And I think there’s a very good chance none of them will get there.
I’m very glad you think it’s easy. That makes me happy. I hope most Republicans think it will be easy too.
Pretty likely, I think. I think all of the candidates on the stages recently are worse than McCain and Romney except for, possibly, Kasich. I think everyone else is worse – less charismatic, less intelligent, and less appealing, politically speaking.
But we’ll see.
Based on their performances so far? Very. If you disagree, why?
You keep saying that. Your sample size is one. Once she got down to Obama by an amount that was probably unrecoverable she did show the ability to work from behind. The end of that nomination campaign was a pretty gritty effort IMO. I could claim that means she’s shown a record of learning when things aren’t working and adapting. Since she’s experienced I could expect her adaptation to happen quicker next time. I’d be talking out of my ass because… sample size of one.
Can Clinton come back when she’s behind? Here’s what happened in New Hampshire in 2008:
Poll Date Obama Clinton Edwards Richardson Spread
RCP Average 01/05 - 01/07 38.3 30.0 18.3 5.7 Obama +8.3
Final Results 01/08 36.4 39.0 16.9 4.6 Clinton +2.6
Oh snap!
I already knew that. She cried. Amazing what she can accomplish when she shows a little bit of genuineness. I’m not sure that just losing her composure is going to be enough. Voters have already seen it.
If Clinton is to repeat her comeback, she needs to let down her guard permanently.
You also forget that the polls just could have been plain wrong.
Ah, the no true come back argument.
You haven’t even established that there was a comeback. Your numbers just show the polls being wrong.
No true comeback double down!
Oh come on. You already said that if Bernie gets ahead in the NH polls you don’t think she’ll be able to comeback. Admit it – you forgot she was behind in NH in '08 (it’s okay – I forgot too). So she has such a “comeback” under her belt already.
No true New Hampster puts jam on his pancakes.
Actually I hadn’t. Comes from reading “Game Change” recently.
And I stand by my prediction. Sanders is going to win NH, barring the entry of another candidate into the race.
BTW, Sanders continues to steadily gain in Iowa:
Hillary’s net rating on HuffPo continues to fall and is at -7. Meanwhile Biden continues to improve and is at +2.5. The latest Gallup poll has him at +7. There should be a Hillary Gallup soon which will be an interesting comparison point.
Biden needs to get rolling: Things continue to get worse for Hillary.
Biden is still undecided, according to reports, which tells me that he’s a) waiting to see where Clinton levels off, and b) waiting for the best moment to get a good bump.
Apropos of the DoJ/FBI investigation into classified info on Hillary’s private server, Clinton’s campaign spokesperson Jennifer Palmieri has sent out an email that contains this:
This appears to gloss over / ignore the stunningly obvious point that among would-be presidential candidates, only Hillary had a job that involved handling classified documents subject to laws governing national security.
This sort of transparently bogus spin bespeaks a level of desperation.
It’s even worse than that. Either Hillary, or someone in her inner cicle, apparently removed the “Classified” markings from e-mails. If true, this would be a felony. Hillary’s going to have to find someone to throw under the bus, or it’ll be her that ends up trying to dodge the wheels.
Aside: I normally don’t give much credience to the “Comment” section of articles, because about 99% of them are totally inane, but a few times now I’ve seen comments wondering whether Obama is actually orchestrating this to force Hillary out of the running, all the while smiling & acting like he’s above the fray.
Not to dispute this, but why would he? What possible dog would have in this hunt? :dubious: For Biden’s sake? Can’t be for revenge…
Why do you not think those are just part of the totally inane 99%?
According to an anonymous leak to Fox News, whereas officials who aren’t hiding their identities say the emails were not marked classified.
So this is only “apparent” to someone who believes Fox News citing anonymous officials over the reports of named officials.