In what looks like an early flurry of worrisome news for Hillary Clinton’s pre-campaign for the presidency in 2016, The Drudge Report index of headlines shows these three in a row:
“Shock Poll: Warren Leads Clinton in Iowa, New Hampshire";
“Emerging Hillary Team Shows Signs of Disquiet...”; and
“Unease Grows as Clinton Stays on Sidelines...”
Is Hillary's pre-campaign getting hit with pre-shocks or is it just growing pains ?
WHAT THE POLLS IN IOWA AND NEW HAMPSHIRE SAID
Early MoveOn.org and Democracy for America poll shows Senator Elizabeth Warren leads Clinton in Iowa and New Hampshire — even though Warren says that she isn’t running !According to a report in the Washington Examiner, “...[p]opulist groups cheering ‘Run Warren Run,’ today released [recent] election polls from Iowa and New Hampshire showing Sen. Elizabeth Warren ahead of dominant Democrat Hillary Clinton. *** The YouGov poll of likely Democratic voters for MoveOn.org and Democracy for America also found that 79 percent want Warren [to run] and majorities support her anti-Wall Street positions. *** Warren has said she doesn't plan to challenge Clinton, though several others have indicated that they are looking at a bid, including Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt....” (See “Shock poll: Warren leads Clinton in Iowa, N.H.” by Paul Bedard, 2/11/15, Washington Examiner [http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/shock-poll-warren-leads-clinton-in-iowa-n.h./article/2560098]). The article went on to say that “...[t]he poll of 400 conducted Jan. 30 to Feb. 5 put Warren ahead of Clinton in Iowa, 31 percent to 24 percent. In New Hampshire, her lead is 30 percent to 27 percent....”
TIMES TALKS ABOUT QUICK TURF FIGHT AMONG MAJOR CLINTON PAC-MASTERS
Perhaps more unsettling to the insiders in the Clinton camp is a New York Times report that saysHillary Clinton’s campaign organization is getting off to a bit of a rocky start ( See “Emerging Hillary Clinton Team Shows Signs of Disquiet” by Nicholas Confessore & Amy Chozickfeb, 2/10/15, NY Times [http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/11/us/politics/emerging-clinton-team-shows-signs-of-disquiet.html?_r=0]).
The Times reports, “Lingering tensions between Hillary Rodham Clinton’s loyalists and the strategists who helped President Obama defeat her in 2008 have erupted into an intense public struggle over who will wield money and clout in her emerging 2016 presidential campaign. *** At issue is controlling access to the deep-pocketed donors whose support is critical to sustain the outside organizations that are paving the way for Mrs. Clinton’s campaign. It is a competition that has been exacerbated, many Clinton supporters said, by Mrs. Clinton’s reluctance to formally enter the race and establish a campaign organization with clear lines of authority....”
More than anything else this appears to be a turf war between Democrat insider heavyweights David Brock and Jim Messina.
MEANWHILE WSJ REPORTS ABOUT “UNEASE...” AMONG SOME DEMOCRATS ABOUT HILLARY’S EARLY GAME OF HIDE AND SEEK
Today’s Wall Street Journal reports that “...[some Clinton] allies and prominent Democrats say she needs to jump in sooner than that and begin raising campaign funds and organizing in states with early contests, even if the payoff means more in the general election than the primaries. *** In Iowa, which holds the nation’s first presidential nominating contest, local Democratic leaders caution that Mrs. Clinton risks a backlash if she postpones her announcement too long. Linda Nelson, who leads the Pottawattamie County Democrats, said: “I’ve heard folks who are disgruntled. They’re starting to think: ‘Well, if she’s not going to announce any time soon, I may just start looking elsewhere.’ ” (See “Unease Grows as Hillary Clinton Stays on Sidelines” by Peter Nicholas, 2/11/15, Wall Street Journal [http://www.wsj.com/articles/unease-grows-as-hillary-clinton-stays-on-sidelines-1423694468]).The WSJ also noted that “[a]t a comparable point in the 2008 cycle, Mrs. Clinton was already a candidate. Her main rival for the party nomination in that race, then-Sen. Obama, announced his candidacy eight years ago on Tuesday. But Mrs. Clinton’s team doesn’t see the same urgency as in 2008, when Mr. Obama represented a potent threat, people familiar with her thinking said.”
where is Harold Stassen when you need him?
ReplyDeleteAs our beloved Vice President Biden would say: "Ha HA Ha, what a load of Malarkey [Gale], what a load of Malarkey."
ReplyDeleteWhy is Clinton hiding..
ReplyDeleteHillary's not hiding. She's out saving the world. And getting ready to be our next President.
ReplyDeleteUPDATE & BACKFILL: THE “I’D RATHER BE A HAMMER THAN A NAIL...” EDITION
ReplyDeletePLAYING THE HAMMER TO HILLARY’S NAIL, RAND PAUL PUTS BLAME ON HILLARY CLINTON FOR SPREAD OF ISIS TERROR
RAND TIES OBAMA’S WAR POWERS PROPOSAL TO PRIOR FAILED POLICIES AND ADVICE OF HILLARY CLINTON AS SECRETARY OF STATE
RAND PAUL POUNDS HILLARY WITH “HILLARY’S WAR IN LIBYA...” AND “HILLARY’S ADMONITION TO GET INVOLVED IN THE SYRIAN CIVIL WAR...”
Echoing a similar earlier report in “The Hill,” Newsmax is hyping potential GOP presidential candidate Senator. Rand Paul’s attacks on former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's for her policies’ causing the growing reign of terror throughout the Mideast by the Islamic State (ISIS) ( See “Rand Paul: 'I Blame Hillary' For ISIS Reign of Terror” by Drew MacKenzie, 2/12/15, Newsmax [http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Rand-Paul-Hillary-Clinton-Libya-ISIS/2015/02/12/id/624348/]). Here is some of what Senator Paul had to say: "The disaster that is Libya is now a breeding ground for terrorists and also a breeding ground for armament.” *** "I really do blame Hillary Clinton's war in Libya for creating a lot of the chaos that is now spreading throughout the Middle East."
PAUL HAMMERED HOME HIS POINT ON THE HEMMER SHOW ON FOX
According to the version reported in “The Hill” — “Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on Wednesday accused former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of helping to spur unrest in the Middle East that led to the current battle against militants from the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. *** ‘One of the people I blame for a lot of this, frankly, is Hillary Clinton,’ he said on Fox News’s ‘America’s Newsroom.’ *** ‘The disaster that is Libya is now a breeding ground for terrorists and also a breeding ground for armament. I really do blame Hillary Clinton’s war in Libya for creating a lot of the chaos that is now spreading throughout the Middle East.’...”(See “Paul: 'I blame' Clinton for ISIS conflict” [with link to Fox video] by Ben Kamisar, 2/11/15, The Hill
[http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/232463-paul-i-blame-clinton-for-isis-conflict]).
In the same interview with Fox News’ Bill Hemmer, Paul also expressed his negative impressions about Obama’s attempt to obtain a specific war powers authorization from Congress to fight ISIS, however he quickly “pivoted back to Clinton and said that her push to arm rebels in Syria fighting against President Bashar Assad helped bring weapons into “the hands of ISIS," and criticized her for unrest in Libya. *** ‘I think Hillary’s war in Libya and then Hillary’s admonition, the president’s admonition, and frankly some Republicans' admonition[s] to get involved in the Syrian civil war has actually now created a bigger problem, which is ISIS,” he said.”
“I’D RATHER BE A HAMMER THAN A NAIL... YES, I WOULD... I REALLY WOULD...” – A.G.
In important news: Hillary will be nominated in Philadelphia and not in Brooklyn. I think the Republican's uncivil behavior at the 2004 MSG convention is to blame for our not getting the DNC here in Brooklyn. Philly is fine though.
ReplyDeleteDNC isnt coming to Brooklyn because the only hotels here rent by the hour.
ReplyDeleteaccording to NY Post DNC isnt coming to Brooklyn because of Silver.
ReplyDeleteMakes sense. Shelly could steal the nomination and become President
Hillary’s History: Does anybody on this blog remember this “Front Page Story”?
ReplyDelete______________
“Hillary Clinton Futures Trades Detailed”
By Charles R. Babcock
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, May 27, 1994; Page A01
______________
“Hillary Rodham Clinton was allowed to order 10 cattle futures contracts, normally a $12,000 investment, in her first commodity trade in 1978 although she had only $1,000 in her account at the time, according to trade records the White House released yesterday.
“The computerized records of her trades, which the White House obtained from the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, show for the first time how she was able to turn her initial investment into $6,300 overnight. In about 10 months of trading, she made nearly $100,000, relying heavily on advice from her friend James B. Blair, an experienced futures trader.
“The new records also raise the possibility that some of her profits -- as much as $40,000 – came from larger trades ordered by someone else and then shifted to her account, Leo Melamed, a former chairman of the Merc who reviewed the records for the White House, said in an interview. He said the discrepancies in Clinton's records also could have been caused by human error....” (The rest of the story makes good reading too.)
Hillary made a one thousand dollar investment in 1978. That is about as relevant to her ability to lead our country as how well she did on her third grade report card.
ReplyDeleteUPDATE: THE “MAKE THIS ‘THE MORE BAD NEWS FOR HILLARY’ ” EDITION
ReplyDeleteONE OF BARACK OBAMA’S TOP GUYS, DAVID AXELROD, DISHES ON HILLARY — SAYS THAT AS A PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE SHE MADE A MISTAKE “CASHING IN” WITH HER SPEECHES AND HER BOOK
IS THE OBAMA TEAM REALLY ON BOARD FOR HER RUN FOR THE PRESIDENCY ?
Glenn Thrush did a Politico-Podcast interview with David Axelrod, author of the book, “Believer,” during which he talked about President Barack Obama's evolution on gay marriage, Valerie Jarrett's role in the White House, why news reporters are some of his best friends; and most important for this comments string, about Hillary Clinton’s run for the presidency in 2016 ( See “David Axelrod on Hillary Clinton: I would have nixed paid speeches, book tour” by Glenn Thrush and Matt Sobocinski, 2/11/15, Politico/ Politico-Podcast [http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/david-axelrod-on-hillary-clinton-i-would-have-nixed-paid-speeches-book-tour-115125.html?ml=tl_21]; along with a link to the Politico-Podcast, “Axe on Hillary: I would have nixed paid speeches, book tour” [https://soundcloud.com/politico/axe-on-hillary-i-would-have-nixed-paid-speeches-book-tour]).
AXELROD COMPARES HER TO ROMNEY — CRITICAL OF HILLARY AND BILL CLINTON’S AMASSING WEALTH AS A PART OF HILLARY’S PERSONAL QUALIFICATION TO BE PRESIDENT
During his interview with Glenn Thrush, David Axelrod, a former senior adviser to President Barack Obama, said that, as potential candidate for president in 2016, Hillary Clinton made a mistake by going on her book tour and giving highly paid-speeches across the country. Axelrod specifically said, "If I had been advising her, would I have advised that route? — No! — She had some opportunities she wanted to seize, and she did."
In its coverage of Politico’s podcast, Newsmax observed that “...[d]uring [the] radio podcast with Politico’s Glenn Thrush, Axelrod suggested that it was a bad move in light of her possible presidential run in 2016, while he added, ‘We’ll see what she does when she actually become a candidate.’..." Newsmax also noted that Axelrod mentioned the fact that the former Secretary of State for President Obama has been known to be paid "six-figure" sums for her speeches, and according to the Democratic strategist, she also cashed- in with her best-selling book, “Hard Choices.” (See “David Axelrod: Hillary's 'Six-Figure' Speeches Hurt 2016 Chances” by Drew MacKenzie, 1/12/15, Newsmax [http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/david-axelrod-hillary-clinton-presidency-speeches/2015/02/12/id/624451/]).
Not content with that, Newsmax continued with this “...Axelrod also said that the wealth that Hillary and former President Bill Clinton have amassed since they first moved into the White House with little money in the bank may hurt the former first lady in a potential campaign by turning off middle-class voters in the same way that Mitt Romney did in 2012. *** ‘I question whether her circumstances now somehow render her unable to empathize with the struggles of people,’ he said.”
AXELROD SAID HE KNOWS HILLARY VERY WELL — AND...
The Newsmax story ended with these Axelrod daggers: “I know her pretty well. I have worked for her and I have worked against her, and I have known her for 20 years.... I thought she was a bad candidate in 2007. She was debilitated by the presumption of inevitability (of becoming the Democratic presidential nominee). That rendered her very cautious.... When she lost in Iowa and the race seemed almost lost, she threw caution to the wind and … her own vulnerabilities were obvious and made her more approachable.... So the question moving forward is, can she reclaim that authentic self. Or how does she handle the presumption of inevitability.”
With David Axelrod giving interviews like this to Politico, I have to ask the question — Is the Obama Team really supportive of a Hillary Clinton candidacy in 2016 ?
Axelrod torpedos Hillary?
ReplyDeleteThats no accident.