December 11, 2012

"Hillary Rodham Clinton would be a formidable presidential candidate in 2016."

Says Nate Silver, the proven genius.

104 comments:

Jana said...

Don't need Nate Silver to know that.

Obvious, though, it's quite early to be gaming out 2016. After all, she looked just as formidable, almost inevitable in 2004.

harrogate said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
harrogate said...

Nobody with any sense said he was a genius in earnest, least of all Silver himself. He is just a card counter, a sabermeterician, and he is very good at what he does.

You know: as opposed to getting all swept up in an ideological echo chamber to the point that you think all the world is that chamber.

hombre said...

Of course, she's done such a fine job as Sec of State, particularly condemning the "video" and carrying "fast and furious" over to Islamic jihadists.

But then, she is a woman and is committed to the agenga - you know, the agenda.

Otherwise, I assume Silver is talking about her ability to carry the moron vote in the fine tradition of Oblahblah. In that regarde, she is formidable, if unremarkable.

Jon said...


If Nate Silver is such a "genius" why did he underestimate the GOP's 2010 House gains by 10 seats? It's much easier to make accurate predictions when the team you are rooting for is favored. The media gushes about Silver's accuracy in 2008 and 2012, but never mentions his poor performance in 2010. Let's see how well he does in 2014.

edutcher said...

Silver was handed the election returns Axelrod and Plouffe set as benchmarks - some genius.

As for the Hildabeast, she is really showing the mileage and has yet to rack up a real achievement at State. If her next campaign is like her last, she'd do well just to stay home and have fun making Willie's life miserable.

AReasonableMan said...

If the election was held today she would win easily against essentially any Republican. She retains almost all of Obama's voters with the exception of those who won't vote for a woman. She picks up at least as many, and I would suspect more, traditional Democrat voters who wouldn't vote for a black. In addition, she will pick up a large fraction of female independents and even some Republicans.

The only thing stopping here at this point is she has to stay alive until 2016, not an actuarially unlikely outcome but not absolutely certain either.

Bob Ellison said...

As far as I'm concerned, Nate Silver is Jimmy the Greek. I'll go with his predictions until he starts talking about racial tendencies.

Shouting Thomas said...

Who in the hell knows what will happen or what the political and economic landscape will look like by 2016?

Obviously... nobody.

ricpic said...

What's "formidable" about the yenta? Her ability to mouth non-stop platitudes while attempting to satisfy her insatiable greed for money be stealing hand over fist; greed for power by way of blackmail, threat and murder; greed for women by keeping an ever rotating harem of lesbians while leering popeyed at every breast that comes within range?

Renee said...

Baby Boomers and Women.... clinched.

Maguro said...

Hate to disagree with a supergenius, but Hillary is a thoroughly mediocre politician. She will not win the nomination in 2016.

Anthony said...

I've already seen a Warren for President 2016 bumper sticker. So it's not too early.

rehajm said...

The euphoria of election victory is high. Throw Ted Kennedy's name out there and NYT would get crackin' on the Sunday think piece about the first 'dead' president...

EMD said...

Cuomo refuses to endorse, which is funny considering someone asked on 12/11/12.

Methadras said...

Not one mention of how she started the birther movement on Barak Obama. Interesting.

MadisonMan said...

Hillary! is back!

I feel like a voiceover is needed: In a world where political fortunes are won and lost based on daily events, one woman has steered her ship through the shoals of State...

edutcher said...

AnUnreasonableTroll said...

If the election was held today she would win easily against essentially any Republican.

This is the woman that couldn't make a decision last time.

I'm betting the most worthless Democrat around could beat her (happened last time), much less any Republican.

Methadras said...

Renee said...

Baby Boomers and Women.... clenched.


Fixed for truthiness. Not to mention she will trot out the same cavalcade of fear mongering that Urkel put out there. That an evil, dirty, nasty republican will steal your lady parts in the middle of the night, drink the blood of babies, park themselves outside of every drug store, pharmacy, and planned parenthood to keep the ladies from aborting the next democrat generation.

Paco Wové said...

So, who else is on the Dem.'s bench for 2016?

Renee said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Inga said...

Yes she can!

Shouting Thomas said...

I thought Obama said, way back in 2008, that both the Clintons are racists.

I thought that that was a moral defect that cannot be forgiven or repaired.

And, Obama said it, so it has to be true.

Shouting Thomas said...

And, Inga, my whoremongering days are not over.

My mojo is still working!

YoungHegelian said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
YoungHegelian said...

The Democrats should be wary of "the next guy in line for the job" method of picking their candidate. See how well it works for the Republicans!

Also, Obama came outta nowhere to beat Hillary in 2008. Who's to say some charismatic dark horse Dem. candidate won't do it again in 2016?

Ignore punditry that puts some candidate from the NE at the top of the heap. these are the same folks who claimed that Guiliani was the Republican candidate in waiting in 2008. Four years is an eternity in American politics.

somefeller said...

Jon says: The media gushes about Silver's accuracy in 2008 and 2012, but never mentions his poor performance in 2010. Let's see how well he does in 2014.

Well, you're only as good as your last game, and Silver certainly won big in 2012. So it's natural to focus on that. But there's always next season, so don't give up hope.

pm317 said...

I don't get excited about Hillary's prospects for 2016 any more. Her time and moment was 2008 and that was stolen. The same fucking thieves and their footlickers are singing her praise now. Why now? I have a theory about it. It is more of sore winners. They want to rub it in the face of Republicans. They are goading the Repubs about another historical win but they are not all that really excited about her. They are parading her only for one reason, to rub it in the face of the wimpy, loser, neanderthal, racist, sexist Republicans.

Lem said...

Yes she can!

And Inga will be right there changing her diapers.

somefeller said...

They are parading her only for one reason, to rub it in the face of the wimpy, loser, neanderthal, racist, sexist Republicans.

That is a pretty good reason, but it's not the only reason. It is reason enough for now, however. Heh, indeed, as they say.

edutcher said...

Actually, it's desperation.

The Demo bench is practically nonexistent.

Andy Cuomo was supposed to be their great white hope, but Sandy will do him in the way it will Christie.

They're also talking about Halo Joe running.

If that isn't desperation, it must be panic.

edutcher said...

somefeller said...

The media gushes about Silver's accuracy in 2008 and 2012, but never mentions his poor performance in 2010. Let's see how well he does in 2014.

Well, you're only as good as your last game, and Silver certainly won big in 2012. So it's natural to focus on that. But there's always next season, so don't give up hope.


It's easy to look good when you've been told the results ahead of time.

Let's see how things look after the crash.

Cedarford said...

Paco Wové said...
So, who else is on the Dem.'s bench for 2016?

==================
Corey Booker and Deval Patrick are having their feet licked already by the liberals and progressive Jews running the media, and "opinion deliverer" centers in academia, and celebrityville.

Once you go black, you can never go back.

Of course they are presenting Hillary as being as "inevitable" as she was supposed to be in 2008...better to make her a big fat target that will get pulled down. Not the least by women and blacks that deserted her in droves in the 2008 Dem primaries for their Dream Black Man.

She will suffer not just from being a pedestrian liberal though sans penis and so important from an identity politics niche...but from being older, fatter, and called into account for being stepinn fetchit to Obama....and the public will be as sick of Obama after 8 years as they were with Clinton fatigue and the largely failed Bush Presidency (at least failed in the sense of the colossal bag of shit he handed his successor - conceding in my opinion, that Obama made Bush's dogs breakfast even worse.)

DADvocate said...

Hard for me to see Hillary winning the nomination. She's looking old and will look even older in 4 years. She's yesterday's news. The Democratic Party moved beyond her with Obama. They ain't going back.

bagoh20 said...

More likely she will become the Jerry Quarry of Presidential politics.

SteveR said...

I just don't think she'll be able to hold up. She doesn't look healthy.

shiloh said...

Althouse, you're developing a Silver fetish, much like your mittens fetish ...

ok, ok, no one will ever replace your boy-toy Willard.

And yes, Hillary will have all the advantages Obama had, plus she's female and white.

Be afraid, be very afraid!

Wally Kalbacken said...

At age 69, looking even more haggard, despite all of Bill's cash. Fugetabouit!

edutcher said...

I see some phony folksy has retreated in favor of his sockpuppet.

Hillary has the advantages of Zero?

Axelrod is going to throw an election for her?

Doubt it.

Hilla barely survived '08 and she'd actually have to answer questions about Benghazi, Barry never had to answer anything.

PS Somebody tell the little weasel there's a /sarc tag on Ann's description of Nate Silver.

shiloh said...

she's female and white.

Gee, isn't that RRRAAAACCCCIIISSSSTTTTT?

edutcher said...

I see some phony folksy has retreated in favor of his sockpuppet.

Hillary has the advantages of Zero?

Axelrod is going to throw an election for her?

Doubt it.

Hilla barely survived '08 and she'd actually have to answer questions about Benghazi, Barry never had to answer anything.

PS Somebody tell the little weasel there's a /sarc tag on Ann's description of Nate Silver.

shiloh said...

she's female and white.

Gee, isn't that RRRAAAACCCCIIISSSSTTTTT?

phx said...

She might not be just a formidable candidate, she might be a formidable president.

Titus said...

Her tits will be too shriveled in 2016

edutcher said...

phx said...

She might not be just a formidable candidate, she might be a formidable president.

Formidable being a synonym for incompetent?

Bruce Hayden said...

I don't get it, why they think that she would be so formidable. Sure, she would have Bubba working for her. But she isn't black and she isn't Hispanic, and I don't see why the Black or the Hispanic communities would turn out for her in the numbers that Obama needed for his election.

The other thing is that she is old, and will be nearing 70 by the next election. She looks old. How is she going to get that youth vote that was so important? Can she really connect with the young better than a Paul Ryan or Marco Rubio?

She also has a lot of baggage. Numerous financial questions running from their time in Arkansas through her campaign for the Senate. Rose Law Firm billing records, future trading, Vince Foster, White Water Investment, the S&L, Puerto Rican votes for pardons for convicted terrorists, etc. Add to that, that her stint in the Senate was mediocre, and her stint at State was disasterous - and I suspect that the latter will become even more evident over the last four years.

Erika said...

If this last election taught us anything, it's that competence/record don't matter for shit. I don't see that changing anytime soon. Also, we learned that our nation's voters are children. Do you really see any of them giving a rat's ass about Whitewater or Vince Foster or other scandals that few people gave a rat's ass about when they actually happened, decades ago? They care about A. which social tribe they want to identify with and B. who's promising the most freebies. The end.

Inga said...

Bruce, age has nothing to do with it, young people will not vote Republican because of their politics.It's the politics that don't connect, not the candidate.

Rubio and especially Ryan won't get that youth, women or minority vote, will not happen.

phx said...

Formidable being a synonym for incompetent?

We're aware of your competent judgment in things political.

Eric said...

If the election was held today she would win easily against essentially any Republican.

But the election won't be held today. In 2016 the electorate will be sick to death of Democrats and Hillary will be too old to run.

phx said...

Also, we learned that our nation's voters are children.

That whole argument that Obama voters are idiots, they're irrational, they're not competent, that didn't get the Repubs very far in 2012, and that was a mainstream line among the rank and file from what I could see.

I'm thinking you're going to stick to it all the way through 2016.

Shouting Thomas said...

The way that Inga has puffed herself up in indignity since the election is a laugh riot.

She's clearly taken on the whole outraged victim bullshit, even though she's an immigrant who held a good job in the U.S.

The extent to which phonies can glom onto to this victim status, and proclaim themselves to be champions of the poor blacks is just hilarious.

What a joke!

Shouting Thomas said...

Folks, it was just one election.

The Democrats will lose again in the future.

I guarantee it. I'm an old fart, and I've been through both parties going through this silly war dance, along with the prediction that the losing party will die.

The best thing to do right now is to give it all a break for a while, but nobody's going to do that, right?

Tim said...

This is funny.

You see, Silver is correct, of course, because nothing will change between now and 2016.

Hillary! won't continue to age like a dried apple; the national debt won't accrue $4 trillion more; taxes won't go up; incomes won't go up; the unemployment rate won't significantly budge from 8%; Obama-care won't increase costs, increase delays, and decrease quality; US power overseas won't be less respected; the Iranians won't have a nuclear device; the Iranians won't extort or even annihilate Israel with said nuclear devices; the Euro will continue to be the world's most stable currency...

Yep.

Nothing will change, at all.

Hillary! is a lock for 2016.

edutcher said...

phx said...

Formidable being a synonym for incompetent?

We're aware of your competent judgment in things political.


Unlike phx who sounded oh, so conciliatory, right up to the "election", right?

And I backed someone competent, unlike phx's choice of President Fiscal Cliff, Arab Spring, Fast & Furious.

There's a real winner.

Big Mike said...

Not if Matt Drudge keeps posting the picture of her he has up today.

wyo sis said...

Rove was a genius a few years ago. A new genius will come forth in the next election.
What goes around comes around. Hillary has had her turn on the carousel.

Titus said...

Her cooch will be dry in 2016 too. Future fires will be her dry cooches fAult.

Paul said...

Any democrat no matter how incompetent or pathological can win in 2016. We're officially an idiocracy now with enough entrenched stupidity that the democrats will have a permanent majority from here on out. They will control the flow information and rewrite history as needed. And the brainwashed masses will swallow it all, hook, line, and sinker.

phx said...

And I backed someone competent, unlike phx's choice of President Fiscal Cliff, Arab Spring, Fast & Furious.

There's a real winner.


Come on over to balloonjuice and say that.

phx said...

I kind of like the Arab Spring.

Bender said...

No, it will not be the ancient wife of Bill in 2016. It will instead be son of Mario.

phx said...

Tough primary. Hillary vs. Andy. Obama declines to endorse.

Chip Ahoy said...

These son of bitches never stop campaigning. They make me sick.

And a president on permanent campaign instigating is a very low sight indeed.

For me.

I always wanted my presidents to be better than myself in observable ways. Easy enough. So I could look up to them. And the guy we have now is just such a ridiculous schmuck and every single principal around him, and the guy before him and the apparent leadership available and coming up and I just don't see it.

There was Romney briefly there who I didn't know until the end but as I did know him, bit by bit, the things I learned, I then thought, shit man, I wanted the person to be better than me but not that much better than me. I remember his son saying of the first time, "you tried, and they didn't have you." So now that's twice. There really are people out there who offer themselves to service of higher calling, and that's a grueling way to have to put forward an offer, but I do not see anything other than ideology and politics among the Democratic leadership.

cubanbob said...

Four years from now Hillary will be the Bob Dole of the democrats. Besides if the economy stays the same as it is or worsens as it seems likely to, why would she even want the job? Come to think of it, who would?

No matter how hard they try, four years from now the democrats won't have Bush to kick arround anymore. Four years from now if things stay the same or worse and Chelsea has kids I think Hillary would prefer to be granny and Bill grandpaw. Say what you will, they were good parents to Chelsea while in the White House. And Bill is too smart to encourage her to run when and if she were to win she would be inheriting Barry's economy. I'm sure he would rather bask in the knowledge of being the last succesful two term democrat president.

phx said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
edutcher said...

phx said...

I kind of like the Arab Spring.

You like the Pencil Neck gassing dissidents in Syria?

You like Morsi paying gangs to rape women protesters?

You like 4 of our guys murdered in Benghazi?

Sick puppy.

phx said...

I like the struggle for freedom.

creeley23 said...

Quite a lot of shit is going to hit the fan between now and 2016, that's certain.

We'll see who looks formidable then.

Eric said...

That whole argument that Obama voters are idiots, they're irrational, they're not competent, that didn't get the Repubs very far in 2012, and that was a mainstream line among the rank and file from what I could see.

That doesn't make it untrue. Just bad optics.

Eric said...

I like the struggle for freedom.

If freedom was what they really wanted I'd agree. But from where I sit it looks like they're just trading one boot in the face for another.

Erika said...

Paul-that's what I was getting at. It's gonna get ugly between here and 2016, but I've lost faith that the American people have the critical thinking skills, attention span and interest to bushwhack through all the rhetoric and media baloney to be able to accurately place blame. If they weren't willing to blame Obama/Democrats for the chin-high snowdrift of failures and incompetencies in Nov 2012, why would they do so in 2016? We're headed toward one-party rule until the whole thing collapses, and then we'll see what emerges on the other side.

Inga said...

Shouting Thomas, I've been a citizen of this country since I've been 9 years old. Your ancestors were immigrants too.

Inga said...

Wasn't your wife an immigrant also ST? I don't want to hear another thing out of your big mouth about immigrants.

Paul said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Paul said...

Erika, yes. Exactly. If you don't know the name Antonio Gramsci, and the Frankfort School investigate them. There's been a long, slow, but wildly successful program to demoralize and destabilize the USA by infiltrating the culture with Marxist critical theory. Oliver Stone has a series on Showtime right now revising American history in the 20th century that is right out of the old Soviet playbook. And you know the soft mushy brains are just soaking it up. This has been going on long enough that the culture has shifted from its freedom-oriented, individualist roots to a collectivist, socialist, welfare mentality that is like a black hole from which there is no escape. We crossed that event horizon last month.

WineSlob said...

Hillary in A Cunning Stunt
Is Already in the Hunt
To Win in '16
USA's First Queen
No 'Pub can O'ercome The Stunning Count.

EDH said...

"Hillary Rodham Clinton would be a formaldehydeable presidential candidate in 2016."

Fixed.

Eric said...

This has been going on long enough that the culture has shifted from its freedom-oriented, individualist roots to a collectivist, socialist, welfare mentality that is like a black hole from which there is no escape. We crossed that event horizon last month.

Oh, we've been on those rails for awhile. Milton Friedman thought the decision point occurred in the '70s, and he was probably right. Socialism is just more facile, and for people who don't follow politics it makes sense. Once you have enough people on the dole there's no going back.

Lyle said...

I agree with Nate Silver. She'd be hard to beat, I think. I don't see how she'd lose any of the people who voted for Obama.

30yearProf said...

Not after Bengazi. She's finished. No one will believe her excuses. They were her troops and she let them down when it counted the most.

Any Democrat can carry the moron vote; the Party doesn't need an old woman as it's head.

bgates said...

If the election was held today she would win easily against essentially any Republican.

It's true. Republicans would be caught flat-footed, complaining that it was senseless and unconstitutional to have a late 2012 election for a presidency to begin in 2017. Democrats would respond angrily that remarks about holding an election four years early were just code for the sexist stereotype that women take a long time to get ready, and as for pointing out that an election on the 12th wasn't the right time of the month, that's as obvious an assault on ladyparts as anyone has ever committed.

Paul said...

"Oh, we've been on those rails for awhile. Milton Friedman thought the decision point occurred in the '70s, and he was probably right. Socialism is just more facile, and for people who don't follow politics it makes sense. Once you have enough people on the dole there's no going back."

Yes it has been going on a long time and the 60's cultural revolution was the first really large mass expression of its influence.

We did have a shift towards socialism in the 70s followed, by a shift back towards American values after the abject Carter presidency with the election of Reagan and the ensuing resurgence in American power and prosperity.

This time however, rather than doing the obvious thing after four dour years under Obama and electing the only choice for a revival of the American economy and spirit, we doubled down on stupid. We're like Joe Montagna's character in "House Of Games"..."Thank you, may I have another", as he gets pumped full of bullets.

That's why I say we've passed the point of no return. To vote for more of this shit, to believe that Obama with all his bungling, narcissism, corruption, and flat out anti-Americanism deserved reelection proves that America has jumped the shark and Western Civilization's days are numbered.

Because without America to stand in stark contrast to the enervating effect socialism has on the economies and spirit of the populations under its thrall there is nothing to stop its creep until it engulfs the world and we all become slaves.

Eric said...

We did have a shift towards socialism in the 70s followed, by a shift back towards American values after the abject Carter presidency with the election of Reagan and the ensuing resurgence in American power and prosperity.

The shift back was illusory. Even under Reagan the government never shrank. It just grew a little more slowly.

Paul said...

"Not after Bengazi. She's finished. No one will believe her excuses. They were her troops and she let them down when it counted the most."

Benghazi? What's that? You think the morons that by in large make up the voting body know, or care about Benghazi?

She's finished because she's worn out. But no matter who the dems nominate they will be the next President. I won't be surprised if BHO manages to figure out a way to get a third term himself.

Paul said...

"The shift back was illusory. Even under Reagan the government never shrank. It just grew a little more slowly."

No the shift was real and was manifest in both the burgeoning economy, and more importantly in the SPIRIT of the people.

The growth of government is not the only metric. Economic growth and and people's optimism for the future are more important in the final analysis.

What we have now is rapidly expanding government power coupled with economic contraction, and leavened with a whopping portion of pessimistic depression and foreboding for the future.

The difference between now and the 80s couldn't be more clear.

ambienisevil said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
mccullough said...

Hillary will have to run against Obama's record. That would be fun to watch. She could run on repealing Obamacare and cut federal spending and winding down the war in Iran.

Eric said...

The growth of government is not the only metric. Economic growth and and people's optimism for the future are more important in the final analysis.

But the growth of the government is the most important metric. If you let it grow unbounded eventually it will suck the air out of the economy, as it has. And with that goes the optimism.

The '80s also saw the imposition of all sorts of new laws and powers for the government to crawl up your financial nether region looking for a few shekels you might not have declared. I mean, new money laundering laws.

Don't kid yourself. Reagan was better than Carter, but there was no deviation from Hayek's road.

Paul said...

Eric, I agree to a point. Had we elected Romney it would have indicated that we we're aware of the need to curtail the size and scope of government, but obviously the electorate has been dumbed down sufficiently to not even recognize the need for a change in direction.

At least in 1980 we knew we had to change course and the Republicans won in a landslide.

MayBee said...

I was talking to international banking friends this weekend, Obama supporters, who have pre-baked in the assumption that the next four years are going to be terrible economically and there's nothing Obama can do about it.

If that's the way things are presented, then I don't see why the Democratic party will suffer as a result of his failures.

In fact, he (and they) will be better off if we never substantially recover from 2008 than if we recover for a while and then sputter into a new recession.
As long as they can point at the 2008 recession being the problem, they can avert the blame and gain the electoral advantage.

That's something worth thinking about when we look at Obama's agenda for the next four years. Mysterious as it is right now.

Jake Diamond said...

It's easy to look good when you've been told the results ahead of time.

Someone, anyone, please escort edumbshit to the nearest mental hospital. He's badly broken and it's just cruel to let him continue to suffer like this.

edutcher said...

The man made of dumbshit's been at the muscatel again.

It would seem he's got no real rebuttal, just his usual moronic insults, the sort of thing they're hearing in Lansing these days.

Somebody tell him he's going to have to come up with a real argument since the Koskidz poll told us 24% of the American public see it my way.

Dante said...

Now experience is an important trait of a Presidential candidate? How convincing is that?

Anyway, she looks sickly and puffy. Like she has been drinking too much. Another four years on that body is going to leave her looking more like a prune than a person.

machine said...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.....

President Obama is so bad....he beat your asses TWICE.


Hillary only needs to be half as good as The President.....

AllenS said...

Evidently, Hillary will be calling it quits for the Sec of State job shortly. It will be interesting to find out what she will do everyday. Where will she live? And, where in the hell does Bill live?

dreams said...

Its going to be a long time before a Republican is ever elected president. The liberal media became fully aware of their power after they were able to destroy Bush's reputation, plus Sarah Palin.

Dante said...


This time however, rather than doing the obvious thing after four dour years under Obama and electing the only choice for a revival of the American economy and spirit, we doubled down on stupid. We're like Joe Montagna's character in "House Of Games"..."Thank you, may I have another", as he gets pumped full of bullets.


That was a great movie, except for the lead actress, who was the director's wife, I think.

"Like a dog going back to his vomit," seems more appropriate.

Dante said...

President Obama is so bad....he beat your asses TWICE.

Brilliant. Well, slavery lasted a long time. Does that make it right?

The Germans all loved Hitler, did that make it right?

Well, according to Machine here, popular opinion is a good indication of the merit of the elected leader.

I can imagine him writing op-eds in Nazi Germany about how wonderful Hitler was.

machine said...

Missing the point and straight to Hitler...touche!

Bruce Hayden said...

I agree with Nate Silver. She'd be hard to beat, I think. I don't see how she'd lose any of the people who voted for Obama.

Any? She isn't Black. She isn't Hispanic. She isn't young, and will be getting ever more unyoung over the next 4 years.

Oh, and she isn't honest. That may be a feature, and not a bug, in Illinois (where she grew up), New York (which she represented in the Senate), and California. But there are still 47 other states.

The Dems really shocked the Republicans this election with their GOTV. It sure shocked me - most of the people I knew who bought into the Hope and Change in 2008 switched to Romney in 2012, and yet Obama still won.

Part of what the Dems were able to do was to motivate the Blacks to vote in near record numbers again, and to get these other demographics to do so too - Hispanics, youth, Julias, etc. Why would they keep their enthusiasm though? A couple of percent here and there would have been all it took for Obama to have lost.

Add in the obvious - the economy is likely to still be in the crapper, with the longest recovery since FDR and the Great Depression. And why? Aren't some of these people going to see the obvious, that the similarity between the two is gross mismanagement of the economy? Plus, by then, Obama and the Dems will have run up roughly half the national debt that the U.S. will have incurred since its founding. Vote for Hillary, so that it can be roughly 2/3 by the end of her term?

Back to turnout. It will only take a couple percent around the margins in each of these demographics to swap the next election. Might running a candidate maybe 20 years younger, who actually understands the economy, etc. attract some of the youth vote? A minority attract some of the Black or Hispanic vote? Or, if not attract, at least leave them at home?

Besides, I don't think that Hillary! was all that great of a campaigner. And, nearing 70, she will likely be a lot less energetic than whoever the Republicans run.

tiger said...

No more Clintons, no more Bushes, no more Kennedys.

Silver was right twice; I'm holding my opinion in abeyance until he's done 5 times - *then* he'll have a track record worth looking at.

Hilary doesn't stand a chance and downright childish for the political reporters to be projecting an election almost FOUR YEARS AWAY.

Farking idiot.

Dante said...

Missing the point and straight to Hitler...touche!

I don't think I'm missing the point.

But maybe you should go to North Korea and extol the virtues of Kim Jong-un. The population may be starving, but he has the support of his people.

shiloh said...

Again, considering what fools Althouse ...

((( My observation of the entire scene tells me Romney will have a decisive win. )))

and her con lemming sheep made of themselves re: their laughable 2012 presidential election predictions, it's somewhat amusing reading their 2016 forecasts.

This is great news for John McCain!

Forward!

edutcher said...

Resistance is futile - Operation Demoralize.

Considering they had to steal the election means our prognostications were correct, so '16 is up for grabs.

machine said...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.....

President Obama is so bad....he beat your asses TWICE.


The brainless automaton (notice how the stupid ones feel obliged to laugh like jackasses?) forgets he had to steal it.

Not the same thing.

Joe Schmoe said...

Hillary was gift-wrapped the nomination for 2008, and she farked that one up. What makes anyone think she'll be soooo much better in 4 years? She wouldn't have vast right-wing conspiracies to blame for all the accumulated krep from 8 years of Democratic rule.

The only way she looks good is if Joe Biden shakes out to be her main opponent.