When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ?

Quote Olivier5:

They are very much on the same page about almost everything-in the nineties as now. Voting to give the President the option to invade if the evidence indicates after being fed phony evidence is not the same as being President and being able to direct events so that we don't get to the point where invasion seems an option. That's what Bill did with the Yugoslavian bloodshed and heading off Russia's moves toward re-asserting itself in Eastern Europe, and that is the direction Hillary will take as President. And Bill's moves with NATO and calling for the Dayton Accords kept Europe-East and West-moving forward into peace and prosperity while keeping Russia at bay.

Peace and Prosperity-that's why I'm looking forward to another Clinton presidency.

I admit, the war angle of the Hillary presidency is the one which worries me almost the most, the most is the Israel issue. I am hoping she gets a less war hawk for the vice pick. Not sure who that would be as it would be almost as bad to go the other direction like Sanders. I would have to investigate it if I only knew where to start. Wish we had more choices all around.

I'm a fan of Bill, including for how he dealt with ex-Yougoslavia. But she's a different person, a person who was easily fooled into voting for a war of choice, or perhaps more probably, a person who could not find in her the resolve to vote against a war that she knew was wrong, because she was afraid for her career if she had voted against it.

That's how important the lives of your sons and daughters are for Hillary: let them die for nought, as long as she keeps her job.

Let's hope she isn't EVER placed again in a situation where she thinks she needs to wage war in order to stay in power...

There are a number of very good choices for v.p. out there - some of the younger midwestern/western governors seem to be great options for the development of the future of the party - and to bring balance to a potential Clinton presidency.

I trust her judgement on issues around the world. I don't like war and I don't think Clinton is more likely to take us to war then any of the republican candidates are. I do think she'd be more responsible than they would be. Her positions around conflicts around the world are much more nuanced and thought through than any other candidate out there. She also has much more experience dealing with issues around the world than any other candidate.

It's easy to sit behind a computer or from a safe senate seat and say "war is bad" especially when our uninformed decisions/opinions have no consequences. It's a lot tougher from the oval office (which is why I think Obama's actions versus his ideals are so far apart).

At the very least, I expect Clinton to engage in any conflict in a way that is at the very least responsible and with the support of world leaders. Also fiscally responsible, unlike the last two wars.

I may be wrong, but I'm smart enough to know what I don't know.

I imagine this is going to get me flak, but, every time I see Bill Clinton on TV or pic on the internet, he looks really frail, he doesn't see up to his usual energy. If people are depending on Bill for Hillary's presidency, I am not so sure their hopes will be realized.

Before Obama I loved Bill Clinton with an almost embarrassing infatuation which lasted until the 2008 election and some of his words came across in a bad way to me, haven't felt the same about him since. He redeemed himself at the 2012 convention, but still something rubbed me wrong, but I can't recall exactly what it was. It seemed politically racist at the time aimed at those who would be receptive to such.

Well, here is hoping you are right as I think she would be better in all other ways than any other candidate running.

The only thing that ever got me worried about Bill Clinton was the pardons he issued days before handing over. That was gross. I haven't watched him lately.

But indeed, nobody should vote for (against) Hillary because they like (dislike) Bill. That would be like voting for Trump because you dig his latest trophy wife...

That has happened literally with every president. It will happen with Obama. It will happen with Clinton/Sanders or Trump/Cruz too.

I kinda guess it will happen with Clinton again, but not sure about Obama or Sanders.

Quote Olivier 5:

Oh, please, Hillary & Bill have been on the same page since forever. When has Hillary ever broke from Bill on anything?

When Bill Clinton first took office, all the Republicans were screaming about "the co-presidency" as if Bill just didn't have the guts to tell his wife to shut up, make cookies, and keep out of his way. Now Hillary's opponents are hollering, "Oh, no reason to think Hillary would govern like Bill at all". Baloney. Everyone knows these two have been a team since the beginning, they've been criticized by their opponents for being a team, and now their opponents are claiming one won't be anything like the other. What a laugh.

Looking forward to peace and prosperity under another Clinton Administration.

Ok so you're voting for Bill and Hillary Clinton, as a team. Fair enough i guess, and legit in form although in fact and in the spirit of the law, that Clinton team already had its 2 terms.

Hillary neutrals and Hillary supporters also hope that.

I sure hope she's not too much like him. I've always thought she was the smarter of the two (though missing the charm gene that was both a blessing and a curse for him) and hope she would be a wiser president than Bill was if she is given that opportunity.

I'll take the first Clinton Administration overall. Not without its mistakes, but its overall direction was extremely positive. 16 Million Full Time jobs, put an end to the soaring crime and murder rate increase, (in no small part due to those 16 Million Full Time jobs, poverty breeds crime), and a real respect around the world. I can remember when previous presidents, including Clinton, used to visit the UK, British supporters would line the streets as the motorcade went into London. Then Bush 43 came in, and they had to whisk him from the airport to London in a helicopter, instead of cheering crowds they were afraid of riots if they had a motorcade. Obama's terms repaired much of the damage, but there is still more to go from The Lost Decade, (Bush years).

I'm ready to get started, and I think most of the voters would agree. If Bernie gets it instead of Hillary, well and good, but I think Hillary has the best chance on Election Day, though I wouldn't count Bernie out. Especially considering the Republican opposition might not be strong.

Not voting for Bill & Hillary as a team, fact is I agree with Revellette and see that Bill needs to slow down a bit, that heart condition has taken its toll. I think that Bill was very much the president during his term, but he had Hillary as his close advisor and that worked out great. Hillary, if she is nominated and elected, will unquestionably be the president, only with Bill as her close advisor. Sounds good to me.

That is very true. I think all of the Republican candidates are complete war-mongers with no understanding of how, why or when to use force as a tool of statecraft. Clinton is dramatically better than the Republicans. She is still a little too inclined to use force for my tastes (Libya is the perfect example for me, her aggressive comments on Iran as well), but I'd take her over the Republican candidates any day.

As long as you aren't black or on welfare, of course.

Blacks did quite well under Bill Clinton, where have you been? How about black people being able to feed their families-does that count for anything in your universe? During Clinton's two terms, Full Time jobs increased for all races 16.7% Know how much Full Time jobs for blacks increased? 29.7%

When Bush II came in, for his two terms Full Time jobs for the general population increased a mere 0.3%. For Bush II's two terms, Full Time jobs didn't increase at all. They declined 1.9%.

Full Time jobs under Clinton, all races:
1993 Q1: 96.528 Million Full Time jobs
2001 Q1: 112.654 Million Full Time jobs
Result: Increase of 16.7%

Full Time jobs under Clinton, blacks:
1993 Q1: 9.954 Million Full Time jobs
2001 Q1: 12.912 Million Full Time jobs
Result: Increase of 29.7%

And then you put up these posts about how you simply cannot understand why blacks think well of the Clintons. Pretty easy to see why they do, just look at the facts.

Those numbers speak for themselves, but I'm not so sure blacks are aware of them. Even I didn't know the job increases for blacks were that high. 29.7% is more than impressive; it's fantastic!

Here's some interesting statistics on educational attainment and employment/unemployment among blacks.
http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2015/educational-attainment-employment-and-unemployment-among-african-americans.htm