Hillary in 2012

It is my contention that Hillary Clinton has not lost her taste for power and still intends to challenge Obama in 2012. For this to be successful she needs about 18 months to mount a campaign (that includes the campaign year) or about February of 2011. This will be used to put together her organization and her fund raising. To do this she has to be outside the Obama adminstration for about 6 to 10 months so she does not appear to be an ambitious spoiler. Here is the important thing, she has to appear to break from Obama over a moral or national security issue. She is the Secretary of State so that would be her bailiwick. Possibly North Korea. The South and North are at again and it is very serious this time. Hillary has made big talk about how the North had better mind it's manners whereas Obama has said nothing. Hillary can say all the platitudes of she cannot in remain in an administration that takes national security so lightly.
She would look like the adult and the more moderate Democrat.
Any questions???

I agree with you that I believe she will run again in 2012. Korea would be a good issue for her to make her break from the administration without it looking as if she quit to run for President. To do that would be bad for her in much the same way Palin is hammered for quitting the Govenorship of AK. I supported Hillary during the Primary in much the same way I supported McCain, I think she is to the right of President Obama in ideology. She would have been the lessor of two evils.

The whole N. Korea/S. Korea situation is a little scary right now and Obama really needs to step up here. N. Korea's actions were totally unacceptable and many other countries would have already retaliated. Obama needs to lean hard on China not to block any UN actions.

I guess did not miss this one by much did he, Iran and Korea have certainly maintained their membership in the axis of evil.

I agree that HRC's ambition has always been to ascend to the presidency. Although I think she will wait until 2016 so she is not seen as a spoiler or as disgruntled by the Democraptic hierarchy. I believe that she will resign as SOS sometime before the election in 2012, but that will be to begin her fund-raising efforts. If the Bamster wins re-election, she will look as the heir-apparent, since Biden is as dumb as a fencepost and has the IQ of mayonnaise. If the Bamster loses, she will be the "I told you so" candidate.

Although I, too wanted HRC in 2008, Oprah and George Soros' money was too much for even Hillary to overcome. I personally think she'll stay the course for the long haul as SOS . If BHO loses in 2012, she is still in a strong position as one of our better SOS in recent times and the leading candidate in 2016. Funny about Biden, his wife has a PhD and comes off as very intelligent (but that's another subject). I don't really think Obama will lose in 2012 unless he pulls a real boner (like GHW Bush: "Read My Lips, No new taxes"). Who have the Repubs got? Palin? Do any of you think that ditz is qualified to be president? Mitch McConnell? aka Mr. Wall Street's poodle. John Boehner? He lost his prestige when Rand Paul beat his endorsed candidate in Kentucky. Senator Scott Brown? Too much of a novice (sound familiar, Barack?) We could run wishy washy John McCain again (ROFLMAO). Then, there is Michael Steel, RNC Chairman - awe, no, he's too weak). Looks like a Washington outsider may come in and shake things up, much like Carter did in 1976. Do we need another Jimmy Carter? Basically honest, but not the leadership we were looking for. All we Republicans have now is Dick Cheney. Laughable at best. Wouldn't the Dems love us for running him? Palin could be his VEEP (LMAO, "You Betcha!"). America!!!! LIsten up!!! We need help. Now, let's hear it from the rest of you folks, this should be a good forum for this issue.

This is a good demonstration of how far out the left is when it comes to the right. Ask who could be president and you get an insult hurled at Sarah Palin. Then you get a laundry list of people that are not even top tier because you don't understand the right. Like Norman Lear trying to write a "conservative" comedy. It always turns into a caricature. The people most talked about on the right; Palin (what really counts is can she be elected), Bachman, Christie, Pawlenty, Gringrich, Romney, or Barbour. Not trying to be demeaning to anyone but you need a lesson in what the right is really all about.
But back to the original purpose of the post. When 2010 is over it is likely the democrats will have lost the house and will come close to losing the senate. It will all be blamed on Obama and the economy is not improving. For every gain the White House crows about (the stock market going up in April) they try to get out of when events change (the stock market going down in May). Hillary has to distance herself from this adminstration with the moral high ground and sufficient time to mount a challenge. Either she has to pick her time or has to concoct a reason to leave with right and the public on her side.

Let me step into the shoes of Omahan and say that keep the remarks and comments germain to the thread and lets stop with the personal insults. I don't consider it an insult if you back it up with fact ie.; X is not as smart as Y, X has very low college scores and almost flunked whereas Y graduated with honors from the same college.

Let me step into the shoes of Omahan and say that keep the remarks and comments germain to the thread and lets stop with the personal insults. I don't consider it an insult if you back it up with fact ie.; X is not as smart as Y, X has very low college scores and almost flunked whereas Y graduated with honors from the same college. Originally Posted by john_galt

As Joe Biden once said, "I think I probably have a much higher IQ than you do, I suspect" because I would know better than to misspell 'germane' the way that you just spelled it. HA HA HA (NOTE: This is not an insult because I backed it up with fact.)

You know Monger you might actually bring something to a thread sometime, rather than run out from under the coffee table and nip at someones toes and then run back under it like a yapping dog. Bring something to a post or STFU.

My deepest apologies Monger, I sometimes slip into German... I hope you don't mind Scheisskopf! Tut mir leid, bitte


Of course that or your comments do absolutely nothing to defeat my comment, do they???

I think Hillary still has a thirst for power...but she is still paying the debts from her last run, her husband has used up all of his political capital, and Obama has the big dem fundraisers in his camp. It really is startling - Hillary controlled the bulk of the money in the party. Barak buses a bunch of people in to vote in Iowa, and presto, the Clinton era of control is over.

I really think the era of Clinton relevance is over. Now Barak has been marginalizing Hillary, which might piss her off enough to run...and Obama himself may not run for re-election...but if I were to bet on it, I'd say Hillary sits the next one out.

Check out the book "Game Change" by Mark Halperin who is a liberal wienie but it is an interesting read. Just don't get too incensed by the comments dropped by a guy (Halperin) who does not really understand middle America.

Hillary was boned just like some other women in Obama's life. What a sweetie...

short & sweet no she will not win & why bring up korea they sank a south krorea ship not ours. Its best to let Hillary talk tough but not the prez it leaves room for us to see what the north dose but if the prez talks to hard then the north dose some more dumb shit then we'd have no chose but bomb them right. So this way the people in the field can try & talk this over. We can't be everybodies big brother.

I was stationed in South Korea, as part of the 2ID. We are doing more than just butting our nose in Korea's business....we have had a committed troop presence since the cease fire in the 1950's...and if the shit hits the fan, we will see a couple thousand US Troops vaporized in what would be the largest artillery (and rocket) barrage since WWI. The civilian toll would also be enormous. The concept of merely 'bombing' North Korea is not on the table. The first explosion in the north triggers the barrage. Our troops are essentially human shields...one of the little talked about successes of Rumsfeld is his reduction of our troop strength there, precisely because of this delima.

Hillary is taking the role of the 'grown up', and by doing this, she lets Obama play golf and look like he doesn't care. I can see how she is manuevering on this issue...but at the same time, I have always thought that Hillary genuinely took national security very seriously (I strongly contemplated voting for her over McCain, if it had come to that).

HRC is serving in the role at the pleasure(pardon the pun) of the President. Maybe my memory is bad, but when is the last time a sitting President eligible for re-election did not recieve his parties nomination? My memory took me back into the 30's before FDR. My point is, highly unlikely if history is an indicator of future that Barack will not represent the Dem's in 2012. HRC lost her opportunity in 08, her best hope is 2016 riding the coattails of Obama and the ineptence of the moderate Repulicans to control the far right which hopefully will cost them again...

As Joe Biden once said, "I think I probably have a much higher IQ than you do, I suspect" Originally Posted by Longermonger

Was Biden talking to the jar of mayonnaise?

Was Biden talking to the jar of mayonnaise? Originally Posted by fritz3552

It was a Joe Biden quote from his first Presidential campaign. I though that since another poster brought it up...and this thread is about who'd run in 2012...that it was on topic...or as Latoya Jackson might say, 'Jermaine'. I just got a PM from ONE OF the mods for insulting John Galt. Figure that one out and then tell me if he got in trouble for calling me a shithead.

As far as Hillary running in 2012, you're dead wrong. History will prove you wrong.