Hillary and her campaign aides have long been involved with Russia for
reasons of personal gain. Clinton herself got $145 million in donations to the
Clinton Foundation for allowing Russia to take over twenty percent of
all uranium production in the U.S. Her campaign chairman, John Podesta, is
reaping the financial benefits of being on the board of a Russian company,
Joule, which he did not disclose. PATRICIA McCARTHY
Hillary Clinton's Impossible Dream
Hillary Clinton, still suffering from delusions of adequacy, has a dream. It is that Democrats will beg her to run again and be their savior. After all, she recently celebrated her historic 2016 win against President Donald Trump during an interview with Judy Woodruff.
Yes, the psychosis has progressed that far.
Still, the lineup of Democrat candidates is so awful that Clinton is actually tied with Andrew Yang in third place in the PredictIt political prediction market.
The betting market is responding to Clinton's not so subtle odor of desperation, as well as the apparent weakness of the field.
Far too many Republicans and Democrats alike view Clinton as the real-life incarnation of Jason Voorhees of Friday the 13th fame, although this is perhaps unfair to Jason, since it was safer to be acquaintances with the machete-wielding psychopath.
Jason was the un-killable evil force. Just when the brave and plucky heroine finally incinerated him, he popped back up with his hockey mask on and creepy music in the background to teach her the error of her ways.
With Clinton, her political immortality is purely an illusion. In fact, there are only two Americans who really want her to run: Clinton herself and President Donald Trump. You could perhaps add Bill Clinton to that list if it would keep her away from the mansion a bit longer.
In light of the Left's outraged attacks on Ellen DeGeneres for not pushing George W. Bush out of the press box of a football game, perhaps the only remaining issue that can unite Republicans and Democrats is loathing of the corruption queen.
Usually, losing candidates see their approval ratings improve. Not Clinton.
Conservatives detest her even more now than they did in 2016 thanks to her starring role in the first administrative coup attempt. They are joined in disgust by a sizable percentage of liberals, who will never forgive Clinton for losing that election.
The problem for Clinton is that every day for the Democrats brings a fresh reminder of what they lost in 2016. The Democrats were within a hair of locking down full ideological control of America, likely forever, and Clinton fumbled away their perverse dream.
Think about what this moment meant for America, particularly if you were a liberal.
If Clinton had won, liberals would have a 6-3 majority on the high court, with almost no possibility for conservatives to win back the court in our lifetime. That would have been lights out for America.
Clinton singlehandedly brought about the greatest mass outbreak of schadenfreude in human history. That's not an easily forgiven achievement for liberals. Democrats blame her and are decidedly not with her this time around.
Clinton was left chucking lamps at staffers while John Podesta was giving his version of Winston Churchill's "Fight Them on the Beaches" speech to the world's saddest victory party. Clinton didn't even have the decency to thank her supporters since it was never really about them. With a Cilnton, it is always only about that Clinton, raw political power, and insatiable greed.
Clinton is waiting for Joe Biden to implode with the hopes that she will get drafted to replace him as the Democrat establishment choice.
Biden might oblige her. He was already in deep trouble, but the latest revelation that he may have also collected a small fortune from Ukraine may seal the deal. "Make the Bidens Richer Again" is not resonating as a campaign theme despite the triggered media's best attempts to black out any mention of Biden and Ukraine in the same sentence. Poor Joe may have no other choice in 2020 but to cast his ballot for President Trump to protect his ill begotten loot from the Cherokee maiden's wealth tax.
But even if Joe crashes, there will be no outcry for Hillary to take his place. Should she enter the race, she will be destroyed. Democrats do not reward presidential losers. The last Democrat nominee to get two shots was Adlai Stevenson, who got trounced twice by Dwight D. Eisenhower in the 1950s.
Democrats always put their losers out to pasture. Sure, a John Kerry might occasionally pop up like a whack-a-mole to whisper sweet words of treason in an Iranian mullah's ear, but Democrat general election losers are effectively done as national candidates.
If a candidate was ever going to buck this trend, it would have to be one that commanded broad respect, had strong charisma, and was viewed to have a good chance of winning. That's not Clinton. Her approval rating outside of the Clinton house is stuck somewhere between horrible and abysmal.
The absolute best thing that could happen for Republicans is if Democrats really do draft Clinton into the race. They won't. If you think the Bernie Bros were mad in 2016, the Cherokee's tribe will go on the political warpath if Warren is denied the nomination by Clinton chicanery.
One theory posited is that Clinton could be a compromise candidate chosen at the convention should no other candidate claim the nomination outright. Perhaps if it were still 2016. But the Democrats changed their rules after 2016, making this far less likely. A candidate has to win support from only a majority of the pledged delegates on the first ballot, when superdelegates cannot vote. The laws of political momentum suggest that no more than two candidates will dominate the field once voting starts. So if there is a road where Clinton could take advantage of the rules to sneak back in, it is a microscopic one that would require such a confluence of events as to be nearly impossible.
On the unlikely scenario that the first ballot is close but doesn't produce a candidate, I'm guessing that the superdelegates will throw their weight behind either the top performer in the first ballot or whoever is closest to an "establishment" candidate, which will likely be Biden.
Many Democrats are already suffering buyer's remorse on Warren, even though they haven't actually bought her yet. So there will be attempts to draft an alternative.
If not Clinton, then who is first in line to be drafted?
If Warren is Bernie Sanders 2.0, then the biggest threat to Warren would be Clinton 2.0, which is not Hillary. That would be Michelle Obama.
She is newer, fresher, and not despised as a loser by most of her party. She is also the candidate best poised to appeal to all the factions in the Democratic Party. Socialists will love her since they will strongly suspect she is one of them. The establishment would back her, assuming she is preferable to Warren. She wouldn't suffer from Warren's real and perhaps campaign-fatal problem with black American voters. Her approval rating is at its high water mark.
I would be surprised if she is not fielding phone calls urging her to enter the race.
Regardless, Clinton will continue to chatter from the sidelines, hoping for one last shot at her dream. But, as a national candidate, she is done. That impossibly morbid dream is over.
Fletch Daniels blogs at deplorabletouchdown.com and can be found on Twitter at @fletchdaniels.
Clinton Foundation Put On Watch List Of Suspicious ‘Charities’
GRIFTER AND PHONY CHARITY FOUNDATION
FRAUDSTER HILLARY CLINTON’S LONG SERVICE TO AMERICA’S MOST EVIL BANKSTERS
The judge found these
releases, together with the publication of Clinton’s secret speeches to Wall
Street banks, in which she pledged to be their representative, were “matters of
the highest public concern.” They “allowed the American electorate to look behind
the curtain of one of the two major political parties in the United States
during a presidential election.”
“Clinton also
failed to mention how he and Hillary cashed in after his
presidential tenure to make themselves multimillionaires, in
part by taking tens of millions in speaking fees from Wall Street
bankers.”
VIDEO:
THE FRAUDULENT CLINTON FOUNDATION EXPOSED.
PAY-TO-PLAY FROM THE FIRST DAY!
Is it a signal
that she's back in the game because she's selling her president-ability to the
world's global billionaire crowd and laying the groundwork for more
funds? There are all kinds of ways for foreign billionaires to get
money to the U.S. without consequences, after all. What's more, it's
pretty much the biggest base of support she has, which is at least one reason
why she lost the 2016 election.
“The couple
parlayed lives supposedly spent in “public service”
into admission into the upper stratosphere of American wealth, with incomes in the top 0.1 percent bracket. The source of this vast wealth was a political machine that might well be dubbed “Clinton, Inc.” This consists essentially of a seedy money-laundering operation to ensure big business support for the Clintons’ political ambitions as well as their personal fortunes.
into admission into the upper stratosphere of American wealth, with incomes in the top 0.1 percent bracket. The source of this vast wealth was a political machine that might well be dubbed “Clinton, Inc.” This consists essentially of a seedy money-laundering operation to ensure big business support for the Clintons’ political ambitions as well as their personal fortunes.
The basic components of the operation are lavishly paid
speeches to Wall Street and Fortune 500 audiences, corporate campaign
contributions, and donations to the ostensibly philanthropic Clinton
Foundation.”
"But what the
Clintons do is criminal
because they do it wholly at the expense of
the
American people. And they feel
thoroughly entitled to do it: gain power, use
it
to enrich themselves and their friends.
They are amoral, immoral, and venal.
Hillary has no core beliefs beyond power and
money. That should be clear to
every person
on the planet by now." ---- Patricia
McCarthy -
AMERICANTHINKER.com
///
THE DEMOCRAT PARTY’S
BILLIONAIRES’ GLOBALIST EMPIRE requires someone as ruthlessly dishonest as
Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama to be puppet dictators.
http://hillaryclinton-whitecollarcriminal.blogspot.com/2018/09/google-rigged-it-so-illegals-would-vote.html
1.
Globalism: Google
VP Kent Walker insists that despite its repeated rejection by electorates
around the world, “globalization” is an “incredible force for good.”
2.
Hillary Clinton’s Democratic
party: An executive nearly broke down crying because of the candidate’s loss. Not
a single executive expressed anything but dismay at her defeat.
3. Immigration: Maintaining
liberal immigration in the U.S is the policy that Google’s executives discussed the
most.
HILLARY CLINTON’S GLOBALIST VISION:
SURRENDER OF OUR BORDERS WITH NARCOMEX AND SUCKING IN GLOBAL
BRIBES FOR THE PHONY CLINTON FOUNDATION
Even though it has gone
virtually unreported by Corporate media, Breitbart News has extensively documented the
Clintons’
longstanding support for
“open borders.” Interestingly, as the Los Angeles Times observed
in 2007, the Clinton’s praise for
globalization and open
borders frequently comes when they are
speaking before a wealthy
foreign audiences and donors.
THE OBAMA – CLINTON RUSSIA CONNECTION
WITH THESE
TRAITORS, JUST FOLLOW THE MONEY!
How President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton aided
Russia’s quest for global nuclear dominance.
THE
SHADY POLITICS OF HILLARY CLINTON and her PAY-TO-PLAY MAFIA
The left cared
nothing about that bit of collusion.
Hillary and her
campaign aides have long been involved with Russia for reasons of personal
gain. Clinton herself got $145 million in donations to the Clinton
Foundation for allowing Russia to take over twenty percent of all uranium production in the U.S. Her campaign
chairman, John Podesta, is reaping the financial benefits of being on the board
of a Russian company, Joule, which he did not disclose. PATRICIA
McCARTHY
Had
Hillary been elected, the Clinton Foundation would be raking in even more
millions than it did before. She would be happily selling access, favors
and our remaining freedoms out from under us. PATRICIA McCARTHY
GEORGE SOROS AND
THE CLINTON GLOBALIST AGENDA FOR BANKSTERS AND WIDE OPEN BORDERS
*
NEW YORK — Demand Justice, an
organization founded by former members of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential
campaign and associated with a “social welfare organization” financed by
billionaire activist George S oros, is raising money for an eventual court
fight against what the group describes as President Trump’s proposed “racist,
unnecessary wall.”
*
*
“Obama would
declare himself president for life with S oros really running the show, as he
did for the entire Obama presidency.”
*
“Hillary was always small potatoes, a placeholder as it were. Her health
was always suspect. And do you think the plotters would have let a doofus like
Tim Kaine take office in the event that Hillary became disabled?”
“There is no controlling Bill Clinton. He does whatever he wants and runs up incredible expenses with
foundation funds,” states a separate interview memo attached to the submission.
“Bill Clinton mixes and matches his personal business with that of the
foundation. Many people within the foundation have tried to caution him about
this but he does not listen, and there really is no talking to him,” the memo
added.
HILLARY CLINTON: Serving the super-rich and filling her
bottomless pockets as she does!
*
"And this being Hillary, with her stated presidential
ambitions still remaining, it's also a distinct possibility that donations to
the Clinton Foundation are still being sought, especially since they have
dropped to nearly nothing now that Clinton has no influence to
sell. With Hillary, it's always about money. Her stint as
secretary of state was completely about pay to play, after all." MONICA
SHOWALTER – AMERICAN THINKER
Is it a signal that she's back in the game because she's
selling her president-ability to the world's global billionaire crowd and
laying the groundwork for more funds? There are all kinds of ways
for foreign billionaires to get money to the U.S. without consequences, after
all. What's more, it's pretty much the biggest base of support she
has, which is at least one reason why she lost the 2016 election.
*
No comments:
Post a Comment