Thread: Hillary Clinton, Hispanics and 2016

September 23, 2014, 10:00 am

Hillary Clinton, Hispanics and 2016


By Raoul Lowery Contreras, contributor

Blinded by star power manufactured in former President Bill Clinton's shadow, many Hispanics have declared for Hillary Clinton's nascent 2016 presidential campaign, proving that they wish to remain sheep buried in the ignorance they manifested in voting for President Obama.

Hispanics voted in huge numbers (70 percent) for Obama, who promised jobs, education and immigration reform; immigration reform would be done in his first 100 days. A grateful Obama gave Hispanics record high unemployment and underemployment and no improvement in education after he eliminated President George W. Bush's signature educational achievement of "No Child Left Behind," which measurably improved Hispanic test scores.

Most importantly, he did nothing about comprehensive immigration reform. He didn't even lobby for the aborted "DREAM Act" that would have legalized people brought here illegally as children. It failed because even though enough Republicans — three — voted for it to pass, five Democratic senators voted to kill it, with Obama's knowledge.

The highest percentage of Obama Hispanic votes came, as usual, from Puerto Ricans and Dominicans in the Northeast and new Floridian Puerto Ricans. That percentage lowered as the vote moved west into Texas and the Southwest, where Mexican-Americans gave a majority of their vote to Obama, but not 70 percent.In less than 20 months after voting for Obama, Hispanics have joined the rest of the country and dropped their overwhelming support by more than 20 points in the polls. Obama has suffered more support drop among Hispanics than from any other identifiable group in the country.

Will this drop in support manifest itself at the polls this November? Hispanic and Republican Govs. Susana Martinez in New Mexico and Brian Sandoval in Nevada will run away with their races for reelection, so breaking down their votes won't show much.

The Colorado governorship race and one suburban Denver congressional seat might be affected by Hispanic voting. California has two or three close seats that Hispanics might influence.

Florida's Gov. Rick Scott (R) is carrying a potential two-to-one romp among South Florida's Cuban-Americans into the voting booth that should torpedo formerly Republican governor-turned-independent-turned-Democrat Charlie Crist's chances into oblivion.

2014 voting Hispanics should have some impact but a lower than 2012 Hispanic turnout will not cast a Hispanic hue to election results this time like they might in 2016's presidential race.

Upwards of 10 million Hispanic voters might vote in 2016 and their effect could be considerable.

First, Hispanic voters in New York and New Jersey (Puerto Rican and Dominican) will have minimal effect because they are guaranteed Democratic voters in Democratic states. The same will be true of Salvadoran voters in Virginia, but that will be a swing state despite Salvadoran votes. Florida's Puerto Rican voters in and around Orlando and Tampa Bay could, if they turn out in huge numbers, affect Florida's vote like they did in 2008 and 2012.

Moving west to Texas, despite registration gains among Democrat Hispanics, Texas will remain solidly Republican and assuming the Republican isn't a raving lunatic on immigration and trade with Mexico, Mexican-Americans could reach 35 percent for the Republican, or more. Arizona will vote Republican, New Mexico might not and Colorado could swing either way depending on the campaign. California will remain Democratic because the Mexican-American voters will need another generation or two of education and business formations to follow the Italian pattern of emigrating out of the Democratic Party into the solid Republican mass they have become.

The 2016 campaign might very well be decided by Hispanic voters and that is why the plunge in Obama's popularity among Hispanics is important, almost as important as an episode in Iowa at Sen. Tom Harkin's (D) traditional steak fry. There, former Secretary of State, former U.S. Senator and wife of former President Bill Clinton totally messed up with her response to a party-crashing Hispanic "Dreamer" immigration activist's question.

When asked what Clinton thought of Obama's punting or kicking his promised immigration reforming executive order can down the road until after the Nov. 4 election, Clinton gave the most ridiculous answer possible and gives evidence to why Mexican-Americans can vote against her with gusto. As reported in The Hill: "'Well, I think we have to just keep working, can't stop ever working,' Clinton said, and added, when pressed, 'You know, I think we have to elect more Democrats.'"

Add one more gaffe to the Hillary Clinton repertoire that so far is highlighted when she claimed that she and Bill left the White House (in 2001) broke, with a daughter in an expensive college and no home of their own.

Certainly, American Hispanic families will shed a tear for the millionaire Clintons and how "broke" they were in 2001 when Hispanics family income was $42,899 and has dropped since while the Clintons have brought in over $100 million dollars for the hard work of speaking into microphones.

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/218572-hillary-clinton-hispanics-and-2016

Even Libs Say No to Hillary in 2016

Chuck Norris | Sep 23, 2014



Last week, Hillary Clinton returned to Iowa for the first time since her 2008 presidential campaign loss, saying, "I'm back." She continued: "It's true. I've been thinking about it," referring to another run in 2016. But the truth is that even many of her esteemed liberal cronies think it's a bad idea.
I know that billionaire buddies such as Wal-Mart heiress Alice Walton, philanthropist Jon Stryker and progressive globalist George Soros were among 32 other wealthy elites who helped the former first lady raise over $4 million last year for the "Ready for Hillary" super PAC. However, outside of her super-rich comrades -- who have clear self-invested interests in resurrecting and ensuring a Clinton dynasty -- hosts of other liberals are petrified of the prospect of her becoming president.
Most expect us conservatives to oppose the 2016 presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton, but listen to the liberals themselves. They've already done our bidding.
Let me give you 10 -- among many other -- liberal cases against Clinton, in their own words, including one from Clinton herself.
10) "It's possible, even likely, that by 2016 the electorate will be restive, and ready for more change than a pillar of the Obama administration could provide. ... Progressives might think it's time to run a national campaign from the left, particularly on issues of national security. And it might indeed be time for a challenge to the bipartisan national security consensus that's hardened since 9/11, as exemplified by the centrist-liberal crowd that feted Clinton at the Saban forum. It would be hard for that campaign to be Hillary Clinton's. ... I do think people have valid reservations about the nepotism and inbreeding of our political elite. ... Like it or not, Clinton is inextricably tied to Obama's presidency. If he stumbles ... her candidacy will be wounded if not doomed." -- Joan Walsh, former editor-in-chief of Salon.com and presently an MSNBC and CNN political analyst, writing for Salon.com
9) "You can't be the candidate that shakes down more money on Wall Street than anybody since, I don't know, Woodrow Wilson, and be the populist. You can't be the one to say we're going to focus on rebuilding America if you voted to go to the Iraq War. There were 30-some Democrats who voted against that. ... Are we going to choose more leadership that is going to roll over and get scratched on the belly by corporations like a fat dog?" -- Brian Schweitzer, former Democratic governor of Montana (2005-13), to Time magazine
8) "(Clinton) cannot simply ignore the controversies and wage an energetic defense, a full embrace of America's international record at a time when (Barack) Obama is scoring the lowest poll numbers of his presidency on that issue. Obama's foreign policy looks like a key vulnerability for Democrats in the next presidential election. ... Clinton did not get everything right. Her failure to list Nigeria's Boko Haram as a terrorist organization, for example, was a mistake. And to the extent that she did play a role in Obama's foreign policy, she cannot completely disassociate herself from his failures." -- world affairs columnist Frida Ghitis, writing for CNN
7) "The first real hand-hold that the president had in climbing out of single digits in the Democratic primaries in 2008 is that he had condemned the Iraq War and Hillary Clinton had voted for it. It was the first real difference between the president, and most of the rest of the field. For me, I could be wrong, but I still think a vote for that war still should be a deal-breaker in Democratic primaries. Some mistakes you can't walk back." -- Charles Pierce, lead political blogger for Esquire
6) "We cannot have the party go back to the center. And we can't have Rand Paul talking about Ferguson and race and not Hillary Clinton, when she is the senator from the state where the (Eric Garner) chokehold case was. ... This is now a national, central issue, and anyone running for president needs to come up with a formula, or in my opinion, they forfeit their right to be taken seriously. ... I'm amazed that we are not hearing from leading candidates -- Chris Christie or Jeb Bush or Hillary Clinton." -- Al Sharpton, civil rights activist
5) "Many liberal and progressive activists don't trust Clinton because they think she sides with big banks and big money instead of the middle class and they're wary of her on national security. ... Possibly the biggest concern among liberals is Clinton's coziness with Wall Street, their big bogeyman. Since leaving the State Department in 2013, she has spoken at events sponsored by Wall Street giants like Fidelity, Goldman Sachs and Ameriprise Financial, and during her Senate runs and 2008 presidential run, Clinton defended lobbyists." -- "Why many liberals don't trust Hillary Clinton," by Dan Merica for CNN
4) "I don't think she has been aggressive on the banks. When I think of Hillary Clinton, I actually think she is in bed with some of the banks and Wall Street is her ally." -- Nelini Stamp, a progressive political organizer from New York
3) "If there was an actual, authentic 'I am going to listen to you about your issues' from Clinton, instead of kind of pounding the drum of inevitability and stampeding over the left on her way to assumed victory, that would be effective. ... You wonder if it is a pivot or whether she is saying what the moment demands." -- Sally Kohn, a progressive activist and CNN contributor
2) "(Clinton) basically seems to be taking positions that are very similar to the vision of America's role in the world that (in 2008) Democrats rejected." -- Michael Cohen, a fellow at The Century Foundation and a former speechwriter for several Democratic politicians
1) "I have to admit that a good deal of what my husband and I have learned (about Islam) has come from my daughter. (As) some of you who are our friends know, she took a course last year in Islamic history." -- Hillary Clinton, addressing members of the American Muslim Council at the first White House celebration of Eid al-Fitr, on Feb. 20, 1996
Enough said.

http://townhall.com/columnists/chuck...4935/page/full