If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(RealClearPolitics)   5 Reasons Hillary won't run in 2016   (realclearpolitics.com) divider line 101
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

1069 clicks; posted to Politics » on 18 Jun 2014 at 11:46 AM (5 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



101 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-18 11:27:15 AM
1) She's just not that good at campaigning
True
2) The "fire in the belly"question.
Well there is the whole first woman president that would be her legacy
3) It ain't gonna be a coronation.
I doubt there is much left the GOP could throw at her.
4) Obama is leaving a mess.
The situation after Bush was pristine, only two on going wars and an economy in the toilet.  Somehow she still wanted that.
5) The country wants real change
But they don't want the GOP
 
2014-06-18 11:48:09 AM
5) The country wants real change

Is that code for more tax cuts?
 
2014-06-18 11:48:37 AM
What, no Benghazi? They're losing their touch.
 
2014-06-18 11:49:10 AM
shin splints?
 
2014-06-18 11:52:33 AM
Better headline "5 Made-up reasons we don't want Hillary to run in 2016."

Best part how Hillary supposedly wilted in the face of critical media.  Because she hasn't faced any criticism since 1991 of course (and since 1978 in Arkansas).  Total babe in the woods.
 
2014-06-18 11:52:58 AM
Right now, whoever gets the DNC nomination will be the next President.  The GOP has NO ONE AT ALL that the country would vote for in large numbers.

I mean, for the love of god, they're talking about Romney running again.  And Jeb knows better than to try and run against a Clinton.

Christie?  His own party hates him.

They have NO ONE.  A bag of airplane peanuts would win the Presidency over those clowns.
 
2014-06-18 11:53:32 AM
I'm not much for political dynasties. I'd rather not see another Kennedy, Bush or Clinton.

However, I'd vote for her in a blink over any potential or real GOP candidate. The right hopped the express train to crazytown, and it's a downhill run, with an oversize load and bad brakes.
 
2014-06-18 11:55:27 AM

Pinner: shin splints?


Bone spurs. Very painful.
 
2014-06-18 11:56:59 AM
Isn't RCP conservative-leaning? And because they're not Hillary, can we confidently call this speculation?

Also, if my first question is true, why is there still so much butthurt over what is being speculated as a non-candidate?
 
2014-06-18 11:56:59 AM
Hillary should run in 2016. Go through the primaries and right at the end withdraw and throw her support behind someone else. The GOP would lose their collective minds and the hundreds of millions of campaign dollars invested in the anti-Hillary movement would just be gone. It would be an epic level trolling event.
 
2014-06-18 11:58:14 AM

EvilEgg: 1) She's just not that good at campaigning
True
2) The "fire in the belly"question.
Well there is the whole first woman president that would be her legacy
3) It ain't gonna be a coronation.
I doubt there is much left the GOP could throw at her.
4) Obama is leaving a mess.
The situation after Bush was pristine, only two on going wars and an economy in the toilet.  Somehow she still wanted that.
5) The country wants real change
But they don't want the GOP


5) But they don't want the GOP.  No, but the Tea Party is ramping up to full swing.
6) Because Hillary is a liar.
7) Because Hillary has not excuse for the CF that was Benghazi.  Also see #6.
8) Because I don't think the country can stand Bill Clinton back in the WH banging every secretary in the office pool.
 
2014-06-18 12:01:19 PM

Infernalist: Right now, whoever gets the DNC nomination will be the next President.  The GOP has NO ONE AT ALL that the country would vote for in large numbers.

I mean, for the love of god, they're talking about Romney running again.  And Jeb knows better than to try and run against a Clinton.

Christie?  His own party hates him.

They have NO ONE.  A bag of airplane peanuts would win the Presidency over those clowns.


Pretzels. Airline Pretzels. Peanut allergies are on the rise nationwide.
 
2014-06-18 12:01:22 PM

mistrmind: EvilEgg: 1) She's just not that good at campaigning
True
2) The "fire in the belly"question.
Well there is the whole first woman president that would be her legacy
3) It ain't gonna be a coronation.
I doubt there is much left the GOP could throw at her.
4) Obama is leaving a mess.
The situation after Bush was pristine, only two on going wars and an economy in the toilet.  Somehow she still wanted that.
5) The country wants real change
But they don't want the GOP

5) But they don't want the GOP.  No, but the Tea Party is ramping up to full swing.
6) Because Hillary is a liar.
7) Because Hillary has not excuse for the CF that was Benghazi.  Also see #6.
8) Because I don't think the country can stand Bill Clinton back in the WH banging every secretary in the office pool.


I remember the Clinton years.  They were 'good' years for most Americans.

And just so you know, because you've clearly forgotten: Americans didn't give a shiat about the blowjob then and they don't give a shiat now.
 
2014-06-18 12:03:47 PM
This is pretty much a list or why she won't get the republican nomination. What the right fails to understand is that the left genuinely likes Hillary. Granted the only reason we are not talking about McCain's second term is because they were totally unprepared to run against anyone but Hillary. That's a real reason she might not run
 
2014-06-18 12:04:17 PM
I'm really, really hoping she's just constantly making it seem like she's going to run to fark the GOP over, since they will pour ALL of their money into prepping for her, because they have a goddamn obsession with her.

I can see her being vindictive enough to do that.
 
2014-06-18 12:05:51 PM
1) She's just not that good at campaigning
Yeah, she kinda sucks at that. She'd do a good job, but the campaign would be clumsy.

2) The "fire in the belly"question.
There's no question Hillary has the drive and ambition. Trying to argue that Hillary has no energy and would rather make money and be a grandma is just stupid.

3) It ain't gonna be a coronation.
Because she's had nothing but favorable press since the '90s?

4) Obama is leaving a mess.
This is true. We avoided a 2nd depression, the DOW has doubled, we'll be out of 2 wars, our international reputation is improved, crime is down, millions of Americans have healthcare... Nothing but a mess everywhere you look.

5) The country wants real change
If you mean a progressive populist, you may be right. But anti-establishment? No. Anti-GOP? Yes.
 
2014-06-18 12:06:13 PM

Lackofname: What, no Benghazi? They're losing their touch.


Because the guy they captured will tell them he wasn't in constant touch with HRC to get his marching orders.
 
2014-06-18 12:07:26 PM
I'm surprised how many of these also apply to the GOP...

1) She's just not that good at campaigning

It's true for her, but also double dog super true for the last two whole fields of GOP candidates in '08 and '12

2) The "fire in the belly"question.

That's kind of a weird question, she actually has already campaigned for the Dem nom in a previous election.  It's not like she's hasn't shown interest in the position.  Also, my dad is older than her and still installs heating and air conditioning for a living (including side jobs on the weekends).  67 year olds can work long and difficult days.  Also, looking at the GOP in the recent past, can you look at Romney or McCain and say, "Yeah, you can see how much more they wanted to be president than Hilary will."?

3) It ain't gonna be a coronation.

True, but she's already survived one round of opposition research.  I doubt a 2nd round is going to dig up much more.  As for the GOP, they've got it worse because they have to survive not just the opposition research of "Have you done anything scandalous?" but they also have to try and hide any sensible legislation or points of view they've been associated with in the past.

4) Obama is leaving a mess.

Both her and the GOP will have to contend with that.  Most reasonable people know that the mess being left is predominantly a GOP creation anyhow.

5) The country wants real change

Yes, but the change the country needs isn't to be found to the right of the Dems.  It's found to the left of the Dems, sadly though, there isn't a political party over there.
 
2014-06-18 12:09:44 PM
Dear pants-crapping right wingers,

We get it you are concerned about Hillary. But she is NOT going to sleep with you.

She is just going to FARK you.

Signed,
   The rest of us.
 
2014-06-18 12:11:11 PM

saint1975: This is pretty much a list or why she won't get the republican nomination. What the right fails to understand is that the left genuinely likes Hillary. Granted the only reason we are not talking about McCain's second term is because they were totally unprepared to run against anyone but Hillary. That's a real reason she might not run


I think you're wrong there.  Dems and (non-tea party) independents like Hillary.  The left fears that Hillary will cater too much to Wall St due to the fact she's had kind words for those corporations within the last year.

That being said, if you give the left a choice between a pro-corporate right of center president and a GOP nutjob, they'll take Hillary.
 
2014-06-18 12:11:39 PM

Infernalist: Right now, whoever gets the DNC nomination will be the next President.  The GOP has NO ONE AT ALL that the country would vote for in large numbers.

I mean, for the love of god, they're talking about Romney running again.  And Jeb knows better than to try and run against a Clinton.

Christie?  His own party hates him.

They have NO ONE.  A bag of airplane peanuts would win the Presidency over those clowns.



This.

And they deserve no better.
 
2014-06-18 12:12:47 PM
Since "she murdered Vince Foster" isn't on the list, how are we supposed to take this seriously?
 
2014-06-18 12:13:49 PM

Triple Oak: Isn't RCP conservative-leaning? And because they're not Hillary, can we confidently call this speculation?

Also, if my first question is true, why is there still so much butthurt over what is being speculated as a non-candidate?



It's not butthurt. It's bemusement.

The right wing is running itself ragged trying to stop a non-candidate who they claim they are not affraid of anyway. It's hilarious (pardon the pun)  and people enjoy pointing it out.
 
2014-06-18 12:13:52 PM

mistrmind: 5) But they don't want the GOP.  No, but the Tea Party is ramping up to full swing.


Yep... social conservatism's death throes are becoming quite violent.

Infernalist: 6) Because Hillary is a liar.


Which truly makes her unique among politicians and perspective candidates.

Infernalist: 7) Because Hillary has not excuse for the CF that was Benghazi.  Also see #6.


She doesn't need one. Our consulate was attacked during a violent anti-America demonstration, and we lost an ambassador. Any post-attack discussion that involves more than reviewing and updating our general security policies is a pathetic attempt to politicize a blameless act of violence.

mistrmind: 8) Because I don't think the country can stand Bill Clinton back in the WH banging every secretary in the office pool.


I'm pretty sure a majority of Americans would happily buy Bill Clinton's some escorts via Kickstarter if it helped lead to increased wages and employment.
 
2014-06-18 12:14:37 PM
People forget something very important at moments like this: Just because Obama will be an ex-President, that doesn't mean he's retiring from the political scene.

Unlike GWB who is almost universally scorned and has to hide out in Texas, Obama is most likely going to stay in or near DC to help the Democrats continue their winning ways with his political machine that he's built and honed over the last two successful national elections.

And the DNC and the next nominee will get full use of that tried and experienced political campaign machine.  Obama will make sure of that.
 
2014-06-18 12:19:04 PM

mistrmind: 8) Because I don't think the country can stand Bill Clinton back in the WH banging every secretary in the office pool.


He was banging EVERY secretary in the office pool?  That's awesome!  If that's not worth another eight years in, I don't know what is.

/No, he actually didn't.
//Yes, that would be awesome.
 
2014-06-18 12:19:40 PM

mistrmind: 7) Because Hillary has not excuse for the CF that was Benghazi.


At this point bringing up Benghazi hurts the GOP more than it hurts Hillary. The general consensus among the non-FOX News watching majority is that scandalizing Benghazi is a desperate ploy perpetrated by a morally bankrupt party out of helpful ideas and sinking to politics by trumped up nonsense.

If you want to  help the GOPyou should never mention Benghazi again. Seriously.
 
2014-06-18 12:21:39 PM
I want her to run, and to win.  She hates congressional republicans.  Hates them.  We wouldn't need TV shows like "Game of Thrones" anymore; we could just watch C-SPAN.

/I also think she'd make a decent president
 
2014-06-18 12:21:40 PM

Infernalist: People forget something very important at moments like this: Just because Obama will be an ex-President, that doesn't mean he's retiring from the political scene.

Unlike GWB who is almost universally scorned and has to hide out in Texas, Obama is most likely going to stay in or near DC to help the Democrats continue their winning ways with his political machine that he's built and honed over the last two successful national elections.

And the DNC and the next nominee will get full use of that tried and experienced political campaign machine.  Obama will make sure of that.


I for one am curious as to what Obama does after the presidency.  If you look at Carter and Clinton, they're using their legacy to accomplish some truly wonderful things in the world.  It seems to be some kind of Democratic guilt where you knew you had to govern too far to the right when you were president and now that you're free to do what you please, you want to make the world a better place.

Obama will likely contribute to Dem fundraising procedures, sure, but I'll be interested to see what social or medical or economic good will cause he takes up when he's out.
 
2014-06-18 12:22:25 PM

clkeagle: Pinner: shin splints?

Bone spurs. Very painful.


I was gonna guess "cankles" made an appearance.

// because we all know that the shape the flesh surrounding the talocrural joint takes is directly related to Executive skill
 
2014-06-18 12:23:20 PM

Dr Dreidel: clkeagle: Pinner: shin splints?

Bone spurs. Very painful.

I was gonna guess "cankles" made an appearance.

// because we all know that the shape the flesh surrounding the talocrural joint takes is directly related to Executive skill


It's a double standard.  Ford had charging rhinoceros legs and he was president.
 
2014-06-18 12:26:40 PM
Her husband is Bill Clinton.  Even people that hate Bill still like him.
 
2014-06-18 12:27:31 PM
1) She's just not that good at campaigning -
-- That's true, but thankfully, neither are the recent crop GOP presidential candidates. 

2) The "fire in the belly"question.
-- This is a pretty stupid argument. Listen to any interview -- like Bill, she loves talking policy.

3) It ain't gonna be a coronation.
-- The media has never liked her, but at this point, I think it works to her advantage because a lot of people perceive it as unfair treatment.

4) Obama is leaving a mess.
-- She wasn't involved in domestic policy, and everything went to hell in Ukraine and Iraq after she left. She can also go back to the talking point about how she and Bill cleaned everything up in the 1990s, that the Clinton's know how to turn things around. 

5) The country wants real change
-- And the GOP is going to offer that? Tax cuts for the rich, no immigration reform, more wars?
 
2014-06-18 12:31:27 PM

Infernalist: People forget something very important at moments like this: Just because Obama will be an ex-President, that doesn't mean he's retiring from the political scene.

Unlike GWB who is almost universally scorned and has to hide out in Texas, Obama is most likely going to stay in or near DC to help the Democrats continue their winning ways with his political machine that he's built and honed over the last two successful national elections.

And the DNC and the next nominee will get full use of that tried and experienced political campaign machine.  Obama will make sure of that.


He's going to be an even more effective kingmaker than Bill Clinton.  I'm going to enjoy watching this "inner city community organizer" embarrass the Republican party for the next quarter century or more.
 
2014-06-18 12:32:01 PM

physt: 5) The country wants real change

Is that code for more tax cuts?


I'll admit that Obama hasn't brought the type of change that I felt he promised during his campaign.  A lot of that isn't his fault, as he's had a completely recalcitrant House to deal with for most of his time as President, though I do think he's turned out to be more of a moderate than he positioned himself as.

He has done some very good things, and overall I'd say his Presidency has been a success thus far.  I just wanted more of a liberal lion willing to actually fight the GOP.

With that in mind, yes, I'd like change.  I don't think that Hillary is necessarily the one to bring it.  I'd rather have an Elizabeth Warren, Robert Wexler, or Alan Grayson run.
 
2014-06-18 12:33:05 PM

WHAR BRAIN DAMAGE

WHAR

 
2014-06-18 12:33:30 PM

SpectroBoy: mistrmind: 7) Because Hillary has not excuse for the CF that was Benghazi.

At this point bringing up Benghazi hurts the GOP more than it hurts Hillary. The general consensus among the non-FOX News watching majority is that scandalizing Benghazi is a desperate ploy perpetrated by a morally bankrupt party out of helpful ideas and sinking to politics by trumped up nonsense.

If you want to  help the GOPyou should never mention Benghazi again. Seriously.


Why are you so afraid of shedding light on the truth?  Why do you shy away of justice being served to those that lost loved ones to a tragedy that quite frankly could have been avoided if Hillary acted.
 
2014-06-18 12:40:49 PM

TuteTibiImperes: physt: 5) The country wants real change

Is that code for more tax cuts?

I'll admit that Obama hasn't brought the type of change that I felt he promised during his campaign.  A lot of that isn't his fault, as he's had a completely recalcitrant House to deal with for most of his time as President, though I do think he's turned out to be more of a moderate than he positioned himself as.

He has done some very good things, and overall I'd say his Presidency has been a success thus far.  I just wanted more of a liberal lion willing to actually fight the GOP.

With that in mind, yes, I'd like change.  I don't think that Hillary is necessarily the one to bring it.  I'd rather have an Elizabeth Warren, Robert Wexler, or Alan Grayson run.


I'll point out that he had 2 years of a democrat controlled congress to get his agenda passed.  You can only blame the opposition party so much before people begin calling bullshiat on you.
 
2014-06-18 12:42:02 PM
The country wants real change. And who better to represent that than another old rich white man?
 
2014-06-18 12:44:37 PM

bobothemagnificent: TuteTibiImperes: physt: 5) The country wants real change

Is that code for more tax cuts?

I'll admit that Obama hasn't brought the type of change that I felt he promised during his campaign.  A lot of that isn't his fault, as he's had a completely recalcitrant House to deal with for most of his time as President, though I do think he's turned out to be more of a moderate than he positioned himself as.

He has done some very good things, and overall I'd say his Presidency has been a success thus far.  I just wanted more of a liberal lion willing to actually fight the GOP.

With that in mind, yes, I'd like change.  I don't think that Hillary is necessarily the one to bring it.  I'd rather have an Elizabeth Warren, Robert Wexler, or Alan Grayson run.

I'll point out that he had 2 years of a democrat controlled congress to get his agenda passed.  You can only blame the opposition party so much before people begin calling bullshiat on you.


2 years... 72 days... What's the difference right?
http://www.winningprogressive.org/democrats-had-a-filibuster-proof-sen ate-majority-for-72-days-during-president-obamas-first-term
 
2014-06-18 12:46:38 PM

bobothemagnificent: TuteTibiImperes: physt: 5) The country wants real change

Is that code for more tax cuts?

I'll admit that Obama hasn't brought the type of change that I felt he promised during his campaign.  A lot of that isn't his fault, as he's had a completely recalcitrant House to deal with for most of his time as President, though I do think he's turned out to be more of a moderate than he positioned himself as.

He has done some very good things, and overall I'd say his Presidency has been a success thus far.  I just wanted more of a liberal lion willing to actually fight the GOP.

With that in mind, yes, I'd like change.  I don't think that Hillary is necessarily the one to bring it.  I'd rather have an Elizabeth Warren, Robert Wexler, or Alan Grayson run.

I'll point out that he had 2 years of a democrat controlled congress to get his agenda passed.  You can only blame the opposition party so much before people begin calling bullshiat on you.


If by '2 years', you mean 'less than 3 months', then I suppose you have a point.
 
2014-06-18 12:48:32 PM

mistrmind: SpectroBoy: mistrmind: 7) Because Hillary has not excuse for the CF that was Benghazi.

At this point bringing up Benghazi hurts the GOP more than it hurts Hillary. The general consensus among the non-FOX News watching majority is that scandalizing Benghazi is a desperate ploy perpetrated by a morally bankrupt party out of helpful ideas and sinking to politics by trumped up nonsense.

If you want to  help the GOPyou should never mention Benghazi again. Seriously.

Why are you so afraid of shedding light on the truth?  Why do you shy away of justice being served to those that lost loved ones to a tragedy that quite frankly could have been avoided if Hillary acted.


Bless your heart.
 
2014-06-18 12:50:53 PM

mistrmind: SpectroBoy: mistrmind: 7) Because Hillary has not excuse for the CF that was Benghazi.

At this point bringing up Benghazi hurts the GOP more than it hurts Hillary. The general consensus among the non-FOX News watching majority is that scandalizing Benghazi is a desperate ploy perpetrated by a morally bankrupt party out of helpful ideas and sinking to politics by trumped up nonsense.

If you want to  help the GOPyou should never mention Benghazi again. Seriously.

Why are you so afraid of shedding light on the truth?  Why do you shy away of justice being served to those that lost loved ones to a tragedy that quite frankly could have been avoided if Hillary acted.


For God's sake man can't you see that chicken's had enough?
 
2014-06-18 12:55:53 PM
She will run and she will win.
 
2014-06-18 12:58:01 PM
EvilEgg:
1) She's just not that good at campaigning
True
2) The "fire in the belly"question.
Well there is the whole first woman president that would be her legacy
3) It ain't gonna be a coronation.
I doubt there is much left the GOP could throw at her.
4) Obama is leaving a mess.
The situation after Bush was pristine, only two on going wars and an economy in the toilet.  Somehow she still wanted that.
5) The country wants real change
But they don't want the GOP


1.  You're right and wrong.  She sucks at campaigning.  The people who surround her aren't.  You can polish crap until it shines like gold but in the end it's still crap.  That's the problem she has with campaigning.
2. This is a legitimate point.  Legacy aside, I don't think (from what I've observed) that she really wants to be President after seeing what our current President has to go through.  She's got to be thinking to herself if it's really worth it.  That is especially true if the GOP retakes the senate and keeps the house.
3. There is a lot the GOP can throw at her still.  She was part of the mess we now have.  What is she going to do different from the current president?  And Benghazi is still far from over.  So are questions about the IRS.  And she can be tied to an administration that is seen as responsible for the V.A. hospital problem.
4. And the situation now is better?  More people on food stamps, more people out of the work force, and the middle east ready to basically implode is better?  Russia annexing territory is better?  Insecure borders are better?  My predictions are becoming true: he's making Carter look like a competent president.  No wonder Carter likes him.
5. I can say the same thing about the democrats.  I am saying the same thing about the democrats.  We would be better off if everyone in DC resigned and we started over from scratch at this point.
 
2014-06-18 12:59:00 PM

Wrongo: Infernalist: Right now, whoever gets the DNC nomination will be the next President.  The GOP has NO ONE AT ALL that the country would vote for in large numbers.

I mean, for the love of god, they're talking about Romney running again.  And Jeb knows better than to try and run against a Clinton.

Christie?  His own party hates him.

They have NO ONE.  A bag of airplane peanuts would win the Presidency over those clowns.

Pretzels. Airline Pretzels. Peanut allergies are on the rise nationwide.


It was Pretzels that nearly toppled the Bush administration, so definitely Pretzels. Peanuts aren't even real nuts.
 
2014-06-18 01:03:36 PM

Infernalist: If by '2 years', you mean 'less than 3 months', then I suppose you have a point.


It also ignores how farked up Senate cloture rules are.
 
2014-06-18 01:08:56 PM

Dr Dreidel:
// because we all know that the shape the flesh surrounding the talocrural joint takes is directly related to Executive skill


That appears to be a gender-specific attribute.
 
2014-06-18 01:11:06 PM

bobothemagnificent: We would be better off if everyone in DC resigned and we started over from scratch at this point.


There's an easier way to do this. The first Tuesday in November 2014, DON'T PULL THE LEVER FOR INCUMBENT CRAZYPANTS McLOONFACE MASHEDPOTATOSOCKS. Garbage in, garbage out.

It's in less than 5 months - quicker to do it this way than a coup.

// I'm game for a ConCon, though, if you're interested in systemic, rather than demagogic, reform
 
2014-06-18 01:14:38 PM
lets see what the right win dero-o-sphere has to say about this topic.

img.fark.net
 
Displayed 50 of 101 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report