For quite some time now - namely, ever since Joe Biden declined to jump into the Democrat primary campaign a couple of months back - I've been warning you all not to buy into the media hype that Hillary Clinton is "the Democrat frontrunner". Oh, sure, I know what the polls say, that aside from New Hampshire Herself is leading everywhere else as well as nationally; I'm not denying that. By that measure she would merit that designation. The complicating factor is that she's not acting like the frontrunner; indeed, from how frantically she continues to pander to the extreme Left, it seems abudantly clear that she's convinced she's behind Weekend Bernie Sanders by double-digits pretty much everywhere. Does her campaign have internal polling (i.e. drained of hype and designed to be as accurate as possible) that shows this? Or is she just hopelessly paranoid after her last coronational processional was submarined eight years ago by You Know Who? And Sanders isn't even a mulatto.
Whichever explanation it is, she has now admitted her fears to her supporters by trying to prepare them for the shocking results soon to come:
On the heels of polls showing Bernie Sanders chopping fifteen points off Hillary’s lead in Iowa — narrowing her advantage to 50%-45% — Hillary Clinton has sent out an email to her supporters today (Wednesday, December 23rd) warning them to brace themselves for the chance that she might lose Iowa or New Hampshire.
Iowa OR New Hampshire? The latter is pretty much guaranteed and has been for months. Does she think her supporters are narcoleptics or something?
In a highly unusual email headlined “If We Lose Iowa Or New Hampshire”, Hillary speculates that she might meet defeat in the first two contests with Bernie Sanders.
Urging her supporters to be “realistic” and warning that “winning the nomination is no sure thing,” she appeals for money to rev up her campaign.
First, a true frontrunner does not typically go around boasting that s/he has the nomination "in the bag," but they usually do ACT like they do - quietly confident, focusing on the other party's likely nominee, "triangulating" - which is another way of saying that everybody knows s/he has the nomination in the bag and therefore s/he doesn't HAVE to go around pointing it out at every opportunity (though Trump probably would). Second, a candidate that ISN"T the frontrunner but whom everybody THINKS s/he is is very likely to try to manage the expectations of his/her supporters once the time for actual ballot-casting approaches.
But aside from all of that, is paranoia really an effective fundraising premise? And is the $2.5 Billion Woman really getting short on campaign cash? Seriously?
Anticipating the possibility — or likelihood — of one or two early defeats, she writes: “If we lose in Iowa or New Hampshire, we’re going to need to dig in and work that much harder to make sure we win the nomination. I’m going to fight as hard as I can to earn every last vote.”
And then she scam and fabricate the rest.
The stunning admission that Sanders might capture one or even both of the two earliest States is unprecedented. Sanders has always led in New Hampshire with RealClearPolitics.com polling average showing him up but 51%-43% over the last seven polls.
But, in Iowa, once considered safe for Hillary, the only post-debate poll, by CNN, has her ahead by only 50%-45%, a dramatic comedown from the lead PPP found prior to the debate of 52%-34%.
Holy crap, maybe that extra long potty break had an impact after all. Or perhaps Trump riffing on it did. Which simply another indication that he's running in the wrong party.
For Hillary to admit, this far in advance, that she might lose Iowa and/or New Hampshire, we can only speculate on what her private polls must be showing.
We're not privy to that internal polling. But we know Hillary Clinton. We know who she is and what she is. We know that she completely and utterly lacks any kind of political skill set. We know she has not a single "accomplishment" she can legitimately call her own in nearly a quarter-century in Washington, D.C. We know that she is arguably the worst campaigner and politician ever to seek the presidency of the United States. And we know that even her own party mostly mistrusts and detests her and highly resents her Bushesque "next in line/It's my turn" entitlement mentality and would prefer just about anybody else, which is why a crazy, ancient, wild-eyed communist white guy looks poised to take the first two Democrat nominating contests and shatter the stubborn myth of her "inevitability" once and for all.
Which is not to say that losing Iowa and New Hampshire would finish the Empress (again). Neither of those States have more than a pittance of delegates to offer, and there'd be forty-eight more to go. But as the Toe-Sucker points out, since the modern primary system was established way back in 1972, only twice in eleven cycles has the eventual Democrat nominee lost the first two nominating contests. And one of them was her husband, who is his wife's mirror opposite as a campaigner and political tactician. The other lost forty-nine States to Tricky Dick.
Neither is a particularly pleasant foreshadowing for the old harridan, is it? No wonder she's growing visibly incontinent. And now her supporters may be joining her .
UPDATE: Nothing new about this:
[Bill] Clinton is a revered figure in Democrat circles and was a key surrogate for Barack Obama in his 2012 re-election bid. A survey conducted in part by the Wall Street Journal last year said he was by a margin of more than two to one the most admired president of the past quarter century.
Marc Lasry, a friend of Clinton’s and head of New York hedge fund firm Avenue Capital Group, said: “Bill Clinton campaigning for Hillary is a huge asset. People love seeing him and he’s able to explain things to people in a way that’s unique.”
Yeah, and that might matter - if he was the candidate. His record of getting anybody else elected is, to put it charitably, abysmal. Getting his wife elected is a mountain too high for even the Big Me to climb. Why else would he have outsourced the task to Donald Trump?
UPDATE II: If Sick Willie can't lift his ball and chain to the promised land, the DNC certainly can't. But they keep on trying anyway.
UPDATE III: Don't all of a "front-runner's" prominent endorsers put off their actual endorsements?