Once again, Hillary Clinton disappointed last night. She lost the Nebraska caucus by double-digits and didn’t top 40% in the West Virginia primary. As many observers noted, eight years ago she won every West Virginia county. Last night, she lost every single one. It was probably the “coal miners out of work” gaffe that did it.

Now we’re seeing battleground state polls in the general election where Hillary is also not faring well. Pennsylvania, Florida, and Ohio are all close, and in Ohio Trump has a lead. In the national polling, her margin has been cut in half in the space of a month.

Most of that is because the rank-and-file Republicans are coming home and uniting behind Trump. It’s also possible Trump is getting a (related) post-nomination bounce. He hasn’t officially been nominated yet, but the perception is that Trump is victorious over his rivals. Voters like a winner.

And voters, for whatever reason, don’t seem to like Hillary. This is not a year that favors establishment politicians and Hillary is establishment to the core. The e-mail scandal is still around. It’s hard to see why the national party is so enthusiastic about nominating her. Bernie Sanders would be the much better candidate. In the meantime, to wrap up the nomination Hillary is going to have to move further to the left while still being unable to match Bernie on the real reason he’s popular: authenticity. But it looks like the party has decided on Hillary, so Hillary it is.

That means we’re probably headed for a closer national election than many predicted. Hillary will rail against “Dangerous Donald” while Trump will try to eviscerate “Crooked Hillary.” Danger, risk, versus crookedness. We’ll see how the voters decide this November.

20 Comments

  1. Pro-Hillary all the way

    Why is a republican getting to call Hillary Clinton weak on this website? I thought this was a forward thinking “politicsnNC” blog.

  2. cosmic Janitor

    I stand by my remarks, they are public record and cannot be refuted. If you are thrilled to support the Wall Street Establishment candidate – who promises more of the same: austerity for the people, corporate free trade agreements and more war for corporate profit – wit an ever escalating national debt, then you are supporting the correct candidate, DINO neo-con Hillary Clinton.
    Also, Arizona, New York, Connecticut – as well as the Iowa caucus and perhaps several other states, were all contested primaries that were awarded to Hillary Clinton anyway by the corporately owned, fawning news media. There is a good reason all the prominent republican neo-cons are beside themselves to put Billary in the WH. – they know she is a dependable establishment insider.

    • Earl

      Cosmic Janitor:

      You mistook my previous post as directed at you. It wasn’t. I meant it for John Wynne – who, in his two opening sentences, seemed to say that Clinton lost the Nebraska caucus two days ago, which is factually incorrect – she won the Nebraska primary a couple of days ago, but lost the Nebraska caucus a couple of months ago (see my original comment).

      I ignored your initial post as a boring rant filled with nothing but your opinion devoid of any factual support. Your replies to me are more of the same.

      You assert, somewhat overconfidently (to be mild), that you stand by your remarks, purportedly because they are public record and cannot be refuted.

      Technically, you may be correct on your first point – your remarks became public record as soon as you posted them. But that does not magically transform them into irrefutable fact or ground them in anything other than more of your own opinion.

      Your apparent unwillingness or inability to distinguish fact from opinion may make your second assertion seem true on the surface – your remarks “cannot be refuted,” as far as you’re concerned. However, there is a plenty of available objective evidence to refute your opinions. And you have provided none to support your own remarks. If I had endless amounts of time, cared more about your opinion, or thought you would listen to something other than your own voice, I would point you in the direction of those facts.

      • Cosmic Janitor

        Oops! posted my reply to you in the wrong order, so I am reposting here.

        Earl: “I ignored your initial post as a boring rant filled with nothing but your opinion devoid of any factual support. Your replies to me are more of the same.”

        Here you go Earl, start refuting ‘my opinion’ as you say – it’s only a google search away; or does that overly challenge your belief system.
        http://HillaryIsANeocon.com

      • Cosmic Janitor

        Earl,

        Further Reference Material:

        Neocon Kagan Endorses Hillary Clinton.
        Dick Cheney Heaps Praise on Hillary Clinton.
        Kissinger: Clinton “Effective” at State.
        Wall St. Republicans’ Dark Secret.
        Hillary Clinton and the Weaponization of the State Department.
        Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton’s State Department.
        The Left Ought to Worry About Hillary Clinton, Hawk and Militarist, in 2016.
        Hillary as Hawk.
        Hillary the Hawk.
        Hillary Clinton Pitched Iraq As “A Business Opportunity” For US Corporations.
        For Hillary Clinton and Boeing, a Beneficial Relationship.
        On the NSA, Hillary Clinton Is Either a Fool or a Liar.
        Harper’s Magazine urges readers to ‘Stop Hillary! Vote No’.
        Videos

        • Cosmic Janitor

          These urls have to be copied and pasted in your browser to research the material – sorry about that!

  3. cosmic Janitor

    I stand by my remarks, they are public record and cannot be refuted. If you are thrilled to support the Wall Street Establishment candidate – who promises more of the same: austerity for the people, corporate free trade agreements and plenty of war for corporate profit, then you are supporting the correct candidate in republican neo-con Hillary Clinton.
    Also, Arizona, New York, Connecticut and Iowa (and I believe several other states) were all contested primaries yet in each instances they were awarded to the media’s presumptive democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton – who is an ethically reprehensible politico who is unelectable.

  4. Earl

    You should get your facts straight.

    Last night, Clinton won the Nebraska primary by 6.5 points. Sanders won the Nebraska caucus – two months ago.

    The Nebraska primary is largely symbolic because the delegates were awarded based on the caucus in early March. With that caucus win, Sanders’ earned 15 delegates to Clinton’s 10 from that state.

    There were more than 75,000 total votes cast in the open Nebraska primary yesterday – three times the number of early March caucus votes. This undercuts the Sanders argument that he tends to win when an contest or when more voters participate.

    Clinton has won 26 contests; Sanders, 19.

    Clinton has 10 wins from states in which she earned 70 or more delegates – Georgia, Texas, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Illinois, Ohio, New York, Maryland, and Pennsylvania – many of which are swing states in the general election, with large, diverse Democratic electorates.

    By contrast, Sanders has won only one contest in which he earned over 70 delegates – the state of Washington (77) – with most of his wins in caucuses held in much smaller states with a predominantly white electorate – including New Hampshire, Colorado, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Vermont, Kansas, Nebraska, Maine, Idaho, Utah, Alaska, Wisconsin, Wyoming, Rhode Island, and Indiana.

    Clinton has won 12.5 million total votes – 3.1 million more than Sanders and 1.6 million more than Trump. Sanders has won the least vote total of the three remaining candidates – without taking any direct assault from Republicans and not much from Clinton. And Clinton has more than 300 pledged delegates than Sanders and more than 700 total delegates.

    Those are the facts. The media and pundits like yourself fail to mention them or at least mention them accurately. I’m sure there are good reasons for that.

    • Cosmic Janitor

      Earl: “I ignored your initial post as a boring rant filled with nothing but your opinion devoid of any factual support. Your replies to me are more of the same.”

      Here you go Earl, start refuting ‘my opinion’ as you say – it’s only a google search away;

      http://HillaryIsANeocon.com

      You may have to copy and paste the ‘url’, if it doesn’t highlight

  5. Cosmic Janitor

    A very prescient analysis John of just why lying Hillary Clinton is an unelectable candidate. Authenticity is absolutely correct and Hillary doesn’t have any whatsoever. Her public record proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that she is not only an Establishment corporate democrat owned by Wall Street, but she is furthermore the darling of the republican neo-con war Hawks – so much so that she brought into her State Department and gave prominent positions to two of the worst republican neo-cons there are: Robert Kagan and Victoria ‘the butcher’ Nuland. Dick Cheney is beside himself singing Hillary’s praises. Only complete idiots would vote such an evil into the Oval Office. Just like her husband Bill, who during his campaign stated he would never sign NAFTA into law – though he did so as his first official act as POTUS; so says Hillary about signing
    the traitorous TPP, TTIP and TISA free trade agreements, but you better believe she’ll sign them just as quickly as her pathetic excuse for a husband did, cause she is a liar. Lastly, nothing could be worse for this country then these worthless dynasty candidates who have one aim and one aim only: to continue business as usual for the war profiteering oligarchy. Thanks for an honest assessment John!

    • larry

      Worthless dynasty? You mean like the Bush family? And you believe of course Sanders or Trump are a more attractive alternative? ha ha ha ha

      • cosmic Janitor

        That’s exactly what I mean, absolutely no difference between the two family’s – as a matter of fact they are all the best of friends; Bush Senior has even called Bill Clinton the ‘son he never had’. We will see who has the last laugh, or last cry, when you realize you’ve been entirely misled and enabled a DINO neo-con to gain control the executive branch.

    • JC Honeycutt

      I think by referring to Bill Clinton as “the son he never had” (assuming he actually did so), Bush Senior means “the smart one”. As for Hillary being a “dynasty candidate”, you might want to check your dictionary: mine defines a dynasty as “a series of rulers from the same family” or “a sequence of rulers from the same family that retains power for several generations”. The last time I checked, two out of 43, separated by 16 years, did not constitute either a series or a dynasty. Perhaps you were thinking of that other notorious “dynasty”, Theodore and Franklin D. Roosevelt–that certainly was a disaster, if you live in Backwards Land (as I believe many Republicans currently do). Voting against someone because of their family tree is equally as stupid as voting in their favor for the same reason.

      • Norma Munn

        TO: JC Honeycutt; Well said! Especially the last sentence.

      • Cosmic Janitor

        You are so right JC, I meant ‘legacy’ but wrote ‘dynasty’ by mistake. Presumption is not a valid ‘fact’ in debate, your implication that I must be a ‘republican’ couldn’t be further from truth of the matter. I am a ‘progressive independent’, who unlike the die-hard Hillary fanatics, is well acquainted with who and what Hillary Clinton is and whom she does and will represent if in office; unfortunately you all choose to keep your blinders on, believing everything the US. corporately owned media tells you. Clinton has said during her campaign that she will set-up ‘no fly zones’, ‘safe zones’ [yet it is the US. that has unleashed and maintained the terrorists proxy armies in Syria] and put boots on the ground – a gross violation of International Law and the Geneva Protocols against aggressive military interventions and meddling in the affairs of a sovereign state – or are you unfamiliar with such concepts?

  6. Maurice Murray III

    The author of this post, a republican strategist and political analyst, is declaring that Bernie would be the better candidate. You’re a clever man, John Wynne, and cunning as well. However, we know Hillary’s roots in Alabama and southern firewall are beneficial in states like North Carolina, Florida, and Virginia, which are critical to the national victory.

  7. Jon

    Polling averages show Clinton up ahead nationally by 7 points.

    Also, for all of the swing states you mentioned, Trump has to get all of them in order to get the white house. So Trump is up in Ohio? It doesn’t matter. If Hillary wins Florida (and she will), it’s basically all over.

  8. Norma Munn

    In context: Hillary Clinton’s comments about coal jobs

    By Lauren Carroll on Tuesday, May 10th, 2016 at 12:01 p.m.
    Hillary Clinton, the Democratic presidential hopeful, speaks during a round table discussion with locals at the Williamson Health and Wellness Center in Williamson, W.V., May 2, 2016. (Ty Wright/The New York Times)
    Hillary Clinton, the Democratic presidential hopeful, speaks during a round table discussion with locals at the Williamson Health and Wellness Center in Williamson, W.V., May 2, 2016. (Ty Wright/The New York Times)

    Hillary Clinton met a tough crowd in West Virginia coal country recently.
    A gaffe from Hillary Clinton? Not for those who actually listened.
    Below is precisely what Clinton said about putting coal miners out of work.

    Source: Politifact, May 10. (She made the comment during a March 13 CNN Town Hall. Journalist Roland Martin asked why should poor white people vote for her.)
    “Look, we have serious economic problems in many parts of our country. And Roland is absolutely right. Instead of dividing people the way Donald Trump does, let’s reunite around policies that will bring jobs and opportunities to all these underserved poor communities.

    So for example, I’m the only candidate which has a policy about how to bring
    economic opportunity using clean renewable energy as the key into coal country. Because we’re going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business, right?

    And we’re going to make it clear that we don’t want to forget those people. Those people labored in those mines for generations, losing their health, often losing their lives to turn on our lights and power our factories.

    Now we’ve got to move away from coal and all the other fossil fuels, but I don’t want to move away from the people who did the best they could to produce the energy that we relied on.”

    As long as reports of anyone’s words and/or deeds are consistently characterized in disparaging terms — and especially over decades — the impression of many others will be negative. As for people turning to Trump, I can only say, his inconsistency on policy and lack of basic understanding of how the US government must handle its debt should be alarming to any thoughtful person, no matter what their political party may be.

  9. larry

    Dude…..keep telling yourself that claptrap. You continue your long streak of delusion.

Related Posts

GET UPDATES

Get the latest posts from PoliticsNC delivered right to your inbox!

You have Successfully Subscribed!