Posts
I agree that she would be one of the most qualified presidential candidates in recent history. First Lady, Senator and now Secretary of State. I think you have to back to the early 1800's when a Secretary of State was elected President. That was John Quincy Adams.
But timing is everything and that's where the Supreme Court comes in. If one of the liberal Justices born in the 1930's such as Ginsburg or Breyer decides to retire the President will probably be able to get his pick confirmed despite the usual caterwauling from Rush and Fox News. On the other hand if a spot opens because Scalia or supposed moderate Kennedy or one of the other conservative Justices leave the court then there will be a big fight. In my judgement the only person that could be confirmed in that circumstance would be Hillary Clinton. The Senate rarely rejects one of their own and the American people have a high regard for her.
If that timeline doesn't work out I'm on board with Hillary 2016.
3 comments:
The morning after John Kerry blew the election to GW Bush every Democrat (including yours truly) would have bet his/her last buck that Hillary was going to be the nominee in 2008.
To say that she (if she wishes) will get the nod in 2016 is probably not a safe bet in view of recent history.
Who knows is someone in the Democratic party will come along as Obama did and inspire. Besides, after the way the party treated her five years ago why would she (pushing 70)want to undergo a grueling campaign?
As for the SCOTUS, my opinion is why waste a valuable appt. on someone who will probably not even serve 10 years??? You want someone in their 40's or early 50's.
I love Hilary; she set the standard for all wives to follow... Let your husband park his pecker wherever he likes, as long as the woman can use him to advance her career, who cares about self respect.
Thants right folks. Women only let your husbands cheat on you if you don't have a career and no means to support yourselves! Remember you are our property!
Post a Comment