#HillaryLandslide2016

[Smart3]

PPP, Feb. 8-12, 603 Louisiana Voters, MoE +/- 4%

Hillary Clinton 48%
Bobby Jindal 45%

Hillary Clinton 46%
Marco Rubio 43%

Hillary Clinton 46%
Paul Ryan 46%

Should Jindal run for president? Yes 24%, No 66%

[James Madison]

Yikes...

Ron is the only person who would even stand a chance against Hillary. Sorry, but Rand would get smoked.

[TheTexan]

Sorry, but Rand would get smoked.

Doesn't matter if this is true or not, this will be one of the many excuses why the GOP will not nominate Rand.

Rand 2016 is a happy fantasy, and if a side effect is that people get more involved in local & state politics, that's great. But that's all it is, a fantasy

[Kilrain]

Edit: Nevermind, didn't see that it was just an LA poll. Silly me.

[Smart3]

Doesn't matter if this is true or not, this will be one of the many excuses why the GOP will not nominate Rand.

Rand 2016 is a happy fantasy, and if a side effect is that people get more involved in local & state politics, that's great. But that's all it is, a fantasy

Rand has about the same chance as Robert Taft. The only question in 2016 is who is Dewey 2.0?

but if Hillary can win Texas and Louisiana, she can probably win GA/NC/VA/FL by big margins. If this happens, no candidate could beat her.

[jkr]

#HITLARYCRIMINALKILLERFOREVEA

[paulbot24]

Polling done in one state regarding a landslide victory in a national election three years away where all the margins of victory all fall within the margin of error? Screw the landslide, I'm still looking for relevance.:toady:

[Matt McGuire]

Polling done in one state regarding a landslide victory in a national election three years away where all the margins of victory all fall within the margin of error? Screw the landslide, I'm still looking for relevance.:toady:

The point is that Hillary doing so well in these southern states pretty much guarantees a victory across the board. There's no way she's going to lose the traditional blue states, although Christie may do well in those.

I am just hoping that she declines in 2016, because I don't believe anybody, even Rand, could beat her.

[James Madison]

Just for reference...

Romney won Louisiana by 17% last November.

[Smart3]

Polling done in one state regarding a landslide victory in a national election three years away where all the margins of victory all fall within the margin of error? Screw the landslide, I'm still looking for relevance.:toady:

Obama lost Louisiana by +17.21%

That means Hillary outperforms Obama by as much as 20%, which indicates a landslide where she wins all swing states by solid (+5%) margins and picks up several GOP states, possibly even much of the South.

It is far out, but all three GOP candidates here are well-known in LA and everyone knows Hillary, so the poll is relevant.

[itshappening]

The point is that Hillary doing so well in these southern states pretty much guarantees a victory across the board. There's no way she's going to lose the traditional blue states, although Christie may do well in those.

I am just hoping that she declines in 2016, because I don't believe anybody, even Rand, could beat her.

Voters often give the opposite party the White House after a two term presidency so there's no reason why she's unbeatable. The economy will suck even more by then and Obamacare (which she supports) will be seen and felt.

[osan]

PPP, Feb. 8-12, 603 Louisiana Voters, MoE +/- 4%

Hillary Clinton 48%
Bobby Jindal 45%

Hillary Clinton 46%
Marco Rubio 43%

Hillary Clinton 46%
Paul Ryan 46%

Should Jindal run for president? Yes 24%, No 66%

What is the point of all this? As if it will make any difference in the grander scheme of things. This is exactly what They want folks to do - waste their time and energy in this meaningless "competition" of Klowns. This should be abundantly clear to one and all by now. Clinton sits, congress does its thing. Then Bush, then Obama, all the while the same schedule of agenda items is advanced. Go ahead and put Ron Paul in the Oval Office. Resurrect Patrick Henry and put him in. Nothing will change. "We" routed the Democrats in '10 and what did it get us? More of the same.

Time to wake up and smell the guano because we are up to our necks in it. They are not going to stop until such time as we stop them. There is vanishingly small chance that this can be done without some serious physicality at this point. We are not feared in the least measure nor are we afforded any measure in their eyes. Given what we have all witnessed over the past few decades this is in no way surprising. Were I in their position, I would certainly hold no fear of the mob.

Keep on keeping on, but temper your expectations because it seems to me that the overwhelming majority are very much alright with the direction in which things are heading. The average man is a despicable creature, They know it, and They capitalize on all the worst qualities of the human mean. Those of us who refuse to lay down have far more enemies than allies; at least 100:1... probably much more than that.

[IPSecure]

The Question for Hillary Which May End Her Career... (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?128697)

[Smart3]

Voters often give the opposite party the White House after a two term presidency so there's no reason why she's unbeatable. The economy will suck even more by then and Obamacare (which she supports) will be seen and felt.

I think 2016 will either be 1988 or 1944.

[paulbot24]

Chris Rock on Hillary Clinton:

"I actually think America is ready for a woman president. But does it have to be that woman? . . . She's gonna work in the office where her husband got blow jobs?! There ain't enough redecorating in the world she can do to change that!"

Forgive me but I have to use humor to ease my mind of the possiblity of Hillary as POTUS. I think it is the only way I can cope with something that awful.

[ZENemy]

The throne is rigged and broken. It doesnt matter who sits in it.

[itshappening]

I think 2016 will either be 1988 or 1944.

it's possible but Hillary will have a tough election if she runs especially with a sucky economy and Obamacare round her neck. Just wait and see. People are not going to be happy with what's happening by 2016 and may give the White House to the GOP.

[itshappening]

The other thing is what's inflation going to be like in 3 years with the Fed printing 85 billion+ a month.

There's no way they can get away with 3 trillion+ of new money without it showing up to the average joe. It's going to be like the 70's again.

[Smart3]

it's possible but Hillary will have a tough election if she runs especially with a sucky economy and Obamacare round her neck. Just wait and see. People are not going to be happy with what's happening by 2016 and may give the White House to the GOP.

I don't think the economy will be the main issue in 2016. I really think social issues and Obama worship will be the path to victory for the Dems in 2016. "Look at all Obama has done for you, now send Hillary to continue the progress!"

Obama won't endorse anyone other than Hillary or Biden in 2016, and once one of them has his endorsement they win.

Obama is Ronald Reagan 2.0, so it does make sense for Biden to run. Hell, he'd be better than most possible candidates (Rahmfather, Warren, etc)

[itshappening]

I don't think the economy will be the main issue in 2016. I really think social issues and Obama worship will be the path to victory for the Dems in 2016. "Look at all Obama has done for you, now send Hillary to continue the progress!"

Obama won't endorse anyone other than Hillary or Biden in 2016, and once one of them has his endorsement they win.

Obama is Ronald Reagan 2.0, so it does make sense for Biden to run. Hell, he'd be better than most possible candidates (Rahmfather, Warren, etc)

Not a chance, the economy will be the central issue. Especially after 8 years of these idiots and trillions in the Fed expanding its balance sheet. All that inflation is going to show up and unemployment will get worse, obamacare hits, people's hours will be reduced, etc etc.

As for Reagan, the economy was doing well. it grew at 7% one year. That's never going to happen any time soon. There will be anemic growth and high inflation and people's wages will not keep up with it so they will feel it along with Obamacare hitting. It will be disastrous.

[Smart3]

Not a chance, the economy will be the central issue. Especially after 8 years of these idiots and trillions in the Fed expanding its balance sheet. All that inflation is going to show up and unemployment will get worse, obamacare hits, people's hours will be reduced, etc etc.

As for Reagan, the economy was doing well. it grew at 7% one year. That's never going to happen any time soon. There will be anemic growth and high inflation and people's wages will not keep up with it so they will feel it along with Obamacare hitting. It will be disastrous.

The Dems can blame all of those problems on the GOP. Why wouldn't they? The American electorate is stupid and gullible. The Dems will win in 2016, there can be no doubt.

[shane77m]

At the rate we are going Obama will probably still be president.

[GunnyFreedom]

The Dems can blame all of those problems on the GOP. Why wouldn't they? The American electorate is stupid and gullible. The Dems will win in 2016, there can be no doubt.

Sounds like you need to get OUT of Commiefornia, it's coloring your perspective.

[Smart3]

Sounds like you need to get OUT of Commiefornia, it's coloring your perspective.

The Dear Leader Jerry Brown disapproves of this message.

[QWDC]

Is it just me not getting something, or are the recent PPP biased a bit toward the D side?
For example, this poll had D +3 from the results of the last election, and the last national poll released was D+4 from the nationwide popular vote. Maybe I'm just not interpreting the data correctly, I'm basing it off of the question "Who did you vote for last prez election?"

Anyways, Hillary can be dealt with. She lost to a no-name senator last time she ran and people realized she wasn't a female Bill Clinton.

[green73]

Doug Casey says Hillary will get beat in 2016 because the economy will be horrendous.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/lewrockwell-show/2013/02/13/347-u-s-of-totalitarianism/

[itshappening]

The Dems can blame all of those problems on the GOP. Why wouldn't they? The American electorate is stupid and gullible. The Dems will win in 2016, there can be no doubt.

That won't wash when they have the presidency and the Senate. The Democrats will get blamed for the mess of the economy and obamacare in 2016 .

[GunnyFreedom]

Is it just me not getting something, or are the recent PPP biased a bit toward the D side?
For example, this poll had D +3 from the results of the last election, and the last national poll released was D+4 from the nationwide popular vote. Maybe I'm just not interpreting the data correctly, I'm basing it off of the question "Who did you vote for last prez election?"

Anyways, Hillary can be dealt with. She lost to a no-name senator last time she ran and people realized she wasn't a female Bill Clinton.

Yeah you have to watch PPP. They can be sick accurate sometimes, but sometimes they come WAAAY WAY out of left field. I actually know the folks who operate the joint. Personally. They think Nancy Pelosi is a right wing lunatic.

[FrankRep]

Yikes...

Ron is the only person who would even stand a chance against Hillary. Sorry, but Rand would get smoked.

Rand would have mainstream GOP support. Ron Paul would be rejected.

[TheTexan]

Hillary scares the shit out of me. That woman is pure evil. With that said I hope she wins. Texas may be more likely to secede if there is a Blue Team president during the collapse. But on the flip side of that coin, Hitlery is probably 40% less likely to let us secede peacefully than the Red Team nominee.

With any luck, a Hitlery presidency would be so over the top ridiculously tyrannical that maybe it would give this dying country a clean death. Or she might rule over the bloodiest decade this world has ever seen.

Oh well. /heil Hitlery

[supermario21]

If the economy is bad, Hillary won't run. The problem for the Dems is they have NO bench whatsoever. The reason they are pushing Hillary so much is because they know the economy will be shit and there are no good Dems to run.

[TheTexan]

If the economy is bad, Hillary won't run.

Passing up an opportunity to run for President is not in her character. She wants that power. Bad.

[pcosmar]

I predict that Lucifer will be the next world leader,, and that most will cheer.

:(

[green73]

I predict that Lucifer will be the next world leader,, and that most will cheer.

:(

Isn't that the case now?

[TheTexan]

Doesn't matter if this is true or not, this will be one of the many excuses why the GOP will not nominate Rand.

Rand 2016 is a happy fantasy, and if a side effect is that people get more involved in local & state politics, that's great. But that's all it is, a fantasy

To the person that -rep this as "defeatist"... incorrect. Local & state politics is how we win. Nullification. Secession.

Some people talk a big game about state's rights, but you don't get your rights back by begging for them. You get your rights back by taking them back. We can do that at the state level.

Accepting the fact that national politics is irreparably broken isn't "defeatist." It's an acknowledgement of reality that has to take place before we can make real progress.

[Anti Federalist]

The throne is rigged and broken. It doesnt matter who sits in it.

/thread

[Anti Federalist]

Have some plus rep to negate that.

Sad to get neg repped for speaking the truth.


To the person that -rep this as "defeatist"... incorrect. Local & state politics is how we win. Nullification. Secession.

Some people talk a big game about state's rights, but you don't get your rights back by begging for them. You get your rights back by taking them back. We can do that at the state level.

Accepting the fact that national politics is irreparably broken isn't "defeatist." It's an acknowledgement of reality that has to take place before we can make real progress.

[James Madison]

Rand would have mainstream GOP support. Ron Paul would be rejected.

The GOP is dying faster than it can replace its own. Don't kid yourself into thinking the 'Tea Party' is gonna save America when most of my generation sees them as a laughing stock. Ron inspires people like no one I've seen before; that's the only way you're gonna take down Hillary.

[oyarde]

At this point, I actually believe it may all just take itself down and as badly as that will hurt many , it may be the only way.

[GunnyFreedom]

If the nominate Rubio at least we'll know for certain that they desperately want to lose again.

[osan]

To the person that -rep this as "defeatist"... incorrect. Local & state politics is how we win. Nullification. Secession.

And possibly having to air out certain elements of the "Them" crowd.


Some people talk a big game about state's rights, but you don't get your rights back by begging for them. You get your rights back by taking them back. We can do that at the state level.

At the INDIVIDUAL level. Be very careful about your use of terms such as "state" because they have been mangled and laced with all manner of tacit but powerful semantic poisons that people ingest without so much as the first concern, most often destroying the ability to think with clarity, precision, and correctness.


Accepting the fact that national politics is irreparably broken isn't "defeatist." It's an acknowledgement of reality that has to take place before we can make real progress.

Agreed. A great error so many people make is to confuse the realist for the pessimist or cynic. In politics that can be fatal. Literally. Just ask the people of Germany ca. 1938.

[jkob]

Hilary is a strong candidate but I'm not 100% sure she'll run and her %s wil start going down once the scrutiny from the campaign starts.

[GunnyFreedom]

Hilary is a strong candidate but I'm not 100% sure she'll run and her %s wil start going down once the scrutiny from the campaign starts.

Shillary is not invulnerable. She will be ruthlessly mocked for getting the vapors whenever it gets stressful, she will turn around and blame the "GOP's War On Women (tm)" which will torpedo her own campaign, as all but the most dedicated holier-than-thou elite leftist are already getting sick and tired of their BS.

ETA - Me, however, I'll just accuse her of getting fall-down-drunk whenever the tension dials up, and then ask if she is going to crack her head open on the toilet again the next time the hotline rings.

[paulbot24]

The final question about whether Jindal should run exposes the true nature of these manipulative tools masquerading as polls. How does the media decide for the people who is "electable"? Could it be that they hit you early and hammer you repeatedly with meaningless polls showing whatever strong or weak possibilities one might have until people just seem to "know" the who, how, and why Candidate A could/should beat Candidate B.? People eat it up like they're getting hot insider tips or finding out whether "the fix is in" so they know who's going to win and therefore who to vote for. If you can get enough people to start saying nobody could possibly beat Hillary in 2016, well, they're right.

[GunnyFreedom]

The final question about whether Jindal should run exposes the true nature of these manipulative tools masquerading as polls. How does the media decide for the people who is "electable"? Could it be that they hit you early and hammer you repeatedly with meaningless polls showing whatever strong or weak possibilities one might have until people just seem to "know" the who, how, and why Candidate A could/should beat Candidate B.? People eat it up like they're getting hot insider tips or finding out whether "the fix is in" so they know who's going to win and therefore who to vote for. If you can get enough people to start saying nobody could possibly beat Hillary in 2016, well, they're right.

which is why I keep saying a wet noodle in a paper skirt could beat Shillary in a landslide. She's weak and unpredictable, and tends to faint when the going gets tough.

ETA - Oh yeah, and she asked Senator Rand Paul "What does it matter??" that the folks in Benghazi died while she sat on her throne and let it happen.

[Okie RP fan]

Oh, shocking. Most of us have been saying this... Hillary would be the absolute final blow to the Constitution (assuming there is any shred left after Obama, continuing what Bush did...). Hillary is one of the top global-elite insiders and after electing and re-electing the first half-black president, Democrats and perhaps even some independents would be riled up to elect the first woman president.

This is also why I've been trying to say to cool it with the Rand '16 talk. Not only does he have a lot to prove to us in terms of liberty, but, we can do far more effective damage by focusing on state and federal house and senate seats where we can start combating with numbers opposed to running Rand for pres. which is already a long shot in itself.

[libertariantexas]

Until the GOP expands beyond (mostly white) moralizing social conservatives/evangelicals and those who (wrongly) believe Republicans are fiscal conservatives, run of the mill GOP candidates will continue to get smoked even by bad Democrats like Obama and Hillary.

They won't win if their main appeal is "we are anti-black, anti-Muslim, anti-Hispanic, anti-gay, anti-woman, anti-atheist, anti-drug, and anti-asian, but we love Jesus and (pointless) Wars!"

[compromise]

Even if Hillary beats Rand in a landslide, getting Rand the Republican nomination will be a major victory for the liberty movement and will one day lead to a constitutionalist becoming the President of the United States.


They won't win if their main appeal is "we are anti-black, anti-Muslim, anti-Hispanic, anti-gay, anti-woman, anti-atheist, anti-drug, and anti-asian, but we love Jesus and (pointless) Wars!"

I don't think the GOP can really be considered anti-black or anti-Asian. They are working to get rid of the anti-Hispanic label too. The "anti-woman" accusation that liberals use would apply to all pro-life libertarians too.

Also, it would be unwise for the GOP to ignore religious social conservatives, they do make up a large proportion of the US population.

[itshappening]

Oh, shocking. Most of us have been saying this... Hillary would be the absolute final blow to the Constitution (assuming there is any shred left after Obama, continuing what Bush did...). Hillary is one of the top global-elite insiders and after electing and re-electing the first half-black president, Democrats and perhaps even some independents would be riled up to elect the first woman president.

This is also why I've been trying to say to cool it with the Rand '16 talk. Not only does he have a lot to prove to us in terms of liberty, but, we can do far more effective damage by focusing on state and federal house and senate seats where we can start combating with numbers opposed to running Rand for pres. which is already a long shot in itself.

The states are still pussies. They're not going to combat anything from the Federal government. They have all accepted Obamacare and most of them are implementing it. There is no "fight" to be had or won, it's just complete acquiescence and that will continue. America is becoming a European like social democracy and the Supreme Court have ok'd the transformation.

Capturing the presidency is the only way to stop it and change course. The states will not do a damned thing. They're lapdogs and even if they do fight the courts are ruling against them and the press vilifying them as uncaring. So apart from armed resistance there's not much to be done locally.

[libertariantexas]

Even if Hillary beats Rand in a landslide, getting Rand the Republican nomination will be a major victory for the liberty movement and will one day lead to a constitutionalist becoming the President of the United States.


I think a libertarian/liberty minded person like Ron (or, to a lesser degree, Rand) can do better, because they don't subscribe to all of the "anti-" rhetoric you hear from "mainstream" Republicans.

[Okie RP fan]

The states are still pussies. They're not going to combat anything from the Federal government. They have all accepted Obamacare and most of them are implementing it. There is no "fight" to be had or won, it's just complete acquiescence and that will continue. America is becoming a European like social democracy and the Supreme Court have ok'd the transformation.

Capturing the presidency is the only way to stop it and change course. The states will not do a damned thing. They're lapdogs and even if they do fight the courts are ruling against them and the press vilifying them as uncaring. So apart from armed resistance there's not much to be done locally.

All in all you're right, and that's particularly because of the tax system and how states have become dependent on federal money.

However, take note that I said both state AND federal house and senate seats. You're not going to tell me that getting more Amash's, Bentivolio's or Massie's won't help?

[itshappening]

All in all you're right, and that's particularly because of the tax system and how states have become dependent on federal money.

However, take note that I said both state AND federal house and senate seats. You're not going to tell me that getting more Amash's, Bentivolio's or Massie's won't help?

The problem is we need hundreds of them to do it and that's impossible. We're never going to have a critical mass like the establishment so taking the presidency with one charismatic figure would probably be better.

[Okie RP fan]

The problem is we need hundreds of them to do it and that's impossible. We're never going to have a critical mass like the establishment so taking the presidency with one charismatic figure would probably be better.

I just don't know... If we had a couple million more followers around the country, I think we could focus on both, but, at this point, without re-engaging a lot of folks who have checked back out after the RNC, and folks who were soft support during the primaries, we can't do both. We'd be spread too thin, I think.

I really think we are around 1-2 million more country-wide liberty folks away from being able to do optimal damage to the establishment.

[Michigan11]

Hillary Clinton is the last thing I am worried about for 2016. The media is so ridiculous, and more so by the day, I'm not even sure if it's cause am more into watching politics since discovering Ron, or its reflective of the population so severely dumbed down now lol

[itshappening]

I just don't know... If we had a couple million more followers around the country, I think we could focus on both, but, at this point, without re-engaging a lot of folks who have checked back out after the RNC, and folks who were soft support during the primaries, we can't do both. We'd be spread too thin, I think.

I really think we are around 1-2 million more country-wide liberty folks away from being able to do optimal damage to the establishment.

There's no way we're going to get a critical mass though any time soon. Congress will change slowly, there are more people concerned about the budget and at least balancing it over 10 years.

Capturing the presidency would allow us to ram OUR agenda down THEIR throats with the bully pulpit and everything that powerful office brings so we can de-centralize and de-regulate from the top.

[Okie RP fan]

There's no way we're going to get a critical mass though any time soon. Congress will change slowly, there are more people concerned about the budget and at least balancing it over 10 years.

Capturing the presidency would allow us to ram OUR agenda down THEIR throats with the bully pulpit and everything that powerful office brings so we can de-centralize and de-regulate from the top.

Your take on this is something I'll ponder over a little more, but, I'm still not sold on Rand, and not sure if I will be.

[itshappening]

Your take on this is something I'll ponder over a little more, but, I'm still not sold on Rand, and not sure if I will be.

Rand is our most viable prospect for 2016 and the forseeable future for the Most Powerful Office in the Land. We must take it in order to change the country.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

If the nominate Rubio at least we'll know for certain that they desperately want to lose again.


Rubio's a win for the statist establishment. It's how they'll win again either way.

[Lucille]

#LadyMacDeath (http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/97168.html)2016!


“We came, we saw, he died,” babbled our notoriously bloodthirsty Secretary of State (http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/10/23/the-return-of-barbarism/) as news of Moammar Gadhafi’s grisly murder hit the headlines. Throwing her arms up in a gesture of mock-triumph, she averred – perhaps sarcastically – that she was “sure” her recent visit to Tripoli had something to do with the Libyan dictator’s death.

It’s hard to imagine a more inappropriate response to the revolting scene of Gadhafi’s last moments, as captured on video: beaten and bloody, propped up on the hood of a jeep and paraded through the streets of Sirte by screeching rampaging savages, these scenes elicited revulsion even from some pro-rebel Libyans. [...]

That a US Secretary of State hailed the horrific death of someone – anyone – the way Hillary Clinton did in the case of Gadhafi would have been almost inconceivable in an earlier era: say, the 1950s or 1960s. That today no one so much as blinks tells us everything we need to know about the age in which we are living: to call it barbaric is to slander barbarians.