And_Gignac
Member
Clintons are over. It's time to let it go.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Chris Matthews (MSNBC) suggests Clinton might run for Gov. of NY in 2018
- Thread starter Lights and Waves
- Start date
- Status
Cuomos issues are the only reason this is being discussed
Hillary being able to troll Trump from the NY Governors office would be incredible tho.
AntraxSuicide
Banned
I really dislike the idea that governors should be focusing on other shit instead of their highly important jobs. Governor of a bumfuck state could probably get away with it though, but definitely not New York.
StrikeNinja24
Banned
Oh, let's talk about the people who voted for him. Here's just a few responses of what they thought when voting for him: http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/trump-voters-explain-themselves-1790711999
It's really a thing of magic to read.
Miles Quaritch
Member
Didn't she win the poplar vote though? By millions?
Cindi Mayweather
Member
I like how because you think Hillary should hang it up, this means you don't think she has a role to play in politics at all, apparently!
She would be really good in an advisor role. A former first lady, senator, secretary of state? She's experienced as hell. But her role in the future should be grooming for that future. Not taking more offices. Personally, I just want the Clinton's to go away in general.
She would be really good in an advisor role. A former first lady, senator, secretary of state? She's experienced as hell. But her role in the future should be grooming for that future. Not taking more offices. Personally, I just want the Clinton's to go away in general.
You're painting it as if it would be a tremendous sacrifice for her to run for office due to the catastrophic scrutiny she'd have to face.
Because she lost a presidential election due to a few hundred thousand voters in places like Michigan (but actually won the overall vote by millions), that means people in New York who overwhelmingly voted for her don't want her?
As a New Yorker yea she has her strongholds and fundraising rolodex but insanely popular is stretching it. Especially after her loss to Trump. She's damaged goods, and while she was a pretty good Senator she wasn't a transcendent one that people are clamoring to return either.
Nothing about the NY governorship office impedes new blood. It's her or Cuomo.
There are only a few national level positions available for Democrats, the Democrats should try to use them wisely. Jerry Brown could be a great replacement for Feinstein, but it makes more sense to use that position to elevate Garcetti, Chiang, Newsom or Xberra.
You don't think a governorship would be huge boost to Kathy Hochul or Kirsten Gillibrand?
Some of y'all are forgetting that Clinton lost by... -3 million votes. For all her faults, she was still technically the more popular candidate nationally, and would do well in a local election in a state as blue as NY. That said, I'm not feeling this one - gonna have to see some actual evidence that she really cares to run for this thing.
IIRC Chelsea is supposed to be getting ready for a run for a house seat, so folks wishing for the Clintons to get out of politics... Keep on wishing.
Eh, NC has continued to stay purple despite the GOP's fuckery, and we're scheduled to have another go at state elections with slightly less terrible gerrymandering later this year. Unless the GOP can find a way to ban dirty liberals from moving in and/or having babies, I'm not sure how much they can do to really stifle the change... Short of turning us into Kansas 2.0 in less than a year.
IIRC Chelsea is supposed to be getting ready for a run for a house seat, so folks wishing for the Clintons to get out of politics... Keep on wishing.
Eh, NC has continued to stay purple despite the GOP's fuckery, and we're scheduled to have another go at state elections with slightly less terrible gerrymandering later this year. Unless the GOP can find a way to ban dirty liberals from moving in and/or having babies, I'm not sure how much they can do to really stifle the change... Short of turning us into Kansas 2.0 in less than a year.
Melkezadek
Member
I didn't say that at all. I was saying that despite her historic loss, which I'm sure broke her, she still wants to go out there and try to make a difference.
That, to me, is admirable.
Trojita
Rapid Response Threadmaker
Hyperbole. She's done a lot for this country, but information coming out after the election shows she ran a lousy campaign.
If she's okay with running, I suggest she does it. For some reason this seems like a weird trajectory in positions, but if she loves New York and wants to do her best, I say let her.
Jerry Brown will be like 80 years old by the time of the next Senate election, he's not running for Feinstein's seat so that seems like a moot point. Besides, I'd think those guys would be all be pretty likely to run as Brown's successor than Feinstein's anyway.
She's probably more likely to launch a bid for president than governor anyway.
Gillibrand is better off staying away from Albany. It's like the Most Eisley cantina: a corrupt hive of scum and villainy.
Garrett Hawke
Member
She lost even more narrowly than this guy called Nixon.
It's a step back for Gillibrand. But local NYNJ politics are poison for careers in general. See: Booker.
Context is important here. This is not a normal situation w Cuomo.
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
Better than losing to an R if Cumo's numbers hold.
AntraxSuicide
Banned
I repeat, the New York governor's mansion is not a fucking joke to use as a stepping stone. New York (post Brexit) is the financial capital of the entire world. NYC is the largest city in the country by a factor of 3. It's not an internship.
Your anecdotal evidence doesn't line up with the data.
BoosterDuck
Banned
hey if Shillary can do the job then she can do the job
She just needs to lay off the stats a little
Melkezadek
Member
Sounds like a poor reflection on the voters.
Garrett Hawke
Member
...because the people who voted for him didn't care.
She lost very narrowly in the rust belt because of inaccurate polling data that led her campaign (stupidly) to try and sow the seeds of flipping the south while trump's campaign in a desperate last ditch attempt focused on areas with demographics most favourable to trump's rhetoric (i.e. angry white people who felt that the system had abandoned them).
Feinstein will be 85. Jerry Brown would be termed out as governor. If you are saying they will not run for Feinstein's seat, who would run? And they all can't share the governor's seat (though someone could get a Lt. Gov spot). I'm pretty sure Brown is interested in staying in the spotlight, but more reasonable heads would probably prevail.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
You honestly believe this?
Right, the data that said Clinton had the presidency locked up. If that's your argument there's nothing I can say that would convince you of any trepidation on behalf of New Yorkers. Like I said earlier, I'd vote for Cuomo over her anyway if it came to it.
New York is becoming an increasingly more red state and Clinton is political poison at this stage whether you like her or not. Cuomo's numbers aren't doing well so theyll need to rethink their policies if they want to address the concerns of literally the entire state outside of NYC and Albany.
I don't agree that the electorate has these preconceived notions about certain regions. "New York" values rang flat amongst the demographic that was more likely to be anti NY/NJ. I think the electorate does place some premium on "executive experience".
We had the same issues about Obama and Chicago politics.
Federal and city regulations and taxes have much more of an impact on what NYC firms are doing that the state governor. I disagree that New York governors will never see that there are higher positions to aspire to.
Monocle
Member
She still has loads of valuable experience, so why not?
Yeah her loss is totally definitely an indictment of her ability to serve competently and effectively in a political role.
You mean the election she lost by a hair due in large part to post-truth fuckery, a sustained campaign of hyperbolic bullshit over her emails, and Russia's intervention? The one where the popular vote fell in her favor by around 3 million?
Yeah her loss is totally definitely an indictment of her ability to serve competently and effectively in a political role.
Mammoth Jones
Member
If she runs against Cuomo and loses it'll be salt in the wound.
Hillary pls....
Hillary pls....
R10Neymarfan
Member
She probably shouldn't and instead put her energy and mentor the next up and coming. This election proved she was "unelectable". It is a huge blow to the reputation and I doubt the public would want her.
SolidSnakex
Member
No, the election she lost because she thought campaigning in Arizona was more important than campaigning in one of the states (Wisconsin) critical to her path to victory. At what point are people going to admit that she and her campaign fucked up rather than continually blaming it on everything and everyone else?
legacyzero
Banned
Could have said the same during the Primary. But that would have made me a "sexist" back then.
They won't be holding an actual primary. If she enters, he will already be on his way out..
Multiple things went into the election results. The campaign fucking up was one of them. But it wasn't the only thing that mattered - there were a bunch of different things that went into what ended up being a loss by a hair.. If you think only 1 variable mattered, you are wrong and have an incredibly shallow view of the world.
Gnome Scat
Member
Is vote for her if I lived in New York, she should do it.
Melkezadek
Member
You need to get that chip off your shoulder.
ErasureAcer
Banned
Cuomo is more progressive it seems as he is promoting Bernie ideas(free college, $15/hr, etc...) where Clinton doesn't believe in shit.
Monocle
Member
At what point will her rabid detractors admit that the whole election was anything but ordinary, and that it hinged on factors totally independent of conventional strategy?
Is it Hillary's fault that a bunch of low info racist reactionaries hated the reality of a black man in office so much that they latched onto the first populist flimflam artist willing to pander to their nastiest impulses and their nostalgia for a time that sucked for everyone but straight white dudes?
Lord Frieza
Member
She loves public service
We're not making statements on her political or policy ability. We're reflecting on the simple fact that it would be very difficult to get her elected to that position after a very expensive and public ally shaming election. You and I feel similarly about the way the election went but there HAS to be a better candidate than her, she's tainted goods at this point to voters on both sides of the aisle.
It doesn't help that NY is heating up due to its rust belt status which doesn't help her case. What matters is that she's PERCEIVED as a weak candidate when it comes to addressing those issues.
Oh, no wonder people want him gone.
Veritigo_X
Member
I was wondering how long it would take for Bernie supporters to come around to Cuomo. Pretty fast apparently!
It takes surprisingly little to be progressive these days. *looks at Tulsi Gabbard*
Aaronology
Member
This logic obviously does not apply to other notable liberals who performed poorly in 2016. Her defeat is tragic but losing a political contest is not itself indicative of a politician's future worth. The most popular Democrat at the moment is a man who also lost his race by millions of votes and didn't make it nearly as far as her.
Stop demonizing the woman, please. Any one who can help the country move forward should be implored to do so.
AntraxSuicide
Banned
You are literally making the "climate change isn't real, I'm holding a snowball" argument.
Anti-intellectualism belongs to the right. Keep this shit out of the left.
Cindi Mayweather
Member
- Status