Top Menu

Hillary Exits with 2016 “Field-Clearing” Status


WE JUST can’t leave it alone. Writing about Hillary Clinton and her prospects for 2016 is just too delectable, too enticing, too historically epic in proportions that keeping it all alive until Mrs. Clinton decides is what any political writer worth his or her salt will do. You’re going to have to decide what’s worth reading, because right now it’s a crap storm out there. However, the latest topic of discussion is on whether Hillary is a “field-clearer” for 2016.

Mike Allen, as only he can do [see video above], succinctly and correctly lays out the case why Hillary is in the position she is today. It doesn’t take a historical rundown, or any dissecting of any great magnitude. It comes down to the issue that Mrs. Clinton has the resume, has paid her dues, and there has never been a female president of the United States and it’s long past time there was and she’s made for casting.

Jonathan Martin wrote the best piece yet on it, which kicked off the conversation down the new media chain, because to be out of the Hillary traffic loop on the web is accepting irrelevancy.

Steve Kornacki does the historic work, filling in the background, because the obvious has already been done.

David Corn recently revealed yet again his endless anti-Clinton bloodline, opining “I’m not convinced yet that Hillary is going to run because she’ll be 69.”

The rebuttal was left to Joan Walsh, who was afraid of calling Corn out in her piece, “No, Hillary Clinton is not too old to be president.” Writing, “I’m not crying sexism,” talking about Corn, then finishing with “there’s no doubt Clinton’s age will push more people’s buttons than if she were a man.” Leaving Corn aside, it’s logic twisted in knots until it chokes.

I’ve never been afflicted with that disease, which is why I became a pariah for telling the truth and being right. So a little truth… It’s not that David Corn is sexist; it’s that he’s a die hard Clinton hater.

And what would a “field-clearing” story be without juicy gossip came from a Clintonite who just can’t help but keep that hope alive? Unloading the absolute dish for Rupert Murdoch’s rag is the best way to get it done.

“Hillary will be our next president and she will be a great one,” Angelo Tsakopoulos, 76, told the Greek Reporter at a private banquet in California last weekend. “I talked to her husband, and he confirmed it. She will run.”

Who can doubt that former President Bill Clinton would say that to someone on the sly?

Hillary Rodham Clinton is a “field-clearer,” because she’s the most capable candidate the Democratic party could field in 2016, including Vice President Joe Biden, who is a tremendous asset for Democrats, but is still just another white male among many.

, , , , , , , ,

11 Responses to Hillary Exits with 2016 “Field-Clearing” Status

  1. PeggySue February 27, 2013 at 11:55 am #

    Good post, Taylor. And I agree that the media is Hillary Clinton crazy of late. The age factor is so bogus. We’ve had and still have old men running the show but a woman of a certain age is automatically considered over the hill. Yet, I’m willing to bet that despite Clinton’s recent medical emergency, she’s in better health than many of the nay-sayers. And Lord knows the woman has the experience for the job, far more than a lot of others I could mention [Rubio, anyone?]

    Of course, if and when she announces, the long knives will come out. The great Republican love fest of all things Clinton will shrivel and we’ll be back to the good ole days of conspiracy and nonsense. But Hillary Clinton represents the best Democratic bet for a 2016 win, particularly with a GOP configuration that seems hellbent on discarding their best bet–Chris Christie. The man has a 75% approval rating in my home state of NJ. But C-Pac leaders claim he “has no political future.”

    The GOP just keeps digging the hole deeper and deeper. It’s a beautiful thing to watch!

    • Ga6thDem February 27, 2013 at 12:35 pm #

      The problem is that the CPAC people are right when they say Christie has no future–he truly does not have a future in the GOP. The current GOP is basically composed of elderly segregationists and evangelicals.

  2. jjamele February 27, 2013 at 12:10 pm #

    Probably no other Democrat will even run if she announces (maybe someone like Kucinich or another no-hoper, but that’s it) and the demographics are getting no better for the Republicans between now and 2016….barring a Depression or the most nuclear negative campaign ever, it’s hard to see why Hillary shouldn’t be measuring the drapes in the Oval Office right now.

  3. Ga6thDem February 27, 2013 at 1:06 pm #

    i really hopes she runs but kind of dont’ want to get my hopes up at the same time.

  4. secularhumanizinevoluter February 27, 2013 at 6:31 pm #

    I hope she runs…maybe with Warren as VP

  5. mjsmith February 27, 2013 at 6:53 pm #

    It would be great if she won the nomination! I am not sure that the majority electorate would want a former Secretary of State that traveled so much and did nothing in regards to our relationship with Russia, did nothing in dealing with Iran, did nothing in regards to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, did nothing in regards to our relationships with China. Maybe I am wrong. What was the name of the treaty that Hilary Clinton brokered? Why did Hilary insist that Assad go and al-quaeda take over in Syria? Does Clinton sincerely not understand, as she so eloquently put it, “what difference does it make”, when Americans are killed by al-quaeda and its reported by our Government that it was because of a youtube film? How is she going to say she is going to deal with al-quaeda? By her record of blaming America instead of them when we get attacked? Will she say that she will deal with al-quaeda by helping them overthrow more governments? She said at one time that our massive debt was our #1 National Security issue. How is she going to reduce the size of our debt? It is great to hear the optimizism because she does not stand a chance and that would discourage many.

    • Ga6thDem February 27, 2013 at 7:10 pm #

      Exhibit A showing that you were right about the GOP Taylor.

      What you don’t realize is that the GOP can say all that but just like the faux Benghazi stuff they have been shoveling, no one cares and this kind of stuff excites no one but the far right. What you are saying sounds like all the tired old regurgitated talking points from the GOP.

      What I foresee the GOP doing is following your above model and nominating a tea party wacko who says all of that stuff and sounding like a bunch of creaking decrepit sexists while doing in and helping Hillary get 450 electoral votes.

      • mjsmith February 28, 2013 at 8:47 am #

        Listening to how great the Obama foriegn policy is going is as pathetic as listening to Obama talk about how great his domestic economic policy is working. It is a joke that is not at all funny.

        • Ga6thDem February 28, 2013 at 12:14 pm #

          Sorry but the GOP has the albatross of Iraq still hanging around their neck. Until they deal with the elephant in the room, not many voters are going to listen to them and then to top it off, they want to waste trillions more dollars in some crazy adventure in Iran.

        • secularhumanizinevoluter March 2, 2013 at 11:40 am #

          “Listening to how great the Obama foriegn policy is going is as pathetic as listening to Obama talk about how great his domestic economic policy is working. It is a joke that is not at all funny.”

          As is reading the drivel spewed by a certain segment of the wingnutesphere. Nothing original…nothing fact based….nothing even remotely connected to reality. A bad…very, very bad joke indeed.

    • secularhumanizinevoluter March 2, 2013 at 11:38 am #

      “maybe I am wrong.”

      maybe? MAYBE?! M-A-Y-B-E?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


.... a writer is someone who takes the universal whore of language
and turns her into a virgin again.  ~ erica jong