Should we really be ruling out a Hillary 2020 run?

[Hammy]

I hate to break it to you Timmy, but the online sexists won, and decency lost, as the former had the patriarchy behind them.

Sexism isn't to blame for Clinton's incompetence--he people that refused to vote for her because she was a woman, would likely not have voted for any Democrat in the first place. And going with this reason makes the same mistakes of nominating somebody who is reviled and unable to run a competent campaign even more likely to be repeated.

Seriously, is there ANYTHING worse than the smug, self-assuring look of liberal political commentators who repeat this COMPLETELY baseless, self-congratulating trope?  Someone who refuses to vote for any woman couldn't vote for a male Democrat regularly?  Show me the proof of that bullshlt, LOL.  Until then, I'll trust my anecdotal experience, which says that could not be further from the truth.

Based on personal experience, this has absolutely been the case. Everyone I've ever come across that refused to vote for a women (on those grounds) are all hardline conservatives--not saying all conservatives have this mindset mind you. And bear in mind there were many who voted for her as well solely on those grounds. And are you, a Republican, actually going to take the side of Dems playing the sexism card because their side didn't win?

Tom voted for Clinton, so his preferred candidate didn't win. I agree with his claim, although conversely, people who cared enough about electing a woman president to the point that they voted for Clinton are unlikely to have voted for a Republican otherwise.

Anyways, to the original question posed, Yes. Many of you may think she's overly ambitious, but she's not stupid. She knows she won't win. The people who want her to run again badly are ones who want Trump to win again.

My "nobody" is a generalization and going on personal experience. But given the people that voted for Clinton because she was a woman (people who may not have voted otherwise) offset any who may have voted Dem but didn't because they won't vote for a woman--the main point of my earlier post is we can't keep removing the blame for losing from the candidate themselves--all the reasons why they lost need to be looked into, and one of the major ones was her apparent desire to expand the map outweighing the need to defend "blue wall" states where she was failing to make 50% in the polls.

[Technocracy Timmy]

The sexist responses are disgusting. I literally can't even.

She will run and win 1980 Reagan style in 2020.

[Hammy]

I'll just go on record now: if Clinton runs again, I'm voting for Stein.

[SATW]

yes, her time is up. bye felicia.

[kyc0705]

She has unambiguously said that she is never running for elected office ever again.

[Technocracy Timmy]

She has literally said that she is never running for elected office ever again.

She's a sneaky little rascal and is making sure her opponents aren't focused on her until she breaks out and wins the nomination ala Nixon 1968.

[Mr. Morden]

Polls may show her ahead now, as they did before 2016, but that gap will narrow when people remember what a horrible candidate she is and she will lose again.

They don't though (if you're talking about the primary).  The last Harvard-Harris poll has her behind both Sanders and Warren:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?;topic=261065.0

[TDAS04]

She shouldn't run again.  I guess it's possible she will, but she probably realizes her time is up.

[Beet]

Yeah, she's only polling at 10% in the polls now, versus 70% in the run up to 2016. So her political position isn't as strong as in 2016. Remember, a lot of the support for her in 2016 was due to her nearly winning the nomination in 2008 and being a good team player. The Democratic party owed her a debt, and that debt was repaid. It doesn't owe her any further debt now.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

On the sexism thing, y'all realize that sexism in modern America isn't just people consciously thinking "I will never vote for a woman", right?

[Technocracy Timmy]

Where's Green Line to back me up? Hmmmm

[Sumner 1868]

The sexist responses are disgusting. I literally can't even.

She will run and win 1980 Reagan style in 2020.

So Hillary Clinton will be shot a year into her presidency for Jodie Foster's sake?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

On the sexism thing, y'all realize that sexism in modern America isn't just people consciously thinking "I will never vote for a woman", right?

Why don't you go bother the French people instead for having Le Pen poll around 38% but only get about 34%, probably due to sexists or something?

[Green Line]

I hate to break it to you Timmy, but the online sexists won, and decency lost, as the former had the patriarchy behind them.

Don't you ever give in.  #resist!

[Green Line]

She will run again, I think.  She is the People's President right now, winning the popular vote.  She needs to run for reelection.

[TML]

As I've mentioned elsewhere before, I don't think she would be a viable candidate in 2020 - she has accumulated so much political baggage over the last several years that I believe that she is now like a female version of Adlai Stevenson in terms of electability.

On the other hand, the question of "Will she run?" is probably a toss-up at this point. Back when she stepped down as Secretary of State in 2012-13, she was supposedly retiring from politics based on official statements, but we all know what happened a few years later. Thus, if she somehow feels that the political winds are in her favor by the time 2019 rolls around, it is entirely plausible that she could throw her hat into the ring once again.

[DK_Mo82]

Her recent actions make seem like she is keeping the door open. That speech to the donors that leaked, she said "We would have won if the election was on Oct 27th." She is referencing the James Comey memo theory swinging voters to Trump or to stay home last minute breaking voters. It was small enough margin that this is plausible theory prima-facie. But the question to ask yourself is why is she imparting that message to the big donors a few of whom can be heard cheering in the background.

Now If Trump is very unpopular after the Midterms and she has her health there is no way she will not be tempted like a moth to a light given what we know about her.

Her path to the nomination would be bloody, she would it goes without saying not be the unified establishment choice this time. She will have to prove herself more viable than Cuomo, Booker, and all of the others. Only then does she earn the right take on either Sanders or Warren one on one in national primary after finding a way to win somewhere early (South Carolina probably easiest).  "Rule it out" no.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Third time was the charm for Reagan.

Nixon came back and won after losing a national election.

I believe in Hillary. Sexist teenagers on forum boards cannot stop her.

Reagan never expected to be nominated in 1968; he was a late entry and ran then to ensure that a Liberal wasn't Nixon's VP.

I predict Hillary will run in 2020.  The decks won't be cleared for her, however, which might actually help her by making her look like "one of the pack". 

[GoTfan]

She will run again, I think.  She is the People's President right now, winning the popular vote.  She needs to run for reelection.

Your devotion to Hillary borders on fetishistic

[Technocracy Timmy]

She will run again, I think.  She is the People's President right now, winning the popular vote.  She needs to run for reelection.

Your devotion to Hillary borders on fetishistic

It's something every good person should aspire to.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

She will run again, I think.  She is the People's President right now, winning the popular vote.  She needs to run for reelection.

Unlike Gore, she clearly lost the electoral college.

[Maxwell]

No. Stop. Enough.

Also hate to stand with Jfern, but unlike Gore, Hillary was EXPECTED to win the popular vote in the first place. Gore's performance in 2000, by all accounts, was a smashing success considering how far down he was at certain points in the race. Gore 2004 would've made way more sense than Hillary 2020.

[Technocracy Timmy]

She will run again, I think.  She is the People's President right now, winning the popular vote.  She needs to run for reelection.

Unlike Gore, she clearly lost the electoral college.

I heard there was KGB ballot stuffing in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.


Hillary deserves a third chance without Comey and Russia.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

She will run again, I think.  She is the People's President right now, winning the popular vote.  She needs to run for reelection.

Unlike Gore, she clearly lost the electoral college.

I heard there was KGB ballot stuffing in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.


Hillary deserves a third chance without Comey and Russia.

Well, Comey's gone. We just have to carpetnuke Russia.

[MM876]

Polls may show her ahead now, as they did before 2016, but that gap will narrow when people remember what a horrible candidate she is and she will lose again.

They don't though (if you're talking about the primary).  The last Harvard-Harris poll has her behind both Sanders and Warren:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?;topic=261065.0

While that feels gratifying, I was actually I was referring the poll where people said they wish she was president instead of Trump right now, which itself isn't exactly indicative of strong support.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=264375.0

If Clinton is the nominee again I might just vote for Trump to prove to the Democratic Party how irredeemably stupid they're being.