We need to keep the White House. That is my first thought, my first priority.

And then I think: With her?

I don't know.

I just don't know.

Idk either.

eom

Why do we always want to skip the game and get to the end game without further knowledge?

If she's the candidate, I'll vote for her.

I want to see fresh blood without as much baggage.

With Hillary, there's something for everyone to be underwhelmed by.

put in place a very progressive government but I don't think that will happen. The other side has stupidity and money and that beats progressives every time.
People have to find ways to survive that do not depend on government paving a better way. That just is not going to happen.
Young people need to find a way to get a skill that pays enough to keep them above the fray. I am afraid if they can't they will have to join the rest of the lower middle class and exist as best they can.
I think until the progressive movement has enough power to take on the power of the 1% things are likely to turn even more center right.
Hoping for Warren or some other liberal to ride in and win against the billions being spent by the right is just living in denial.
Hillary is the best we have for now.
If we run a weak Dem things will get worse faster than they already are.

win the WH. It will be deplorable if a republican secures the WH in 2016. Sadly, this nation currently runs on big $$$$$'s thanks to the despicable Citizens United decision.

It's a cruel joke to call the US a democracy when big $$$$$'s put into office whomever they want in this oligarchy. I like the other potential democratic choices too, but I seriously doubt they could win the WH given the insane political climate of this country.

The general populace of the US is not DU, the general populace is IMO highly propagandized and information limited. Hence IMO at this point in history we need the candidate with the most political clout, brand recognition and monied resources to win in the hostile political climate in the US. To me, that is HRC. I will vote for and support whomever the democratic candidate is, but I sure as hell hope some don't sit at home on their asses and not vote in 2016.

to necessarily take on the 1%. it is true;ONLY money speaks.
We really have almost no audible voice.
But, we only need enough money to be heard.

I didn't get that quite right, but I think you know what I mean.

I have Clinton/Bush fatigue. Unless the Dems come up with an alternative candidate, I will be writing in.

She surely is qualified. Now to see where she stands on the important issues. I am happy she is running. Now she has to earn my vote

That being said, I'll vote for her before I'll vote for any of the Republican nutcakes.

have Hillary as President but I will vote for her if she is the nominee.
I would like to know her positions on TPP for example. Net neutrality? Social Security and Medicare? etc., etc.

Has she voted in ways I disagree with? Yes. Does she play ball with corporations and take money from them? Yes. But denying that one has to deal with the power structures that are in place is IMO a naive fantasy. There's no way a savior is going to ride in on a white horse, raise a socialist army that is big enough to win an election and then wrench the power from the hands of the large structures. The alternative is to use their money and power to do as much good as possible and let the world turn toward inclusion. It might not happen, but the realities of the day are in fact realities and need to be worked with. I think she can.

thanks

wouldn't be able to do much. In fact, they'd be made a lame-duck, one-term president.

It's sad that too many even here on DU don't understand this political reality.

Unless and until we get a strong progressive Congress in the majority and KEEP that majority for longer than two years, we'll have left of center or right of center presidents. Those be the political realities.

although I did caucus for her in 2008 and will vote for her. Not my first choice then or now.

So yeah, I want her to run again.

Historically, the odds are against her.

When was the last back to back Democrat who got elected after holding the WH for 8 years? I think that we have a better chance with Hillary than with a lesser known candidate.

and you may well be right that she has a better chance than any of the other prospective candidates.

Look at the numbers for Hispanics. The GOP has completely alienated them and they are breaking hard for Dems. Hispanics overwhelmingly approve of Obama's immigration actions. This trend will not change and it will likely get worse as the GOP primary debates begin and each GOP candidate tries to prove who is the bigger bigot.

Also, look at the amount of swing states they have to win. The Republican nominee will have to win every swing state.

The GOP nominee has no chance.

It's a dirty little secret the media is hiding because they want a competitive race.

The reality is very much different.

Republicans will be formidable to beat in 2016. This won't be like the 2008 election. In 2008 it was almost a forgone conclusion that a Democrat would win the WH after 8 years of Bush's incompetent regime, two wars and the financial collapse of September 2007. That's why Hillary and Obama fought for the nomination until the bitter end. They knew that whoever got the nomination would also win the presidency.

In 2016 we should consider ourselves lucky if our nominee barely manages to make it through the finish line. A lot will depend on what happens to the economy and on foreign soil between now and election day. Circumstances that will be outside the purview of our nominee, be it Hillary or anyone else.

The problem for Republicans is the electoral map.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/11/20/1346224/-GOP-Columnist-The-VERY-Bad-News-FOR-THE-GOP-in-the-GOP-s-Midterm-Victory#

Remember, it takes 270 to win.

They've also shot themselves in the foot with Hispanics.

No Democrat is going to make all of us happy.

That's the nature of politics.

I'll probably make up my mind next January, based on who I think can beat the Republican candidate. A pro-choice. moderate-to-progressive president is my desire, and that leaves the field open.

After the 2016 convention, I'll be supporting the nominee who comes out of that convention. Until then, I have other things to think about and local legislative candidates to help.

Hillary Clinton will probably be the candidate. If so, then I'll support her candidacy for the general election. Until then, it's just primary season, and I get one vote. That's my only influence on the presidency.

Hopefully, the primary process will push her left and bring in more voters. AAR, I won't bash any Democratic candidate running or considering a run. GOTV, DU

If some is able to beat her in the primary, that candidate will have proven they stand a chance in the general.

I'd happily vote for her in the general. The primaries would depend on who else runs, but with her machine and funding it will probably be long a fait accompli by the time I get the chance.

I'm certainly not going to gnash my teeth about silliness like dynasties or corpora-DLC-DINO-Bankster whatever claptrap ad homs du jour. She has overwhelming support because...she has overwhelming support. To pretend otherwise is to pretend that primary voters and caucus attendees manage to get off their asses and do what few others care enough to do (barely one quarter!) by getting involved in those processes, but simultaneously lack the motivation to check out other candidates with a couple of mouse clicks. She is likely to win (not going to worry one bit if she doesn't though, I'd also happily vote for anyone who has so far expressed even the slightest hint at a serious campaign) and a lot of folks here are likely to lie to themselves and others about the reason being a Banker/media conspiracy to exclude other candidates, even though they will get plenty of press and every chance in the world to get their message out just like the losers, HRC included, did in 2007-8.

I'd probably prefer O'Malley so far although it's early days and who knows what will happen. But that preference is like chocolate to strawberry ice cream; I'd be happy to get either.

I mean.... what, on Earth, FOR?

She's been around forever; yet her accomplishments are slight. Some of her judgments have proved catastrophic. (eg. IWR)

She advocates cliched, warmed-over , essentially, GOP ideas.

I've never heard her say anything of consequence or originality. She takes no risks.

We already have plenty of candidates of equal weight, and comparable style.

They're called "Republicans."

Oh. OK. She's a woman... and will break the gender barrier, should ( god forbid) she be successful .

Great. Our very own Margaret Thatcher.

merrier. Competition is a good thing.

But I voted for Barack Obama, not Hillary, in the 2008 primary, and would love to see a very lively Democratic primary once again in 2016. Not sure who the major Democratic contenders will be yet, but I'm looking forward to finding out.

or buy into it...

It's like a cheap fantasy movie....SHE'S BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK!

Not what I want to watch while I eat DOTs

... interest in voting for or in any way supporting another member of the 2 American Royal Families.

Sorry.

Nor do I think it's the high point of the Democratic Party. Every time I consider Hillary for the top job, I'm left with a feeling of ambivalence, perhaps even apathy. I keep waiting to see who else, who else will unite us, and instead of putting the brakes on to slow the rush of the nation into fascism, who will turn the wheel and drive the car back the way we came towards individual civil rights, and freedom. I know Hillary isn't that person, and I'm sorely disappointed in just knowing that. The best we can hope for is she touches the brakes on the drive towards an oligarchy. We certainly won't see any civil rights progress from Mrs. Clinton, former Secretary of State, and former Senator.

I'm not sure we can endure another term, or two, of more of the same.

Barney Frank made me feel a little bit better about her than I did but I'm not thrilled. Not at all.

There is your sign. They are usually always on the wrong side of the story.

nt

2. accept that something undesirable cannot be avoided.

(or someone equally DLC) can't have it.

They've demonstrated as much many times.

Wish she had been elected in 2008, although Obama has been a good president.

running for president? What's not to feel good about?

In the general? Don't know. She certainly would not be the first opportunistic unprincipled lying Democrat I've voted for.

Hell, she wouldn't even be the first opportunistic unprincipled lying Democrat named Clinton that I've voted for.

I hope she does well and beats the GOP into the ground.

cry like little babies!

And now that I have lived long enough to see a Black American president I hope I got enough time left to see our first female president!

She has every right to run.

I have the right to not vote for her.