Discussion for article #230817
As long as Mark Penn’s name isn’t in there anywhere, I’m cool.
1 Like
If she were smart, she’d hire Axelrod and Plouffe
1 Like
Precisely what she won’t do. It would make too much sense, it would remove her from her pre-fab bubble of yes-men that she already has. And, it would mean she was serious about winning.
I suspect she will dip in a toe into Iowa, but not take it further. Her age, her lack of energy, her lack of any policy issues, and her refusal to take any difficult, brave stance, means that her layer of “support” is about as thick as the first layer of an onion. Remove that, and she has no There there.
2 Likes
Good, Ms. Rodwell.
Time to either poop or get off the pot. I’d prefer she run, but if she isn’t going to, she needs to clear the field immediately.
1 Like
I agree - I am not impressed and all the Ready for Hillary envelopes I am getting in the mail go straight into the trash.
2 Likes
To all those disaffected “progressives” who whine about HRC, I have only one thing to say. Wait until you see what the GOP has to offer. All of a sudden HRC will seem a lot less old, fat, conservative, etc. I can’t really identify another candidate the Dems have who is ready for prime time this cycle and I don’t think there is another Barack Obama about to jump out of the bushes and blow HRC away. So start working on your wish list for Veep.
1 Like
It’s the Supreme Court stupid! If it means HRC so be it. I suggest that Ms. Clinton Inc. work on getting more flattering stock photo’s of her face.
1 Like
Assuming that Hillary is the Democratic nominee put forth for 2016, how will that affect our rhetoric about her after the Dem convention? I’m not a fan of HRC, and I highly suspect that my support for the Dem candidate for POTUS will go mute if she’s the nominee. I would still support her over any Repub nominee, by my own rhetoric will be shifted toward denigrating the GOPer candidate, rather than supporting the Dem candidate. Is that really what is best for our party? She’s not the ideal candidate. She’s very far from it, but she does have the money, and the name, and some credible experience that puts her immediately ahead of every other Dem candidate that would all be a far better Democrat than she will ever be. I can’t see anything positive resulting for progressives, or for Democrats, in general, or the nation if she is, in fact, the Democratic nominee. And to be perfectly, brutally honest, I don’t really see any support for her candidacy stemming from anywhere in the country! The only possible support I can see in her favor is the fact that she’d probably win, in which case, this nation will have settled for a lesser President. Since she resigned as SOS, she’s been completely silent on everything. Democrats need a candidate that we can feel good about, and support. She fails me on both counts.
1 Like
Completely. Not a word was spoken on her latest book selling trip across the country (complete with very odd republican squirrel…who was also completely silent), she has given not a single interview on any subject to anybody…except all the ones that she did give that have been slapped on the front page of this and every other political website and picked apart in excruciating detail by both sides of the political aisle.
/snarkoff
1 Like
You beat me to it.
I remember quite clearly seeing on the morning news in Feb 2008 - prior to voting in that year’s CA primary - a simultaneous interview with Axelrod, Mark Penn, and Joe Trippi (John Edwards’ manager). I ended up voting for Obama because of what I saw out of Axelrod and Penn that morning as much as anything else. Penn was a total jerk, Axelrod was quite reasonable in the face of Penn jerkdom, and Trippi just looked uncomfortable over the whole thing. I wanted Penn nowhere near the Oval Office.
That’s just not true. She will still be too old, too conservative, and with too much of a sense of entitlement. It is just that the GOP bench will be laughably bad.
We have a ton of mid level democrats who can take a step forward. It is just that the media keeps concentrating on mainly GOP talking heads and the same few, DINOs like Schumer and others. And they have skin in the game for a hillary candidacy. Because their policies are as bad as hers would be.m
1 Like
Its a fallacy to assume that because Axelrod did so well with candidate Obama, that he will always do well with every other candidate.
Additionally, its better for the party over all by encouraging up and comers. We want to ensure that the pipeline of good campaign staffers is full so we don’t run into what happened to republicans vis a vis Rove, where he demanded so much of the power that he created a void in republican professional staffers for years.
Joe Trippi was probably nervous and uncomfortable about all sorts of things right about that time…none of which had to do with the interview going on. 
My bet is on the woman from Emily’s List. Hilary wants to go big on “I Am Woman”, and she is the most logical choice for that.
The lack of bench is not the GOP’s problem. The fact that Democrats do not have a single alternative to Hillary is a problem. The only thing the dems have to offer is a candidate whose only reason for being in this position is that she is married to Bill Clinton.
She has zero accomplishments of her own. If Hillary is the democratic nominee, which I don’t think she will be, unless the GOP nominates a loon or Jeb Bush, she will loss.
A press-annointed moderate “new car-smelling” Jeb Bush will crush Hillary.
And, like it or not, she is Ronald Reagan old.
Personally? I’d say Eli Gold.
1 Like
Since she resigned as SOS, she’s been completely silent on everything.
not true. she’s made a point to distance herself from obama’s foreign and domestic policy. that should get the dems out in november!
100% chance…