5 Reasons Hillary Won't Run

How many times do I have to say it, we can all agree to the stipulation that she is the front runner.

Is it a lock that she will be the next President? I surely wouldn't bet the farm on it and as the book tour proved once again she is not very good out in public and she didn't help herself let alone probably hurt herself. That is not saying that she knock herself out of contention but I would challenge you to show how she helped her chances.

They have several in their stable, viable does not mean a lock on it you know.

Ahh she doesn't about her age or the fact that she will be a grandmother or her health, those will NOT be the reasons she decides not to run although they may be the announced reasons. Has nothing to do with being psychic, I know them well from past history.

It has been an utter failure compared to ANY previous President including Bush43. That is why the Democrats in tuff states are running away from him.

Yes he could be and would be one who would not run on Obama policies but has anyone heard a wimper about him even considering a run? I haven't but I don't claim to be listening especially for it.

 

What the Demos forget.....that which comes around, goes around. So Like BO did to Romney even before Romney threw his hat in the Ring. BO used the MS media to go after Romney.

Now its Hill-Dogs turn. Except she has a whole hell of lot more damaging baggage then Romney ever did. Not to mention the village idiot routine.

Plus she keeps having to point out her differences from BO and all his failings. So.....let her run.

All will know about her true character from Benghazi......Pics of Stevens being dragged thru Libya are All ready to go. Then there is that issue of.....her never checking back on her people to see if they got out alive.

She never checked back after she talked to Hicks.

This will be put out everywhere and with all Broadcast Sources. Let her face that reality!

 

we put a high value on electability.

I am all for diversity and open discussion. I never said otherwise. I merely point out the obvious in that the nature of primary voters will require the GOP crop of potential nominees to run pretty far to the right, and "etch-a-sketch" opportunities really don't exist.

Hillary spoke quite clearly about her wish that armed invasion be the LAST option. Those others were not willing to exercise that amount of patience, unfortunately.

You'd think they would have learned that in 2008... what creates this belief you have that they have learned it now? Really. As poorly as the economy was doing in 2012, if you all couldn't take down Obama under THOSE circumstances, why in the world do you think you'll be able to take down Hillary? And with WHOM?

 

That's the goal, in 2008 they place race on the higher pedestal, now will it be sex? It certainly wasn't qualification or accomplishment.

Well that is exactly what you are criticizing the Republicans. And with the Democrats we seem to be seeing a far radical leftist, Warren, now being injected which will bring up the same discussions on that side.

Sure everyone wished Saddam would have come to reason, but she also said that was not going to happen and as long as he was in power he would remain a threat. The fact remains she was one of the most vocal and ardent supports of the war in Iraq yet the left refuses to hold her accountable as they do those on the right and in fact try to not just ignore it but rewrite it.

She had no patience anymore and was quite clear that she had no reason to believe Saddam was going to cooperate and disarm EVER.

There was no TP in 2008.

2012.

It didn't get better after 2012. Obama being an incumbent squeaked it out, with the help once again of the MSM and the petty misrepresented attacks on Romney personally let only on the issues and once again race had a lot to do with it. Yes Hillary will be a tough candidate if she eventually becomes that because the MSM so supports her and of course her sex will have a lot to do with it. She certainly won't win based on her accomplishments or record so what exactly do you think it will be that gives her the win?

 

more electoral votes than your candidate.

 

But you don't like the Tea Partyers either, SMW....you've always said that they are loyal Republicans who in the end, do as they're told on Election Day.

 

Poor Sarah......good thing Rightwing Media never goes after Democrats and their familes, huh?

(Ref: all the crap even on this thread about Hillary and Bill. Or even attacks on Chelsea when she was young.)

Funny how the Clintons can stand up to it....but Sarah ..can't.

 

the Obama "mystique" cannot be recreated

the timing was right
here's a hip black guy
Hollywood and the media pushed him everywhere

the youth and blacks were motivated

that will not be recreated because that voting block has moved on to Instagram, selfies etc and they've "done politics"

So, that leaves you back to a traditional campaign and only the Clinton machine with the name recognition has a chance at getting out voters

 

that's your take on it.... good for you. Who'd you pick to win in '12, btw?

 

Don't be so sure of yourself

The media is already running cover for her by asking her all those "tough questions" right now.

They will not ask her any of those during the campaign. They can simply say that it's been covered.

Let's review potential opponents

Christie- guilty of nothing but he's already been smeared by the media to the point that people think he did something wrong and is a bad guy

Jeb- please, another Bush. People don't know why the "dislike W" but the media has told them to dislike "W" so no Bush stands a chance

Jindal- who?

Walker- Who

Rubio- who?

Cruz- you're kidding, right?

Paul- LMAO

that leaves 2 candidates

Perry and yes, Romney.

Sure, Perry has the glasses and is riding the birder crisis wave and has jobs in TX.

Romney has name recognition and his campaign can basically be, here's your chance for a do-over.

Romney v Hillary is the closest race there can be

Hillary v anyone else and she's a shoe in

Romney v anyone else and he's a shoe in

it's about brand recognition this time and both Hil and Mitt have already been vetted.

Both parties, despite their bloviating in public, already know this.

America is ready to put an adult back in the office to fix the problems and both of them can make that claim. With both of them, it will come down to whether you believe America stands for opportunity or America is for punishing success.

 

Obama.

Feel free to go back and read any of my posts. I disagreed with my fellow conservatives who felt that voters were smart enough to understand the state of the economy and foreign affairs.

I posted that not enough pain had yet been felt and the media was still blaming Bush and the GOP.

During the 08 campaign I admired the work of Axelrod and posted that. I could see what he was doing and would have done it myself.

My background is marketing and as a business owner I need to be able to predict trends and demands and not react to them, but anticipate them. If we're in reaction mode then it's too late.

There is nothing political about my saying that Hillary must be the horse you ride. It's just a marketing guy stating which product he sees as having the most sales.

 

and do you honestly think that the GOP has any skill in predicting the trends of voters in America? And I am perfectly happy with Hillary as our candidate. I am sure she'll be a great president and Bill will be a great supreme court justice... or maybe Obama... or both?

 

No their not......they are doing exactly what they did to Romney.

I see you don't have Ben Carson, Mike Pence, Kasich or Portman from Ohio, nor Mitch Daniels either.

Also Condi Rice as a VP......for Pence, Daniels, or Kasich. Crushes anything the Progressives and or Liberals can muster up.

The Demos need to start looking to their future......as soon they will no longer be able to divide the country up.....just to have a chance to win.

 

good grief

who, who, who and who?

The media is too invested in a Democrat keeping the WH.

Major networks also see the polls and what people think of their "news" organization.

By asking questions, and allowing her to bob and weave, the major networks get to check off the box of having vetted Hillary way back in 2014

That then opens up the narrative of all of her experience (no accomplishments) but let's get serious. It's going to be eluding to how the economy was when a Clinton was in the WH

The Clinton name is the only one that the Democrats have to address the economy. Do you really think Biden or any other Dem has a chance by touting the success of all of the restaurant and part time jobs which were created under their watch?

You really need to pull back from the politics and policy and look at it from a messaging perspective. That is what wins marketing and political campaigns.

The public does not want to learn about policy. They don't want to have to understand how capitalism really is the only answer.

They want a short, sweet ad and if they are going to vote, they want it to be for a name that they know. Those are the voters who now decide elections.

Both sides, those who want to punish success and those who believe in America, each have their base which will vote. It's getting the uninformed who just vote out of habit to pull the lever for you

Calling them "independents" or "undecided" voters is just a nice way of saying uninformed.

 

The who who and who.....if you notice most have Governorship experience.

Also Pence used to be the 3rd Highest ranking Repub in the House......before he became Governor of Indiana. Which Mitch Daniels the former Reaganite was holding the Hat prior to Pence.

Which really does outshine the who and not much there for the Demos.

Well, when it comes to all those undecided.....one thing is clear. They would rather have one that would do anything to help get them out of trouble. Not leave them there to die.

Hillary isn't much to hang their hopes on.....as like BO. She will leave them with just more Change in their Pocket.

 

ROFL to compare the one statement by Limbaugh for which he quickly apologized to the relentless going after Palin's children even to this day is laughable.

 

ya know... there are good candidates and bad candidates... and everybody who is at all opinionated has their favorites and they have the ones they vilify. It seems to me that the GOP has gotten into a groove of devouring their own during primary season, but that's just my take. If I were a betting man, which I rarely am anymore, I would put money on Hillary to beat whoever comes out alive at the other end of the GOP primary death match. But until a truly transformational leader arises from one of the two major parties that can bring us all together, or until one party gets the house, 60 in the senate AND the white house, we are in for more gridlock and bickering, I feel. I'll just sit down here by the pool, margarita in hand, and watch the fun from afar.

 

And that assuredy is based on what exactly?

A lawyer who is prevented from practicing law before the SCOTUS because he committed felonies before a federal court sitting on the bench, how absurd.

You can't be cool on the SCOTUS nor go around speaking your mind freely on issues so why would Obama want to be on the SCOTUS?

 

Could be overcome and forgotten.

Hillary, please another Clinton?

Obama who?

There's others out there we can't even imagine at this point.

I'd vote for either in a heartbeat over Hillary as would most conservatives the question being will moderates and I would say yes.

Don't bet the farm on it this early.

Obama had no brand recognition heck Bill Clinton had no brand recognition the first time he ran other than a godawful speech he had given and the previous convention.

 

more than a half a century observing American politics.

committed FELONIES? Never convicted of a single one.... you need to use the language with more precision.... either that, or (*)(*)(*)(*).

I disagree. Thurgood Marshall was cool. W.O. Douglas was wicked cool. Obama would do well, and there clearly is precedent for him to move over to that job.

 

no kidding Obama was a nobody

Axelrod sensed the market conditions and executed a tremendous marketing campaign. If Obama was a white guy, or even a white woman, his plan would not have worked.

Hollywood, magazines and the media hopped aboard and the wave began.

Come on, kids singing mmm mmm mmm Barack Obama or "we're gonna change the world, Obama gonna lead us"

History will look back and say........................what the F were we thinking? How did we allow that to occur and put a completely incompetent and inexperienced person in the WH

The answer- Axelrod

he waged a very good marketing campaign and the moons were aligned for it

 

whoosh, right over your head

I know who they are
you know who they are

do you really think the uninformed voter is going to waste their valuable vote on someone they don't know or will bother to actually research the person?

heck no

do you recall the 2012 election with panels of "undecided voters" right up until November.

You're kidding me right? Undecided voters..........................

the uninformed will vote for a name they think they know but definitely heard of before

I bet if you ask the "undecided" or "independent" voter why Bill Clinton doesn't run again that 1/2 of them don't know the answer.

 

Well BO did prove Marketing himself. So we do have to think about.....how a nobody can become somebody.

 

What ever you do do not forgot about the electoral college, Democratic trustworthy states vs. Republican trustworthy states. In states Obama won by at least 10% of the vote that gives the Democrats 207 electoral vote and in the states where Romney won by at least 10% of the vote, that is 154 Electoral votes. These I call safe sates. So in safe states the GOP will be starting at a 53 Electoral vote disadvantage. 270 is needed to win. Now throw in the states that were in-between 5-10%, These can change, but the odds are roughly 4-1 that they will remain the same as in 2012. That brings the score to 272 to 191 with only 4 states that was decided by less than 5 percentage points, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina and Florida.

So what states that are in that 4-1 odds should the GOP look at to switch to their side, Colorado which Romney lost by 5.37%, Pennsylvania by 5.39%, New Hampshire 5.58% and Iowa at 5.81%. For a GOP candidate to win in 2016, they must the 4 mentioned swings states from the paragraph above and at lease one of the 4 I mentioned in this paragraph.

 

Depends if Kasich or Portman makes the dash. If they do and win the Nominee. Ohio will go Red.