Las Vegas Sun

April 25, 2015

Currently: 59° — Complete forecast | Log in | Create an account

Letter to the editor:

Hillary Clinton will be president

Another view?

View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:

Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.

Columnists - local and syndicated writers.

Letters to the editor - readers' views.

Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.

The next president of the United States will be Hillary Clinton.

As sure as the sun comes up in the east and sets in the west, she, with the help of her husband, Bill, will be the 45th president.

Save this letter, and you will know that I was the first to call it.

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy

Previous Discussion: 23 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. I can vote for Hillary, I supported her in 2008. But with any luck the Modern Whigs will have a viable candidate by then. :)

    The Republicans, if they can get a clue from this year, will get on Christie's case and make him lose 200lbs and run him against her. No way can you vote for a walking heart attack waiting to happen, unless they put Bobby Jindal on the ticket as VP, or maybe Barbour.

  2. Too bad she is not currently.

  3. Wishful thinking. Hillary had her time and didn't, couln't. She's too old. And any energy she cold muster she squandered omn Secretary of State runnning here and there and everywhere so her boss could get in another 9 and/or 18 holes on the green. He made sure she wouldn't run again. She lost to a well managed [read nasty and smear] and momentum building campaign of Barack H. Obama. She's old, tired and looking to enjoy life now with her daughter Chelsea and perhaps some grands.
    Bill is the village idiot. Maybe being grandfather will help.


  4. Out of curiosity, I wonder if our contributors have a leading Modern Whig candidate in mind for '16.

  5. PISCES41,

    There is no one in particular at the moment, but I can say there have been some feelers extended in both directions. I know that there will be at least a few more Congressional candidates nationwide than there were this year. I can also say that the Convention took steps to improve funding from the membership for both the National and State level organizations.

    To be perfectly honest, we are far more interested in getting people into the State legislatures and Congress than having a Presidential candidate at this point.

    My personal goal for Nevada is to have at least one Congressional candidate and five State legislature candidates in 2014.

    Given the strong libertarian streak (read that as Classical Liberal and NOT Libertarian Party) that runs in Nevada's backbone I think the Whigs should be a natural fit here.

  6. There is much truth in your declaration Mr. Mike Kerzetski, of Las Vegas, Nevada.

    Hillary Clinton is the favorite to win the White House in 2016. One thing we do know, the Republicans will not win another National election within the next 12 years. Too many extreme positions, too many extreme individuals out front representing the party. The American People soundly rejected the Republican Platform and the party National candidates.

    Vice President Joe Biden sent out subtle messages of running, but this will not happen.

    On who is best qualified to be President in 2016, Hillary Clinton stands alone. There is not a Republican, Independent, or Democrat even close to her experience in domestic and international affairs.

    Yes, Mr. Kerzetski your declaration is solid, barring any major unexpected change politically. Hillary Clinton is expected to be the President in 2016. One thing we do know, it will not be a Republican.

  7. RefNV,

    As much as I like Hillary, I would have to take a long look at her from the standpoint of whether or not there would be any indicators of her age affecting her mental capacity (assuming there was no Whig candidate.) Revelations about Reagan were disconcerting, to put it mildly. (IBM brought out a Presidential model of the Selectric typewriter, it had no memory and no colon.)

    On the other hand, if her only serious opponent was Biden I'd take her in a heartbeat.

    I sincerely hope the Republicans get a clue and put up someone like Christie or Barbour, with Jindal in the VP slot.

    Again, assuming the Whigs concentrate on local and State races, I think having a choice between Hillary and Christie would be a tough decision for a lot of people in a good way. I can see where the Whigs at the national level could endorse one of those two if we do not have our own candidate. An endorsement of either of the candidates this year was simply out of the question from the very start.

    By the way, would you be willing to consider Dog Catcher? :)

  8. RefNV,

    I should have said an endorsement by the Whigs of either candidate from the major parties this year was out of the question, and was in fact never considered. We endorsed T.J O'Hara, an Independent, since we had no candidate of our own.

    Again, the Whigs are much more concerned with getting people into local, State and Congressional seats than the Presidency at this point in time. Therefore I am free to discuss what kind of Democrat, Republican or any other Presidential candidate I would prefer.

  9. Hilary would have been the best choice but wasn't chosen in 08. Obviously to the voting public both Dem and Rep, experience doesn't mean much as Obama beat her out in 08. I do believe that with current events, which she is responsible for, her legacy is tainted. The next 4 years will tell the tale. If this economy does not turn around you can rest assured that the Dems will not win in 16. A true telling factor will be the midterms in 14.
    Keep this letter so I can say you heard it here first.

  10. I'm going to risk having a comment removed and point out race might have played an unexpected role in the nomination of Obama over Hillary in 2008. But only in the sense that freed male slaves were given the right to vote long before women were.

    This is not so much a matter of race as it is a matter of gender. While no rational person would say that we have resolved the race issues in this country, no rational person would say that women in general are on an equal footing with men, either. The fact that the question of free birth control pills can be used as a wedge issue is proof that the concept gender equality is still sorely misunderstood by both conservatives *and* progressives today.

  11. boftx

    Thanks for the reply. I'll watch the evolution of MW with an open mind.

  12. And thank you, PISCES41, that is the best that I, or any other Whig, could hope for.

  13. Ref....I agree with ya! 69 is way to old. Way too much crap to deal with for a atherosclerotic 69 year old brain. 60 should be the limit for that gig.

  14. Author, after eight years of Obama, I assure you democrats won't be welcome in The White House or on The Hill.

  15. I wish to Thank both Bill and Hillary for their service to this country. I would support Hillary in a heartbeat if she decides to run again. I hope she does, and will be available to help anyway I can. I know too many people in their 70's that are still very capable, plus wise. Age is not what it was in the past. Modern humans can be productive much later than in the past.

  16. Kerzetski,

    Unfortunately, the current and 44th President of the United States will be our last. You may wish to "save this letter."


  17. My selection over Hillary was the guy who supported a single payer universal healthcare plan. Now, I can't even remember his name.

    My focus was on a healthcare cost control solution, because of the out of control costs for everyone & our economy. I didn't like the plans that H Clinton and B Obama presented.

    Now, some have begun to speak of a woman reaching 69 being incapable of clear and reasoned thought because surely she will be demented soon. Clearly, dementia is already underway in some of the male minds in this forum and elsewhere.

    Why isn't that issue raised about men? Surely, there is plenty of reason to ask when you hear McConnell, McCain and others.

    You may want to examine your deeper conditioning toward women before you start making such assumptions or speculations.

    Btw, about "free contraception". I get really irritated with all the people that think women are so superficial to have that be the reason they vote for anyone.

    This proves there is no change in the lack of respect toward women as equals.

    I will express my thoughts on why that issue was important.

    It wasn't about "free" pills. It was about having them covered under group insurance, with a copay equal to all other pills, including the Viagra that men wanted add to their insurance.

    The issue about religion dictating what could be covered is unjust for the reason that it is totalitarian, not giving Catholics and non-Catholics employed in their institutions the right to follow their conscience, which is also a teaching in the Catholic church. Or having an employer decide whether they are covered.

    It is an issue about freedom of choice, and against archaic thinking.

    Another reason it was an important issue was that "men" were the ones dictating, acting as spokesmen, initiating and signing laws that prohibit women from having freedom of choice about their reproductive rights, their bodies, as well as some forcing a woman to have an invasive procedure without medical necessity.

    This is the way the Taliban or other Islamic extremists treat women. It is insane.

    That is a pretty important issue for women, and another good indication why universal healthcare in needed in our country.

    Men can have their opinions, and partners have a right to their decision making, but politicians and religious leaders have no right to dictate to women on this issue.

    Free choice doesn't prohibit a woman from following her conscience in either direction.

    People can show their stupidity and disrespect for women by continuing to think that "free contraception" was the issue, or a 69 year old woman too near dementia to be President, and that shows why we have such a messed up country. It is because of messed up thinking of a good number of men, including some in Congress. Dementia is not gender specific.

    I understand that some men have moved away from this kind of thinking, and I applaud their rational evolution.

  18. RefNV,

    I consider that law to be just as stupid and lacking in justice, no matter who does it.

    That said, I have assisted at the circumcision of newborns, and it is a barbaric procedure.

    I was horrified as I observed the newborns turn blue crying, and pain so bad they were unable to make a sound although crying. It was nothing but torture, literally. At that time no anesthesia was used.

    Obviously, I don't support circumcision without anesthesia. It seems enough to cause PTSD.

    I don't know about the practice now, since there has been so much controversy. I do know that it is performed on adults males under anesthesia.

    There are serious health risks for non-circumcised males and any sexual partner they may have. There is scientific medical facts that would support circumcision, as well as those on the opposite side who would refute the research, as happens in many things.

    I am for freedom of choice, and each person taking the responsibility for the outcomes of their choices in human sexuality, from beginning to end. Multiple choices have to be made in the process.

    The problem is that a newborn has no freedom of choice, so it is in the hands of the parents. Unless they choose not to have the newborn circumcised, leaving it to his decision when he is an adult, the infant has no choice.

    Btw, this is not an issue limited to SF. It is a global issue that other countries have tried to deal with as well, legally and otherwise.

  19. At the risk of appearing politically INcorrect, government seems to be trying to give minorities a turn. Sure, it is possible to see Hillary Clinton as President. Who would be the Republicans to run against her? Can Sarah Palin at this point? Or will it be a Hispanic candidate? This is the age of spreading the liability of responsibility.

    Commenter Peacelily pretty well said it. I also agree with Commenter Boftx, who penned, "I'm going to risk having a comment removed and point out race might have played an unexpected role in the nomination of Obama over Hillary in 2008. But only in the sense that freed male slaves were given the right to vote long before women were.

    This is not so much a matter of race as it is a matter of gender. While no rational person would say that we have resolved the race issues in this country, no rational person would say that women in general are on an equal footing with men, either."

    To Commenter SimplySaid, maybe opening the Bible to Revelations or Isiah is a better indicator of what humanity "owns". There is, afterall, "Nothing new under the sun". Throughout the ages, prophets and intuitives, as Nostradamus, saw the handwriting on the wall. Humanity still struggles to play well together, so we experience the events, issues, and crisis on this planet as we do.

    Blessings and Peace,

  20. Comment removed by moderator. - -

  21. <<Now, some have begun to speak of a woman reaching 69 being incapable of clear and reasoned thought because surely she will be demented soon. Clearly, dementia is already underway in some of the male minds in this forum and elsewhere>>

    Bravo, Peacelilly!!! And Carmine leads the pack. The odd thing is a lot of the "male minds" here are much younger than Hillary!! Reagan didn't really govern his second term because he was in the beginning stages of dementia/Altheimers. Even at the beginning stages of that horrid disease, it is hard for someone to make day-to-day decisions, let alone run a country. But I don't see anyone commenting on that. Maybe because he was a man.

    I doubt Hillary will run in 2016. She may very well be a grandma by then and will want to enjoy the time with her family. This last 4 years alone were draining on her.

    I've been enjoying reading your comments since the election. I find it refreshing that people can move on from their differences and have cordial "conversations". Of course, there are still some that just won't move on already and it's their problem, but I'm glad most have moved on.

  22. Det__Munch,

    With all due respect, you have mentioned a positive and a negative? Peacelily and Carmine have two totally different positions. And RefNV cannot explain his positions.

    What is your point?