To adapt a quote of Princess Leia's to Imperial Governor Tarkin, "The tighter Mrs. Clinton grips the Hillary Trap, the more Democrat voters slip through her fingers":
Senator Bernie Sanders has squeaked past Democrat rival Hillary Clinton in Iowa – and both he and Vice President Joe Biden outscore the scandal-plagued [Rodham] on honesty and empathy, a new poll shows.
According to the Quinnipiac University survey, Vermont's Sanders and [Mrs.] Clinton are in a statistical dead heat. He is the choice of 41% of likely Democrat caucus voters in Iowa, while 40% back [Mrs.] Clinton and 12% support Biden – who's yet to announce if he'll even launch a campaign.
In July, the pollster showed [Mrs.] Clinton with a commanding 52% support among Democrats in the first-voting State; Sanders lagged at 33% and Biden registered a barely-there 7%.
Weekend Bernie has already overtaken Hillary in New Hampshire. Now he's passing her up in Iowa as well. Which (1) means that he's a lot more than "the Eugene McCarthy of 2016" and (2) ought to dispense with the persistent descriptions of the Empress as "the Democrat frontrunner". Oh, yes, and (3) if Slow Joe does jump into the race, given that he'd be splitting the Democrat "establishment" vote with her with full White House backing, and combined with the Emailgate vice squeezing tighter and tighter, it could be that Mrs. Clinton will be driven from the presidential race altogether before the end of 2015.
Or would if she wasn't an obsessed megalomaniac. Which means that the end of Democrat hopes of retaining the White House next year (absent Donald Trump riding to the rescue) will not be a pretty one. A crying shame, huh?
Case in point:
David Brock’s war against the New York Times just went nuclear — and the paper is responding with equal fury.
Brock, the former right-wing journalist-turned-[dinnermashing]-pro-[Rodham] crusader, takes aim at a top New York Times editor in a soon-to-be released book obtained by Politico. In the book, [subtley] titled “Killing the Messenger: The Right-Wing Plot to Derail Hillary Clinton and Hijack Your Government,” Brock accuses senior politics editor and former Washington bureau chief Carolyn Ryan of helping to turn the paper into a “megaphone for conservative propaganda” by unfairly targeting former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton....
“As it concerns [Rodham] coverage, the Times will have a special place in hell,” he writes, claiming that interviews with current Times employees prove his case. [emphasis added]
Oh, wait, it gets better. Get a load of the Times's retaliatory retort:
“David Brock is an opportunist and a partisan who specializes in personal attacks,” Eileen Murphy told Politico in an email.
“We’ve seen him lash out at some of our aggressive coverage of important political figures and it’s unsurprising that he has now turned personal. He’s wrong on all counts,” she added.
BAM! goes the dynamite.
The fact is, as I reiterate yet again, that Hillary Clinton is a grating, hateful, obnoxious shrew, a godawful candidate of abysmal proportions, and the figurative scandal object shackled to her ankle in the above pic ought to be the size of an ocean liner. All of the above has gotten so egregious and ridiculous that it isn't as if even the house propaganda organ of the Democrat Party can embargo that reality, or make themselves look escalatingly foolish by faithfully regurgitating her fantastist delusions of alternate reality grandeur. And it's no defense of the Times to point that out.
I interpret Brock's tirade on Hillary's behalf as prima facie evidence that they know she's going down, and they know we know she's going down, and she and they are going to take as many of her fellow travelers who don't manage to escape the Hillary Trap down with her as inhumanly possible.
And just think, my Democrat friends: you get to watch Bernie Sanders lose all fifty States next November. Or, if you're lucky, Joe Biden fail to clear two hundred Electoral Votes.
Better luck next time, suckers.
UPDATE: Here are the key stats in the crosstabs:
The big key for Sanders in Iowa are the demos in age and income. He blows Hillary out of the water among 18-34-year-olds, 66/19, and has an edge on the 35-49YOs too at 43/40. This particular demographic provided most of the energy for Barack Obama’s two presidential runs, and the lack of interest in Hillary should be a huge red flag for Democrats. Similarly, Sanders dominates in the under-$30K income demo, 51/32, and ties Hillary among the $30-50K range at 38/38. The only income demo Hillary wins is the $100K+ group, 50/36.
In other words, her base is older, wealthier voters … who normally skew Republican in general elections. That’s certainly not the second coming of the Obama coalition, at the very least. [emphasis added]
See why the Nutroots hate her, and why she'll never, EVER win their support, no matter how many times and ways she smears Republicans? It's like the old saying goes: "What you are speaks so loudly, I can't hear a word you're saying."
And then there's another old sage, "If a tree falls in the forest, and nobody is present to hear it, does it make a sound?"