The Word For Hillary | The American Spectator | USA News and Politics
The Word For Hillary
by

There is a word for Hillary Clinton: “Loser.”

Five weeks ago, with her significantly trailing Obama in pledged elected delegates and votes cast (not counting the nonsense “cheat” votes in Florida and Michigan), and winning by a lesser margin among pledged superdelegates, the expectations were for her to:
A) Win Pennsylvania by more than 15 points
B) Run about even in Indiana
C) Lose North Carolina by about 15-18 points
D) Maintain her lead among superdelegates
E) Significantly eat into Obama’s votes-cast lead

Instead, despite EVERYTHING going her way before the Pennsylvania primary — the “bitter” remark, more REzco stuff, the beginnings of the Ayers stuff — she won that state by LESS than double digits (I think the final margin was 9.6 percent).
Then, despite everything ELSE going her way — the truly terrible Rev. Wright explosion and more attention to Ayers — she still barely squeaked by in Indiana, and lost North Carolina by a huge margin, almost as large as originally projected.

Overall, in the three states combined, she significantly LOST ground among pledged superdelegates, picked up NO ground among pledged elected delegates, picked up only 3,000 votes total among votes cast overall (after well over 4 million more votes were cast), and fell BELOW the day-of-primary expectations in all three states. (I.e., in all three states, the expectations had shifted by election day, so that she was STILL expected to win Pennsylvania by double digits, was expected to win Indiana by mid-to-HIGH single digits, and hold Obama to mid-to-high single digits in North Carolina.)

In other words, the best she could do despite everything going her way was to lose ground overall, by breaking even in total votes and elected delegates and losing among superdelegates and losing in the updated expectations game. Meanwhile, the exit polls consistently show that about half of voters in DEMOCRATIC primaries do not think she is honest. That is devastating. And it a stigma that will not leave her, because it is an accurate stigma.

The truth is, the lady is not a popular candidate. Even with a large number of white workers voting AGAINST Obama as much as for her, she still can’t make up any ground. She has had every advantage during this whole primary season, but the only way she can win now is by changing the rules. (Yes, that IS still a possibility; see the excellent analysis by Mark Impomeni.) All of which makes her a loser, through and through. And it also makes her decidedly NOT a good choice for Obama for Veep, because Obama would be foolish to saddle himself with a running mate of whose basic integrity half of his OWN party seriously doubts.

Sign Up to receive Our Latest Updates! Register

Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://thespectator.com/world.

Be a Free Market Loving Patriot. Subscribe Today!