An Open Letter to Madam Secretary: Run, Hillary, Run!

(Cross-posted at Salon.com)

She won’t, of course.  But if I were a Democrat, here’s why I think she should.   (Please note the disclaimer: I’m posing as a Democrat!)

To begin, the President is in deep political trouble.  I’ve presented some basic economic indicators earlier that show the historical comparisons indicating that Obama is in Jimmy Carter territory.  These are crude measures, of course.  But more sophisticated forecast models, such as Yale economist Ray Fair’s, which uses per capita growth of real Gross Domestic Product during the three quarters preceding the election; the growth in inflation during the incumbent’s term; and the number of quarters during the incumbent’s term in which real GDP grows by more than 3.2 percent to predict the popular vote, now show Obama winning slightly less than 50% of 2012 popular vote.  Given current economic projections, there’s not likely to be any more strong growth quarters between now and November, 2012 meaning the odds for Obama’s reelection are probably not going to get better. To be sure, most of the political science forecast models don’t kick in until a year from now, so it’s a bit early to rely on them.  But if Clinton is going to run, she can’t wait.  And right now Obama is very vulnerable to a strong Republican challenger.

Of course, the fundamentals won’t change if she’s running. But note that the forecast models aren’t predicting a Republican blowout – they are forecasting a race that is, at this point, too close to call.  That means marginal changes in turnout among key groups are crucial. Here’s where Hillary has the advantage.  To begin, her stint as Secretary of State has done wonders for her approval rating, as indicated by Gallup poll surveys dating back to her time in the White House.  While the President, mired deep in the political muck of Washington politics, sees his approval falling to 40%, Hillary’s has climbed close to 70% approval – and even higher in other surveys. Yes, this is a partly an artifact of her position, which places her above the fray of domestic politics, and yes it will fall if she enters the race.  But the fact remains that her public profile has been bolstered in the last several years, and she enters the race with that advantage.  Indeed, she can use that non-partisan vantage point to frame her decision to run: it’s not about politics – it’s about the future of this country both here and abroad.

Her second advantage relates to the first:  she’s not part of the mess at home. She didn’t weigh in on the stimulus bill, or health care, or the banking overhaul, and she certainly bears no responsibility for the state of the economy.  In this respect, she’s the Obama of 2012: a candidate who can run on the promise of change, without specifying the nature of that change.  And she’s has an added advantage: years of governing experience in the White House, the Senate and most recently within the foreign policy establishment.  To be blunt, her resume outshines the incumbent’s. Meanwhile, her liabilities (the health care fiasco, Hill and Bill) have largely receded from public consciousness.  And in any case they are now dwarfed by Obama’s baggage.  In 2008,  Obama was the unsullied one. Not anymore.  Heck, even the Big Dawg has been largely rehabilitated.

This leads to a third point: buyer’s remorse.  It’s not one she can directly bring up (after all, she’s above politics), but others will certainly remind voters that she did warn you.  Remember that 3 a.m. phone call?  Remember the warning about the rose-colored petals falling from the sky?  Remember about learning on the job?  Sure you do. Doesn’t a part of you, deep down, realize she was right? If I heard it once this past week, I heard it a thousand times: you were duped by Obama’s rhetoric – the whole “hopey-changey” thing. And you wanted to be part of history too – to help break down the ultimate racial barrier.  That’s ok.  We were all young once. But now it’s time to elect someone who can play hardball, who understands how to be ruthless, who will be a real…uh….tough negotiator in office.   There won’t be any debate about Hillary’s, er, “man-package”.

All of these factors mean Hillary will appeal to precisely those voters who are most disillusioned with Obama, and who the Democrats lost in the 2010 midterms: older voters, the less educated and independents.  Moreover, she has stronger support in the key battleground states of Ohio and Florida and maybe even Pennsylvania, whose electoral votes may determine the 2012 election.  And the chance to finally put a woman in the Oval Office will energize voters in a way that Obama’s candidacy cannot.

The problem with this scenario, of course, is that it ignores a very big obstacle: the nomination fight.  The reality is that, at least until the recent debt deal, Obama continues to have strong support among Democrats.  Why should we expect Clinton to prevail in a nomination fight?  Indeed, a Gallup poll survey from last September shows Obama beating Clinton in a hypothetical nomination contest.

Politically speaking, however, that poll came out ages ago.  Since then, it has become clear that the economy is not going to rebound any time soon.  Obama’s approval ratings continue to drop, and this is before the full impact of the debt negotiations on Democratic support – particularly within Obama’s base: those Democrats with higher incomes and better education, as well as minorities and younger voters.  The other fact to remember is that despite the gaffes in Clinton’s 2008 primary run – the failure to fully contest caucus states, the mishandling of the Florida and Michigan delegates issue, she essentially fought Obama to a nomination draw.  Indeed, by some estimates she won more popular votes than he.  In the end, his nomination was secured not by winning enough delegates at the ballot box, but by gaining support from the non-elected superdelegates.  Four years later, who do you think has gained more politically among likely Democratic voters?

Make no mistake about it: a contested nomination would be a nasty, brutish spectacle. But in all likelihood the winner would come out stronger.  Think back to 2008 – despite the appeals from Obama backers that Clinton should drop out for the good of the party, she stayed in until the end – and in so doing exposed vulnerabilities in his candidacy in time for him to address them before the general election.  A primary challenge will be good for the party – it will give Democrats a real choice. It will mobilize the base. And it will expose candidate strengths and weaknesses leading into the general election.  Remember, there’s no evidence that previous primary challengers weakened incumbents.  The causal arrow runs in the other direction: incumbents like Carter in 1980 were challenged because they were already weak.  A Clinton run won’t damage Obama, and may strengthen him – if he fends her off.

And really – isn’t it time to elect a qualified woman as President? We are way behind the rest of the world in this regard.

But there’s a more important reason why Hillary should run – one that transcends party, or personal gratification, or payback, or breaking barriers.  She should run for the good of the nation.  She should run to prevent a rollback of health care, to make sure the Bush tax cuts are not renewed, to protect entitlement programs, to make sure Republicans – who are poised to regain the Senate in 2012 – don’t control all three governing institutions through 2016.  It’s not about her – it’s about the future of the country.

Madam Secretary, if you are reading this – the President is a good man who happened to be very unlucky in office.  He inherited problems of almost unprecedented severity.  But this is no time for sentiment to cloud your judgment.  You need to do what’s right.

If not now, when?  If not you, who?  The nation cries out for leadership.

Run, Hillary, Run!

93 comments

  1. well get out in the streets! I live in Mexico but I would do what I can from here. Things will never change if people don´t get out in the streets….then they will deserve what they get.

    Although I believe Hillary, after seeing what has been happening could do things differently. I have a lot of faith in her. She´s no dope and she does have a pair. That´s what we need in our President.

  2. As I was returning from lunch, I briefly listened to Rush Limbaugh.
    He is convinced that “in the boughs of the Democratic party” they are thinking about having Hillary Clinton “primary” Obama.

    Are you prescient or what!

  3. “And really – isn’t it time to elect a qualified woman as President? We are way behind the rest of the world in this regard.”

    Okay, can we just take this “reason” and send it back to whatever pit of hell that spawned it? SO sick of hearing “it’s time.” It’s only ever “time” to elect the best possible president, regardless of race or gender.

  4. Mike – Note the adjective “qualified” – you’ll find no disagreement from me that we want the best person possible. But what if there are more than one eminently qualified person (as if often the case) – does it now make sense, for reasons of “descriptive representation” that we elect the woman?

  5. What about Hillary’s close aide, Huma Abedin? Her mother is the head of the Saudi Women’s division of the Muslim Brotherhood. Can we have such a person privy to State Secrets? I don’t think so.

  6. I voted for Obama and did volunteer work during his campaign. Now, I have voter’s remorse. He has so utterly disappoint me that if he gets nominated, as he probably will, for the 2012 presidential election I will stay home and not vote. On the other hand, if Hillary runs I would definitely vote for her without hesitation. She has demostrated strengh of character, unquestionable competency at State and a leadership record that Obama totally lacks. I regret that I did not vote for her in the primaries.

  7. If he would put her as VP, he might get a boost. I just don’t see Hillary challenging him as President.

  8. The Presidency should not be held someone who’s only concern is making a deal at any cost. Obama is playing checkers and the republicans are playing chess. It pains me to see the Presidency become so irrelevant. A long time ago, Eugene McCarthy challenged a sitting President and disrupted the automatic re nomination.

    There is too much at stake here for sentimentality. We need a leader who can fight for the protection of the working class. Do the right thing President Obama. Do not seek or accept the nomination of your party for President of the United States. Hillary Clinton can lead us effectively.

  9. It doesn’t HAVE to be a “challenge.” Lots of scenarios where BHO could step aside, or switch places, or take another cabinet post, for HRC.

  10. During the election, I was out of work and felt Obama seemed out of touch. My Obama-obsessed friends told me I needed to have “hope.” Almost three years later, I’m worried about losing the job I finally got. Once again, Obama seems out of touch and the “hope/change” stuff just seems like an empty marketing campaign.

    I can’t imagine that Hillary would re-enter the race but I can’t think of anyone else more qualified right now. So, Madame Secretary, how about it?

  11. Helen,

    As my students will attest, it is true that I have no shame. However, that does not tell me the purpose of your comment. Please clarify.

  12. She did run…in 2008.
    But the party chose a clown.

    Mrs. Clinton would be foolish to run in 2012; and she’s no clown.
    Only the GOP can mess up an anti Obama landslide.
    Of course, they’re pretty good at doing that…

  13. If Obama puts her at VP then they will both lose. Obama is starting to get toxic – radoactive. If Obama’s on the ticket then the democrats lose. Period. He is the Jimmy Carter of this generation. Hillary needs to run and she needs to be on a ticket that does not include President Obama. He simply is not up to the job and voters are going to be really tired of him by November 2012. If Hillary throws her hat into the ring she gets into the race with people remembering the splending economies that her husband built and that would be powerful memories for voters. I’m not saying it would be easy for her to beat the GOP because they play hardball, but she can beat them whereas President Obama can not. All democrats need to face this. Look at President Obama’s planned strategy against Mitt Romeny – Obama plans to attack Romney for being wierd. Give me a break! If this is what he has to resort to then he should understand that he can not win. He blew it when he first got into office because he had control of the senate, house, and white house and he should have done a big jobs bill that would have lasted throughout the 3 or 4 years but he did not and now the GOP won’t let him have a jobs bill and he isn’t even in the media screaming at republicans about it. he’s just allowing them to reject a big jobs bill. He’s foolish. If Hillary ran she could start her first day bellowing from the rafters that the first thing she will do is push a jobs bill through and I mean a big jobs bill. We need Hillary and we need her to get into the race NOW!!!!!!!!!! If she delays she will find herself in a hole that she won’t be able to dig out of. Walter Mondale lost his Minnesotta senator run a few decades ago because he got into the race too late. Hillary needs to run for president NOW!!!!!!!!!

  14. President Obama can not win re-election. He needs to accept that and invite Hillary to run for President. President Obama needs to think about what’s good for the country and the party. He can sell a Clinton Presidency to african americans if he wants to, and he should, if he cares about america and the democratic party. also, if africans don’t support Clinton then they will be very very sorry when Michelle Bachman or Mitt Romney start start enacting policies that hurt african americans. You can kill affirmative action and maybe even all of EEO anti-discrimination laws if these tea-party types win the government.

  15. Some of the comments on here are idiotic. You guys can’t be serious. Huma Abedin? She married a JEW, YOU DUMBASS.

  16. HELLO Think 1968 Johnson withdrawing and the whys and you have a much better set up for Hillary Clinton actually jumping in the contest.

    (though it’s Great bit of writing and the logic is flawless otherwise)

    Anywhere this topic comes up, President Obama facing a primary challenge, I tell people we may end up seeing history getting set to repeat itself ala the Democratic primary contest 1968.

    As you probably know President Johnson entered the 1968 primary contest with the same overwhelming advantage that President Obama now has.

    Absolutely no one doubted President Johnson would be renominated and win a second term.

    The noise from the street protests that signaled widespread Democratic dissatisfaction with the President who ended segregation forever were dismissed as a bunch of hippy led malcontents not worth acknowledging.

    What happened in the first primary was a stunner. Johnson did not win by a landslide as expected. Instead it was a close race between a no chance of winning dark horse Eugene McCarthy and Johnson.

    McCarthy received 42% of the vote to Johnson’s 48%.

    Considering that Johnson was the overwhelming favorite, this was major humiliation seen as no different than loss for Johnson.

    Sensing weakness Robert Kennedy jumped in the race.

    Then Johnson made the unexpected announcement that he was withdrawing from the race, and then Humphrey jumped in.

    Wikipedia says Johnson received the highest percentage of the vote in 1964. A record that still stands.

    Perhaps presaging history getting ready to repeat itself, President Obama broke a record in his win in 2008. Johnson recorded the highest percentage of votes for President. President Obama set the receiving the largest number of total votes ever cast for a candidate for president.

    The notion that the followup to 1964 would be his withdrawing from the 1968 primary contest was impossible to conceive of for anyone during that time, just as it is impossible for anyone in the know to conceive of anything or anyone capable of beating President Obama during the primaries.

    Additionally President Obama also shares the same liability that killed Johnson’s 1968 chances – overseas war. Johnson had Vietnam, and President Obama will still be engaged in all three theaters still spending billions even if combat roles have ended.

    Currently the albatross around his neck is mainly the economy.

    As people start to focus on the tremendous waste of war during an economic crisis; his inability to withdraw as he promised despite finally getting around to heading that direction recently; could turn into the unforgivable broken promise, because as president he is Commander and Chief. If there were one promise he could fulfill simply by issuing an order – ending the policy of continual war is one of them.

    How this could play out in 2012 is easy to see and that is a Democrat seen with no chance of winning (Kucinich perhaps, Governor Brown maybe or even Greyson just to make a point) decides to enter the race for the nomination, or perhaps a near total unknown but charisma challenged challenger jumps into the fray, and the same thing happens to President Obama that happened to President Johnson.

    He comes too close to losing to someone who was supposed to have no chance in hell of beating him.

    Nothing would make the writing on the wall as clear as day that President Obama could end up being forced from the race if he didn’t withdraw. Like Johnson I imagine Obama would find the risk just too high and not worth it.

    Should history repeat itself, it would be the best for HR Clinton, because then she like Hubert Humphrey could jump in the race with clean hands, and in regards to President Obama this would be extremely important.

    Were HRC to turn on her President and jump into the primary race while he was still assumed to be the eventual nominee, she would have to kiss a strong black voter turn out goodbye.

    Black Americans who still overwhelmingly support the President despite the recent distance the Black Caucus put between their positions and the President’s, as well as the lack of anything concrete Black Americans can point to that President Obama has tried to do for their community beyond being a Black President (and that is quite a bit actually).

    IF HRC were to enter the race as you suggest and win the nomination, the bad blood it could potentially create among her and the vital black voter could doom her in the general.

    To avoid such a fate, any challenge to President Obama would have to initially be someone else.

    Someone else would have to nearly achieve an upset win in New Hampshire vs. a vs. President Obama and result in his dropping out of the race.

    Should that happen, then HR Clinton could/would jump in the race with clean hands, and most importantly with the strong support of President Obama just as Hubert Humphrey received Johnson’s support once he ended his bid for a second term and little or no hard feelings among Black Democratic voters which would mean she’d win November 2012 no matter who the Republicans put up!

  17. Hillary,

    NOW is the time to run against Obama….I know this is unprecedented, but these are unprecedented times and it is now time to put the Country ahead of the Party (who trashed you anyway in my opinion). If you ever want to run again, it would be too late later….you could not have a platform after carrying his water for 8 years, but now could be respected as no choice but to get him out and save the Country! Hillary, you looked absolutely radiant during your campaign, so may I suggest you cut your hair and get back on track and do what you do best….run against him!!!!!
    Love and Respect from Pittsburgh!!!!!

  18. “Tom writes:

    Three years ago, there was no merit to the “who do you want to answer the phone at 3 AM” ad, other than to raise unjustified fears of Obama. Hillary was no more experienced than Obama. Being First Lady is hardly experience for becoming president, unless you believe osmosis is a form of learning. Indeed, given Hillary’s missteps as First Lady (Health Care reform, Right Wing Conspiracies, Vince Foster, the Rose Law Firm’s billings, etc), there was then plenty of reason to completely disregard her tenuous claims of experience and judgment.

    Given that many of the players of Obama’s Administration are recycled members of the Clinton Administration, do we really think that Hillary’s pool of advisors would be much different from Obama’s. I think not. Extending this to how a H. Clinton administration would play out, it seems likely that it would not be that different from what we with Obama.

    Furthermore, the Debt Ceiling deal, such as it is, is really only part of a mid-game slugfeast. Obama needed to get a deal done short of invoking the 14th Amendment, for all the lawsuits that would have spawned. In the process, the Republicans boxed themselves in with rhetoric of no new taxes, which should play out against them as rigid and senseless doctrine. Lets hope that Obama uses such rigidity to his advantage. Meanwhile the immediate crisis is past and the new ceiling gives enough time to make it through the next election.

    I have no “Buyer’s Remorse”. Indeed, I’ve got more appreciation for Obama than I have for many previous presidents with whom I become thoroughly disenchanted by the end of their first term. Despite comparisons to Jimmy Carter, we have not had a wholesale firing of the Cabinet (only to be rehired), we have not had a Bert Lance, embarrassments from family members (a charge that also applies to Hillary if you remember her brothers), or dour, humorless leadership. Much of what Obama promised, he has truly delivered. Science has been given preference to ideology (would you rather have Sec. Jackson or Sec. Watts running the EPA?). Health Care Reform is a work in progress, but he got a bill enacted that eluded any interested president since the days of Lyndon Johnson.

    Of course the Rose Color glasses have long since come off. But that is a charge that would apply to any President. I’m sure that even the most ardent conservative was disappointed at some point by President Reagan during his presidency (post death, the rose color glasses are back on and deeply tinted).

    If Hillary was to run, her baggage from the Clinton Presidency would surely be recycled. I’m not sure she is ready to rehash it, particularly in her dignified and respected role as Secretary of State. I suspect that she will go out on a high note and choose not to revisit the past.

    Regards,

    Tom”

  19. Tom,

    You make a number of useful points, but I disagree with some of your other ones. To begin, while Clinton certainly had her baggage, most of it preceded her time as First Lady, and I think I might not include the Vince Foster tragedy in your list. More generally, I think she was more than the traditional “First Lady” and in fact served in some sense as a key White House aide, particularly in the health care debate. So I think there’s some credence to her claim to have some perspective on what it means to be president – certainly more so than Obama.

    I also think you miss the attraction of a Clinton candidacy to many Democrats – it’s not that she would necessarily push different policies. It’s that she would push Obama’s agenda with more tenacity, and less inclination to compromise when the negotiations bog down. Fairly or not, there is a perception among many Democrats that Obama simply lacks the temperament to fight for what he believes is right, whereas Clinton is more of a fighter.

    I find more to agree with in your analysis of the debt deal – indeed, it is almost exactly what I said on my posts on the deal. And I think there is still strong support for Obama among many Democrats, and for the reasons you cite. What should worry you, and others who support the President, is not the fear of a Clinton challenge (I agree with you that she’s not likely to run), but his falling support among independents. In the end, most Democrats will support the President. But without a turnaround in the economy, he’s likely to lose independents. And that will put his reelection in jeopardy.

  20. Tom,

    It would serve you to investigate Hillary Clinton’s time before she was in the White House. As First Lady of Arkansas, she accomplished a great deal for the people, especially children and the poor, much to the consternation and outright anger of the good ol’ boy network solidly in place.

    As for her health care plan that failed, I relish her debating Obama about that. Hers failed because she refused to let the Insurance Companies sit at the table, preferring to work with doctors, hospitals, nurses and patients, and the Insurance Companies responded with a $30 million campaign against it. Ergo, it didn’t have the votes to pass. Obama’s passed because not only did the Insurance Companies sit at the table, they sat at the head and helped write it with their minions in Congress. Ergo, no $30 million campaign against it, it passes and now they’re making record profits.

    With so many out of work and suffering and so many more so thoroughly disgusted with this Hope and Change guy — how many here think anyone is going to believe anything he says on the campaign trail? show of hands. anyone? anyone? — and scared to death of the reactionary, conservative zeal of the Tea Party, her Clinton baggage will be an afterthought and most people just aren’t going to care. Her accomplishments have far outpaced the Republican witch hunts of the early- to mid-90s.

    And remember: Hillary Clinton — with the Democratic Leadership and the Media solidly against her, winning debate after debate while Obama got softball question after softball question (so much so that Saturday Night Live made fun of it) — still won every single Large State Primary (CA, NY, NJ, OH, PA, etc and so on) in the 2008 Primary. The only large State Obama won was his own, Illinois.

    It’s almost as if voters were trying to tell the Leadership who they wanted, but they just wouldn’t listen. They had The One.

    Not sure the date of the poll cited above, but if that 10% were to break more toward her than him — as it more than likely would as her approval ratings are miles above his right now –, they’d be within the margin of error, a frightening thought for an Incumbent.

    Add in the excitement of making history AGAIN by voting for the first woman, mix in a soupcon of regret for having fallen for the slick snake oil salesman the first time around, throw in a dash of “man, they treated her like shit in 2008 and THIS is what we ended up with?” anger with a stir of “oh my God, she even FEELS like more of a President than he does AND she’s already gone up against the Republican Hate Machine and WON!” (see, Senator Clinton, see, Secretary of State Clinton), and one could easily see how Hillary Clinton could end up in the White House.

    Run, Hillary, run.

  21. I wish Hillary would run as we need the Clinton’s now more than ever!!Our Country is falling apart!! Obama is a failure and I will stay home and not vote if he gets the nomination.

  22. Hillary please run. Its almost a slam-dunk this time. Obama is all what you warned about and believe me, now people remember.

  23. The real question is not whether Secretary of State Clinton will run or not, but more of will President Obama resign. Maybe both Hillary and Obama have the same set of ideology as some suggest, or some argue Mr. Obama is more of Republican than Democrat. No matter what the argument is, my opinion is Mr. Obama is a idealist and Hillary is a realist and they have different approach. Mr. Obama is more of a university professor who teaches moral and standard of politics and Hillary is a seasoned politician who is not afraid of getting her hands dirty to achieve better goal. Mr. Obama is a great and smart person but I would rather have a bar fight with Hillary than Mr Obama. Now it looks like cry baby John Boehner has more balls than Mr Obama !!!

    If Mr. Obama is a idealist, he should resign for the greater good for the American people. If he is a politician then he is a really bad one.

    BTW I supported Hillary in 08 because I never trust an idealist in politics.

  24. If Mrs. Hillary Clinton wouldn’t run, I will sit out. Obama is an educated, and a nice person, but he failed to rise to meet the challenges for so many times, for so long. Sure, Obama is the President, but he doesn’t have the quality of the leader, especially the type of leaders in this type of situations. He is more like Carter, who is nice, caring and loving, but do not expect him to do something extraordinary even if the country requires him to do so.

    DNC is the same thing, just keeping the course, and status quote. I’m very disappointed!

  25. One question – why did all the libs fall for this guy? If you and the rest of the media spent 1/10 of 1% of the scrutiny you put Palin, Perry and all the other republican candidates thru, Obama would have never made it pass Iowa. But you guys all fell for it. Shame on you.

  26. John,

    It’s unclear whether by “you and the rest of the media” you think that I work for a media outlet. I do not. In any case, any evaluation of Obama took place in a side-by-side comparison with other candidates. So, who do you think would have done a better job, and why?

  27. Hillary should enter the Republican primaries. Iowa is a caucus, New Hampshire is open. She could win both, with the weak field of Republicans in the race. She’d attract a new set of voters (who don’t need to participate in Dem presidential primaries in 2012.)

  28. I must agree that this present President is doing an awful job. I think one problem could be lack of integrity. But now if Hillary should run for this office I must question her integrity.
    Must liberals lack integrity. As a son of liberty I believe that this office needs someone that is a true American, not a socialist type, or Marxist type. How about someone that can bring duty, honor back to our country. Hillary would make a very bad President for our nation. SHE CAN NOT BE TRUSTED! Wake up libs! You are, and will continue to lose more of your 401K’s, pension etc. They (the insiders) are having a party, and your not invited.

  29. Im a recent retiree from the IBEW electrical construction feild….Pres Obama and His cronies (from my democratic party) with the help of the GOP crooks …have put this country in a hole surounded by sand…the more we wiggle the more were trapped..our sec of state would be the Sea Stallion Helicopter to rescue only whats needed and let the rest of them sob’s burie themselves…AND WE GET A VERY VERY ASTUTE ADVISOR ALONG WITH HER FOR FREE…who’s baggage has gone to another destinatio. Run Hillary Run….we need you…juice in minnesota

  30. I was always 100% for Hillary – but doubt she wants to put herself through that mess again. Doubt too, she would want to run against our democratic incumbent. But if she changes her mind I`ll do all I can to help her.

  31. Please tell me how I can be removed from any further phone calls from the runhillary campaign. I am supporting the President for reelection and will not consider funding, working for or voting for Mrs. Clinton.
    I’ve tried the various sites but to no avail…can’t seem to get them to accept my removal.

  32. Maggie – Welcome to the brave new world of the Robocall! As far as I can tell from media reports, some unidentified group has begun automated calling as part of a draft Hillary movement. Alas, I’m not part of any pro-Hillary campaign, so I can’t help you. Remember, I just analyze political events – I don’t make them!

  33. Run Hillary run. We need a choice Hillary or Mitt to save America. The chance that Obama will have 4 more years scares the hell out of me. That is enough time for him and his puppet masters to destroy America.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>