AOL News has a new home! The Huffington Post.
Click here to visit the new home of Politics Daily!
The CNN/Opinion Research survey, taken last Friday and Saturday, said 65 percent of respondents had a favorable view of Clinton, including 92 percent of Democrats and 64 percent of independents. Thirty-one percent overall, and six out of 10 Republicans, had a negative opinion. The survey of 1,023 adults had a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points.Of course she has done a great job, but enough is enough and her decision to stop is not to get out of politcs is to have enough preperation time to campain for the Presidency 6 years from now.
March 23 2011 at 12:36 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyToo bad. I'm not a Hillary fan, but her speech in Paris yesterday showed a strength that heavily outweighs the 'resident' and his weakling posture. I see why little barry keeps her under wraps. She does invoke strength and a vigor lacking in his teleprompter readings.
March 20 2011 at 5:01 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyI wish I knew the truth behind Hillary's emphatic announcements...Wolf's questions were not a surprise to her...
Part of me thinks Bill is a beloved humanitarian and rock star to the world... Chelsea is getting her doctorate degree in world health and Hillary wants to advocate for women and children internnationally...CGI is a monumental success and can only soar higher with Hillary and Chelsea...it's an obvious, understandable and awesome family undertaking...it's nobel and destined to succeed...
But part of me thinks there's another reason why Hillary has decided not to support the Obama Administration any longer...I trust her brilliance and judgement so believe we need to know...
There is an article that says most secretary of states serve just 4 years...it is not an easy job.
March 17 2011 at 11:41 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyN.Y. will take her back; Ark. would just as soon not have the Clinton's back!!!
March 17 2011 at 6:34 PM Report abuse Permalink -22 rate up rate down ReplyFDR changed his Vice Presidents every time he ran (4). His choices got better with Truman as his last pick and successor. With all due respect to Biden, I hope Democrats persuade Obama that he needs Hillary Clinton as his VP choice in 2012. It is possible that such a dynamic switch is in the works with her announcement that says 2012 is her last government job as a political cover until the Obama people sort out the President's chances. She has now gained the majority respect of Independents, the key voting block where Obama has problems.
Hillary would add excitement as a female VP of intellect and pragmatism, energize the Democrat base and remind people of Bill Clinton's success with the economy. After the dismal Democrat turnout in 2010 and loss of Independents, Obama-Clinton is the winning prescription.
That's good news!!!!
March 17 2011 at 4:07 PM Report abuse Permalink -22 rate up rate down ReplyI got the feeling early on in the Obama administration that Secretary Clinton did not particularly care for her job as Secretary of State. I think she found the incredibly hectic schedule replete with arduous demands and unwieldy challenges. I don't think foreign affairs is her thing nor do I think she likes the incessant traveling, especially when she has to bring along hundreds of staff members. I think she took this job rather than the vice presidency beacuse she wanted ot be recorded in the history books. Let's face it. Very few people ever remember who a vice president is, unless he eventually becomes the president, but people DO REMEMBER who the Secretary of State was.
March 17 2011 at 3:42 PM Report abuse Permalink +18 rate up rate down ReplyWhether the current foriegn policy of the US is Obama's alone or hers or some combination...Its become increasingly clear that we are not longer setting the agenda or leading. There are those in the world and here at home that want the US to step back without a leadership role. We are seeing the results of leaderless world. It will become more dangerous without us. Soon no one will fear us which will lead to much mischief down the road.
All other powers want us taken down a peg or two. they will get their wish....parthialy because we are broke. Partially because we were responsible in iraq and Afganistan...."If you break it you must fix it"
It funny how no one is mentioning that this is the result of the Bush policy of democritization of the Middle East. time will tell whether it will be good or bad.
g4advertising, the U.S. is still considered a leader in the world, and will be for some time to come. If we had to, we have the capacity to feed a large portion of the world's population, not just our own. We have water and lots of. Natural resources like coal and natural gas are still readily available. We could be self sufficient as a country, if necessary. Our size as a country, resources, and level of industrial/technological development make us a force to be reckoned with. However, the economic advantage we had after WWII, is disappearing. After WWII, many countries had to literally re-build, and some countries were underdeveloped, far behind us terms of manufacturing and technology. Because the world is changing, more countries want a stronger voice in global policies, and whether we like it or not, we have a global economy now. That means though that if we go down, the world is coming along for the ride. We still have a voice and a strong one. Is leading the same as policing the world? Not in my view. We don't have the economic resources for another war, military intervention, whatever you want to call it. Any single country can only do so much, as even the ancient Romans learned. We still have troops on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan, as you pointed out. It doesn't matter how many times our presidents declare victory, we are still there and I don't think we are leaving any time soon.
March 17 2011 at 5:09 PM Report abuse Permalink +14 rate up rate down ReplyShe is retiring from politics.and that is her choice. She will not seek another term IF Obama wins. She would have never served the first term if the DNC didn't twist her arm. They used the debt that she owed the DNC from her primary run back in 2008. Her or her husband to not support Obama's agenda and they never did. Even what bill did was because of the DNC. Now that they feel the debt is paid in full they will bowl out with grace and class. These are two qualities Obama will never have alone know how to spell . His cabinet has been changes faster then he can change suits and more often. Their primary battle did a lot of damage to the democratic party and his presidency has done a lot to alienate many of their supporters. It will take the DNC many years to come back to be the party they used to be.
March 17 2011 at 12:40 PM Report abuse Permalink -18 rate up rate down ReplyI think it is a good time for Clinton to exit politics. She and her husband served for better or worse and now we need new people and new ideas. This has become ever clearer after Obama hired many old Clinton staffers whose ideas no longer seem to be working.
March 17 2011 at 11:49 AM Report abuse Permalink -16 rate up rate down ReplyFollow Politics Daily
POPULAR
News From Our Partners



Top News
More News
More on Aol
Local News
More Blog/Sites
Sites and Services
15 Comments