Clinton Staff Shake Up?

[candycorn]

Clinton spending more on polling than six GOP candidates combined

Do you know which 6? Spending more than some of them is not hard to do...I probably spent more on Super Bowl treats than some of them have spent on their campaigns.

 

[candycorn]

She is regularly cited as one of the most admired women in the world...

The world has low standards

Trump leading the GOP field is more adequate proof.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

OMG, what next? Will they finally admit that area 51 is real!?!

Actually, I think they have done that already

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

She is regularly cited as one of the most admired women in the world...

The world has low standards

Trump leading the GOP field is more adequate proof.

Neither one bodes well

 

[9aces]

If so, very bad move.

Politico is reporting that a half dozen "insiders" are confirming that a bad loss in NH will result in a shake up of staff and strategy.

This is a very Bad idea this early for Secretary Clinton; which probably means she will do it.

#SMH

Her knees are shaking too.
FBI formally confirms its investigation of Hillary Clinton's email server

Maybe one or two of those staffers will be needed as fall guys?

 

[Missourian]

candycorn ...It's in the article.

Cruz spent $352K
Bush $150K
Rubio $150K

Trump, Carson, Christie and Kasich spent nothing.

Bernie $500K

Cruz spent an additional $3 million on "donor profiling".

Hillary spent $720K last quarter.

She spent $1.9 million the previous quarter.

 

[DarkFury]

If so, very bad move.

Politico is reporting that a half dozen "insiders" are confirming that a bad loss in NH will result in a shake up of staff and strategy.

This is a very Bad idea this early for Secretary Clinton; which probably means she will do it.

#SMH

Hillary now officially desperate.

Looks that way. She will have it in the bag on 3/15 if she keeps to her knitting....

It's a shame

Hillary has spent $77 million thus far, she can't buy respect or love, she seems to have forgotten this.

She is regularly cited as one of the most admired women in the world... She needn't worry about that.

So was Bonnie Parker of "Bonnie and Clyde".

 

[Missourian]

If so, very bad move.

Politico is reporting that a half dozen "insiders" are confirming that a bad loss in NH will result in a shake up of staff and strategy.

This is a very Bad idea this early for Secretary Clinton; which probably means she will do it.

#SMH

I read on Drudge a few days ago that Hillary spends more on polling than all of the other candidates combined.

Perhaps she is seeing something that we are not...or, she could be jumping at ghosts. More polling means more outliers...more outliers could look like a trend.

Either way, if true...it's bad news.

I'll try to find that story and post a link further down the thread.

I was thinking that too on the way to work. Maybe she has some internals that are showing some bad signs. It's possible. But if that is the case, it's not demographics that are telling the story. She kills with women, blacks, Hispanics, and establishment Dems. It has to be character up and down the list; likability, electability vs ___________ (GOP contender), Strong leader, shares values....

In politics, perception is reality. That Politico is reporting it and we're reciting it means there is discontent in the House of Clinton and thus the Democratic Party because Bernie is roadkill for any Republican in my view.

I may be a Rubio supporter by the time it's over.....LOL

I believe the consensus is that she is losing the female vote to Bernie.

The Steinem and Albright comments seem to reflect that fear...the fear that women are jumping ship. And Hillary exacerbates the problem by hitting them over the head with a hammer.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/08/u...-albright-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders.html

...with her opponent, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, outdrawing her in support among young women, Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy has turned into a generational clash, one that erupted this weekend when two feminist icons, Madeleine Albright and Gloria Steinem, called on young women who supported Mr. Sanders to essentially grow up and get with the program.

While introducing Mrs. Clinton at a rally in New Hampshire on Saturday, Ms. Albright, 78, the first female secretary of state, talked about the importance of electing a woman to the country’s highest office. In a dig at the “revolution” that Mr. Sanders, 74, often speaks of, she said the first female commander in chief would be a true revolution. And she scolded any woman who felt otherwise.

“We can tell our story of how we climbed the ladder, and a lot of you younger women think it’s done,” Ms. Albright said of the broader fight for women’s equality. “It’s not done. There’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other!”

<snip>

Women were expected to help power Mrs. Clinton to the Democratic nomination, but as she struggles to overcome a tough challenge from Mr. Sanders and trails him in New Hampshire polls, her support among them has been surprisingly shaky. Young women, in particular, have been drawn to the septuagenarian socialist from Vermont, and the dynamic has disappointed feminists who dreamed of Mrs. Clinton’s election as a capstone to their long struggle for equality.

Ms. Steinem, 81, one of the most famous spokeswomen of the feminist movement, took the sentiment a step further on Friday in an interview with the talk show host Bill Maher. Explaining that women tend to become more active in politics as they become older, she suggested that younger women were backing Mr. Sanders just so they could meet young men.

“When you’re young, you’re thinking: ‘Where are the boys? The boys are with Bernie,’ ” Ms. Steinem said.
​

I agree with you that her long term outlook in the primary is good...she is the inevitable candidate...just like Romney was.

Perhaps she believes that like Romney, a prolonged primary will damage turnout in the General election, especially among young women who have supported Sanders. That's my best guess.

 

[candycorn]

If so, very bad move.

Politico is reporting that a half dozen "insiders" are confirming that a bad loss in NH will result in a shake up of staff and strategy.

This is a very Bad idea this early for Secretary Clinton; which probably means she will do it.

#SMH

I read on Drudge a few days ago that Hillary spends more on polling than all of the other candidates combined.

Perhaps she is seeing something that we are not...or, she could be jumping at ghosts. More polling means more outliers...more outliers could look like a trend.

Either way, if true...it's bad news.

I'll try to find that story and post a link further down the thread.

I was thinking that too on the way to work. Maybe she has some internals that are showing some bad signs. It's possible. But if that is the case, it's not demographics that are telling the story. She kills with women, blacks, Hispanics, and establishment Dems. It has to be character up and down the list; likability, electability vs ___________ (GOP contender), Strong leader, shares values....

In politics, perception is reality. That Politico is reporting it and we're reciting it means there is discontent in the House of Clinton and thus the Democratic Party because Bernie is roadkill for any Republican in my view.

I may be a Rubio supporter by the time it's over.....LOL

I believe the consensus is that she is losing the female vote to Bernie.

The Steinem and Albright comments seem to reflect that fear...the fear that women are jumping ship. And Hillary exacerbates the problem by hitting them over the head with a hammer.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/08/u...-albright-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders.html

...with her opponent, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, outdrawing her in support among young women, Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy has turned into a generational clash, one that erupted this weekend when two feminist icons, Madeleine Albright and Gloria Steinem, called on young women who supported Mr. Sanders to essentially grow up and get with the program.

While introducing Mrs. Clinton at a rally in New Hampshire on Saturday, Ms. Albright, 78, the first female secretary of state, talked about the importance of electing a woman to the country’s highest office. In a dig at the “revolution” that Mr. Sanders, 74, often speaks of, she said the first female commander in chief would be a true revolution. And she scolded any woman who felt otherwise.

“We can tell our story of how we climbed the ladder, and a lot of you younger women think it’s done,” Ms. Albright said of the broader fight for women’s equality. “It’s not done. There’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other!”

<snip>

Women were expected to help power Mrs. Clinton to the Democratic nomination, but as she struggles to overcome a tough challenge from Mr. Sanders and trails him in New Hampshire polls, her support among them has been surprisingly shaky. Young women, in particular, have been drawn to the septuagenarian socialist from Vermont, and the dynamic has disappointed feminists who dreamed of Mrs. Clinton’s election as a capstone to their long struggle for equality.

Ms. Steinem, 81, one of the most famous spokeswomen of the feminist movement, took the sentiment a step further on Friday in an interview with the talk show host Bill Maher. Explaining that women tend to become more active in politics as they become older, she suggested that younger women were backing Mr. Sanders just so they could meet young men.

“When you’re young, you’re thinking: ‘Where are the boys? The boys are with Bernie,’ ” Ms. Steinem said.
​

I agree with you that her long term outlook in the primary is good...she is the inevitable candidate...just like Romney was.

Perhaps she believes that like Romney, a prolonged primary will damage turnout in the General election, especially among young women who have supported Sanders. That's my best guess.

This will sound like I'm talking smack.
I am not.

The right wing is becoming so extreme, so unstable, and frankly so paranoid about the rest of the electorate (you heard this from Sen. Rubio several times in the debate on Saturday); the women's vote will be there for whomever the Democrats nominate. One vote is the swing on Roe; you don't mess around with that and risk a TEA party type getting into the Oval.

Surely Secretary Clinton knows this as does Ms. Steinem (sp?). Perhaps there are segments of the vote that may give the GOP contender a look but I doubt there will be much more than that.

Just on an aside...and I'm addressing this to the GOP backers as a whole.


The reason Bernie is giving Clinton so much trouble is because he's giving the moderate Democrats a choice. This is why I love it to death when the idiots you hang with keep bringing up Benghazi, the e-mails, her looks, Bill's record, and those stupid cartoons. She loves it too from a political standpoint. When you start to give her constituents a real choice, you give her problems. Jon Huntsmann would have given Obama fits in 08. Instead, you guys tried to thread the needle with Romney and it was over in April. Hopefully, She will right the ship and you guys will do it again.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

If so, very bad move.

Politico is reporting that a half dozen "insiders" are confirming that a bad loss in NH will result in a shake up of staff and strategy.

This is a very Bad idea this early for Secretary Clinton; which probably means she will do it.

#SMH

I read on Drudge a few days ago that Hillary spends more on polling than all of the other candidates combined.

Perhaps she is seeing something that we are not...or, she could be jumping at ghosts. More polling means more outliers...more outliers could look like a trend.

Either way, if true...it's bad news.

I'll try to find that story and post a link further down the thread.

Hillary does not believe in outliers. No one can out lie Hillary!

 

[OKTexas]

If so, very bad move.

Politico is reporting that a half dozen "insiders" are confirming that a bad loss in NH will result in a shake up of staff and strategy.

This is a very Bad idea this early for Secretary Clinton; which probably means she will do it.

#SMH

More like rats fleeing a sinking ship. LMAO

 

[SwimExpert]

She is regularly cited as one of the most admired women in the world...

The world has low standards

In fact, you're more right than you probably realize.

These are the most admired people in the world

Just take a look at the 10 most admired women list. Sure, Malala Yousafzai is a good picks. But Angelina Jolie, Celine Dion, Julia Roberts, and Oprah Winfrey? That's nothing but admiration for celebrity status.

The list is rounded out with four high ranking political/government figures, namely: Aung San Suu Kyi, Elizabeth II of England, Angela Merkel, and Hillary Clinton.

When we sneak a peak at the men's list we see even more celebrity names. Jackie Chan!? And the adulterous David Beckham!?! You got to be kidding me!

 

[jknowgood]

If so, very bad move.

Politico is reporting that a half dozen "insiders" are confirming that a bad loss in NH will result in a shake up of staff and strategy.

This is a very Bad idea this early for Secretary Clinton; which probably means she will do it.

#SMH

it hasn't happened yet. and these unnamed "insiders" really aren't a source.

Anyone but Hillary, looks like even liberals are waking up AGAIN. Lol

 

[jknowgood]

If so, very bad move.

Politico is reporting that a half dozen "insiders" are confirming that a bad loss in NH will result in a shake up of staff and strategy.

This is a very Bad idea this early for Secretary Clinton; which probably means she will do it.

#SMH

it hasn't happened yet. and these unnamed "insiders" really aren't a source.

Granted. If it was Beirbart or any number of other rags, I'd discount it. Politico...six sources; knowing her penchant for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory and saying stuff she needn't say (ala "I didn't inhale)...I think they are strongly considering it. I hope it doesn't happen.

I think she may be thinking about how she didn't do it in 08 and what happened as a result. Someone needs to tell the Secretary that Bernie is not a buzzsaw and that when he doesn't have 6 months to campaign and get his message out...it will be much different. When they start having contests every other week and multiple times a month, Bernie's "army" will fade and she will have momentum and the nomination sewn up in short order.

She was running such a great campaign too. Its a shame if/when it happens.

Can you say, president Trump?

 

[jknowgood]

Clinton spending more on polling than six GOP candidates combined

Do you know which 6? Spending more than some of them is not hard to do...I probably spent more on Super Bowl treats than some of them have spent on their campaigns.

On polling, you know what Bill ran his presidency on?

 

[SwimExpert]

Can you say, president Trump?

Of course. It's a free country. Anyone can say whatever they want.

But short of brain damage, why would anyone want to say that?

 

[jknowgood]

Can you say, president Trump?

Of course. It's a free country. Anyone can say whatever they want.

But short of brain damage, why would anyone want to say that?

Anyone but Hillary.

 

[imawhosure]

If so, very bad move.

Politico is reporting that a half dozen "insiders" are confirming that a bad loss in NH will result in a shake up of staff and strategy.

This is a very Bad idea this early for Secretary Clinton; which probably means she will do it.

#SMH

I read on Drudge a few days ago that Hillary spends more on polling than all of the other candidates combined.

Perhaps she is seeing something that we are not...or, she could be jumping at ghosts. More polling means more outliers...more outliers could look like a trend.

Either way, if true...it's bad news.

I'll try to find that story and post a link further down the thread.

I was thinking that too on the way to work. Maybe she has some internals that are showing some bad signs. It's possible. But if that is the case, it's not demographics that are telling the story. She kills with women, blacks, Hispanics, and establishment Dems. It has to be character up and down the list; likability, electability vs ___________ (GOP contender), Strong leader, shares values....

In politics, perception is reality. That Politico is reporting it and we're reciting it means there is discontent in the House of Clinton and thus the Democratic Party because Bernie is roadkill for any Republican in my view.

I may be a Rubio supporter by the time it's over.....LOL

I believe the consensus is that she is losing the female vote to Bernie.

The Steinem and Albright comments seem to reflect that fear...the fear that women are jumping ship. And Hillary exacerbates the problem by hitting them over the head with a hammer.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/08/u...-albright-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders.html

...with her opponent, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, outdrawing her in support among young women, Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy has turned into a generational clash, one that erupted this weekend when two feminist icons, Madeleine Albright and Gloria Steinem, called on young women who supported Mr. Sanders to essentially grow up and get with the program.

While introducing Mrs. Clinton at a rally in New Hampshire on Saturday, Ms. Albright, 78, the first female secretary of state, talked about the importance of electing a woman to the country’s highest office. In a dig at the “revolution” that Mr. Sanders, 74, often speaks of, she said the first female commander in chief would be a true revolution. And she scolded any woman who felt otherwise.

“We can tell our story of how we climbed the ladder, and a lot of you younger women think it’s done,” Ms. Albright said of the broader fight for women’s equality. “It’s not done. There’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other!”

<snip>

Women were expected to help power Mrs. Clinton to the Democratic nomination, but as she struggles to overcome a tough challenge from Mr. Sanders and trails him in New Hampshire polls, her support among them has been surprisingly shaky. Young women, in particular, have been drawn to the septuagenarian socialist from Vermont, and the dynamic has disappointed feminists who dreamed of Mrs. Clinton’s election as a capstone to their long struggle for equality.

Ms. Steinem, 81, one of the most famous spokeswomen of the feminist movement, took the sentiment a step further on Friday in an interview with the talk show host Bill Maher. Explaining that women tend to become more active in politics as they become older, she suggested that younger women were backing Mr. Sanders just so they could meet young men.

“When you’re young, you’re thinking: ‘Where are the boys? The boys are with Bernie,’ ” Ms. Steinem said.
​

I agree with you that her long term outlook in the primary is good...she is the inevitable candidate...just like Romney was.

Perhaps she believes that like Romney, a prolonged primary will damage turnout in the General election, especially among young women who have supported Sanders. That's my best guess.

This will sound like I'm talking smack.
I am not.

The right wing is becoming so extreme, so unstable, and frankly so paranoid about the rest of the electorate (you heard this from Sen. Rubio several times in the debate on Saturday); the women's vote will be there for whomever the Democrats nominate. One vote is the swing on Roe; you don't mess around with that and risk a TEA party type getting into the Oval.

Surely Secretary Clinton knows this as does Ms. Steinem (sp?). Perhaps there are segments of the vote that may give the GOP contender a look but I doubt there will be much more than that.

Just on an aside...and I'm addressing this to the GOP backers as a whole.


The reason Bernie is giving Clinton so much trouble is because he's giving the moderate Democrats a choice. This is why I love it to death when the idiots you hang with keep bringing up Benghazi, the e-mails, her looks, Bill's record, and those stupid cartoons. She loves it too from a political standpoint. When you start to give her constituents a real choice, you give her problems. Jon Huntsmann would have given Obama fits in 08. Instead, you guys tried to thread the needle with Romney and it was over in April. Hopefully, She will right the ship and you guys will do it again.

Candy, don't take this as me laughing at you or being smug, because I am not.

I kept telling anyone who would listen.......and you can look over many of my posts........INTERNALS, INTERNALS!

Hillary is going to win (if the DNC lets her) the nomination; unless Bernie really has something in those speeches he has asked her to release. (which I think he does, but a change of staff wouldn't help her in that case, so this is about INTERNALS)

The DNC, the RNC, I, and probably a few other people on here know what the internals are saying. Her message is NOT working, and the polls of her beating anyone are going in the wrong direction.

Look here-----------> I see you posted the final results of the 2012 Presidential race. What they say is pretty accurate. But here is a brutal truth..............up until a very few days before the election, the DNC thought Obama was going to lose, and lose pretty badly! Bet you didn't know that! Same for Republicans I might add, lol. (don't believe me, ask DWS, and ask her to give you an honest answer) Let me tell you seriously how much this was perceived in Washington as being FACT-------> The Dems were already talking about how to deal with Romney, the GOP was already talking about their agenda when Romney took office.

So why am I pointing this out to you now? Because the GOP had accurately predicted the fall off in voters for the Democrats to within .3 % points, oh yes they did! They also projected very close to that how the independents would swing, oh yes they did! What they were aghast at, and off by a wide margin, was their own voting base! This was the START of the Trump/Cruz/Carson/Fiorina candidacy, at that VERY moment, when it became apparent what actually had happened by the numbers.....some of which you cited.

Now look at who/whom is voting en mass, (so far anyway) and who/whom is not! That is a significant part of internals. Look who are re-registering to vote creating a significant block. Look at the totals for Iowa, and lets see what happens in NH.

If Hillary supporters will not come en mass to drive her coronation as they did for Obama, what would make you think they will be driven enough to show at the general?

On the other hand, you have record setting votes (again so far) to choose the other sides candidate to depose the policies of Obama. (again, it is obvious, and it was seen INTERNALLY long before it happened)

Now, I know you are partisan, and I have no problem with that at all. No need to answer the question publicly, but take off your partisan hat and look what is happening. It isn't a secret, the numbers show.

Bernie is FORCING Hillary to run to the left, and she knows she needs to run right; but she can't. She isn't interested in stealing GOP voters, but she knows even if it is a low turnout 2016, she HAS to convince independents to vote for her. She has to create a message to take a chunk of them to win, but can't do it, as long as Bernie has her feet in the fire.

And so, what is the brutal truth? Without Democratic enthusiasm close to Obama 2008, and with GOP enthusiasm at all time highs, and with independents in 2012 breaking heavily for Romney as a revolt vote on Obama policies, and Hillary running as a 3rd term of Obama, she is in deep trouble. Let me rephrase that........deep, deep, deep, trouble. I know that some refuse to believe it, but if you take the truth of what is going on, draw logical conclusions based upon what did happen, and what is happening, if you take off a partisan hat from either side, the trend becomes apparent. She needs a new message, and it has to steal independents or she will lose, going away.

 

[TNHarley]

better keep worrying. Sanders is whooping that ass in NH

 

[candycorn]

If so, very bad move.

Politico is reporting that a half dozen "insiders" are confirming that a bad loss in NH will result in a shake up of staff and strategy.

This is a very Bad idea this early for Secretary Clinton; which probably means she will do it.

#SMH

I read on Drudge a few days ago that Hillary spends more on polling than all of the other candidates combined.

Perhaps she is seeing something that we are not...or, she could be jumping at ghosts. More polling means more outliers...more outliers could look like a trend.

Either way, if true...it's bad news.

I'll try to find that story and post a link further down the thread.

I was thinking that too on the way to work. Maybe she has some internals that are showing some bad signs. It's possible. But if that is the case, it's not demographics that are telling the story. She kills with women, blacks, Hispanics, and establishment Dems. It has to be character up and down the list; likability, electability vs ___________ (GOP contender), Strong leader, shares values....

In politics, perception is reality. That Politico is reporting it and we're reciting it means there is discontent in the House of Clinton and thus the Democratic Party because Bernie is roadkill for any Republican in my view.

I may be a Rubio supporter by the time it's over.....LOL

I believe the consensus is that she is losing the female vote to Bernie.

The Steinem and Albright comments seem to reflect that fear...the fear that women are jumping ship. And Hillary exacerbates the problem by hitting them over the head with a hammer.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/08/u...-albright-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders.html

...with her opponent, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, outdrawing her in support among young women, Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy has turned into a generational clash, one that erupted this weekend when two feminist icons, Madeleine Albright and Gloria Steinem, called on young women who supported Mr. Sanders to essentially grow up and get with the program.

While introducing Mrs. Clinton at a rally in New Hampshire on Saturday, Ms. Albright, 78, the first female secretary of state, talked about the importance of electing a woman to the country’s highest office. In a dig at the “revolution” that Mr. Sanders, 74, often speaks of, she said the first female commander in chief would be a true revolution. And she scolded any woman who felt otherwise.

“We can tell our story of how we climbed the ladder, and a lot of you younger women think it’s done,” Ms. Albright said of the broader fight for women’s equality. “It’s not done. There’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other!”

<snip>

Women were expected to help power Mrs. Clinton to the Democratic nomination, but as she struggles to overcome a tough challenge from Mr. Sanders and trails him in New Hampshire polls, her support among them has been surprisingly shaky. Young women, in particular, have been drawn to the septuagenarian socialist from Vermont, and the dynamic has disappointed feminists who dreamed of Mrs. Clinton’s election as a capstone to their long struggle for equality.

Ms. Steinem, 81, one of the most famous spokeswomen of the feminist movement, took the sentiment a step further on Friday in an interview with the talk show host Bill Maher. Explaining that women tend to become more active in politics as they become older, she suggested that younger women were backing Mr. Sanders just so they could meet young men.

“When you’re young, you’re thinking: ‘Where are the boys? The boys are with Bernie,’ ” Ms. Steinem said.
​

I agree with you that her long term outlook in the primary is good...she is the inevitable candidate...just like Romney was.

Perhaps she believes that like Romney, a prolonged primary will damage turnout in the General election, especially among young women who have supported Sanders. That's my best guess.

This will sound like I'm talking smack.
I am not.

The right wing is becoming so extreme, so unstable, and frankly so paranoid about the rest of the electorate (you heard this from Sen. Rubio several times in the debate on Saturday); the women's vote will be there for whomever the Democrats nominate. One vote is the swing on Roe; you don't mess around with that and risk a TEA party type getting into the Oval.

Surely Secretary Clinton knows this as does Ms. Steinem (sp?). Perhaps there are segments of the vote that may give the GOP contender a look but I doubt there will be much more than that.

Just on an aside...and I'm addressing this to the GOP backers as a whole.


The reason Bernie is giving Clinton so much trouble is because he's giving the moderate Democrats a choice. This is why I love it to death when the idiots you hang with keep bringing up Benghazi, the e-mails, her looks, Bill's record, and those stupid cartoons. She loves it too from a political standpoint. When you start to give her constituents a real choice, you give her problems. Jon Huntsmann would have given Obama fits in 08. Instead, you guys tried to thread the needle with Romney and it was over in April. Hopefully, She will right the ship and you guys will do it again.

Candy, don't take this as me laughing at you or being smug, because I am not.

I kept telling anyone who would listen.......and you can look over many of my posts........INTERNALS, INTERNALS!

Hillary is going to win (if the DNC lets her) the nomination; unless Bernie really has something in those speeches he has asked her to release. (which I think he does, but a change of staff wouldn't help her in that case, so this is about INTERNALS)

The DNC, the RNC, I, and probably a few other people on here know what the internals are saying. Her message is NOT working, and the polls of her beating anyone are going in the wrong direction.

Look here-----------> I see you posted the final results of the 2012 Presidential race. What they say is pretty accurate. But here is a brutal truth..............up until a very few days before the election, the DNC thought Obama was going to lose, and lose pretty badly! Bet you didn't know that! Same for Republicans I might add, lol. (don't believe me, ask DWS, and ask her to give you an honest answer) Let me tell you seriously how much this was perceived in Washington as being FACT-------> The Dems were already talking about how to deal with Romney, the GOP was already talking about their agenda when Romney took office.

So why am I pointing this out to you now? Because the GOP had accurately predicted the fall off in voters for the Democrats to within .3 % points, oh yes they did! They also projected very close to that how the independents would swing, oh yes they did! What they were aghast at, and off by a wide margin, was their own voting base! This was the START of the Trump/Cruz/Carson/Fiorina candidacy, at that VERY moment, when it became apparent what actually had happened by the numbers.....some of which you cited.

Now look at who/whom is voting en mass, (so far anyway) and who/whom is not! That is a significant part of internals. Look who are re-registering to vote creating a significant block. Look at the totals for Iowa, and lets see what happens in NH.

If Hillary supporters will not come en mass to drive her coronation as they did for Obama, what would make you think they will be driven enough to show at the general?

On the other hand, you have record setting votes (again so far) to choose the other sides candidate to depose the policies of Obama. (again, it is obvious, and it was seen INTERNALLY long before it happened)

Now, I know you are partisan, and I have no problem with that at all. No need to answer the question publicly, but take off your partisan hat and look what is happening. It isn't a secret, the numbers show.

Bernie is FORCING Hillary to run to the left, and she knows she needs to run right; but she can't. She isn't interested in stealing GOP voters, but she knows even if it is a low turnout 2016, she HAS to convince independents to vote for her. She has to create a message to take a chunk of them to win, but can't do it, as long as Bernie has her feet in the fire.

And so, what is the brutal truth? Without Democratic enthusiasm close to Obama 2008, and with GOP enthusiasm at all time highs, and with independents in 2012 breaking heavily for Romney as a revolt vote on Obama policies, and Hillary running as a 3rd term of Obama, she is in deep trouble. Let me rephrase that........deep, deep, deep, trouble. I know that some refuse to believe it, but if you take the truth of what is going on, draw logical conclusions based upon what did happen, and what is happening, if you take off a partisan hat from either side, the trend becomes apparent. She needs a new message, and it has to steal independents or she will lose, going away.

Not sure where your logic stems from:
Multitudes more vote in the General than the primary.

Your assessment of the left wing is faulty. As it should be if there is an avowed Socialist in the General but if Hillary is there, you'll see people showing up by the manful to vote for her. Make no mistake.