politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles
Title: Hillary Clinton is unraveling quickly
Source:
NY Post
URL Source: http://nypost.com/2016/05/10/hillary-clinton-is-unraveling-quickly/
Published: May 11, 2016
Author: Michael Goodwin
Post Date: 2016-05-11 08:25:37 by cranky
Keywords: None
Views: 5044
Comments: 37
A liberal friend is very concerned about the Republican Party. He tells me that Donald Trump will make it impossible for anybody anywhere running under the “R” column to win election. Even a dogcatcher in Podunk is doomed! The New York Times shows a similar concern. Surely written with furrowed brow, its front page worries because “Sparring in GOP Rises” and because “Rift Grows Wide as Republicans Abandon Trump.” It joins two other concerned lefties, the Huffington Post and CNBC, in declaring that the GOP is “unraveling.” All stand ready to help sponsor a dignified funeral, but that won’t be necessary. Their reports of the Republican Party’s death are premature. Very premature. A new Quinnipiac poll tells the inconvenient truth. Trump and Hillary Clinton are tied in each of the three key swing states of Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida. The breakdown in Florida reveals how truly close the race is. As Politico puts it, Clinton has a 13-point advantage among women, 48 percent to 35 percent, while Trump’s lead among men is also 13 points, 49 percent to 36 percent. Each gets 39 percent of independent voters, while Trump wins big among whites, and Clinton wins big among nonwhites. The candidates have identical net negative approvals of minus 20 points, 37 percent to 57 percent. With the poll showing Bernie Sanders doing better against Trump than Clinton (and Sanders winning the West Virginia primary on Tuesday), I myself am growing concerned about the “unraveling” of the Democratic Party! Big Media’s fixation on the defections of Big-Name Republicans is the latest proof that both groups remain stubbornly disconnected from real Americans. If Trump had been dependent on the support of Mitt Romney or Sen. Lindsey Graham or assorted pundits and donors, he never would have gotten 10 million primary votes. He launched a rocket-fueled revolution, defeated 16 rivals and became the presumptive nominee by running against the entire national establishment, not to mention conventional wisdom and both political parties. Now he’s doomed if Romney doesn’t back him? Nonsense. Yet each day, the drum beats louder about a new and greater threat to GOP harmony. The current one is the insistence from everybody on the left, and a few on the right, that Trump is toast if he can’t get House Speaker Paul Ryan to endorse him. By all means, endorsements are generally a good thing for candidates, and party unity is usually regarded as an essential starting point. But the claim that Trump must finally conform to all the traditional norms repeats the false assumptions that led the media and most Republicans to miss Trump’s astonishing appeal in the first place. He is a phenomenon, much as Barack Obama was in 2008, and he could do to Clinton what Obama did to her then. Obama was fresh, and she was tired. Now Trump is fresh, and Clinton is even more tired. One result is that the campaign will be fought on his turf. The issues most associated with him — immigration, terrorism, trade, jobs — dominated the GOP primaries. Indeed, try to imagine the last year without Trump. Who would have set the GOP agenda, what issues would have led the way, and how would voters have responded? Would turnout have hit record levels when so many Republican voters feel betrayed by their own party leaders? Trump stirred the drink from day one and the ability to set the terms of the contest is usually the hallmark of a winning campaign. That’s what he’s done so far, and that’s what he’ll try to do in the fall. Clinton can’t let him succeed, and instead must put him on defense with nonstop attacks on his character and lack of government experience. She’s already doing that, but is paying a price with his fierce counter-punching. Her big advantage is the Electoral College, and she will try to shut him down by relentlessly playing the women’s and racial cards. And it’s certain Trump will hand her gaffe gifts and display an embarrassing lack of detailed knowledge. We know all that already, yet still they are tied in the states that matter most. She may win and he may lose, but neither The New York Times nor Mitt Romney will make a whit of difference. Blas, Cuo in summer slimeshare The continuing blizzard of subpoenas demonstrates that New York’s twin corruption scandals are no mere spring fling. Investigations are expanding in the offices of both Mayor de Blasio and Gov. Cuomo and could make for a very hot summer. Coming after numerous lawmakers were convicted in separate cases, the probes paint the era as one of the most corrupt in history. How’s this for a slogan: More crooked than Tammany! Things are so bad that Mayor de Blasio is using Al Sharpton as a character witness. The mayor made a visit to Sharpton’s headquarters and again painted himself a do-gooder caught up in a witch hunt. “The voices of the status quo find many, many ways to undermine progress,” he claimed. Sharpton echoed the “woe is us” tone, calling de Blasio a man of “integrity.” He should have found a word with less baggage. Recall that the mayor had called Sheldon Silver a “man of integrity” when Silver was charged in the federal case that saw the former Assembly speaker sentenced to 12 years in prison and hit with nearly $7 million in fines and restitution. And this Thursday, another alleged man of integrity, former GOP state senate leader Dean Skelos, gets sentenced for his thievery. Silver and Skelos are Cuomo’s former amigos from three-men-in-a-room infamy, and now the governor himself could be under the feds’ microscope again. Prosecutors want records showing whether six current and former members of his inner circle did anything to “benefit” 20 different companies that got state business. Cuomo and de Blasio are sworn enemies, and each is no doubt happy to see the other in a jam. For now, both would be wise to hold the laughter. a Khan-do mayor Sadiq Khan, London’s first Muslim mayor, wrote an op-ed promising that: “As mayor, I will be the British Muslim who finally roots out extremism and radicalisation from British society. I will support mainstream Muslims to challenge extremists and work with the internet providers to ban extremist websites.” Wait, if he’s saying there is an actual link between Islam and Islamic terrorists, he must be wrong. President Obama says there is no connection, and He always knows best. Trans-fer fight to lockers A reader offers a suggestion on the transgender tempest in a piss pot. “Bathrooms are very private places,” he writes. “Locker rooms and shower rooms are not. How many women would be happy to share a locker room or shower with a transgender woman who has male sexual organs? “My guess is that the polling numbers would be dramatically different if pollsters asked about locker rooms instead of bathrooms.” 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 9.
#1. To: cranky (#0)
I missed the "unraveling" in the text of the article. Yes, and much as Barack Obama was in 2008, Trump is a fraud.
Obama has not been a fraud. He campaigned on a set of principles, and by and large he did what he was expected to do.
Unbelievable!! The guy is more despicable liar than the Clintons and a bigger crook than Nixon. For God's sake, man, get a sense of reality. Just look at all the outright lying, records burying, cover-up actions, and total lack of transparency from him and his minions. No person in their right mind would believe anything this asshole says.
Well, here are the things I have heard him say over the years: (1) He would implement universal health care. He did. (2) He would have a different relationship with the Muslim world. He did. (3) He would advance gay rights. He has. (4) He would raise the taxes on the rich. He did. (5) He would impose as much restriction on guns as he could. He has. Obama never said what means that he would use to do it. He never ruled out really nasty, even illegal tactics. No, he said what he was going to do, said what he was running on and what he was elected to do, and he DID IT. He said he would close GTMO, and hasn't quite done that, but he has let a lot of terrorists go. Obama has not been a fraud. He ran on a list of things, and he executed most of the things on that list. Sure, he used vicious, even illegal tactics to achieve his goals, and sure, some of those goals themselves are questionable as to their value, but that is not the issue. What I said was that Obama was not a fraud. He promised the people who voted for him (and warned everybody else) that he was going to do certain things. And he did nearly all of them. That's not being a fraud - that's being straightforward. Obama has been a very EFFECTIVE president, at advancing HIS agenda. Just because YOU despise him and his agenda doesn't mean that he was a fraud. It means that you don't like his objectives, and you hate the fact he was effective at ramming them through, by hook or by crook. Contrast that with the Republicans, who have run on a number of things election after election, but who never actually DO them once in power. Obama DID what he said he was going to do. In that respect, he was far more honest than his Republican rivals, who promised the moon but who ended up just rolling over and giving Obama what he wanted. Do not confuse tactics with objectives.
(1) He would implement universal health care. He did For starters he didn't implement that at all but only a first step towards a single payer system. ObamaCare still leaves tens of millions without healthcare coverage. As for the rest of your claims of what he said, they are pure BS. For example, he ran saying that he opposed gay marriage - FLASH he didn't keep that vow. Yes, he changed relationships with the Muslim world by alienating the Saudis et.al in favor of Iran - wow, a nuclear Iran, what a deal, Iran will undoubtedly get nukes and soon. As for raise taxes on the rich, he also raised taxes on everybody else as well. For example, the upper income threshold for 15% tax bracket in 2007 for married joint return fliers was $63,700 in 2015 it was $72,500, a 13.8% increase. The upper income threshold for the same group for a 33% tax bracket in 2007 was $349,700 vs. $398,350 in 2015, a 14.1% increase just about the same for the middle class taxpayer. But here is the kicker if you earned less than $15,650 in 2007 YOU PAID ZERO Federal income tax but by 2015 those earning $1-$18,450 YOU PAID 10% to Uncle Sam. GET IT - that is a infinite increase on income of $15,650 or less under Obama. Did he tell you hat as well? You are so wrong that one wonders if you are just deliberately misinformed or a DRat shill. In any event you are plainly full of sh*t. "Obama never said what means that he would use to do it. He never ruled out really nasty, even illegal tactics. No, he said what he was going to do, said what he was running on and what he was elected to do, and he DID IT." He also ran on being the most transparent, open and honest administration ever. I guess you believe that he lived up to that claim as well? That is consistent with you DRats who always believe that the ends justify the means. "Do not confuse tactics with objectives." Don't confuse lying, dishonesty, cheating, illegal activities with anything remotely resembling someone that keeps his word or acts in an enviable, much less honorable or justified, manner.
I get it. You hate Obama. You hate Trump. You're unhappy with everybody and everything. And if somebody disagrees with you, you level years of compressed vitriol at him, over nonsense that occurs in a city 500 miles away, over which neither you nor he has any control. So, now that you've vented, have a nice night. I stopped reading at "As for the rest of your claims...they are pure BS". Ok, got that too. You disagree, therefore, whatever I say is bullshit. You are entitled to your opinion. You've expressed it. Whatever you said after that point will be read by others. I stop now at the first insult and don't bother reading on. Not interested in being insulted. If you want to be heard, them you have to talk to people better. If you want ME to read what you say, stop insulting me. Since I stop reading at the first insult, everything anybody writes after that was just a waste of time. The target never saw it, and on this thinly-trafficked site, probably nobody else ever read it either.
I am glad that you realize this. Keep coming to the light. "I stop now at the first insult and don't bother reading on. Not interested in being insulted. Then stop posted BS comments when you know, or certainly should know, that they are BS. But you clearly identified yourself as one to who telling the truth doesn't, that honesty, integrity and even honor don't matter only winning does by any means necessary. You don't need me to embarrass or insult you. You don't need anyone to do that. You do the best job of doing that yourself.
There are no replies to Comment # 9. End Trace Mode for Comment # 9.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest He [Trump] is a phenomenon, much as Barack Obama was in 2008
#2. To: ConservingFreedom (#1)
Barack Obama was in 2008, Trump is a fraud.
#3. To: Vicomte13, ConservingFreedom (#2)
Obama has not been a fraud. He campaigned on a set of principles, and by and large he did what he was expected to do.
#4. To: SOSO (#3)
No person in their right mind would believe anything this asshole says.
#5. To: Vicomte13 (#4)
Well, here are the things I have heard him say over the years:
#8. To: SOSO (#5)
#9. To: Vicomte13 (#8)
....therefore, whatever I say is bullshit.
Replies to Comment # 9.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]