Skip to main content
No. of Recommendations: 2
I've been saying this for some time: that Hillary would be the Dem presidential nominee in 2016


9/14/2012 11:39 PM
In 2016 Hillary will be 68 with no serious health issues. McCain was 72 and a cancer survivor when he ran. I don't believe age will stop her from running.
She can have the nomination for the asking.
Let's ask the question this way:
Which Democrat is more likely to get the nomination in 2016?
I'll just put it out there right now.

Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic nominee for President in 2016.

http://boards.fool.com/some-links-30263866.aspx


11/27/2012 6:15 PM
I also believe she will run. And (though it is not inevitable) I believe she will win.

http://boards.fool.com/hillary-clinton-has-50-chance-of-bein...


2/26/2013 11:55 PM
Hillary will be compelled by history to run for President in 2016.
The only thing that would dissuade her would be ill health.
As I have said, the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination is hers for the asking. That alone would make history. But even more compelling: she would probably win.

The first woman President of the United States of America. She cannot say no to that historic event.

http://boards.fool.com/hillary-clinton-2016-30563884.aspx


Also found this:

Hillary will be the Dem VP nominee
http://boards.fool.com/hillary-will-be-the-dem-vp-nominee-26...

LOL! Got that one wrong. Though apparently it was something of a tossup between whether she or Biden would be VP and the other State.


Interesting thread:
http://boards.fool.com/rabit-challenge-hillary-will-bow-out-...

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Do you think she can get 75% of the female voters?

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I hope so!

The recurring ad will be from her opponent "what difference does it make"
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Well, lFO, it looks like we can nail down our dream match-up right now.

Cruz vs Clinton in 2016

Right?

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Cruz vs Clinton in 2016

LOL.

Can't wait for the Hillary! / Cruz debates.

I'm imagining something like 1984 in reverse.

Tough to see how Cruz would even carry Texas.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
IMO, we'd all be better off if she won in 2008. But that's over, and it doesn't mean she's the best in 2016. She might be the best Dem that can win.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Hillary hasn't got a snowball's chance in Timbuktu of even getting nominated, let alone elected. The same goes for Biden. If either of them even tries, some younger, more ambitious Donkey will muscle them aside and take the nomination. And that younger, more ambitious Donkey has a good chance of victory.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Cruz won't get the nomination. He's unelectable, a wackjob, and just plain no damn good, and if he runs, the GOP establishment will see to it that he does not get the nomination. He's a rabblerouser, and the GOP establishment is not stupid enough to nominate a rabblerouser, becausr any such person cannot even beat an egg, let alone a famous Donkey.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
If Cruz runs, the establishment won't be able to stop him. Mark my words. The base will come out in droves in support of Cruz over whelming any opponent in his path.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
If either of them even tries, some younger, more ambitious Donkey will muscle them aside and take the nomination.

Who would that be? No one springs to mind. And it's hard to imagine anyone more ambitious than Hilary Clinton.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
rin Hillary hasn't got a snowball's chance in Timbuktu of even getting nominated, let alone elected.

Well, you seem pretty sure about this. How about a wager.

If Hillary doesn't get the nomination I make a post with the title:

rinjr715 is a wise man

And a body that says:

And I am a stupid idiot.

And if she DOES get the nomination? Well, you can guess the rest...


I'm down. Are you?

RABITMARKER

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I'm down. Are you?

RABITMARKER


______________________


How come you have so many RABITMARKERs on the course of politics?

But ya can't even get the World Series right...

CARDS win tomorrow night...

I'll take two to one odds

(NB Boston wins the Series)
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Rt But ya can't even get the World Series right...

LOL. I guess I'm better at politics than baseball.

Cards win their final home game and lose the next two in Boston?

You are really going out a limb there, buddy.

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Percentages favor the team that wins game 1.

Ken
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Trust me, lFO, the GOP establishment will see to it that Cruz is stopped, even if they have to cheat like hell to do it. Cruz is unelectable and everybody knows it, and the wingnut base is too small to force him through over the objections of the establishment or the rest of the electorate. I think in the end he will realize that and not run in 2016.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Ray, Hillary is too damn old. If she were 10-15 years younger, she would probably win in a walk, but she'll be 68 in 2016, and her fellow Donkeys won't nominate somebody that old.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Peter, wager accepted.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
"Cruz is unelectable and everybody knows it, and the wingnut base is too small to force him through over the objections of the establishment or the rest of the electorate. I think in the end he will realize that and not run in 2016."

I suspect Cruz already knows, but has embarked on this path very deliberately. Once he tries and fails to win the nomination and/or the Presidency, his road forward is paved with gold. It will lead him to much wealth and a long Palinesque career of Fox "News" shows, book tours, appearances and speeches to pathetically hopeful right-wing extremists who will gladly line his pockets.

His faux passions are as fake as any hucksters. Ted Cruz is interested only in promoting the cause of Ted Cruz.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1

His faux passions are as fake as any hucksters. Ted Cruz is interested only in promoting the cause of Ted Cruz.


But he has worked so hard. He deserves the right to fleece the American public.

Everybody needs a rational for how to make money in America based on hard work. Ted is the man behind the war on women, the man who would destroy the African American community's voting rights. He is the man who makes the working poor poorer. And yet here you are saying that his hard work should not pay off? Who are you? Some sort of commie? Some sort of worker at some sort of corporation? Some sort of mom or dad who is paying attention and does not make as much money? Why are you informed at all?

Ted for Ted, not for President.

Dave
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Ray, Hillary is too damn old. If she were 10-15 years younger, she would probably win in a walk, but she'll be 68 in 2016, and her fellow Donkeys won't nominate somebody that old.


That wasn't my question. Who is this younger, more ambitious candidate that is going to steal the nomination from her?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1


You are really going out a limb there, buddy.


Life is a limb, but back home you get Ortiz and Napoli batting back to back.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
rin Trust me, lFO, the GOP establishment will see to it that Cruz is stopped, even if they have to cheat like hell to do it. Cruz is unelectable and everybody knows it, and the wingnut base is too small to force him through over the objections of the establishment or the rest of the electorate. I think in the end he will realize that and not run in 2016.

I agree on both points.

Look at the recent GOP Presidential candidates:

1992 Bush I

1996 Bob Dole

2000 Bush II

2008 John McCain

2012 Mitt Romney

These are all more or less moderates (on the US scale). Even George W Bush was understood to be a non-scary conservative. As was Reagan.

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
rin Ray, Hillary is too damn old. If she were 10-15 years younger, she would probably win in a walk, but she'll be 68 in 2016, and her fellow Donkeys won't nominate somebody that old.

I suspect that you are not a Democrat. (I'm not either, but I play one on the Internet.)

Democrats WORSHIP Hillary Clinton. There is no one else in sight.

[CNN/ORC poll] showed 65% of Democrats and independents who lean toward that party say they would likely back Clinton as their presidential nominee. Vice President Joe Biden comes in a distant second, at 10%, with freshman Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts at 7%, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo at 6%, and Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley at 2%.

The CNN survey is in line with previous polls from other organizations conducted earlier this year that indicated Clinton, who has not said whether she'll run, is far ahead of all the other possible Democratic candidates.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/16/politics/2016-poll-deep-dive/

This is going to be a coronation.

Too bad you are not a betting man.

Now things can always change. For example: it might be revealed that Hillary Clinton is a man in drag. Or she could undergo gender reassignment surgery. That might change the outcome, though not necessarily.

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
> Peter, wager accepted.

Cool. Disregard line in post I just made. This is going to be fascinating.

Now since we are agreed that it won't be Cruz, we can speculate on who the Pubs will pick.

http://boards.fool.com/naw-clinton-booker-bipartisanship-is-...

I sorta like Jeb Bush (he's younger than Hillary) for historical resonance.

Clinton vs Bush in 2016. LOL.

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Rt Life is a limb, but back home you get Ortiz and Napoli batting back to back.

I was being tongue-in-cheek. I agree with you. Of the six possible outcomes, the one you suggest is most likely.

Cards - Cards

Sox - Sox

Sox - Cards - Cards

Sox - Cards - Sox

Cards - Sox - Cards

Cards - Sox - Sox <----------

Home field advantage and all.

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"Look at the recent GOP Presidential candidates:

1992 Bush I

1996 Bob Dole

2000 Bush II

2008 John McCain

2012 Mitt Romney

These are all more or less moderates (on the US scale). Even George W Bush was understood to be a non-scary conservative. As was Reagan."


True, but even though the last two candidates were somewhat moderate, they were done in because they could never recover from their sharp turns to the right in the primaries (alienating minorities and women).

Taking a somewhat moderate GOP candidate and then having them try to flash their conservative credentials in the primaries is a losing path because they either come off as too erratic and all over the place (McCain) or a flip-flopper (Romney) in the general election.

I would love to see Christie get the GOP nomination in 2016 but I now it will never ever happen. He will not make the crazy, outrageous proclamations that are necessary to appeal to the crazy wing of the party and every other candidate will be running ads showing him walking the Jersey shore arm in arm with Obama.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
KMOX announcer says Ortiz is batting 733 in series, rest of Sox batting 156.

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Umm Taking a somewhat moderate GOP candidate and then having them try to flash their conservative credentials in the primaries is a losing path because they either come off as too erratic and all over the place (McCain) or a flip-flopper (Romney) in the general election.

And a Tea Party type who will please the base will not win in the fall. The sad truth for the Republican Party.

"Houston, we have a problem."

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0



Of the six possible outcomes, the one you suggest is most likely.

Cards - Cards

Sox - Sox

Sox - Cards - Cards

Sox - Cards - Sox

Cards - Sox - Cards

Cards - Sox - Sox <----------

Home field advantage and all.

Peter


I guess I lost the bet::


RE: batting averages

Question:

Will anyone remember Victorino's batting average in the World Series a year from now, or will they remember his Grand Slam that sent them to the World Series and his Triple 3 RBI to finish off the Cards in Game six?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
>I guess I lost the bet::

Well, we both expected the Cards to win the final game in St. Louis.

I don't think many folks expected the Sox to win it in six.

Yes, Victorino in the clutch.

Ortiz hit 11-for-16 (.688) with a 1.948 OPS, two home runs and six RBIs against the Cardinals, and just missed a grand slam when Carlos Beltran robbed him by reaching over the short bullpen wall. By comparison, the rest of the Red Sox hit .169 with a .484 OPS and two home runs.
http://espn.go.com/boston/mlb/story/_/id/9905733/2013-world-...

688 average for Ortiz. I think that will be remembered.

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
That’s sort of my point. I know that baseball is a Statistician’s delight, but do you really think that anyone will remember Jonny Gomes’ World Series BA of .177, or Jonny Gomes hit a three-run home run in the sixth inning in St Louis to bring the Red Sox to a 4-2 win from behind?

I know I’ll remember the Homer.

Yes!!! Ortiz Was Great...
Beltran not so much.

Sidenote: I prefer Baseball to Politics
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Rt That’s sort of my point. I know that baseball is a Statistician’s delight, but do you really think that anyone will remember Jonny Gomes’ World Series BA of .177, or Jonny Gomes hit a three-run home run in the sixth inning in St Louis to bring the Red Sox to a 4-2 win from behind?

Yes, good point. The averages give us the context but we remember the deeds.

Peter
Print the post Back To Top