Posted on 01/05/2017 9:55:32 AM PST by heterosupremacist
I heard Chris Matthews say the other night that she should run for governor. She should and she would win, he said. He feels that way she would not go out a loser. Oops, too late for that one.
interesting. I’d have thought governor of new york.
guess she knows/thinks she’ll get a pardon from obama.
if she doesn’t get a pardon, and she’s threatening a comeback, sessions will hopefully put her away.
It’s never over for the Clintons.
“…It’s up to you New York, New York!”
sadly though she will win in NY- they are simply beyond help there-
Why not, NY City is a sewer now, the only thing left is to compete with Chicago for the murder capital of the world.
He'll be the first saxophonist to solo "Freebird."
This *itch is like a hideous wart that won’t go away!!!
[[“…It’s up to you New York, New York!”]]
They’ll elect her because she’ll tell them what she told them the first time “I’m going to work to get everyone in rural districts high speed INTERNET, and this time I really really mean it” and the rural counties will go big for her like they did before- and of course she will carry the cities-
She’ll win the vote on sympathy. Poor poor (walk in the woods) Hillary.
Knowing a lot of NYers and living only minutes from the City, I can tell you that’s there’s more than a little truth in the claim that Hillary is “wildly popular” with New Yorkers....well, more accurately , she WAS wildly popular with NYers, as a Presidential candidate going up against Donald Trump. But just as part of what lost her the Presidency was the perception that she would just be “four more years of Obama”, part of what would doom her as NYC Mayor would be that she’d be “four more years of DiBlasio, who as anyone who lives around here knows is close to “wildly UNpopular” with large sectors of NYC. Even ole NYC might be ready for a change.....putting forth HRC as a viable Mayoral candidate is fatuously based on the notion that “well, she ran for Senator and won, why not Mayor???” Well, what happened in the past is no guarantee of future results....Senator was just a notch to be put in her belt on the way up, and she went up and up , and finally failed at the top—even New Yorkers will have the eyes opened by the craven strategy of “finding a place for Hillary” at this late stage in her “career”.
Does it really matter? Can she possibly be any worse tHan DiWhatshisname? We’re talking about New York. One liberal is as good as the next to them
Find the right judges and legislators and anything is possible.
Then they’ll see what a useless mess she is
It would be epic to see a Hillary v Weiner battle for mayor.
An influence peddler in search of some inventory.
There it is. A new powerbase
Why is it that whenever something or someone is reported to be “wildly popular,” it always turns out to be leftist wishful thinking? It’s like it’s one of their code-words or dog-whistles or something.
I’m sure her family would love it. Bill so he could get rid of her, and Chelsea because it would keep her relevant.
I’m sure her family would love it. Bill so he could get rid of her, and Chelsea because it would keep her relevant.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.