Editor’s Note – Are some Democrats becoming weary and wary of Hillary Clinton? We sure are, and so should the rest of America!
It is puzzling how so many people still back Hillary Clinton, completely ignoring the massive amount of baggage she has in tow. The baggage of course includes Benghazi, and having absolutely zero success in any of her previous incarnations and positions.
Hillary Clinton has reportedly pressured the Democratic leadership to fill all five seats available on the Select Committee on Benghazi. Why, because she needs cover, she needs an Elijah Cummings to conduct circus acts to obfuscate the outcome. Why, because she is up to her eyeballs in it, and is responsible in part, or whole, for the debacle and horror that came before, during, and after that second 9/11.
We have asked ourselves many times if there are any statesmen on the left anymore – but alas, we knew of none. But wait, maybe some are getting wary of her at least. Having to defend her and Obama incessantly seems to be bringing some to that breaking point. Maybe they see that we want people who are Americans first, not the typical politician we so often now.
Even the most tried and true liberal must at some point get very tired of suspending all disbelief to stay in lock step with the leadership to get her elected and to save Obama.
If it were not for the mass ignorance in the populace to rely upon, the Democrats would have long ago jettisoned her for someone who was a bit more palatable or certainly someone with fewer ghosts hanging over their heads.
Wake up America; Hillary Clinton is toxic, and you need to make sure all know. We cannot afford another ‘cult-of-personality’ candidate for anything and survive as the Representative Republic we were created to be. We need true American women warriors – we need “Women at War…for America!”
The ‘Wary of Hillary’ Democrats
Everyone knows about the “Ready for Hillary” Democrats — the rapidly proliferating parade of elected officials and activists getting behind Hillary Clinton’s increasingly likely 2016 presidential campaign.
But there’s also a smaller but increasingly vocal group making its presence felt lately — call these Democrats the “Wary of Hillary” Democrats. They’re not outwardly opposing a Clinton candidacy. But they are anxious about the spectacle of a Clinton juggernaut, after seeing what happened when she ran a campaign of inevitability last time.
Some feel a competitive primary, regardless of the outcome, is good for the party. Others say Clinton, who’s been out of electoral politics for five years, needs to be tested. And some Democrats are merely concerned that the party won’t have an open airing of views on economic policy.
The reservations, expressed mostly in private company, have been given voice in recent days by some of the party’s most prominent governors.
“She is an enormously capable candidate and leader, but I do worry about the inevitability, because I think it’s off-putting to the average voter,” Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, a longtime Obama ally, told CNN earlier this month. “And I think that was an element of her campaign the last time. As an enthusiastic Democrat, I just hope that the people around her pay attention to that this time around.”
The public commentary about the risks of Clinton as fait accompli seems less a harbinger of a messy primary fight than an effort to nudge Clinton to the left. There’s no apparent candidate with President Barack Obama’s political skill to catch Clinton by surprise this time. But the Democratic base doesn’t want Clinton to get a free pass, lest she give short shrift to the progressive agenda and tack to the center before the primary campaign is even fully underway.
California Gov. Jerry Brown, who was endorsed by Bill Clinton in his 2010 gubernatorial race but who challenged him for the presidency in 1992, also praised Clinton but suggested she needs to act with care in the coming months.
“She’s got the capacity,” he told ABC News. “But like any front-runner, she has to be cautious and wise in how she proceeds forward.”
Patrick recently told POLITICO “maybe” when asked if he would consider a national run, although not necessarily in 2016. Obama said in March that Patrick, one of his close supporters, shouldn’t rule out 2016. Brown, who sought the presidency three times in the past, had been seen as leaving his options open for 2016, but he told reporters in January that running this cycle is “not in the cards. Unfortunately.”
Whatever concerns Patrick and Brown have about Clinton, said former Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland, they’re not something she is bringing on herself.
“Secretary Clinton’s inevitability, or what appears to be inevitability, is something that is happening [on its own],” Strickland, a Clinton supporter, said in an interview. “So what to do about it? You accept it for what it is — a grass-roots movement.
“I don’t know that there’s a lesson to be learned from what happened several years ago. The circumstances were very different then,” he added.
The comments by Patrick and Brown came on the heels of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid remarking to NBC News’ Chuck Todd earlier this month that the bloody primary fight between Clinton and Obama six years ago was “an extremely healthy process.
“I think it was wonderful. People learned about these two people” things that they didn’t know before, he added.
Reid prefaced that by noting that “everybody knows I love the Clintons … including Chelsea.” (Read more here at Politico.)