It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Hillary Clinton: The next President?

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 01:30 PM
Almost everyone has heard the rumors that Hillary will be running for president in 2008, and I'd like to know how everyone feels about that. I've taken the time to put together a list of where she stands on some of the issues.


Our duty is to...adopt a fiscal policy that continues our prosperity, not retards it; to pay down our debt, not explode it; to provide prudent tax relief, to invest our surplus wisely consistent with the values and needs of our people, not to waste it.
Hillary Rodham Clinton, April 2001

While running for Senate in 2000, she stated that she would improve NY's economy. She followed through on that and helped to bring more jobs into NY. She also is opposed to Bush's plan to put money into private accounts instead of Social Security.

National Security
Clinton helped pass the National Guard and Reserves Reform Act for the 21st Century which expands healthcare for members of the National Guard and the Reserves enabling them to buy into TriCare, gives them a lower retiring age, and allows them to buy health insurance for their families.
When it comes to nuclear weapons, she wants to work more closely with other nations to prevent the production of such weapons, and want to give more support to the Nunn-Lugar Act. This act was signed by the first president Bush to destroy the nuclear material created by the former Soviet Union.

Homeland Security
After 9/11, Clinton worked to secure health screening and tracking for the volunteers and first responders who were at ground zero. She also worked to make sure that the families of the victims received the financial support they needed.

She introduced landmark homeland security legislation to provide direct funding to communities and first responders, with a specific formula that would take threat and vulnerability into account to ensure that federal homeland security resources are directed to the local communities and states that need them most.

She has either sponsered, co-sponsered, or supported numerous bills to increase healthcare coverage to those in need, and to decrease the costs of healthcare while increasing the efficiency of hospitals. One example is of the Coordinated Environmental Health Network Act of 2005. This act established a nationwide tracking network to "help identify connections between disease and environment and develop a response system to address public health threats."

Clinton wants to put more funding behind the No Child Left Behind Act to insure that children have the quality of teachers and education that they deserve. She also is working to prevent college tuition costs from becoming so high that only the rich can afford to attend.

She has fought for tighter pollution controls on power plants and other industry polluters, and introduced an act to fund the development of fuel cells. She has fought against the Clean Skies Initiative which would have weakened the Clean Air Act.

Women's Issues
Clinton supports Roe v. Wade, and believes that abortions should be safe, legal, and rare. She believes that more funding should be put into education about birth-control options, and into providing emergency conception to those who need it. She is a leading sponser of the Paycheck Fairness Act of 2005 which works to ensure that all workers are paid equally for the equal work and equal experience regardless of their gender.

Children and Families
She has worked to provide better healthcare coverage to children of working families, to provide incentives for parents to rid their homes of lead-based paint, and to ensure that there is never a shortage of vaccines while making sure those vaccines are safe for children.

Cont. next post...

posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 01:30 PM
There are also numerous other examples of ways that she has worked to benefit children and families such as: her support of the Family and Medical Leave Act that allows parents time off in case of health emergencies of their children; the Children and Media Research Advancement Act which will form a study on the effects of electronic media on the young children’s mental growth; and the Adoption Incentives program which offers incentives to parents who adopt children with special physical or mental needs.

This is only a sample of Senator Clinton’s views on some of the issues. My question for everyone who took the time to read this far is: Would she really make a good candidate for the next president? Keep in mind that she has not yet announced her intentions to run; this is just a what-if scenario. If she were to run, do you think she would be elected? Why or why not? What if she were to win the presidency? What, if anything, do you think would actually get changed about our country and the way it’s ran?


[edit on 15-7-2006 by Jenna]

posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 02:49 PM
I'm not wild about Hilary at all, but I have to consider the fact the she and Bill have the experience
to lead in a world of Chaos.

I'm really torn wishing that Dole would announce his candidacy, but also understand that no one
in their right mind would want to inherit this nightmare.

I think we need to concentrate on the upcoming November elections, doing all we can to to weed
out corruption in Congress first.

We need to put aside petty social issues of personal choice and concentrate on strong ethical leadership.

posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 04:55 PM
Thanks for taking the time to pull that together Jenna, this is the type of thing we hope to see more of on this forum.

As for Hillary, I can't agree with her on every issue, though I do like how she's handled some, but I have to say - the thought of it (her running the Country) scares the hey out of me.

If I started a thread about who do you trust the least (as oppossed to my dead one - who do you trust the most :lol
I might even have her on the top of my list. I don't think she's sincere in all her intentions as much as I think she knows how to say what we want to hear.

Anyway, I think that anyone who actually announces for the next shot has got to know they are walking into a no win mess and will probably be a one term President. So either they are a sacrificial lamb of their party for the greater good (as if) or someone who really should be in office but won't survive politically.

In my opinion Hillary is too shrewd to risk either of these scenarios, so if I'm right, her big surprise may be that she doesn't run till 2012.

posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 05:02 PM
For some reason I do not expect to see Hillary going anywhere as a candidate . . . she may make it to the primaries but that is where she is going to stay if she decides to run.

I can no find any goods attributes on her politics.

posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 05:03 PM

Originally posted by Jenna
Hilary Clinton... The Next President?


you are joking arent you! that was really funny. id shoot myself before hilary clint becomoes ANYTHING important, nevermind a president.

[edit on 15-7-2006 by worksoftplayhard]

posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 05:22 PM

Originally posted by worksoftplayhard

[edit on 15-7-2006 by worksoftplayhard]

Okay, give us a comparable thread for someone you WOULD vote for. Dare ya.

*dangles 1500 points shamelessly*

posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 05:29 PM

Originally posted by Relentless

Originally posted by worksoftplayhard

[edit on 15-7-2006 by worksoftplayhard]

Okay, give us a comparable thread for someone you WOULD vote for. Dare ya.

*dangles 1500 points shamelessly*

DICK CHENEY. he has very good aim... could be put to use!

posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 05:37 PM

Originally posted by Relentless
As for Hillary, I can't agree with her on every issue, though I do like how she's handled some, but I have to say - the thought of it (her running the Country) scares the hey out of me.

Can't say I agree with her on everything either. I think she has done a lot of good for New York while she's been senator there, but I'm not sure how much she'd be able or willing to do for the whole country. The way I look at it though, if I can agree with any given candidate on at least 85% of the issues, those are pretty good odds. From what I have found out about her stance on some of the issues I see as more important, I can agree with most of what she stands for. Not all, though!

Anyway, I think that anyone who actually announces for the next shot has got to know they are walking into a no win mess and will probably be a one term President. So either they are a sacrificial lamb of their party for the greater good (as if) or someone who really should be in office but won't survive politically.

In my opinion Hillary is too shrewd to risk either of these scenarios, so if I'm right, her big surprise may be that she doesn't run till 2012.

I have to agree with you there. I don't see her laying down her political career on the proverbial alter... You never know though. She may decide to run in 2008 and, assuming she does run and wins, she may very well be smart enough to create enough changes in the way things are done to ensure she gets re-elected in 2012.

posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 08:32 PM
I think we need to see what happens in the congressional elections first.

The effectiveness of any new candidate for POTUS will stongly depend on the
congressional balance of power.

Until this week, the Democrats have organized their campaign around our involvement in the middle east, attempting to structure a plan for troop withdrawals.

With the rapid escalation of hostilites now not only in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also in Israel, Lebanon and throughout the entire region, the likelihood of troop withdrawal is not only slim, but impossible.

It seems as if the timing of this new escalation fits perfectly into the plans of PNAC members, right before the elections where anti-terrorism and national security are the current administration's strongest running points.
The strong ties between PNAC and The Israel Lobby are nearly impossible to ignore.

The mind boggles

[edit on 15-7-2006 by FallenFromTheTree]

posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 11:40 PM
True. I agree we'll have to wait and see if she actually runs, but I don't think she has much strong competition for her seat in the senate. (Could be wrong, since I don't live in New York!) But I think that if she were to announce her intentions to run in 2008, she would stand a good chance of winning.

Until this week, the Democrats have organized their campaign around our involvement in the middle east, attempting to structure a plan for troop withdrawals.

I agree with them that we need to start thinking about how we are going to withdraw, but I wouldn't count it against them that that's what they were attempting when the mid-east (once again) got more hostile. They aren't clairvoyent. They at least get credit for trying in my book, even though it's not realistic at the moment... Someday we might pull out of there, but it won't be any time soon.

Anyway, back on topic for me. So, assuming that Hillary is still a senator after the upcoming elections, and decides to run for president, what do you think about her as a potential candidate?

posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 07:15 AM
Hillary will be the next president. I wish it were Guiliani who would be. But
I have resigned myself to the fact that Hillary will be. I would be surprised if she
isn't. My consolation in this is that it isn't Kerry or Biden ... I'd rather have Hillary
than those two.

posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 07:28 AM
No, she wont be the next POTUS and I would certainly not vote for her, this little facade that she's putting on now to try and appeal to both sides is easy to see through. As another members said she might make it to the primary’s but I doubt she will be picked by the DNC, and even if she is picked there’s strong dislike and opposition toward her. Personally I'd go for Sen. George Allen, but that's just me.

[edit on 6-8-2006 by WestPoint23]

posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 01:15 PM
George Allen Arggggggggh!

You might as well elect Tammy Fae Baker

posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 01:27 PM
No thanks, seeing as how I cant quite find any one person in Washington who has every single view I have I’d also be willing to vote for Jeff Sessions. There’s only a few issues I don't agree with him on, such as restricting funding for embryonic stem cell research and probably his view that all abortions should be banned.

posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 05:39 AM

Originally posted by WestPoint23
No, she wont be the next POTUS and I would certainly not vote for her, this little facade that she's putting on now to try and appeal to both sides is easy to see through.

I actually don't see the majority of people "seeing through" her. She scares the hey out of me. I keep seeing visions of her as the most likely candidate to invoke the Marshall Law and other powers that her two predecessors have put into the hands of the POTUS.

Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton - this alone should be striking people with fear. Why don't we just pick a family and go back to a monarchy?

posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 10:09 AM
This isn't intended as a red meat type of post, but a political strategy post. I'm not baiting any one group or the other, just talking numbers and political reality.

I put even money on Hillary becoming the next president for several, incredibly realistic reasons. The most obvious being the rough and tenuous position the would be Republican candidate will find himself in. Depending upon who survives the southern primaries, Hillary either strolls into the White House, or really has to hunker down for a long winter.

For a republican to win, they have to be Conservative enough to win in South Carolina, but Moderate enough to win in New Hampshire.

While the numbers suggest Guliani and John McCain as the clear front runners on the Republican ticket - both beating Hillary, if the election were held today with a thousand voters - they both have some logistical flaws in their approach. Condi Rice is being touted by the Hawks and Neo-Cons, but she has an even more chaotic road ahead of her. Jeb Bush is being courted by the Evangelicals, but he has a harder road than anyone.

In fact, the only Republican with smoth sailing through the back office politics is Newt Gingrich.

Rudy Giuliani is a liberal Republican, so he either loses the Southern Primaries, or he wins, but the Evangelical/Pro-Life, Anti-Gay Rights voter turnout will decrease dramatically. Plus, Giuliani is an admitted adulterer, so the soccer moms will be turned off. And, he has some pretty embaressing secrets to hide, given his close relationship with Bernie Karik. (Not saying that as gossip, just the inference that everyone has secrets to hide, and his could be explosive. As an Obtober surprise, it would be devestating)

Mainstream Republican voters love him, but Values Voters simply won't be impassioned to stand in line and vote for a guy who doesn't represent their views - not matter how much they don't like Hillary.

MY PREDICTION Regardless of how messy the electoral map becomes during the General, I just don't see him surviving the Southern Primaries intact. He has to compete with McCain for the same moderate Republican votes, while hard right candidates breeze through. Look for him to pull a Howard Dean, and fizzle out by South Carolina.

John McCain has the quintissential as the political maverick, and his military career gives a much need credability on foriegn policy matters, but his insistance on playing the meverick card too often has infuriated the two core demographics of the Republican party: Southern white men, and Evangelicals. Both of whom view his past behavior during the Bush years as a personal betrayal.

McCain's Detainee Amendment was viewed as soft liberalism during a war, not to mention his inclusion in the gang of 14, which prevented more conservative judges to be appointed. While being very conservative himself, he has to fight his moderate media portrayel if he has any shot at winning South Carolina.

He's has some pretty bitter fueds with both Bush AND Karl Rove, but it seems as though they've patched things up, in order to create an heir apparent. And, while he publicly patched up his fued with Jerry Falwell, behind closed doors, I can't imagine Falwell - and his many Religious Right supporters - are none to happy to see him succeed.

But, the one thing that will most certainly doom John McCain is his near constant battles with the Republican machine. The influential, backstage power brokers and influential donors who influence policy making decisions. As the Chairmain of the Senate Subcommittee Indian Affairs, he's personally responsible for crushing Jack Abramof, and thereby destroying the political careers of Tom Delay, Ralph Reed, and Bob of a whole cadre of powerful, well connected senators and congressmen.

If the Democrats retake the House and Senate, it will be because John McCain exposed corruption at the the highest levels of government, and turned out his fellow Republicans, handing them otheir pink slips on a silver platter.

Now, make no mistake Ladies and Gentlemen, the HIGH NOON - Gary Cooper routine makes for great media, but it wins an untenable amount of animosity from the very people he needs to win. And, these are the people that know where the bodies are buried.

The read on McCain is that he's politically savy, but has a hair trigger which quickly escalates into a full blown temper tantrum when things don't go his way.
Do not be surprised if an embaressing and damaging tape of a McCain temper tantrum is somehow filtered to the Media from Newt's people. If so, he's finished.

MY PREDICTION: If the Bush political machine backs McCain, he might be able to overcome his shortcomings with idealogues. If Giuliani drops out before South Carolina, McCain has a chance. But, if Giuliani stays in, they compete for the same moderate votes, thereby splitting them and hurting both men.

However, If McCain somehow wins South Carolina, he carries the Republican Primaries, and has a 50/50 shot at becoming the next president. If he places anything other than first or second in South Carolina, it's over before it begins

posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 10:53 AM
Condi Rice is being courted by many of the hardliner hawks and garish neo-cons to run as the heir to Bush. But, Condi is a distaster waiting to happen. I'm not sure she even gets off the launch pad.

The two primary reasons why some in the Republican Party want her to run, is because A) She's a woman B) She's Black. They believe that this will somehow split the Democratic voters, and overcome the lack of energy and drive that would come from the Republican base - specifically, Sourthern White Males and Evangelicals - who would most definitely stay at home on election night.

The problems for Condi are numerous...

1) She's unmarried, which plays horrible with the electorate. We live in a political system in which image is everything, so when the questions are posed; Will she date in the White House? Her carerr aspirations immediately become the punchline for the late night talk shows.

2) She's black. Sorry to my friends in our beautiful southern states, but the chances of an unmarried black woman winning any of the Southern Primaries are about as high as Zell Miller beating Hillary in New York. It just won't happen.

3) She has 8 years of unpopular public policy hung around her neck, which she'll be forced to defend constantly. She'll have to run an entire race completely on the defensive - without sort of offensive abilities. She'll have to run as an encumbant, without the guaranteed primary election.

4) She's a muted, droll public speaker. She's very eloquent, but she also suffers from the John Kerry syndrome. She SOUNDS like someone who speaks fluent Russian, and plays classical piano. She could run as a Park Avenue Democrat right now, and win any race AS a Democrat. But, to run as a Republican is foolhardy at best, a disaster at worst.

MY PREDICTION Condi doesn't run for the President in 2008, or any year. If she does, and somehow wins the Repubican Primary, look for the Libertarian Party to post its strongest year ever, with an influx dissatisfied Republican voters.

Jeb Bush is someone who should be our next Republican candidate for the President of the United States, but he won't. Not anymore. While to die hard Bush backers, Jeb is a dream come true, his political road to the Presidency ends with as much disaster as Condi's does.

The primary reason is simply Buish Fatigue.

Jeb is a smart, effective political operative, but he also doesn't want to become Ted Kennedy. Always in the shadow of his more successful, and well liked brothers. Right now, Jeb has a very popular operation in Florida. I'm not sure he'll be willing to jeopordize his own legacy, to run on his brother's beaten up, worn out ticket.

Jeb saw his White House aspirations disappear when Iraqis turned on each other, and the Voters turned on the President. When George lost Kansas (a metaphor for the midwest), Jeb lost his future.

If Jeb does run, he has a pretty good chance of winning the Southern Primaries, but would lose to Hillary in the general. 2008 would be the year of Terry Schiavo, and Jeb would be forced to defend his position on a highly unpopular issue. He keeps Evangelicals and Middle aged White Men, but he loses moderates, Soccer Moms, and Republicans with Bush fatigue.

MY PREDICTION: Jeb doesn't run, he'll stay home and count his chits, maybe banking on becoming a cabinet member, maybe running for the U.S. Senate later, maybe running for the Chairman of the GOP. Depending upon what happens in Cuba, he might very well be the new Ambassador to Cuba - considering how popular he is with his Cuban voters in Florida.

If he does run, he wins the primaries, but loses to Hillary in the general. Reds and Blues carry the same states as last time, except Hillary wins in Ohio this time.

posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 11:15 AM
So, what does Hillary do next?

My guess is that she'll enter the 2008 race with over 100 million dollars in her war chest. She'll concentrate on playing the Margaret Thatcher roll, trying to court middle class, white men, knowing that she'll carry Democrats regardless.

While her Republican counterparts will struggle, spending all their time moving to the right to appease their base, Hillary will have the headstart, and she'll be able to move to the center - quickly and brutally.

The Republican candidates will all attack Hillary, but that will eliminate nearly every other Democratic challenger from the media's attention. The focus will Hillary. She'll be the given candidate, and it will become conventional wisdom.

The republican candidates will spend months running for the republican Nomination. Hillary will spend those same months running for President.

The real spoiler during the Democratic primaries won't be John Kerry. I think he recieve 3-5% in Iowa and Hew Hampshire, and then quickly drop out. No, the real spoiler will be the Senator from Wisconsin, Russ Feingold.

However, I'm pretty convinced that Hillar will learn the Howard Dean lesson from 2004, an duse Mark Warner, the former governor of Virginia as her Ringer. In 2004, when Dean was established the front runner, EVERYONE attacked him, and his candidacy died the "Death by a 1000 Cuts". They wore him down.

I think Hillary will strike an early deal with Mark Warner, offering him the VP position if he runs flack during the Democratic Primaries. That way, Warner spends his time attacking Feingold, attacking John Edwards, attacking John Kerry, - responding to the nagative echo chambe they're trying to create - so Hillary won't have to.

Hillary then has plenty of time to run right on defense (look for a great campaign focusing on "Rebuilding our Armed Forces"). By the time the Republican nominee is found, she's ten steps ahead.

Once the General starts, Hillary will focus her time in Colorado, Nevada, and Ohio, courting disatisfied moderate Republican voters. She'll be in New Mexico courting Hispanic voters, outraged and betrayed by Republican immigration reform measures.

There's no real danger of Hillary losing blue states from the previous election, and all she has to do is gain one more. The most likely candidate is Ohio, right now gripped by a terrible scandal involving the state house, and the governor. But, if Hispanics can mobilize a million people at a time for nation wide protests, so not be surprised if New Mexico goes Democrat as well.

posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 12:09 PM
I am a staunch liberal and proud of it thank you very much and I wouldn't vote for Hillery and I think it would be a terrible mistake if the democrats ran with her. If she runs I will not vote for her, and lacking a viable 3rd party candidate I will sit out the election for the first time in my 30 years of voting.

Why? three basic reasons:

(1) One or one and a half terms in the Senate does not qualify you to be president. Nor does, for that matter, one and a half terms as a state governor, which is what we got now and we can all see the results. At least her husband had spent a decade or better as the governor of Arkansas, but even then i was not exactly thrilled with him the first go round...of course by the second, he so annoyed the Republicans that I had to vote for him.
. This citique holds true for John Edwards and John Warner and George Allen (both of Va.) too, though Warner was an excellent governor. Allen is a pinhead (trust me on this he was one clueless governor and in the Senate he makes Rick Sanitarium look like a brain surgeon) who recieved too many injuries to the head playing football. In short she just is not qualified. Yet.

(2) She represents everything wrong with the Democratic party today. She so hews to the middle of the road it can be effectively argued that she doesn't stand for anything at all. As a key member of the Democratic Leadership Council she is responsible for setting policy for the party along with the rest of the council. They have so bled the party of any meaningful positions that they make milquetoast seem rich and complex. a lifelong Democrat it infuriates me. I think I can safely speak for the Democratic rank and file when I say stand for something damnit and stop trying to position yourselves as conservative lite. We want viable options, viable choices and the DLC is not giving us it. John Kerry (whom I wasn't exactly doing handstands for either) would have been a lot better off if he had told Bush etal. Yeah so I am a liberal....what of it? Now lets discuss the issues. but no he played middle of the road and became road kill. It is really pathetic watching invertabrates trying to stand up and that's exactly what watching the Democratic leadership in congress try and do.

(3) Finally, and I think the biggest reason not to run her, is her herself. She is such a polarizing figure that she would energize the Republican base like a Karl Rove wet dream while not doing the same for the Democratic base. Every right wing whacko would come out of the woodwork to take a swipe at her and it would not be pretty. In fact if she runs I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised if there weren't an assissianation attempt on her from some far right nutball.

I honestly think that if the Democrats run Hillery Clinton they deserve to lose, and they will. If the Republicans had any brains they would run John McCain or Elizabeth Dole in 08, or both on the same ticket. I would like to see Russ Finegold and John Warner, or maybe Wes Clarke.

My nightmare race would be Hillery Clinton vs Newt the Gingrich...only then would I hold my nose, go into the polling station with a barf bag and vote for her.

[edit on 7-8-2006 by grover]

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in