Posted on 05/15/2013 2:22:23 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The top advisor to last year’s Republican nominee predicted Wednesday that if Hillary Clinton runs for president in 2016, she will lose in a Democratic primary.
Clinton is widely thought to be the strongest 2016 presidential contender in either party, with high approval ratings and early poll numbers that show her beating top Republicans like Sen. Marco Rubio in their home states.
But Stu Stevens, the senior advisor to Mitt Romney’s failed presidential bid, told reporters at a breakfast sponsored by National Review that Clinton wouldn’t survive a Democratic primary.
“I would predict that if Hillary Clinton runs, she’ll lose the primary,” he said.
Asked what Democratic candidate might beat her, Stevens tossed out just one name: John Hickenlooper, the moderate governor of Colorado who is thought to be considering a bid, despite having little to no name recognition at the national level.
“She’s been around since the ’70s,” said Stevens, adding that Clinton may very well end up running against a Republican many years her junior. “It’s very rare that we go back a generation. And you know, unless we nominate Bob Dole, we won’t be going back a generation.”
“If I was a Democratic hot-shot politician, I would primary her so fast,” he added....
(Excerpt) Read more at buzzfeed.com ...
“Top Romney strategist” is an indirect oxymoron. ;^)
Morality is destiny.
Stevens “It’s very rare that we go back a generation. And you know, unless we nominate Bob Dole, we won’t be going back a generation.”
________________________________________
LOL
Willard is older than Hillary...
His old age doesnt stop the Romneybots from continuing to try to push him for 2016...
They’re actually only about six months apart, both born in 1947.
So you checked ???
But while Hillary is pillaged as “old” by the RomneyBots, Willard is worshiped as energetic and vibrant, “capable” of being “president”
If Hillary is damned because she is too old, why not the old Botox-faced Willard ???
and since Hillary at 69 is considered too old in 2016, that also disqualifies Willard who is as you said six months older...
Its also laughable that the RomneyBots were screaming in 2008 that FRed Thompson at 64 was way too old to be president...
BTW I wont be voting for either liberal...
even if they were only the required 35...
Soon to be ex-mayor Villaaraigosa of Los Angeles would love to be the younger face to defeat Hillary. But I can’t think of any other young Democrats who are up for it. Who am I forgetting?
Yup....this is a center-left nation now thanks to demographic changes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.