Hillary Clinton is unraveling quickly

Feel the Bern!
He's about 90% better than Hillary..for real.

 

Is that really how Republicans feel?

 

Yeah. Hillary's a corporate shill, but Sanders is real and ethical. Okay, sure he's far left, he'll raise taxes to hell. But it'll also put the nail in the coffin in the "The US has far more mouths to feed, but can easily be Sweden!" talk. If Sanders works out great, if he doesn't, our argument becomes the only argument left.

A failure of a Democratic president means that sooner rather than later, you'll have to "puke" and vote right wing. Hey, at least it won't be another neo-con Thank us for hijacking and destroying them.

 

Bernie's a crazy old commie, but we love him compared to Hillary (And, we love what he's doing to Hillary )

That should tell you a lot about Hillary.

You're running the worst candidate ever.

Even Obama could make himself appealing to half of America.

 

The DNC is scared sh!tless of the Clinton's and especially Hillary. ONLY way that she won't get the nomination is

1. She steps aside - NOT going to happen
2. She drops dead

Note that even IF she ends up indicted I doubt if she'll withdrawal.

 

I completely disagree tat Hillary is a "corporate shill".

She works within the system. And does it well for everyone's benefit.

Since when did Republicans object to corporations?

Not in my lade time. But then I guess you need something to say

 

Why would someone not be anti-Hillary? She's a liar and a crook.

Oh wait, I'm asking someone that would ask for "more evidence" if she shot her dog in the face in the middle of the white house lawn.

 

According to NBC Exit Polls, 1/3 of the people who voted in the primary said that they are going to vote for Trump regardless of who wins the nomination. Sanders won those voters by a large margin.

 

Bernie whipped her ever-broadening ass. Voters who have not voted yet in the primaries, your nation needs you. Right or Left, vote for Bernie so he can carry a string of wins into the convention. The more the nation sees Hillary, the more they detest her. Exposure for her is like light to a vampire:

The Huffington Post favorability rating tracker shows this clearly since Clinton emerged fully into the light during early 2013:

 

This is correct, but that's not where the Democratic Party is heading. They have no interest in reviving the type of FDR populism that Sanders embodies.

There is a particular strategic vision represented by the Clintocrats. It's been developing for 25 years, and they are not about to give it up. They aim to replace the GOP as the go-to party for multi-national corporatism. They have the FIRE sector well in hand already, and rumblings from the Kochs indicate the energy sector may not be far behind.

The New Democrats are angling to be a center-right coalition with the full backing of liberal capitalism (liberal capitalism has a particular meaning here - I'm not talking about 'liberal' politics). The proximate triggering event is the revolt within the GOP. The republican establishment is no longer able to enforce the mandatory paradigm: open borders, 'free' trade, free movement of capital (outsourcing), and destabilization of foreign regimes that do not buy into the paradigm.

Clinton is totally reliable on all these points. Trump is reliable in none of them (at least, as far as we can now tell). Obviously, Sanders. Warren, and other dissidents are totally off the reservation. They will be strung along for a time and gradually forced into the wilderness.

Sanders and other progressives will be fighting the last war. They will try to 'reform' the Democratic Party. They may waste another decade in this futility. By the time they realize their mistake, left populism will be dead.

If the Clintonocrats are successful, they will be able to establish the Presidency as a one-party center-right state for the foreseeable future. With unlimited financial backing, they would (over time) be able to parlay this into significant gains in the national and state legislatures.

The only person standing in their way is Trump. By accident of history, is the right man at the right place at the right time. Is he equal to the task?

I have no clue, but the stakes are higher now than they have been in the past 75 years, if my analysis is correct.

 

Hillary Clinton has set low personal standards and then consistently fails to achieve them.

 

Oh thanks..Such a insightful post. aka either side can win. bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

I am no prophet nor the son of a prophet but I do have some analytical ability.....Trump will win! got dat....and as some think............by a landslide.

Get on The Trump Wagon....a revolution is about to happen.

 

LOL Hilary is GW Bush in drag. She is owned outright by Wall St and the Neocons. If you loved the Patriot Act and 2008 bankrupting of America, you have definitely hooked your horse to the right wagon....

 

Nice death cross! You smell that? Smells like someone's campaign just died.....

 

And with more scrutiny this election season (Trump will FORCE the media to cover it by bringing it up) thats sure to grow.

As a registered independent, I will be voting for Bernie in the CA primary.

Why, that won't help Hillary one bit.

 

I wouldn't worry about the Democratic Party, they still have the larger voting base or those who affiliate with them. Granted going by one poll, those numbers are good for Trump. But an April poll puts Clinton up by 7 over Trump in Arizona.

http://www.brcpolls.com/16/RMP 2016-II-04.pdf

A May poll has Trump by only one in Georgia.

http://media.beta.wsbtv.com/documen...ide Poll Pres May 5th xlsx_4271809_ver1.0.pdf

An April 26 poll has Clinton up by 12 in North Carolina.

https://1ttd918ylvt17775r1u6ng1adc-...nt/uploads/2016/04/CivitasNCPollApril2016.pdf

There's good and bad news all around. My guess is Pennsylvania remains close until a month or two before November and then shows it true colors and goes Democratic as it has in each of the last 6 presidential election. Florida and Ohio, too close to call. Also Georgia will go for Trump, now North Carolina, who knows? Remember it went to Obama in 2008 and then to Romney in 2012. Both by an average of 2 points.

The thing about this election is Clinton has tons of baggage, she is not well like outside of Democratic circles, she is a poor campaigner and she comes across as aloof. Any Republican candidate should be leading her by double digits, but Trump is trailing her.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...s/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

That may say more about Trump than Clinton. I see you said those two are tied among independents. Not good enough for Trump to win. Trump has to win around 55% of the independent vote to overcome the larger Democratic voting base. A tie among indies benefits Hillary.

I will say this, a week ago I would have said Trump has no chance. But looking at Trump and how he disagrees with quite a lot of the Republican Party ideals and the idea of an independent candidacy. Trump in a way has run an independent candidacy within the Republican Party to gain its nomination. One sees it here on this site with Trump supporters calling him a populist, a nationalist, everything but a Republican or an old fashioned conservative.

Thinking about that, I take back my no chance of winning. I think it is a very steep hill to climb and Trump at the moment is behind the 8 ball. Also I am not all that sure Clinton will be around to run in November. Yesterday I would never had said that. No reason, just a gut feeling.

 

I agree with your analysis, except with one important caveat: I don't think the Clintons planned this, so much as they 1) Lucked into it and 2) I think the ones wanting this, is big industry. And then 3) I don't think this will go as well as planned, if they can't bring the Left Populists abroad. I suspect the thoughts of West Virginians are the thoughts of most Left Populists: If they can't get populism from the Left, they will join the new Populism party.

That may very well not be Trump. What we have to hope for, is that Trump's defeat is mitigated, he accepts it gracefully, etc. Don't make it harder then it actually is to replace the system through the democratic process. It's already a mountain, and its going to be a taller mountain going forward. The only way it's not a taller mountain is if Donald Trump wins.

And even then, if he wins and flops, it'll be a taller mountain still. Who would be persuaded by "I'm a better reformer than Donald Trump?" Nobody, that's who.

 

Hillary has a path to victory but its very rigid and clearly defined.

Trump has much more maneuverability-and he's a master at maneuvering.

I've never seen anything like it. I think the buzz alone could win it for him.

 

shortly after bambam' inauguration i predicted that hillary would succeed him in the oval office. it was easy to recognize our hapless leader as the nation's first affirmative action president and i realized at the time that the american electorate was on a roll and probably wouldn't stop until it had given both of our most advertised victim classes their turn in the oval office. it isn't that i thought the american people were any dumber than they had ever been, but that they now believed themselves to be intellectually superior to the populations that had come before and it would take these two atrocious mistakes before they realized that it wasn't just the old white guys who were screwing up the country. though trump's successes this last year and hillary's failures and inability to stay out of trouble during her tenure with the current administration have certainly cooled my certainty in my own predictive capabilities, i still believe the electorate is foolish enough to put hillary in the white house once again for at least a single term. my reasoning is quite simple - the media has sold the unwashed masses on the idea of their superior intellectual qualities and those attention whores can't afford to change horses at this late a date, even for a chance at real change in the political establishment.

 

I view it just the opposite. Clinton is basically starting out with 247 electoral votes, 227 if you discount Pennsylvania. Trump with 191 and that is including Georgia and Arizona. 164 without those two states. Clinton has at the moment solid leads in New Hampshire 12 points, Virginia 9 and North Carolina, 3 of the 8 swing states counting Ohio, Florida as too close to call or put into anyone's column. Those three states, Virginia, North Carolina and New Hampshire add up to 32 electoral votes. That's 279 if one includes Pennsylvania, 259 without. Even without Pennsylvania that leaves Clinton needing only 11 more out of Florida 29, Ohio 19, Iowa 6, Nevada 6 and Colorado 9. 270 needed to win.

I just do not see the maneuverability at this point in time. That may change, But most states are written in stone as to whom wins what.

 

Do you think more "solid" states are in play this cycle?

 

As a registered Republican I will be voting for Bernie in the CA primary right along with you. Go Bernie!

 

....

 

Georgia and Arizona may be, more so Arizona than Georgia regardless of what WSB's poll showed. From what I have read there has been a huge increase of Hispanic voter registration in Arizona. Hence the polls that show Trump and Clinton tied out there. So too is the senate race between McCain and Kirkpatrick all tied up.

You mentioned Pennsylvania which at the moment, like Georgia looks very much in play. But I would say look again around August. I think both states won't be in play anymore. Pennsylvania has a long history of looking in play until a month or two prior to the election and then it goes Democratic. I wouldn't call Pennsylvania solid Democratic, but likely. The same with Georgia for Trump, likely.

I would call Nevada, Ohio and Florida pure toss ups. I would call North Carolina, Virginia, New Hampshire, Iowa and Colorado as leaning Democrat. Leaning mean those states are competitive but one party or the other has an advantage. At the moment I would consider Pennsylvania as leaning Democratic, Arizona and Georgia as leaning Republican.

I thought Michigan would be competitive this cycles with around 500,000 Democratic voters leaving Detroit and other cities up there. But it doesn't look like it. Michigan hasn't been polled since March, but those three polls showed Hillary in the lead by 8, 10 and 13 points. A lot of Republicans thought Wisconsin would become competitive, but 2 April polls shows Clinton up by 12 and 10.

Its early, like I always say, all it takes to turn this election on its ear is one major unforeseen event. I do think independents and Hispanics may hold the key to November. Romney won 51% of independents in 2012 and lost, he also received 27% of the Hispanic vote and lost. In case you're wondering, Romney also received 59% of the white vote. Only Reagan back in 1984 received a higher percentage of the white vote than Romney did, Reagan received 66%. Reagan also received 37% of the Hispanic vote.

 

And Reuters confirms they are tied nationally.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/trump_41_clinton_39

Rasmussen picked up this shift a couple of weeks ago