW hate.

Selfish me, but I like Dean/Clark, and Hillary hasn't
been working like a dog for the past year firing up
the party base.

We need that fire, or were sunk.

ever

She should keep her promise for a full senate term.

She should keep her promise for a full senate term.

I do not wish to hear, 24/7, about Vince Foster, Whitewater, and Travelgate, AGAIN!!! The media would run the footage as if all this were yesterday!

I'm not too excited about her comments about Iraq, either!