Hillary Clinton officially launches "Onward Together" PAC

[DrScholl]

And the problem with this is? She got almost three million more votes than Trump, so she clearly has a big enough following to get things done. She's not out trying to sabotage candidates that don't fit her standards like Sanders tried to do Ossoff, she's actually trying to accomplish wins.

[DrScholl]

People who hate Hillary Clinton desperately want her to run again and are convinced that she is actually running again.

[DrScholl]

I could see "taking money from Hillary Clinton" or "funded by Hillary Clinton" being an effective attack line against Democratic candidates who take money from this PAC.

Effective where? In the ghost coal mining towns that are already voting Republican, but Bernie Sanders is convinced are winnable with a super socialist message? Give me a break.

[DrScholl]

I could see "taking money from Hillary Clinton" or "funded by Hillary Clinton" being an effective attack line against Democratic candidates who take money from this PAC.

Not as effective as congressional republicans embracing Trump.

Problem is that the Dems don't know how to make the campaign national. If Clinton is involved in the congressional campaign at all, it'll do nothing but remind people who didn't vote in 2016 why they didn't, and you'll end up seeing a 2014 landslide repeat for the GOP.

A 2014 repeat is pretty much impossible considering that Republicans control all three branches. People who didn't vote in 2016 are reminded of what it was a bad idea not to vote every day when they hear about what Trump is doing.

[DrScholl]

People who hate Hillary Clinton desperately want her to run again and are convinced that she is actually running again.

The entire country (minus #Resistance Twitter) wants her to run again? News to me!

And yes, Democrats should absolutely disassociate themselves with Clinton and her ilk. What's the point of having someone as toxic as her in the picture?

Most people do not have an irrational, obsessive hatred of Hillary Clinton.

[DrScholl]

I could see "taking money from Hillary Clinton" or "funded by Hillary Clinton" being an effective attack line against Democratic candidates who take money from this PAC.

Not as effective as congressional republicans embracing Trump.

Problem is that the Dems don't know how to make the campaign national. If Clinton is involved in the congressional campaign at all, it'll do nothing but remind people who didn't vote in 2016 why they didn't, and you'll end up seeing a 2014 landslide repeat for the GOP.

A 2014 repeat is pretty much impossible considering that Republicans control all three branches. People who didn't vote in 2016 are reminded of what it was a bad idea not to vote every day when they hear about what Trump is doing.

It's not like these voters didn't know what was at stake when they cast their non-vote last time. Many don't see much of a difference between Clinton and Trump, and I doubt anything has changed in that time. And despite voting for her in 2016, I'll withhold my vote in the future on anything the Clintons are involved in.

Whatever gives you life, kid. Judging from what has been happening, it seems like a lot of non-voters are becoming involved and that will make a big difference next year.

[DrScholl]

The response from Democrats on this forum has honestly been disturbing. We shouldn't be shunning the former nominee of our party just because she lost an election which, she of course, won by almost 3 million votes. We should be gratefully embracing her efforts to help take down Chief Baby-Hands by propping up Democrats of all ideologies including the Berniecrats who spat on her name.

People forget that Clinton won the support of her party and most of the nation. To throw her movement to the side would be ignoring the will of the majority of Democrats. Don't Dems want a big tent, with Clinton and Sanders supporters? Include the majority, folks.

Remember, 52% of people who voted, voted for somebody who wasn't Hillary Clinton, not to mention the many who refused to vote for anyone.

Whatever gives you life, kid.

There seems to be quite a few here who want to bury their head in the sand and refuse to accept that nominating somebody who was massively unpopular is part of the reason you lost, given many Dems are less partisan and won't automatically vote for somebody just because of that letter following their name.

And there seem to be quite a few around her that remain obsessed with a losing presidential candidate in a presidential race that is over. Clinton isn't running for anything, but some of you refuse to believe that.