How "unstoppable" is Hilary?

[CosmicDestiny]

Based on the fundamentals as we stand right now, 2016 should be a decent GOP year, or at least a complete toss-up.  The sitting President's approval ratings are mired in the low 40's, economic growth is rather anemic, and it's naturally difficult for a party to get more than 8 years in the White House at a time. 

Yet despite these fundamentals being where they are right now, Hilary is out-polling every GOP challenger, and often quite significantly.  If the economy improves or Obama's approval rating goes up, Hilary's position would only strengthen.  Of course, people probably were thinking similar things about McCain at this point in the 2008 cycle; however, McCain may very well have won without the September stock market crash. 

Clearly, if a cataclysmic event like a major war or economic collapse occurs, then Hilary would have a very hard time becoming President.  But right now, it seems hard for the climate to get much better for the GOP.  Obama's approval ratings are down, his health care law is fairly unpopular, and the economy isn't where it needs to be.  If the GOP can't lead Hilary with these conditions, it's hard to envision them doing it in 2016, when the economy will probably be somewhat better.   

If Hilary doesn't run, the GOP will probably win in 2016.  If Hilary does run, it will be extremely hard for the GOP to win in 2016.             

It seems like the best GOP strategy for winning in 2016 is praying HARD to God that Hilary doesn't run.  Past that, it seems like they should just focus on keeping however many seats in the Senate they won in 2014 by trying to save Senators Kirk, Johnson, Ayotte, and Toomey.  It seems like they should focus more of their resources on Congress at that point rather than trying to beat Hilary in what would likely be a fruitless attempt.

Who knows, in 2 1/2 years this might go into the ultimate "Fail Prediction" thread or something, but it just seems like this is Hilary's to lose. 

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Maybe 'middling' unstoppable? She's in a unique and generally good position, and the Republican bench appears rather weak. While she's very far from a sure thing, most of what could stop her are events completely beyond the Republicans' control. Meanwhile the Republicans have their own internal problem in the form of the Tea Party and their ilk, who can potentially cost the Republicans the general election in several different ways, but don't actually bring much to the table.

[King]

Very unstoppable for one big reason: she's popular with olds. The only reason McCain, Romney, and the Republican Party were event competitive these past two times and in the midterms out were distrust of Obama by seniors.  

While younger generations have generally swayed in the direction of the incumbent the past three decades, the current senior generation went from more Democratic than average in the 90s and 2000s to immediately more Republican in the Obama years.




We won't get into the reasons why seniors distrust Obama, but in the crosstabs for every poll out there, Hillary is solidly in the lead with 65+ demo. That's huge because people under 65 have completely tuned out the GOP and have no interest in coming back any time soon.

It would have a completely unforeseeable event to change this tide.  An act of God.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

She's Al Gore Part II if she runs.  We're (and by this I mean Democrats) just going to give it to her.  I do think she'll be an effective leader.  We might be years removed from her crusade for healthcare reform as First Lady, but I feel she's still progressive at heart. 

[King]

She's Al Gore Part II if she runs.  We're (and by this I mean Democrats) just going to give it to her.  I do think she'll be an effective leader.  We might be years removed from her crusade for healthcare reform as First Lady, but I feel she's still progressive at heart.  

The President is only as liberal/conservative as the Congress that sends her the legislation. Hillary would bring a strongly Democratic wave with her into Washington.

If you're progressive, you'd be better off with Hillary than a "true believer" who spends their entire term arguing with a Republican Congress.

[Mister Mets]

In the primary, she'll likely do well. She's in a better position than she was in 2008, and in 2008, she lost to a candidate who seemed to be built to beat her. Barack Obama was a Senator with an academic and activist background from that big state next to Iowa who represented a milestone as significant as first female President, and had been on the right side (as far as the party was concerned) of a major policy issue. And that was a close primary, even considering Obama's superior organization (a shortcoming Hillary is unlikely to allow in 2016).

There doesn't seem to be anyone with the combination of national stature, sheer political talent and demographic appeal to beat her in the primary. Elizabeth Warren comes closest (Progressive favorite from the big state next to New Hampshire, Represents similar milestone) but she doesn't seem interested. Her odds of winning the primary if she enters are pretty high (between 75-85 percent.)

The General Election's a different story. She's not as effective a politician as President Obama. While it's possible that a crackpot will win the Republican nomination by appealing to the party's lowest common denominator, whoever emerges from the crowded field is likely to demonstrate significant political talent. While Clinton polls well now, a big part of that is that voters aren't likely to pay attention to her views until the General Election.

[Badger]

For the Democratic nomination? It's hers if she wants it.

The general election? Too soon to tell. Ask me when the GOP nominee is clear.

[Potatoe]

For the Democratic nomination? It's hers if she wants it.

The general election? Too soon to tell. Ask me when the GOP nominee is clear.

The GOP's field is crap, I mean, pre Bridge gate Christie had a fairly good shot, but now he's been knocked out (Maybe), the GOP's new hope is Rand Paul, and if he rules out a run, Rick Perry, yeah, it's that bad.

[Badger]

For the Democratic nomination? It's hers if she wants it.

The general election? Too soon to tell. Ask me when the GOP nominee is clear.

The GOP's field is crap, I mean, pre Bridge gate Christie had a fairly good shot, but now he's been knocked out (Maybe), the GOP's new hope is Rand Paul, and if he rules out a run, Rick Perry, yeah, it's that bad.

Still too early. Christie might still recover from Bridgegate (though I'm not counting on it). More importantly is whether Jeb Bush gets in.

If not, Walker has a decent shot, but he's much more polarizing a candidate than I'd want for the general.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

I will say this about Hillary.  She needs young females to offset the losses the Democrats are going to see with young males vs. how Obama did.  From my experience in college, my fraternity, and now in the Navy... man, a lot of these young guys who went with Obama just do not like her one bit.  Not trying to be all Naso-esque about my analysis, but I feel like I've met a large enough sample size to make this determination.  

[Potatoe]

For the Democratic nomination? It's hers if she wants it.

The general election? Too soon to tell. Ask me when the GOP nominee is clear.

The GOP's field is crap, I mean, pre Bridge gate Christie had a fairly good shot, but now he's been knocked out (Maybe), the GOP's new hope is Rand Paul, and if he rules out a run, Rick Perry, yeah, it's that bad.

Still too early. Christie might still recover from Bridgegate (though I'm not counting on it). More importantly is whether Jeb Bush gets in.

If not, Walker has a decent shot, but he's much more polarizing a candidate than I'd want for the general.

Like I said before, Bush has a lot of meat, but considering his friendship with Bloomberg (That'll be a funny primary ad, get on that Ted Cruz), and the fact that he's a Bush sink him, as well as the fact that he hasn't been elected office for 8 years (10 in 2016)

[Badger]

For the Democratic nomination? It's hers if she wants it.

The general election? Too soon to tell. Ask me when the GOP nominee is clear.

The GOP's field is crap, I mean, pre Bridge gate Christie had a fairly good shot, but now he's been knocked out (Maybe), the GOP's new hope is Rand Paul, and if he rules out a run, Rick Perry, yeah, it's that bad.

Still too early. Christie might still recover from Bridgegate (though I'm not counting on it). More importantly is whether Jeb Bush gets in.

If not, Walker has a decent shot, but he's much more polarizing a candidate than I'd want for the general.

Like I said before, Bush has a lot of meat, but considering his friendship with Bloomberg (That'll be a funny primary ad, get on that Ted Cruz), and the fact that he's a Bush sink him, as well as the fact that he hasn't been elected office for 8 years (10 in 2016)

I'm old enough to remember that people said his father's (then considered) failed presidency only 8 years earlier would sink W for sure in 2000. Look what happened.

Jeb's time in the wilderness may actually help him with voters. It doesn't hurt him one iota with the establishment big donors, many of whom are just waiting for the word to start bundling checks.

[Heimdal]

Christie won't recover from Bridgegate

You mean the scandal that no one is paying attention to anymore?

But with regards to the topic of the discussion. I think Hillary is basically as unstoppable as she was in 2007.

[pbrower2a]

She's Al Gore Part II if she runs.  We're (and by this I mean Democrats) just going to give it to her.  I do think she'll be an effective leader.  We might be years removed from her crusade for healthcare reform as First Lady, but I feel she's still progressive at heart. 

One big difference: she will have the Obama campaign behind her. Expect a beat-the-cheat strategy that allows multiple ways of winning so that the election does not boil down to what results some governor wants. Such was the difference between a Gore loss and an Obama win. Gore should have gone for some other state (Nevada, New Hampshire, or Ohio) in addition to Florida to hedge his chances. 

[King]

Christie recovering from Bridgegate is a Catch-22. It increases his chances in the general but returns a pragmatic "liberal" that primary voters hate.

[Bull Moose Base]

If Hilary doesn't run, the GOP will probably win in 2016.  If Hilary does run, it will be extremely hard for the GOP to win in 2016.             

It seems like the best GOP strategy for winning in 2016 is praying HARD to God that Hilary doesn't run. 

Disagree. I don't think polls now give you a good measure of how strong Klobuchar or Warren would do. Both are currently widely unknown, especially Klobuchar. I would consider either the favorite against any of the Republicans getting speculation.

That said, I think Hillary is close to unstoppable for the nomination if she runs, and, as any Democratic nominee is likely to be, a favorite in the general.

[DINGO Joe]

Only one way to stop Hillary--Repeal the 22nd Amendment.

[IceSpear]

Christie won't recover from Bridgegate

You mean the scandal that no one is paying attention to anymore?

But with regards to the topic of the discussion. I think Hillary is basically as unstoppable as she was in 2007.

This has to be the laziest comparison ever. There's a big difference between polling in the 30s and the 60s/70s.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Only one way to stop Hillary--Repeal the 22nd Amendment.

It's  a reach to say that a Clinton is definitely going to win the 2016 election.

[Simfan34]

A lesser biblical prophet could not beat her. Someone like Moses, sure, he could win. But a Zechariah or a Habbakuk? I doubt it.

[Reaganfan]

She's Al Gore Part II if she runs.  We're (and by this I mean Democrats) just going to give it to her.  I do think she'll be an effective leader.  We might be years removed from her crusade for healthcare reform as First Lady, but I feel she's still progressive at heart. 

One big difference: she will have the Obama campaign behind her. Expect a beat-the-cheat strategy that allows multiple ways of winning so that the election does not boil down to what results some governor wants. Such was the difference between a Gore loss and an Obama win. Gore should have gone for some other state (Nevada, New Hampshire, or Ohio) in addition to Florida to hedge his chances. 

Gore tried hard for New Hampshire and Ohio. He began running ads in Ohio criticizing Bush's gun stance and the Gore campaign found out it hurt him among Ohio women voters.

[Matty]

Hllary is a shoe-in at this point. She will get votes by shallow voters who want to say "I voted for the first female president".

[Blue3]

She's not 100% likely or 99% likely, but she is greater than 50% likely. Likely to win the presidential election in 2016, that is.

[Potatoe]

Oh yeah, the Bush/Collins ticket is just so popular.

[Lincoln Republican]

Oh yeah, the Bush/Collins ticket is just so popular.


Well, I must say my good man, that I am absolutely flattered that you actually paid attention to that for the short time I had it in my signature, and that you still remember it.

Thank you.