Bill Maher is correct that Hillary Clinton could lose the 2016 election
Bill Maher entertained a possibility many Hillary Clinton fanatics are so far refusing to ponder. Assuming Hillary Clinton runs for the presidency and as expected makes it through the primary, there is no guarantee of a 2016 victory.
Too many Democrats share Founder/CEO of I.A.V.A. Paul Rieckhoff’s over confidence that there is no Republicans in the queue that could beat Hillary Clinton. This is the same over confidence that was shared by Gore operatives in the 2000 election. None of them thought that an inarticulate Texan named George W Bush could possibly beat Al Gore. America is now living through the tragedy of that miscalculation.
Why did Bill Maher say that Hillary Clinton could lose? He said so because the narrative is being laid out to defeat her. Moreover the tactics being used are multidimensional. They are attacking her age, her health, her competence at the state department, her Wall Street ties, and the former President Bill Clinton.
Republican potential candidates like Rand Paul provide a danger many scoff at. Again the election of George W. Bush should be probative. A few months ago I wrote the article ‘Don’t laugh but Rand Paul could be our next president.’ The following was stated in that article.
A few weeks ago this article, raised the ire of many. It explored whether Hillary Clinton was the president we needed at this time. It explored some of her major weaknesses. It also wondered if an Elizabeth Warren like candidate would be a better fit. The article concluded the following.
If Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee, as a Democrat it would be better than any Republican getting elected. Given Hillary Clinton’s Wall Street baggage however, the triangulation used by the Clintons against the Republicans in the past may just be used against them in 2016. A populist Republican with limited Wall Street ties, with a fairly liberal social stance on marijuana, marriage equality, immigration reform, incarceration (mandatory minimums), and women’s rights is out there waiting. Anyone following the news can see that Republican in the making.
Many believed that the populist Republican being referred to was Rand Paul. That was not necessarily the case then, however it is now. This is not some naïve judgment. It is something that Democrats better take seriously before the coronation of our candidate. We better have a credible populist in the wing.
This article is as true then as it is now.