Five Reasons No Progressive Should Support Hillary Clinton

Anyone can run.

Your position on this is absurd.

If Huntsman does run it will be a sure win for the republicans. No name recognition.

I've long thought third parties could be of interest - at the same time they end up working as spoilers, which makes me angry; Nader, for example. Sigh.

This says a lot aboutsome of my fears:

Hillary Clinton's suffocating presence/The Economist
Inevitable?

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2015/02/2016-democratic-primaries


It's also worth noting that the Democrats' electoral advantage at the presidential level is not a sure thing. It materialises only if the party machine succeeds in getting young, poor and minority voters to the polls. Mr Obama beat Mrs Clinton from her left, and went on to beat John McCain by exciting sometimes tough-to-reach Democratic constituencies. Mrs Clinton's gender is certainly a source of excitement, but her presidency would mark a shift to the right for Democrats at a time when the party's energy is coming from the left. A competitive primary pitting Mrs Clinton against an attractive progressive rising star or two would test whether she remains capable of generating real enthusiasm across the party's varied base. It seems like a test worth running.

Democrats ought to worry at least a little about the possibility that Hillary Clinton has become the contemporary Democratic version of Bob Dole in 1996: an elder statesman, a presumed nominee, universally admired and, when it really counted, insufficiently voted for.

I will certainly be voting for Hillary,
although having looked up Huntsman, I don't think he's half bad.
Mindblowingly progressive for a Republican.

I absolutely will never vote for any Republican.

Elizabeth Warren has said she would not run. Yet, there is movement to draft Warren.

But, like I said, there's the baggage of other republicans he'd have as part of his administration.

A month after dropping out of the race, Huntsman offered the opinion that there was a need for a third party in America. In an appearance on the MSNBC talk show Morning Joe on February 23, 2012, Huntsman said that a third party would be a healthy development in the presidential election process.

I think we’re going to have problems politically until we get some sort of third party movement or some voice out there that can put forth new ideas. Someone’s going to step up at some point and say we’ve had enough of this. The real issues are not being addressed and it’s time that we put forward an alternative vision, a bold thinking. We might not win, but we can certainly influence the debate.

Huntsman said he was not throwing his own hat in the ring as a third party presidential candidate in 2012.[76]

The Republican National Committee reacted by withdrawing an invitation for Huntsman to appear as a speaker at a Republican fundraiser in Palm Beach, Florida, in early March.[77] In early July, Huntsman announced that he would not be attending the 2012 Republican National Convention for the first time since he attended as a Reagan delegate in 1984. Huntsman issued a statement chiding the Republican Party for what he perceived as its failures to focus on the daunting socio-economic issues facing America.

I will not be attending this year's convention, nor any Republican convention in the future until the party focuses on a bigger, bolder, more confident future for the United States — a future based on problem solving, inclusiveness, and a willingness to address the trust deficit, which is every bit as corrosive as our fiscal and economic deficits.