Which is more likely...

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Romney's chances seem to be going up... but I believe it is more likely Hillary is elected in 2016 then Mitt is elected now

[politicus]

HRC in 2016, but I doubt any of the options are going to happen.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

HRC in 2016, but I doubt any of the options are going to happen.

HRC in 2016. She has a good chance at the nomination, and she's a good candidate. I would vote for her, and I don't think I can say that about any other Democrat. Romney has trouble with his base and this looks like a good year for Obama with the economic upturn.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Romney, simply because I think it is more likely he will run in 2016 than Clinton.  Of course, we should have had Hillary win in 2008, Jeb in 2016, Chelsea in 2024, ...

[Bandit3 the Worker]

I still don't get what was so great about the Clinton era that we need to keep dredging the Clintons up as possible candidates.

Obama has been a hell of a lot better than ol' Bill was.

[Grumpier Than Thou]

President Mitt Romney.

[Politico]

There is almost no chance of the Democrats holding onto the White House for eight more years (If they couldn't make it three consecutive terms in 2000, how in the hell are they going to do it in 2016?). There's a less than 50% chance of Obama winning re-election. Therefore, President Romney is far more likely than President Clinton (And she will probably be too old in 2020). And obviously President Romney is not going to lose re-election if everything goes as smoothly as I expect.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Leaving aside your wildly inflated chances of a Romney victory, (I'd estimate those chances as about 20% right now and falling along with the price of gas now that it is receding from its peak.)  I expect the economy will improve in the 2013-2016 time frame no matter who is in the White House.  Control of the White House is therefore unlikely to switch in the 2016 elections.  Hillary is younger than Mitt, and women live longer, so I don't think the "she's too old to run" meme would have any traction in a race between her and Mitt.  That said, I don't think she intends to run in 2016.

[Earthling]

Obama is at 60% on Intrade right now. I think that is about right at the moment.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

There really is no better person to lead the free world than Hillary. She would put our American interests ahead of the usual Communist sympathy policies the left is fond of, not to mention she just has the perfect personality for commander in chief. Approachable, pragmatic, but unwavering. I think America would feel alot safer about Iran if Hillary was in the White House.

It's just a shame America constantly rejects the right people for the job.

[Vosem]

Mitt in '12, if only because he actually has the nomination. Clinton has the '16 nomination if she wants it, but it's still unclear whether she wants it. I hope she does - against, say, Rand Paul she'd definitely have my vote, and I'd consider her against the other Republicans as well (though I'd probably end up going R in the end).

[HagridOfTheDeep]

If Obama does win reelection, I think the Dems' only hope for a third term is Hillary.

I'm sure if you polled the Democratic electorate, many people would regret picking Obama over Hilldog. She is still percieved, for whatever reason, as being the antithesis to Obama. They won't be lumped together, just by virtue of the 2008 primary race. Not to mention, I know a lot of right-wingers who would vote for HRC. Me included. I would be very proud to support a President Hillary Clinton.

Kinda funny that she currently has so much cross-over appeal... but she really does.

[old timey villain]

Hillary has rehabilitated her image mainly because she occupies probably the most non partisan position in the administration. Foreign policy hasn't been a major issue in this administration, at least compared to economic and social issues, so she has managed to stay above the political fray, jetting around the world.

This isn't to say that she hasn't done a good job as Secretary of state, and that she doesn't have a good shot in 2016. I'm just saying that for 20 years, Hillary has been a major target for the right for a good reason. Hillary the politician is seen as entitled, shrieking and inauthentic. At least this is how she has been portrayed for 20 years.

Anyone can enjoy a surge of popularity once they leave political office. I mean look at Jimmy Carter.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

In all fairness though, she learned a lot in '08. Even if she hadn't been Secretary of State, I still bet she'd get a lot of cross-over support in 2016. (She was actually my first choice four years ago.)

But I see your point.

[jeron]

Romney. Even if Clinton does run in 2016 someone else will win the nomination.

[Mr. Morden]

Even if Clinton does run in 2016 someone else will win the nomination.

I actually highly doubt that.  I'm starting to agree with what Joementum wrote about a year ago, which is that if Clinton runs for the nomination in 2016, she might end up clearing the field, and perhaps receive only token opposition.  (A la Al Gore in 2000, where he only had one challenger of any significance, and he ends up winning the primaries in all 50 states.)

In contrast to the situation back in 2006-2008, when there were serious doubts about her electability in a general election, Clinton is now the most popular (or nearly the most popular) politician in the country.  Assuming she doesn't do anything to screw that up in her last year as SoS, she'll probably still be uber-popular in 2015, plus there'll be this residual sense of "unfinished business" about electing the first female president among a large segment of Democratic primary voters.  Given that, I highly doubt anyone in the Democratic Party establishment will put up a fight against her.  Whatever primary challenge she would face would be from the Left, but Clinton would be heavily favored to win that fight.

That said, the answer to this question is still Romney, because he has about a ~35% or so chance of winning this November, and even if Clinton would have an easy time at winning the 2016 Democratic nomination, it's a tossup as to whether she runs in the first place, and a tossup as to whether she wins the general election.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

If you ask me, she's the only Democrat who'd have a shot at beating a strong Republican in 2016. And you better believe it will be a strong GOP nominee.

That being said, I don't think Biden would be so selfless about letting HRC hold the reigns. If Biden wants it, he wants it--he'll feel entitled to it (as he sort of should--after all, he's the VP), and he won't step aside for anyone. I could see a Clinton-Biden fight. Unfortunately for Biden, it wouldn't even be close. Running against Hillary would hugely taint people's final image of him, especially when he loses the primaries in a landslide.