Why a GOP Senate could be short-lived — Senate Democrats have long awaited the 2010 tea party wave to splash back on Republicans during the 2016 election cycle. — That moment is almost here. — After two years of obsessive focus on the teetering reelection prospects of red-state Democrats …
Editor's notes: it is true that 2016 will see more contested GOP Senate races than this year with 7 GOP senators working for re-election in states carried by Obama in 2012. Problem: they ARE the incumbents and are fairly popular within their state. Secondly, the referendum for that election cycle will be Hillary. She has been around for a number of years and there are a lot of strong opinions about her leadership or lack thereof. Also, she is not the popular choice of the Hard Left Progressive element within her party. More than this, she is simply not the political and charismatic force that her husband or Obama are, and she will be judged by that comparison . . . . . . effecting the level of support she will be able to command.
Gore should have won the 2000 election, easily. Instead, he lost in his home state of Tennessee and in Bill Clinton's home state of Arkansas, and, consequently, lost the electoral vote, over-all. Keep in mind that Gore came out of a very successful Administration, with a historically stable economy, and was as active a VP as this country had seen in years. He should have won by a margin of 3 points or more. Why the failure? He was about as charismatic and believable as a fat boy at a dieter's festival.
Four years later, John Kerry, could not beat a very unpopular GW Bush. Why? Again, Kerry simply did not have the charisma needed to overcome the Right-leaning tendencies of the voting republic.
And now, Hillary, with no charisma and an unimpressive political record, has finally made it to the threshold of her party's nomination. Her problem? She has the same "charisma deficiency" many "front runners" within the Democrat Party.
More than this, she will be challenged by a divided political party that is/was disappointed with the failure of their Progressive President in being progressive; and she will have to contend with Elizabeth Warren, a Harvard academic with no experience as to the business of running a business, but a woman who is seriously Progressive in all the ways the New Marxist Left intends and is as well spoken as she is believable in her Marxist malfeasance.
In other words, Hillary has serious problems, as a candidate, within her own party. While she seems to be a lock for the Democrat nomination, she certainly is not overwhelming as a contender on the national stage. Intelligent, faithful to a fault as to party politics, moderate when compared to Obama and Warren, but, as charismatic as a brick.
If the GOP manages its new found "popularity" well, over the course of the next two years, does not go overboard in its angst with Obama, but concentrates it's political power in offering serious ideas and meaningful legislation, and continues to make progress as to the ins/outs of winning a national election in these modern times, 2016 could be the Crown needed for the GOP and conservatives, in putting this once great nation back on track.
After 8 years of Obama, "hope for change" is more strongly felt than ever before.
And now, Hillary, with no charisma and an unimpressive political record, has finally made it to the threshold of her party's nomination. Her problem? She has the same "charisma deficiency" many "front runners" within the Democrat Party.
More than this, she will be challenged by a divided political party that is/was disappointed with the failure of their Progressive President in being progressive; and she will have to contend with Elizabeth Warren, a Harvard academic with no experience as to the business of running a business, but a woman who is seriously Progressive in all the ways the New Marxist Left intends and is as well spoken as she is believable in her Marxist malfeasance.
In other words, Hillary has serious problems, as a candidate, within her own party. While she seems to be a lock for the Democrat nomination, she certainly is not overwhelming as a contender on the national stage. Intelligent, faithful to a fault as to party politics, moderate when compared to Obama and Warren, but, as charismatic as a brick.
If the GOP manages its new found "popularity" well, over the course of the next two years, does not go overboard in its angst with Obama, but concentrates it's political power in offering serious ideas and meaningful legislation, and continues to make progress as to the ins/outs of winning a national election in these modern times, 2016 could be the Crown needed for the GOP and conservatives, in putting this once great nation back on track.
After 8 years of Obama, "hope for change" is more strongly felt than ever before.
No comments:
Post a Comment