Hillary Clinton email megathread

[Skill and Chance]

She has become a complete disaster since starting her campaign.  Seriously, it would only be a plus for Democrats if she dropped out tomorrow.  Exactly what advantage does she still have at this point?  Being a woman?  That ship has sailed.  It's not like any women who have ever voted Republican in the past 20 years are going to support her now.  There are plenty of other Democratic women who could run.

[Skill and Chance]

She has become a complete disaster since starting her campaign.  Seriously, it would only be a plus for Democrats if she dropped out tomorrow.  Exactly what advantage does she still have at this point?  Being a woman?  That ship has sailed.  It's not like any women who have ever voted Republican in the past 20 years are going to support her now.  There are plenty of other Democratic women who could run.

Elizabeth Warren should have ran, or even Kristen Gillibrand.

They still can and very well might in a post-Hillary field.  Warren is perfect for reassembling the Obama coalition, and she has room to reach a couple % more of the rural white vote on economic grounds to offset any fall in black turnout.  Not sure what is so special about Gillibrand, though.  I would prefer Klobuchar among female Dem senators.

[Skill and Chance]

She has become a complete disaster since starting her campaign.  Seriously, it would only be a plus for Democrats if she dropped out tomorrow.  Exactly what advantage does she still have at this point?  Being a woman?  That ship has sailed.  It's not like any women who have ever voted Republican in the past 20 years are going to support her now.  There are plenty of other Democratic women who could run.

Elizabeth Warren should have ran, or even Kristen Gillibrand.

They still can and very well might in a post-Hillary field.  Warren is perfect for reassembling the Obama coalition, and she has room to reach a couple % more of the rural white vote on economic grounds to offset any fall in black turnout.  Not sure what is so special about Gillibrand, though.  I would prefer Klobuchar among female Dem senators.

What post-Hillary field? People think Hillary will imminently drop out because of the email thing? Hillary is neither going to drop out nor lose the support of the establishment until the nomination is clinched by someone, and that someone is overwhelmingly likely to be her.

Calm down, everyone.

It's a hypothetical and I got a bit hyperbolic earlier in the thread.  Nevertheless, I think there's a very strong argument that as of now she is no longer the most electable Democrat.  And she is becoming more, not less of a liability with time.

[Skill and Chance]

The fact is that without Hillary the Democrats don't really have a plan B.  Sanders and Biden are both unelectable, and O'Malley/Chafee/Webb aren't viable.

At this point, I would be willing to support an alternative to Clinton, should a serious and electable alternative emerge.  Unfortunately, nobody of that description is currently challenging her or is even rumored to be challenging her.

Right now Democrats are stuck hoping that this email scandal blows over.  Barring that, we have to hope that the Democrats have someone lined up to enter the race (who isn't Biden).  

And there lies the issue. But if you stick with such a corrupt individual, wouldn't that destroy the credibility of your party? Wouldn't it make more sense tactically to surrender 2016 and target gains in 2018 instead?

There is no such thing as 'tactically' surrendering a presidential election.  Losing the presidency won't help us in 2018.  In fact, if the economy continues to grow, then Democrats would be in an incredibly bad position in 2018, fighting against both an incumbency advantage from the economy and low turnout.

Wrong. There will be a lot of term limited governors in 2018. Easy pickings since midterms favor the opposite party. You could also maintain your at risk Senate seats versus almost invariably lose them. Losing them would almost certainly destroy your chances of taking back the Senate in 2020 and probably 2022 since the blue state Pubs will probably be filtered out next year.

"

This attitude is also dumb.  2016 should be nothing worse than a toss up for Democrats, even without Clinton.  This is an election that can be won.  There is no need to step back and (with near certainty) let Republicans fully control the federal government for the next 4 years and basically enact damnatio memoriae on everything Obama stands for just so that you might be able to control 2022 redistricting.

[Skill and Chance]

The fact is that without Hillary the Democrats don't really have a plan B.  Sanders and Biden are both unelectable, and O'Malley/Chafee/Webb aren't viable.

At this point, I would be willing to support an alternative to Clinton, should a serious and electable alternative emerge.  Unfortunately, nobody of that description is currently challenging her or is even rumored to be challenging her.

Right now Democrats are stuck hoping that this email scandal blows over.  Barring that, we have to hope that the Democrats have someone lined up to enter the race (who isn't Biden).  

And there lies the issue. But if you stick with such a corrupt individual, wouldn't that destroy the credibility of your party? Wouldn't it make more sense tactically to surrender 2016 and target gains in 2018 instead?

There is no such thing as 'tactically' surrendering a presidential election.  Losing the presidency won't help us in 2018.  In fact, if the economy continues to grow, then Democrats would be in an incredibly bad position in 2018, fighting against both an incumbency advantage from the economy and low turnout.

Wrong. There will be a lot of term limited governors in 2018. Easy pickings since midterms favor the opposite party. You could also maintain your at risk Senate seats versus almost invariably lose them. Losing them would almost certainly destroy your chances of taking back the Senate in 2020 and probably 2022 since the blue state Pubs will probably be filtered out next year.

"

This attitude is also dumb.  2016 should be nothing worse than a toss up for Democrats, even without Clinton.  This is an election that can be won.  There is no need to step back and (with near certainty) let Republicans fully control the federal government for the next 4 years and basically enact damnatio memoriae on everything Obama stands for just so that you might be able to control 2022 redistricting.

This attitude is also dumb. Get out of your bubble and face facts. Obama is NOT that popular, and the presidential pendulum almost is never broken. It WILL be Lean R without Hillary

We have 5% unemployment and dropping and petroleum products are almost free.  It's true that Obama isn't overwhelmingly popular, but he's holding up well enough that were are presently looking at a 1960/1968/2000 statistical tie situation, with a chance at 1988/1940 conditions if the rate of economic improvement picks up.  And with today's map, the Democrat almost certainly wins the electoral college if it's within 1% either way.  No reason to give up.