US Hildawg 2020 Megathread - She rules out 2020 run, but says 'I'm not going anywhere'

  • Thread starter Thread starter RG 448
  • Start date Start date
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
she’s considering another presidential run, telling a New York City audience on Friday that she would be well suited to the office.

During a far-ranging interview with Kara Swisher of the technology website Recode(Ms. Swisher is also a contributor to The Times’s Opinion section), Mrs. Clinton initially said “no” when asked whether she wanted to run for president again. She then paused and repeated “no.”

But after Ms. Swisher noted the slight hesitation, Mrs. Clinton seemed to reconsider her response, saying that a major task of the next Democratic president will be improving the international standing of the United States.

“Well, I’d like to be president,” she said, during the public taping at the 92nd Street Y of Ms. Swisher’s podcast. "The work would be work that I feel very well prepared for having been at the Senate for eight years, having been a diplomat in the State Department, and it’s just going to be a lot of heavy lifting.”

Mrs. Clinton has become a more visible presence in recent weeks, increasing the number of her public appearances and raising money for Democrats across the country. Last week, she spoke at a fund-raiser for Donna Shalala, a former Clinton administration official, who is running for a House seat in Florida.

“She will always be a winner and I’ll always be with her,” said Ms. Shalala, introducing Mrs. Clinton to a room full of 200 Democratic donors in Miami.

Mrs. Clinton said she wouldn’t consider a possible run in 2020 until after the midterm elections next week.

“I’m not even going to even think about it until we get through this Nov. 6 election,” she said. “But I’m going to do everything in my power to make sure we have a Democrat in the White House come January of 2021.”

Should she mount a third presidential bid, Mrs. Clinton would be entering a Democratic field crowded with potential contenders, a major shift from 2016, when nearly no Democrats were eager to challenge her.

Mrs. Clinton said she expects a crowded field of as many as 20 Democrats.

“I think we’d have a number of excellent candidates who would be really formidable on the campaign trail, but let’s wait and see who it is,” she said. "I’m just going to wait and watch what happens.”

Mrs. Clinton dismissed some of the calls for her to retreat from public life as sexist.

“There were no articles telling Al Gore to go away or John Kerry to go away or John McCain or Mitt Romney to go away,” she said. “Mitt Romney is going to the Senate, that’s where he’s going.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/29/...njrGrvSt4OQXEaaRhIucX1lF0uxBqgQZE1z56E4Giq7xU
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Click to expand...
AnOminous said:
"Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently inquired of the wise men." Matthew 2:16



AnOminous said:
"Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently inquired of the wise men." Matthew 2:16
Click to expand...

Yep! That"s a whole new one. I really need to think more about names.
Click to expand...
 
AnOminous said:
Not really. Most people just view it as something Republicans call literally everyone who isn't one of them. It's about as meaningful as "Nazi" now.
Click to expand...

As stated above, Bernie never shied away from the label and actively accepted it. Most Republicans do not admit to being nazis.
 
Matthew216 said:
OK, decided to post this here. It's a faux-article I wrote, but never posted, from right after the 2016 election.

A MEMO TO HILLARY

By Matthew Taylor.

Hillary, Hillary, Hillary.

I think we need to talk.

As I speak it’s been a few weeks since the election, and I’ve been thinking a lot about it. I feel, Hillary, that we should have a few words, I’m going to be brutally honest, just so you know.

I’m sad to say Hillary, that with this loss your place in history is now set. Your loss in 2008 was understandable, as Obama is a much better politician than you, but this one really seems, on the surface at least, to be unexplainable. I’ve heard that several websites have now given you the title of “Worst Politician in History.” Yeah, I can see that.

As I said, your place in history is now set. You are now one of “them.” Oh I don’t mean people who lost their election, no, I mean people who LOST their election. You are now standing in such august company as Jimmy Carter, Michael Dukakis, Walter “Funeral Thief” Mondale, and that guy the Chicago Daily Tribune thought beat Truman. You will now be defined by this loss.

Part of it is simply because you don’t possess the talent to really succeed in high end politics. To quote Bill Murray.

“When we lie to the government, it’s a felony. When they lie to us, it’s just politics.”

Politics is the art of lying, and this is another field where you just don’t match your husband. When Bill Clinton lied to us, it was like George Benson performing “On Broadway” live, the guitar is perfectly tuned and his voice is just working! When you lied to us, it was like listening to a poor karaoke performance of said song by a toneless man who seemed to have just recently been in a an accident that ruined his vocal chords, but like the true champion he is, he soldiers on to finish that bloody song!

You are the kind of politician meant for, at best, a cabinet position. Secretary of State was really the best you could hope for. You are the “expert adviser,” and the “Highly Placed Source.” One problem is that you are surrounded by yes-men whose entire job is to spend every minute making you feel smart. This is one more reason you just aren’t cut out for the presidency, or for any real leadership for that matter.

Another reason is you ran under the feminism label. Look, here I am going to be brutally honest, I’m all for equal rights, but you are not the person to be championing this, especially since you are a democrat. The biggest mistake Feminists ever made was attaching their caboose to the democratic party.

The Democratic party, nowadays, is pretty much defined as the party of Minorities. Black rights, Gay and lesbian rights, animal rights, you can be certain that all of these, when brought up, will be attached in some way to the democratic party. Over the last 8 years, the Democrats major minority group has been black people (and, in fact, has been for much longer), and feminism has always been the, well, “Other” Minority.

Democratic leaders see feminists as the Secondary Minority, the Lesser Minority, the “Not as Important” Minority. Oh sure, they give lip service to Feminism, but that’s all it is, lip service. You will not receive anything other than surface success so long as you attach the feminist cause to the modern Democratic party.

A major reason for this is that the Democratic party is currently either headed by left over sixties radicals, or people who were taught by them. And so long as these people lead the party, it will not change. The sixties radicals known as “true believers”, as in those who truly and passionately believed in the socialist cause, idolized Black people. Many people think the sixties began and ended with the Hippes. Not true, there were many radical political groups active in that period (and through the early seventies) and all were aiming for Socialism (the more hardcore were out-and-out communists), though everybody had different ideas as to how it would come about.

When Nixon ended the draft, he pretty much destroyed the majority of this movement, but the true-believers never gave up.

Some years back I read the autobiography of David Horowitz, and he talked about the differences between his radical generation, and his parents. He talked about how his generation viewed the Black people the same way their parents had viewed the Proletariat. It was not enough that they were the focal point of a movement, but they were the Chosen People, they were the people chosen to lead the rest of the dirty, unwashed masses to true earthly paradise. That feeling, that emotion, has died down in the last few decades, but it is still there among the true believers, for whom Socialism is still their great dream (even if they will never admit it).

This belief has hung on in more understated ways since then, so much so that it has begun to creep over and infect the more cynical politicians, the guys who are in it primarily for power and influence and a cushy home in Washington they don’t have to pay too much for. Even if they don’t share these feelings, they see the advantage in using the Black race, keeping them in a state of victimhood, just so they always have someone to champion.

In this state of being, Feminists, the other minority who most of them don’t really like anyway, can play second fiddle. And it seems to me that a lot of them secretly know this. Since the advent of legal equality, feminists have become more and more bitter, their war becoming more and more stringent, as if they really don’t want equality, so much as to see the male world burn. This could be because of the movement being taken over by the most hard-core feminists, defined more by hatred of men, then love of equality.

While there are true issues of equality between the sexes to be dealt with, the woman who currently head feminism are not capable of producing a truly charismatic leader, the one who can cross over the gender line, and convince men to vote for her. This is a weakness that feminism has suffered for decades, as the last truly charismatic leader they had, Gloria Steinem, is too old and characterized as more an “gender studies expert” than a real leader.

Also Hillary, you may not realize this, but you dodged a bullet. You don’t want to be the first female president. This is a horrible thing for any politician, the only thing worse is to be the first black president, just ask Obama about it (yes, he’s technically mixed race, but we all know that’s meaningless. He has pretty much taken the title of First Black president by force). As I stated above, the black man has been held in a position of almost worship by many of those who have defined the democrats as we know them now. Out of this idea the “First Black president” was born.

Now I don’t mean the first president who was black, no, the “First Black President” was a figure of almost prophetic myth.

“The Clouds did part, and upon a bridge of rainbow he didst descend. A crown of stars upon his stately brow, his face strong, yet kind. Where his feet walked flowers bloomed and nature thrived. In his right hand was strength, and in his left was mercy, and as he opened his mouth a river flowed from it, and in it was wisdom. He did descend to rule forever and ever.”

This is what the “First Black President” was to the true believers. These people, their minds too besotted with faux-enlightenment to believe in real religion, turned their faith to this.

The First Female President would be in a situation not unlike this, at least to her own true believers. She would be forced into a position of not really being an actual president, but a medicine to break the delusions of her followers (just as I think Obama is in a way), and allow an actual female president to be elected somewhere down the line.

Is this what you wanted Hillary? To be a sacrifice? A metaphysical sacrifice to break a radical movements self-delusions? No, that doesn’t sound like you at all.

And now, you’ve attached your name the recent demands for a recount. You know those people I listed above? You can now add Al Gore’s name to that list. I wouldn’t be surprised really if sometime in the future a secret memo is found that reveals Democratic party officials suggested this, knowing it would push you under a bus. What better way to remove someone from their party then associate them with the recount fiasco of 2001?

Look at it this way Hillary, you won’t fade into obscurity (which would be a far worse fate for someone like you than prison), you have the future speaking and lecturing tours to look forward to, and let’s not forget that multi-million dollar book deal that we will be seeing in the future. Heck, it worked for Jimmy Carter. Also, you no longer need to pretend you still want to be married to Bill, you can now kick him to the curb (not that he’ll care, he’s had that ticket to Palm Beach ready for years now. Sure Florida voted Republican this election, but Bill might find that a “forbidden” turn on).

Let these things comfort you in your future Hillary.
Click to expand...
Whoa there Dickens, I didn't sign up for Kiwi Farms to read novels.
 
If I were putting together a list of shit I didn't want to hear from a Presidential candidate and showed they weren't worthy of the job, guess what would be at the top of the list?

"I'd like to be President."

No shit you dumb cunt.
 
Hillary Clinton apparently is determined to become the Walter Mondale of our generation. I fucking wish she'd quit this shit. She's a goddamn albatross around the neck of her own party at this point, and they need to realize that.
 
Rate me :optimistic:, but I honestly doubt she'd get the 2020 nomination since that would be a huge PR disaster for the DNC and while yes they are idiotic, I do not think they'd be this stupid. If anything they're going to likely push for a younger female candidate.
 
Unpleasant said:
I disagree. Bernie didn't seem like a child eating pizzagate spirit cooking participant, but socialist is still a very dirty word to the majority of Americans. Even though the MSM would have been behind him, he would have never had the praise that clinton or the huge bump she did for being an oppressed woman.

All it would have taken would have been for trump to start trashing the "socialist" for his multiple houses or whatever. Trump doesn't back down from being richer than god, where most politicians (who, even though Bernie is far from the wealthiest or even particularly wealthy in general, would still make a good target) try and downplay their personal wealth to be more like the common man.

The campaign trump ran on hillary would have played out the same or stronger against Bernie. Minus the emails, it would have been the same incitement for the common man to stand up against the "swamp". Hillary isnt even particularly liberal on non-social issues, especially compared to Bernie. That would have given him even more to punch on.

While trump ended up with a commanding electoral lead over hildawg, I don't think some states, like FL or OH, would have ever been in close contention in a general after the attack ads revved up.
Click to expand...
I imagine the clip of Bernie getting cucked by two shrieking BLM harpies would have pretty damaging for him in head-to-head campaign against Trump.
 
Bernie's got his own albatross around his neck, his wife and her corruption scandals. General election, with actual opposition, wouldn't be very kind to him.
 
Truthboi said:
Rate me :optimistic:, but I honestly doubt she'd get the 2020 nomination since that would be a huge PR disaster for the DNC and while yes they are idiotic, I do not think they'd be this stupid. If anything they're going to likely push for a younger female candidate.
Click to expand...
Yeah... the rest of the DNC may not want her, but doesn't she control where the money goes? Didn't the DNC sell their souls to Hillary for some of that secretary of state favor money?
 
Corbin Dallas Multipass said:
Sure, I get that, but my point was that I believe they are under contractual obligations to hillary. I could be wrong, but that's the only angle I see getting Hilldawg the nomination. Because I would think the DNC wants someone who's not such a proven loser. Not to mention all the skeletons in the closet.
Click to expand...

Makes me wonder just how much dirt the Clinton's have on the DNC? Considering how the party treats them, it's gotta be tons.
 
After the Blue Wave fails to happen, she'll shut up and go back to avoiding phone calls from all the people who expected something for their bribes.
 
Truthboi said:
Rate me :optimistic:, but I honestly doubt she'd get the 2020 nomination since that would be a huge PR disaster for the DNC and while yes they are idiotic, I do not think they'd be this stupid. If anything they're going to likely push for a younger female candidate.
Click to expand...

This is why I keep saying the most likely nominee is going to be Kamala Harris, and, at best, the DNC will avoid getting barbelled by Hillary by giving her the VP spot on the ticket as a consolation prize and let her get up to proper Cheney shenanigans in office.

This is, of course, assuming she makes it to 2020. Wasn't she rumored to be in a back brace for a good portion of this year? Her health is getting less and less easy for people to ignore and will be a huge issue if she's stupid enough to actually enter the primary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom