| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Hillary Might Reject State offer.... | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Nov 18 2008, 09:08 PM (311 Views) | |
| Franko | Nov 18 2008, 09:08 PM Post #1 |
|
Shower Moderator
|
Source
Hmmmm...... any thoughts on why Hillary wouldn't be interested ? Or is she not as confident about operating in the foriegn affairs area as opposed to domestic ? I also don't understand much about this "overseas fundraising" business. ![]() "Hmmmm...." Edited by Franko, Nov 18 2008, 09:24 PM.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Wichita | Nov 19 2008, 06:45 AM Post #2 |
|
The Adminstrator wRench
|
One, she would be an absolute lunatic to take the position. The most often reason I have seen posted is that she is the junior senator from New York. That's true, but not by much and I would think she was much more influencial than the individual who is the senior senator. In fact, I think he actually is riding on her coattails. Second, the article was very "nice" (and fairly inaccurate) in describing Bill's possible problems with foreign money. In the primary, there was a different kind of example involving the former president. One of his associates in a business deal suddenly got a sweetheart of deal dropped in his lap after hiring the former president. He got a contract that was extremely lucrative despite his business having no past experience in the particular area. It was technically legal, but nothing you want the secretary of state to have to take into consideration when in negotiations. Third, oh, and Obama would be nuts if he asked her as well. Certain positions in the US government serve at the pleasure of the President, including the Cabinet. He has to be able to terminate someone for a variety of reasons. He didn't pick her as VP ... and reportedly didn't pick any women as VP because he was concerned about losing her supporters by picking someone else. All those issues still exist. He picks her as Secretary of State and then dumps her in 18 months for whatever reason he chooses and it will look like he is simply getting rid of a political rival. Now, that worked for him when he had every opponent in his previous election petitions invalidated and when suddenly the sealed divorce records of not one, but two, of his previous opponents in a different race were inexplicably unsealed just in time to help his election, but this is the big leagues. Hillary supporters are less forgiving. I would recommend to him that he keep her in the Senate and hold her to her promise to be supportive of his positions. Edited by Wichita, Nov 19 2008, 06:46 AM.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Intrepid2002 | Nov 19 2008, 08:38 AM Post #3 |
|
UNGH!
|
What is Bill Clinton to Hillary Clinton these days anymore? Seemingly a burden. What is Hillary Clinton to Pres. Elect Obama these days anymore? Seemingly a threat just by being there no matter what position she holds. I find it hard to believe people aren't thinking 2012 or even 2016 when they make these decisions or accept these offers. I could only hope they have the best interests of the country at heart. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| HistoryDude | Nov 19 2008, 09:34 AM Post #4 |
![]()
Shaken, not stirred...
|
Interesting. I'd be surprised if she is offered the position and even more surprised if she takes it. I am keenly interested in Obama's cabinet picks. He has promised to "change" things...it was the capstone of his campaign. We'll be able to tell by his cabinet picks if he really will change a thing...or go with the same old Washington insiders and former Clinton White House staff. Curiouser and curiouser...
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Nov 19 2008, 09:34 AM Post #5 |
|
Time to put something here
|
Don't we all, But the cynical person that I am doubts it. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Nov 19 2008, 03:49 PM Post #6 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
The sycophantic media is now portraying Obama as Lincoln because he is floating the idea of Hillary as Secretary of State. (For those who don't know, Lincoln named William Henry Seward, his chief competitor for the 1860 Republican presidential nomination as his SecState.) |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Swidden | Nov 19 2008, 11:28 PM Post #7 |
|
Adm. Gadfly-at-large; Provisional wRench-fly at large
|
Personally, I think that Obama and Co. want Sen. Clinton at State so she can't work at stealing their thunder for any thing they try to accomplish domestically. If she is at State then she will spend a lot of time out of the country and will not be all that involved with domestic policy. That way, should Obama be a two termer, Biden will figure he has an advantage over her. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| RTW | Nov 19 2008, 11:58 PM Post #8 |
![]()
Vice Admiral
|
That's an "I'd bet she'd make a good Secretary of State" look? I would have sworn it was a "how many beers" look.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Nov 20 2008, 09:04 AM Post #9 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
Also, there's no way she'd be able to run for president in 2012 as a member of Obama's Administration. EDIT: She could, but it would show a certain lack of "gratitude" and "grace." Edited by Admiralbill_gomec, Nov 20 2008, 09:04 AM.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Swidden | Nov 21 2008, 05:05 AM Post #10 |
|
Adm. Gadfly-at-large; Provisional wRench-fly at large
|
For her to even think about running in 2012 President-elect Obama would have to have a term worse the former President Carter did. Not that that is impossible... |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Nov 21 2008, 09:50 AM Post #11 |
|
Time to put something here
|
Its quite possible for him to have a bad first term. A few big things are staked against him, like the economy, and if plans to use this time to create sweeping change don’t pain out well voter sentiment can go quite negative. Creating sweeping change would be difficult under the best of circumstances, even than the higher the ambitions the higher the risk. If change where easy it would be done all the time. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| « Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic » |





2:13 PM Jul 11