Why Hillary Will Win (probably)

[candycorn]

In the title you show doubt. In the OP you show doubt.
Admit or not you see a possible defeat. After only what? 12 hours after she announced?

No kidding..the election is over a year and a half away. But look at the battlefield.

Cruz & Paul have no chance of winning the election. Fact.
That Curz and Paul are in the primaries forces those to their left to move right. Fact.
Once the GOP nomination is settled, whomever wins will have to move back to the middle to attract independents. Fact.
It would be much easier to move back to the middle if they never had to leave it thus fostering consistency and confidence in supporters and voters. Fact.
Hillary will not have to move one iota to win the nomination. Fact.
If the hard right does not get their guy, they stay home as we saw in 2012. Fact.
The hard left will not stay home regardless of who wins the DNC nomination. Fact.

Can Hillary sabotage her campaign? Sure. Ask 47% Mitt about that or the boob who picked Palin for VP... But she won't make the same tactical mistakes she made in 08. For one thing, she can'. For a second thing, the fences have mended between the moderates and Clinton since she came on board for Obama as SoS.

 

[DarkFury]

In the title you show doubt. In the OP you show doubt.
Admit or not you see a possible defeat. After only what? 12 hours after she announced?

No kidding..the election is over a year and a half away. But look at the battlefield.

Cruz & Paul have no chance of winning the election. Fact.
That Curz and Paul are in the primaries forces those to their left to move right. Fact.
Once the GOP nomination is settled, whomever wins will have to move back to the middle to attract independents. Fact.
It would be much easier to move back to the middle if they never had to leave it thus fostering consistency and confidence in supporters and voters. Fact.
Hillary will not have to move one iota to win the nomination. Fact.
If the hard right does not get their guy, they stay home as we saw in 2012. Fact.
The hard left will not stay home regardless of who wins the DNC nomination. Fact.

Can Hillary sabotage her campaign? Sure. Ask 47% Mitt about that or the boob who picked Palin for VP... But she won't make the same tactical mistakes she made in 08. For one thing, she can'. For a second thing, the fences have mended between the moderates and Clinton since she came on board for Obama as SoS.

And the "hard" left was where in 2014? Drugging?Boozing? What?

 

[MarcATL]

In the title you show doubt. In the OP you show doubt.
Admit or not you see a possible defeat. After only what? 12 hours after she announced?

No kidding..the election is over a year and a half away. But look at the battlefield.

Cruz & Paul have no chance of winning the election. Fact.
That Curz and Paul are in the primaries forces those to their left to move right. Fact.
Once the GOP nomination is settled, whomever wins will have to move back to the middle to attract independents. Fact.
It would be much easier to move back to the middle if they never had to leave it thus fostering consistency and confidence in supporters and voters. Fact.
Hillary will not have to move one iota to win the nomination. Fact.
If the hard right does not get their guy, they stay home as we saw in 2012. Fact.
The hard left will not stay home regardless of who wins the DNC nomination. Fact.

Can Hillary sabotage her campaign? Sure. Ask 47% Mitt about that or the boob who picked Palin for VP... But she won't make the same tactical mistakes she made in 08. For one thing, she can'. For a second thing, the fences have mended between the moderates and Clinton since she came on board for Obama as SoS.

And the "hard" left was where in 2014? Drugging?Boozing? What?

You're not thinking clearly, you're reacting. THINK!

 

[BULLDOG]

I don't blame the GOP for limiting the debates. If I had that many loons on display, I would want to limit their chances to say stupid things too.

 

[Statistikhengst]

One smart thing the GOP did was limit the number of debates. On the surface, at least, this was smart because it gives the whackjob candidacies of Cruz and Paul less official forums to announce their positions. Contrary to the belief that the Parties pick the candidtes; they actually have very little authority over them let alone control what they say. The flip side is that the urge to make a "big splash" may be too great for either of them to understand. Those who are looking to put their marker down somewhere between the hard right and the moderate right are probably the most dangerous.

Every karem to or pander toward the hard right forces the eventual nominee to move in that direction. This will, of course, hamstring him in the general election when the enevitable move back to the center has to be made.

The reason Hillary will win is because no such force sits to her left which would force her to react in such an irrational manner. Also, if such a force were to materialize, there would still be no need for Clinton to make the move; the voters on the hard left will be there for her in November. If we learned anything from 2012 it is that the hard right will abandon a GOP candidate that is seen as not willing to carry their water and message.

Obama fatigue and the ocassional flub (if they are ocassional) and tactical mis-step of the Clinton campaign will play a role as well but there shouldn't be enough of them to swing the election.

She isn't a shoo-in for the Presidency; there is still a long way to go. But it would be hard to imagine a better set-up for Secretary Clinton than what has happened in the last few weeks with Cruz, Paul and Rubio entering the race

Exit polls, 2012:

Exit polls 2012 How the vote has shifted - The Washington Post

The electorate on that day:

Female: 53% in 2012 and 2008, 54% in 2004, 52% in 2000 and 1996, 53% in 1992, 52% in 1988, 53% in 1984, 49% in 1980 and 1976,
Male: 47% in 2012 and 2008, 46% in 2004, 48% in 2000 and 1996, 47% in 1992, 48% in 1988, 47% in 1984, 51% in 1980 and 1976,

The female vote has been the majority of the electorate since 1984. If Hillary is the nominee, this number is sure to not go under 53% and is likely to jump to 55%.

Age:

18-29: 19% in 2012, 18% in 2008
30-44: 27% in 2012, 29% in 2008
45-64: 38% in 2012, 37% in 2008
65 and over: 16% in 2012, unchanged over 2008

Race:

White: 72% in 2012, 74% in 2008, 77% in 2004, 81% in 2000, 83% in 1996, 87% in 1992, 85% in 1988, 86% in 1984, 88% in 1980, 89% in 1976.

In 36 years, from 1976 to 2012, the White Vote percentage of the overall electorate went tom 89% to 72%, a -17% decline over 9 cycles. 17/9= 1.9.

The logical trend is that White voters will be around 70% of the electorate, maybe even 69%, in 2016.

Black: 13% in 2012, unchanged from 2008, 11% in 2004, 10% in 2000, 10% in 1996, 8% in 1992, 10% in 1988, 1984, 1980, 8% in 1976.

In 36 years, the black vote has risen from 8% over the overall electorate to 13% of the electorate. One of the great myths propagated about 2012 is that the black vote exploded in 2012, but statistically, it was exactly the same % of the overall population as in 2008. It is important to note that in 5 of those 10 cycles, the black vote was at 10%. The right is hoping that the black vote will recede to 10% of the electorate in 2016, but if the 2013 VA gubernatorial and 2014 VA senatorial races are our guide (VA was THE bellwether in 2012), then this is unlikely.

Latino: 10% in 2012, 9% in 2008, 8% in 2004, 7% in 2000, 5% in 1996, 2% in 1992, 3% in 1998 and 1994, 2% in 1980, 1% in 1976.

In 36 years, from 1976 to 2012, the Latino vote has jumped by a factor of 10.

Asian: 3% in 2012, 2% in 2008, 2004 and 2000, 1% in 1996 and 1992. The Asian vote was not measured before 1992.

So, in 20 years, from 1992 to 2012, the Asian vote has tripled.

Very possible voter make-up, 2016:

White: 70%
Black: 12%
Latino:12%
Asian: 4%
other: 2%

Male: 45%
Female: 55%

Hillary +24 in the Female vote = 62% of 55% = 34% of the total electorate.
With a pretty much guaranteed 90% of the black vote (half of which is also female, don't forget), at least 70% of the Latino vote, 80% of the Asian vote, well over 90% of the gay vote, probably 75% to 80% of the Jewish vote, over 90% of the muslim vote and atheist vote, Demographics say that Hillary, just as I have been predicting for 12 months straight without changing my tune, is heading for 57% of the NPV and will come close to or go over 400 EV.

Or, look it is this way:

White vote: 41% of 70% = 28.7%
Black vote: 90% of 12% = 10.8%
Latino vote: 75% of 12% = 9%
Asian vote: 80% of 4% = 3%
other: 95% of 2% = 1.9%

Total: 53.4%

But if Hillary takes the female vote by +25, she won't stay at Obama's 41% statistic, she will come up to at least 46% of the White vote:

White vote: 46% of 70% = 32.2%
Black vote: 90% of 12% = 10.8%
Latino vote: 75% of 12% = 9%
Asian vote: 80% of 4% = 3%
other: 95% of 2% = 1.9%

Total: 56.9% (57%)


The polling, ACROSS THE BOARD,is showing Hillary at at least +20% margin in the female vote in national polling, upwards of +36 to +40 in blue states, and +25 and above in critical battlegrounds.

57%.

 

[candycorn]

In the title you show doubt. In the OP you show doubt.
Admit or not you see a possible defeat. After only what? 12 hours after she announced?

No kidding..the election is over a year and a half away. But look at the battlefield.

Cruz & Paul have no chance of winning the election. Fact.
That Curz and Paul are in the primaries forces those to their left to move right. Fact.
Once the GOP nomination is settled, whomever wins will have to move back to the middle to attract independents. Fact.
It would be much easier to move back to the middle if they never had to leave it thus fostering consistency and confidence in supporters and voters. Fact.
Hillary will not have to move one iota to win the nomination. Fact.
If the hard right does not get their guy, they stay home as we saw in 2012. Fact.
The hard left will not stay home regardless of who wins the DNC nomination. Fact.

Can Hillary sabotage her campaign? Sure. Ask 47% Mitt about that or the boob who picked Palin for VP... But she won't make the same tactical mistakes she made in 08. For one thing, she can'. For a second thing, the fences have mended between the moderates and Clinton since she came on board for Obama as SoS.

And the "hard" left was where in 2014? Drugging?Boozing? What?

This may come as a shock to you but the mid-terms are historically a point when enthusiam wanes for the incumbent's party.

You'll see them in 2016.

 

[Statistikhengst]

In the title you show doubt. In the OP you show doubt.
Admit or not you see a possible defeat. After only what? 12 hours after she announced?

No kidding..the election is over a year and a half away. But look at the battlefield.

Cruz & Paul have no chance of winning the election. Fact.
That Curz and Paul are in the primaries forces those to their left to move right. Fact.
Once the GOP nomination is settled, whomever wins will have to move back to the middle to attract independents. Fact.
It would be much easier to move back to the middle if they never had to leave it thus fostering consistency and confidence in supporters and voters. Fact.
Hillary will not have to move one iota to win the nomination. Fact.
If the hard right does not get their guy, they stay home as we saw in 2012. Fact.
The hard left will not stay home regardless of who wins the DNC nomination. Fact.

Can Hillary sabotage her campaign? Sure. Ask 47% Mitt about that or the boob who picked Palin for VP... But she won't make the same tactical mistakes she made in 08. For one thing, she can'. For a second thing, the fences have mended between the moderates and Clinton since she came on board for Obama as SoS.

And the "hard" left was where in 2014? Drugging?Boozing? What?

Right where the Right was in 1930, 1934, 1954, 1958, 1972.....

learn from electoral history, then you won't make such a fool out of yourself...

 

[candycorn]

I don't blame the GOP for limiting the debates. If I had that many loons on display, I would want to limit their chances to say stupid things too.

Candidates will say whatever they can to get eyeballs and contributions. The only tools parties have to limit their ability to say it on a prominent stage is to either limit the access to the debates or limit the number of debates.

Whats important to me as a Clinton/Democratic supporter is that they still put the clown car on the road and those with zero chance still put their own inertia on the debate.

Every whacky stand they take on doing away with the IRS, making women wear chastity belts, going back into Iraq or Afghanistan, forces the eventual nominees to respond. They won't want to insult the Paul/Rubio/Cruz supporters so they will not totally blow their opponent's idea out of the water.

 

[DarkFury]

In the title you show doubt. In the OP you show doubt.
Admit or not you see a possible defeat. After only what? 12 hours after she announced?

No kidding..the election is over a year and a half away. But look at the battlefield.

Cruz & Paul have no chance of winning the election. Fact.
That Curz and Paul are in the primaries forces those to their left to move right. Fact.
Once the GOP nomination is settled, whomever wins will have to move back to the middle to attract independents. Fact.
It would be much easier to move back to the middle if they never had to leave it thus fostering consistency and confidence in supporters and voters. Fact.
Hillary will not have to move one iota to win the nomination. Fact.
If the hard right does not get their guy, they stay home as we saw in 2012. Fact.
The hard left will not stay home regardless of who wins the DNC nomination. Fact.

Can Hillary sabotage her campaign? Sure. Ask 47% Mitt about that or the boob who picked Palin for VP... But she won't make the same tactical mistakes she made in 08. For one thing, she can'. For a second thing, the fences have mended between the moderates and Clinton since she came on board for Obama as SoS.

And the "hard" left was where in 2014? Drugging?Boozing? What?

Right where the Right was in 1930, 1934, 1954, 1958, 1972.....

learn from electoral history, then you won't make such a fool out of yourself...

Oh but I do look at history. Worst off year defeat in history. The ONLY credit downgrade in history and democrats have TWO of those.

I look at Carters ass kissing history and post Nixon history. I also look at world history and the ENTIRE globe minus Greece moving RIGHT.

And I look at Hillary's history. I don't think there is ANYBODY in office or trying for office that has MORE neg rep then she does. The die hard Leech-o-tards support her. About 30% but beyond that? Division and a crumbling base. Face FACTS, she IS a LIAR.

 

[Statistikhengst]

In the title you show doubt. In the OP you show doubt.
Admit or not you see a possible defeat. After only what? 12 hours after she announced?

No kidding..the election is over a year and a half away. But look at the battlefield.

Cruz & Paul have no chance of winning the election. Fact.
That Curz and Paul are in the primaries forces those to their left to move right. Fact.
Once the GOP nomination is settled, whomever wins will have to move back to the middle to attract independents. Fact.
It would be much easier to move back to the middle if they never had to leave it thus fostering consistency and confidence in supporters and voters. Fact.
Hillary will not have to move one iota to win the nomination. Fact.
If the hard right does not get their guy, they stay home as we saw in 2012. Fact.
The hard left will not stay home regardless of who wins the DNC nomination. Fact.

Can Hillary sabotage her campaign? Sure. Ask 47% Mitt about that or the boob who picked Palin for VP... But she won't make the same tactical mistakes she made in 08. For one thing, she can'. For a second thing, the fences have mended between the moderates and Clinton since she came on board for Obama as SoS.

And the "hard" left was where in 2014? Drugging?Boozing? What?

Right where the Right was in 1930, 1934, 1954, 1958, 1972.....

learn from electoral history, then you won't make such a fool out of yourself...

Oh but I do look at history. Worst off year defeat in history. The ONLY credit downgrade in history and democrats have TWO of those.

I look at Carters ass kissing history and post Nixon history. I also look at world history and the ENTIRE globe minus Greece moving RIGHT.

And I look at Hillary's history. I don't think there is ANYBODY in office or trying for office that has MORE neg rep then she does. The die hard Leech-o-tards support her. About 30% but beyond that? Division and a crumbling base. Face FACTS, she IS a LIAR.

No. Your facts are not in order. You just lied out your ass.

Both 1930 and 1958 were far worse pummelings for a President's party than 2014.

You really need to learn to read and act like a real adult.

 

[Statistikhengst]

I don't blame the GOP for limiting the debates. If I had that many loons on display, I would want to limit their chances to say stupid things too.

Candidates will say whatever they can to get eyeballs and contributions. The only tools parties have to limit their ability to say it on a prominent stage is to either limit the access to the debates or limit the number of debates.

Whats important to me as a Clinton/Democratic supporter is that they still put the clown car on the road and those with zero chance still put their own inertia on the debate.

Every whacky stand they take on doing away with the IRS, making women wear chastity belts, going back into Iraq or Afghanistan, forces the eventual nominees to respond. They won't want to insult the Paul/Rubio/Cruz supporters so they will not totally blow their opponent's idea out of the water.

Yepp.

The best way to let the GOP lose in a historic landslide defeat is to simply let their candidates:

talk.

 

[Mac1958]

.

This is gonna be one ugly, nasty, sloppy, shitty campaign., a reflection of our politics.

But I can definitely see Hillary winning it, if she and her people can control all the drama.

.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Again, if the Rs can't beat Hillary they need to hang it up. She is the ultimate poster child of what is wrong with america. She has plenty of red meat and low hanging fruit just waiting for someone to tee off on.

 

[Mac1958]

Again, if the Rs can't beat Hillary they need to hang it up.

Yeah, pretty much, but it could sure as hell happen.

The GOP is so divided now, though. I don't see how it presents a united front in 2016. They fight each other with more intensity than they fight the Democrats.

.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Again, if the Rs can't beat Hillary they need to hang it up.

Yeah, pretty much, but it could sure as hell happen.

The GOP is so divided now, though. I don't see how it presents a united front in 2016. They fight each other with more intensity than they fight the Democrats.

.

I agree.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

One smart thing the GOP did was limit the number of debates. On the surface, at least, this was smart because it gives the whackjob candidacies of Cruz and Paul less official forums to announce their positions. Contrary to the belief that the Parties pick the candidtes; they actually have very little authority over them let alone control what they say. The flip side is that the urge to make a "big splash" may be too great for either of them to understand. Those who are looking to put their marker down somewhere between the hard right and the moderate right are probably the most dangerous.

Every karem to or pander toward the hard right forces the eventual nominee to move in that direction. This will, of course, hamstring him in the general election when the enevitable move back to the center has to be made.

The reason Hillary will win is because no such force sits to her left which would force her to react in such an irrational manner. Also, if such a force were to materialize, there would still be no need for Clinton to make the move; the voters on the hard left will be there for her in November. If we learned anything from 2012 it is that the hard right will abandon a GOP candidate that is seen as not willing to carry their water and message.

Obama fatigue and the ocassional flub (if they are ocassional) and tactical mis-step of the Clinton campaign will play a role as well but there shouldn't be enough of them to swing the election.

She isn't a shoo-in for the Presidency; there is still a long way to go. But it would be hard to imagine a better set-up for Secretary Clinton than what has happened in the last few weeks with Cruz, Paul and Rubio entering the race

Please list her accomplishments. I'll start.

1. Logged many miles of flight. (I have to admit, I got that from hillary herself.)
2.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Being disappointed would mean I somehow expect her to break with Wall Street, I do not. Sick of these corporate dems, I would almost rather have a conservative government that openly despises my ideology.

God willing.

 

[Roadrunner]

American men like children... might run to Momma Hillary....

to have their nappies changed...idiot weaklings that they are!

Anybody that votes for Hillary deserves what they get.

Same as for all those middle class idiots that voted for Obama, and have seen no recovery in the past six 1/4 years.

 

[JoeB131]

Again, if the Rs can't beat Hillary they need to hang it up. She is the ultimate poster child of what is wrong with america. She has plenty of red meat and low hanging fruit just waiting for someone to tee off on.

You guys are making the same mistake you made in 2008 and 2012. You assume because you hate her with a passion that makes you blind, everyone else does, too.

 

[JoeB131]

American men like children... might run to Momma Hillary....

to have their nappies changed...idiot weaklings that they are!

Anybody that votes for Hillary deserves what they get.

Same as for all those middle class idiots that voted for Obama, and have seen no recovery in the past six 1/4 years.

As opposed to you clowns running Jeb Bush after Dubya fucked everything up so badly.