2:00PM Water Cooler 11/12/2018

By Lambert Strether of Corrente.

Patient readers, I am finishing up a post on the California wildfires, so talk amongst yourselves. –lambert

But here’s a conversation starter, since the 2020 campaign season has already begun:

“Ex-Clinton aide: Hillary will run again in 2020” [The Hill].

Penn, a frequent contributor to The Hill, co-wrote a Sunday op-ed for The Wall Street Journal with Andrew Stein, a former Democratic Manhattan borough president and president of the New York City Council. (Stein is the brother of James Finkelstein, chairman and CEO of The Hill.)

“You can expect her to run for president once again,” [Penn and Stein] predicted. “Maybe not at first, when the legions of Senate Democrats make their announcements, but definitely by the time the primaries are in full swing.”

“She has decisively to win those Iowa caucus-goers who have never warmed up to her,” they wrote. “They will see her now as strong, partisan, left-leaning and all-Democrat—the one with the guts, experience and steely-eyed determination to defeat Mr. Trump.”

“Mrs. Clinton knows both Mr. Clinton and Mr. Obama declared they weren’t running, until they ran,” the pair argued. “She may even skip Iowa and enter the race later, but rest assured that, one way or another, Hillary 4.0 is on the way.”

It is true that Clinton hasn’t made anything like a Sherman statement. It is also true that the Clinton camp has never accepted they were defeated in 2016, and she’s still surrounded by the same people, whose sycophancy and lack af ability to self-reflect is notable. It’s also true that in the event of a deadlocked convention, the superdelegates could play a decisive role on her behalf, as they did in 2016. Finally, Clinton’s base is still extremely influential in the party (rebranded as Indivisible, etc.). One barrier: It’s not clear to me she could fundraise at the same level. Personally, I think the idea of Clinton running again is so crazypants it can’t possibly come to anything. Penn has been peddling this line for some time (ka-ching). Clinton needs to sell tickets and books (ka-ching). But stranger things have happened, as we know. And she’s only 71….

* * *

Readers, feel free to contact me at lambert [UNDERSCORE] strether [DOT] corrente [AT] yahoo [DOT] com, with (a) links, and even better (b) sources I should curate regularly, (c) how to send me a check if you are allergic to PayPal, and (d) to find out how to send me images of plants. Vegetables are fine! Fungi are deemed to be honorary plants! If you want your handle to appear as a credit, please place it at the start of your mail in parentheses: (thus). Otherwise, I will anonymize by using your initials. See the previous Water Cooler (with plant) here. Today’s plant (EM):

A coral mushroom. Apparently some are edible, but proper identification is key!

* * *

Readers: Water Cooler is a standalone entity not covered by the annual NC fundraiser, now completed. So do feel free to make a contribution today or any day. Here is why: Regular positive feedback both makes me feel good and lets me know I’m on the right track with coverage. When I get no donations for five or ten days I get worried. More tangibly, a constant trickle of small donations helps me with expenses, and I factor that trickle in when setting fundraising goals. So if you see something you especially appreciate, do feel free to click below! (The hat is temporarily defunct, so I slapped in some old code.)

Or Subscribe to make a monthly payment!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
This entry was posted in Guest Post, Water Cooler on by .

About Lambert Strether

Readers, I have had a correspondent characterize my views as realistic cynical. Let me briefly explain them. I believe in universal programs that provide concrete material benefits, especially to the working class. Medicare for All is the prime example, but tuition-free college and a Post Office Bank also fall under this heading. So do a Jobs Guarantee and a Debt Jubilee. Clearly, neither liberal Democrats nor conservative Republicans can deliver on such programs, because the two are different flavors of neoliberalism (“Because markets”). I don’t much care about the “ism” that delivers the benefits, although whichever one does have to put common humanity first, as opposed to markets. Could be a second FDR saving capitalism, democratic socialism leashing and collaring it, or communism razing it. I don’t much care, as long as the benefits are delivered. To me, the key issue — and this is why Medicare for All is always first with me — is the tens of thousands of excess “deaths from despair,” as described by the Case-Deaton study, and other recent studies. That enormous body count makes Medicare for All, at the very least, a moral and strategic imperative. And that level of suffering and organic damage makes the concerns of identity politics — even the worthy fight to help the refugees Bush, Obama, and Clinton’s wars created — bright shiny objects by comparison. Hence my frustration with the news flow — currently in my view the swirling intersection of two, separate Shock Doctrine campaigns, one by the Administration, and the other by out-of-power liberals and their allies in the State and in the press — a news flow that constantly forces me to focus on matters that I regard as of secondary importance to the excess deaths. What kind of political economy is it that halts or even reverses the increases in life expectancy that civilized societies have achieved? I am also very hopeful that the continuing destruction of both party establishments will open the space for voices supporting programs similar to those I have listed; let’s call such voices “the left.” Volatility creates opportunity, especially if the Democrat establishment, which puts markets first and opposes all such programs, isn’t allowed to get back into the saddle. Eyes on the prize! I love the tactical level, and secretly love even the horse race, since I’ve been blogging about it daily for fourteen years, but everything I write has this perspective at the back of it.


    1. PNW_WarriorWomyn

      Sympathy, empathy, loving kindness from PNW. Washington State mobilized 106 firefighters and 20 engines. Fifteen additional engines from other local fire districts will also head down. They’re going to Chico to help battle the Camp Fire.

  1. Kurt Sperry

    My first-blush reaction to a potential 2020 Clinton run is a terse, “Brang it! Brang it chica.”

        1. Enquiring Mind

          “The new StASSen is a Democrat. The name’s now McCarthy.”

          -Malcolm Forbes, in his eponymous publication

      1. UserFriendly

        The best part of Mark Penn’s piece in WSJ is him playing up her running too left as 1st spouse, too far right in 2008, and too far left to try and match Bernie in 2016 as why she’s sure to get it right this time.

        Who could possibly object to someone with no principals?

        1. Darthbobber

          So he thinks the standard artillery fire bracketing method applies to politics. Silly enough. Thinks Clinton ran in A direction, instead of several, in 2016. Special.

      2. Procopius

        Hey, don’t knock Harold Stassen. My mother worked for at least two of his campaigns. Maybe more. I have no idea what party, if any, he ran for or what any of his ideas were, but she needed something to get her out of the house.

    1. HotFlash

      It is also true that the Clinton camp has never accepted they were defeated in 2016, and she’s still surrounded by the same people, whose sycophancy and lack af ability to self-reflect is notable.

      Does this woman not have any real friends? Ones who would tell her to, I dunno, learn how to bake cookies or something useful instead of trying (once again!) to inflict herself on the poor old US of A?

    2. flora

      The bank friendly Dems who voted to deregulate the banks with the Crapo bill didn’t fair well in the midterms. Hillary’s association with bank deregulation will weigh down any future run. Bank friendliness is more a liability than asset for Dem candidates now. Hillary is still seen as the bankers’ darling, imo.

      The “Crapo bill,” a bank deregulation measure co-authored by Senate Banking Committee chair Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, and several centrist Democrats, passed Congress this spring with the help of 17 members of the Senate Democratic Caucus and 33 House Democrats.

      In the 10 states where Donald Trump won in 2016 and a Democratic senator stood for re-election this year, the three who opposed the Crapo bill all won a greater share of votes in their states than the seven who voted for it. Senators voting “no” averaged 54.7 percent of the vote and won by 10 percentage points, while the “yes” votes averaged 48.1 percent and lost by 1.5 points. The only Republican who lost, Dean Heller of Nevada, also voted for the Crapo bill, and fell by 5 points to Jacky Rosen, who voted against the legislation in the House.

      The Crapo bill rolled back a number of elements of the Dodd-Frank Act, including, in particular, stiffer regulations on banks that have between $50 billion and $250 billion in assets.


  2. shinola

    If the Dem’s run HRC (aka Richard-Nixon-in-a-pantsuit) again, I will again vote for the Green Party candidate.

    HRC is the main reason we have P.T. Barnum as prez.

    1. anon4

      nah, that’s on you and others like you…congratulations! You have become like HRC with deaths on your hands.

      1. Adam

        Did you forget your snark tag? It’s up a candidate to show why they deserve a vote and not just point to the other person. That’s how we got in this mess in the first place. Actually, if all those Hillary voters in safe states had voted third party, the outcome would be the same but we’d be a lot closer to actual democracy.

        I’m not sure what deaths are you taking about though? Pretty sure Hillary was for the MIC and foreign intervention (far more than Trump); electing Trump may have saved lives in the ME.

        1. jrs

          It’s really debatable who was more for foreign intervention. Wars in the middle east have escalated under Trump. But Hillary would probably have been no better.

          1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

            With Trump, one is reminded that it’s darkest before sunrise.

            That is a possibility, given reports of him wanting to get out of Syria.

            1. Schmoe

              His pledge of aircover (and threats to start WW III if Russia participates) for jihadi’s / moderate rebels in Idlib is a far cry from him wanting to get out of Syria. Yes there would have been civilian casualties, but that would be the end of this debacle.

              1. drumlin woodchuckles

                ‘His’ pledge? I thought that was ‘Her’ pledge. You know . . . ” Assad must go!” and “No-Fly Zone” and all that stuff.

                Is my memory backwards? Did HE say those things during the election?

          2. anon

            A lot of people voted for Trump because he campaigned on ending US regime change interventionist wars. For whatever reason, he’s reneged on that promise.

            But Hillary was massively NeoCon:

            She pressured Obama, Gates, etc. to bomb Libya, now a terrorist hellhole with slave markets.

            HRC and Obama’s CIA director, John Brennan, launched the current round of Syria regime change, including the CIA’s Operation Timber Sycamore, which gave $5 Billion to
            “moderate rebels.” Hillary wanted a NFZ in Syria, which could have led to a hot war with Russia. When Trump bombed Syria the first time, HRC egged him on, urging him to take out all of Syria’s air fields. (So takfiris could take over)

            Hillary’s Asst Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland (Robert Kagan) supported the Maidan putsch that toppled Ukraine’s elected president. US NeoCons pushed to arm the regime with its Neo Nazi elements.

            HRC supported the anti-democratic coup in Honduras, that exacerbated the violence. Berta Caceres fingered her, before she was murdered.


          3. drumlin woodchuckles

            During Trump, the Global Jihadi War against Syria has turned out not necessarily to the Cannibal Liver Eating Jihadis’ advantage. A million Syrian Alawite lives and a half a million Syrian Christian lives and some number of Syrian Shia lives and maybe a lot of Syrian Kurdish lives as well . . . have been saved.

            Thanks to Global Axis of Jihad supporter Clinton losing the election.

      2. nippersdad

        And whose deaths would be on the hands of Stein voters? Seems like the Bush/Obama/Clinton/Trump nexus of neoconservative war criminals has a lot more on their hands than we ever had the opportunity to create. But I am open to your views.

        Prove your contention.

        1. Amfortas the hippie

          such creatures feed on our reaction.
          I’ve all but abandoned social media because of them.
          apparently, I am a misogynist…because i voted for Jill…and it just goes downhill from there.
          their support for Herself seems so obviously good and just that they haven’t bothered to figure out an actual rationale for it. So all they have is yelling and namecalling.
          It’s the perfect expression of post-post-modernist identitarianism during the exhaustion-phase of a civilisation. Team Blue embodies Toynbee’s “Dominant Minority”, resting comfortably on their withered laurels while burning all the ladders that a new Creative Minority might use to challenge them.
          I predict that trump’s raging Id will not usher in American Fascism…Team Blue’s entitled Super-Ego will. (see: Bertram Gross, “Friendly Fascism”, for starters)

          1. Sparkling

            I am a woman who was accused of being an agent of the patriarchy in disguise for not picking Hillary. Keep in mind this was on Facebook, the one website where most people use their real names.

            It’s gotten to the point that I can’t say anything bad about her without being accused of supporting concentration camps, even among some of my friends. Who will hopefully still be my friends if I vote third-party.

            1. The Rev Kev

              Sorry to hear that you are getting so much flak. It is true that Hillary’s campaign ideals broke with the norm. When a President is elected, they take an oath which in part states “…and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” In Hillary’s case, she expected America to take that Oath to her.

            2. roxan

              Yep! All I’ve heard since the election is how I single handedly elected Trump by voting for the Greens. I stay away from social gatherings, these days.

          2. drumlin woodchuckles

            This comment and the replies goes to show yet again how right my prediction was/is/will be when I said that the millions upon millions of Jonestown Clinties are irredeemable and will remain a deadly threat and a menace to the Civic Survival of America until they have all died from old age. Hopefully any time now.

          3. a different chris

            >apparently, I am a misogynist…

            Don’t forget to apologize for your racism, too! Because Hillary is…um, blackish? Never sure of the exact connection but it’s true because She says it is!!

            Voting for Obama doesn’t count, so don’t even bother us with that.

      3. Summer

        The duopoly is like a pick to see who gets killed. Every election is like the Purge with these war mongerers presented by big money.

        1. HotFlash

          Yup, and in the last pres election it was really hard to decide which of the Two Evils would work out to be the Lesser, Ms Lawful Evil or Mr. Chaotic Neutral?

    2. Isotope_C14

      I’d love to see the real vote tabulation, including all the provisional ballots. I’d suspect the greens had 13% actually.

      Of course only fascist parties are allowed in the selection of the corporate puppet in-chief.

      Can’t allow a left party get matching funds.

      1. Carey

        Good comment. Most of the citizenry detested both of brand-name candidates,
        but somehow Stein-Baraka got only 1% of the votes? No chance.

        1. juliania

          I totally agree. What’s more that figure never changed all night long. I once way back suggested parallel vote tabulation. Wildly impracticable, I know, but I wouldn’t mind voting twice – once in ‘their’ booths, and then again in ours, with our nice recountable ballots. Down the road a bit, nice little green tents. Have a lot of Jimmy Carters roaming around on bicycles making sure it was on the up and up.

          My uncle’s pet name for me was ‘Dreamer’.

      1. Big Tap

        Speaking of Nixon. If you take away his horrific Southeast Asian war he extended by years, enemies list, domestic spying (minor compared to today) and his paranoia he was by far the most leftist president in my lifetime. Let’s see: created the EPA, OSHA, lowering voting to age 18, Affirmative Action (not LBJ), , after getting lots of people killed ended the military draft, and created Title IV. Nixon was even for price controls and did eliminate the gold standard which are not conservative ideas. If I was older and drafted and sent to Vietnam instead of being too young I probably would have a far different opinion of Nixon.

      2. Procopius

        On foreign policy, too. Nixon actually created an easing of tensions between USSR and USA. Hillary is a neo-conservative. Who promoted Victoria Nuland and approved her coup in Ukraine?

    3. Mildred Montana

      If HRC runs again and is nominated it’ll be Hillary 4.0 0, Trump 2.0 2. That’s how hated I believe she is. She and her (in Penn and Stein’s words) “steely-eyed determination”.

      In the unlikely and lamentable event that she becomes President she should do something she’s good at and start a war—a War on Cliche. Her first act as a war President should be to execute these guys for overuse of hackneyed phrases.

  3. Martin Finnucane

    “They will see her now as strong, partisan, left-leaning and all-Democrat—the one with the guts, experience and steely-eyed determination to defeat Mr. Trump.

    So the one with the blood of Berta Cáceres on her hands is “left-leaning”, and the one who lost to a ostentatiously ludicrous carnival barker is the one to win against same said carnival barker? The world is too complex for me to understand, or too brutal for me to face. Words just don’t work anymore.

    1. Isotope_C14

      But she’s a capitalist, a well regulated capitalism, you know, where the bankers self regulate. That’s why you don’t release speech transcripts. People might get the wrong idea about your public position and your private position.

      1. Procopius

        I am so tired of the speech transcripts. Do you honestly think there’s anything of interest in them? She was not paid big bucks for saying anything in those speeches. She was paid big bucks for those speeches to put her under obligation, or, maybe, in hopes of creating a feeling of gratitude. She might as well have been reading from a Roget’s Thesaurus. I am convinced chasing those stupid speeches is a complete distraction, like her emails, but hey, whatever floats your canoe.

        1. Isotope_C14

          I believe WL published some from the juicy Podesta emails. Those are particularly interesting. Search Dennis hastert in there for some utterly weird emails.

          “But her emails” were illegaly stored on a private server.

          As Neera pointed out “her instincts are sub-par”

          She sets a pretty low bar for what is supposed to be the highest office in the land.

          Why does she always have something to hide? Guess grifters gotta grift.

    2. Carey

      Thanks for that quote- I thought it stood out, too. Bizarre. What are Penn and the other
      dude angling for here, or am I overthinking this?

          1. Sparkling

            If Elizabeth Warren can say she’s an old-school Republican and get away with it, so can Hillary Clinton. Granted, liking Eisenhower is a bit different than liking Goldwater.

              1. tegnost

                yes all the dems who desire to reach across the aisle should just go over to the other side and be republicans and they can enact their republican friendly policies as republicans. of course the identity of republican will chafe but I hear if you rub the area with enough bonds of zero duration the pain recedes spectacularly. Too, as I have said previously, in a top two election such as this last in CA, you should be required as well to assume the party of the majority of voters who voted for you, so that feinstein, who almost certainly got lots of republican votes, would be relegated to a minority position in mcconnells senate, which should be fine as the identity of minority is hard to get.

            1. JBird4049

              Actually, Warren is an old school Republican! A moderate one at that. The fact that she can only be in the Democratic Party as an economic liberal shows just how distorted the American political reality is.

              It is only with the deliberate destruction, or better say extirpation, of anything even just hinting of being economically center-left that one could possibly say that Clinton is a liberal, nevermind leftist.

              1. Procopius

                I agree with you except for “center-left” I would put “center-right.” That’s much to leftist for our liberals.

        1. Madcity Tom

          My read is that HRC chose a couple of fairly prominent political operatives who no longer have close ties to her to float this trial balloon. Monitor the reaction and feed it to her focus groups.

  4. petal

    Reckon her camp isn’t worried about fundraising at that level again-they think she’ll be able to waltz right in to the race at any time, things will be so bad and so many people will be so desperate and hate Trump so much that she won’t have to do a lick of work to earn the nomination and will walk into the presidency. The voters will realise their 2016 mistake and will make it right this time around! She won’t need campaign money. The public will be longing for a savior like never before, and that savior will be her.
    Popcorn futures, baby.

    1. Arizona Slim

      I am becoming ever more convinced that Trump is a lot more popular than the media and Democratic party elites think he is. He will be tough to beat in 2020.

      1. Pat

        Particularly if the Democratic Party chooses to nominate status quo candidates like Biden or Harris.

        If the Party understands why they lost in 2016, they are trying desperately to pretend that Trump will make voters forget that they offered most of them no reason to vote for the Democrat.

        1. DaveOTN

          I agree that Trump will be tough to beat in 2020. So much of the Dem’s late-stage campaign strategy around him in 2016 was fearmongering, of the “literal Hitler” sort – I know plenty of people who were convinced that by the end of January 2017 we’d be living in some sort of apartheid hell-state full of death camps. When four years go by and all that’s happened is the sort of low-grade corruption and incompetence we’ve seen so far, it’s going to be hard to get that charge to stick again. If he manages to actually improve conditions for the working class (even by cutting out cheap imported goods via tariffs), or keep us out of any major wars, it’s all over, especially with the current stable of challengers.

          1. Darthbobber

            Perhaps the only parallel between Trump and FDR is in the hysterical reaction among the elite elements of their opponents.

            The press and free market politicos turned the volume up all the way on Roosevelt before he’s really done much of anything at all. So there was no higher notch to turn it to at critical points.

            As Thurman Arnold mentions, you don’t reveal the villain and the plot in the opening act. And if you do the villain tends to become a protagonist.

            This is part of why the times and weapon are so at sea. They were already throwing everything including the kitchen sink before the 2016 election, and never stopped or caught their breath since. After awhile, it loses such effect as it once had.

        2. shinola

          “If the Party understands why they lost in 2016…”

          They don’t appear to have a clue.

          It seemed apparent to me that Trump winning the R primaries was a giant middle finger to the status quo establishment.
          So what did the DNC force on us?

          The most status quo establishmentarian candidate they could come up with. And they seem determined to do it again in 2020.

        3. JTMcPhee

          I see Biden just wrapped some kind of Big American Medal around the necks of GWB and the lovely Laura The Liberty Medal. https://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/2018/11/12/george-w-laura-bush-awarded-liberty-medals-biden-bestows-honor/1974567002/ Supposed to be “for commitment to veterans.” F@ck them all, says this one little veteran. Smug draft-dodging pr!icks, one and all.

          Did Michelle “Love me because I could afford to produce offspring by in vitro fertilization” Obama then kiss GWB on both tattooed cheeks, or something? https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PI2CzDxJeiQ

          Happy (sic) Armistice/Veterans/DoorbusterDeals Day to all my fellow veterans, living and dead, of all Fokker-generated Racket wars.

      2. Phil in KC

        I agree: Trump is difficult to beat because he is so good at finding and then exploiting the weaknesses of his opponents, like a typical sociopath. It should go without saying that you don’t feed trolls. Right, Senator Warren?

      3. Procopius

        That thought is in my mind, too. Trump’s approval rating is 40%. That’s a heck of a lot higher than the approvals of either the Republican or the Democratic parties. His disapproval rating, the last time I saw it, was about 55%, but that doesn’t mean that many people will vote against him. I am not so sure Bernie could beat him in 2020, and I’m quite sure Hillary could not. I think AOC could, but it’s way too soon in her career to be thinking about that. I’d like to see Tulsi Gabbard run, but even she’s a little too young. The New Democrats managed to prevent a whole generation from becoming plausible candidates.

        1. a different chris

          >I think AOC could, but it’s way too soon in her career

          Doesn’t matter if her career started at age 7, you have to be 36 to be Prez. Interesting that that works out to be exactly 2 terms from now.

  5. Pat

    I’ve been saying since Trump took the oath that Clinton was going to run again. Despite denials, so are Cuomo and Gillibrand. Here’s the thing, she lives in a bubble, and despite the hit of losing no one is telling her what really went wrong. For one, she still doesn’t understand that SHE was why a whole lot of people voted for Trump, and his being President has not changed anything regarding her for these voters – if they don’t vote for Trump they either won’t vote or they will vote third party. For all the bull about her being resilient, she really isn’t. She has no real purpose except to make herself President, she can’t and won’t move on until all the enablers are gone, maybe not even then.
    That said, I don’t think the people around her will let her enter the race until after Iowa. I can’t begin to believe that everyone is as delusional as Penn sounds. They have to know that Hillary v. 503 is not going to play any better there than any previous version. She barely won in 2016, and people now know Sanders even better and like him even more, and there are going to be half a dozen or more candidates besides him. Nope, she hasn’t got a chance in Iowa.

    Personally, outside of the hung convention and super delegates, I don’t see a route for her to get the nomination. And I’m not even sure she would get it then (she has lost to Trump once before), I think Biden or one of the governors get it (also bad choices, but Democrats cannot do policy).

  6. Big River Bandido

    On the downside…

    If Mark Penn told me the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, I’d check a more reliable source first (like Google), just to be sure.

    Given that Clinton barely won the nomination in 2016, I can’t conceive of her doing *better* among Democrat faithful four years hence — especially given that her conduct since 2016 has been, well, deplorable.

    She came within a hair’s breadth of losing caucuses and primaries in both Iowa and Massachusetts, two key constituencies for any hopeful Democrat running for President. In all likelihood, both of those “victories” were the result of “irregularities” noted during the campaign. It’s not as though Democrats in those two states don’t know Hillary Clinton. There’s absolutely nothing to indicate a new warmth toward her in either of those key constituencies — and in all likelihood, she’s lost ground precipitously in both places.

    None of which bodes well for a Presidential run. Unless your sole goal is to keep the insurgency from claiming the nomination.

    1. Stephen V.

      Big River, I think you’ve hit it. If the Dems are passionate about anything it’s the Greens or anyone leftward.
      Basically I think she’s a psychopath. Make that a zombie psychopath. One who has suffered any number of public deaths and won’t go away. I don’t understand her donors, however, who seem determined to continue to prepare their mummy for the afterlife. ..
      I’m also struggling to understand this: driving home last Thursday evening I was confronted with a mass of protestors in the cold driving rain. SAVE MUELLER screamed the signs. I happen to live in Bill & Hills’ first hometown or whatever they’re calling it now.
      I’ll trade you one Trump tower floor of Russian money launderers for Billary’s Golden Triangle of Speaker Fees, Arms Deals and Clinton Foundation donations.
      Kill me now. Please.

      1. NotTimothyGeithner

        Her donors? Its just doubling down on a bad bet. I’m a huge believer the one thing people despise more than con men is acknowledging they, themselves, were conned.

        If HRC was as a bad candidate, just the candidacy aspect, as someone such as myself claim, then what does it say about her supporters especially the ones’ who are just being pragmatic and concerned about winning? Bear in mind, she did lose to Barack Hussein Obama and Donald Trump.

        There are true believers in the lot, but the 2007/8 primary was pretty damning of Hillary. Was her time as Secretary of State worth ignoring this issue or the efforts/results the Clinton loyalists produced over the years? These aren’t secret results or something terribly complex. It just takes a bit of effort to see how she’s a terrible candidate.



        I couldn’t stand Obama, but to me, my primary vote came down to an Obama nomination brought the potential for 59 seats and HRC had the potential for 53. I expected a win either way, but she has a problem which her campaign in 2008 failed to solve.

        1. drumlin woodchuckles

          They just want to prevent a Sanders-figure from winning the Nomination and threatening them with policies which would cost them money. To her pragmatic donors, she is just the last, best tire iron they can swing at the Sanders wing.

          And she does have her fanbase of millions upon millions. They are Legion.

      2. Procopius

        I don’t understand her donors, however, …

        I feel the same way about Biden’s backers. He has so much baggage I’m amazed anyone things he won’t be annihilated. Just making student debt non-dischargeable in bankruptcy should sink him.

    1. Bugs Bunny


      My allergist had stacks of early 70s Spidermans and Hulk. Made me look forward to those evil injections. I figured he probably read them too. Dr. Shoenkerman. Probably long gone. Unlike my allergies.

    2. The Rev Kev

      Imagine. Living a life doing what you want & having fun doing it and at the end of it all, millions of people will mourn your passing. RIP.

      1. Mark Pontin

        Imagine. Living a life doing what you want & having fun doing it

        Jack Kirby’s side of the story —

        Steve Ditko, responsible for Spider Man, felt the same way about Lee. Kirby was a volcanic figure so Stan Lee wasn’t quite the parasite Kirby bitterly painted him as as. But it’s clear, based on what both men did before and after, that Lee did two things right — he could write dialogue for the stories Kirby created and he had the sense to build Marvel around Kirby — but other than that it was all Jack Kirby.

  7. barefoot charley

    Just more wow from the op-ed, that they’re right about what they notice that’s wrong, excepting Hillary herself. The Democrats have a Bozo bench worthy of the Republicans. Their primary will be Michelin Persons flogging each other with spaghetti sticks.

    The generation of Democrats who have been waiting to take over the party from the Clintons will be fuming that she is back and stealing their show. But they revealed themselves to be bungling amateurs in the Brett Kavanaugh nomination fight, with their laughable Spartacus moments. She will trounce them. Just as Mr. Trump cleared the field, Mrs. Clinton will take down rising Democratic stars like bowling pins. Mike Bloomberg will support her rather than run, and Joe Biden will never be able to take her on.

    1. Sparkling

      That makes me wonder whether dumbing down the party was intentional. They’ll always need her if she’s the smartest woman in the room…

      1. NotTimothyGeithner

        It predates Bill and Hill. Oh sure, they poured fuel on the fire, but the problem is still a party completely reliant on self funding candidates at the earliest levels. Instead of say “generic Democrats” who agree with the horrors of liberalism as described by FoxNews such as Medicare for all or more money for public schools, one gets random people interested in running for class President. Once the pot holes that riled them up at the local level aren’t there concern, they just become people who are there looking for easy answers or the path of least resistance. These candidates didn’t sign up to regulate their golf buddies. They signed up for a title.

        AOC jumps out. I believe Yves called her one of the most natural on camera presences she’s seen or something to that effect. AOCs now a Congressman elect, and a year ago she was bartending. She and her organization did it without the Democratic Party. Not that I don’t think Crowley needed to be ousted, but a healthy political party would have found a way to get AOC on a ballot somewhere. She wouldn’t be challenging Crowley, but they would have found a spot for her. Its like the Red Sox were able to draft a SS prospect named Dustin Pedroia after drafting SS prospect Hanley Ramirez, so they told Pedroia he would be a second basemen.They could keep both of them. (My dad is still crazy about the Hanley trade) Years later, they drafted a 2b prospect, Mookie Betts, but they had Pedroia at 2nd. They told Mookie, maybe the best player in baseball these days, he was going to play out field. They found a way to get the talent on the field. AOC shouldn’t have been bartending a year ago. It would cost money AOC doesn’t have. This is what Republicans do. If AOC said, “Bernie Sanders was bad, and Hillary Clinton is a Communist love child of Joe Stalin and Gloria Steinem,” she would have three shows on Fox by now. This is an aspect of Dean’s 50 State Strategy which was to leave a permanent organization to be available or cheaper because one doesn’t have to start over every cycle.

        Republicans get Republicans, and Democrats get people who just kind of accept Pelosi and Schumer.

  8. SufferinSuccotash

    Hillary lost the ’08 nomination to a freshman Senator from Illinois named Barack Hussein Obama.
    She almost lost the ’16 nomination to a 72 year old Jewish Socialist from Brooklyn.
    She lost the ’16 general to…Donald Trump.
    She we’re still supposed to think that Hillary’s a winner?

    1. Hepativore

      “But we’ve got demographics on our side!”

      If she does run again in 2020, all of the talking points of her ill-conceived candidacy will probably revolve around taking revenge on those no-good Ruskies that stole her coronation from her in 2016.

  9. Chauncey Gardiner

    The Washington Post reported earlier today that although a judge has ruled there is no evidence of voter fraud, Trump has alleged without evidence that ballots in Florida are forged and missing, called for the recounts to be halted, and reverting to election-night totals in Florida.


    5.5k readers’ comments there so far.

    1. Lambert Strether Post author

      They’re all horrible from top to bottom, from Trump to Scott. So it would be super-nice if the Democrats didn’t cave like Al Gore did in 2000. It would also be nice if the election apparatus could actually count votes without losing them, meet deadlines, and all that. What a mess.

      1. NotTimothyGeithner

        My memory is fuzzy, but did Gore cave as much as get blindsided by Warren Christopher’s desperation for his one shining moment and Lieberman’s efforts to clear a path for 2004?

        Since the revelations about Carville calling Mary in 2004, I don’t trust any operation which would have had Clinton loyalists anywhere near it.

  10. Robert Hahl

    Stray Cats – Stray Cat Strut
    The opening guitar lick uses a whole tone scale. Almost unheard of in popular music. Bleated happy international cat day, btw.

    John Trudell – Wildfires
    It was originally just a cassette tape that John sold out of his trunk at PowWows across the country. Then Dylan plugged it and all hell broke loose.

    Chris Minn Doky – The Dapper King

    Norm Macdonald talks Trump, PM Trudeau
    Why Trump impressions are generally so unfunny.

    Del McCoury Band – That Ol’ Train

    Del McCoury Band – All Aboard

  11. nippersdad

    I simply cannot see Clinton running a third time. Both sides’ views have hardened; it would be far more likely that Biden finally decides, or is pushed, to run…That Medal of Freedom for the Bush family will figure prominently in his campaign, and will have the same result as McCaskill’s “more Republican than actual Republicans” race.

    Winning by losing is fast becoming a real feature of the Democratic Party.

    1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

      I am tempted to give her a life-time achievement (in running) award.

      “And the winner is…”

    2. Synoia

      I simply cannot see Clinton running a third time.

      “Running?” Nor I.

      Limping to Victory, yes.
      Embalmed? Yes.

      1. Big Tap

        Hillary Clinton will run for president in only one scenario. When the primary season begins if one candidate starts off with a big lead in delegates over their competitors and that candidate is named Bernie Sanders she’s in if nothing else to sabotage him. Think what Obama did to Keith Ellison to prevent him becoming DNC chair.

  12. IowanX

    Mark Penn is, and has been, an idiot. The only way Hillary becomes the Democratic nominee is by a vote on a second, third, or twentieth ballot of the Convention with all the Super-Delegates lined up behind her. And then, a Dukakis level loss.

    1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

      I wonder if Hillary is inspired by Mao and the Long March.

      How many believed at the start that he would get to rule starting 1949?

      “Never say never.”

  13. Katz

    1. “Hillary 4.0” as a return to Clinton’s authentic, liberal, roots is a clever. Clever in the only way Mark Penn knows how.

    2. Setting aside the absurd “analysis” of 2016, the idea that Clinton could run on #MeToo is laughable. Clinton has not handled questions about Lewinsky, post #MeToo, well at all.

      1. WJ

        This is a brilliant insight. It is *just* the sort of ploy the Clintons are so good at staging. She will divorce Bill and will present this as her #MeToo cum “Progressive” Awakening/Repentance, will be given lots of friendly fawning press and interviews for doing so, and will strongarm/bribe the Post and Times to represent her as a genuine moderate Progressive or something. If she’s elected then Bill can get into the act by staging his own repentance and they will reconcile to great fanfare. (Whether or not heir remarrying follows their reconciliation chiefly depends on what the tax attorneys think is best.)

  14. Kurt Sperry

    The more corrupt status-quo corporate Dems throw their hats in the ring, the better. Biden, Bloomberg, Booker come in in, the water’s fine! Hillary’s trump card was her “inevitability”, her “electability”. Both those are now cast into the dustbin of history. I would love to see the three time loser tag as her final epithet.

    1. Lambert Strether Post author

      On the one hand, the Democrats are going to abolish the electoral college and make Puerto Rico and DC states. On the other, they’re going to be bipartisan and work with the Republicans. Both of these things cannot come true.

        1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

          The beauty is that they are Schroedinger’s Cat – the voters don’t find out tilll they open the box, much later.

    2. John k

      The more neoliberals running the easier it is for a progressive to win. Kamala, Biden, Clinton, booker, Bloomberg… fill up the clown car.
      I’ve always thought they can’t keep Bernie from the nom if he’s healthy, Clinton looks to help out.

  15. hamstak

    My pet theory is that Hillary will not end up running and will have to content herself with a role as attempted “queenmaker” — Kamala Harris comes to mind — giving her a role in a symbolically historic election and granting her some megalomaniacal satisfaction. In return (provided victory), she gets a juicy cabinet position. Since she has already been Sec. of State my money would be on Chief of Staff; it is not a visible position, but it can be a powerful one.

    1. NotTimothyGeithner

      Two things:

      -one, HRC wanted to be President. Serving in Obama’s cabinet only happened because Joe Biden meant there would be no VP opponent in 2016.

      -two, there is no Cabinet job better than Secretary of State. Its a nothing job since Defense handles all of our important relationships. Yes, its on a President by President basis too, but the other posts require a certain amount of work. Chief of Staff is a job, not a ceremonial post. There is an element of accountability.

      1. hamstak

        AG came to mind, but the resistance to that would be incredible, and the position requires congressional confirmation. As for the Chief of Staff (via Wikipedia):

        — The White House Chief of Staff has traditionally been the highest-ranking non-elected employee of the White House.

        — The Chief of Staff is a political appointee of the President who does not require Senate confirmation

        — a chief of staff, who typically oversees the actions of the White House staff, manages the president’s schedule, and decides who is allowed to meet with the president. Because of these duties, the chief of staff has at various times been labeled “The Gatekeeper”, or “the power behind the throne”

        Admittedly this is completely speculative, but the position fits the bill (provided my back of the envelope undegraduate psych-eval of her is correct). She gets a great deal of influence without public scrutiny. But perhaps that is not enough for her.

        1. NotTimothyGeithner

          HRC wanted a coronation. She isn’t interested in the Chief of Staff or influence. Air Force one, the White House, the Marine Guard, Hail to the Chief, having useful people kowtow for a stupid medal, etc. All she had to do to be President both times was to be out in front with relatively bold and positive policy messages. Its theoretically a test run for the Presidency. So why didn’t she do it? She didn’t want to.

          Admittedly, this attitude applies to all state wide office holders, but the Chief of Staff job isn’t going to turn into being the most famous person in the world for Hillary at this stage in her life.

          1. Procopius

            I wonder if her backers still think a good answer to a policy question is, “That’s covered on my web site. Next?”

            I’d like to see Trump and his kleptocrat crew gone, but he doesn’t offend me nearly as much as he did before the Clintonistas started the stupid Russia, Russia, Russia thing. Anybody heard anything recent about the Concord Consulting LLC trial, or Mueller’s Folly, as I call it? I haven’t seen anything more recent than August. Did the DoJ ever reply to the judge’s question about why all the advertisements they want to present in evidence are in Russian? “Who was going to read these?,” the judge asked.

  16. noonespecial

    Gaia – Mining in Idaho

    Bloomberg published an article related to mining in Idaho at a place known as the Bunker Hill Mine. Its a long read with some historical context and a few points for and against the new deal to re-open the Mine.

    One detail at the beginning makes the point that currently, “…Bunker Hill’s tailings heap still oozes 400 pounds of toxic metals a day [flow] into the South Fork of the Coeur d’Alene River.”

    Operations are set for a re-start since under Pruitt’s (mis)leadership a consent decree is in place that requires the new company to “contribute $20 million toward cleanup costs for the Bunker Hill Mine, and provide almost $1 million a year for water treatment. In exchange, the new Bunker Hill Mining Corp. and the property’s previous operator were absolved of any responsibility for past toxic releases.”

    At the end of the article, we learn that, “whoever operates the new Bunker Hill will use new techniques to extract more metal from 1,500 tons of ore each day than the mine’s old operator got from twice that much. And so, instead of employing 2,200 workers and powering the economy of North Idaho, the new Bunker Hill, at full production, will probably employ about 200 people.”

    One last thought, does this new move to re-open the mine signal that the mine’s investors are confident that the outcome of the lawsuit filed against the EPA’s mine clean up rule is set to favor industry? Reuters published an article on 5/16/2018 with some details about the case.


    1. GF

      What happens to the water treatment payments after the new Bunker Hill Mining Corp. goes belly up? Is there a bond posted to cover the next 50 years or so after that? What about a bond posting of $20 million per year of new operation for the toxic waste produced by the new Bunker Hill Mining Corp.? I don’t think the hopelessly outdated General Mining Act of 1872 has anything to say about the Fed ability to require high dollar bonds for cleanup prior to mine startup.

  17. Anonymous

    I was an intern in the Manhattan Borough President’s office as young ‘un back when Andrew Stein was in the job. One afternoon in the very late 70s, as we rode up Amsterdam Avenue (in his chauffeured car, mind you), the conversation turned to the potential of real estate and development to transform the city and get it out of its financial problems. Stein waved his hand at buildings as we passed and told us one day this will all be changed. One of his staff, just a few years older than I, expressed empathy for the residents, how as a group they were barely hanging on financially even then. “Fuck ‘em” Andrew said.
    It was an early scales-falling-from-my-eyes moment – the first of many, many scales to come – with regard to the we-the-people Democrats. IMO the Dems were done with its working and middle class base by the 1977, max. By class, if not color.
    Btw, there’s something pleasing about the fact that Amsterdam has proven somewhat more resistant to residential gentrification than the rest of the upper west side.

  18. Mark Gisleson

    I left Iowa in 1988 and haven’t tracked state party D politics that closely since leaving, but D’s winning 3 out of 4 CDs this fall was VERY impressive. [If you look at a map you’ll see why King’s seat will be all but impossible to take without changing the lines after the next census.]

    It takes a lot of work for D’s to win in Iowa. I doubt very much that these winners would appreciate Hillary Clinton reinserting herself into the dialogue. She is massively unpopular in rural areas, and I’m including Democrats when I say that. Rural D’s I know in MN, WI and IA are all incredibly fed up with being scapegoated for D failures after D’s write them off and then discourage donations for organizing purposes.

    1. Big River Bandido

      Actually in the general election Clinton did poorly in the populous eastern counties where a Democrat must pad their vote totals to counterbalance the more Republican west. A Democrat cannot won a statewide race without running well ahead in Scott County, and she has never came close there, in several cycles.

      Flipping IA-01 and IA-03 were achievements, but I would note that both Finkenaeur and Axne were weak candidates who won “Clinton-style” electoral victories (pluralities without majorities). Doesn’t bode well for them in 2020.

    1. drumlin woodchuckles

      I suspect Hilly was being sardonic and making some kind of triple-cushion-carom indirect accusation that that was exactly the kind of joke the Deplorables would tell and mean it.

      It goes to show what a cement-ear she has for anything political.

  19. Sparkling

    The current catchphrase of her Facebook shills is that if she were a man she wouldn’t be getting this treatment. Apparently, her level of ambition is totally normal and if she was male people wouldn’t be calling her desperate and downright unseemly.

    I think that says a lot more about Clintonites than it does about anyone living in the real world.

    1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

      If we are just talking war movies in general, I will offer the 1947 Chinese film, The Spring River Flows East, set a few years earlier.

    1. johnnygl

      NC can often resist the explosiveness of certain topics and keep its collective head…but something like HRC 2020 causes meltdowns everywhere!!!

      I kind of want her to run so she can get the jebbie treatment. She’s earned it!!!

  20. kareninca

    Here’s my prediction: Trump will be in real trouble in 2020 if food prices keep going up like they have just started to. A bag of frozen okra at Safeway just jumped from $1.99 to $2.50 where I live; rutabagas are now $1.99/pound at the cheap produce place (not the farmers’ market where you would expect that). Yes I can afford this but that is irrelevant; I know people who are having trouble with food costs. I remember the inflation of the 1970s since I am 55 y.o. and if we have anything like that he will be toast; no plausible salary increases (which are taken up with taxes and health insurance increases anyway) can make up for it, and people go nuts when grocery store food gets costly.

    Even Hillary could win if food prices go up enough.

  21. Hepativore

    I would not put it past Hillary to run again in 2020. The real question is, I wonder what her hypothetical pick of running mate would be?

    1. NotTimothyGeithner

      HRC is devoted to the New Democratic playbook. She would worry about her age, sex, and appealing to Obama’s voters (as perceived by Clinton loyalists) and not threatening big business. Also not being upstaged. Could the country wait four years? Kaine hits all of those marks.

      The Clinton people might have an all women event, but she isn’t going to have a revolutionary appearing cabinet.

      I would be looking for a younger Kaine as the hypothetical running mate. A running mate who isn’t obviously grotesque or too exotic. Who might be a MIC white male Democrat who came into office before this year but after 2010? That’s the HRC 2020 pick. The Clinton loyalists tried to convince us Joe Lieberman was exotic once upon a time to balance out Al Gore’s sleepiness.

      1. Hepativore

        On the other hand, Clinton might try and find a token minority to try and placate the Sanders wing of the Democratic party, just like how the Democratic leadership is pushing Kamala Harris.

        However, like Kamala Harris, it would be just another neoliberal in progressive clothing and the whole point would be to convey the idea that Clinton is “hip to today’s youth!” while not actually meaning any of it.

      2. pricklyone

        A country of 325+ million people, still choosing from a tiny pool of grifters and frauds. Is there no one else?

    2. ambrit

      My money’s on Michelle Obama.
      A marriage made in Identity Politics Heaven.
      So, if HRH HRC kicks the bucket during her term, another DNC ‘insider’ can take up the reins and steer the “Chariot of State” across the heavens to Elysium.

  22. djrichard

    Can’t you hear the population begging, “We need a savior!” ?

    In my mind that’s what the whole media campaign has been since Hillary lost. It’s been a war campaign, not just against Trump, but on the US population as a whole, relentlessly beating us into submission that the empire is in danger. And so mission accomplished – the population is begging for relief. The stage is set. Now the stage is simply waiting for somebody to occupy it – to give the population what they’re asking for.

    Or if you will, the whole point of the media campaign was to prep the way for a marquis card: Hillary vs Trump II. Nothing less will satisfy now. Bernie vs Trump? Sure that’ll be interesting. But will it satisfy the blood lust that’s out there? Me thinks not. Because who else better represents the defender-of-the-faith for an empire that is under attack than Hillary? Nobody.

    Media did what it does best: bang the drums for war. We’re now primed for war. “Bring it on!”, the population says.

      1. Amfortas the hippie

        that picture!
        I prefer the one with the mumuu/tablecloth/catlady attire…this one reminds me of the Sith.
        I do not look forward to re-litigating Her Turn….the trolls, especially…the paid for variety and the True Believers combining in that under-the-bridge sordidness,hatefulness and inevitability.
        If Herself is reanimated, I’ll endeavor to become the county chair of the Green Party in protest and spite(a simple task, and without much purpose, out here…just call them up and ask, then just keep doing what i do)
        Reading Christopher Lash, the word “Narcissist” is lodged in my forebrain…and that woman embodies that disorder, for me.
        I see trump as an almost inevitable anomaly…a cherry on top of the giant pile of sh^t that Herself and what she represents have erected.
        Fie! Fie!
        and Basta!
        and if She wins?!
        that is not out of the question, sadly—given the purposefully hackable machinery built by the goptea, but enabled at every turn by Blue Dogs and their ilk.
        As crazy as it feels to say it, I’d prefer another four years of incompetence and foot and mouth disease.

  23. John Beech


    So what . . . like America can’t put 100 of those 747-based tankers to work? This problem is partly based on a failure of imagination, e.g. scaling up solutions before they devastate lives! After all, forest fires are a regular occurrence, right? Why don’t we have a fleet of these ready? Is anybody seriously going to use a spreadsheet to justify not having them at the ready? How many are we freaking scrapping at Davis-Mothan Air Force Base – that’s the aircraft the graveyard in the desert? I could cry sometimes regarding the government we receive. Sigh.

    John Beech

  24. Massinissa

    Penn: “True to her name, Mrs. Clinton will fight this out until the last dog dies,” the pair wrote. “She won’t let a little thing like two stunning defeats stand in the way of her claim to the White House.”

    If by ‘dog’ he means ‘blue dog’, that might be what will happen.

  25. Darthbobber

    No. Just no. The relationship between the Clintons and those willing to back them has always been-complicated. Lots of non-love on all sides. And for the money folks, even those who want the Wall Street +selective identity politics combo Clinton came to be identified with don’t see her as the desired package/frontperson for the product anymore. Not sure a lot of them ever did. All those Biden trial balloons in late 2015, 2016 wouldn’t have been happening if they had no misgivings.

    The other advantage she’ll never have again was the support of pretty much every urban/suburban democratic machine.

    And if she’s not giving firm assurances and ready to put people on payroll by early next year, most of the switch flippers and button pushers will commit to new paymasters for the cycle.

  26. allan

    Liz Cheney poised for ascent into Republican leadership [AP]

    Liz Cheney has had a quiet first term as congresswoman, but that’s about to change. She’s seeking a House Republican leadership post that’s key to her party’s strategy against next year’s Democratic majority.

    If she succeeds, Cheney will be the only woman in House Republican leadership — and follow in the footsteps of her father, former Vice President Dick Cheney, who won the same post more than 30 years ago. …

    Yet having the Cheney brand at the forefront of the GOP communications apparatus could set a mixed tone. …

    The Cheney brand. Not a marketing concept you would expect to see, outside of The Hague.

    1. The Rev Kev

      Oh good. You could have a future Presidential election then with Liz Cheney for the Republicans versus Chelsea Clinton for the Democrats. Everything old is new again.

  27. cj51

    From the movie “Shooter”:
    “There are no Republicans or Democrats! There is only haves and have-nots”.
    I think H. Clinton is on the “haves” side.
    She has stated that “single payer is not going to happen”.
    Clinton does not represent me.

  28. Carey

    I wonder if we can change the rules so that V Vladimirovich can run? Hey, the citizenry
    of his country all get health care, so he’d have a solid platform to run on; why not US?

      1. tegnost

        ok this is actually what I was looking for in response to charles leseau (oops wrong thread, aoc rental woes…) re instruments, and I got side tracked, didn’t realize today is his b-day
        this is text
        from the interview…
        “Q : Of all the guitarists that came out in the Sixties, it seems you’re the only one capable of playing in a real trash style.

        NEIL : Thank you. That’s very kind of you. “

        1. tegnost

          jeez and I meant part one, how much worse could I screw this up?
          re: don’t look, just listen…
          “Q : Have you got a favourite guitar…one that you use especially for writing songs?

          NEIL: Not really. Generally, I write with very cheap guitars and not very good. For example, I have a Japonese Epiphonie that I bought in New Zealand. The sound isn’t good, but it’s unique. I like to always buy second-hand guitars, because I know I’m going to write at least one or two songs with them. Because every guitar comes with its own history and the feeling of all the people who have used it before. That makes you play certain chords that you wouldn’t play normally, and pushes you towards something new. If you’re lucky, you’ll get a song out of it.”

    1. Carey

      Thanks for that link. “He told me red means run, son; numbers add up to nuthin’…”

      Oh the urge for transcendence

  29. Oregoncharles

    First thought: no way the Dems will nominate Her Highness again.

    Second thought: it’s still their turn to lose, so of course they will.

    1. Carey

      Yes, if they can find a way to do it, of course they will.

      Deterring democracy is the Democrats’ well-compensated job.

  30. Whoa Molly!

    HRC 2020 = NC clickbait.

    Clickbait worked on me.

    I believe she will (try) to run again. She might even get the nomination.

    I also believe that she will lose if she runs against Trump.

    Crazy times.

    1. openandshut

      IKR? NC links to a story on her every day. Do websites have “sweeps weeks” that demand a Clinton story for ratings or something?

Comments are closed.