Hillary Clinton Challenges Barack Obama in 2012

Just like in my previous thread about John McCain challenging George W. Bush in 2004, the POD is Hillary Rodham Clinton not running for president in 2008 and challenging Barack Obama in the Democratic Party Presidential Primaries of 2012. According to most analyses, Obama was vulnerable in 2012, leading me to believe that without the defeat of 2008 and a record as Secretary of State to defend, Hillary could actually primary him in 2012. Bernie Sanders supported the idea of someone challenging Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination. How will the election against Mitt Romney go and who might her opponent in 2016 be?
 
Just like in my previous thread about John McCain challenging George W. Bush in 2004, the POD is Hillary Rodham Clinton not running for president in 2008 and challenging Barack Obama in the Democratic Party Presidential Primaries of 2012. According to most analyses, Obama was vulnerable in 2012, leading me to believe that without the defeat of 2008 and a record as Secretary of State to defend, Hillary could actually primary him in 2012. Bernie Sanders supported the idea of someone challenging Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination. How will the election against Mitt Romney go and who might her opponent in 2016 be?

My question is what would cause Hillary Clinton to not run for President in 2008? It'd be one thing if Bush was popular and his hand picked successor was guaranteed the win, but that wasn't the case in 2008, just about any Democrat was going to win and she was in just as good of a position as anyone else to run that year. A better POD for this would be for her not to take Obama's offer to be Secretary of State and stay in the senate and have Obama's 1st term go worse (Bin Laden Raid gets botched, maybe the credit downgrade and the issues in Europe trigger a recession in late 2011 or 2012). That's the only way I could see it happening and if it did, it would be a repeat of Carter vs. Ted Kennedy.
 
My question is what would cause Hillary Clinton to not run for President in 2008? It'd be one thing if Bush was popular and his hand picked successor was guaranteed the win, but that wasn't the case in 2008, just about any Democrat was going to win and she was in just as good of a position as anyone else to run that year. A better POD for this would be for her not to take Obama's offer to be Secretary of State and stay in the senate and have Obama's 1st term go worse (Bin Laden Raid gets botched, maybe the credit downgrade and the issues in Europe trigger a recession in late 2011 or 2012).
That POD is better. My original idea was Obama having a juggernaut lead in the polls like she did starting out, Obama having the support of youthful and African American voters, Obama attacking Edwards, Dodd, and Biden on their Iraq War votes, and Bill Ricnardson and John Edwards` scandals breaking out much earlier, intimidating her to sit 2008 out.
 
That POD is better. My original idea was Obama having a juggernaut lead in the polls like she did starting out, Obama having the support of youthful and African American voters, Obama attacking Edwards, Dodd, and Biden on their Iraq War votes, and Bill Ricnardson and John Edwards` scandals breaking out much earlier, intimidating her to sit 2008 out.

Why would he have such a big lead so early? At the start of the race, Obama was relatively unknown, he didn't become the juggernaut that we know until after running in the primaries for a while.

The most likely thing to keep Hillary out would be if Bill started suffering health problems right before she had the chance to run. Even if you think she's completely heartless, she would have to realize that it wouldn't look good for her to run while her husband is in the hospital.
 
Why would he have such a big lead so early? At the start of the race, Obama was relatively unknown, he didn't become the juggernaut that we know until after running in the primaries for a while.

The most likely thing to keep Hillary out would be if Bill started suffering health problems right before she had the chance to run. Even if you think she's completely heartless, she would have to realize that it wouldn't look good for her to run while her husband is in the hospital.

Health problems for Chelsea would work better (worse). But if President Obama has troubles in 2012, Hillary running would cost the Democrats the Presidency, just like Reagan in 1976 and Kennedy in 1980. Running against a sitting President isn't good for your election chances, it usually gives it to the other party.
 
This may not be what you are looking for but how about Obama wins in 2008 with HRC as his VP. He decides not to run in 2012 for whatever reason - his healthy, Michelle's health, Michelle hates being First Lady, whatever. HRC runs in 2012.
 
Hillary's not going to run against Obama in 2012. Unless a sitting President really screws up or is deeply unpopular they sail through the primaries with only marginal figures challenging them. For a major figure running against a sitting President is basically career suicide. The party establishment and voters will probably see them as someone who cares more about their own career than the success of the party, which will mean being cast into the political wilderness (this is particularly true if the President then loses the election, since their primary opponent will probably be blamed for poisoning the well/fracturing the party). Plus, given incumbent advantage and the support the establishment almost automatically gives the President it would be a difficult fight to win. It's far better to wait 4 years and run then, something that Clinton is smart enough to know.
 
Hillary's not going to run against Obama in 2012. Unless a sitting President really screws up or is deeply unpopular they sail through the primaries with only marginal figures challenging them. For a major figure running against a sitting President is basically career suicide. The party establishment and voters will probably see them as someone who cares more about their own career than the success of the party, which will mean being cast into the political wilderness (this is particularly true if the President then loses the election, since their primary opponent will probably be blamed for poisoning the well/fracturing the party). Plus, given incumbent advantage and the support the establishment almost automatically gives the President it would be a difficult fight to win. It's far better to wait 4 years and run then, something that Clinton is smart enough to know.

Reagan's in '76 wasn't political suicide. He went on to win four years later, and while Ted Kennedy killed any chance he had at the Presidency when he challenged Carter in 1980, his career went on after for almost 30 years.
 
Reagan's in '76 wasn't political suicide. He went on to win four years later, and while Ted Kennedy killed any chance he had at the Presidency when he challenged Carter in 1980, his career went on after for almost 30 years.
In both of those cases they were facing unpopular President who had made major screw-ups. They were saved by the fact that a large number of people were dissatisfied with the President and thought the party could do better. Had they run against a popular President (say Reagan runs against Nixon in 1972), their careers would have been finished.
 
Reagan's in '76 wasn't political suicide. He went on to win four years later, and while Ted Kennedy killed any chance he had at the Presidency when he challenged Carter in 1980, his career went on after for almost 30 years.

Things were a bit different 40 years ago, though. Politics was less tribal. Now primary-ing the president would be akin to political treason.
 
Top