Will Hillary Clinton Run again in 2020

Jump to Last Post 1-5 of 5 discussions (58 posts)
  1. RJ Schwartz profile image90
    RJ Schwartzposted 9 months ago

    Hillary has hinted and has been fundraising in the last month, which some say indicates she is preparing for another run at President Trump.  Others say she's just trying to make it look like she's a candidate to keep the law off of her tail.

    Thoughts?

    1. JAKE Earthshine profile image78
      JAKE Earthshineposted 9 months agoin reply to this

      Why shouldn't Hillary run again in 2020? She already beat Bozo Trump by about 3 million votes which is pretty easy to do and if not for Russian espionage against the USA and infiltration of our electoral process, he would have never won the electoral college:

      1. RJ Schwartz profile image90
        RJ Schwartzposted 9 months agoin reply to this

        For someone who calls themselves a "journalist" in their profile, you seem unable to answer even the simplest questions without a snarky remark.  I'm wondering if it's even possible for you to answer a question without propaganda or smearing someone?

        I can only assume this "stand up act" you perform daily is to get hits and earn money on HP.  I see people just like you every day in the comments sections in other new sites.  Problem with that kind of approach in my opinion is that no one takes you serious.  Maybe try an argument with facts and details. 

        Here, I'll help correct your response:

        Why shouldn't Hillary run again in 2020?  She did win the popular vote, however in the United States, we elect our President by Electoral College votes and if she put some hard work into campaigning in the purple states, she might have even won.

        1. JAKE Earthshine profile image78
          JAKE Earthshineposted 9 months agoin reply to this

          Snarky? Maybe, and who deserves it more than Bozo the racist who has degraded this once great nation into a 3rd rate dictatorship?
          Propaganda? Nope, perhaps you should re-read my last comment and tell me what part of it is untrue or 'propaganda' as you falsely
          claim:

          1. RJ Schwartz profile image90
            RJ Schwartzposted 9 months agoin reply to this

            Obviously you feel it's acceptable to continue with the falsehoods and name calling - the American economy is better than it's ever been and you deem it third world.

            Propaganda is citing unproved so-called Russian collusion Jake - by definition, propaganda is information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.

            All you need to do is show some proof of this so-called infiltration - BUT, since no one else in the entire Federal Government can prove it, I'm betting you aren't able to either.  Proof is something that holds up in court, not just what some other politician says.

            Waiting for proof.....

            1. JAKE Earthshine profile image78
              JAKE Earthshineposted 9 months agoin reply to this

              By now, after about 4 months of membership, everyone should understand that I always have facts to back up my comments:

              Issuing unlawful orders to separate innocent children from their parents and then actually caging them like Adolf Hitler would do and degrading the CIA, FBI and law enforcement while cowering to our enemy Vladimir Putin are just 2 examples of Mr. Trump's 3rd rate dictatorship:

              Our once great economy is now in chaotic decline under Mr. Trump's insanity, the greatest point drop in the stock market occurred just 5 or so months ago and companies are exiting the USA for foreign lands to avoid paying Mr. Trump's massive job killing tax hike:

              "Harley-Davidson, Blaming E.U. Tariffs, Will Move Some Production Out of U.S."

              https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/25/busi … riffs.html

              All U. S. intelligence sources have arrived at the logical conclusion that Russia infiltrated our democracy in favor of their poodle Bozo Trump: Maybe that's why he feels the need to insanely attack our courageous law enforcement agencies like a ghoulish drooling orange creature almost every day:

              "The Russian government interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election in order to increase political instability in the United States and to damage Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign by bolstering the candidacies of Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein."

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_i … _elections

              1. RJ Schwartz profile image90
                RJ Schwartzposted 9 months agoin reply to this

                As I said - no proof of anything Jake.

                Wikipedia is not a credible source seeing that anyone with an account can make changes to an entry.  Seriously, I didn't think anyone would even attempt to cite it anymore.  Almost as funny as people using the left wing site snopes to fact check.

                The economy is thundering at a pace near post-war recovery periods and you cherry pick a single story and call it consensus - I suggest you look further than your preferred propaganda websites and read actual financial and economic data.  Here's a couple of examples:

                Bloomberg says - "during Trump’s 16 months in office. Jobless rates among minorities are at or near record lows, openings are at an all-time high and there are more positions available than there are unemployed."  Expansion is averaging 2.4% (you need to go back to the early 1960's to see comparable growth.) Unemployment in May was 3.8% (hasn't been that low in 50 years) Plus there are millions of open jobs in America.

                Turning to another point - The Stock Market has always operated under the Random Walk theory Jake - I suggest you research it and you'll understand how it works rather than just basing your assumptions that it's directly tied to the economy.  "A “random walk” is a statistical phenomenon where a variable follows no discernible trend and moves seemingly at random. The random walk theory as applied to trading, most clearly laid out by Burton Malkiel, an economics professor at Princeton University, posits that the price of securities moves randomly (hence the name of the theory), and that, therefore, any attempt to predict future price movement, either through fundamental or technical analysis, is futile."  In layman terms, the market has millions of variables that influence it (including a host of variables outside the nation and outside of any American politician's control) - therefore it's impossible to predict how trading will occur and when.

                https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/r … lk-theory/

                I'd love to discuss economics at length with you - what's your degree in Jake?  Where did you go to college?  You still haven't answered my previous question on your journalism credentials. It doesn't even need to be on this forum - you choose the venue.  I'm pretty sure I can hold my own in the debate.

                Border enforcement laws are laws - I think you should do some reading so you have a better understanding of US Immigration code (focus on ACT 235 - you'll get a richer understanding of how the US Attorney General makes the calls on what can and can't be done)  - illegal aliens crossing illegally into America have no rights other than freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and Miranda rights -  Now, once the criminal illegals are inside the US border, they do get more rights, but at the border...not happening.  Your  emotional rhetoric sounds nice, but it isn't anything else.  And by the way, there were family separations and children being kept in cages under former President Obama as well - but you probably don't care to hear about that since it deflates your narrative.

                Here's the link to the entire US Immigration and Nationality Act in case you weren't able to find it. 

                https://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB … B/act.html


                I can appreciate the fact that you despise President Trump - we're all entitle to our own opinions.

    2. promisem profile image96
      promisemposted 9 months agoin reply to this

      She is not a viable candidate for president and she also is not a viable candidate for prison.

      1. RJ Schwartz profile image90
        RJ Schwartzposted 9 months agoin reply to this

        If I were in her shoes, I'd be glad to be out of politics.  It takes years off your life.

        1. promisem profile image96
          promisemposted 9 months agoin reply to this

          Frankly, I don't know why anyone wants to be in politics. Even the local politicians I know get hammered all of the time by extremists on both sides.

          1. RJ Schwartz profile image90
            RJ Schwartzposted 9 months agoin reply to this

            It's getting worse now with the violence, the protests at people's homes, doxing, and threats on people's lives - there are days when the shadow of the third world looms heavy.

        2. MizBejabbers profile image91
          MizBejabbersposted 9 months agoin reply to this

          If I were in her shoes, I would be glad to sit back and enjoy their money. They weren't always wealthy.

          1. RJ Schwartz profile image90
            RJ Schwartzposted 9 months agoin reply to this

            I think they spend at a pretty heavy rate - likely they "need" more cash

    3. Credence2 profile image80
      Credence2posted 9 months agoin reply to this

      I think that her time has past. The faction of the party that she represented doesnot constitute a winning combination for the Dems right now.Only our enemies would have their hearts lifted with her candidacy.

      1. MizBejabbers profile image91
        MizBejabbersposted 9 months agoin reply to this

        Credence, I'm sorry to say that I have to agree with you. She has reached the age to retire gracefully. Also, despite the denials, I believe that she has some health problems that would prevent her from another run. She would have gotten a lot more votes except for that "open-door" policy. I can't go along with that. I think we have to have more control over our borders, although I don't agree with a wall and separating families either. There has got to be a better way.

        1. Credence2 profile image80
          Credence2posted 9 months agoin reply to this

          Yes, she has lost twice, and with that comes a sort of jinx. Despite contrary reports, most libs are not for open borders, but as you say there has to be another way, beside the manner in which Trump is handling this. I have mentioned before the option of raising penalties against those that hire illegals. But, the GOP do not want to ruffle the feathers of those that are well a large part of its constituency that would be the result of such a course.

    4. Old-Empresario profile image79
      Old-Empresarioposted 9 months agoin reply to this

      It would be crazy to run her again. But then again, the DNC has lost its mind and so may go for it. I was a Democrat from 2004 until 2016 when the party went off the deep end.

      1. PhoenixV profile image61
        PhoenixVposted 9 months agoin reply to this

        Many people have decided to #walkaway from whats left of the democrat party.

        In my opinion hillary was mentally and physically unfit to run in the first place. Being unfit, however makes her future actions unpredictable. She may want to run as a teapot, who knows.

        As she was being dragged unconscious from van to van, as msm was dragging her through winning poll to poll and debate question to question. Throwing her glass ceiling victory parties the night before. The woman couldnt even cheat Bernie to the top. Very sad to watch.

        But who knows these things for sure? If 12 Russians had not been given Podestas Spirit Cooking Recipes, hillary might be pilfering WH furniture as we speak.

    5. profile image59
      Nanahayesposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

      I don't think so that Hilary Clinton will be the next president.

      RouterLogin

  2. Live to Learn profile image81
    Live to Learnposted 9 months ago

    I think it would be in the best interests of the party to quietly suggest she disappear into the sunset.

    1. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 9 months agoin reply to this

      And perhaps in the best interests of the country if she runs?

      1. Live to Learn profile image81
        Live to Learnposted 9 months agoin reply to this

        I would like to think people are smart enough to, by now, know she is not fit to be president but there is so much going on that points otherwise..... I'd rather see them field a candidate I can understand why someone would vote for them.

        1. RJ Schwartz profile image90
          RJ Schwartzposted 9 months agoin reply to this

          Honestly, the only reason anyone seems to be considering her for another run is the lack of another viable candidate (name recognition, fundraising abilities, etc.)  I think people see Joe Biden as a liability with female voters because of his excessive touching.  Liz Warrren is polarized because of the Native American issue.  It will be interesting to see who gets the nod. Maybe feel the Bern?

          1. promisem profile image96
            promisemposted 9 months agoin reply to this

            I agree Warren is polarizing in part because of her battles with Trump. Otherwise, Senators Brown, Harris and Gillibrand all have ambition and credibility.

            1. Credence2 profile image80
              Credence2posted 9 months agoin reply to this

              "I agree Warren is polarizing in part because of her battles with Trump"

              I don't know, I think that makes her more qualified rather than less. She distinguishes herself as the polar opposite of Trump along with having an impeccable Progressive record makes her the ideal candidate, in my opinion, of course. Regardless, I would virtually beg her to run in 2020, offering my full support.

              1. RJ Schwartz profile image90
                RJ Schwartzposted 9 months agoin reply to this

                What do you think would "put her over the top" and gain the support of the entire Party?  She's weak on climate change issues and, nothing personal, but being an East Coast Liberal wouldn't seem to appeal to much of the heartland of America.  Plus, it's not commonly known, but she used to be a Republican

                1. Credence2 profile image80
                  Credence2posted 9 months agoin reply to this

                  What do you think would "put her over the top" and gain the support of the entire Party? 

                  Interesting, RJ. Yes the Clinton faction failed miserably. I tell you that if Sanders were the nominee, he would have defeated Trump. Clinton had been a changeling. Too busy trying to suck up to conservatives, who could never get the message. She straddled the fence and was found lukewarm to everyone's palate.

                  There are many things that she is STRONG about that allow most of us to overlook a facet or two.

                  As for being an east coast liberal, don't forget that a young "overeducated" black guy won the election not once but twice. The voting public can be quite fickle. The electorate is not your grandfather's, the increasing significance of minority votes is moving us away from the model of what the "heartland of America" would find palatable. How else would a Barack Obama become president? Ms. Warren appeals to me and others like me, so who really bothers considering what the "heartland" wants?

                  We all can change and she has made a genuine and true transition to the "light side" and I am proud to call her one of our own.

                  1. RJ Schwartz profile image90
                    RJ Schwartzposted 9 months agoin reply to this

                    I agree that Bernie would have beaten Trump - it must be driving the Party leadership crazy too since they basically were against him from the beginning. 

                    The young black man you refer to was Hawaiian - a far cry from the East Coast Liberal mold.

                    Pitch me on her virtues - especially ones that would sway independent voters to give her their support.

              2. promisem profile image96
                promisemposted 9 months agoin reply to this

                Credence, I agree it makes her more qualified with Democrats and others on the left.

                The downside of being polarized is that it runs the risk of alienating independents and others in the center who are needed to win a national election.

            2. MizBejabbers profile image91
              MizBejabbersposted 9 months agoin reply to this

              I don't understand all the tempest in a teapot over her saying her family claims to have Native American heritage. People tell her to "get a DNA test" but that doesn't prove anything. Anyone can be a tribal member and have Native American heritage without its showing up in a DNA test. I know several people, who have the heritage, but our dinky DNA tests that are so touted on Ancestry and other sites aren't sensitive enough to detect the genetics. One of them even states "maybe your ancestor was a white person who was adopted into the tribe." Maybe, but a tribal member was a tribal member, regardless of bloodline.

              1. RJ Schwartz profile image90
                RJ Schwartzposted 9 months agoin reply to this

                Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe she used it get a job at Harvard and she has no tribal affiliations - those of us on the right see it as suspicious that she fights it so hard.  She is being challenged by a real Native American who has also stated that Warren has no links to any tribe.

                1. MizBejabbers profile image91
                  MizBejabbersposted 9 months agoin reply to this

                  Look at all the "African Americans" who have no tribal ties to Africa, yet they get in as minorities on color alone.

                  1. Credence2 profile image80
                    Credence2posted 9 months agoin reply to this

                    But look at all the rich white kids that get into these esteemed institutions of higher learning based on this "legacy" thing? Is that not receiving preference just because one of your parents attended?

          2. Live to Learn profile image81
            Live to Learnposted 9 months agoin reply to this

            Maybe, and this is just a random thought....put someone forward who actually has a unique mind which puts loyalty to the people over special interests and party loyalty?

            Sorry. I forgot we were talking about the Democratic party. Never mind.

            1. MizBejabbers profile image91
              MizBejabbersposted 9 months agoin reply to this

              And you can offer evidence that the Republican Party puts loyalty to the people first? Especially Women?

              1. wilderness profile image96
                wildernessposted 9 months agoin reply to this

                LOL  I don't think there is a politician on the Hill that puts the people before the party.

                But haven't a clue what the women comment was about, unless it was about putting the lives of innocent, helpless children ahead of selfishness desires of (female) mothers?

          3. MizBejabbers profile image91
            MizBejabbersposted 9 months agoin reply to this

            I can't think of a quicker way to a democrat loss than "feel the Burn". I don't care if he is a member of the Democrat Party, he isn't a democrat, he is a socialist.

            1. RJ Schwartz profile image90
              RJ Schwartzposted 9 months agoin reply to this

              Do you believe he would have beaten Trump?

              1. MizBejabbers profile image91
                MizBejabbersposted 9 months agoin reply to this

                No, I do not. I think he had a very vocal minority among Democrats. The squeeky wheel gets the grease but not necessarily the votes.

                1. Credence2 profile image80
                  Credence2posted 9 months agoin reply to this

                  On the contrary, I think that Trump was so inherently a toxic candidate that only Hillary Clinton with the numbers of skeletons in her closet could have been defeated by Trump. Bernie had a wider constituency, if not "the machine" among us democrats and would have defeated Trump in my opinion.

  3. Readmikenow profile image96
    Readmikenowposted 9 months ago

    Is it possible that Hillary Clinton is thinking of making a third run for the presidency because there are NO Democrats who could realistically defeat Trump?  He could only lose if his base leaves him, and they are solidly behind him.  The Republican party is also growing with Trump as president. 

    "While most Obama to Trump voters once identified as Democrats, a majority now identify as Republicans. Since 2011, there has been a 28 percent decline in Democratic identification and a 43 percent increase in Republican identification among these voters.'

    https://www.voterstudygroup.org/publica … ty-hoppers

    1. RJ Schwartz profile image90
      RJ Schwartzposted 9 months agoin reply to this

      That's basically what I've been hearing from my Democrat contacts.

      The Republican Party is now the Trump Party - the old guard doesn't have much power anymore aside from the few hanging-on deep stater's and the resist crowd (like Romney, McCain, and a few other sore losers)

  4. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 9 months ago

    In the end , after all of this party horse shyte has run it's course , It will become known through the entire DOJ just how corrupt the Clinton Mafia is and was in decimating the integrity of the DNC alone . Say nothing about the utter incompetence surrounding the Russia investigations and their own involvement [Clintons].   After the news media has ended it's love affair with Pravdaism , after the democrats have coagulated some sense of party , probably after Hillary herself comes clean about her own political blundering , Democratic voters  may come to know just how evil she is ,
    At this point give her a walker and stand back , Nothing she will do or say surprises me .

  5. Marisaupa profile image84
    Marisaupaposted 2 months ago

    Does Hillary want to run?

    Does Hillary feel the need to validate herself by finally running a winning presidential campaign?

    Does Hillary want what she feels she has deserved for so long?

    To those questions, I would answer in the affirmative.

    Will she run in 2020, however, well... no — I don't see that happening.

    The race for the Democratic nomination is going to be packed. The "new guard" will be there with Harris and Castro. The absolute unknowns such as Pete Buttigieg will be there. The old establishment may be there with Biden and Warren. Not to mention good old Bernie probably making a reappearance of his own. Add a half a dozen other ambitious faces to the mix and that will be the stage for the Democratic primaries.

    There are just too many fresh fish and old fish for the DNC to green light a third Hillary trip to the batter's box.

    When you add the scrutiny that a Hillary 2020 campaign would bring to the DNC after the allegations of how they secretly coordinated with the Clinton campaign in 2016 during the primaries to the determent of Bernie, it's highly unlikely that Tom Perez or the rest of the DNC leadership would look too kindly on any attempt by Hillary to get in the race. Why stir up old dirt?

    Additionally, let's be honest, Hillary is not an effective campaigner. She lacks the charisma and energy to be one. Obama capitalized on that in 2008 and Trump did so in 2016.

    The whole "Clinton" mystique doesn't have the power that it did in the past. Bill, instead of being a powerful proxy campaigner as he was in years past, is now more of a liability.

    Would Hillary love to run again?   Yes.

    Would Hillary run without assurances from the party that she will be the "anointed" or "defacto" nominee from the beginning?    No.

    In 2008 and 2016 she, in all likelihood, received such assurances even though fate had other plans. In 2020 she would not be welcomed by the DNC, much less "anointed" before anyone gets out of the gate.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)