Hillary Clinton is still a terrible candidate


Oh, how stupid we all were! Remember that time five minutes ago when we all wanted Joe Biden — Joe Flipping Biden — to get in the race? I can’t either. And all that anxiety about an email server in Chappaqua, New York? Preposterous. At the first Democratic debate last week, Hillary Clinton sent a message to doubters: “Crushed it!” Cancel the future debates. Let’s start picking her cabinet. She’s got this.
Hate to spoil the party, everyone. But Hillary did not make herself queen last week.

Conventional wisdom, like the above from last week, is like a traditional soufflé in a microwave. Instant, tasteless, likely to collapse any minute. Yes, Clinton can unite her party. Especially when the other options are an avowed socialist, a former Republican senator, a former Reagan official who smiles at the thought of killing on the battlefield, and a former Maryland governor who built a cops-and-incarceration résumé and ran in the exact year when those politics seem cruelly out of date.

I cannot stop emphasizing: Hillary Clinton’s only electoral victories were in one of the most Democratic states in the country and against nobodies. She defeated an incompetent Republican backbencher, Rick Lazio, in 2000. In 2006, the New York State Republican Party sent John Spencer, mayor of Yonkers, to be its sacrificial lamb. Clinton spent $36 million defeating Spencer in an election with a 23 percent voter turnout. Spencer had raised just over $5 million, and was given to describing people as having a “Chinaman’s chance.” Not exactly a model for defeating the GOP this time — unless Donald Trump is her opponent, he suddenly goes dead broke, and his name recognition drops by roughly 97 percent. (The “Chinaman’s chance” thing, I can imagine him saying.)

Clinton was beat when Barack Obama slyly made ethics and conviction the themes of his campaign. Sanders foreswore the possibility of talking about her email server, and he seems not at all interested in contrasting his constancy of conviction with her history of expedient changes of heart.

Senate, as secretary of of state, and then draw your own conclusion." A Republican might actually point out that when she asks us to fill in the blanks, it’s because that record is mostly blank. Or bad. In the debate she referred to the U.S. intervention in Libya as “smart power at its best.” Surely Jeb Bush could point out that Libya is now plagued by the Islamic State, and anarchy reigns there to such a degree that it is now one of the major veins through which a refugee crisis flows into Europe. Clinton called for “a new New Deal for communities of color,” which sounds almost exactly like the kind of phrase you might use in the 1950s.

Rubio, who says that he is the candidate of tomorrow, will not let her get away with hawking 80-year old policy ideas.
Clinton has never beaten a first-class opponent. And nothing in her recent campaign should cause us to forget it.
Hillary Clinton is still a terrible candidate

Unless the GOP really screws up it should be a GOP election.


The TEA party wants to see the GOP burn, and to hell with the nation.


There is no TEA party and there is no lock-step among the various Tea parties. In the last election there were TEA parties in favor of and TEA parties opposed to Romney.


[QUOTE=Jazzhead (C&P from quote)]The TEA party wants to see the GOP burn, and to hell with the nation.[/QUOTE]
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight… :rolleyes:


It’s the DNC and the GOP that want to see the country burn.


It is plain to see neither wants what is best for the country




Good point. There are several different TEA groups and no they are not in lock step. But they do make a good strawman for the left.


Not to me. It is plain to me that both Dem. and GOP believe they are the good guys. It’s violent people Nazis, Fascists, Commies, who insist that only they are the virtuous ones in a democracy.


I don’t think they want to see the country burn. I believe that they don’t care if the country burns as long as it doesn’t spill over into their nice neighbourhood, affect their careers, impact their children’s private schools.

These people are from a different universe than the one where they would affix their signature to a document ending “…we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”


I strongly suggest we crawl out of our foxholes long enough to grasp a few very simple concepts.

First - people tend to vote in what they PERCEIVE to be their self interest.

Second - many/MOST people are either too busy or too lazy or too stupid to pay attention to what is happening at home and abroad in any meaningful detail and, as a consequence, do not have a well developed understanding or historical perspective of important events.

Third - successful politicians “craft” their message based on the above two points.

Our founders conceived of an enduring republic based upon, indeed requiring, the presence of an alert, informed electorate. What we have instead is a distracted, unfocused electorate all too often swayed by distorted messaging contained in 30 second sound bites and visuals intended to take advantage of the seemingly ever increasing number of low-information voters lacking in historical perspective and practical knowledge of how/why things do or don’t work.

The point: We can point the finger at the RNC, DNC, this or that politician and other entities all day long to explain how/why things at home and abroad have sunk to this point - and they deserve their share of the blame. However, when it is all said and done, far too many of us have failed to live up to our part of the grand bargain placed upon members of any republic - becoming educated and remaining informed and vigilant and actively demanding better; mediocrity (or worse), dishonesty, scandal and even open corruption have become acceptable to far too large a segment of our electorate.

The cure - Beats the hell out of me, but let us hope it isn’t getting a city and her people blown to hell or soup lines stretching for blocks on end.


The problem isn’t 30-second sound bites. The problem is too many people listening only to perspectives that reinforce their prejudices and fears, rather than challenge them.

What worries me are folks who think all they need to do to be “informed” on the issues is to listen to an hour a day of Rush Limbaugh, or Rachel Maddow.


I couldn’t follow a lot of politics because it is very time consuming. As to Rush Limbaugh, when I turned off the music stations and started listening to him, that’s where I learned a lot about how politics work today, who the players are, etc. He is the one that got me interested,

It’s natural for people to want to hear that they are not alone with their ideas and feelings about issues. To pigeonhole or paint everyone with a broad brush is what liberals do.


The GOP establishment is certainly TRYING to give the election to Hillary. Perhaps Jeb! should just be her running mate.

Don’t worry. THE DONALD will be the nominee and he will crush the Democrat nominee. Count on it.


Don’t get ahead of yourself. At this time during the 2012 election cycle, Herman Cain was ahead in the polls.


Think for yourself, dude. You’re not Trump’s minion.



Even if someone doesn’t support Trump, at least he’s taking 99% of the heat right now. Meanwhile, the non establishment candidates are continuing to rally support. I think that should encourage everyone who wants a candidate other than Trump.


The best (indeed the only good) thing I can say about Trump is that he’s attacted millions to the debate. They tune in to see the geek, and hopefully take an open-minded look at the other candidates, many of whom are excellent conservatives.