It was positive, happy, hopeful without being hokey.  It showed all the different kinds of families, at all different stages of their lives.

I think she looks great - no need to have her eyes done, unless she wants to take the chance that, like John Kerry, she'll end up looking like aliens took her up to the mothership, took her apart and didn't quite put her back together right.

What's left of the middle class needs somebody's attention; it's still just a major illness or job loss away from sinking out of sight.

I liked that it wasn't the traditional announcement; I think it could signal that she's not going to play the same game she did in 2008.  

A personal presence would have been infinitely more dynamic.

She featured many groups of people - as many as they could figure out I guess - but no Jews with Yarmulkas. Huh uh. Can't go there.

And no women concerned with making a choice of terminating an unwanted pregnancy.

No. Definitely can't go there.

Just people starting businesses.
People growing tomatoes.
Training their doggies.
Couples getting married.
Young people entering the job market.
"This country was founded on hard work."

Nice.

She would be better, I expect, than any of the Republicans vying for the nomination, and the rest of the democratic field looks truly uninspiring to me.

But just about anyone could have made that video.
Jeb could have made that video.
He probably will.

They care.
They're on our side.
Work hard. Stay in school. Train your dog.
Join them.

One: A Sunday ... different it itself; and, a family day and, for many, a day off and time to see, reflect.

Two: The independence of doing it her way is striking.  Heck, everyone has huge announcements, confetti, almost parades ... everyone does that and everyone knows that everyone does that.  They talk, talk at you about how good they are.  Mostly, they want to be noticed and break through.  IMO, Hillary is wise to take advantage of her strengths from the get-go.  She has no problem with the sine qua non "name identity" (she is even a first-namer.) Everybody does it is just that ... she always has been different with her person, drive, wherewithal, and resilience. No need to get in the game of who delivered the most intense or in-your-face opening speech.  That is for Cruz and Paul and Rubio and maybe even J. Bush.

Three: My husband watched it first.  He said: You are going to be surprised ... then smiled, nodded, and said that she doesn't say anything for the first minute and a half.  We watch together ... my gosh, says I, she is showing other humans at stage center, all of them looking forward to or aspiring to something that Americans aspire to, etc. etc. etc.  A real diversity.  (And, to tell you the truth, it was genuinely nice to see "emotions" on the faces that didn't concentrate on huffing & puffing anger (the angry this, the angry that) after so many campaigns ignoring most of the people that make up this country.

Four: After hearing several days back that a low-key "listening tour" would follow, I wondered "huh."  Gradually, it dawned on me that--with all the months left in the campaign to be talked at--the approach was sensible plus.  People are always saying that the candidate should listen ... well, how can they, if they are talking all the time to all the special interests that comprise the particular party.  Talking among the houses, student groups, working groups or Iowa and New Hampshire and all to come over the next month or so could just be the innovative strategy that breaks the mold ... it allows her time and real input to assess day-to-care concerns.  And, guess what??? I suspect that it will drive the there-must-be-a-lazy-headline-everyday press up the proverbial tree.  Good on her.  It is her campaign not theirs.

Five: To some, the middle-class may be mundane.  Well, for the number of people who inhabit the middle class and working class Americans, it is the center.  Yes, everyone talks about helping the middle-class ... but, with her disciplined focus and refusal to do the rah-rah-rally routine, she is not only taking charge; but, I'd expect actual positive gains to come from it.  

And I also like how she spoke about "earning" our votes.  

She will have to do a lot to earn my vote.  Although I was supporter of hers in 2008, the Democrats abysmal handling of the financial crisis, and embracing of neo-con foreign policy, makes it unlikely that I will support anyone in the party.

But I will listen.  

This is why we,as liberals, lose elections.  The R's pander and then go work for the 1%.  That type of comment/attitude is where the 'elitism' label comes in.

On the one hand, she has to present herself as someone who can improve the lot of the "average" American. Next to that, she could present herself as someone who is out to improve the lot of those at the very bottom of the economic scale. The hopeless among us.

On the other hand, she has to make things kind of rosy, lest she infer that the Obama years have been less than fruitful.

Jeb is under no such constraints.
We are weak and he will make us strong --- and all that horrific Bushian b u lll s h-ttt.

It made me recall Hillary during the "debates" (what a farce) in 2008 when she was campaigning for the nomination against Barack.

I remember her saying at the end of one of those debates how thrilled she was to be on the same platform as BARACK OBAMA!
Gush.
I thought she had lost her mind.
I believe I said so in a post to that effect, and was remanded - she was doing the right thing politically.

But I believe she sent the message, sh-t - if Hillary thinks that Barack is so great, why in the world should I vote for her?

And, as we know, she lost the nomination.

In short - I think she should, in the coming months, take the gloves off.

Obama has been very measured in his support of her, in my opinion, and she owes him nothing. Less than nothing.

If Bernie Sanders decides to throw his hat in the ring he's got my vote, because Bernie Sanders is the $hit.  Otherwise, I don't see anyone jumping in who will top Hillary, but we shall see.

NY Times.

   I do, however, know a lot of people from a broad range of backgrounds including many who are very active in party politics. The lack of enthusiasm is noteworthy and I mentioned it because many here seem to think we will witness a cakewalk to coronation over some schlub/nut from the other side. I think that belief is wrong and overestimating Hillary's appeal is dangerous.

  I also perceive some cognitive dissonance between the ideas that the Republicans are clown show lightweights with little hope of even making it close and the argument we should accede to Clinton because she is the most "electable."

  If we truly believe the Republican candidate will be "unelectable" why do we need to worry about people pointing out her many flaws or decide now that  despite such flaws she is by mandate the best possible candidate.

  Surely, we have other people who can beat a clown.

  His number crunching is more impressive in terms of thoroughness of data collection and analysis than statistical genius. The repute he's earned for being close to actual results is overblown because the average informed person can call the vast majority of races well before election day just by reading the paper. That he is marginally above the norm in calling contested races would be more impressive if he could do it before anyone else. The idea that 49 out of 50 is awesome loses force when it's really 4 out of 5 and we realize relatively few do worse than 3 out of 5.

  But, with at lengthy caveat:

The truth is that a general election win by Clinton -- she's very likely to become the Democratic nominee -- is roughly a 50/50 proposition. And we're not likely to learn a lot over the rest of 2015 to change that. Here's why:

I don't want to just talk about the present.
I wqnt to talk about the future.
Whatever we have in store, cannot be known.
But given time it can be understood.
The past was once the future.
The future is, I should say, unknown.
It is in fact, unknowable.
So I'm asking you to meet me at the station
And join me as we board a train bound for
A place called... the future.
We will be ready for that future, whatever.