Is Hillary Clinton making another Run?

[redleghunter]

Richard Nixon was the last American politician to achieve his party's presidential nomination twice!

Thanks that is correct and I see the potential parallels.

 

[redleghunter]

...and she may have won the Miller's Ice Cream poll, too, for all I know; but in our country you win the election by winning the vote of the Electoral College.

Yes you just reminded me I have to dust off my football bat for the World Cup.

 

[rambot]

...and she may have won the Miller's Ice Cream poll, too, for all I know; but in our country you win the election by winning the vote of the Electoral College.

Why did you feel the need to point that out when the VERY NEXT SENTENCES qualifies what I said with what you are saying.?

 

[mark kennedy]

Hillary Clinto is an expert fund raisrr and campaigner. She is proably just trying to motivate the Dem base. This is an important election coming up, stakes are high. Her career was over in 2016 when she lost to Trump, but she can still rally support, that's one thing she is good at.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Hillary Clinto is an expert fund raisrr and campaigner. She is proably just trying to motivate the Dem base. This is an important election coming up, stakes are high.

This first event is November 18 in Las Vegas. After the election.

 

[Albion]

Why did you feel the need to point that out when the VERY NEXT SENTENCES qualifies what I said with what you are saying.?

Because it doesn't. It takes up a different issue.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

The Dems need to toss a fresh face into the mix.

I'm sure whoever they pick will still be the target of a bunch of wild conspiracies just like she was, but none the less, we've already seen how the "Trump v. Hillary" story unfolds, and given that his followers seem be even more vested in the Hillary conspiracy theories now then they were when the election was taking place (I suspect due to needing an excuse to express the "cuz Hillary was worse" reasoning as a last line of defense when losing a debate about something ridiculous Trump did/said), I don't foresee any of them jumping ship to pick her over him this time.

There's plenty of fresh options in the blue pool without them having to recycle one of their previous failed picks.

 

[Albion]

Wouldn't you agree that the new faces are even worse, though? Think of Sens. Harris, Gillibrand, Warren, Booker et al.

Compared to VP Biden and even John Kerry, they are "beyond the pale", at least in how they talk and behave. It's not likely that someone who berates President Trump for his allegedly undiplomatic or reckless speech is going to unseat him by doing the same thing but in spades!

 

[rambot]

I teach English to Junior high and I feel pretty confident in my language knowledge and my ability to explain myself. I have no clue how/what you are arguing so I'm hoping you can help me clarify where I went off track.
Here is my quote:

Well first, she WON the popular vote. But that's a sidebar; she didn't win the electoral votes so she's not president.

So I say:
1) She won the popular vote
2) she didn't win the electoral votes
3) She's not president because of 2) .
I go on to ask about how she's "acting how she won" because I know she didn't win the electoral votes but I see no behaviour indicating she won ANYTHING really. I was hoping for some examples; that was my main question.

Your reply was:

but in our country you win the election by winning the vote of the Electoral College.

which I indicated after the semicolon already. I even dismissed the fact that she DID win the popular vote as a "sidebar" because I recognize that electoral votes get you the presidency NOT popular votes.
I don't understand why you repeated what I said and I'd hoped you would clarify why you'd repeated what I said. Your reply totally befuddled me:

Because it doesn't. It takes up a different issue.

1) "it doesn't". And yet, I just broke down the posts and it...well, DOES.
2) What is the "issue" it takes up?

As it stands, it just seemed like you were being contrarian but I don't take you to be that kinda poster so I'm just confused.

 

[rambot]

Wouldn't you agree that the new faces are even worse, though? Think of Sens. Harris, Gillibrand, Warren, Booker et al.

Compared to VP Biden and even John Kerry, they are "beyond the pale", at least in how they talk and behave. It's not likely that someone who berates President Trump for his allegedly undiplomatic or reckless speech is going to unseat him by doing the same thing but in spades!

"Allegedly undiplomatic": Are you constructing your arguments so Democrats could not possibly make sense?
When Trump has been called out for his lack of diplomacy (lets say, for example, full on admitting he lied to Trudeau), how can it be that we hear "We need someone who doesn't take nonsense from our closest allies"? There is nothing "allegedly undiplomatic" about that. That's just being a bad human; and bad humans can't be good diplomats.

I am exceedingly curious to hear what makes Warren "Beyond the Pale". I can only think of one controversy (and I use the term loosely since it's become more of a point of mockery against her) that dogs her at all. I mean, I hear her share her views with passion, but seriously, I can't see how you can even put her and trump anywhere near the same sport, let alone ballpark.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

I sure hope she's the nom. It'll make the landslide victory for Trump so much more sweet!

It would also be that much sweeter if she ran and beat him.

 

[Rion]

Can I just check who were the republican presidential candidates 6 years out of the last election, an how did they look?

Is there any evidence at all tying any of these people to a presidential run?

The only person I am aware of that has said they are definitely considering it is Avenatti.

I hope that he runs too. People have already found out that he gets really, really angry when you call him a creepy inappropriate content lawyer.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

I hope that he runs too. People have already found out that he gets really, really angry when you call him a creepy inappropriate content lawyer.

I never really got that name. Is he creepy because he's a inappropriate content lawyer or does he just happen to be a "creepy" inappropriate content lawyer?

 

[Rion]

I never really got that name. Is he creepy because he's a inappropriate content lawyer or does he just happen to be a "creepy" inappropriate content lawyer?

He literally told Trump Jr. to "fight me irl" so I am going to say the latter.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Wouldn't you agree that the new faces are even worse, though? Think of Sens. Harris, Gillibrand, Warren, Booker et al.

Compared to VP Biden and even John Kerry, they are "beyond the pale", at least in how they talk and behave. It's not likely that someone who berates President Trump for his allegedly undiplomatic or reckless speech is going to unseat him by doing the same thing but in spades!

And yet, Candidate Donald was a new face who went "beyond the pale" -- didn't seem to hurt him much...

I agree, however, trying to out-Trump Donald isn't going to help... but let's not pretend hypocrisy is a dealbreaker in Washington.

 

[Ancient of Days]

Just a thought. But, I'd hope they'd find someone better. John Kerry or Joe Biden seem to be much better candidates who could challenge Trump (although, I expect him to win again). No point in throwing money at a losing hand.

John Kerry or Joe Biden???? Ah come on man... You would do better having Bozo and Gumby entering the race.

 

[Albion]

John Kerry or Joe Biden???? Ah come man... You would do better having Bozo and Gumby entering the race.

We might think so, but then just try to come up with someone else who can keep a civil tongue in his or her head and has a chance of winning the nomination of the Democrat Party as it now is.

 

[TLK Valentine]

We might think so, but then just try to come up with someone else who can keep a civil tongue in his or her head and has a chance of winning the nomination of the Democrat Party as it now is.

Since when is a civil tongue a requirement?

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

You might be right. The real question is why would anyone buy a $700 and up ticket to see a couple who is no longer in the game?

Because, they are really smart, been places politically and good things to say. And can encourage better changes.

 

[Gigimo]

Now that would be interesting.

Trump's 2020 Rival Got Caught Ripping Gullible Democrats OFF!