Chance Clinton Doesn't Run

[RFayette]

I know a lot of Republicans are mighty scared of Clinton given her poll numbers, and it seems their best hope is for her not to run.

What's the chance Clinton gives this gift to the GOP?  It appears some are suggesting it's possible.

I say it's basically a 0% chance because the national Democratic party would destroy Clinton if she doesn't run, given her massive advantages in GE polling matchups.  They just won't let her pass up a run, even if she doesn't want one.

[Beet]

F__ the national Democratic party. If the Democrats try to attack Clinton for not running, I would leave the Democratic party, and so should she. Further, any party that tries to interfere with the civil liberties of private citizens would be inherently totalitarian and should be destroyed immediately.

The last thing the Democrats should want is a candidate who is physically and mentally unprepared to run. Even if elected, such a person would be a bad president and only serve to eviscerate the party further than the damage Obama has already done (down-ballot).

[Abraham Reagan]

Clinton not running is about as likely as Ted Cruz becoming a democrat.

[IceSpear]

Like 1-2%.

[Beet]

It's hilarious how Democrats are hanging onto her heels like a bunch of pathetic losers anyway, after what they did to her in 2008. I think it would be hilarious if she didn't run and just gave them all the big F.U.

[IceSpear]

It's hilarious how Democrats are hanging onto her heels like a bunch of pathetic losers anyway, after what they did to her in 2008. I think it would be hilarious if she didn't run and just gave them all the big F.U.

Hey, better late than never for them to realize the error of their ways.

[moderatevoter]

It's hilarious how Democrats are hanging onto her heels like a bunch of pathetic losers anyway, after what they did to her in 2008. I think it would be hilarious if she didn't run and just gave them all the big F.U.

That actually would be hilarious.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

I know a lot of Republicans are mighty scared of Clinton given her poll numbers, and it seems their best hope is for her not to run.

What's the chance Clinton gives this gift to the GOP?  It appears some are suggesting it's possible.

I say it's basically a 0% chance because the national Democratic party would destroy Clinton if she doesn't run, given her massive advantages in GE polling matchups.  They just won't let her pass up a run, even if she doesn't want one.

How could the national Democratic party "destroy" Clinton?

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

35%. Remember, democrats had to beg her to even consider running. This idea that she's near-certain to run is silly, though based on her book, paid speeches, and the massive drafting effort, it is likelier than not that she will run.

[Türkisblau]

I know a lot of Republicans are mighty scared of Clinton given her poll numbers, and it seems their best hope is for her not to run.

What's the chance Clinton gives this gift to the GOP?  It appears some are suggesting it's possible.

I say it's basically a 0% chance because the national Democratic party would destroy Clinton if she doesn't run, given her massive advantages in GE polling matchups.  They just won't let her pass up a run, even if she doesn't want one.

How could the national Democratic party "destroy" Clinton?

It almost sounds like the DNC mob is going to go after her.

You better run or Chelsea's next.

[heatmaster]

Over hyped and overrated; remember in 2008? Hillary as we all know was the prohibitive favorite for the nomination and along came this guy Obama; so what makes me think,  even 'if' she gets the nomination, that doesn't mean she's got the election wrapped up. I recall that in 1960, Vice President Nixon was deemed a strong possibility for winning the presidency,  by virtue of the fact he had no primary competition,  what happened?  A guy called John Kennedy who had been seasoned and steeled by a vigorous primary campaign,  by virtue of the fact of him selecting Lyndon Johnson narrowly won that election. The lesson is this, Hillary might not have to endure a competitive primary campaign, that doesn't mean she has a lock on the election. For example say her opponent is one of the following individuals,  Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney, John Kasich, Chris Christie or Rick Perry and one of these individuals go with a female Vice Presidential nominee, e.g. Joni Ernst, Haley,  Susanna Martinez or even Condoleezza Rice. Then everyone might need to throw out the conventional wisdom play book and go back to the drawing board. Democrats & Republicans don't have the wisdom of 20/20 vision in hindsight and as none of us are blessed with the ability of being able to see into the future. Everyone is clinging to the comfort blanket of C.W. & not learning from the lessons of history. Democrats have the hope that a movement conservative like Cruz, Paul, Huckster or Santorum will be the party's standard bearer and therefore the election is there's.  We Republicans are hungry, not stupid...I think cynical pragmatic thinking will prevail and our party will be looking at demographics and electoral votes, when the primary season gets closer. The election is going to be closely fought affair, Democrats are going to be angry that they have to fight for every vote,  all because Republicans are hungry and got smart. Anyone remember 1980? Jimmy Carter despite all the problems,  underestimated Reagan like every one else. But he didn't count on events or someone like John Anderson or the "there you go again" moment in that debate to produce the outcome we got. As the 1980 election illustrates,  depending on conventional wisdom is not a smart call. You have to consider events, issues, the identity of the candidates and yes even maybe those pesky debates. There are so many different scenarios to consider as well. Remember 1968? no one believed in January of that year, the events which would occur. The Tet offensive,  Bobby Kennedy running for President,  his assassination and the assassination of MLK,  the withdrawal of LBJ from the presidential contest,  the riots in Chicago & what happened?  Well the rest is history. The object lesson is this, there will be different dynamics and paradigm's at play in 2016. You heard it here. So please take note.

[pbrower2a]

It looks as if Hillary Clinton's chances of not being the Democratic nominee are essentially actuarial (as in health).

[RFayette]

I know a lot of Republicans are mighty scared of Clinton given her poll numbers, and it seems their best hope is for her not to run.

What's the chance Clinton gives this gift to the GOP?  It appears some are suggesting it's possible.

I say it's basically a 0% chance because the national Democratic party would destroy Clinton if she doesn't run, given her massive advantages in GE polling matchups.  They just won't let her pass up a run, even if she doesn't want one.

How could the national Democratic party "destroy" Clinton?

It almost sounds like the DNC mob is going to go after her.

You better run or Chelsea's next.

What I meant was that Hillary would be ostracized by the party for choosing not to run and they might try to take away things like speaking engagements from her.

[Württemberger]

Probably roughly 10%.

[Stranger in a strange land]

Less than 5%.

[Blair]

I recall that in 1960, Vice President Nixon was deemed a strong possibility for winning the presidency,  by virtue of the fact he had no primary competition,  what happened?  A guy called John Kennedy who had been seasoned and steeled by a vigorous primary campaign,  by virtue of the fact of him selecting Lyndon Johnson narrowly won that election. The lesson is this, Hillary might not have to endure a competitive primary campaign, that doesn't mean she has a lock on the election. For example say her opponent is one of the following individuals,  Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney, John Kasich, Chris Christie or Rick Perry

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWXRNySMW4s

[ElectionsGuy]

30%

[SWE]

Hillary won't run

[SPC]

About 1%

[Jerseyrules]

Same chance that Nixon wouldn't run in 1960 or Gore in 2000

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Same chance that Nixon wouldn't run in 1960 or Gore in 2000

I hope that means 33%

I know they're independent events, but we're due for a gift!

[dudeabides]

As a Republican, I would love to have Elizabeth Warren as the Democratic nominee, or Bernie Sanders for that matter.

Both would lose on the issues, plus Warren has baggage.

In terms of the Hillary Clinton question, I am almost certain she will run - I'd give it 90% chance she runs. But, will she be the nominee? Probably. But, of all her prospective opponents (Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Martin O'Mally, Jim Webb) Webb probably has the best chance of defeating her. Why? Biden is undisciplined, O'Mally has lower name I.D. than Warren with liberal activists, Warren is all over the place, and Sanders doesn't come across as presidential - plus he will have no money. Webb will likely do well with voters who supported Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton in 2008 - the left wing of the party, as well as independents in certain states. He could also compete with Hillary for union households as he is running as a populist.

[Maxwell]

It's hilarious how Democrats are hanging onto her heels like a bunch of pathetic losers anyway, after what they did to her in 2008. I think it would be hilarious if she didn't run and just gave them all the big F.U.

What, actually looked at a different candidate and thought, huh, this guy isn't terrible, let's go with him.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I really hope she doesn't.

[HAnnA MArin County]

I really hope she doesn't.

I hope she doesn't either. That way we can nominate an Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders and end up with a President Mitt Romney or President Jeb Bush.