Posted on 11/05/2014 9:21:37 AM PST by LeoMcNeil
Andrew Romano of Yahoo News believes Hillary Clinton was the big winner of last nights election. Liberals are obviously desperate to latch onto something positive from last night, even if they have to make it up. Last night’s Republican wave wasn’t so much about the Republicans making great arguments and winning the country over. It was a repudiation of the Democrats, President Obama in particular. Because we have only two major parties, the Republicans benefited from the repudiation of the Democrats by default. The left is hoping that the repudiation was limited to Obama and not the entire party. If the country simply dislikes Obama, Hillary Clinton will be in prime position to win the White House in 2016.
The problem though is that Hillary had her own string of defeats in 2014. Kentucky Democrat Alison Grimes did everything she could to distance herself from Obama while she embraced Hillary. Grimes lost by 15. She campaigned for Sen. Bruce Braley in Iowa. Braley lost by 8.5. Both Bill and Hillary Clinton campaigned for Mark Pryor in their old Arkansas stomping grounds. Pryor lost by 17 points. In other words in these key battleground Senate races Hillary did absolutely nothing to help the Democrat candidate. If one were to believe the polls over the last month, all of them were potentially winnable by the Democrats. Yet despite Hillary’s campaigning, none of the Democrats came close to winning. This includes Arkansas, a state in which the Clinton’s have been almost invincible for four decades.
Hillary is going to have a hard time separating herself from Obama. This is going to be a problem for any Democrat but it’s particularly a problem for Hillary. She served as his Secretary of State for four years, she was part of his perceived inner circle. While Hillary was infinitely better as Secretary of State than John Kerry has been, she’s going to carry Obama’s international baggage with her. Benghazi is the biggest international problem that can be attached to Hillary. All of the international issues that have cropped up over the last two years have ties to Hillary. ISIS didn’t just come about over night, they’ve been around for years. Hillary is going to have a hard time distancing herself from Obama’s foreign policy, especially so if things get progressively worse in the international world.
Even domestically Hillary is going to have a hard time distancing herself from Obama. At the end of the day, it was Hillary who argued for Obamacare in the 2008 Democrat primaries. Obama wanted single payer, Hillary wanted what was to become Obamacare. Her best argument is that she can manage it better than Obama, which is a tough argument to make in a country that opposes Obamacare by a 60% majority. She had her own “you didn’t build that” moment a few weeks ago when she declared that businesses don’t create jobs. In a country that rates the economy and jobs as the most important issues and with Obama’s policies clearly not working and/or not supported by the public, Hillary’s going to have a tough time distancing herself from Obama’s core economic philosophy.
Romano of course assumes that Hillary will not only run for President but become the Democrats nominee. Everyone assumed as such after the 2006 midterms and look how that turned out. The Republicans obviously have their own problems, not the least of which is a battle between the Tea Party and the establishment. However anyone who looks at last nights election and walks away thinking Hillary is the big winner is dreaming. Democrats are in trouble. Their leader is unpopular, they didn’t just lost the Senate last night. They lost 4 Governors races flip, including blue states such as Maryland, Massachusetts and Illinois. The Republicans held onto blue or purple state Governor mansions in Florida, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin. Several state legislatures turned Republican, including the New York Senate. The Democrats were beaten soundly last night across the board. This doesn’t bode well for Hillary or any other Democrat. The 2016 electorate will not be the 2012 or 2008 electorate. It will be a lot more Republican because after eight years of a Democrat in office, the country is ready for a change.
Once again the toxic coattails of the Clinton Crime Family were deadly on the campaign trail.
Rand is exactly right. Every candidate she worked hard for lost. Arkansas went 100% Red. Illinois has a Republican Governor.
Please, Hillary, keep helping the RATS!
The question for her, if she runs, is whether she goes far left or tries to position herself as a moderate. Think about how either option will go over with the RAT base...
That’s why Warren will run, to make Hillary look Moderate by Comparison.
Arkansas is now unbelievable. Gov, Both sens, all four congress members.. LOL
I realize the Clintons haven’t been associated with the state in two decades but it’s still fun to discuss.
NO
If Crust had won, yes, but he didn’t. The clintoons were crying last night
Elizabeth Warren is going to run and she has a shot at taking Hillary down. Warren could be 2016’s Obama. The majority of Democrats are far left progressives like Obama. They’re likely to pick a leftist and stick with him or her. Bill Clinton’s coalition doesn’t exist like it did in 1992, which is why Hillary lost in 2008. She has name recognition but that won’t matter when the base Democrat primary voter is to her left.
Don’t forget about Julian Castro. He’s my “pick to click.”
I don’t think this made any difference.
The next Democratic nomination remains, as it has been since Bush was re-elected ten years ago, Hillary’s to lose.
We know from 2008 what it takes for her to lose it: a candidate who excites the money, appeals to one or more core primary demographic, and feeds the media a story as good or better as “first woman President.”
We can start out saying that no white man plays, period. Elizabeth Warren neutralizes the “first woman” story ... but she has yet to convert her left wing preaching into any kind of support outside of the latte-sippers, who are a minor demographic, while that preaching has polarized the East Coast money against her. Julian Castro might be a better case; in 2016 Latinos will be a much larger share of the primary electorate than African Americans in many states, while at the same time he doesn’t have the reputation as a leader in the anti-business rhetoric that Warren does.
"Really...?"
Yahoo should fire Romano. He's beyond delusional. BUT this is probably a sign the delusional party is going to throw that warmed over left over casserole out as another HISTORIC UNQUALIFIED CANDIDATE.
The Clinton wing of the Democrat Party is all in for Hillary. The progressive, Obama wing of the party is not. At least not yet. It will be interesting to see who the progressive wing picks as their next greatest thing. Elizabeth Warren is someone they might attach themselves to. I’ll bet Obama gets involved publicly, which no sitting President has ever done before.
The Clinton Crime Family has a really strong record of imparting toxicity to candidates they campaign for.
And if you look at “voter heartthrob” BJ he won only by pluralities both times. Hillary did win pretty big twice but it was in NYState, hardly a challenge for a Dem.
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.