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

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

 

[The Great Chandler]

Is Hillary basically the left’s Mitt Romney/John McCain?

No. She'll go the way of Henry Clay who tried running 3 times or so. But even he'd laugh at her sore loser attempt.

 

[sperginity]

There's a huge freak out about how "Hillary said all black people look alike", but if you watch the clip it's pretty clear that she's roasting her interviewer for mixing up Cory Booker and Eric Holder.

 

[usernames can change now!]

They lost a primary and never faced the actual national election. There's a difference between losing the primary and sticking around as a backup down the line if their main guy loses and setting up a presidential election re-match, something Democrats are the only American political party to have done with Adlai Stevenson in the 50's and William Jennings Bryan around the turn of the century.

If Romney actually does make it to the top of a future Republican ticket you'd have a point.

...what?

McCain and Romney both ran for President as the top of the ticket. In the national election. In 2008 and 2012. Are you from an alt-Earth or something?

 

[Luthien]

She lost the primary to a man whose name was a couple consonants from being "Iraq Hussein Osama" and then barely won a rigged primary against a self-avowed socialist who looks like he sleeps on a park bench, and then lost to a blithering idiot who has been a public clown since the '80s. She is hopeless. She just needs to fuck off and (preferably literally) die.

Here's the thing: Obama was basically a nobody when he ran for president. Well, at least compared to other candidates at the time. So when you've been First Lady and the Senator for a substantial state like New York and you lose against a nobody, that should already be a sign that running for president is not a so good idea, unless you REALLY rethink your strategies. But apparently, she was too good for that, and she's still utterly convinced of it.

I'm even doubtful Bernie had actual chances of winning against Trump, because even people who always voted Democrat would have probably chickened out from voting for a socialist, even if the other alternative is Trump. One thing I've witnessed though on Tumblr is how Tumblrinas spent the first few months stanning Bernie and trashing Hillary, and once Bernie was out of the game, how quickly they switched to cheering for Saint Hillary. It was mind-boggling. That's pretty much one of the reasons why the "Bernie or Bust" crowd happened, not only because they were disgusted at all the turncoats who didn't even bother speaking loudly enough about how the elections had been rigged, but ironically, they were also pretty mad about how Bernie switched to telling people to go for Hillary, using the "I was just campaigning" excuse, which pretty much destroyed his "man of principles" image.

As for Trump... the whole email gimmick became old really, really quickly. There are so many other things he could have called her out on, and considering how much of a motor mouth he is, I'm actually amazed he didn't.

So yeah, long story short, the DMC still hasn't understood in 2018 that their guilt-tripping gimmick is not going to earn them any more votes, because unlike the illegal immigrants they'll pay below the minimum wage, people do not like to be treated like cattle.

 

[Replicant Sasquatch]

...what?

McCain and Romney both ran for President as the top of the ticket. In the national election. In 2008 and 2012. Are you from an alt-Earth or something?

He's referring to when McCain and Romney ran in the Republican primaries in 2000 and 2008, respectively.

 

[RadicalCentrist]

which pretty much destroyed his "man of principles" image.

It was always a fraudulent image. You really would think a congressional rep for twenty years would know the difference between theoretical and effective taxation.

 

[AnOminous]

I'm even doubtful Bernie had actual chances of winning against Trump, because even people who always voted Democrat would have probably chickened out from voting for a socialist, even if the other alternative is Trump.

He always polled better heads-up than Hillary did. Some of that might have and probably would have eroded once the attack machine went into play, but I still don't see him failing harder. Even if he had, he would have presented a clear distinction between what Trump was offering and what Democrats were offering, which Hillary didn't. Hillary was just either business as usual or new guy, and people were sick of business as usual.

 

[Absolutego]

...what?

McCain and Romney both ran for President as the top of the ticket. In the national election. In 2008 and 2012. Are you from an alt-Earth or something?

The primary != the national election. Neither of them kept posturing to run for election again after the American people at large rejected them in favor of the other party. They were instead defeated within their own party. That's why people weren't making this stink about Hillary re-running for president 2008-2016 (at least not on this particular point), because back then she was where Romney was pre-2012 and McCain was pre-2008. That is no longer the case.

 

[shartshooter]

This article reads like it's prepping the narrative of her reluctantly accepting the burden after being forced to. It will take a manufactured redemption arc for democrats to accept her candidacy, but they all would. It would be hyped as a rematch. I genuinely believe people running the DNC and journalists would see it as that.

I think this sums up my feelings:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=v1dPRSyq5P0

Tbh this example of hubris should give you pause. Conservatives winning big was more of a bullet dodge than a foregone conclusion.

 

[sperginity]

He always polled better heads-up than Hillary did. Some of that might have and probably would have eroded once the attack machine went into play, but I still don't see him failing harder. Even if he had, he would have presented a clear distinction between what Trump was offering and what Democrats were offering, which Hillary didn't. Hillary was just either business as usual or new guy, and people were sick of business as usual.

A majority like Bernie as a person and think he is a good guy. That would have gone a long way, I am certain he would have won. Most voters in the last election felt both candidates were bad, dishonest people. It made for apathy and being easily swayed by each news cycle.

 

[CWCchange]

With Trump signaling he's about to carry out one of his lesser-known campaign proposals of ending birthright citizenship, maybe he'll finally fulfill his second-biggest campaign promise and LOCK HER UP!

Make no mistake, if the Democrats and Soros decide to prop this cunt back up, they'll do ANYTHING to make her president. I wouldn't take it for granted, because of course, that's what Hillary and her retard supporters did when believing Trump would never win.

 

[Calooby]

Lock her up pls kthx

 

[Matthew216]

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.

 

[Kosher Dill]

By Matthew Taylor.

I hope that's not actually your name.

 

[Matthew216]

I hope that's not actually your name.

It is. I have a long reputation for terrible Internet names.

 

[Unpleasant]

A majority like Bernie as a person and think he is a good guy. That would have gone a long way, I am certain he would have won. Most voters in the last election felt both candidates were bad, dishonest people. It made for apathy and being easily swayed by each news cycle.

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.

 

[Power Armor]

She's spent so much money on her last campaign it's not like the dnc will be able to give her anywhere near the backing she got last time. She lost to the world's most unlikable candidate, sure maybe they'll throw money her way but after all the losses I doubt it would come anywhere close.

Hooray, now we can look forward to another election cycle where one of our two major parties gets all its resources siphoned off to keep a zombie candidacy on life support.

You know guys, Hillary is a true patriot. Now, you might doubt that, but consider her actions and the events they have kicked off over the past 3 or 4 years.

1. Got the DNC, the party pushing toxic identity politics, to give her ALL THEIR MONEY
2. Ran a campaign so bad, she lost to Donald Trump. In hindsight it might look easy, but that was no mean feat at the time. While doing so, she spent ALL THE DEMOCRAT'S MONEY
3. Rigged the primary so Bernie Sanders, a real life socialist, couldn't win. Had he won, he might have defeated trump, and plunged our country into socialist hell.
4. Exposed several layers of corruption within the FBI by blatantly breaking the law and publicly getting away with it.
5. Showed that the DNC was willing to wiretap its political opponents.
6. Backed and spurred on the insane behavior of the worst of the DNC (My avatar says hi)
7. In doing the above, got democrats to go fully insane during the kavenaugh hearings, punching a huge hole in MeToo, before it could do too much damage with unsubstantiated accusations and rumors.
8. In doing the above, ensured that the supreme court will have a very dim view of identity politics, which are currently poisoning the nation.

Now, with very little effort or work on her part she can make sure this all stays true for another 4 years, while at the same time again draining the democrat's money.

This woman may have singlehandedly turned the US around from it's suicidal headlong rush into the woodchipper that is identity politics, into embracing the US as a legitimate force for good in the world. We thought Bush had killed patriotism, but hillary showed that people just needed to see the disgusting alternative to go back to it.

yo does anyone have that hugeass writeup someone here made about all the shitty things hillary did including draining the dnc of all of it's money

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

As for Trump... the whole email gimmick became old really, really quickly. There are so many other things he could have called her out on, and considering how much of a motor mouth he is, I'm actually amazed he didn't.

Really? He should just drop the fact that she was involved in some very heavy conflicts of interest at the very least, and then destroyed the evidence, apparently with the cooperation of the FBI? The fact that she was selling favors as secretary of state for donations to her foundation?

Maybe you're sick of hearing about it, but I'm sick of her getting away with it. I mean, after a couple weeks of the OJ simpson stuff, did you just say "I'm bored of this murder trial crap, just let him go"?

 

[AnOminous]

It is. I have a long reputation for terrible Internet names.

"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

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.

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.

 

[Your Weird Fetish]

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.

Probably would get a bit more traction considering Sanders has called himself a socialist in the past.