I Hope Hillary Runs for President

MReaganby Michael Reagan   6/14/14
Hillary, you go girl. Run as hard as you can for president. Play hardball to get your party’s nomination. Do whatever dirty party tricks it takes to knock off what’s-her-name up in Massachusetts, or what’s-his-name out in Montana.

Compared to you, they’re a pair of minor league bat boys — two lefty Democrats who can’t hit to every field or duck Monica Lewinsky fastballs like you can.

Turn it on, Hillary. Spend a billion dollars trying to get your own key to the Oval Office.

Crank out two or three more books about all those hard choices you had to make when you were a secretary of state, a U.S. senator and the starving wife of public-servant-in-chief Bill Clinton.

Appear on TV with Diane Sawyer every Monday. Use Bill to seduce the big campaign contributors.

Deploy Chelsea to explain to the families of those who died at Benghazi why, now that it matters to your future plans, you really do care about what happened there.

And if anyone in your party thinks you’re too old, too aloof or too close to Wall Street to win the general election in 2016, sic that old attack dog Carville on them.

In case I haven’t made myself clear, Hillary, I want you to run for president.

I don’t want any organization on my side of the aisle to oppose your nomination by the Democrats. In fact, maybe I’ll see if I can get the GOP to help you win it.

I want to see you take the mound for the Democrats in 2016 and face whomever the Republican Party puts up to bat against you.

I don’t know who that’ll be, but it won’t matter. The GOP has its deepest bench in a long time.

It’s got half a dozen governors whose states are doing well — Walker in Wisconsin, Kasich in Ohio, Daniels in Indiana, Jindal in Louisiana, Christie in New Jersey, Perry in Texas.

Plus there’s ex-governor of Florida Jeb Bush, probably the best and brightest of them all.

They’re all executives. They all have real-world experience in governing. The GOP can nominate any one of them by pulling his name out of a hat and he’d be more qualified to be president than you, Hillary.

Let’s face it, Hillary. You’ve never excelled at anything except being an activist in college and standing by your man Bill.

You were a lousy senator from New York. You were a lousy secretary of state — and not just because of Benghazi.

You have no issue to run on, except that you’re a woman. And the only thing you have going for you is that you’re still married to Bill and everyone loves and adores him now that he is powerless.

Hillary, you don’t even have the demeanor or the personality to be president. Did you see yourself in that Diane Sawyer interview?

Do you think anyone wants an in-your-face person like you to be president? Someone who acts arrogantly — “I’m Hillary Clinton and I want to do what I want to do and so I’m going to do it.”

“And by the way, Diane, did I ever tell you how hard Bill and I worked as public servants? And how dirt poor we were when we left the White House?”

So, seriously. I repeat. “Please, Hillary. Run.” And to the Democrat Party, I say, “Please nominate her.”

In fact, let’s make it official.

“I, Michael Reagan, hereby endorse Hillary Rodham Clinton to be the 2016 presidential nominee of the Democrat Party.”

And Hillary, if you run, I even promise you this. I will vote for you as many times as possible in the 2016 California primary.

Michael Reagan is the son of President Ronald Reagan. He is president of The Reagan Legacy Foundation and founder of the Michael Reagan Center for Advocacy. • (1346 views)

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to I Hope Hillary Runs for President

  1. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    I had the privilege of meeting Mike at a local event. I rode shotgun with Pat (who you may know as pst4usa at this site) when we picked him up at the airport. In all, including me buying Mike and Pat lunch, we spent a couple of hours just talking.

    Mike Reagan is a very nice man. And, yes, there is a “but” involved in this. “But” I found him to be pretty much an Establishment Republican, favoring Jeb Bush (as you see in this article). And he seemed not so hot on Ted Cruz and Sarah Palin. I found his approach to politics to be much more PR-based or tactician-based than principle-based (conservative principles, anyway).

    And that’s really as much as I’ll say for now. We disagreed on so many issues that, after the public speech he gave to a very appreciate crowd of about 250, he turned to me and asked, “How was that? Did I pass?” And, of course, I told him it was a pretty good speech, which it generally was. He doesn’t use prepared notes and is extremely fluid and engaging. But I found the speech itself filled with too many platitudes and generalities for my taste. Mr. Reagan says we need “unity.” But I say, “Fine, but unity around which ideas and principles?”

    And I say all this in kindness, for his father’s quote is always paramount in my mind: “Don’t be afraid to see what you see.” And I saw a good man who perhaps isn’t in touch with the grassroots of this party as well as he needs to be. Well, he did get an earful of yours truly at times, so there is that.

    Mike gave me permission to reprint this article and I’m very thankful for that and for having the opportunity to spend some quality time with him.

  2. Timothy Lane says:

    Well, his argument is very convincing, though one must note that Elizabeth Warren revealed herself in 2012 to be ignorant (when she discoursed on the taxes owed by business owners as if unaware that they already pay plenty of taxes, most of which go to transfer payments rather than education and infrastructure) and incapable of logical reasoning (she defended her claim of being an Indian because “all Indians have high cheekbones” like her mother and grandmother [but not, she admitted herself, which means that she doesn’t qualify], which would be a compelling argument if instead she had said that only Indians have high cheekbones), and still won handily.

    So while the Fire Witch’s qualifications are indeed as inferior as Michael Reagan says, will that be enough to defeat her? As Clarence Darrow said to Judge Raulston, “Well, Your Honor has the right to hope.”

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      To some extent, it doesn’t matter who the Democrats run. They have a huge built-in base now of dependents and surrogates. Hillary could certainly be “good enough” to beat yet another lame Establishment Republican such as Jeb Bush.

      As a good friend reminded me, we’re not India. We don’t want to be ruled by the Gandhis, even if their name is “Bush” (or “Clinton,” for that matter). If in a nation of over 300 million people the supposedly best qualified person is yet another Bush, there’s something rotten in Denmark.

      I think Hillary is weak because she’s getting old and she’s, well, she’s a bitch. She comes across as harsh. As Rush says, see sounds like his ex-wife. I forget which analyst said this, but I heard it several years ago. He said that no person can gain the presidency without a positive persona and uplifting message. I’m not sure that Hillary has that within her.

      Hillary’s other main weakness is that her own people don’t particularly like her. After all, even though it was “her turn,” she was passed over for an unknown (Obama).


        I think you’ve put your finger on it, Brad – the Democrats can win no matter who they run because their base of welfare recipients, rent-seekers, and public-sector workers is so dangerously large. (And who let that happen? Oh, yes, Establishment Republicans!) As awful as Hilary is, she would probably beat another Establishment-man (and if Jeb Bush or Chris Christie won, to quote Hillary, “What difference would it make?” The country would continue its decline apace under them.) And you’ve got Mike Reagan pegged – nice guy, good fellow to have as a neighbor, but strictly Establishment in his thinking.

        • Timothy Lane says:

          Rather ironic when one considers what the Establishment thought of Ronald Reagan. I still remember the 1976 primary season (I contributed $80 to Reagan, which was nearly 1% of my total income that year). Only a handful of congressional Republicans (including, perhaps most crucially, Jesse Helms — but also Philip Crane and the recently elected Ron Paul) supported him.

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          Nik, Jeffrey Lord (one of the few remaining objective conservative writers) has an excellent article at The American Spectator: Dave Brat and the Return of the Constitution.

          In that article he quotes Reagan (Ronald) biographer, Steven Hayward:

          By 1980 many Republicans in Washington could be considered victims of the political equivalent of the Stockholm syndrome, in which hostages come to sympathize with their captors. Having been in the minority for so long, many Washington Republicans had come to absorb the premises of establishment liberalism, preferring to offer a low-budget version of the Democratic platform.

          That’s probably a kind way to say what is really going on, although that is a factor indeed.

          There is a large country club Republican set who is fat, dumb, and happy with the status quo. The money is rolling in. So what if the country is going broke? I’ve got mine.

          Thus the Establishment Republicans are not only out of touch with America but many, such as Cantor and Boehner, are actively hostile to reform. You wonder where their sense of patriotism went, assuming they had any at all.

          And, I’m sorry, but there is a real problem if anyone thinks Jeb Bush is the answer.

          • Timothy Lane says:

            I don’t think it was just Stockholm syndrome, though that no doubt is a part of it. (This is one reason why liberals are so abusive — they know it works. This is why SCOTUS justices from out of town are so much likelier to sell out than those who’ve already endured the abuse and transcended it.) But they also find it very convenient personally to be part of the scam; they get plenty of crumbs and some nice perks. As for the rest of the country — well, if you have no real ideology of any sort, you can always persuade yourself that what you’re doing is relatively harmless.

  3. David Ray says:

    Me? I hope the bitch chokes on her own bile. I’m sick of her annoying habit of spiting it in other’s faces. (What are the odds that Bill shares my opinion?)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *