Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  1 2 3 4 5 (5 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dvsinla
02:21 PM on 04/14/2012
if she runs she will have to be drafted. meaning she will give in to all the pressure and see that we have no other option in 4 years... (if that's the case)
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Pucker
My micro-bio is pending approval
02:17 PM on 04/14/2012
I support Obama, but believe Clinton would have done a better job.

Republicans draw the base of their power from Southern Strategy racism. This is how they make poor/middleclass whites vote directly against their own best interest -- purely out of fear that what THEY perceive as lower classes (blacks) will get something for nothing. So they vote Republican - cutting off the nose to spite the face - rationalized through gun, cross or hate.

It's for this reason that Obama can't show anger and is locked into a straight role. He deliberately/wisely picks his comments on issues that have even slight race related undertones. Under these rules, even a strong position supporting the poor serves as a target for the enemies.

While seeing a black man elected President is the most patriotic moment of my life -- something I'm truly proud of the nation (born with the original sin of slavery and just generations removed from the Civil Rights movement) for doing, it doesn't do anything for poor and middle class of this nation.

I think President Clinton would have been able to do more, faster, where it matters. It would have been equally strong symbolism having a woman elected, and as a woman could have redefined what we look for in leadership (men, by nature, need to be more aggressive/militaristic). Attacking her would have been difficult, and she would have been able to express both anger and compassion on levels Obama can't.

Clinton/Clinton 2016

(that's Hillary / Chelsea)
Ifeomamn
When MSM report Facts, USA thrives.
02:36 PM on 04/14/2012
So your assessment is that pres Obama was a token by you? Most who voted for then sen Obama would 1001% disagree with you

How insulting? How crude, cruel and down right ugly.

This why America speaks idealistically but fails short.

I profoundly disagree with you.
photo
camelias and sweet tea
Small drinking village with a shrimping problem
03:06 PM on 04/14/2012
fanned already/faved
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Pucker
My micro-bio is pending approval
12:02 AM on 04/15/2012
Explain how I call Obama a 'token', please. Otherwise, I'll just assume you got a Red State education.

Let me make something clear about my original post though......

My main point.....was that attacking a woman is fundamentally different than attacking a black man. Obama has done an absolutely amazing job navigating these waters, but it cripples him in many ways and for many issues (I mention speaking for the poor, expressing anger, etc).

The irony is that.....if I insulted anything it was women in power. I said that there would be a new set of rules for opponents if a woman was elected President, which would have made it easier for Clinton. I can make arguments for that, but it's pointless, because you've already declared me a depraved (crude, cruel, etc) racist.

Finally, note that I didn't break into the strengths/weakness of any candidate past or present. I only evaluated the effect (particular handicaps) of race & sex. If you live in a colorblind/sexless world where this discussion isn't acceptable, then sorry for offending your frail sensibilities.
03:02 PM on 04/14/2012
I must respectfully disagree with your conclusion that HC would have been a more effective president than BO.

First, the Republicans would have followed their "just say no" policy no matter who was in the Oval Office, and no amount of pounding the table would have changed that. In fact, such posturing might have made the economic situation even more unstable.

Second, Hillary was still overshadowed by Bill in 2008. Remember, one of the reasons she wasn't picked as VP was because Obama's advisors were afraid of Bill. Bill has been remarkably subdued since then, and has admirably honored his old agreement with Hillary to support her career now. So, I don't see this as an issue in 2016. (I still think there's a chance that Joe B. might "resign" to open the way for HC to run as VP if Obama's reelection campaign is in real jeopardy.)

Third, one of HC's big weaknesses as a candidate was lack of foreign experience (not that Obama had more). By serving so well as a strong SOS, she would pretty much own any opposing candidate of either party on this front in 2016.

In short, neither she nor the country was ready for another episode of "Billary" in 2008. But she would be awesome in 2016, and, short of an epic campaign f'up, the Presidency would be hers, if she wanted it.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Epilef2000
Cafe Con Leche Party
04:39 PM on 04/14/2012
I think that the Republicans have opposed Obama even more due to the color of his skin. They would have opposed Hillary nevertheless, but it is unlikely there level of opposition would be so dramatic. Although, as evidenced by the Republicans attack on women, we could have probably see a more harsh attack on women which could have been worse.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Pucker
My micro-bio is pending approval
11:48 PM on 04/14/2012
1. Republicans would be Republicans, but Clinton wouldn't have still been waiting for them to negotiate after many clear signs of bad faith negotiation. Obama nearly blew healthcare reform (and it ultimately resulted in a watered down plan).

2. Obama played the Bill card in the primary. Bill Clinton had some bad comments. You are talking political soundbytes rather then anything the least bit meaningful.

3. Clinton's weakness was foreign policy? When? What are you talking about? She ran against Edwards and Obama.

My main point.....was that attacking a woman is fundamentally different than attacking a black man. Obama has done an absolutely amazing job navigating these waters, but it cripples him in many ways and for many issues (I mention speaking for the poor, expressing anger, etc, but there are other ares where he is limited).

The Republicans would have been far more limited attacking Hillary. Look, at the soft gloves used even when the Democrats went after someone as clueless as Palin. Look at the dangers Republicans face with the Sandra Fluke/ Limbaugh thing.
photo
JBDenver
I got my Nobel Peace Prize. Let's fight!
01:53 PM on 04/14/2012
C'mon Hillary, it's not too late for 2012
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kiksadi50
04:23 PM on 04/14/2012
give her 4 yrs to rest up; she'll rally.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
EspritDeVoltaire
K Street PR firm board member
01:38 PM on 04/14/2012
How well she would do depends completely on her choice of a campaign team. The same hacks as last time most likely would return the same result.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:34 PM on 04/14/2012
Why not stay relevant Palin as been doing it since 2008 and Hilary Clinton could get the Democratic nomination!
02:29 PM on 04/14/2012
Palin is not relevant.
photo
camelias and sweet tea
Small drinking village with a shrimping problem
03:07 PM on 04/14/2012
Palin is NOT relevant at all, she is just a reality show..She promotes herself and just wants to rake in the coins...