Oh boy. Where to begin? Just note that Matthews is clearing the deck, doing ideological battlespace preparations for Clinton, to inoculate her from charges of socialism, from charges that she's no different from Bernie Sanders, who honeymooned in the Soviet Union. Matthews, more of a Democrat Party operative with a journalist's byline than almost anyone in the corrupt leftist media complex, knows full well that he's got to whitewash Hillary's radicalism. This is a woman who's come out for every leftist development under the sun. She backed the Houston city ballot measure to allow grown men dressed as women to use restrooms with your pre-teen daughters. She's been trying to coopt the crypto-communist Black Lives Matter movement forever, and may still do so, with her formidable black support in the Southern states. Remember, the Clintons are Southern Democrats, and they'll milk the black vote, pretending to be "black" to keep that constituency down on the leftist plantation. Matthews knows they've got to come across, in the end, as centrist, and thus he mainstreams the left's stealth 20th-century socialism through the institutional Democrat Party machinery as American as apple pie. The Founders of this nation would be shocked at the transmogrification of our political regime into the collectivist dependency monstrosity it's become.
(I didn't even get to Matthews' lies about the Republican Party, who had more votes in Congress for civil rights legislation in the 1950s and 1960s than the Democrats ever did, to say nothing of the filibusters from white supremacists like Strom Thurmond and so forth. They're racist Dixiecrats, the lot of them. These people are rank, despicable partisan liars and crooks.)
Man, we're completely screwed if the American public falls for this again. Hillary wants to complete the Radical-in-Chief Barack Hussein's "fundamental transformation," and she's got the collective media to lie and sugar coat for her. It's so bad that even Orwell would be flabbergasted.
In any case, here's more form Alexis Simendinger, at RCP, "Tough Iowa Race Leaves Clinton Reassessing Sanders":
After winning the Iowa caucuses by a margin so slender that her underdog challenger appeared stronger as a result, Hillary Clinton is trying to figure out if Bernie Sanders remains a contender for weeks, or for months.Simendinger's quoting Hillary from the very same Chris Matthews interview seen above. Notice how it's all of a piece? Paint Hillary as the pragmatic one, the one who can get things done, when the facts are she can't get things done (hello Benghazi). She's a rank partisan operative who'll bend her political image to the goals of the ideological program. She wrote her senior thesis at Wellesley, entitled "There Is Only the Fight," on Saul Alinsky. She knows as well as anyone that you've got to play sneaky and underhanded to keep pushing the revolution from within, to keep marching through the institutions to achieve that fundamental change that Barack Hussein wasn't shy about proclaiming just days before election 2008.
New Hampshire could be the high point of Sanders’ presidential bid, considering the hefty lead he has racked up in Granite State polls, or it could put revolutionary fever on ice as the Democratic contest moves past the tiny, liberal and overwhelmingly white New England state to venture into more diverse, populous territory.
Clinton and the Vermont senator flew to New Hampshire, determined to press ahead to that state’s Feb. 9 contest, then to Nevada’s caucus Feb. 20 and the regionally important South Carolina primary Feb. 27.
“I have to really get out there, make my case, which I intend to do this week,” Clinton said Tuesday during an MSNBC interview. “I feel really good about my campaign in New Hampshire … We're not leaving anything on the ground. We're moving forward. And I think we'll do well.”
Sanders currently enjoys an 18-point lead over the former secretary of state in New Hampshire, where Clinton won in 2008 following her memorable burst of teary-eyed candor following a loss days earlier to Barack Obama and John Edwards in Iowa.
With expectations of a Sanders victory there, the two foes are mulling three challenges.
First, do they have the right messages for New Hampshire?
Clearly, Sanders’ rallying cries to think “big” and triumph over a rigged political system and an economy tilted to advantage the “billionaire class” drew young liberals, first-time participants, and the less affluent during the Iowa caucusing. The senator channels the angst of fed-up idealists and reflects the aspirations of struggling families. His message will not change in New Hampshire.
Clinton’s campaign pitch, on the other hand, could get retooled. Her message is often perceived to be about herself, more than about the electorate. And the former first lady is arguing she is steeped in policy, tough enough to trounce a GOP nominee, and seasoned on the world stage.
Her counter arguments to Sanders’ aspirations for free college tuition, a Medicare-for-all health system, and higher taxes on the wealthy are intended to be pragmatic and deliverable. Some Democrats pointed to the Iowa results to wonder if Clinton’s rationale for the presidency comes off as pale beige in a wild-paisley kind of race.
“I just want them to understand what I'm offering, what I believe we can do,” Clinton told MSNBC about New Hampshire voters. “You know, ideas that sound good on paper but can't create results for people are just that -- good ideas on paper. I have a track record of producing results.”
When New Hampshire Sen. Jean Shaheen was asked Tuesday if Clinton needed to alter her campaign message, the senator fell back on talking points about experience often used by the former secretary of state’s political advisers.
“This is a long campaign. People are just beginning to pay attention. And I think when those young people hear the differences between Hillary and her opponents, that she's going to come out on top,” Shaheen said.
Second, how are the two candidates playing the expectations game?
Campaigning in New Hampshire after her Iowa squeaker, Clinton lowered expectations for victory, while Sanders behaved as if he has the home-field advantage. Anything Clinton can do to readjust expectations may help ease the vapors among her Democratic base of supporters, as well as with voters in the contests that follow New Hampshire, and among the media (up to a point).
Having represented nearby New York, won the New Hampshire primary once and watched her husband declare himself the “comeback kid” there in 1992, Clinton is not exactly a stranger to the Granite State. But she’s begun to define it as Sanders’ turf...
People have really got to pay attention to how this all plays out through the spring. Remember Mother Jones' secret videos of Mitt Romney and the 47 percent? If the Republicans aren't ready to play hardball like that, to go toe-to-toe on down-and-dirty politics, they're going to lose again. Chris Matthews is devious. He's a devious mofo, and as Hillary warms up to his ideological subterfuge-signaling the video, she plays the moderate card to the hilt.
More from Simendinger at the link, in any event.
0 comments:
Post a Comment