Hillary Will Never Survive The Trump Onslaught: It’s Not Fair, But It Makes Her A Weak Nominee

[Purveyor]

Clinton backers who tout their "realism" need to get real about how she'll handle the shitstorm coming from Trump

BY STEVE ALMOND

There are many nauseating aspects of the new reality TV series, “America Picks a Prez,” which airs around the clock on every single channel on earth: the cynical, open-air conspiracy between our Fourth Estate and Donald “Ratings Viagra” Trump. Ted Cruz uttering the word “prayerfully“ while not exploding into a cloud of synthetic piety.

Among these, let me nominate one more: listening to Hillary partisans explain to those of us who support Bernie Sanders just how naive we are. Only Hillary, we are told, has a real shot at winning in November. She’s the only one with a realistic grasp of how Washington works, whose moderate (and modest) policy aims might, realistically, be enacted. It often sounds as if Clinton’s central pitch to voters isn’t that she has a moral vision for the country, but that she owns the franchise on realism.

Bernie, meanwhile, is just a sweet-shouting rube whose quarter-century as a congressman and senator has somehow failed to instill in him an appreciation for the twin plagues of grift and gridlock.

For us benighted hippies, the standard counter-argument at this point is that our man understands all too well the magnitude of Washington’s dysfunction, which is why he’s calling for a political revolution: to obliterate the most heinous aspects of the status quo, starting with corporate-sponsored elections.

I happen to agree with this. But there’s a sadder and more pointed response to Hillary’s reality brigade. Namely, that they need to face the reality of what the 2016 election is going to be like with Hillary at the top of the ticket.

MORE...

http://www.salon.com/2016/03/14/hillary_will_never_survive_the_trump_onslaught_its_not_fair_but_it_makes_her_a_weak_nominee/

[Jackie Wilson Said]

1. And yet those who do statistics for a living say something very very different.

http://predictwise.com/politics/2016-president-democratic-nomination

[deathrind]

2. He is right on the

Money with that article...

"Republicans tend to lose when they have to talk in specific terms about policies, priorities and solutions. They win when elections are reduced to brawls and/or personality contests. (See Reagan/Carter, Bush/Kerry, et al.)"

HRC has a ton of baggage going all the way back to "Whitewater". If HRC is the nominee republicans will not have enough time or be able to spend enough money on attack adds between now and Nov to rehash all the baggage HRC has. There will be no talk of policy it will be all scandals all the time to distract the voters...and it will work.

[mythology]

4. Except that argument can't be quantified

It effectively can be used to justify any lost race. How exactly does one determine if a race is about personality or policy? For example Kennedy versus Nixon and the impact of the tv debates?

Or affable Bill Clinton against stodgy Bush 1 or Dole?

[deathrind]

7. I hope you are right...

But.... "How exactly does one determine if a race is about personality or policy"

If history is any indication Republicans will determine this...as they have in the past. They will unleash attack ad after attack ad on HRC and she will be spending all her time explaining / defending / clarifying or just setting the record straight in response to those ads.

Unless The Democratic Party gets tough and fires the first shot. If Trump is the nominee he has just as much baggage and the Dems can go after him on numerous fronts from his business dealings (bankruptcies), his treatment of women, his racist comments, his lies etc. However Dems have historically not been ones to go that route. If HRC is the nominee Dems are going to have to hit hard and often on Trump (presuming he is the republican nominee).

It is going to be very interesting to watch. I think this GE is going to be like nothing we have seen. The Daisy ad, Willy Horton, McCains illegitimate baby will be nothing compared to what is coming. It will be more like Jackson v Adams of 1828. That is one of the dirtiest campaigns ever...but this one may even top that.

[Bleacher Creature]

3. Getting really tired of this ridiculous argument.

This is the key paragraph for me:

"All of which brings us back to that credulous waif from Brooklyn, by way of Ben and Jerry’s. Donald Trump can holler all he wants about how Crazy Bernie is a socialist. But he (and the super Pacs) won’t be able to distract voters by digging up scandals in his past. Nor will Trump be able to portray him as a corporate stooge."

What scandals did Obama have when he won the nomination? How about when he ran for re-election? In both cases, the answer is "none." That didn't stop the GOP from creating a litany of fake scandals, ranging from the location of his birth, to when he met Bill Ayers, to how close he was with his pastor, to Michelle Obama's college thesis, etc., etc., etc.

By 2012 it was all about the DEA gun program, IRS targeting, apology tours, fake quotes, and later Libya.

These are all fake scandals. The only difference between Hillary and Bernie is that her "scandals" are already made up.

Does anyone honestly think they won't come up with a list of phony scandals about Bernie in about 10 seconds (max).

[Wilms]

5. Here's a few differences.

Many of Hillary's scandals are real. And, importantly, Obama won.

Her campaigns seemed marked by diminishing and vanishing margins. And it's happening again.

[Bleacher Creature]

8. I'm almost afraid to ask which of those scandals you consider "real."

On second thought, nevermind.

[Wilms]

9. And there you have it.

A perfect voter for HRC.

[Cali_Democrat]

6. Hillary would beat Trump with both arms tied behind her back. nt