Posted on 05/21/2014 7:04:35 AM PDT by Kansas58
"The Mother-in-Law of Chelsea Clinton, former congresswoman Marjorie Margolies lost a chance to get back to Washington, "losing big in her Pennsylvania House race against state lawmaker Brendan Boyle."
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
“Neither an event featuring Bill Clinton, nor Hillary Clinton’s fundraising help was enough in Marglies’ effort to replace Rep. Allyson Schwartz. Schwartz gave up the seat to run for governor in Pennsylvania but also lost his bid.
Margolies served in the U.S. House from 1993 to 1995, but she failed to win re-election – largely because of her deciding vote in favor of then-President Bill Clinton’s budget bill.”
If you look at history, 1992 and beyond, the Clintons have either been ineffective or toxic when it comes to candidate endorsements.
Sometimes folks forget that even old BJ hisself never won a majority of votes for POTUS and likely would have lost both races if they were 2-way.
Well, I’m in no hurry to find them :)
Good points. Ross Perot was a big factor in Clinton’s elections.
Clinton won solid majorities of the electoral vote in each election, but never cleared 50% of the popular vote.
Wasn't it called the "Clinton Thud"?
Yep, headline sounds as if the Clintons are lost and can’t find their way back home.
Despite the most fervent worship and hype of the MSM, the Clintons have never really been that popular.
2008 proved it when the “formidable” Hildabeast was stomped by an unknown guy from Nigeria with the nearly unelectable name Hussein.
The same thing could easily happen again in 2016.
Good points.
And I wonder how it is, that so many say Hillary is inevitable. She was considered inevitable in 2008, and was taken down. If Hillary was inevitable once before and taken down, why does everyone think she is inevitable this time around?
The Clintons are not exactly loved by significant numbers of Democrats. I think Obama defeated her in part because of his being more liberal than her, and because he was a clear alternative to the Clintons. If a clear alternative comes up, I think that candidate will give the Clintons a run for their money again.
The Left wants Hillary to look “inevitable” and she is clearly NOT!
Assuming Lizzie Warren can secure the backing of the Chicago Mob (I have no idea how they relate) she would likely defeat Hillary in the primaries.
There were three candidates from Montco and one from Philly. The Philly guy won with the least amount of money but with very strong union support. He also was tepidly pro-life (while claiming to support Roe) so that gave him an advantage with Catholic Dems. The outgoing incumbent, Allyson Schwartz who tried and failed to gain the Dem gov nomination, was a pro-abort ghoul so this was the first contested Dem primary in some time with a marginally pro-life candidate, and the three Montco Dems tried to bash Boyle's abortion stance, and IMO it backfired on them.
They are....home is in Arkansas living on the Whitewater Estates which is exactly where they should be.
Thanks for the great details!
And she lost to a pro-life guy!!
Perhaps this will help
Yet, she might resonate with the voters for her disgust with the out-of-control banking system. I hope Rand Paul stands up real soon to inherit that issue from his dad, or the the dems will own the issue of reining in the out-of-control globalist banking cartel and the federal reserve.
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.