Hillary.

[Blue3]

Sorry about that, Snowstalker, didn't see it on the last page.


1. What concerns you, ideologically, about her? I know she didn't sound much better in 2008 than Obama does now on some civil liberty issues, and is more conservative in sticking with the war on drugs, but I'd rather solidify all the good Obama has done and finish anything left on his agenda by having Clinton for 8 years (as well as just trusting her to lead us, in general) and then get more civil/social libertarian-minded Democrats after her. I don't see Cuomo, Gillibrand, or O'Malley being better than Clinton on these issues either.

2. I didn't say that was my reason, though I am excited about the possiblility of us electing our first female president, and I really do believe she is the best regardless of gender.

3. Thanks, we agree here.

4. Yeah, this is a wait-and-see, but she's already learned from her mistakes before and emerged stronger...

[Blue3]

sorry, quoted myself instead of editing

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I'm only now becoming a full-blown supporter of Obama; before I saw him as a decent president who was keeping us from a Romney presidency. However, Hillary, at least in image, is more moderate and pragmatic. The Democratic Party has been moving right (other than on social issues) for the past 25 years or so, and I think that Hillary would at best let that trend continue and at worst accelerate it. The main flaw with the Obama presidency is that its reforms have lacked a central focus. Roosevelt had the "New Deal", Truman the "Fair Deal", Johnson the "Great Society". Obama would have been stronger had he pushed for a single package and advertised his platform as moving forwards towards one goal. And given her record on the campaign and the fact that she's married to Bill Clinton (possibly the worst Democratic president of the 20th century), I don't see Hillary as even center-left, let alone progressive. Though I don't want defeat in 2016, the best bet in the long run may actually be for a Republican to win, then for a liberal version of Ronald Reagan (Elizabeth Warren? Brian Schweitzer? Kamala Harris?) to win in 2020 and succeed in actually moving the nation to a left-right division as opposed to a center-right/far-right division.

[Beet]

The "New Deal", the "Fair Deal" and the "Great Society" were all domestic economic programs. I don't see anything in Hillary's record on the campaign that suggests she's to the right of Obama on these issues, if anything, in her last campaign she was slightly to the left of him. So if you're a full-blown supporter of Obama, I don't see any grounds to not be a full-blown supporter of Hillary if your top priority is the left-right spectrum and economic issues.

It also troubles me when people presume to know Hillary's mind based on Bill's presidency. Hillary is her own person. She's not an appendage of Bill. Part of me wants her to win solely to prove that. If her politics are pragmatic, it's because she's an establishment figure, like Obama (who packed his administration with Bill's officials), not because of who she married. The idea that a woman, no matter how accomplished or admired, completely is stripped of her independence, and uniqueness as a human being after marrying someone who becomes more powerful than her, is profoundly troubling.

[politicallefty]

I disagree that Hillary lost in '08 because of un-likability. As I recall, when Obama condescendingly told Hillary that she was "likable enough" this backfired on him. Hillary's personality and character has always been one of her strengths, if not her main strength.

She only lost the primary because she was didn't take the caucus states seriously enough. If every state had a primary, she would probably be POTUS right now. (However, I should say that I'm not one to say she was cheated, as the rules were in place fair and square.)

I'm not a Hillary supporter just because I feel like jumping on the bandwagon. As I've said before, I voted for Hillary in the 2008 primaries. The biggest substantive difference I recall was that Hillary supported an individual mandate for healthcare and Obama did not (and look how that turned out). Hillary is probably our best chance at a big win in 2016, someone who can pull in new Democrats in Congress. With majorities in both Houses, we can bring about serious progressive changes (not to mention what another term or more will mean for the courts).  The only reason we didn't get more out of the 111th Congress was due to the filibuster. Speaker Pelosi moved a lot of great legislation through the House that just died in the Senate. At worst, she'll be similar to Bill Clinton or Barack Obama. I think she has the potential to be even greater. None of that even includes the historical significance of actually having a President Hillary Clinton. I love the idea of President Clinton working alongside Speaker Pelosi.

[Gamecock]

Though I don't want defeat in 2016, the best bet in the long run may actually be for a Republican to win, then for a liberal version of Ronald Reagan (Elizabeth Warren? Brian Schweitzer? Kamala Harris?) to win in 2020 and succeed in actually moving the nation to a left-right division as opposed to a center-right/far-right division.

It's really simplistic to think that 2008-2020 is a repeat of the Nixon-Reagan cycle. 2016 is not destined to be Jimmy Carter 2.0. One major difference is that the Nixon coalition was a much more stable force compared to the Obama coalition. It remains to be seen if Democrats are going to be able to keep all of their factions satisfied. It is very difficult to manage a coalition of the most privileged and the least privileged, but we’ll see.

I'm unsure whether Clinton would be able to keep it together...

[Sbane]

Rich people vote Republican.

[Obamanation]

Though I don't want defeat in 2016, the best bet in the long run may actually be for a Republican to win, then for a liberal version of Ronald Reagan (Elizabeth Warren? Brian Schweitzer? Kamala Harris?) to win in 2020 and succeed in actually moving the nation to a left-right division as opposed to a center-right/far-right division.

It's really simplistic to think that 2008-2020 is a repeat of the Nixon-Reagan cycle. 2016 is not destined to be Jimmy Carter 2.0. One major difference is that the Nixon coalition was a much more stable force compared to the Obama coalition. It remains to be seen if Democrats are going to be able to keep all of their factions satisfied. It is very difficult to manage a coalition of the most privileged and the least privileged, but we’ll see.

I'm unsure whether Clinton would be able to keep it together...

Proof?

[BluegrassBlueVote]

Yeah, given that Nixon won 49 states in '72 and Ford barely managed half of that in the very next cycle, I wouldn't call that a stable coalition.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Yeah, given that Nixon won 49 states in '72 and Ford barely managed half of that in the very next cycle, I wouldn't call that a stable coalition.

Not to mention that the most Republican region in 1972 became the most Democratic region in 1976.

[IceSpear]

This thread was certainly an interesting read.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Given her name recognition and the fact that she's admittedly done a good enough job as SoS, this current frontrunner status is natural.

If she's the nominee, I'd probably vote for her, and she'd probably be at least an okay president.

I would support Clinton if she was the only option for keeping the White House in Democratic hands, which doesn't seem likely, supposing that we still have a good field to choose from in 2016 and she doesn't scare away some of the more progressive possibilities.

That said, I basically agree with Snowstalker's reading of Clinton. There's a reason I was for John Edwards and then for Barack Obama in 2008. Clinton is certainly a winning candidate, but I would prefer one that is to her left.

Of course, I'll vote for whomever the D nominee is because the Republicans are insufferable and cannot be trusted in government. But a Hillary nomination would certainly be a roadblock to the evolution of the Democratic Party into a fully progressive party.

I'm only now becoming a full-blown supporter of Obama

Oh how things have changed...

[Maistre]

A week is considered an eternity in politics. So digging up statements from a year ago doesn't really prove your point.

[IceSpear]

A week is considered an eternity in politics. So digging up statements from a year ago doesn't really prove your point.

I'm not sure what you think my point is.

[tarheel-leftist85]

hillary is going to ditch her "better""clinger" coalition from '08 - the people who care about permanent disemployment, foreclosure fraud, and other FIRE sector economic rape - for the brObot "ascendant coalition" who hides their pro-Wall Street view behind the rainbow flag and the marijuana leaf. her '08 coalition will be demoralized. but they were all racists anyway, bro, and deserve to have their retirement confiscated by open-minded bros at JP Morgan.

[Bacon King]

Look guys you can be ready4hillary now or ready4hillary when she's in the general election against Rand Paul or Ted Cruz, putting off your support of her greatness is only going to make it harder harder on you

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

What has Hillary accomplished, why should anyone vote for her?

[IceSpear]

Ah Hillary Clinton is ahead in the primary polls. Does this sound familiar to anyone else?

Only on a surface level.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_Democratic_Party_2008_presidential_candidates
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_Democratic_Party_2016_presidential_primaries

Pretty clear and glaring differences.

[H. Ross Peron]

hillary is going to ditch her "better""clinger" coalition from '08 - the people who care about permanent disemployment, foreclosure fraud, and other FIRE sector economic rape - for the brObot "ascendant coalition" who hides their pro-Wall Street view behind the rainbow flag and the marijuana leaf. her '08 coalition will be demoralized. but they were all racists anyway, bro, and deserve to have their retirement confiscated by open-minded bros at JP Morgan.

Welp...