[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

[FULL VIDEO] Police release bodycam footage of Monroe County District Attorney Sandra Doorley traffi

Police clash with pro-Palestine protesters on Ohio State University campus

Joe Rogan Experience #2138 - Tucker Carlson

Police Dispersing Student Protesters at USC - Breaking News Coverage (College Protests)

What Passover Means For The New Testament Believer

Are We Closer Than Ever To The Next Pandemic?

War in Ukraine Turns on Russia

what happened during total solar eclipse

Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage

Earth is Scorched with Heat

Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman

Vibe Shift

A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound.

Older Men - Keep One Foot In The Dark Ages

When You Really Want to Meet the Diversity Requirements

CERN to test world's most powerful particle accelerator during April's solar eclipse

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.

Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared

Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin

How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End?

What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery!

2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years

2024 and beyond in prophecy

Questions


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles

Title: The astonishing weakness of Hillary Clinton
Source: TheWeek
URL Source: http://theweek.com/articles/569184/ ... shing-weakness-hillary-clinton
Published: Jul 31, 2015
Author: Michael Brendan Dougherty
Post Date: 2015-07-31 10:43:17 by Tooconservative
Ping List: *2016 The Likely Suspects*     Subscribe to *2016 The Likely Suspects*
Keywords: None
Views: 6662
Comments: 124

Hillary Clinton is as unpopular as she ever has been. Her favorability ratings have fallen to just 40 percent. Her campaign is already heading south, even though she has serious advantages over everyone else in the campaign, both Democratic and Republican.

Her opponents in the Democratic field do not pose a plausible mathematical threat. Bernie Sanders can attract huge crowds in college towns, but he is going nowhere with the African-American voters who would be key to building an anti-Clinton Democratic primary coalition. Martin O'Malley's record, shaped by his transition from the Baltimore mayoralty to the Maryland statehouse, has made him radioactive to an activist Democratic base that wants criminal justice reform and that winces when a politician like him says, "All Lives Matter." Clinton is thus free to define her agenda apart from them.

Because the Republican field is startlingly unanimous in its positions, Clinton has the opportunity of running against a coherent platform, while picking out its weakest spokesperson on every individual issue. She can run against Trump on immigration, against Huckabee on social issues, against Walker on foreign policy.

But it's an opportunity that she has so far passed over. Perhaps she doesn't want to get bogged down in actual policy details, always unpopular with an electorate that grows fat on cliché but retches at details.

Still, it means that the entirety of Clinton's campaign has alternated between distancing herself from the legacy of her family name, and stonewalling reporters investigating one scandal or another. In the first category, she has repudiated the tough-on-crime policies of her husband. She has strongly embraced gay marriage even though her previous support for traditional marriage was, according to Clinton, rooted in timeless religious principles. She has joined the new gender politics, despite her own history of slut-shaming her husband's mistresses. Calling Bill's pump-and-dump paramours "trailer trash" and "narcissistic loony tunes" is understandable in my own view, but considered impolitic today.

Hillary Clinton has never won a competitive election. This can't be repeated enough. She beat Republican Rep. Rick Lazio for her Senate seat in 2000. And she defeated a mayor from Yonkers in 2006. In her first competitive race, the 2008 Democratic presidential primary, she began as a heavy favorite and she lost.

What has she done to improve her chances in that time? She's aged well, I guess. And she served without distinction as secretary of state. The most notable addition to her CV was her strenuous support of military intervention in Libya, which has left that nation in ruins and vulnerable to ISIS. In turn, Libya has left Clinton with a new scandal about her home-brew email server and the deletion of thousands of emails that congressional oversight might have used against her.

She has high name-recognition. Until she started campaigning she was polling well even with Republicans. She has the Obama coalition, and an electoral map where Republicans need significant pickups. But boy, it all seems underwhelming. What is the task for Democrats in the post-Obama era? Why is Clinton the one to take on this mission?

After achieving a policy almost approximating universal health care, the dream of Democrats since Harry Truman, what are the Democrats to do? Are they pro-globalization? Do they have ideas for integrating the great wave of immigration to America that has occurred over the past 50 years? Do they have anything to offer the dying white working class? Are they for reforming any of America's major institutions?

Clinton just seems like a mismatch for the party and the moment. The center-left darling of Wall Street talking up issues of inequality. The former Walmart board member posing as savior of American jobs. The "Smart Power" leader whose achievement at state was wrecking a nation and turning it over to Sunni terrorists faster than George W. Bush. A champion of women who pretended the leader of the free world was the victim of his intern. The wife of a man who flies on the "Lolita Express" with a porn star that was booked for "massages." The vanquisher of a Yonkers mayor.

Is this really the best the Democrats can do? Yes, and that should worry them.


Poster Comment:

After a few weeks of Trumpsterism, the GOP has forgotten about Hitlery altogether. But she is self-destructing from her own scandals and repulsive public persona. Her name recognition and reputation are sky-high. And that is her biggest problem. The Dems know who and what she is. I think the writer overlooked just how repulsive her major Wall Street banking connections are with Goldman-Sachs, JP Morgan, Chase, the new UBS scandal, etc. That's pure poison to the Dem base voters, the bulwark of the Occupy Wall Street types. And the Xlintons are still loathed by the Obama Dem establishment.Subscribe to *2016 The Likely Suspects*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 33.

#3. To: TooConservative (#0)

Not a bad article, but I can sum it up in fewer words:

The ruling party will determine whether or not all of its election fraud, stuffing ballot boxes, and illegal immigrant voting will be enough to get a flawed candidate like Hilliary Xlinton elected.

It may or may not be - the jury's still out on that one.

But since the ruling party will decide who the republican branch candidate will be, they'll just have to ensure Xlinton's "opponent" will be the Jebster - another flawed candidate.

Jebster or Xlinton. Doesn't matter.

Rufus T Firefly  posted on  2015-07-31   11:54:51 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Rufus T Firefly (#3)

Jebster or Xlinton. Doesn't matter.

Despite their similarities, there will be significant differences in the outcomes from those two. Appointees to the Supreme Court, etc.

I'd say too little difference but not "no difference".

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-07-31   13:26:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: TooConservative (#5)

Appointees to the Supreme Court, etc.

I've posted this before, but I'll repeat myself here:

The ONLY reason I've had for voting GOP since Reagan is the argument you just presented. Repeat - ONLY.

In the Bible - Book of Esther verse 4:14 - there is this:

And who knows but that you have come to your royal position for such a time as this?”

Since 2008, there have been two (no, three) SCOTUS decisions that defy Constitutional logic. Upholding Zero-care; Re-upholding Zero-care; and homosexual marriage.

Republican appointees whiffed on all three.

That reason no longer holds water, and since Jeb (or another corrupted candidate) will be the nominee, I don't see me voting gop for POTUS anytime in the near future.

Rufus T Firefly  posted on  2015-07-31   14:39:43 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: Rufus T Firefly (#10)

Republican appointees whiffed on all three.

And the Dems voted in unison.

Again, it is weak but it is what it is when you judge by actions, not words.

For each justice a Prez Hitlery appoints to the Court, assume at least five more years before the Court will allow any opportunity to move the Court's jurisprudence to the Right (toward liberty) and away from collectivism and Leftist ideology.

With Dems on the Court, you are absolutely guaranteed to lose every fight, most likely irremediably as they pile up one precedent upon another.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-07-31   17:51:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: TooConservative (#18)

Again, it is weak but it is what it is when you judge by actions, not words.

With Republican nominees you are also guaranteed to lose every abortion fight.

O'Connor. Kennedy. Souter. Roberts. The attempt to put Harriet Miers.

I'm reminded of the American Revolution. Throughout the war there was an opposition in the British Parliament that thought the American grievances were legitimate and that the government should stop the war and give the Americans what they wanted, short of independence (which the Americans did not originally seek).

Should the Americans have stuck with England because a toothless minority in Parliament was on their side?

That's what you're advocating. You're saying that the Democrats are SO TERRIBLE that the Republicans must be supported.

But one what, exactly, are the Democrats "so terrible"?

Not on war policy. Bush gave us the wars and lost them. The Democrats have continued them at a lower scale with less American death. You're not going to get anything different from the Republicans than the Democrats on war policy.

What, then? The Border? Bush and the Republicans left the Border open, and make clear they will continue to do so. The Democrats, at least, have Unions constraining them. The Republicans have given nothing more than the Democrats.

So, what then? What's left? Economic policy.

The Republicans want to privatize Social Security and put it into the stock market. Madness and greed. Crony capitalism. The country very rightly sees that the Democrats are hands-down superior at protecting the American retirement program.

The Republicans hate Obamacare. And they hate Medicare. And they hate Medicaid. So, what DO the Republicans propose? Nothing. They would simply dismantle government health insurance, apparently, and "leave it to the markets". They did this once upon a time, under the leadership of a very charismatic President who was a good grand strategist and an economic moron. Ronald Reagan deregulated the Savings and Loans. Some crony capitalists got rich, and a whole industry was destroyed and had to be bailed out by the taxpayers. Fact is, government health insurance is a necessity. It cannot be done any other way. Obamacare will never be repealed by Republicans. They had two shots at it in the Supreme Court, and opportunities to defund it. Fact is, Republican leaders about national health care are the same as they are about abortion: they throw boob bait for Bubbas about repeal, etc, but they intend to ENTRENCH it too. Why? Because Obamacare is very, very good for the interests of crony capitalists. People HAVE to buy insurance, and that's good for financiers.

So, we've got Democrats installing Obamacare because they rightly see that we need universal health insurance. And you've got Republicans conniving at making sure it survives, not because the Republicans give a good goddamn about the health of Americans, but because their economic alphas have figured out a way to make a killing at it.

The Democrat plan was originally single payer, essentially universal Medicare. And that's what we'll eventually end up with. Obamacare was a compromise by Democrats, to offer Romneycare, just exactly what the Republican Presidential nominee had done in Massachussetts, to the nation.

Republicans refuse to be realistic about the economics of middle class and working families. They fundamentally oppose Social Security and public health insurance.

In this very real sense there is a difference between Republicans and Democrats, and the Republicans are clearly worse, and have been since Herbert Hoover. Democrats win over time on economics, because they understand the modern world, and understand that urban societies need national insurance to cover the basic needs of health, education and retirement. Eventually, they'll add home ownership to that, and they'll do it by direct government loans - single lender - and cut the financiers out again. All in good time.

Republicans, meanwhile, bellow about socialism and propose nothing but a return to the Great Depression.

On economic grounds alone the Democrats are the better party. It's a pity they are evil murderers, glorifying in the killing of babies. For if the Democrats were pro-life, it would be a no-brainer to vote for them, and they'd win every election.

But they're not. Instead, we have two parties that get to the same place, in their ACTIONS, on abortion and foreign policy, and a Democrat Party that is much better on economics.

All things being equal, then, by YOUR logic, because the Democrats are better at ONE thing that is important, I should vote for them.

But I am a moral purist. I don't vote for murderers. The Democrats are the better party, because their economics are sane and work. BUT, they're babykillers, so I will not join them.

Instead, because of that ONE issue, I stayed in the Republican ranks. But the betrayal is now so clear, I know that the Republicans will NEVER actually use their power - which they have even right now - to move against abortion.

Which means that both parties connive at abortion, but Republicans LIE about it. Which makes them scumbags.

Still not voting for babykillers.

But following your logic, I SHOULD vote Democrat, because both parties are IN FACT equal on abortion results, but the Democrats are better on economics.

If I were you, that's what I'd do. But I'm me, and I don't vote for babykillers, or cut them any slack, just because they happen to be right on some other things.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-07-31   21:15:06 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: Vicomte13 (#30) (Edited)

With Republican nominees you are also guaranteed to lose every abortion fight.

No, you know factually that it is Democrat nominees that make it guaranteed to lose. This is why pro-lifers stick with the GOP; they know that no federal judge appointed by Dems in the last 30 years has the slightest interest in any protection of the unborn.

If you were the raging pro-lifer you try to depict yourself as, you would know this.

I've concluded you are, at most, nominally pro-life. Not actually pro-life in any meaningful sense.

IOW, you are even less pro-life than your fellow-Catholic GOP justices you love to decry as the traitors of the pro-life cause. I think that would describe you much better.

As always, every drop of your venom is used on a GOP target, not on the Dems who have been the implacable enemies of the unborn for the last 50 years and whose judges are absolutely uniform in their enmity toward unborn children.

You aren't fooling us with your more-pro-life-than-thou routine.

The price of really abolishing abortion is socialism. I have reconciled myself to that reality and accept it.

So you can have your communism and your abortion ban too? Don't make me laugh. Surely no serious person you've ever met considers you anything but a loon on this topic.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-07-31   21:36:47 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 33.

#36. To: TooConservative (#33)

Surely no serious person you've ever met considers you anything but a loon on this topic.

I'm pretty sure the Pope and Cardinal Egan agree with me, and they are serious people.

The price of cheap exploitable labor, since the Civil War, has been the steady importation of Catholics.

The crony capitalists got their cheap exploitable labor. But that labor is Catholic. And it votes.

And Catholics know that the King has a direct commandment from God to care for the poor, and that in democracies we are all the King. Therefore, Catholics know that taxation and redistribution through vast social safety nets is a commandment of God, and obligatory for Christians. And that is precisely how we have always voted, and always will.

The Know-Nothings were right: let in all those Catholics, and they will change your country forever.

Mexicans may not be good enough Catholics to ever ban abortion, but they will certainly uphold the Social Welfare state.

THIS is where you Protestant Southerners have decided to refight the Civil War. Truth is, we agree on abortion. Truth is, by opposing Social Security, universal education, universal health care, and general poverty relief, organized by government and paid for by redistributive taxes that specifically take more from the rich, because they have been given much and much is now expected, you oppose God.

You think you support God, but that's just Calvin's "usury is ok" heresy working its way through Protestant veins.

Nobody every convinces Protestants they're wrong. Sexual license has made half of them leave the faith, leaving a remnant that is hard-core, and minoritarian.

Nobody ever convinces Catholics they are wrong either. Catholics who go soft, prevaricate about abortion and turn into Pelosis and Bidens, which is terrible, BUT even THEY retain the fundamental understanding that the social welfare state and progressive redistributive taxation are expressions of the commandment of God to the king to care for all the poor, and that in democracies were each the fractionated piece of the king, and must vote to support what is necessary.

Your side will never be convinced otherwise, and neither will mine. It's the North and South all over again.

But demography is destiny, and we're STILL importing millions of Catholics every year, because your crony capitalists just LOVE that cheap exploitable labor, and you Protestants can never find your way to free yourselves from them.

This is why I'm pretty confident of the future, looking forward.

Obama set down a marker with Obamacare. It's a crappy program, and its pressures will inevitably drive us to full-on single payer, a new Social Security program, paid for by progressive redistributive taxes. Just as God wants.

Catholics and Protestants don't agree. But Protestantism is disappearing, and Catholics keep immigrating and reproducing.

So in time, I win. By the time I'm 250, things should be pretty good.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-07-31 21:53:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: TooConservative (#33)

I've concluded you are, at most, nominally pro-life. Not actually pro-life in any meaningful sense.

I don't vote Democrat, even though the Democrats are right on economics.

You DO vote Republican, even though the Republicans put Roe in place, expanded it with Casey, and ushered in public funding of abortion through Romneycare and two Supreme Court decisions protecting Obamacare.

Truth is, you serve money. That's what Republicans do: they serve money. They serve monied interests. Then they lie about being pro-life, even though they GAVE us Roe v Wade and Casey and Romneycare and Obamacare, because that's the only way they can persuade a large electorate to vote against its interests.

People like me, for example, who voted Republican for all these years, against my economic beliefs, because of the abortion issue.

So I guess if voting is a meaningful thing, then the fact that I have voted for Republicans for 15-odd years because of the abortion issue means that I am "actually" pro-life in a meaningful sense.

Truth is, in this corrupt and dying country, the most meaningful thing that anybody can do that is pro- life is to pray.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-07-31 22:08:28 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: TooConservative (#33)

As always, every drop of your venom is used on a GOP target, not on the Dems who have been the implacable enemies of the unborn for the last 50 years and whose judges are absolutely uniform in their enmity toward unborn children.

You aren't fooling us with your more-pro-life-than-thou routine.

Republicans and Democrats are both babykillers and evil.

Democrats believe in social welfare once you're out of the womb. Republicans oppose that.

So, Democrats are despicable babykillers, and Republicans are uncharitable despicable babykillers and liars.

A pox on both houses.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-07-31 22:36:18 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 33.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com