Posted on 03/17/2016 7:01:44 AM PDT by shortstop
Even with her victories Tuesday night, Hillary Clinton will not be elected president of the United States.
Why? Because she can’t win, that’s why.
And the sooner you figure this out, the calmer you will be.
She wants desperately to win. She’s endured painful decades of Bill, years of Barack, eating all the insults like so many sins and swallowing them down as the price of her ambition. It’s all there in the dull weight of her eyes.
But I just don’t see Hillary winning this election, because she’s the lone candidate of the establishment in a year of insurgency.
Common wisdom and her fierce Clinton tribalists will probably want me burned at the stake for heresy, or chemically altered. But this is an insurgent year. And she’s the Empress dowager of the Washington establishment.
Democratic socialist Bernie Sanders isn’t an establishment creature. And on the Republican side, economic nationalist and self-funding Donald Trump and conservative Ted Cruz are definitely not establishment. Cruz and Trump have been at war with their party. The GOP establishment needs Cruz now, but they don’t like him.
And they’re angry with Trump because he won’t take their money, although in the last Republican debate Trump did something brilliant. He suggested he may be open to fundraisers if he’s the Republican nominee, smartly giving those money boys an opening. This was missed by the media in all the talk of Trump’s new tone. But the insiders certainly noticed. All they want is access. By hinting that he may allow it after the Republican convention, Trump means to charm them into leashing their dogs.
That leaves Hillary Clinton, with her massive fundraising, her Democratic Party insider status, the Wall Street speeches bringing more cash, the Clinton Foundation clout, the connections foreign and domestic.
Clinton is the political embodiment of the establishment. And that spells serious trouble for her, because the American people are in an insurgent mood, fueled by the holes in their bank accounts, all those jobs Bill Clinton sent overseas with his support of NAFTA, and the rifts in what we once called the common culture. It spreads across class lines like fire in a dry riverbed. It won’t stop until the weeds are gone.
Most of the public focus has been on the Republican side, on the anger over there. But the Trump rally in Chicago was shut down Friday after anti-Trump protesters massed inside the gathering.
The screaming at enemies has two purposes: The first identifies the foe. That’s understood. But the second involves herding votes.
Because the longer you can compel the tribe to shriek wildly and point at that tiger in the night forest, the more you can get them to fear what’s out there, the tighter the villagers are bound to your side around the campfire.
It’s not only about pointing at the enemy. It’s about using shame — even on social media — to make sure the simple villagers won’t stray.
But the Democrats have far fewer villagers this year. Their turnout in primaries is low. The energy is all on the Republican side. And all that shaming has kept Americans blind to Clinton’s weakness.
She has other problems, including the consensus from primary exit polls that she’s considered to be a liar. Young women don’t like her much, perhaps because Clinton’s old feminist allies tried to shame them into submission. Now Hillary is thought of as some angry grandmother.
She seems overly scripted, stuffy, tired, as if every word she speaks has been poll-tested and run past criminal lawyers. And she still hasn’t won that critical FBI primary over her email scandal.
Clinton kept top secret information on a private email server and the secrets may have been hacked by foreign intelligence, compromising lives and American policy. Her IT guy has been given a grant of federal immunity and is cooperating.
FBI Director James Comey is a close friend of corruption-busting former U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald of Chicago. They’re cut from the same stone. Don’t be surprised if he drops one on her.
Even Democrats who aren’t excited by Clinton say that she deserves the nomination. And, if she could be honest for a moment and drop the gender identity war club, she might say that gender aside, she deserves it, too, for all the time she’s put in climbing.
But Clint Eastwood explained all you need to know about the deserving to a dying Gene Hackman in the Oscar-winning Western “Unforgiven.” Hackman, shot and on the ground, said he didn’t deserve to go that way.
“Deserve’s got nothin’ to do with it,” Eastwood told him.
And it was done.
Deserves have nothing to do with power politics. Timing is everything. And I don’t see Hillary winning, because she’s the wrong candidate at the wrong time.
Americans are pissed.
Yepper!
“As it is written so it shall be done”.
yeppers
Well the GOP treasonists are trying their utmost to make it so. They'd rather have Paul Ryan or Mutt Romney as the nominee which would be a guaranteed loss to the witch.
I remember when Bill Clinton could not win reelection in 1996.
Hillary &Crew have been busy for months changing local election law & regulations to allow more Dem votes more often and fewer Republican votes - it is all about her ground game - not her popularity, not inside or outside.
Voting machines that automatically change R votes to D votes, votes counted overseas by Soros owned foreign companies are among the reasons to be even more wary.
Underestimating the Dem ground game is one reason 0bama won twice.
BJ was certainly vulnerable.
But with Viagra Bob as the candidate and Perot spoiling again, he had a massive 379 ev win.
If they do that and win, isn’t their government illegitimate?
Don’t believe this. Hillary can win. Trump better do something about the fact that he last women votes in every state this time around. He has to find an answer for that.
0bama did and managed 7.5 years, so “what, at this point, does it matter?”
I had a conversation with a relative yesterday who had been looking at the turnout per candidate in a particular state, I think Missouri, and the turnout was higher for Hillary than for Trump, and he felt that meant that Hillary would win based on turnout in a head to head match in the fall. I hope he’s wrong. I will admit I’m not a Trump supporter originally, and as I have had conversations with this relative in the past - he is a democrat but initially felt Hillary couldn’t win, would have been okay with Paul, and was afraid of Trump. he asked me what I was going to do. I said, I can’t vote for Hillary, and he said, you can’t? I said no. I still feel and hope that Trump with run away with it, but my relative did unnerve me a bit with his analysis. We can talk about politics without screaming at each other. :-)
Considering that it makes our elections a sham, it matters. Considering that it strikes at the root of what our system of government is supposed to be, it matters. Considering all that the government presumes to do for or to us, and does so witbout the true consent of the people, it matters.
That was a Hillary quote BTW.
Oh, I know. It can be used to cover a number of situations by the left, such as, as long as they get power and do what they want to do, what difference does it make how they got there?
Not that Herself cannot possibly win, but only to the degree that vote fraud and chicanery go unchallenged and not acted upon.
It is not who votes, but who counts the votes.
Fraudulent elections are rarely overturned in this country.
And if the results are not overturned, then the vote was “legitimate”.
No way a guy named Barack Hussein can be elected President ...
And the Republicans should have learned by now to have closed primaries if they don’t like the results. Shame on how stupid, stupid, stupid the RNC has been. They certainly have had the money to shape up and wasted the opportunities.
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.