if Hillary doesn't run, and Republicans take back the White House

[daveosupremo]

will she be blamed and become an outcast from the Democratic Party?

[Free Bird]

Prepare for storm of people saying "NO YOU'RE WRONG SHE WILL RUN AND WILL WIN ALL THE STATES BECAUSE HAIL HILLARY!"

[King]

Hillary is going to run.

[Free Bird]

Hillary is going to run.

Boom. Told ya. BUT WHAT IF SHE DOESN'T, RINO?

[Simfan34]

Hillary is going to run.

Boom. Told ya. BUT WHAT IF SHE DOESN'T, RINO?

How would we eat bacon if pigs flew? This is an important question that needs to be answered.

[SteveRogers]

Hillary is going to run.

Boom. Told ya. BUT WHAT IF SHE DOESN'T, RINO?

I'll go one step further and say she's literally already running right now.

[Free Bird]

Hillary is going to run.

Boom. Told ya. BUT WHAT IF SHE DOESN'T, RINO?

I'll go one step further and say she's literally already running right now.

It's okay to speculate. You guys have a case there. But THIS is going too far.

[dmmidmi]

The premise of this thread (if Hillary doesn't run) is akin to "If the moon hits the Earth."

Speculation is fun, but this would all be "Let's make believe."

[Free Bird]

The premise of this thread (if Hillary doesn't run) is akin to "If the moon hits the Earth."

Speculation is fun, but this would all be "Let's make believe."

The people who don't think she runs have a credible case, you don't have to talk down to it

[IceSpear]

I'd imagine a lot of people will be upset with her (including myself). It would be one thing if she immediately took herself out of the running right after leaving SoS and never wavered from that position, but all the steps she's taken since then point to a run, and have essentially "frozen the field" for her. To pull out at this point would be a pretty dick move, just like Schweitzer who telegraphed for a while he was going to run for Senate only to pull out at the last second.

[Free Bird]

I'd imagine a lot of people will be upset with her (including myself). It would be one thing if she immediately took herself out of the running right after leaving SoS and never wavered from that position, but all the steps she's taken since then point to a run, and have essentially "frozen the field" for her. To pull out at this point would be a pretty dick move, just like Schweitzer who telegraphed for a while he was going to run for Senate only to pull out at the last second.

Which is why I am very skeptical about all the Clinton hype.

[Niemeyerite]

Prepare for storm of people saying "NO YOU'RE WRONG SHE WILL RUN AND WILL WIN ALL THE STATES BECAUSE HAIL HILLARY!"

Shut up.

[Free Bird]

Prepare for storm of people saying "NO YOU'RE WRONG SHE WILL RUN AND WILL WIN ALL THE STATES BECAUSE HAIL HILLARY!"

Shut up.

It's called satire. Learn to take it or get off the Internet

[Mister Mets]

Probably not.

Al Gore didn't get blamed for Bush's reelection, and got a lot of positive attention (especially from the left) with An Inconvenient Truth.

[dmmidmi]

The premise of this thread (if Hillary doesn't run) is akin to "If the moon hits the Earth."

Speculation is fun, but this would all be "Let's make believe."

The people who don't think she runs have a credible case, you don't have to talk down to it

The people who don't think she runs have built their case on wishful thinking and hoping that none of the GOP candidates have to go up against her in 2016.

You're willfully ignoring an awful lot of evidence if you sincerely think that the odds of her not running are better than the odds of her running.

[Free Bird]

The premise of this thread (if Hillary doesn't run) is akin to "If the moon hits the Earth."

Speculation is fun, but this would all be "Let's make believe."

The people who don't think she runs have a credible case, you don't have to talk down to it

The people who don't think she runs have built their case on wishful thinking and hoping that none of the GOP candidates have to go up against her in 2016.

You're willfully ignoring an awful lot of evidence if you sincerely think that the odds of her not running are better than the odds of her running.

No. I acknowledge it is very possible. What I am saying is that a lot of people are ignoring the possibilities that she WON'T.

1. Age. It matters.
2. Overall Health. Blood thinners are not a good sign of health, and campaigning is a stressful thing
3. Obama fatigue (might not stop her from running, but it will hurt her in the general)
4. Grandchild on the way. She might want to spend time with her family.
5. Failure of a book might discourage her
6. She KNOWS her foreign policy is atrocious

How are these and a few others I can't think of but know exist NOT legitimate arguments? How am I willfully ignoring the "inevitable" when you guys are ignoring these ideas when I wouldn't be shocked at all if she runs, but you wouldn't know what to do if she declined?

[dmmidmi]

The premise of this thread (if Hillary doesn't run) is akin to "If the moon hits the Earth."

Speculation is fun, but this would all be "Let's make believe."

The people who don't think she runs have a credible case, you don't have to talk down to it

The people who don't think she runs have built their case on wishful thinking and hoping that none of the GOP candidates have to go up against her in 2016.

You're willfully ignoring an awful lot of evidence if you sincerely think that the odds of her not running are better than the odds of her running.

No. I acknowledge it is very possible. What I am saying is that a lot of people are ignoring the possibilities that she WON'T.

1. Age. It matters.
2. Overall Health. Blood thinners are not a good sign of health, and campaigning is a stressful thing
3. Obama fatigue (might not stop her from running, but it will hurt her in the general)
4. Grandchild on the way. She might want to spend time with her family.
5. Failure of a book might discourage her
6. She KNOWS her foreign policy is atrocious

How are these and a few others I can't think of but know exist NOT legitimate arguments? How am I willfully ignoring the "inevitable" when you guys are ignoring these ideas when I wouldn't be shocked at all if she runs, but you wouldn't know what to do if she declined?

Because those ridiculous talking points are far weaker than every other indication that she has given that she will run.

Lagging sales of her book are going to determine whether or not she runs for President? Seriously? It debuted atop the NY Times bestseller list, as did Mitt Romney's book.

Grandchildren? George H.W. Bush had a couple of them by the time he ran.

Ronald Reagan was almost 70 when he assumed office.

Treating the indications for vs. against as equal, and weighing them equally, is disingenuous.

[Free Bird]

The premise of this thread (if Hillary doesn't run) is akin to "If the moon hits the Earth."

Speculation is fun, but this would all be "Let's make believe."

The people who don't think she runs have a credible case, you don't have to talk down to it

The people who don't think she runs have built their case on wishful thinking and hoping that none of the GOP candidates have to go up against her in 2016.

You're willfully ignoring an awful lot of evidence if you sincerely think that the odds of her not running are better than the odds of her running.

No. I acknowledge it is very possible. What I am saying is that a lot of people are ignoring the possibilities that she WON'T.

1. Age. It matters.
2. Overall Health. Blood thinners are not a good sign of health, and campaigning is a stressful thing
3. Obama fatigue (might not stop her from running, but it will hurt her in the general)
4. Grandchild on the way. She might want to spend time with her family.
5. Failure of a book might discourage her
6. She KNOWS her foreign policy is atrocious

How are these and a few others I can't think of but know exist NOT legitimate arguments? How am I willfully ignoring the "inevitable" when you guys are ignoring these ideas when I wouldn't be shocked at all if she runs, but you wouldn't know what to do if she declined?

Because those ridiculous talking points are far weaker than every other indication that she has given that she will run.

Lagging sales of her book are going to determine whether or not she runs for President? Seriously? It debuted atop the NY Times bestseller list, as did Mitt Romney's book.

Grandchildren? George H.W. Bush had a couple of them by the time he ran.

Ronald Reagan was almost 70 when he assumed office.

Treating the indications for vs. against as equal, and weighing them equally, is disingenuous.

Not a newborn one to my knowledge. And everyone is different. Hillary might crow a soul when her grandchild is born and want to be with it instead of risking her own health. Blood thinners aren't a thing to scoff off. As for the Reagan point, he was unhealthy when he assumed office based on my observations. Probably beginning stages of dementia by 82. The point is, don't go being convinced. Stranger things have happened. Schweitzer declined to run for senate when everyone thought he would and the signs pointed to it, same with Warner running for president in 08. Nothing is inevitable.

[MurrayBannerman]

This thread prefix should be renamed "If Hillary dies or has a heart attack/stroke..."

[dmmidmi]

The premise of this thread (if Hillary doesn't run) is akin to "If the moon hits the Earth."

Speculation is fun, but this would all be "Let's make believe."

The people who don't think she runs have a credible case, you don't have to talk down to it

The people who don't think she runs have built their case on wishful thinking and hoping that none of the GOP candidates have to go up against her in 2016.

You're willfully ignoring an awful lot of evidence if you sincerely think that the odds of her not running are better than the odds of her running.

No. I acknowledge it is very possible. What I am saying is that a lot of people are ignoring the possibilities that she WON'T.

1. Age. It matters.
2. Overall Health. Blood thinners are not a good sign of health, and campaigning is a stressful thing
3. Obama fatigue (might not stop her from running, but it will hurt her in the general)
4. Grandchild on the way. She might want to spend time with her family.
5. Failure of a book might discourage her
6. She KNOWS her foreign policy is atrocious

How are these and a few others I can't think of but know exist NOT legitimate arguments? How am I willfully ignoring the "inevitable" when you guys are ignoring these ideas when I wouldn't be shocked at all if she runs, but you wouldn't know what to do if she declined?

Because those ridiculous talking points are far weaker than every other indication that she has given that she will run.

Lagging sales of her book are going to determine whether or not she runs for President? Seriously? It debuted atop the NY Times bestseller list, as did Mitt Romney's book.

Grandchildren? George H.W. Bush had a couple of them by the time he ran.

Ronald Reagan was almost 70 when he assumed office.

Treating the indications for vs. against as equal, and weighing them equally, is disingenuous.

Not a newborn one to my knowledge. And everyone is different. Hillary might crow a soul when her grandchild is born and want to be with it instead of risking her own health. Blood thinners aren't a thing to scoff off. As for the Reagan point, he was unhealthy when he assumed office based on my observations. Probably beginning stages of dementia by 82. The point is, don't go being convinced. Stranger things have happened. Schweitzer declined to run for senate when everyone thought he would and the signs pointed to it, same with Warner running for president in 08. Nothing is inevitable.

So, the argument that she probably will not run is predicated on the following:

-She has a grandchild
-Book sales are disappointing
-She has gone to the hospital for health issues
-Mark Warner didn't run for President, and Brian Schweitzer didn't run for Senate

Do you even read what you're typing out? This is seriously the evidence that someone is basing their position that Clinton will not run on? Despite writing a book, numerous speaking engagements, a fluff piece on ABC, and every other piece of evidence that points towards someone laying the groundwork for a Presidential run, those signs all point towards a likely pass?

You know what? This is par for Republicans and conservatives. The people saying this are the same people who were arguing that, despite all contrary evidence, Mitt Romney's chance of winning in 2012 was at least 50%. Wishful thinking and prayers.

[MATTROSE94]

From the looks of this article (which was posted on the forum a couple weeks back), It seems that Hillary Clinton is already preparing the groundwork for a 2016 Presidential run.

http://hollywoodlife.com/2014/08/05/hillary-clinton-campaign-president-running-2016/

Getting back to the original question, I don't think that Hillary Clinton will become an outcast in the Democratic Party if she somehow decides not to run. Heck, it is also possible that Clinton's reputation might even improve in the eyes of some people.

[Free Bird]

The premise of this thread (if Hillary doesn't run) is akin to "If the moon hits the Earth."

Speculation is fun, but this would all be "Let's make believe."

The people who don't think she runs have a credible case, you don't have to talk down to it

The people who don't think she runs have built their case on wishful thinking and hoping that none of the GOP candidates have to go up against her in 2016.

You're willfully ignoring an awful lot of evidence if you sincerely think that the odds of her not running are better than the odds of her running.

No. I acknowledge it is very possible. What I am saying is that a lot of people are ignoring the possibilities that she WON'T.

1. Age. It matters.
2. Overall Health. Blood thinners are not a good sign of health, and campaigning is a stressful thing
3. Obama fatigue (might not stop her from running, but it will hurt her in the general)
4. Grandchild on the way. She might want to spend time with her family.
5. Failure of a book might discourage her
6. She KNOWS her foreign policy is atrocious

How are these and a few others I can't think of but know exist NOT legitimate arguments? How am I willfully ignoring the "inevitable" when you guys are ignoring these ideas when I wouldn't be shocked at all if she runs, but you wouldn't know what to do if she declined?

Because those ridiculous talking points are far weaker than every other indication that she has given that she will run.

Lagging sales of her book are going to determine whether or not she runs for President? Seriously? It debuted atop the NY Times bestseller list, as did Mitt Romney's book.

Grandchildren? George H.W. Bush had a couple of them by the time he ran.

Ronald Reagan was almost 70 when he assumed office.

Treating the indications for vs. against as equal, and weighing them equally, is disingenuous.

Not a newborn one to my knowledge. And everyone is different. Hillary might crow a soul when her grandchild is born and want to be with it instead of risking her own health. Blood thinners aren't a thing to scoff off. As for the Reagan point, he was unhealthy when he assumed office based on my observations. Probably beginning stages of dementia by 82. The point is, don't go being convinced. Stranger things have happened. Schweitzer declined to run for senate when everyone thought he would and the signs pointed to it, same with Warner running for president in 08. Nothing is inevitable.

So, the argument that she probably will not run is predicated on the following:

-She has a grandchild
-Book sales are disappointing
-She has gone to the hospital for health issues
-Mark Warner didn't run for President, and Brian Schweitzer didn't run for Senate

Do you even read what you're typing out? This is seriously the evidence that someone is basing their position that Clinton will not run on? Despite writing a book, numerous speaking engagements, a fluff piece on ABC, and every other piece of evidence that points towards someone laying the groundwork for a Presidential run, those signs all point towards a likely pass?

You know what? This is par for Republicans and conservatives. The people saying this are the same people who were arguing that, despite all contrary evidence, Mitt Romney's chance of winning in 2012 was at least 50%. Wishful thinking and prayers.

Wow calm down. You're generalizing me so much. The Warner argument was not for him specifically. It was to prove that stranger things have happened. You're so worried about keeping the White House that you panic whenever somebody even SUGGESTS that your only shot won't run. And book sales weren't intended as an argument, they were to imply that she knows people are getting sick of her. Calm down.

[Never]

The premise of this thread (if Hillary doesn't run) is akin to "If the moon hits the Earth."

Speculation is fun, but this would all be "Let's make believe."

The people who don't think she runs have a credible case, you don't have to talk down to it

The people who don't think she runs have built their case on wishful thinking and hoping that none of the GOP candidates have to go up against her in 2016.

You're willfully ignoring an awful lot of evidence if you sincerely think that the odds of her not running are better than the odds of her running.

No. I acknowledge it is very possible. What I am saying is that a lot of people are ignoring the possibilities that she WON'T.

1. Age. It matters.
2. Overall Health. Blood thinners are not a good sign of health, and campaigning is a stressful thing
3. Obama fatigue (might not stop her from running, but it will hurt her in the general)
4. Grandchild on the way. She might want to spend time with her family.
5. Failure of a book might discourage her
6. She KNOWS her foreign policy is atrocious

How are these and a few others I can't think of but know exist NOT legitimate arguments? How am I willfully ignoring the "inevitable" when you guys are ignoring these ideas when I wouldn't be shocked at all if she runs, but you wouldn't know what to do if she declined?

Because those ridiculous talking points are far weaker than every other indication that she has given that she will run.

Lagging sales of her book are going to determine whether or not she runs for President? Seriously? It debuted atop the NY Times bestseller list, as did Mitt Romney's book.

Grandchildren? George H.W. Bush had a couple of them by the time he ran.

Ronald Reagan was almost 70 when he assumed office.

Treating the indications for vs. against as equal, and weighing them equally, is disingenuous.

Not a newborn one to my knowledge. And everyone is different. Hillary might crow a soul when her grandchild is born and want to be with it instead of risking her own health. Blood thinners aren't a thing to scoff off. As for the Reagan point, he was unhealthy when he assumed office based on my observations. Probably beginning stages of dementia by 82. The point is, don't go being convinced. Stranger things have happened. Schweitzer declined to run for senate when everyone thought he would and the signs pointed to it, same with Warner running for president in 08. Nothing is inevitable.

So, the argument that she probably will not run is predicated on the following:

-She has a grandchild
-Book sales are disappointing
-She has gone to the hospital for health issues
-Mark Warner didn't run for President, and Brian Schweitzer didn't run for Senate

Do you even read what you're typing out? This is seriously the evidence that someone is basing their position that Clinton will not run on? Despite writing a book, numerous speaking engagements, a fluff piece on ABC, and every other piece of evidence that points towards someone laying the groundwork for a Presidential run, those signs all point towards a likely pass?

You know what? This is par for Republicans and conservatives. The people saying this are the same people who were arguing that, despite all contrary evidence, Mitt Romney's chance of winning in 2012 was at least 50%. Wishful thinking and prayers.

While Hillary Clinton is likely to run for president at this point, we cannot say that she is guaranteed to do so. Until she formally announces her candidacy, I don't see the problem with speculating what the 2016 election would look without her in the ring. Surely many factors are affecting Clinton's decision-making process, and as outside observers, there are probably some that we can't readily assess.

It's not like everything is going to be smooth sailing for any potential candidate. FreedomHawk seems to be pointing out some of the obstacles to a Clinton candidacy and accepting that people don't always make the choice we expect them to.

[Dixie Reborn]

Wishful thinking and prayers.

Kind of like how Democrats think Hillary will win 47 states and her coattails will let them win every senate elections etc...

[Free Bird]

As I've said, I won't be shocked if she runs. There IS evidence to support it. BUT, I won't be shocked if she doesn't, unlike some that will have convulsions at the mere thought of her passing.