Update: Open thread: America to stride boldly into future behind man named “Bush”. No, not “Bush”. It’s “Jeb!” But really, it’s “Jeb?” It’s “Jeb?” for the anti-Common Core Americans. It’s “Jeb?” for the anti illegal immigration amnesty voters.
Jeb? also released two campaign commercials on this his official announcement day.
George W. Bush “compassionate conservative” theory is back. Jeb?
If you had terrific eyes you would have seen good ol’ Big Pink on the telly at Hillary’s Saturday kickoff rally. The rally and speech? It was a spectacular setting. The first fifteen paragraphs (with the exception of one sentence) were wonderful. The best and most stunning line (transcript of speech HERE) from Hillary “I will be the youngest woman President in the history of the United States!”
That line was buried near the end of the speech. That “youngest woman president” line should have been at the very beginning, not forty or fifty paragraphs in.
It is a devastating line which addresses the attacks against Hillary as too old. It makes Hillary fresh as a daisy. It’s the future and rallies women to make Hillary the 44th person to take the oath of office. The fact that Hillary acquired that line from a young black man at one of her listening forays should also have been highlighted to show the virtues of listening. But instead the line was pirates gold entombed on a deserted isle, difficult to find except for those with a marauder’s map to buried treasure.
Worse, the terrific line was used as a jumping off point to attack Republicans instead of to inspire voters, women in particular, to vote for her not against someone else. The too cute conceit in the reference to the 50 year old Beatles song “Yesterday” served only to solidify the attack that Hillary is too old. From there the speech got worse as Hillary emitted policy noise that made little sense and only pleased Big Media, Republican candidates for president, and the Kook left who hate her.
What should have happened? The first fifteen paragraphs could have stayed in with the exception of a sentence which referenced Barack Obama – but they should have been placed at the end of the speech. The entire speech should have started and been about the “youngest woman president” in American history followed by all the personal history of her mother, father, grandparents, and all those that helped make Hillary who she is today. The speech was upside down. The end of the speech should have been at the beginning and the beginning should have been at the end. The specific policy crap should have been dumped in the garbage can along with Obama/Biden2008 bumper stickers.
After that recitation Hillary should have referenced how that history and all the opportunities she had in life, all the adversity she had in life, led to her success. Then Hillary should have said that this is what she wants for all Americans. That is why she is running. Hillary should have staked the claim that she is the champion of all Americans in terms of values not in terms of policy. Hillary should have cut the policy crap and panders from her too long 40 minute speech to make it tighter and values driven.
What did the speech accomplish?
Regular readers will recall our meltdown when Mitt Romney chose a Saturday morning to make his big speech alongside Paul Ryan In that speech Romney declared the 2012 election was to be about Romney/Ryan policy proposals not a referendum on Obama. We declared that very day, in furious, almost deranged words, that Mitt Romney had destroyed himself. But we were right. That sunny day spelled doom for Romney/Ryan. 2012, like 2016 will be a referendum on Barack Obama’s occupation of the White House.
What the Hillary Clinton speech on Roosevelt Island accomplished was to provide fodder for Jeb Bush in his kickoff speech on Monday when he makes it official that he is running for president. Ditto Donald Trump. Ditto Scott Walker. Ditto Bobby Jindal. Ditto all the Republican candidates who are in a very tough nomination fight – yet they have not yet announced! So if Republicans in their hotly contested primary battle have not all yet announced, their field still not determined, their first battles still unseen – why in blazes is Hillary making policy speeches?
To us the only legitimate question Hillary2016 should have debated was whether to launch a few days before or a few days after the first Republican debate on August 6. At that point Hillary2016 could have maximum impact and maximum devastation against Republicans – in one spectacular deed, not clever words. The only issue should have been whether to stomp on the first Republican presidential debate before or after with Hillary’s majestic entrance into the joust.
Can someone please explain to us why Hillary even gave this speech on a Saturday morning in June? What is the freaking rush? We know the staff and consultants want the paychecks to start flowing early. But now Hillary is going to give even more policy speeches? Why?
What we saw on Saturday was Mitt Romney style foolishness. First of all, young New Yorkers on Friday nights party to let off steam. Older New Yorkers use Saturday to chill and get some things done and relax from the stress of the week. So if you are going to hold a rally on a Saturday on Roosevelt Island do it in the afternoon. Do it after New Yorkers are awake and thinking about how to spend the day. Brunch or the Hillary rally? “Hey is it still difficult to get to Roosevelt Island? Is the only way to get there the gondola from the Swiss Alps? Whaddayathink? Hillary rally or brunch? Wanna try the Hillary rally?”
So what did the Hillary speech on Saturday accomplish? Surely with all the pandering to the kook left Hillary is now in good stead with the kooks right? Well, on MSNBC the charge was that the Hillary Crowd Too White, Too Small and None Too Enthusiastic,
Hillary is never going to satisfy the kook left. If Hillary wore a Mao pantsuit and waved a DailyKooks flag of the U.S.S.R. the DailyKooks would say she is too centrist and fake. In one sense the kooks are correct – Hillary is not the kook she pretends to be. All Hillary’s phony panders to the kook left accomplish is to make her look phony, feel phony, talk phony, and be phony.
Recently the Hillary haters on Morning Joe discussed what Hillary had or had not said about the minimum wage. In short, Hillary on a simple topic is incomprehensible. Hillary is in Dostoevsky’s words “emitting sounds” not conveying thoughts:
Some Hillary supporters don’t want to hear what we say. “Hillary is great, everything is great, all is right with the world.” That is the whistle played by graveyard Ruth Marcus at the Washington Post:
Clinton’s Illusory Lurch to the Left
WASHINGTON — Warning to readers: Reports of Hillary Clinton’s supposed lurch to the left have been greatly exaggerated, and there’s more to come.
Certainly, her campaign has supplied bullet points for a tale of leftward tilt:
Clinton came out for an immigration program even more expansive than Barack Obama’s. She called for overhauling the criminal justice system, arguing to “end the era of mass incarceration” that her husband helped create.
She endorsed universal, automatic voter registration and 20 days of early voting in every state. Last weekend, she phoned in to a union meeting to back a higher minimum wage.
All of which presents an easy narrative for political reporters: egged on by Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, heels nipped by rivals Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, Clinton wants to get right with a skeptical base whose turnout is essential.
Except, nothing Clinton is saying is outside the 2015 Democratic Party mainstream — and, more to the point, nothing she’s saying is likely to hurt her in a general election.
Sure, the Clinton campaign wants to placate the base. But if Clinton’s recent positions are pandering, this is pandering with a purpose, and without an obvious cost.
She’s saying everything she can to make the left happy — without backing herself into a left-wing corner.
That is wishful thinking. If Ruth Marcus really believes that in the age of Youtube the panders to the kook left by Hillary won’t hurt Hillary2016 then Ruth Marcus really believes in “Yesterday” not Youtube. The days when what you say in the primary won’t affect the general election are gone. Anyone remember Romney 2012?
During the general election all the Hillary panders to the kook left of today will be Youtube fodder for the crucial mass of independent voters.
So why is Hillary Clinton emitting sounds so foolish, flat, and phony? Here is the best rational explanation for Hillary “Kook” Clinton and the embrace of the Obama coalition:
The End of the Clinton Coalition
Every time Hillary Clinton makes a left-wing policy pronouncement, it is, in effect, another eulogy marking the death of the coalition and style of politics that twice made her husband president.
Bill Clinton got elected by peeling off working-class whites and suburbanites from the Republican party, while holding traditional Democratic voters. [snip]
This is all very interesting, but we might as well be talking about Grover Cleveland’s path to the presidency in 1884. The Clinton coalition is rusty and up on blocks in some overgrown backyard like the El Camino pickup he once boasted about. And Hillary knows it.
Who is pushing Hillary to the left? Hillary is. It’s not the memory of what Barack Obama did to her in the 2008 primaries. It’s not fear of Elizabeth Warren. It’s not worry over the primary threats from Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley. It’s sheer electoral necessity.
As Sean Trende of the website Real Clear Politics puts it, President Obama has narrowed but deepened the Clinton coalition.
He blew the doors off it among base Democratic voters. As Philip Klein of the Washington Examiner points out, Democrats had won the 18- to 24-year-old vote by 11.5 points on average and the 25- to 29-year-olds by about seven points on average from 1992 to 2004. Obama won those groups by more than 30 points in 2008 and 20 points in 2012.
He outdid himself among minorities, liberals, and upper-class suburbanites. Obama, Klein notes, amped up not just his margin among African-American voters, but their turnout.
Elsewhere in the former Clinton coalition, though, his support collapsed, with older and blue-collar whites continuing to flee the Democrats. The change was especially pronounced in Appalachia. [snip]
Even if Hillary wanted to try to recapture those kinds of voters, it’s not clear that she could, and the effort would risk alienating the Obama supporters she needs if she’s going to win a national election.
So the question for Hillary is whether a 67-year-old candidate who’s not a racial minority or particularly exciting can reenergize the electoral coalition defined by a youthful African American who rose to prominence on rhetorical flights of fancy about hope and change.
She’s certainly not going to do it by recapitulating the politics of Bill. He hewed to the political center. He played defense on cultural issues. [snip]
Everything indicates she’s going to do and be the opposite. Hillary will make herself a paladin of the Left, and hope to energize and frighten the constituent parts of the Democratic base enough to walk the treacherously narrow electoral path of President Obama.
This is the price of victory Obama-style. Despite his rhetoric of unity, Obama depends on a politics that writes off much of the country and depends on turning out voters already inclined to support him. It is less a politics of persuasion than of mobilization.
For Hillary, this means the centrism and practicality of her husband have to be jettisoned, so what remains from the Clintonism of yore is mostly the shady dealings and shameless insincerity. But she really has no choice. It’s go left, or go home.
The article is written by conservative Republican Rich Lowry but aside from the snide putdowns of Bill Clinton the ideas are the thinking behind Hillary2016 “strategists” and graveyard whistlers such as Ruth Marcus. That the “strategy” such as it is only teases electoral success not governing success is one today’s modern day parties are willing to forgo. It’s a “victory without peace” circa World War I strategy for perpetual war.
The most this strategy promises is an electoral victory not governing success and we believe the electoral promise is overblown. Consider this article from the same Washington Post Ruth Marcus writes for which tracks the limits of the base turnout Obama strategy Hillary2016 has adopted:
Let down by Obama, some black voters ask: Is it even worth backing Clinton?
Jacksonville, Fla. — During those two electric Novembers, the chance to elect a black president, and then keep him in office, seized Regenia Motley’s neighborhood.
Nightclubs were registering voters. Churches held fish fries after loading buses that ferried parishioners to the polls. A truck hoisted a big sign that said “Obama.” And residents waited in long lines at precincts across the community.
But as Motley and some friends sought shade recently under a mulberry tree and looked across the landscape of empty lots and abandoned houses that has persisted here, they wondered whether they would ever bother voting again.
“What was the point?” asked Motley, 23, a grocery store clerk. “We made history, but I don’t see change.”
Unfulfilled HOPE and CHANGE for the worse, are Obama’s legacy. And Hillary bets her future on that?
The whole article on black disappointment with their election of the first boob president with heightened melanin is worth a read. These are the people that must vote at super high numbers if the Hillary2016 strategy (devised by Obama strategists like pollster Joel Benenson who now infect the Hillary2016 campaign) is to have a chance to work. Here are some more excerpts from the article:
On Jacksonville’s north side and in other struggling urban neighborhoods across the country, where Barack Obama mobilized large numbers of new African American voters who were inspired partly by the emotional draw of his biography, high hopes have turned to frustration: Even a black president was unable to heal places still gripped by violence, drugs and joblessness.
The dynamic, made prominent in recent months after unrest in Baltimore and Ferguson, Mo., sets up a stark challenge for Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Democratic presidential front-runner.
While supporting Obama became a cause for many here rather than a typical campaign, Clinton faces a higher bar in making a case that she, too, can be a transformative figure. [snip]
Yet as her allies prepare to register voters and expand the black electorate, her candidacy presents residents here with a question: If Obama’s presidency didn’t do more to help African Americans, then how could hers? [snip]
“But here in Jacksonville, the issues won’t be enough.” [snip]
Still, polls show a gap between the positive feelings black voters have for Clinton and those they hold for Obama. [snip]
“At least with Obama, he gave pride to our young men and was a good role model,” said Daniel “Happy Jack” Cobb Jr., 73, the owner of Happy Jack’s Grocery and Market on Jacksonville’s north side. “Hillary needs to prove to us that she’s genuine and really true. And I’m not even sure that would help. We’ve been snakebitten too many times before.” [snip]
And there was so much swag. Residents kept buttons and door hangers as keepsakes — even squares of toilet paper with Obama’s face on them. [snip]
“It became more about a personal duty to elect Obama than a civic duty to vote,” said Mone Holder, the northern Florida regional director for Florida New Majority, a liberal voting rights group. “There’s been a lot of talk in the state about how to transform that enthusiasm into a black and brown agenda. No one has fully figured it out yet.” [snip]
But now, as the Obama era draws to a close, that excitement has dimmed.
On the north side, gang violence and drug use have surged. In April, 33 Jacksonville residents were shot, including seven who were killed. [snip]
For the friends who gathered recently to hang out in the shade of the mulberry tree, it will be hard to justify the effort of turning out and voting next year when so little has changed — and some things feel worse.
“We got the president his job,” Motley said. “But did he help us get any good jobs? I still need a raise.”
“It’s not his fault,” interrupted Louis Wilson, 65, a retired airport maintenance worker. [snip]
“We all struggling,” said another. One man became so uncomfortable, he removed his T-shirt, wrapped it around his head and walked away. The shirt read “Obama ’08.” [snip]
“It’s not just because Obama was black, but it was because you knew he had a sense of empathy with your struggle,” said Sherrod Brown, a 26-year-old gospel singer. “The people of Jacksonville are fair. We’d vote for Hillary, but she has to prove she’s down.”
Simia Richardson, 31, a teacher, said she was unsure whom to support. “I’m all about [Clinton] being a woman, but it will be a problem for a lot of people,” she said. “And there are some other people who might be interesting. Ben Carson, he’s running.”
Hillary Clinton is in full pander for voters who voted overwhelmingly on the basis of skin color and for those in the far kook left. This does not seem like a successful electoral strategy. The more Hillary panders to the black peas and the kook peas the harder it will be to get the chick peas and the independent peas on the electoral fork.
We’re not suggesting Hillary has to only worry about independent voters. What we suggest is that a combination independent voter/Democratic party voter strategy is wiser than putting all her eggs in a broken Obama basket. When Hillary panders to black voters and/or kook voters she eliminates the possibility of support from middle of the road independent voters.
There is no need for Hillary to pander with foolish policy pronouncements. The yellow dog Democratic Party voters will vote for her. The losses from the left can be made up in profitable votes from the middle. This is not only an electoral coalition but a governing coalition as well.
On Monday, Jeb Bush will announce he is running for president. Jeb Bush has a lot of credible candidates running against him. Yet Jeb Bush waited until now to officially announce because he wanted to get his financial house in order.
Jeb Bush has had many problems thus far one of them being his disagreement with his own party faithful on issues such as immigration and common core. It’s almost the same problem Hillary has except that Hillary has no organizational juggernaut against her which has to be countered with pandering while Jeb Bush has many organizational juggernauts against him.
Jeb Bush exacerbates his problems and assists his juggernaut oppositions with policies on issues such as immigration, common core, and trade policy, which are barely indistinguishable from Barack Obama. Oddly Jeb Bush will be helped by Hillary’s speech this past Saturday because he will use Hillary to try to mollify his opponents.
Jeb Bush’s biggest problem however is his failure to separate himself from the failure that was George W. Bush. Hillary’s biggest problem is her failure to separate herself from the failure that is Barack Obama.