Feel free to consider this as just one, long, self-serving “I Told Ya’ So”, …’cause that’s pretty much what it is.
A few months back, I wrote a post called “The Non-inevitability of Queen Hillary“. Some folks openly disagreed with my premise, while others figuratively crossed their fingers and hoped I was right. But few (…none, actually, as I recall…) came out and echoed what I thought was patently obvious: Hillary is quite simply a supremely non-appealing candidate.
“Inevitable”? Not hardly. She may be the most “evitable” candidate, evah…
Mrs. Clinton is not a “natural”, nor a particularly effective, communicator. As strikes go, those are two biggies. In point of fact, Hillary comes across as insincere to all but her most ardent fans, which her current nightmarish book tour has only served to highlight. Her laugh (cackle) is easily one of the most grating sounds on Earth, and I have personally witnessed reptiles exude more innate warmth.
And here’s the kicker: Clinton’s been able to call her own shots and exert the maximum amount of control of her message possible on this tour, and yet it’s STILL been a disaster.
Translation: it’s only gonna get WORSE from here on out.
Yes, that’s MSNBC saying that the “more that she’s in the public spotlight, the LESS the public seems to like her”.
Which brings us back to my original post from earlier this year. I’m even gonna copy it below, to save any Hillary fans the trouble of having to click a hyperlink.
What can I say? I’m a “Giver”…
“The Non-inevitability of Queen Hillary”
(originally posted March 27, 2014)
Whenever I hear breathless talk of Hillary-in-2016 being a foregone conclusion, I have to admit: I chuckle. Loudly. And no, it’s not because I’m naïvely avoiding reality. Quite the opposite, in fact.
No, any fears I could have from the thought of a Clinton 2.0 presidency is assuaged by common sense: she’s not nearly as popular as the progressive intelligentsia would have us believe.
First of all, we’ve been down this “inevitable” road before. Second are Hillary’s longtime ties to Obamacare, as well as her husband’s. If she thinks those factors will be a net positive for a 2016 presidential bid, I sincerely hope she has the strength of her convictions and runs on ’em. Please.
But thirdly and most importantly of all is this recent poll from Gallup:
The order of the answers is deliberately deceiving, so make sure you look again. The TOP answer to the question is actually listed at the bottom. So the most given response to what would be “the best or most positive thing about a possible Hillary Clinton presidency” was, tellingly: NOTHING.
And the second most given response is “NO OPINION“.
So the poll respondents were torn between:
- “I have no idea“, and
- “nothing positive would come of electing a President Hillary“.
Inevitable? Not so much.
And as for whose fault this all is, well, I think the best answer to that is provided by Hillary herself: