Yes, I think all those things are in play. Plus Hillary has a very unattractive persona and image, and while that may not matter while her only job is supporting an important man, she’s not going to go far nationally with it. She got elected in NYC because they elect the likes of Jerrold Nadler (my rep back in the day - ugh - the slob used to stand by my subway stop at rush hour trying to shake hands and I always avoided him) as long as they’re raving liberals. But outside of NYC, I don’t think she’d go very far.
Obama was the first celebrity candidate, and henceforth, every candidate is going to have to be a celebrity. Bizarrely enough, he’s not good looking, is a terrible speaker, has a lousy track record and a dead-fish personality (with a very limp handshake, I’ve heard) - but the press picked him to promote as a celebrity mainly because of his color and his leftism. Obama was a faux celebrity much the way the Kardashians are, but regardless of that, it works.
The GOP is never going to get the press to give us a faux celebrity. So our next candidate has got to be a genuine celebrity, somebody who’s done something and is somebody, is attractive personally even if not physically, and who can’t be ignored.
No. Hillary does not give one crap about what people think of her. 47% of the people are hers, at least today. Romney d head should have stuck with that premise and gone with it. He was 100% correct. Teh rest, she can get one way or another.
.
When republicans figure out how to deal with that fact they can discuss running a candidate