Start A Petition
Group Discussions
Hillary Clinton's Future Wide Open Now
5 years ago

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s future is about to become wide open, but her next career moves will all depend on whether she decides to seek the Democratic nomination for president in 2016.

President Barack Obama’s one-time foe for the presidency plans to leave the State Department shortly after Inauguration Day, the New York Times reports, and she’s telling people not to ask her to participate in engagements for next year until April or May.

Friends say she and former President Bill Clinton want to buy a house in the Hamptons or upstate New York, and she’s likely to use her husband’s charitable foundation as a kicking off point for her next phase. Clinton is also considering a new book with an upbeat look at her time as secretary of state.

Her name has also come up for huge jobs, such as president of Yale University or head of George Soros’ foundation. However, if she gets serious about running in 2016, that will limit her options, including whether she writes a book, takes a job or even makes statements that may prove controversial.

Her decision has a lot of other people on hold. Former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo said he once agonized over the same choice. His son, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, may also see his future prospects decided on what Clinton decides.

Former aides say she learned in 2008 that the country approves of her and of female candidates in general, and that her feminist leanings -- including an interest in helping poor women around the world -- won’t hurt her in 2016.

If Clinton does decide to run for president again, her announcement probably won’t come as soon as it did for the 2008 race, when she announced two years in advance. And she’s still sticking to the same story: She says she’s not running.

But her husband shows every indication that he’d like his wife to campaign again, sources told the Times.

5 years ago

The Clintons are narcissistic people as well and if she thinks a book will help her, she will write it very carefully. 


I am so tired of all of these players.  They are not politicians of the people and only if people can comprehend this fact; will they lose.  American politics is now a game of being more a celebrity and popular than a person who will work for the good of America and its people.

5 years ago

Why is she held in such high regard? Her time as Secretary of State has been a classic case in incompetence and failure. Sure some of that was due to Dear Leader's policies but the execution like the Russian "reset button" has made the polices even worse in some cases.

5 years ago

Diane and Sheila, I think the most frightening of all of this is that she has been head of George Soros' Foundation.  I think that that offer is a "pay back" for dropping out of he running for President in 2008 and leaving it open for Obama.  We know that Soros has had a great deal to do with running the Democratic Party from the behind scenes and that the Clintons are high on the priority list of his people and so this is not a surprise; but my estimation of Hillary Clinton has taken an all time low.  The Clintons are of the worst part of the Democratic Party and are right in there with Obama.  All th hype of Bill not liking Obama; don't buy into that one as it is just show.  What Bill Clinton would not like or respect is Obama's lack of intelligence as he has a strong affinity for intelligent people; remember, that is what has tied him to Hillary, the fact that he sees her as one of the most intelligent people he knows.

5 years ago

Bill wants Hill to get elected so he can be "first man" again.  He liked living in the white house! 

Or, better still, he liked the "Lewinsky couch" in the white house! 


5 years ago

Oh Tara Jane, it is so good to have you posting.  LOL  Yes, he did like that didn't he.  But then it depends on your definition of "like" I guess as he didn't do too well with other definitions.  LOL

5 years ago

Tara Jane, I knew this thread would bring all of us out to comment.   I agree with John C on this one....Hillary was incompetent as Secretary of State.   What has she accomplished?   Zero!

But, Tara Jane, is absolutely right....Bill Clinton wants Hillary to run so that he can be "first man" again.   LOL!!   He's like the energizer bunny.    He's a president who was IMPEACHED for lying under oath....and he shows no shame.    He considers that yesterday's news and is incapable of self reflection.    Bill Clinton had sex with Monica Lewinsky....we all know that.   But, because he "said" and lied under oath he believes it didn't happen.   Quite frankly, he probably hasn't had sex since then LOL!

So, get Hillary elected to the highest office in our country and Bill Clinton will be like a predator among the young sexy woman swarming in as new pages.   You just can't make this crap up.

Bill Clinton should be listed as a "sex offender."

5 years ago

If I were Hillary I'd tell Bill -- "look bozo I'm leaving.  Can't take any more of this Obama disaster.   I'm gonna stay home, get my hair cut, have my face redone, sit on the couch and eat bon bons.  You make it on your own baby, I'm tired of carryin' your ass." 



5 years ago

Love these posts and all so true.


However, we are dealing with a majority of braindead voters who vote on popularity and celebrity status.  Yest. they made a deal of Hillary and Christiana Agliura on Ellen Degeneress show. 


Ellen went on and on about who was checking who out more and they oogled one another.

This is sick stuff and this is more important to the braindead voters who eat this garbage up; it is a society stuck on stupid! 

Newt Gingrich on Hillary run in 2016 and the GOP
5 years ago


Gingrich: If Hillary Clinton Runs In 2016, Current GOP ‘Incapable Of Competing’

video» 225 comments

Newt Gingrich told David Gregory on Sunday’s Meet The Press “the Republican party of today is incapable of competing” with a 2016 presidential run by Hillary Clinton.

Gingrich thinks “every Republican” should be focused on 2016 because of the severity of their defeat in 2012. Gingrich said that if Clinton were to run in four years, “supported by Bill Clinton and presumably a still relatively popular President Barack Obama, trying to win that will be, truly, the Super Bowl.”

Referring to the comments about the 47% made by Mitt Romney, Gingrich called it “an absurdity.” He didn’t, however, fault Romney entirely for the GOP loss this year. Gingrich told Gregory,

“I think this is much more than Mitt Romney. We didn’t blow it because of Mitt Romney, we blew it because of a party which has refused to engage the reality of American life and refused to think through what the average American needs for a better future.”

This post was modified from its original form on 11 Dec, 6:06
5 years ago

Newt nailed it, there needs to be strong road map and a contract with America again ...

the GOP needs to think it through clearly what does the avg. American need for a better future"

Spell it out in clear and concise terms.


More people who speak plainly and truthfully are needed.  Stop double talk and endless rhetoric with nothing on the platform.  What did the GOP offer up, yes, repeal Obamacare was direct but the messenger was not trusted and that is the problem.


I did not like the GOP of GWB, I sat home and would not vote.  Stop perpetuating apathy amongst conservative republicans.


Bring more people who don't get it and vote stupidly, into the fold by educating them as to the wrong road followed will be bad for their lives in the end.

Using history helps.  I dissect problems.  I use the scientific approach and show the client the root of the problem and if it is not fixed; it will continue to grow and become more and more destructive. 

5 years ago

We know Hillary Clinton would be a disaster but the rest of the country does not know that as they think she is a popular celebrity and that is the criteria they vote upon.


If people don't wake up from stupid; we will lose our freedom.

The UN is trying to gain control of the internet. 

That will be something they don't like as they don't want to give up the freedom they have on the internet now for total control from an agency like the UN.


Until they get a taste of reality and are shown the different outcomes clearly and simply, the demagogues win all the time.  They promise goodies but there is always a price to pay and these people don't get it because they don't analyze the situation at hand.


This is why poverty festers and continues and does become generational along with single moms, no husbands, more kids on welfare, not finishing high school, drugs, crime, etc.

It is very hard to break cycles when you have Obama fostering more and more freebies to the same groups.  Paternalism is bad for this country; it is a step to communism.  Don't expect this group to understand this though.  All they think about right now is getting more money from the govt. 

5 years ago

How do you convince this underclass that higher taxes do not create jobs?


Show them proof, make the companies put forth a proposal on what jobs they will create, what manufacturing opportunities will open up, prove to them that they will not sell them out by shipping more jobs overseas as they did in the past.


This is a 2way street here; why should these people believe the rich industrialists who say one thing and do another.   They need to be very definitive and prove to the public that they mean business and that business will grow within America and affect all of us.   Let the GOP team up with business and spell it out with a map that we can see and understand.


NO MORE FALSE PROMISES and trust me attitude, that is why Obama and the demagogues win and will win again. 


5 years ago



Why would the 47% believe a vulture capitalist like MR who did close American manufacturing plants, shipped plenty of jobs overseas.  Rick Perry et al had all the proof on his business venture capitalism as did that nasty booklet Dump Romney which was passed out at the RNC by the Paulites.


The people on the bottem are never going to believe rich industrialists or venture capitalists when they act like this.   They need a proposal spelled out concisely that they intend to build good jobs for hardworking people in this country.  That their intent is not to get self riches gained for themselves but they really do want America strong and viable again.


I don't blame a lot of people for not believing corporatism today as they proved disappointing in the past.  Time for all of us to change and be committed today.

5 years ago

My only question to these people is this, where would you be without them?  Where would you work as it is these big corporations that support the smaller businesses that supply them.  We saw what happend to High Point, NC when the entire furniture industry packed up and moved to China or India.  Is that what you would want, Sheila.  Is that what should happen?  Well, if we keep pushing the policy of the Democrats that is exactly what will happen.  This happend, by the way, under William Jefferson Clinton.  I know, I was working for one of those small business vendors to the furniture and cabinet manufacturing industry and I saw what it did to our business.  It was a small busiiness employing 40 or so people.  There were 26 machines running 24/7/365.  Today there are 4 employees (one of which is the owner), with 5 of the 26 machines running 4 hours a day, 3 days a week.  They are one step from closing their doors.  If the cost of petroleum increases to the projected $5/gallon they will shut their doors as plastic is a byproduct of petroleum and the cost of the plastic pellets used in this company's manufacturing will be cost prohibitive.  

What they would give to have the furniture industry move back to the U.S., to have those large industrialists back.  And for the information of those reading this, just guess why these companies moved out of the U.S.  Yes, EPA regulations crippled them, energy costs  crippled them, but the biggest reason was that the Clinton Administration set up trade meetings all across the U.S. and encouraged these companies to move to China where they could produce cheaper, even with import costs, and where they could assist the Chinese to become industrialized by sharing their technology.  They were even given tax credit to do this.  It was not Republicans, it was not Romney, it was William Jefferson Clinton.  I know because my boss (owner of the company) attended these meetings, went to India four times and China twice and was working to set up manufacturing there.  He realized that all the Chinese wanted was to gain his technology and access to his copy protected molds for his parts and then to kick him out and manufacture in competition with him, sending his own products back to the States cheaper than he could produce them at home.  He did set up a shop with an East Indian in India and they were manufacturing 3 of the more popular parts and shipping them to the U.S. but there was a major problem, shipping times were not the best, quality of product was not up to standard and so he stopped that venture.  But yes, he bought into Bill Clinton's plan and took advantage of the tax credit to do so.  So let's not start to point fingers here as the Democrats are so good at doing.  Let's call it the way it is.  Romney was not the enemy to the U.S. here.  

And try this one, if the U.S. were to lower taxes, lossen up on cost prohibitive energy restrictions, and encourage these big corporations, they would prefer to be back in the U.S. putting people to work.  It is not the Romney's or Republicans that stand in the way, it is the Obama's and Democrats.

And if the people don't start to believe in corporationsim, they are going to find that we will become a third world country in no time at all as the countries like China and India are rapidly outdistancing us right now and soon we will be dependent on them and then they will control prices and they will furnish us with subpar product.  Is this what you would want for the U.S.?  I certainly do not.  I understand that it is corporations that made this Country great, just as it was the working people.  If you only realized how much of small businesses are dependent on large corporations for which to sell their products.  I had no clue, but now I see the bigger picture.  

And if we want to talk about false promises, Sheila, it is the Democrats that have the history of doing this, always have and always will unless they are willing to revamp their party.  Obama does not win because he keeps promises, he wins only because he makes promises then depends on the Republicans to keep those promises for him; same with the Democratic Party.  Time for the Republicans to pull the plug on this one.

5 years ago

Amen, Linda!!   I agree with everything you said in the above post.   You know hwo I feel about large corporations and small businesses.    They are our job engines.   Where would we be without them?   And, yes, the furniture industry needs to come back.   There are still pockets of furniture makers especially here on the east coast....the Amish, etc

5 years ago

I don't think you are reading what I am writing....


I want the 47% to stop living off the govt.


I am trying to convince this group of their wrong thinking and to do this it appears they want more concrete proof that big business will produce jobs.


Let's see it addressed on a clear and concise platform.... explain how many jobs will be created and where.  


Let us see manufacturing coming back and draw up a plan on how, when and where.


NO more false statements that are VAGUE with no content.

How do you think you can win this group over, with more talk, talk is cheap and full of lies.


To win people over you need facts and stop cheap useless rhetoric with false promises ... chart a workable plan and a course of action.

5 years ago

People are fully aware of vulture capitalism thanks to the GOP nominees who woke up everyone and then Obama ran with it successfully and there was no rebuttal from the republican nominee to explain himself.


want more losers  in the GOP, keep going down the same track ... that is all I am saying.

5 years ago

Shelia: The Left does love to throw labels out there to demonize their opponents but be very careful of that tactic since they are almost always engaged in and/or silent about supporters that do the same thing. Remember the rhetoric about "hedge fund managers" that we've seen them put forth in the past. Conveniently ignored were the hedge fund activities of the likes of John Edwards, Rham Emanuel, and Chelsea Clinton who all had their turn at the hedge fund pig trough thanks to their political connects and made a good chunk of change. That was sort of overlooked as was Elizabeth Warren's $300K flipping houses during the period when the "evil banks" were "ripping off" home owners. I'm sure if we look not too hard we would find a whole host of "progressive" venture capitalists (like some of Dear Leader's financial supporters in the "green energy" sector) that not only ran companies into the ground and/or sent jobs overseas but got Federal dollars to do that. Romney. for all his drawbacks in some area. really gets a bum rap on that compared to real abusers.

Since I worked for two of the biggest companies (at the time) for thirty years there are a few things people need to understand. One is the management has changed over the years a lot like the US population in general in knowledge, work ethic, and outlook. When I started many were from the Depression/WW2/immediate Postwar era and had a different outlook on their job. Later you started to get those born and educated after that period whose outlook, knowledge, and life experiences were different and the effect on company decisions in many areas was noticeable. That has become even more of an issue in many companies today with the much more politically career motivated crew that came out of the 60s/70s with an even different background and outlook. The second big factor in corporate functioning today is the effect of the information systems revolution on companies since many jobs, especially routine clerical positions and supervision of those functions, have been replaced by computer systems. With the internet that makes it easier to outsource overseas a lot of what used to be done here whether that is for cost/regulation/tax or whatever reasons.

5 years ago

Vert giid points John and thank you.  I do think we need to remember that we have turned from a manufacturing-driven economy to a customer service oriented economy and it is the company that offers the best customer service that will succeed.  Yes, there are still some necessary manufacturing, but by and large so much is no longer here.  

I did forget to state that NAFTA and Bill Clinton did a number on our aluminum producers, too. That industry moved to Mexico and South America.  Again, cheaper to produce and they had the necessary natural resources to produce.  By products such as aluminum wheels for cars are almost predominately manufactured or were in Mexico.   

This thread is archived. To reply to it you must re-activate it.

New to Care2? Start Here.