Skip to comments.Why Hillary’s high numbers (even among Republicans!) won’t last
Posted on 05/19/2014 2:09:35 PM PDT by Olog-hai
Some 57 percent of Americans who were aware of Clinton (isnt that everyone?) have a favorable opinion, while 43 percent see her negatively. And nearly one-quarter of Republicans said they had a favorable view of Clinton. Thats pretty remarkable in a polarized electorate, suggesting a certain crossover appeal.
Clinton was most frequently described as strong, but Benghazi was the term that stood out most when respondents who said they had an unfavorable view of Clinton were asked to explain this perspective.
And therein lies the rub. [ ]
The reality is that if nothing extraordinary happens, the only person who could keep Hillary Clinton from being the partys nominee would be Clinton herself, says The Washington Posts Chris Cillizza. [
] But Clinton would be 69 years old on election day 2016, and couple her age with that scare in late 2012 and its hard to imagine Clinton not taking a full accounting of her health before officially deciding to run.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
That’s what was going around before 0bama was elected for his second term.
Lets just wait for that first time she either faints or has a brain stoppage during a live-TV interview.
It will be interesting to see how 2014 factors into this...
The libs will vote for her if she’s in a long term care facility, mumbling from her restraint seat mumbling in word salad.
One of these things is not like the others.
Hillary’s numbers go up according to how much she talks.....the more she talks the more her popularity drops. She wears on people’s nerves. It took no time for BO to surpass her!!!
Hillary knows that she doesn't stand a chance. The evaporation of her support in 2008 will happen again in 2016. The Democrats will support her until some Bright Shiny Object comes along to distract them.
So, what if the Bright Shiny Object is Chelsea, heroically picking up the fallen banner carried so ably forward by her heroic mother?
All Hillary has to do is carry the campaign through Iowa and a couple of other states. Then when she starts to falter, she needs to suffer a near-fatal bout of fill-in-the-blank. Then she can watch from the sidelines while the Democrat Party hands the nomination to Chelsea as payment for What Hillary Is Owed.
You will know this plan is afoot if they start pushing Chelsea out as a Serious Player, and she takes a visible and central role in her mother's campaign.
We will not hear her voice or see her face. The way Gabby Giffords lectures us from the headlines will be the model here.
Her dishonestly, deceit, and dirty dealings can be traced all the way back to the early 1970’s.
She has a laundry list so long, an entire volume of books could be written about it.
ONCE AGAIN, if the Media in this country was to do its job, the American people would know full well about all of reasons why this sleazy woman was not to be trusted to run a hot dog stand, much less a nation.
No joke, bloke. We know now what happens when Beastwoman's legendary telephone rings at 3 a.m. (the _Resident dumps the call and lets the callers burn to death), but that won't stop the Progs from trying to steal the election for whatever the 'Rats vomit up on their 2016 ticket.
Sounds likea bad made for tv movie but it may work what with how stupid so many folks are
If you're Joe Kennedy Sr. and really want to prove your family's as good or better than anybody else's, and you have millions available to you, and you stand no chance of getting elected yourself, you might commit yourself to such a long range strategy.
If you're Hillary Clinton and the presidency is in sight for you and there's no guarantee that your daughter is any good at politicking, and she may not even want the hassle of holding high office, you'll probably follow more of a short range strategy.
FWIW Jackie Kennedy might actually have managed to get herself elected to something if she really wanted it. Betting the mansion on Caroline's getting elected wouldn't have been a smart move. Not that Hillary is Jackie, but Chelsea may well turn out to be Caroline.
ALL YOU EVER WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT "SMART POWER": a post-Bush term coined by Hillary Clinton.
Hillary played a huge part in the "Smart Power" debacle.......her all-girl State Dept airheads couldn't even get the Russian reset button right.
Behold what "Smart Power" hath wrought: Debacle after debacle---Obama's careening and incomprehensible handling of the Syrian crisis, Benghazi, Ukraine, Boston bombings, Muslim jihad.
Obama's a US ntl security and foreign policy centerfold---he's stark naked before the world----naive, isolated, and outlandishly stupid..... displaying a buncha State Dept/NSA boobs as advisors.
Obama's gave his van driver top national security clearance. Tommy Vietor is Hillary's top pick for Secretary of State.
Little dude in his big boy clothes.
Democrats' 'Smart Power' Lies in Ruins; Suddenly
Realizing What They Miscalculated About the World
National Review | Sept 3, 2013 | Jim Geraghty / FR Posted by kristinn
....... Democrats are suddenly realizing that their foreign policy brain-trust completely misjudged the world.
Being nicer to countries like Russia will not make them nicer to you. The United Nations is not an effective tool for resolving crises. Some foreign leaders are beyond persuasion and diplomacy. There is no international community ready to work together to solve problems, and there probably never will be.
You can pin this on Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Susan Rice, but most of all, the buck stops with the president. Those of us who scoffed a bit at a state senator ascending to the presidency within four years on a wave of media hype and adoration are not quite so shocked by this current mess.
We never bought into this notion that getting greater cooperation from our allies, and less hostility from our enemies, was just a matter of giving this crew the wheel and letting them practice, as Hillary Clinton arrogantly declared it, smart power (and fronted Time magazine cover).
(These people cant even label a foreign policy approach without reminding us of how highly they think of themselves.)
They looked out at the world at the end of the Bush years, and didnt see tough decisions, unsolvable problems, unstable institutions, restless populations, technology enabling the impulse to destabilize existing institutions, evil men hungry for more power, and difficult trade-offs.
No, our problems and challengers were just a matter of the previous hands running U.S. foreign policy not being smart enough. (Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Anyone who considers him/her self to be a Republican but has a favovorable opinion of Hillary Clinton is not a republican at heart.
Could that be the start of the Hubbell Dynasty?
I think Chelsea would be 36 in February, 2016. That would probably make her the youngest president ever. And, of course she has a super resume...wait. What? She doesn’t? Doesn’t being Bill and Hillary’s child and being in the white house for 8 years mean she’s qualified? Well, she’s certainly qualified by being Hillary’s daughter as Hillary was the Secretary of State. But, even that might not satisfy a few stuck-in-the-mud voters. Maybe if she had an abortion instead of a child, that would help? I’m sure it would make all the Democrats proud.
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.