According to CNN, Hillary Clinton will throw her hat in the ring (is anybody surprised?) with a video announcement on Sunday:
Hillary Clinton is planning to launch her presidential candidacy on Sunday through a video message on social media, a person close to her campaign-in-waiting tells CNN, followed immediately by traveling to early-voting states of Iowa and New Hampshire to start making her case to voters.
The trip to Iowa, where a third-place finish in 2008 ultimately led to the collapse of her presidential aspirations, illustrates what aides say is a commitment to not take anything for granted in her second bid for the White House, even though she dominates the likely Democratic field in 2016.
Clinton has already filmed her campaign video, a person close to the campaign said, which outlines the central themes of her second bid for the White House. The message is intended to send a signal to Democrats that she intends to aggressively fight for the party’s presidential nomination.
A new epilogue of her book, “Hard Choices,” an excerpt of which was released Friday to the Huffington Post, offers a glimpse into why she is embarking on another presidential campaign. She writes about her new granddaughter, Charlotte, and calls for equal opportunity for her generation.
No Republican can field a candidate, at least right now, that can challenge her. Nor is there a credible challenger in her own party. I’m not a huge fan of Clinton, and although I think it’s time that we had a woman president in this country, I’d much rather it be Elizabeth Warren than Hillary Clinton. And indeed, Warren has been making the tiniest of noises that she may challenge Clinton. I’d favor that, for while I’d hold my nose and vote for Hillary over any Republican on this planet, I’d vote eagerly and gladly for Warren.
Sadly, I think that Warren could be too easily written off by the electorate as a “Massachusetts liberal,” something that would also doom John Kerry, another person I’d like to see in the running. (Kerry, of course, could also be branded as a “loser” for his defeat in the 2004 Presidential campaign, though I don’t see why a single loss is so damning.)
Frankly, I have little confidence that Clinton would be a good President, given her penchant for secrecy, her ties with the wealthy, her failure so far to articulate any vision that I respect, and—not her fault—the fact that she’ll face a Republican Congress. But is this the best the Democratic party can do?