Why Wouldn’t Hillary Win in 2016?

By Lloyd the Idiot

A recent article,  using some iffy polling data, names Hillary Clinton  the odds-on favorite to win the presidential election in 2016.  But why wouldn’t she win?  In fact, I’d say she’s the Republicans’ worst nightmare.

First of all, next to Obama, she’ll look moderate.  Heck, she’ll look like the model of moderation – which, of course, will draw the moderate/independent vote which the Republicans likely still will be ignoring in 2016.  Second, if Republicans continue to clutch the abortion issue like the political anchor it is, she’ll do so much better with women, and especially young women, that it will crush any Republican nominee.  Third, she has the creds – domestic experience as a senator and international experience and Obama’s secretary of state.  That’s something no Republican candidate will be able to beat.  Finally, this isn’t her first time to the Big Dance, and she’ll have plenty of time to dust off machine, oil it and get it running again.   In other words, she’s inherently tough to beat.

Republicans, on the other hand, need to a new prayer book.  Just like you don’t see people debating Free Silver anymore, it’s time to rethink the party’s position on some core issues – like abortion and immigration.  It’s also time to engage more with folks who aren’t white and Protestant.  Campaign in their language and in their neighborhoods, and embrace (not just tolerate) religious and cultural differences.  In other words, build a bigger, more welcoming tent.

Look, it’s already looking poor for Republicans in 2016 and we’re six days into that race.  They have a few years to recover, but unless Republicans achieve some fundamental changes, we’re looking not at just four more years, but a solid 16 year run of Democrats in the White House.

At least.


  • edmundburkenator says:

    Last link:


    Hillsboro, does McCain sound like a guy who’s got this right?

  • Hillsboro says:

    That’s why I referenced the talking points memo. Things would go so much better if you would read what I actually wrote instead of pretending to know what I’m thinking.

    So now you’ve come around to agreeing with me, and you’ve left poor Smith all alone way the fuck out in left field.

  • Hillsboro says:

    > Does McCain sound like a guy who’s got this right?

    Yes. 100% right. This administration has been caught lying about this affair… what purpose would it serve to trust their internal investigation?

  • “This administration has been caught lying about this affair… what purpose would it serve to trust their internal investigation?”

    None whatsoever, Hillsboro, none whatsoever, and that’s assuming we ever even see it, supposedly by today. By the time it goes through repeated wash, rinse and spin cycles it will probably be as bleached and uninformative as a bed sheet.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Hillsboro, you are clearly in the midst of a stroke. Call 911.

  • Belated thanks to NovaGuy… I just noticed your post yesterday:

    “Whoever the hell this T Doom guy is, he is delivering a serious beatdown on the local liberal talent. Keep up the good work.”

    I will.

  • Liz says:

    McCain, who missed a briefing on Benghazi to hold a press conference to ask why there haven’t been enough briefings? Yeah, he really knows what he’s talking about.

  • Hillsboro says:

    He was just being Presidential. Now all he needs to do is skip a few hundred more intelligence briefings.

  • Hillsboro says:

    Some mighty fine words you got there, T. Doom. Unfortunately they’re mostly wasted on this lot.

  • Smith says:


    This sums up most of these comments from the loony right.

    Your incensed Obama hasnt had a scandal.

    How can this illigitimate, incompetent, President get off scott-free. Where is his watergate, iran-contra, abu-grahib, katrina, lewinsky.

    Maybe he is GASP, clean.

    Too bad we didnt get the bitter old man in 2008 and the plutocrat still complaining about the 47% in 2012.

    And T. Doom, you’d have more credibility if when you say your done talking to people bc they are so rude, if you ACTUALLY stop talking to people. But back you are.

    And I am glad you get such pleasure from random poster NoVa guy. I bet you needed your teachers to tell you your art was special and your sooo smart.

  • Smith says:

    And how does it not dawn on these loons on the right that Bush lied about WMDs that led to 4000 troops and 100k+ iraqis dead, outed a CIA agent, had a memo that said bin Laden determined to use planes in attack.

    Susan Rice regujitates CIA talking points and Obama is now Nixon?

    Were through the looking glass here people.

    Nobody likes to back a loser. You and the 32 percent who approved of Bush those last 3 years are bitter, so the next guy MUST be as a loser as Bush. He’s not. Your gonna have to grasp that at some point.

    Or you can put more “DONT TRUST THE LIBERAL MEDIA” bumper stickers on your car.

  • Hillsboro says:

    Smith, Nov 15:

    And T. Doom, you’d have more credibility if when you say your done talking to people bc they are so rude, if you ACTUALLY stop talking to people. But back you are.

    Smith, November 6, 2012

    And I close by saying, I am done with this website.


  • Smith, sorry you misunderstood the post. I’m only finished trying to have a discussion with Liz, I never said I was finished with the rest of you. I’m just hanging up on her, meaning if she calls me I will not answer. I do however reserve my right to opine upon anything she or anybody else says, I just know that a conversation with people like that is not possible.

    Throwing barbs and jabs back and forth, pointing out inconsistency and hypocrisy on both sides is illustrative, entertaining and often thought provoking, such as “Republicans want dirtier air and the sick or elderly to die” or “Democrats only seem to care about Americans dying when it can be blamed upon a Republican”… any thoughtful person who really believes such things of their fellow citizens has a real problem.

    It’s just too bad the overwhelming majority of Democrats are thoughtless 🙂

  • Smith says:

    Smith, Nov 15:

    And T. Doom, you’d have more credibility if when you say your done talking to people bc they are so rude, if you ACTUALLY stop talking to people. But back you are.

    Smith, November 6, 2012

    And I close by saying, I am done with this website.


    Thats a good catch, but as an Obama supporter I just couldnt let you clones just spout away with your BS without riling you up some more. Plus, I love to see the GOP voters continue to not learn the lesson of this election.

    So yes, I came back. Mostly to gloat and inject some reality into your otherwise demented national politics views.

    And you either have a good memory or EXTREMELY too much time on your hands to research what I said two weeks ago. Get a life.

    T Doom, you can try and sound all high and mighty about things said in comments section, but your here and your part of the problem too.

    Democrats may be thoughtless, but Obama is President. Enjoy the next 12 years (as Lloyd predicts).

  • Elder Berry says:

    McCain is studiously demolishing what was left of his tattered reputation. Flat out lying, must have caught it from Romney. Senators do not have “scheduling conflicts” for CIA briefings on national security matters unless they are in surgery. And then to have the nerve to claim to not have been informed, simply makes him look like a doddering fool or a whacko.

    Hillsboro and TDP sound like they have their act scripted. I propose TDP as the first candidate for Haley Barbour’s required Republican proctology exams.

    Hillsboro, you’d be next.

    Who was it said, elections have consequences? Seems to me the founding fathers are smiling, as we just seriously demonstrated that all men (and women, in the US) are created equal. Karl Rove got one vote, I got one vote and I have more friends than Karl has.

  • Hillsboro says:

    eb, here’s an interesting bit of info in that talking points memo that you’re using as a perch to stand upon.

    “Representative Peter King stated that former CIA Director David Petraeus stated that he knew the Benghazi attack was terrorism and that the talking points given to Ambassador Susan Rice were different from the ones prepared by the CIA. Petraeus stated Rice’s talking points were edited to demphasized the possibility of terrorism. ”

    Move along… nothing to see here, folks.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Oh, I’ve heard what Mr. King is saying. Watched him last night and this morning. He was also rebuked by a D that was in the same meeting this morning.

    If you are betting on Mr. King to bring this home, I like where I am in this argument.

  • Hillsboro says:

    Why so vague, eb? Did this D state that Petraeus didn’t testify that the talking points given to Ambassador Susan Rice were different from the ones prepared by the CIA?

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Because I just can’t remember the Ds name and I am trying to get some work done before the weekend. Hold please.

  • edmundburkenator says:


    That was last night. They haven’t posted this morning’s post-hearing comments that I saw early this morning.

    But, if you choose to take my word for it, King did not seem all fired up. In fact, he was unhappy with Petreaus it seemed because Petreaus was making distinctions between what was declassified and available for the public (for Sunday shows) and what was still classified.

  • Hillsboro says:

    So apparently you’ve seen nothing to refute King’s statement that Petraeus claimed that the talking points memo was altered by others outside the CIA?

  • EB and Hillsboro, that is why I have been saying that until you have public hearings with witnesses under oath and an administration that actually backs up their endless claims of transparency so that the information is given to the public in order for them to make their own collective decision about what did or did not happen, we will never know the facts and we will never know the truth.

    Having closed door meetings has always resulted in the partisans emerging claiming they were shocked at what they learned from one side of the aisle and claims there was nothing remarkable from the other.

    It’s been over a month, the alleged internal investigation was originally due yesterday and we have yet to get any kind of cogent, concise delivery of the facts and events from this administration. What I find to be really absurd is that the man in charge who was at the center of and responsible for those “bumps in the road” and the “less than optimal” murder of our fellow citizens apparently is either unaware of his own personal experience and actions throughout the affair or must rely upon others to instruct him as to what he knew and what he did… otherwise he could have just told us.

    In the case of his heroic attack on Bin Laden, we were getting all kinds of detailed information about the intelligence, the planning, the photos of he and Hillary in the Situation Room in addition to national security compromising leaks from his political operatives in the White House and Chicago hangout… yet in this case, where it was Americans who died and not the enemy, all we get is a shell game where they are trying to hide the pea somewhere in State, DOD and CIA.

    In every one of these cases where we have had an administration that was dismissing legitimate oversight as political and behaving as if they had something to hide, we found out in the end that they in fact were. This case involves the death of an ambassador and three other Americans, the information will eventually come out and I have no doubt the same will turn out to be true here.

  • What a difference in the flow of information when the truth makes the King look good. It’s really amazing.

    Here’s what we knew about the Bin Laden raid THE NEXT DAY:

    (CNN) — The operation that led to the killing of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden took shape after detainees identified a trusted bin Laden courier as someone who may have been living with and protecting the militant leader, senior administration officials said.

    That courier became a key lead in locating bin Laden, the officials said.

    The officials provided details on the origins of the operation and the raid that led to bin Laden’s killing:

    • Four years ago: Officials uncovered the courier’s identity.

    • Two years ago: Investigators identified areas of Pakistan where the courier and his brother lived.

    • August: The residence of the courier and his brother was found in Abbottabad, 30 to 35 miles north of Islamabad, Pakistan’s capital.

    • September: The CIA worked with President Barack Obama “on a set of assessments that led it to believe that in fact it was possible” bin Laden may be at the compound in Abbottabad.

    • February: U.S. officials concluded there was a “sound intelligence basis” for pursuing bin Laden at that location.

    • March and April. Obama held a series of National Security Council meetings “to develop courses of action to bring justice to Osama bin Laden.” There were at least five meetings: March 14, March 29, April 12, April 19 and Thursday.

    • Friday. Obama gave the final order to pursue the operation.

    How U.S. forces killed Osama bin Laden

    • Sunday. After months of decision-making and planning, a U.S. military team conducted a small helicopter raid on the compound. The officials did not provide a breakdown of team members, but a senior U.S. defense official said U.S. Navy SEALs were involved in the operation.

    The senior administration officials provided these details of the raid:

    • The team was in the compound for 40 minutes. It did not encounter any local authorities during the raid.

    • Bin Laden resisted the assault force and died in a firefight. Along with bin Laden, three adult males were killed.

    • Two were believed to be the couriers, and one was a son of bin Laden’s.

    Trail leading to bin Laden began with his trusted courier

    • A woman used as a human shield by a male combatant died, and two women were injured.

    • A helicopter was lost because of mechanical failure.

    • Intelligence on bin Laden was not shared with Pakistan and other countries.

    • After the raid, U.S. officials briefed Pakistani and other world leaders.

    • Bin Laden has been buried at sea and his body was handled in the Islamic tradition. The officials but did not elaborate.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    “So apparently you’ve seen nothing to refute King’s statement that Petraeus claimed that the talking points memo was altered by others outside the CIA?”

    I have heard nothing to support his claim either. I think King appears now to be hedging. And a bit miffed at Petreaus for telling him something he didn’t want to hear.

  • liz says:

    TBP, the difference between the bin Laden raid (and all subsequent events you listed) and the attack in Benghazi should be obvious even to you.

    The bin Laden raid was initiated by our people, so of course we knew the who what where when how and most importantly WHY. The Benghazi attack was initiated by others. If you expect people to know what other people are going to do before they’ve done it, then you are even more befuddled than I thought.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Doom, your long-winded false equivalencies are fast becoming scrolling material for me. It’s kind of like flying over the middle part of he country in route to one of the coasts.

  • How is it a “false equivalency” EB? Both situations involved Presidential and administrative policies and decision making, in the former we were treated to weeks and months of breathless reporting and leaked details about the President’s every move, the information he had, when he had it and and what he did about it, right down to how cool and collected he was during his round of golf and a fundraiser that evening.

    Every minute of his schedule, the reports, the pondering, the decisive actions of our Commander In Chief dumped out to the public immediately…Hell, we even got a movie out of it just in time for the election. When do you think the movie will come out about this one?

    Bottom line, his naive policies put those people in harm’s way, he froze when decisive and immediate action was required and he left them to die. Then he or his operatives had that intelligence report altered to remove the embarrassing fact that we were attacked by terrorists on 9/11 despite his claims that terrorism died with Bin Laden, sent his minions out to promulgate the lie and here we are with a cover-up strangely reminiscent of Watergate after Nixon won his decisive re-election bid.

    So now, in addition to Cater’s miserable economy and naive approach to dealing with radicals and Soviet hegemony (remember his shock and surprise at the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan?) we can add a Nixonian cover-ups to the list, complete with claims of executive privilege, in both Fast & Furious as well as the murder of his ambassador at the hands of terrorists. He’s already signalled to Putin that he will “have more flexibility” in his second term, so my prediction is we will see a new form of Soviet expansion or crack-down on one of the former republics in the not too distant future.

    As to your reading habits, what I write is meant to be thought provoking and directed toward thoughtful people. It is obvious to me that you already know all you want to know and rational thought or circumspection is a painful exercise for you, so my advice would be to continue to ignore all that does not support your talking points and, like the First Lord in G&S Pinafore, continue parroting your partisan party line.

    “I always voted at my party’s call…
    And I never thought of thinking for myself at all”

  • A.E. Gnat says:

    I’m wondering what those arguing with TL;DR think they’re going to accomplish. He’ll just come back with another diatribe. He likes to hear the sound of his own voice, or read his own words. In fact, he likes them so much, he reposts many of his comments here on his own blog.

  • Hillsboro says:

    eb, just let me know if you come across anything.

    All morning you’ve been conflating the Petraeus Sept 14 testimony issue (which King is miffed about) and the talking points memo issue (which puts the lie to the claim that the Susan Rice Sept 16 comments were a CIA screw up). Keep dancing, eb.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Hillsboro, now it’s my turn: you’re better than this.

    Even you can now see what happened.

    Here’s what I can’t understand: why is putting Rice through the ringer so important? Is she some pariah on the right and I just missed the memo? This whole Sturm und Drang doesn’t make sense to me.

    I agree with this guy:

  • Hillsboro says:

    > Even you can now see what happened.

    The story of what happened is evolving every day.

    You completely absolved Rice yesterday on wrong information.

    I don’t think she needs to be put through the ringer. I’m just not ready to see her appointed the be Secretary of State until this issue has been properly and openly investigated.

    As this administration’s point person on Benghazi on September 16, she’s in way too deep to assume that she was just an innocent lamb reading the script she was handed.

  • edmundburkenator says:


    You, King, Graham, and McCain may continue to tilt at this particular windmill.

    I’ll be over here.

  • Hillsboro, at some point he is going to have to cut and paste the facts so much in order to support his story line it will look like a ransom note.

    Oh, and Gnat… thanks for being a loyal and studious follower of my writing. You wouldn’t by any chance be one of the folks who have been trying to hack my Google account since I started posting here, would you? They have a bunch of IP addresses that need to be tracked down and perhaps you could save them some time.

    I just love the tolerance of differing ideas and opinions exhibited by the so-called liberals. “In America you have freedom of speech that supports our views, otherwise shut the Hell up.” Every time I drop into one of these forums and toy with these Stalinists they quickly abandon any effort at framing an argument or rational discourse and start down the “You hate all (insert minority or victimized group here)”, “Get a life”, “Shut up” and intimidation/outing routine as Mr. Gnat is attempting to do in his veiled way. It has never worked and it never will.

    Somebody said this site used to be Republican but the founder got into some beef at the local party level, is now a hater of the party. I know nothing of that history or the truth either way but if so it would explain why the infection of intolerance appears to be so advanced.

  • Smith says:

    Obama approval rating in Rasmussen up to July 2009 levels!!!

    The fake Benghazi coverup story sure is hurting Obama.

    My prediction. McCain or Graham apologize to Rice during confirmation hearings.

    But you’ll all move on to the next thing while the members of your party try to sweep the crazies off the deck of their ship to try and win a national election. Too bad they have already infected their own with such crazy propaganda, its tough to reel them back in.

    People like T. Doom and Hillboro are the poor basterds that didnt get them memo that this is all blustering politics to defeat obama and it didnt work.

    Bipartisanship is in in 2013. Out is calling Obama a demon, Socialist, idiot goon.

    Remember, if this was 1996, the GOP would be calling for Bill Clintons head. Now they say he was great. The same will happen with Obama. Hilary will be the next “great threat to our democracy” that you fail to want to meet reality with- hence losing 2 more national elections.

  • The only reason Obama won is that the takers now outnumber the producers, and when there are no longer enough producers to take from the takers will get what they deserve just as they are now throughout Europe. It is a pyrrhic victory you have won and just as economic growth has slowed year after year since you folks have been in charge that rate of decline will accelerate over the next four as all the redistributionist aspects of ObamaNoCare begin to phase in, the debt skyrockets because higher taxes on the wealthy will actual yield less revenue and the spending cuts will never materialize. Meanwhile unemployment will go back up and at an accelerated rate, just as it did over the past week… up to 440,000 new filers for unemployment from 370,000, and that will further balloon the debt as interest rates and inflation start to kick in thanks to your borrowing 40 cents on every dollar.

    You’ve killed the goose and you don’t even know it.

    The only thing I don’t understand is why you seem to be so angry when you claim to be a big winner with your 1% swing majority. If bipartisanship means simply caving in to demands you might as well forget it. All the bipartisanship I see on your side is telling us to agree to raise taxes and not offering up a single dime in real spending cuts, so as far as I am concerned we should just go over the “cliff” so you can get your taxes and I can get some real cuts. Your Messiah has never once offered a single cut in any budget proposal he has sent to The Hill, and neither has he ever gotten a single vote from a Democrat either. Democrats are incapable of cutting spending, in fact the only spending they ever consider is their so-called “tax expenditures” where they count money that was not confiscated from the taxpayers as money “spent” by the government.

    Besides, we don’t need the advice of Democrats telling us how to beat them… I would never be revealing my true play book to you if I were on top. You just keep doing what you’re doing and let us fail on our own, thank you.

    The best strategy in my opinion is to just give you all the rope you want because in every case you promise more than you can deliver, take even more than there is, spend more than you have, and end up being blown out like you were in 1980, 1994 and 2010. Clearly four years of spanking was not enough to teach those 1% who voted for Obama instead of Romney the lesson they needed and I have no doubt that over the next four years you and yours will give them the beating they deserve and they will come to their senses big time. You act like you’re king of the world, but half the country is not on your side.

    We’ll see if you’re still gloating in two years, pal. I still remember those “Don’t blame me, I voted for Ford” bumper stickers and this administration is nothing more than Carter II with a bit of Nixon cover-up thrown in.

Leave Comment