The Coming Democratic Panic. Watch what happens if Hillary Clinton falls behind?

[MAGAnificent]

That Clinton’s candidacy is in trouble is indisputable. She’s not threatened with losing the Democratic nomination—at least not yet. She has the well-financed Clinton machine and a national network of supporters on which she can rely. The campaigns of her Democratic opponents are small and weak in comparison.

But the rationale for her bid for the presidency, the strategy of her campaign, and the tactics she’s adopted—all have failed to stop her steady decline. The expectation of Clinton’s glide into the White House in 2016 is gone.


The Coming Democratic Panic | The Weekly Standard

 

[StillBallin75]

I think there are legitimate criticisms with how Clinton has handled certain things from a PR perspective. That being said, I doubt it means all that much because 1) It's the Clintons, who have been masters with dealing with the PR machine for decades and 2) thus far it doesn't seem like many people seem to care.

So maybe you're right. Maybe Clinton vs GOP field isn't going to be like Warriors vs Cavs. But you also have to consider the other side of the equation as well, because it's not like anyone on the GOP side of things has risen to her level either.

 

[pbrauer]

This article was posted yeaterday: http://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/225882-coming-democratic-panic.html

 

[radioman]

This article was posted yeaterday: http://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/225882-coming-democratic-panic.html

This is true, but because of the massive panic that is raging amongst us Dems, I think two threads are necessary.:roll:

 

[MAGAnificent]

I think there are legitimate criticisms with how Clinton has handled certain things from a PR perspective. That being said, I doubt it means all that much because 1) It's the Clintons, who have been masters with dealing with the PR machine for decades and 2) thus far it doesn't seem like many people seem to care.

So maybe you're right. Maybe Clinton vs GOP field isn't going to be like Warriors vs Cavs. But you also have to consider the other side of the equation as well, because it's not like anyone on the GOP side of things has risen to her level either.

Based on Hillary's tanking poll numbers, I think many care.

 

[pbrauer]

This is true, but because of the massive panic that is raging amongst us Dems, I think two threads are necessary.:roll:

In the same forumno no less.

It's a year and half until election day 2016, which is no time to panic.

 

[radioman]

It's a year and half until election day 2016, which is no time to panic.

Thanks for being the voice of reason.
I have put the Valium away.

 

[MAGAnificent]

In the same forumno no less.

It's a year and half until election day 2016, which is no time to panic.

What is a forumno?

 

[pbrauer]

What is a forumno?

A typo.

Typo | Definition of typo by Merriam-Webster

 

[OrphanSlug]

That Clinton’s candidacy is in trouble is indisputable. She’s not threatened with losing the Democratic nomination—at least not yet. She has the well-financed Clinton machine and a national network of supporters on which she can rely. The campaigns of her Democratic opponents are small and weak in comparison.

But the rationale for her bid for the presidency, the strategy of her campaign, and the tactics she’s adopted—all have failed to stop her steady decline. The expectation of Clinton’s glide into the White House in 2016 is gone.


The Coming Democratic Panic | The Weekly Standard

I've always found it suspect when an arguably right wing written article claims to know when its opposition will and will not panic about something. Opinion is one thing, but there is a long road between now and the conclusion of Hillary's campaign. The polling support has no where to go but all over the place until we get past who all is running, who all makes mistakes out on the campaign trail, get more information on where all the money is going, and get a little close to the nomination process of eliminating competition within a party.

Put the champagne back in the fridge, we are no where near close enough to celebrate.

 

[MAGAnificent]

I've always found it suspect when an arguably right wing written article claims to know when its opposition will and will not panic about something. Opinion is one thing, but there is a long road between now and the conclusion of Hillary's campaign. The polling support has no where to go but all over the place until we get past who all is running, who all makes mistakes out on the campaign trail, get more information on where all the money is going, and get a little close to the nomination process of eliminating competition within a party.

Put the champagne back in the fridge, we are no where near close enough to celebrate.

Amusing. That's just what we tried to tell all of you Hillary fans a little while back when you were coronating Hillary, not only for the democrat nomination, but the fall classic as well. If we suggested otherwise at the time, the left's response was: But...but...but...Hillary leads all potential GOP candidates by double digits.

 

[OrphanSlug]

Amusing. That's just what we tried to tell all of you Hillary fans a little while back when you were coronating Hillary, not only for the democrat nomination, but the fall classic as well. If we suggested otherwise at the time, the left's response was: But...but...but...Hillary leads all potential GOP candidates by double digits.

Um, I'm not a Hillary fan. That should have been blatantly obvious from my response (and post history, and lean, etc.) As for all observers of this campaign so far, most of us knew a long way back there would be challenges with her desires for the White House. Just about everything would be subject to scrutiny.

But the point still stands, we have a long way to go before she exits out of this. And we should be critical of a right wing piece talking about left wing panic.

 

[haymarket]

That Clinton’s candidacy is in trouble is indisputable. She’s not threatened with losing the Democratic nomination—at least not yet. She has the well-financed Clinton machine and a national network of supporters on which she can rely. The campaigns of her Democratic opponents are small and weak in comparison.

But the rationale for her bid for the presidency, the strategy of her campaign, and the tactics she’s adopted—all have failed to stop her steady decline. The expectation of Clinton’s glide into the White House in 2016 is gone.


The Coming Democratic Panic | The Weekly Standard

The article leads with this

When a CNN poll last week showed Hillary Clinton leading Rand Paul by a single percentage point (48-47) and only three points ahead of Marco Rubio (49-46) and Scott Walker (49-46), it was mildly shocking. In April, her lead over the three Republican presidential candidates had been in double digits: Paul (58-39), Rubio (55-41), and Walker (59-37).

If Rand Paul were to actually be the nominee there would be a field day for Dem strategists who would be able to accurately paint Paul as the most extreme anti-middle class American candidate going all the way back to Goldwater in 64. The campaign would so destroy Paul that we would see a repeat of the 64 Democratic Party landslide in most of the nation and up and down the ticket. I suspect Walker will be shown to be a vapid and unchallenging candidate whose sole claim to fame is he is anti-union. I don't think that will be enough outside of the rabid right wing who joins him in his loathing of unions. Rubio would fare better but the has a yeoman task to convince his fellow hispanics to support him and change the demographic advantage the Dems have.

 

[MAGAnificent]

That Clinton’s candidacy is in trouble is indisputable. She’s not threatened with losing the Democratic nomination—at least not yet. She has the well-financed Clinton machine and a national network of supporters on which she can rely. The campaigns of her Democratic opponents are small and weak in comparison.

But the rationale for her bid for the presidency, the strategy of her campaign, and the tactics she’s adopted—all have failed to stop her steady decline. The expectation of Clinton’s glide into the White House in 2016 is gone.


The Coming Democratic Panic | The Weekly Standard

Whatever. The truth is that the democrats have been in a panic all the way back into the lead up to the 2014 elections over what Obamacare is doing to them. Hillary's fumbles as a candidate with all of the skeletons in her closet has only added to that panic.

 

[MAGAnificent]

The article leads with this



If Rand Paul were to actually be the nominee there would be a field day for Dem strategists who would be able to accurately paint Paul as the most extreme anti-middle class American candidate going all the way back to Goldwater in 64. The campaign would so destroy Paul that we would see a repeat of the 64 Democratic Party landslide in most of the nation and up and down the ticket. I suspect Walker will be shown to be a vapid and unchallenging candidate whose sole claim to fame is he is anti-union. I don't think that will be enough outside of the rabid right wing who joins him in his loathing of unions. Rubio would fare better but the has a yeoman task to convince his fellow hispanics to support him and change the demographic advantage the Dems have.

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but Rand Paul will not be the GOP nominee. As for Walker, I think you know better. He would destroy Hillary, as would a few other of the GOP hopefuls. What you were really hoping fore was a Hillary vs Jeb Bush race. As for demographics, I don't buy that the left has that advantage. You are attempting to count your chickens before they hatch. Illegal immigrants are not going to get it done for you. And I think the democrats are afraid of Rubio. That's why they are suddenly making noise about his past traffic tickets. A non issue.

 

[ludin]

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but Rand Paul will not be the GOP nominee. As for Walker, I think you know better. He would destroy Hillary, as would a few other of the GOP hopefuls. What you were really hoping fore was a Hillary vs Jeb Bush race. As for demographics, I don't buy that the left has that advantage. You are attempting to count your chickens before they hatch. Illegal immigrants are not going to get it done for you. And I think the democrats are afraid of Rubio. That's why they are suddenly making noise about his past traffic tickets. A non issue.

Rand is not going to get the nomination. more so if he keeps shooting his mouth off like his dad.

Jeb is a toss up but I think people are tired of bush.

Rubio and Christie are the outsiders I think people need to watch. Honestly I am leaning to either Rubio or Christie and if the republicans ran a Rubio Christie ticket
then they would hands down win.

Dems lose their race card attack which is the only thing that they have.

Republicans strengthen they numbers among Hispanics for electing one and on top of that would have a strong vp in the white house for the next run.

 

[Helix]

unless she comes out for ending the wars and i can actually believe her new populist positions, i'd prefer a different candidate on the left. Obama ran as an anti-war populist, and governed as a semi-interventionist corporatist. part of it was congress, and part of it was because it's a lot easier to argue for these changes on a message board than it is to actually do them when you're in charge. however, the patriot act **** and the new trade agreement that he's pushing are big disappointments. i also still can't believe that with solid Democratic majorities in both the House and the Senate, they still couldn't manage to push through single payer or at least a public option. the ACA isn't even a half measure. it's maybe a step towards a half measure.

 

[haymarket]

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but Rand Paul will not be the GOP nominee. As for Walker, I think you know better. He would destroy Hillary, as would a few other of the GOP hopefuls. What you were really hoping fore was a Hillary vs Jeb Bush race. As for demographics, I don't buy that the left has that advantage. You are attempting to count your chickens before they hatch. Illegal immigrants are not going to get it done for you. And I think the democrats are afraid of Rubio. That's why they are suddenly making noise about his past traffic tickets. A non issue.

I agree that Paul has no chance. I would love for him to be the nominee.

As for Walker - I have changed my mind. Earlier I thought he might be a strong candidate - particularly if he can orchestrate a run with Rubio as his VP. But I have seen nothing from him that impresses me and his entire balloon seems filled with air that is solely from the anti-union haters.

I do NOT want Clinton as the Dem nominee so you are wrong right there. And I think Bush has precious little chance.

 

[MAGAnificent]

Rand is not going to get the nomination. more so if he keeps shooting his mouth off like his dad.

Yep. His dad is a drooling nut job. The more he seems influenced by his dad, the lower his political stock will fall.

Jeb is a toss up but I think people are tired of bush.

Jeb has money and name recognition going for him and nothing else. I think the voters on both side are getting "dynasty fatigue" I think that will be a problem for Hillary as well.

Rubio and Christie are the outsiders I think people need to watch. Honestly I am leaning to either Rubio or Christie and if the republicans ran a Rubio Christie ticket
then they would hands down win.

In my opinion, Christie does not stand a snowball's chance in hell. He overplayed the moderate card with that of hug of Obama and left turn in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy.
Rubio may have a shot.

Dems lose their race card attack which is the only thing that they have.

I think the democrats overplayed the race card in the 2014 midterms and it backfired on them. However they are slow learners as Hillary has proved in the last few days.

Republicans strengthen they numbers among Hispanics for electing one and on top of that would have a strong vp in the white house for the next run.

Easy to visualize Rubio on the VP ticket if he does not get the top spot.

 

[MAGAnificent]

unless she comes out for ending the wars and i can actually believe her new populist positions, i'd prefer a different candidate on the left. Obama ran as an anti-war populist, and governed as a semi-interventionist corporatist. part of it was congress, and part of it was because it's a lot easier to argue for these changes on a message board than it is to actually do them when you're in charge. however, the patriot act **** and the new trade agreement that he's pushing are big disappointments. i also still can't believe that with solid Democratic majorities in both the House and the Senate, they still couldn't manage to push through single payer or at least a public option. the ACA isn't even a half measure. it's maybe a step towards a half measure.

I realize how badly you want a single payer healthcare system in the US. It's just not going to happen....especially after Obamacare. If anything obamacare set your wish back another several decades.

 

[MAGAnificent]

I agree that Paul has no chance. I would love for him to be the nominee.

As for Walker - I have changed my mind. Earlier I thought he might be a strong candidate - particularly if he can orchestrate a run with Rubio as his VP. But I have seen nothing from him that impresses me and his entire balloon seems filled with air that is solely from the anti-union haters.

I do NOT want Clinton as the Dem nominee so you are wrong right there. And I think Bush has precious little chance.

It's not about hating the unions. It is about not wanting unions to bankrupt a state....which is what Walker stopped in Wisconsin. I would not underestimate him. He managed to defeat the unions, defeat a recall, and win re-election in a blue state. I can see him taking Ohio and many other blue states as well as Wisconsin. He could have a shot.

 

[haymarket]

It's not about hating the unions. It is about not wanting unions to bankrupt a state....which is what Walker stopped in Wisconsin. I would not underestimate him. He managed to defeat the unions, defeat a recall, and win re-election in a blue state. I can see him taking Ohio and many other blue states as well as Wisconsin. He could have a shot.

Thank you for confirming that the union hate angle is accurate.

 

[MAGAnificent]

Thank you for confirming that the union hate angle is accurate.

How so? Labor unions have their place, however membership should be voluntary and the unions should not have a noose around the throats of the taxpayers.

 

[demsoc70]

It's not about hating the unions. It is about not wanting unions to bankrupt a state....which is what Walker stopped in Wisconsin. I would not underestimate him. He managed to defeat the unions, defeat a recall, and win re-election in a blue state. I can see him taking Ohio and many other blue states as well as Wisconsin. He could have a shot.

Well, Walker didn't do it all by his lonesome. He had some help from union hating billionaires.

 

[MAGAnificent]

Well, Walker didn't do it all by his lonesome. He had some help from union hating billionaires.

And the left had some help from union loving billionaires like George Soros. What's your point?