Hillary Clinton Missing As G O P Refuses To Confirm Kerry As Secretary Of State

[koheesti]

Hillary Clinton nailed this hearing.

Hardly...

3 Incredibly Outrageous Evasions by Hillary Clinton About Benghazi

1. "I take responsiblity."

2. "1.43 million cables come to my office."

3. "What difference at this point does it make?"

http://reason.com/blog/2013/01/24/3-incredibly-outrageous-evasions-by-hill

"Fair Use" means you'll actually have to follow the link to read the details. But I'd advise against it if you are one of those convinced of Hillary's divinity.

[F430murci]

Hillary Clinton nailed this hearing.

Hardly...

3 Incredibly Outrageous Evasions by Hillary Clinton About Benghazi

1. "I take responsiblity."

2. "1.43 million cables come to my office."

3. "What difference at this point does it make?"

http://reason.com/blog/2013/01/24/3-incredibly-outrageous-evasions-by-hill

"Fair Use" means you'll actually have to follow the link to read the details. But I'd advise against it if you are one of those convinced of Hillary's divinity.

Conspiracy theories are just that, theories. Many whack jobs out there also saying Lanza dead day before Sandy Hook shootings and shot gun not AR-15 used. Government responsible for 911 and Oklahoma City. Same groups or mentality apparently believe Obama wants to take guns away so he can become a dictator. Sad to go through life so obcessed and paranoid. Step away from the news and watch something happy if it has this kind of impact.

[chuckd]

Hillary Clinton nailed this hearing.

Hardly...

3 Incredibly Outrageous Evasions by Hillary Clinton About Benghazi

1. "I take responsiblity."

2. "1.43 million cables come to my office."

3. "What difference at this point does it make?"

http://reason.com/bl...vasions-by-hill

"Fair Use" means you'll actually have to follow the link to read the details. But I'd advise against it if you are one of those convinced of Hillary's divinity.

Conspiracy theories are just that, theories. Many whack jobs out there also saying Lanza dead day before Sandy Hook shootings and shot gun not AR-15 used. Government responsible for 911 and Oklahoma City. Same groups or mentality apparently believe Obama wants to take guns away so he can become a dictator. Sad to go through life so obcessed and paranoid. Step away from the news and watch something happy if it has this kind of impact.

Where is the conspiracy theory in the linked article? All I read was an author writing a not so favorable critique of Hillary's so called Congressional testimony.

[Jingthing]

So called? I love it. Hillary spends several hours being grilled in front of the house and the senate and it's still so called.

Look, this purely political game is totally transparent to the majority of Americans. Hillary Clinton drives right wing Americans bonkers. They thought they could ruin her future presidential career over this Benghazi artificial scandal. The hearings clearly revealed they've got nothing. Yes, it must be very frustrating. Sure she didn't convert any right wingers, any libertarian/tea party commentators, but nothing that happened or that will happen regarding Benghazi will damage Hillary's future chances to win a solid majority one iota. Now it's up to her. Is she healthy enough? Will she want it? If so, she's got it.

Edited January 25, 2013 by Jingthing

[Scott]

Posts and replies with disguised profanity have been removed. They were also off-topic.

[koheesti]

So called? I love it. Hillary spends several hours being grilled in front of the house and the senate and it's still so called.

Look, this purely political game is totally transparent to the majority of Americans. Hillary Clinton drives right wing Americans bonkers. They thought they could ruin her future presidential career over this Benghazi artificial scandal. The hearings clearly revealed they've got nothing. Yes, it must be very frustrating. Sure she didn't convert any right wingers, any libertarian/tea party commentators, but nothing that happened or that will happen regarding Benghazi will damage Hillary's future chances to win a solid majority one iota. Now it's up to her. Is she healthy enough? Will she want it? If so, she's got it.

Hillary folded under the pressure of her lies and evasions. Her political future is over. If she does decide to run in 2016, you can bet her Dem opponents in the primaries will make short work of her. That is her reward for protecting The One. It's almost sad to see the Clintons fall from the political dynasty they were becoming to this. It pains me to say this, but she & Bill deserve better.

Edited January 26, 2013 by koheesti

[maidu]

So called? I love it. Hillary spends several hours being grilled in front of the house and the senate and it's still so called.

Look, this purely political game is totally transparent to the majority of Americans. Hillary Clinton drives right wing Americans bonkers. They thought they could ruin her future presidential career over this Benghazi artificial scandal. The hearings clearly revealed they've got nothing. Yes, it must be very frustrating. Sure she didn't convert any right wingers, any libertarian/tea party commentators, but nothing that happened or that will happen regarding Benghazi will damage Hillary's future chances to win a solid majority one iota. Now it's up to her. Is she healthy enough? Will she want it? If so, she's got it.

Hillary folded under the pressure of her lies and evasions. Her political future is over. If she does decide to run in 2016, you can bet her Dem opponents in the primaries will make short work of her. That is her reward for protecting The One. It's almost sad to see the Clintons fall from the political dynasty they were becoming to this. It pains me to say this, but she & Bill deserve better.

I have to agree with the post above. The Republican attack machine knows no limits to what it will do, with its fat PACS and millionaire-funded war-chests - to try and ruin a good stateman's reputation. They're adept at taking dirty politics to ever-new lows. They're expert at taking a relatively benign issue, and pumping it up with multi-million dollar campaigns, to appear as though the opponent had repeatedly stabbed his grandmother with a rusty blunt knife. Fortunately, a dwindling proportion of American voters aren't sucked in by such gutter politics, as shown by the strong Obama win of a few months ago. It's now official: A US presidential contender can win handsomely with less than 40% of the white male vote. America is changing. Republicans are reluctantly having to adapt (if they don't want to further fade to obscurity), but they're doing so while dragging their feet and griping every step of the way.

Edited January 26, 2013 by maidu

[F430murci]

Hillary Clinton nailed this hearing.

Hardly...

3 Incredibly Outrageous Evasions by Hillary Clinton About Benghazi

1. "I take responsiblity."

2. "1.43 million cables come to my office."

3. "What difference at this point does it make?"

http://reason.com/bl...vasions-by-hill

"Fair Use" means you'll actually have to follow the link to read the details. But I'd advise against it if you are one of those convinced of Hillary's divinity.

Conspiracy theories are just that, theories. Many whack jobs out there also saying Lanza dead day before Sandy Hook shootings and shot gun not AR-15 used. Government responsible for 911 and Oklahoma City. Same groups or mentality apparently believe Obama wants to take guns away so he can become a dictator. Sad to go through life so obcessed and paranoid. Step away from the news and watch something happy if it has this kind of impact.

Where is the conspiracy theory in the linked article? All I read was an author writing a not so favorable critique of Hillary's so called Congressional testimony.

Exactly. Just as a crazy person does not realize their crazy a conspiratist does not realize they're just theories.

[chuckd]

Hardly...

3 Incredibly Outrageous Evasions by Hillary Clinton About Benghazi

1. "I take responsiblity."

2. "1.43 million cables come to my office."

3. "What difference at this point does it make?"

http://reason.com/bl...vasions-by-hill

"Fair Use" means you'll actually have to follow the link to read the details. But I'd advise against it if you are one of those convinced of Hillary's divinity.

Conspiracy theories are just that, theories. Many whack jobs out there also saying Lanza dead day before Sandy Hook shootings and shot gun not AR-15 used. Government responsible for 911 and Oklahoma City. Same groups or mentality apparently believe Obama wants to take guns away so he can become a dictator. Sad to go through life so obcessed and paranoid. Step away from the news and watch something happy if it has this kind of impact.

Where is the conspiracy theory in the linked article? All I read was an author writing a not so favorable critique of Hillary's so called Congressional testimony.

Exactly. Just as a crazy person does not realize their crazy a conspiratist does not realize they're just theories.

Let me try this again, this time in simple language.

From the linked article:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. "I take responsiblity."

"Taking responsibility is the classic dodge in Washington, where pols assume the mantle of leadership and them promptly do nothing to address the situation for which they are in hot water. What does it mean to take responsiblity for the absolute breakdown of security at a consulate where your ambassador gets murdered (along with three others)?

2. "1.43 million cables come to my office."

"The question is plainly not whether Clinton is reading every g**d****d communication addressed to her but whether she's got the right people in charge of assessing risk and making sure resources are apportioned accordingly."

3. "What difference at this point does it make?"

"Contra Clinton, it makes a great deal of difference because understanding how this all happened is the first step to making sure it doesn't happen over and over and over again."

In short, there are four dead Americans as a result of gross incompetence in both the State Department and the White House.

What difference does it make...indeed.

[SteeleJoe]

In short, there are four dead Americans as a result of gross incompetence in both the State Department and the White House.

What difference does it make...indeed.

The "what difference does it make" is in regards to the initially stated reason for the attack, is it not? And that would only have been known after the attack, yes? So if that cause was erroneously or falsely attributed - deliberately or not - it did not cause any deaths, did it?

I think whether people lied about what happened matters. I think it matters a great deal if people died due to gross incompetence - a case that has NOT been successfully made - but let's try not to throw up a strawman or be otherwise intellectually dishonest: Sec. Clinton in no way shape or form stated or implied that the deaths don't matter or that any fault by the US government wouldn't.

EDIT to Add:

"It makes a great deal of difference because understanding how this all happened is the first step to making sure it doesn't happen over and over and over again."

Minus the pointless repetition (not sure what that was meant to convey or imply) I agree fully.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

Edited January 26, 2013 by SteeleJoe

[F430murci]

Conspiracy theories are just that, theories. Many whack jobs out there also saying Lanza dead day before Sandy Hook shootings and shot gun not AR-15 used. Government responsible for 911 and Oklahoma City. Same groups or mentality apparently believe Obama wants to take guns away so he can become a dictator. Sad to go through life so obcessed and paranoid. Step away from the news and watch something happy if it has this kind of impact.

Where is the conspiracy theory in the linked article? All I read was an author writing a not so favorable critique of Hillary's so called Congressional testimony.

Exactly. Just as a crazy person does not realize their crazy a conspiratist does not realize they're just theories.

Let me try this again, this time in simple language.

From the linked article:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. "I take responsiblity."

"Taking responsibility is the classic dodge in Washington, where pols assume the mantle of leadership and them promptly do nothing to address the situation for which they are in hot water. What does it mean to take responsiblity for the absolute breakdown of security at a consulate where your ambassador gets murdered (along with three others)?

2. "1.43 million cables come to my office."

"The question is plainly not whether Clinton is reading every g**d****d communication addressed to her but whether she's got the right people in charge of assessing risk and making sure resources are apportioned accordingly."

3. "What difference at this point does it make?"

"Contra Clinton, it makes a great deal of difference because understanding how this all happened is the first step to making sure it doesn't happen over and over and over again."

In short, there are four dead Americans as a result of gross incompetence in both the State Department and the White House.

What difference does it make...indeed.

Really, that's best you can do or the highlights out of how many hours of testimony? Sounds as if they need a real trial lawyer, not some wanna be posers, asking questions. Yawn. The little wayne depo excerpts are much better and more entertaining. Search for little Wayne threatens lawyer deposition video.

[koheesti]

So called? I love it. Hillary spends several hours being grilled in front of the house and the senate and it's still so called.

Look, this purely political game is totally transparent to the majority of Americans. Hillary Clinton drives right wing Americans bonkers. They thought they could ruin her future presidential career over this Benghazi artificial scandal. The hearings clearly revealed they've got nothing. Yes, it must be very frustrating. Sure she didn't convert any right wingers, any libertarian/tea party commentators, but nothing that happened or that will happen regarding Benghazi will damage Hillary's future chances to win a solid majority one iota. Now it's up to her. Is she healthy enough? Will she want it? If so, she's got it.

Hillary folded under the pressure of her lies and evasions. Her political future is over. If she does decide to run in 2016, you can bet her Dem opponents in the primaries will make short work of her. That is her reward for protecting The One. It's almost sad to see the Clintons fall from the political dynasty they were becoming to this. It pains me to say this, but she & Bill deserve better.

I have to agree with the post above. The Republican attack machine knows no limits to what it will do, with its fat PACS and millionaire-funded war-chests - to try and ruin a good stateman's reputation. They're adept at taking dirty politics to ever-new lows. They're expert at taking a relatively benign issue, and pumping it up with multi-million dollar campaigns, to appear as though the opponent had repeatedly stabbed his grandmother with a rusty blunt knife. Fortunately, a dwindling proportion of American voters aren't sucked in by such gutter politics, as shown by the strong Obama win of a few months ago. It's now official: A US presidential contender can win handsomely with less than 40% of the white male vote. America is changing. Republicans are reluctantly having to adapt (if they don't want to further fade to obscurity), but they're doing so while dragging their feet and griping every step of the way.

Some of you may not know or remember how presidential election politics works. It won't be the Republican "Attack Machine" she has to worry about first in 2016. It will be her own fellow Democrats - just like it was in 2008. Hillary will be just one of many candidates for the Democratic Party's nomination for President. She will have to battle and debate other Democrats for many months leading up to and during the primary season. It will get ugly and they will throw all kinds of mud at her...including Benghazi. She will not have the nomination handed to her just because of who she is...remember, that was expected in 2008 and it didn't work out that way, did it?

Edited January 26, 2013 by koheesti

[FDog]

It's quite amusing that all those that made such a drastically wrong prediciton on who would win the election and why, are now crowing about why they are right about Hilary.

Those that did the questioning got nothing, Hilary is inscathed.

I'd hate to hear what she said to old Bill about that cigar though, geez he'd have copped a flogging.

[Jingthing]

So called? I love it. Hillary spends several hours being grilled in front of the house and the senate and it's still so called.

Look, this purely political game is totally transparent to the majority of Americans. Hillary Clinton drives right wing Americans bonkers. They thought they could ruin her future presidential career over this Benghazi artificial scandal. The hearings clearly revealed they've got nothing. Yes, it must be very frustrating. Sure she didn't convert any right wingers, any libertarian/tea party commentators, but nothing that happened or that will happen regarding Benghazi will damage Hillary's future chances to win a solid majority one iota. Now it's up to her. Is she healthy enough? Will she want it? If so, she's got it.

Hillary folded under the pressure of her lies and evasions. Her political future is over. If she does decide to run in 2016, you can bet her Dem opponents in the primaries will make short work of her. That is her reward for protecting The One. It's almost sad to see the Clintons fall from the political dynasty they were becoming to this. It pains me to say this, but she & Bill deserve better.

I have to agree with the post above. The Republican attack machine knows no limits to what it will do, with its fat PACS and millionaire-funded war-chests - to try and ruin a good stateman's reputation. They're adept at taking dirty politics to ever-new lows. They're expert at taking a relatively benign issue, and pumping it up with multi-million dollar campaigns, to appear as though the opponent had repeatedly stabbed his grandmother with a rusty blunt knife. Fortunately, a dwindling proportion of American voters aren't sucked in by such gutter politics, as shown by the strong Obama win of a few months ago. It's now official: A US presidential contender can win handsomely with less than 40% of the white male vote. America is changing. Republicans are reluctantly having to adapt (if they don't want to further fade to obscurity), but they're doing so while dragging their feet and griping every step of the way.

Some of you may not know or remember how presidential election politics works. It won't be the Republican "Attack Machine" she has to worry about first in 2016. It will be her own fellow Democrats - just like it was in 2008. Hillary will be just one of many candidates for the Democratic Party's nomination for President. She will have to battle and debate other Democrats for many months leading up to and during the primary season. It will get ugly and they will throw all kinds of mud at her...including Benghazi. She will not have the nomination handed to her just because of who she is...remember, that was expected in 2008 and it didn't work out that way, did it?

I consider myself a political junkie. I grew up like that. I'm confident you're off base on this. IF Hillary does run her only serious competition might be Biden. I think the overwhelming sentiment in the democratic party is that Hillary is way overdue for the nomination and totally deserves it. The issue really is age, health, and desire at this point. Obama will be in a fix on choosing between Hillary and Biden and I think he won't and people will accept that as the polite and politic stance to take. He likes them BOTH. Yes I am saying Hillary WILL have the nomination thrown at her and that Biden probably won't even run. If she doesn't run, Biden probably will run and he is more vulnerable and would face a tough fight. The dynamic would be totally different than 2008 in regard to Hillary. She's like a total icon in the democratic party, in some ways more so than Obama. Benghazi? Irrelevant to democrats. Will Hills run? Who can know?

They say you can't beat a somebody with a nobody. So Obama did beat Clinton, a relative nobody beating a somebody. But that was kind of an exception that proves the rule. Hillary is now a somebody on steroids and there is no other democrat including Biden who has her celebrity power, not to mention experience.

Edited January 26, 2013 by Jingthing

[koheesti]

Some of you may not know or remember how presidential election politics works. It won't be the Republican "Attack Machine" she has to worry about first in 2016. It will be her own fellow Democrats - just like it was in 2008. Hillary will be just one of many candidates for the Democratic Party's nomination for President. She will have to battle and debate other Democrats for many months leading up to and during the primary season. It will get ugly and they will throw all kinds of mud at her...including Benghazi. She will not have the nomination handed to her just because of who she is...remember, that was expected in 2008 and it didn't work out that way, did it?

I consider myself a political junkie. I grew up like that. I'm confident you're off base on this. IF Hillary does run her only serious competition might be Biden. I think the overwhelming sentiment in the democratic party is that Hillary is way overdue for the nomination and totally deserves it. The issue really is age, health, and desire at this point. Obama will be in a fix on choosing between Hillary and Biden and I think he won't and people will accept that as the polite and politic stance to take. He likes them BOTH. Yes I am saying Hillary WILL have the nomination thrown at her and that Biden probably won't even run. If she doesn't run, Biden probably will run and he is more vulnerable and would face a tough fight. The dynamic would be totally different than 2008 in regard to Hillary. She's like a total icon in the democratic party, in some ways more so than Obama. Benghazi? Irrelevant to democrats. Will Hills run? Who can know?

Between Biden and Hillary? What does that say about Hillary to put that goofball Biden on par with her? Seriously, Ol' Joe can't get anything done with his foot constantly making its way into his mouth. 2016 is four years away, just the year before the 2008 election Hillary was considered a shoo-in for the nomination. As a self-proclaimed political junkie, you should know better than to hand the nomination off to any one (or two) so many years ahead.

Oh, and btw, in case you missed it, Joe Biden is an old, white male. There is zero chance that the party that has demonized old, white men the past few years will ever nominate another one as their presidential candidate. They'll have to be satisfied as VP, Sec of State, Sec of Defense, etc.

I'd say there is a better chance that Gov. Christie of New Jersey jumps parties to run as a Democrat in 2016 than Biden receiving the nomination.

[koheesti]

It's quite amusing that all those that made such a drastically wrong prediciton on who would win the election and why, are now crowing about why they are right about Hilary.

Because one has absolutely nothing to do with the other?

[Jingthing]

As I said if Biden runs and Hillary doesn't, Biden is very vulnerable. If it's basically Biden vs. Hillary, Biden won't win which is why I doubt he will run if Hillary runs. Yes I think Hillary has this on a platter if she wants it. Yes gender politics is part of it. We've done the African American president thing, that is old hat now, people are more than ready for a lady president so if Hillary is game she can at least be confident of the demo nomination. Even most of her opponents can't deny she is VERY qualified.

Not sure who the elephants will put up yet. Rubio is in play. They think that solves their Latino "problem" but it doesn't.

Edited January 26, 2013 by Jingthing

[SteeleJoe]

They say you can't beat a somebody with a nobody. So Obama did beat Clinton, a relative nobody beating a somebody. But that was kind of an exception that proves the rule.

Her husband did it first. (Elite family background, WW II hero, congressman, UN Ambassador, RNC Chairman, CIA Director, Vice President, President vs. Very humble beginnings and relatively little known Governor of relatively insignificant state...)

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

[Jingthing]

Well I saw nobody from the demo convention that I could imagine beating Hillary in 2016. Those are kind of like tryouts. I liked that nice young man from San Antonio but he needs lots more time (and higher office). Remember Obama got on the national radar from a speech at a convention.

Edited January 26, 2013 by Jingthing

[keemapoot]

Well I saw nobody from the demo convention that I could imagine beating Hillary in 2016. Those are kind of like tryouts. I liked that nice young man from San Antonio but he needs lots more time (and higher office).

You bring up a good point. If Hilary demurs, and decides not to run, the DNC is in a world of hurt. There are a handful of good-looking GOP candidates, that with a little lot of re-shaping of the RNC could be winners against Dems not as strong or well-known. Biden is certainly not going have an easy time against fresher, but already polished guys like Rubio or Christie, etc..

BTW, on her health issue, there was an article, where a doctor analyzed the special glasses she was wearing at the Congressional hearing. Evidently those are special glasses that help with double-vision, so her injury, whatever it is, may be something after all. Maybe it's nothing long-lasting, who knows?

[maidu]

All this talk of Biden vs Hillary in 2016 is premature. As often as not, it's a relative unknown who takes the Democratic mantle. Carter, Bill Clinton, and Obama are just a few examples. I wouldn't be surprised if Ms Clinton declines to run and I'd be surprised if Biden decides to. Koheesti opines, above, that if Clinton ran, her fellow-dem candidates would rip her to pieces in the primaries. First off, that wouldn't happen as the Reps hope it would. The Dems would have civil discussions on issues. They wouldn't adopt the attack tactics (of making political mountains out of molehills) which Republicans are adept at. After the primaries, the respective parties will rally around the designated winner. That's what the Reps did with Romney, as that's what both parties have traditionally done. The cat fighting during the primaries quickly fades.

[SteeleJoe]

Well I saw nobody from the demo convention that I could imagine beating Hillary in 2016. Those are kind of like tryouts. I liked that nice young man from San Antonio but he needs lots more time (and higher office). Remember Obama got on the national radar from a speech at a convention.

I don't disagree. Just quibbling (as is my wont) with the idea that Obama was THE exception ( especially when her own husband had done it).

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

[Jingthing]

For a REAL political junkie it ain't too early to talk about 2020!

Anyway, Biden has that presidential ego thing and if he's healthy and Hillary isn't running, there is NO WAY he isn't running, and you can take that to the Bank of Delaware. He has run so many times already, he wants it really bad, that doesn't change, and that would be his one golden chance. If you don't think he would run, you're basically accusing him of being insane.

[maidu]

For a REAL political junkie it ain't too early to talk about 2020!

Anyway, Biden has that presidential ego thing and if he's healthy and Hillary isn't running, there is NO WAY he isn't running, and you can take that to the Bank of Delaware. He has run so many times already, he wants it really bad, that doesn't change, and that would be his one golden chance. If you don't think he would run, you're basically accusing him of being insane.

I'd be ok with either Biden or Ms Clinton in the highest office. Am also open to unheralded contenders who are not on the radar at this time. Michelle Obama would make an interesting candidate - would sure get the fireworks cracking.

[Jingthing]

Michelle Obama's chances of running for president in 2016: ZERO.

[SteeleJoe]

For a REAL political junkie it ain't too early to talk about 2020!

Anyway, Biden has that presidential ego thing and if he's healthy and Hillary isn't running, there is NO WAY he isn't running, and you can take that to the Bank of Delaware. He has run so many times already, he wants it really bad, that doesn't change, and that would be his one golden chance. If you don't think he would run, you're basically accusing him of being insane.

I'd be ok with either Biden or Ms Clinton in the highest office. Am also open to unheralded contenders who are not on the radar at this time. Michelle Obama would make an interesting candidate - would sure get the fireworks cracking.

I'm a bit embarrassed by how much I like Mrs. Obama: she's got so much going for her and I'm quite impressed. But as a candidate for POTUS? Are you kidding? Among other things, in what way does her background qualify her to be president?

This is the second time I've heard this rather ridiculous suggestion on TVF...

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

[keemapoot]

For a REAL political junkie it ain't too early to talk about 2020!

Anyway, Biden has that presidential ego thing and if he's healthy and Hillary isn't running, there is NO WAY he isn't running, and you can take that to the Bank of Delaware. He has run so many times already, he wants it really bad, that doesn't change, and that would be his one golden chance. If you don't think he would run, you're basically accusing him of being insane.

I'd be ok with either Biden or Ms Clinton in the highest office. Am also open to unheralded contenders who are not on the radar at this time. Michelle Obama would make an interesting candidate - would sure get the fireworks cracking.

I'm a bit embarrassed by how much I like Mrs. Obama: she's got so much going for her and I'm quite impressed. But as a candidate for POTUS? Are you kidding? Among other things, in what way does her background qualify her to be president?

This is the second time I've heard this rather ridiculous suggestion on TVF...

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

I think people observed her strong opinions on issues during the first election, and her professional and educational qualifications, and just assumed she was another Hilary in the sense that she would also use the platform of First Lady as a springboard to a political career. I think that has been shown to be false. She is a bit "preachy" for my tastes also. For sure she is not qualified and would have to do the Hilary path before she ran for President, which I don't believe we have seen indications from her on.

[SteeleJoe]

For a REAL political junkie it ain't too early to talk about 2020!

Anyway, Biden has that presidential ego thing and if he's healthy and Hillary isn't running, there is NO WAY he isn't running, and you can take that to the Bank of Delaware. He has run so many times already, he wants it really bad, that doesn't change, and that would be his one golden chance. If you don't think he would run, you're basically accusing him of being insane.

I'd be ok with either Biden or Ms Clinton in the highest office. Am also open to unheralded contenders who are not on the radar at this time. Michelle Obama would make an interesting candidate - would sure get the fireworks cracking.

I'm a bit embarrassed by how much I like Mrs. Obama: she's got so much going for her and I'm quite impressed. But as a candidate for POTUS? Are you kidding? Among other things, in what way does her background qualify her to be president?

This is the second time I've heard this rather ridiculous suggestion on TVF...

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

...she was another Hilary in the sense that she would also use the platform of First Lady as a springboard to a political career.

Hilary's background and strengths were such that was seen by some credible folks as potential POTUS material before she was even First Lady (some say before Bill was Governor and she gave up her career for him) - let alone an accomplished US Senator and a largely well regarded Sec of State. I know what you mean and you aren't wrong but I don't think people should think she got to where she is solely on the basis of her husband's job.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

[Scott]

I heard Michelle Obama on a talk show once and she said that being President requires a lot of patience, something she says she doesn't have.

[keemapoot]

I heard Michelle Obama on a talk show once and she said that being President requires a lot of patience, something she says she doesn't have.

Her recent famous "roll of the eyes" by something John Boehner may have said sitting next to her probably shows she might not have the patience to put up with the frustrations of the job. I agree.