I’ll take that bet. Hitlery is a menace to society.
Back to Condi Rice… Does she not kick Hilary’s ass?
If the Republicans keep putting out mediocre, insipid candidates like Romney and McCain, yeah I think this is a Hillary win.
In an actual vote or is this a sexual metaphor? If you’re seriously asking about Condi running against Hillary, Hillary would win in a landslide.
Clinton is going to be a tough one for the republicans. Somehow Hillary has managed to brand herself as a moderate democrat…not sure that’s accurate but that’s the perception. Either republicans send someone like Rand Paul who can rally the moderate vote as well, or they’ll go to the far right and send some tea party bumpkin.
Hillary will not a guarantee a Democratic victory in the 2016 elections. In fact, it’s more like the opposite.
First, she is a woman. Like it or not, the US is not as ready as many other countries to be led by a women. Second, people think she is a bitch. Maybe this opinion is undeserved - you can’t really be the Secretary of State without being tough. She will turn off more people than she entrenches. She is neither good looking nor charismatic like Obama. Third, she has too much political baggage. Obama was successful partly because he had such a small legislative record. Thus, there was little that opponent could point to and criticize. Hillary has taken the blame for things like the US embassy attack in Benghazi. These were not really her fault, but she will be held responsible anyway.
Finally, people in 2016 will probably be tired of the “different” candidate. Obama’s message was “Change”. He was chosen because he was not perceived to be like his predecessor, and old white man. Now, people are tired of Obama; they want an old white man back.
Hillary lost to Obama in the last Democratic primary. There were many reasons, but the main reason was that, despite of her fame, accomplishments and connections, people thought she was “unelectable”. The same will probably apply in 2016.
Condolezza Rice would be a very strong candidate for any office. She is a black woman that is respected by the Republican Party. She is gifted, smart and charismatic. She is beloved by almost everyone. However, she has repeatedly expressed that she is not interested in running for an executive position.
You could just nominate a guy named Cruz. With a name like that, he’s obviously an oppressed minority that grew up in the slums and know what it’s like to be poor and discriminated against.
It’s not possible that a guy named Cruz could be an Irish-Italian Southern Baptist, graduated from a prestigious private school outside of Houston, went to Princeton for undergrad and went to law school at Harvard.
Hillary now has a much stronger resume than she did in 2008. The folks who will hold Bengazi against her wouldn’t have voted for her anyway, so now being former Sec State is huge compared to 2008 when she was just Sen Clinton.
Condi would be a better VP choice. Joke as we might, there are still a lot of old, white, racists in the GOP and they’ll never vote for her for the top spot. I don’t think she would pull enough of the female and minority vote to overcome that.
sounds like the prototypical American mother figure to me.
i don’t think its as complicated as you’ve made it sound. she will get far more female votes from moderate and democrat leaning women than obama, and maybe even some “secret” female votes from the far right, as her being a woman will be more important than political affiliation for some traditionally republican female voters. she will get as many votes from the moderate and democrat leaning male group as obama, because she’ll be better than anything the repubs have lined up at this point. the angry white males will probably hate it more than obama but their vote is already going to the right anyway. my bet is that upwards of 65% of women will vote for Hillary if she’s on the docket, up from 55% last time around. i don’t see the male vote changing much, so its an easy Hillary win. the repubs might put up a female candidate for this reason but their lineup looks pretty weak other than Condi.
^I’m surprised there aren’t more old, white racists Democrats. Historically, they’ve been the more hostile party to minorities.
EG - my friend’s great-grandpa died shortly after the 2008 elections. I think he was over 100 years old. And he was an old, white, racist, yellow dog Democrat. “So this is what I got to choose from for president this year–a woman or a [African American].”
I believe Hillary’s now more extensive career would hurt her, not help her, in the 2016 election. Voters care about credible campaign promises, not history of success in high offices; if they did not, they would not have given Obama a landslide victory in 2008. Furthermore, since Hillary is a cabinet member, she is associated with Obama’s administration. Voters overturned Democratic Congress members in the recent 2014, as they are tired and disillusioned with the current administration. Obama did not even show up to campaign in many of the key states - the Democrats did not want him there. Instead, Obama spend his time campaigning for governors in lock-in Democrat states (might as well do something, I guess).
I agree that the Republican party will not choose someone like Condolezza Rice to be their President nominee. As stated earlier, they want an old white guy with a diversity sidekick. This could mean a hispanic man, woman, or even just a young man.
I think Hillary is the strongest candidate from either party…I don’t know how she will win the African American vote though…maybe she can get Rahmbo to be her VP pick?
The Republican bench is pretty weak, much like last time.
@ohai I think more executive experience is generally a positive. Voters are disillusioned with Obama because he’s all talk and can barely accomplish anything. Hillary at least has the impression of being better able to accomplish things.
I could imagine myself getting behind a moderate Hillary. The downside with Hillary is that she’s not really a moderate. She’s a somewhat hawk on foreign policy and a liberal on economic policy. She is totally willing to appeal to the liberal base and say outlandish stuff like corporations don’t create jobs (what?). A more moderate Hillary on economic issues might be pretty hard for Republicans to beat.
As much as I hate to admit it, Hillary is a very strong candidate. I don’t think many people will see strong ties with Obama since she resigned from his administration and a lot of time will have passed since then. As former Sec State, she will put forward much stronger foreign affairs experience than anyone being talked about on the GOP side, and will have similar legislative branch experience to the likes of Paul and Cruz. Sec. State also adds excecutive experience not that dissimilar to a governor. Jon Huntsman could be a very strong general election candidate for the GOP, but he has no chance of getting the nomination because he’s too moderate for “the base”.
If I had to put money on who the GOP will nominate at this point, I’d go with Scott Walker. I don’t think he’s a good GE candidate, but he ticks the boxes that will count in the primaries.
^ plus, Bill’s the man and will help lobbying Hillary’s case among moderate men. her approval ratings among women in general as a result of the Lewinsky scandal will go very far in sealing the deal among most american women. Hillary is seen as a rock in her marriage and is the ultimate ideal of a working woman. it will be nearly impossible to restrict the female vote to less than 60% for Hillary unless the repubs also vouch a female candidate. even still, Hillary > than any other female candidate and she would probably win that race as well.
Hillary is definitely a strong candidate for the democrats. Obama fatigue might disillusion enough centrist democrats and independents that they’d go the other way, but only if he Republican candidate is genuinely compelling. Who would that candidate be?
Hillary is in a good position to distance herself from Obama and come up with her own platform of proposals that are distinct enough to separate her. And the “b-tch” moniker might convince democrats and left-friendly independents that she might actually be able to get stuff done, LBJ-like. And the republicans have just enough control to ruin their reputation for another cycle, rather than say they deserve a chance to control everything. Americans like divided government. Particularly corporations that would prefer nothing to happen over “policy uncertainty.”
Its not a slam-dunk case for Hillary, but it’s ridiculous to say she doesn’t have a strong one.
slam dunk case.
Are you saying slam dunk she’s the nominee? Or slam dunk she wins?
Hillary will spend the next 2 years distancing herself from Obama’s policies. It started with a foreign policy jab a few months ago. Bill will also be paraded like a circus animal. The good news for her is that the Democratic brand in polls has stayed stable despite the President’s approval rating plummeting. That wasn’t the case in 2008 for the Republicans where the party’s popularity was dipping with the President’s. The Democrats are good at getting out the vote on election night and mobilising the base. But it’s way too early to predict a winner. 2 years is an eternity in politics. No incumbent party can survive a deep recession leading up to an election.
We should ask Peter Mackay.
^ Yeah, I think he, well, upgraded, since. If one can say that these days.