Clinton Announces 2016 Candidacy – GOP to add Rubio to the Roster this week

Hillary Clinton announced her candidacy via social media this weekend in what the Washington Post dubbed: “A long awaited announcement”. Apparently, Clinton is going to strike a populist tone.

If there was a do-over and 2008 was the year, that would have been the time to forward Clinton as the candidate of choice (she was the popular candidate of choice, she was not the candidate of choice for the Super Delegates), unfortunately that did not happen. At that time, there was as choice between Clinton, McCain and Obama, it was a no-brainer for the women of America, both Independents, Democrats and yes, some Republicans’. Unfortunately that was not to be, we can’t turn back the clock, and despite best and worst intentions of the media – it may not be the best time for Clinton in 2016. Martin O’Malley is running as well, and he strikes a younger more attractive tone vis a vis the aura of Dynasty that hangs about Clintons Neck.

On the GOP side, polling suggests according to Bloomberg, that Rand Paul and Jeb Bush may have problems in the primary, although, Bush more than Paul, while other conservatives such as Ted Cruz will fare better. (Bloomberg). One might suggest that a robust primary, sans the attack ads at Paul (first) and second whoever does not fit the Beltway image of what is right for the nation, is what does the primary a disservice. Let the duke it out in the debates and the same should hold for the Democrats. Several news sources site that Rubio will announce this week – adding to a decidedly “youthful” cadre of candidates.

A note on those dark and menacing political ads – those should be pulled – one by Ron Paul, a candidate which this blogger finds more than worthy of support, is exactly the type of negative ad, dark, foreboding, that turns back on the candidate. Having watched so many good politicians go down in flames due to bad ads, the anti-Hillary ad is just that. Highlighting differences is fine in this opinion, helping the competition is not. Humble opinion notwithstanding, this general election primary is shaping up to be one of the most interesting - a lot of smart people are running, and there is nothing that the country needs more than a fresh face with a brain.

Rand Paul strikes a chord with Essay on Ferguson – Reaching Across the Demographic Divide.

Dubbed a “very different Republican” by the Los Angeles Times, Kentucky Governor, Rand Paul has managed the unthinkable – an acknowledgement that perhaps, just perhaps, not all Republican’s might be painted with the same media tar brush.(LA Times). The Times might have been an anomaly, however, the confirmation that Paul is not your average “label”, came from NBC News in a piece on Paul suggesting that he “may be changing the way Republican’s talk about race”. (NBC News)

Both of the above referenced articles are in response to an op-ed Paul wrote in Time Magazine, entitled “We must Demilitarize the Police. The sentiment for anyone who is connected to any social media website crosses “Friends” or followers demographics, from the left to the right, to the millennial to the seniors, a growing distrust of police armed to the teeth with tanks and grenades able to bust into one’s home, shoot the family dog, and be justified. It is a growing trend uniting previously political opposites. It is not the first issue of that ilk that Paul has reached out to the public and received support from so varied a populace. He is fast becoming every American’s politician – for now.

Those who would be the purists, from both sides, that would rather see division that a nation united under the leadership of one who would do as Paul does daily, the solid left, the solid right, who refuse to bend even if there is agreement. One would think they were a huge majority, yet, in reality they are merely the loudest minority. The average Joe and Jill are content reaching across the aisle, and Paul might be the perfect, demographic crossing leader that the nation has been seeking for decades or more.

That said, once the DNC finds its perfect candidate (i.e. a female, any female), and the RNC does the same (a solid middle of the road Republican), that same media will, unless hell freezes over, eviscerate Paul at every step. Then again, hell may freeze over and reporting may take a tone of reality rather than opinion.

For now, watching the growth of Paul, with his Jeffersonian-Republican manners, is truly invigorating for those who aspire to see the nation grow, both economically and in accordance with the U.S. Constitution. It has been a long time coming.

Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) – 2016 – Will She or Won’t She Enter the Race

There’s an uptick in news lately regarding the first term Senator from MA, Elizabeth Warren. Most of this is centered on Warren’s popularity with the Progressive base of the Democrat party, and her potential run in 2016. Many insist she is running.

An article in the New York Post, written by Edward Klein, suggests that she has half of the now, almost irrelevant Kennedy family backing. It was in 2008 that the Kennedy’s threw Hillary Clinton under the proverbial bus, in favor of a little known one-term Senator from Illinois – Barack Obama, so this would come as no surprise to anyone in the Bay State. (NYPost) However, with Ted (The Lion) Kennedy now gone, there is no clear leader of that erstwhile clan, therefore, the weight they once pulled, is waning.

A more pragmatic approach was taken by former 4th District Congressional Representative, Barney Frank – notes the Huffington Post, Frank wants Warren to run - but believes she might not, and somehow, the article implies he would back Hillary Clinton.(Huffington Post)

What we apparently have here, is the rumor mills from the right and left, speculating on what Ms. Senator Warren, will or will not do in the coming months. Although somewhat of a mystery, as she emerges from the shadows of Massachusetts, more of her life story is unfolding and as a result, she becomes more interesting. That said, a smart and savvy woman, she is said to be declining to run in 2016 – a source that is in constant contact suggests it is nothing more than rumor.

Herein is what is at issue, without living under a rock, or being a low information voter, one knows the nation is in dire straits – and no matter who takes the helm in 2016 – will be either blamed or blamed when the ship of state does not immediately right itself. (See Reagan’s first term after Carter for reference). Therefore, smart money suggests that both women may sit this one out, in favor of letting an obscure MD governor, or even a Vice President take the loss to any GOP candidate – given the odds of the incoming President being one-term should hypothetically, and either muddying the waters more, or not succeeding quickly enough. They may count on the fickle voters to aid this along with a rapid media. Both women can afford to wait an additional 4 years, in order to put distance between themselves and the nightmare that is DC now. It would surprise this blogger if either of them made any 2016 announcements other than “Next Time!” regarding the 2016 general election. It would be, in this feminist’s point of view, better to win the war than the battle.

On Benghazi and Boko Harem - Making Excuses by Pillorying Hillary Clinton – to what end?

A Politico article, (here)entitled: “The Boko Haram-Benghazi Link”suggests the premise of the article is a rebuttal to Allen West, the Tea Party Republican who is more than likely to hammer Obama for a host of issues, including the Benghazi Scandal. However, this piece was written to excuse Obama and the administrations culpability in both instances (standing down while letting embassy personnel die and refusing to acknowledge the Boko Haram as terrorist) by laying it squarely on the lap of the Clinton State Department. Sprinkled in amongst the rubbish, was a bit of the bad Republicans continuing to investigate a problem with Benghazi that simply did not exist, because it was part of the Obama administrations abhorrence of getting involved in too many conflicts (feint), and besides it all leads back to the State Department.

Of course, when one is possibly going to make a run at a higher office, say Hillary Clinton, there is nothing more assuring than a little help from one’s friends in the media. Therefore, one would think by dropping seeds that can be used by the opposition and planted at a later date, the Politico team is setting the stage for the anti-Hillary. The question remains – “which woman will the Democrats run instead?” – Look to Massachusetts for the answer. If the Democrats thought, however, that Hillary Clinton maybe a bit of a burden to bear, they may be having second thoughts after 2016. Will Hillary run? It appears less likely by the day. Watch for continued glowing coverage of the Harvard Professor turned Senator, Elizabeth Warren.

Hillary Clinton & the Media – Love-Hate Relationship – Would give anyone Pause to Seek Higher Office

Whether or not one is politically for or against Hillary Clinton’s policies, one has to admit that this particular woman has taken a beating from the press. Regardless of any changes in attitudes during the past 100 years towards women, the press, many of those members women themselves, berated Clinton for what she wore, her hairstyles, personal life, rather than report on her political life. This was especially true in 2008 when she won the popular vote in the primary, only to have it stripped away by her colleges in a super-majority vote at the Democrat Convention – giving all to one Barak Obama. It did not hurt Obama one bit that the press was more than devoted to the one-term state legislator, turned one-term Senator – they threw Hillary under the bus before it even arrived.

Therefore it is no startling revelation when Polticio runs a story on Hillary Clinton and her distaste for the “media” – quoting one associate: ““Look, she hates you. Period. That’s never going to change.”(Politico)

Herein lays the crux of the matter, anyone who is brave enough to enter the fray of national politics is either a quart short on reality or extremely dedicated – but of all the attributes and or less than desirable traits any one candidate may or may not have, the one thing is certain, the press, who has its own agenda, will lift them up or tear them down, depending on the movement and the talking points handed down by an editorial board.

Although one believes that Hillary Clinton would most likely be teaching at Harvard than running for the Office of the President again, it would mean to a woman who has devoted her life to that office, her husband, daughter and constituents, open for yet another shellacking by both the press, and this time an Obama weary nation who is looking for the next shiny new toy another term comes to mind – masochist. Seriously, hate is such a strong word, perhaps reasonable dislike of the entire bunch – right or left would be more appropriate to the situation.

Rand Paul and the Libertarian’s – What’s the appeal going into 2016? – Paul wins Maine Straw Poll

Rand Paul recently won the GOP Straw poll at the Maine GOP convention. (Politico). What that means in the most simple terms, is that the activist within the Maine GOP have a majority of Ron Paul supporters giving him both the college grassroots (where he has a good ground) to set up a solid shop for 2016 in the state. Right as of this morning, leading in hypothetical national polls is fine, but without ground troops; one might as well be throwing money into the wind when trying to put together a national campaign.

You need both –

Enter the “Wealthy” Libertarians as they would be dubbed by the New York Times:

“As he has risen in prominence as a Republican presidential contender, Mr. Paul is avidly courting a small but influential cluster of wealthy libertarians. His pursuit offers an intriguing window into an eclectic network of potential donors who have made fortunes in Silicon Valley start-ups and Wall Street hedge funds, a group that could form a vital donor base if he makes a bid for the Republican nomination. A tight-knit tribe of philanthropists and entrepreneurs, they have exerted enormous intellectual influence on conservative policy. But they have historically spent more on nonprofit groups and endowing college economics departments than they have on backing candidates.”

In other words, a Barry Goldwater, who ran as a Republican, and attracted college students and Middle America, including one young Hillary Rodham Clinton.(The Economist)

What is the appeal one might ask when one weighs the differences between the two major parties, and one individual who has a political ideology from a third party? The third party, Libertarians hold a variety of belief’s that appeal to both Conservatives as well as Liberals- they are, for the most part, anti-war, pro-woman’s rights, and complete fiscal conservatives –suggesting that without free-markets (Capitalism) one might as well pack it in. Smart spending versus Big Government wasteful spending has always been a bone of contention with the Libertarian. What Goldwater did not have was timing. Whereas Paul does – today’s millennial are disaffected and disappointed – there are fewer opportunities of the scale that would make younger people more independent and offer more mobility, rather than the current trend of living indefinitely with parents in order to pay off enormous student loans (that industry owned by the Federal Government as well), while finding temp work rather than a career for which they had prepared.

Therefore, as the timing is one which would welcome a state’s rights, free market thinker in the political arena, it may take some doing for the left (including the media) to scare the voter away from Senator Paul. Although odds are better than average that the Democrats will include a woman at the top of the ticket – the timing for that maybe off a bit. With a brand damaged by the Affordable Health Care act, among other lesser publicized “scandals” – the 2014 and 2016 elections will be held in the hands of Barack Obama, much in the same way as the 2006 and 2008 elections were credited to George W. Bush. (Note on that front, the RNC’s ability to front the weakest candidate possible in a given year where by any counts they should win handily, confounds logic. In the case of Bush, some blame has to be placed on the candidacy of John McCain, a Bob Dole for the present age. Romney is another RNC pick, and they are seriously dragging out the political dynasty of Bush once again, with Jeb. One can only hope that they play their cards correctly this time out and stay out of this General Election. It is time for a shift to Liberty minded “Jeffersonian Republicans” to take the reins. Paul is that person, it remains to be seen if his broad appeal to multiple factions opens the eyes of those in DC that cannot see beyond the beltway.

2014-2016 – Party Affiliation No-More – Rand Paul Wow’s Independent Youth Vote – Bests Clinton - Nation Leaning Unaffiliated

Party Affiliation in the U.S. appears to be on the downside, with higher percentages suggesting they prefer no party affiliation according to Gallup Polling – at 42%, the highest percentage in 25 years (Gallup). Another poll from Reason shows a deep distrust of politicians in general,(Reason, with access to crosstabs) which builds a strong case for those running who, while being affiliated with a political party, are not entrenched politicians who parrot their political affiliation party line.

As 2016 polling is strictly hypothetical at this point, given the fact that the 2014 mid-terms must first take place before the real games begin, it is still of interest as to which way the individuals polled are leaning. Take the latest Quinnipiac polling on how Colorado sees the 2016 race. Among likely candidates, Rand Paul is besting Hillary Clinton, and other “rivals”, at the top of the chart – being preferred by the college vote, a normal Democrat stranglehold. (Politico) (A side thought - Colorado is much like Massachusetts)

As the independent voter, regardless of lean, increases, and the distaste and distrusts of those perceived as part of the problem continues to rise, those who, like Senator Rand Paul, stand a better than average chance of reaching for the Presidential Brass Ring with success. Those who are seen as part of a political dynasty may sound fabulous to those who are part of the “machine”, however, to those who vote, and the vote counts, a different outcome is likely. Therefore, one can suggest given the early data, that the individuals running for the highest office will be “gimmicky” (i.e. first this or that), and brand new to the political scene (less than say 3 or 4 terms) and not be wedded to a political party to the teeth, (voting against one’s party on occasion). That leaves very few eligible for the position.

2016 Pre-Update – Rand Paul suggested as likely GOP front-runner – Making Sense of Changing Attitudes in Political Think

Senator Paul, during his filibuster, attracting both left and right over personal liberty - image Sioux City Journal

The Atlantic article titled “Rand Paul is the 2016 Republican Frontrunner” suggests the obvious, assuming that Chris Christie was a serious contender for 2016, or even considering it, and the same can be said of the Senator from Kentucky. If what the Atlantic article suggests were verified in the next 6 to 12 months, that both men were announced candidates for the nomination, there is no doubt that Paul would be the frontrunner.

The reasons are fairly simple, the first being that the media (certain progressive circles) attempt to minimize Paul at every step, from absurd charges of “racism” due to an affiliation with a staff member (who was summarily fired) to charges of “plagiarism” – which was based on the correctness of footnotes, the petty is playing large, as frankly, there is nothing else about the Senator that is remotely touchable. That has to scare a few analysts. He is popular with both bases, as a Libertarian, he is grounded in the Constitution, pleasing the right, whiel at the same time, anti-war, which pleases those on the left. He’s likable, young, a doctor, and does not tread the normal byways of the GOP.

He is the one candidate that one might consider to be free of political sin, and furthermore, not vested in Washington for Decades.

Should he decide to run, in due course, he would certainly be a front-runner. For those who approve of a little push-back against both parties, and Congressional procedures such as a filibuster, Paul ranks the highest in the current “fantasy presidential candidates” sweepstakes. The fact that John McCain referred to him as a “dangerous wacko bird” is just the icing on the cake.

He just might be the next shiny new Presidential candidate, as the left is geriatric at best, with names seen too often, with one exception, Elizabeth Warren, who, although a darling of the left, may not have the juice to unseat a Hillary Clinton (there is the super-delegate though), and should she do so, has less time in the Senate and no practical experience running anything –as a college professor.

Also is it doubtful that Paul would play into the power struggle that was the GOP – after the last two debacles – Romney & McCain, it’s time to recast the party – the Libertarian branch is reminiscent now of the “Know Nothings”, that first formed a viable national party – the Republicans, and elected one Abraham Lincoln. Possible, and probable – Paul is the one to watch for now.

Fighting Factions within the Democrat Party – Recognized – The Progressive versus the Democrat – Warren Coy About 2016 Run

From Politico: