Hillary Clinton in 2016?

I’m bothered by the suggestions that Hillary Clinton will run for President in 2016. Don’t get me wrong, I love Hillary and supported her in 2008 primaries even after it was clear she had no chance. I’m one of those people who are still resentful after Clinton’s loss in 2008 and keep mumbling on regular occasions that “Hillary would sure handle this much better than this Obama character.”

However, I don’t think she is a good candidate for 2016. She is not young and in frail health. In 2016 she will be 69 and 8 years later she will turn 77. Everybody ridiculed McCain’s age when he ran, and he was 72 when he ran. Which is not that much more than 69. Of course, different people have very different experiences of the early seventies. Many remain vigorous, energetic, and fully receptive to change and transformation. Clinton, however, looks exhausted.

Also, I strongly suspect that the health issue she experienced recently was a stroke. The narrative of “she was at home, felt light-headed, fell down, and ended up hospitalized for a mysterious reason” is exactly what always gets said when politicians suffer a stroke and don’t want anybody to know.

I don’t know, I feel nervous about the scenario of Clinton running in 2016. What do you think?

About these ads

22 comments on “Hillary Clinton in 2016?

    • This will be the decisive election of our times. If we win, we have got it made. The conservatives will have to roll back and make significant concessions. If we lose, though, there will be several years of a very harsh backlash. It will be the very last time religious fanatics will have power, and they will let us all know it.

      • Lose, and we will get to the environmental point of no return for sure. Win, and there is still some hope.

  1. I agree completely on all counts. I don’t think doctors often just find blood clots in the brain that need to be treated immediately but are completely non threatening. My first thought when this happened was that it was obviously a stroke. And my second thought was, “there go her 2016 chances.” We care very much about presidential health, and voters would not tolerate this at all. I’ve been quite shocked that the assumption of her not only running but also having a good chance has not changed. Are you and I the only sane ones? ;) My phone made a fun little freudian slip while typing this-it wrote, “there GOP her 2016 chances…” Which is exactly it. Even if Democrats don’t care about her health, the GOP wouldn’t let us forget it.

    • “Are you and I the only sane ones?”

      – Let’s hope more people join us! :-)

      “My phone made a fun little freudian slip while typing this-it wrote, “there GOP her 2016 chances…””

      – Even the phone knows how things stand. :-)

  2. Elizabeth Warren in 2016. Enough said. If Jon Huntsman, Rand Paul, or maybe even Chris Christie do not win the GOP nomination then, that’s who I’ll probably vote for. I do not want a Rick Santorum to become president in any shape or form. In the long term, the performance of the president really depends on who’s in charge of Congress, the House, etc. and whoever becomes president will probably do some things that won’t go exactly with what the respective party’s principles are. Keep that in mind.

  3. Am I the only one who thought that Obama’s campaign in 2008 started as a practice run/run for VP? That election was the weirdest thing ever.

    I too think Clinton would have done a better job on just about everything (and would have pissed off the right people more than Obama ever could). But then I think Romney would have been overall the better choice for the repubs in 2008 and for pres in 2012. Not all his policies were/are great but he has shown a talent for administrating that Obama never has.

    But the problem with US presidential politics is that the entire election process selects for a good campaigner while the job is mostly ceremonial (where simply not falling down is enough) and dull administrating and campaigning and administrating are two largely different skill sets.

  4. In my judgment, Hillary Clinton has shot her bolt. She was not successful as Secretary of State, largely because she had to ‘implement’ Obama’s policies. I agree that she may have had a stroke. I also think that she will be too old and worn out by 2016. In fact, I would not be at all surprised if she died before 2016. Strokes rarely come as singletons. And she is in a dreadful family situation, especially now that she will have to spend more time with Willie and be even more aware of his continuing infidelities.

  5. I think Clinton was quite successful as Secretary of State. Which of President Obama’s policies were problematic? If you believe he should have launched a pre-emptive nuclear strike on North Korea or Iran, then, yes, from your standpoint, his policies are wrong. Otherwise, I don’t think so. The only completely wrong thing he has done is to assassinate people via drone strikes. This has almost certainly created a lot of enemies for the U. S.

      • So, on your own standard, Clinton was not successful as Secretary of State. The next candidate should be the farest possible to Obama.

        What standard? I think she was successful. I do not know what “farest” means. Do you mean as far as possible from Obama?? Or that the next one should be as fair as possible to Obama?

  6. I don’t want her to run either because of her age. I think that she just should retire, or maybe go on speaking tours. I love her, and I look up to her. But I don’t want her to be president if she is in poor health. I didn’t think about the possibility of her having a stroke, but you’re probably right.

    We definitely need some women to throw their hats into the ring next election, though. I would happily vote for Barbara Boxer or Nancy Pelosi, but both women will be 76 in 2016. Surely to god there’s got to be a woman who is young enough not to die whilst in office and is NOT Sarah Palin.

  7. Didn’t you know that Obama is secretly planning to get around the 22th admendment and have a third term? :)

    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/11/right-wing-conspiracy-theory-barack-obama-third-term

    “These messages are accompanied by a slideshow titled “The Third Term — INSIDE: The Secret Plan to Retain Power Through 2020″ and narrated by Stansberry & Associates founder Frank Porter Stansberry. It discusses how Obama will become American history’s greatest tyrant, responsible for implementing “the most terrifying socialist policies” the country has ever seen.”

    • I’m still waiting for a theory where Obama is going to restore monarchy and proclaim himself King. And I’m not just imagining this. I have seen a picture of Michelle Obama with a royal crown and a scepter floating around in the Republican blogosphere.

  8. I preferred Obama over Clinton in 2008, and like many progressives, have been disappointed by his presidency, though it’s better than the Republican alternative.

    Clinton blew it for me with this incident. I dislike bare-faced lying by politicians at the best of times, but that lie was particularly detestable. It was an insult to every soldier and civilian who had actually faced sniper fire in Bosnia or anywhere else.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s