It is still one year and seven months until election day in 2016. Nevertheless, that does not seem to be stopping the mainstream media from explaining why Hillary Clinton is inevitable as the winner of that election. Indeed, I just read a piece in Politico that outlines Hillary's path to victory. The silliness of this analysis is so great that it made me wonder if the author was trying to reassure her liberal audience not to worry after all of Hillary's missteps of late.
Here's the basic thesis in Politico: states that went for the Democrats in the past will continue to do so. Add a few additional states and Hillary has it locked up.
Think about that thesis. One of the inevitable states according to Politico is Wisconsin. What if Scott Walker is the GOP candidate? Will Wisconsin reject its own governor, a man who has won statewide in Wisconsin three times in the last four years, to vote for Hillary? And what of the states like Illinois, Maryland and Massachusetts where Republicans won elections as governor last November? Are these states locked up for Hillary? Even my own state of Connecticut is hardly a lock for Mrs. Clinton.
The problem with analysis like the silly stuff in Politico is that things change, voters change, people change. Using the Politico sort of analysis, we would have seen that Herbert Hoover beat Franklin Roosevelt in 1932; after all, the GOP had won a long string of elections at that point. Alternatively, George Bush would not have won in 2000 or 2004 under the same analysis.
The Politico author also makes sure to add two more points: Hillary is both white and old. According to the author, race is so important in America that Hillary's whiteness will help her immensely. This is basically a claim that many Democrat voters are racists who would vote against their party purely on racial grounds. And as for Hillary being old, there is no question of that. Does the author really think that a tired and old looking Hillary would not be harmed among younger voters due to that comparison against a young and vigorous GOP candidate like Marco Rubio?
Look., no one knows now what the electorate will look like in 2016. We don't know who the candidates will be. We don't know the state of the economy or of the world. It would be best if the mainstream media seers held of on their analysis of who will win in 2016. Remember, at this time before the 2008 election, these same people were predicting that Hillary would narrowly win against the GOP candidate Rudy Giuliani.
Here's the basic thesis in Politico: states that went for the Democrats in the past will continue to do so. Add a few additional states and Hillary has it locked up.
Think about that thesis. One of the inevitable states according to Politico is Wisconsin. What if Scott Walker is the GOP candidate? Will Wisconsin reject its own governor, a man who has won statewide in Wisconsin three times in the last four years, to vote for Hillary? And what of the states like Illinois, Maryland and Massachusetts where Republicans won elections as governor last November? Are these states locked up for Hillary? Even my own state of Connecticut is hardly a lock for Mrs. Clinton.
The problem with analysis like the silly stuff in Politico is that things change, voters change, people change. Using the Politico sort of analysis, we would have seen that Herbert Hoover beat Franklin Roosevelt in 1932; after all, the GOP had won a long string of elections at that point. Alternatively, George Bush would not have won in 2000 or 2004 under the same analysis.
The Politico author also makes sure to add two more points: Hillary is both white and old. According to the author, race is so important in America that Hillary's whiteness will help her immensely. This is basically a claim that many Democrat voters are racists who would vote against their party purely on racial grounds. And as for Hillary being old, there is no question of that. Does the author really think that a tired and old looking Hillary would not be harmed among younger voters due to that comparison against a young and vigorous GOP candidate like Marco Rubio?
Look., no one knows now what the electorate will look like in 2016. We don't know who the candidates will be. We don't know the state of the economy or of the world. It would be best if the mainstream media seers held of on their analysis of who will win in 2016. Remember, at this time before the 2008 election, these same people were predicting that Hillary would narrowly win against the GOP candidate Rudy Giuliani.
No comments:
Post a Comment