Hillary Clinton Not Campaigning Much for her Party in 2014, Unlike Richard Nixon in 1966

Just about everyone noticed Hillary Clinton's scathing comments on President Obama's foreign policy in her interview with The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg.

But almost no one has noticed where Clinton hasn't been seen. That's on the campaign trail or at fundraisers for Democrats running for the Senate.

Obama hasn't been on the campaign trail much either, for the very good reason that he has low approval ratings in the seven states carried by 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney where Democrats are defending Senate seats.

But at least Obama's been busy raising money; up in Martha's Vineyard, seemingly the heartland of today's Democratic Party, he spoke, between golf games, at his 400th political fundraiser.

Clinton here is following the opposite course of a politician she has been compared to frequently, though usually not by her admirers: Richard Nixon.

As Patrick Buchanan shows in his recent and characteristically vividly written book, "The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority," Nixon campaigned tirelessly for Republican candidates in the 1966 midterm elections.

That election produced big Republican gains, including 47 House seats (contrary to the obituaries written for the party after Barry Goldwater's 1964 defeat), and helped elect Nixon president in 1968.

So why isn't Clinton following Nixon's example? For reasons as clear-eyed as her takedowns of Obama. First, she is in a stronger position to win her party's nomination today than Nixon was 48 years ago.

Second, she, unlike Nixon in 1966 and like most sober-minded observers this year, doesn't see this as a good year for her party.

One reason is structural. The Senate seats up for grabs this year are in states that, on average, voted 52 percent for Romney and 46 percent for Obama in 2012. Obama won by an average of only 50.1 percent in seats now held by Democrats and received only 39 percent of the vote in states with seats held by Republicans.

We are not likely to see Clinton campaigning in the seven states with Democratic senators that Romney carried in 2012. Not even in Arkansas, Louisiana or West Virginia, which Bill Clinton carried twice, or Montana, which he carried in 1992.

A year ago, Democrats hoped to hold onto their Senate majority by stressing local issues, accusing Republicans of waging a "war on women" and capitalizing on the defects and mistakes of Republican candidates.

But in a sluggish economy, with one Obamacare miscue after another and a world in violent disarray, promises of free contraception don't seem to be moving many voters, and some local issues are working more against Democrats than for them.

That's apparent in Colorado, a state that twice voted for Obama and where polls now show a tie between Sen. Mark Udall and Republican Rep. Cory Gardner. Democrats hoped for a weaker Republican nominee, but Gardner entered late, and other Republicans stepped aside.

There's also a backlash in Colorado against severe gun restrictions passed by the Democratic legislature and ineptly defended by Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper. And Democrats are split on fracking. Early this month, Hickenlooper and Udall pressured Rep. Jared Polis to drop support for two anti-fracking ballot initiatives, fearing they will be political poison in an energy-producing state.

In a TV spot, Gardner says his family's health insurance was canceled. That may remind voters that Udall's staff was accused of pressuring the state insurance director to suppress reports that 250,000 Coloradans had policies canceled because of Obamacare.

In Iowa, another state that went for Obama twice, Democrats hoped Rep. Bruce Braley would easily replace 30-year Democratic incumbent Tom Harkin. But state Sen. Joni Ernst, who grew up on a farm and became a lieutenant colonel in the National Guard, easily won the Republican nomination, and Braley has made one blunder after another.

Videotape shows him speaking to Texas trial lawyers and disparaging Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley as "a farmer from Iowa who never went to law school." Grassley won in 2010 with 64 percent of the vote.

Braley's wife took issue with a few chickens crossing onto her property, and the Braleys filed a complaint this year with the Holiday Lake homeowners association. At the Iowa State Fair, Braley spoke mainly with reporters, not Iowans. Not very neighborly.

Will Clinton stump in Colorado, a state held up as an example of Democratic gains, or Iowa, a state not usually avoided by presidential candidates? That might force her to weigh in on Obamacare, illegal border crossings and fracking.

In 1966, Nixon's campaigning helped Republicans gain five Senate and those 47 House seats. Clinton is apparently afraid she can't match that record.

Obama's toxic on the campaign trail...some pols have cancelled joint appearances for fear the sight of him will dim their already perilous election chances. But Obama's undeterred---he's a regular Energizer Bunny ---- hopping about non-stop to raise funds.

Obama's obsessive non-stop fund raising among the smug/stupid Dummy elite is beginning to look sinister. The world smolders but the Dumobcrat ding-a-lings soldier on w/ fund-raising.

REALITY CHECK Could this be a WH/Democrat Ponzi scheme in progress?

While they bash Wall Street publicly, leaders of the Democrats' mega-funder "The Democracy Alliance" have quietly recruited venture capitalists, bankers and hedge fund moguls -- along with union bosses and red-diaper trust fund babies -- to fund their takeover goals. ....$230,000 public school union dues go to the Democrats' "Democracy Alliance."

"The Democracy Alliance" does not itself raise and spend a great deal of money. Rather, being a partner in the Alliance requires one to contribute large amounts to other left-wing groups. The Alliance evaluates left-wing organizations on various criteria, and makes recommendations to its members as to where they should put their money. Currently, the Alliance lists 21 groups in its “Aligned Network”:

<><> America Votes, American Constitution Society, Black Civic Engagement Fund, Brennan Center, Catalyst, Center for American Progress, Center for Community Change, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Common Purpose Project, Fund for the Republic, Latino Engagement Fund, Media Matters for America, New Media Ventures, New Organizing Institute, Organizing For Action, Progressive Majority, Progress Now, State Engagement Initiative, State Voices, Women’s Equality Center and Youth Engagement Fund.<><>

The most interesting of the D/A documents that have come to light is the one that contains D/A’s “investment recommendations” for 2014. Not only does it list the recommended organizations, but it rates each organization in several categories, sets out the group’s budget for 2014, and shows how much of that budget should be contributed by the 100 members of the "Democracy Alliance." One category in which DA rates the organizations is “Collaboration,” as DA believes that all left-wing groups should coordinate their activities for maximum political impact.

Opportunistic pols like Harry Reid have denounced Charles and David Koch, and others, who contribute to conservative causes as “shadowy,” “secretive” people who dare infest politics with “dark money.”

In that context, it is worth noting that most of the groups to which the Alliance and its elite liberal members contribute are 501(c)(4)s that do not disclose their donors.

===============================================

ANALYSIS Buncha sap-happy Dummy/dopes are feeding the Democrats' Democracy Alliance lotsa money---thinking its safe.....going to a "good thing."

That's exactly how Madoff operated. Money-laundering, tax evasion was part of the Madoff mix---helping investors, foundations, and tax-exempts break the law in a seemingly legal way.

=====================================================

Madoff helped himself to the untraceable money in the process.....and got himself in trouble. When he went to jail for 125 years, investigators found Ponzi King Madoff had stashed billions offshore---into a labyrinth of financial entities.

COLLUSION AND CONSPIRACIES GALORE Some $8.9 billion was funneled to Madoff through a dozen so-called feeder funds based in Europe, the Caribbean and Central America......a labyrinth of hedge funds, management companies and service providers that, to unsuspecting outsiders, seemed to compose a formidable system of checks and balances.

But the purpose of this complex financial architecture was just the opposite: the feeder funds provided different modes for directing money to Madoff in order to avoid scrutiny.

Dummycrats apparently took notes.

Morning Joe Consensus: Hillary's Canned Quality Makes You Cringe
NewsBusters ^ | Mark Finkelstein / FR Posted by governsleastgovernsbest

So lacking is Hillary in the most basic of personal political prerequisites that even Morning Joe called her "canned" and cringeworthy. The panel was commenting on an excruciating clip of Hillary...... that there is something about Clinton's public persona as to be seriously off-putting. (Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...

===============================================

The Clintons are paranoid---Hillary's "dead broke" comment to ABC's Diane Sawyer is haunting her candidacy. The Clintons lay awake nights, trying to dream up angles to make voters forget her "dead broke" bomb.

She's really desperate---picking on the Redskins franchise last week. She bombed doing an outlandish comedy routine w/ Colbert. Where she'll strike next is anybody's guess.

Maybe she'll take it all off for Playboy---seeing that "she needs the money"?

Maybe Hillary, Bill and Chelsea will stand in a bread line, join hands, and sing Kumbaya?

==========================================

The Clintons were relying heavily on the old reliable Dummycrat "equality" bugaboo but that was before the world knew the Clintons were worth billions. The Clintons' have benefitted from, and are climbing back into office, using privileges far beyond those of the "community of color" to whom they planned to appeal.

"White privilege" denotes the array of advantages the Clintons have cultivated over years in public office. The gold-plated, endless perks of "white privilege" include:

<><> their personal massive wealth in the $2 billion range....

<><> ownership of multiple homes in posh enclaves....

<><> unknown secret offshore bank accounts...

<><> unrevealed investment profits...

<><> the chain of high public offices they've held....

<><> privileged friends in high places....

<><> global connections....

<><> constant affirmations of their own worth....

<><> greater social status...

<><> the expansive freedoms wealth and connections provide...

<><> unlimited access to the press to speak freely.....

<><> their memoirs made millions....

<><> Dec 2000 book deal $8 million; 2014 book deal $14 mill....

<><> three tax-exempt Clinton family foundations worth hundreds of millions....

<><> Clinton foundation "endowment" skyrockets to $200 million overnight....

<><> Hillary's $200,000 speeches.......

<><> Bill's tax-paid cushy pensions/benefits....

<><> tax-paid Clinton Library (Hollywood honey Sultan of Brunei a donor).....

<><> Chelsea's paid-for $10 million uber-condo.

2016 Hillary was relying on the "income equality" bugaboo to hoist herself into office......as good a definition of "white privilege" as any. The Clintons strategy is to label others as "different" while presenting themselves as "normal."

The Clinton "normal" is couple billion dollars laying around without having a real job. The Never-Enough Clintons had planned to run a populist campaign, critical of the Wall Street types”....that's after the world was informed that speaker Hillary was pocketing $200,000 a throw from Goldman Sachs.....and other corporate giants.

The Clintons went from "dead broke" to multi-billionaires in an astonishing short period of time----without holding jobs The greedy, mega-wealthy Clintons have money pouring in from everywhere without lifting a finger...said to be worth couple BILLION dollars.

Never-enough Bill/Hillary look to cash in w/ another go-round in the White House. The Clintons owe bigtime......money is pouring into their three tax-exempt foundations......and these donors expect payback.

Clintons raised $2-3 billion in two decades
The Hill ^ | July 2, 2014 | Alexandra Jaffe / FR Posted by Cincinatus' Wife

Bill and Hillary Clinton raised $2-3 billion in the two decades they’ve been prominent on the national stage, according to the WSJ.

The Journal tallied the Clintons’ speaking fees, fundraising for their foundation and the sums raised for Bill Clinton’s two presidential campaigns for the DNC while he was in office and for Hillary Clinton’s Senate and presidential campaigns.

Between $1.3-2 billion came from U.S. companies and industry sources, making up at least 75 percent of the sum — more than the 60 percent industry sources contributed to the two Bushes’ political operations.

The Journal reports that if Hillary Clinton runs for president in 2016, as expected, she could return such donors to the Democratic Party, a source of concern for Republican fundraisers as they gear up for what’s expected to be the most expensive presidential election in history.

Overall, the Clintons’ political operations raised $1.2 billion, their nonprofit drew between $750 million and $1.7 billion and they made about $100 million in speaking fees. --SNIP--

=================================================

The figures are what THE CLINTONS ALLOW us to know. DOES NOT include (1) amounts secreted in numbered offshore bank accounts,(2) investment holdings, (3) safe deposit boxes holding coins, gold, valuables, etc, (4) other holdings in real estate, businesses, (5) rental, interest accrued, investment income, etc .....

=================================================

The latest Clinton frown-line maker is that they are investors in "The Beast"----the freight train company bringing illegals across the border to leech off Americans. There have been thousands of accusations of human rights abuse, and even reports of murder on the freight trains transporting undocumented migrants to the US border. The migrants have also reported train operators standard practice of extorting money from the passengers.

The trains used and involved in these accusations are publicly-traded companies, traded on NASDAQ, with "very influential stockholders", such as Clinton and Carlos Slim. Other stockholders include,T Rowe Price, Bank of America, and General Electric. A real bummer is that these transportation companies are involved in the Narco trade, and in this report it makes it clear that the companies are aware of the abusive practices their train operators are engaging in. The border swarm is all about human trafficking, narco trafficking, and government and corporate collusion.

This is "The Beast"---ain't no Atcheson, Topeka and the Santa Fe.
No running water and flush toilets on those freight trains.

Coming to America.

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.