Rubio Is Rising. Clinton Is Moderately Progressive

Keep your eyes affixed.  The winners of Iowa (even third placers) will impact the amount of gas the Super PAC's will put into their candidates race car before they pull the plug and find a racer with a better chance at winning.

Did you know that when a caucus room is split evenly between two
prospective candidates for president, the stalemate is broken by a coin flip?

Apparently, Marco Rubio put  quite a bit of effort into his engine to gain the spot that he got from Iowa, and is expected to try a similar win from the back attack to achieve similar success in NH. If you find it somewhat odd for a candidate to fight like crazy just to be a second or third, you don't get how peculiar caucusing is. In fact, caucusing is almost exactly like Super PAC'ing, in which the biggest groups try to promote a viable candidate, but must bow out and shift their support elsewhere once their first choice loses viability, lest they risk wasting their support.

Be it several crowds of people caucusing in some high school gym, or several piles of money gathered together in the name of a Political Action Committee, this game is about finding financial gamblers to keep alive your political aspirations, and keeping that PAC behind your back for a long enough time to survive the attrition of the process.

Unless you are Donald Trump of course, who is engaging in mostly merchandise sales and speaking event ticket sales to fund his effort to be president, on top of being really rich to begin with.

Trump remains the main candidate that is NOT beholden to any financial engine as his means of getting his message across. Bernie Sanders is in a similar position with his, NO SUPER PAC, small donor effort to upset Hillary, but even he is raising and spending money in lock step with other candidates who feel that they must spend to survive early in this race.

Jeb Bush actually spent more money in Iowa ($2800 per vote that he won) than everyone combined, only to end up in....in (what place did Jeb end up in?).

Let me repeat that in case you missed it.

Did the only Libertarian quit because he
wanted to, or did his supporters pull the plug ?

Jeb Bush.....all by himself......spent more money in Iowa than all of the other GOP candidates combined, comparative to the votes that he received for his spending. Only Bush and Mike Huckabee exceeded $500 spent per vote received in the final outcome of Iowa, bringing into question the value of the increased levels of spending allowed under new campaign finance laws.

Granted, Iowa and New Hampshire might be worth the spend, as they are critical testing grounds for whether or not your campaign has the legs to endure 48 more states worth of caucusing.
As a result of the failures in Iowa, Rand Paul has suspended his
campaign-  as did Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee,
and democrat Martin O'Malley.

Did O'Malley know he was leaving before he agreed to that last debate that originally included him, but wasn't originally guaranteed to include Sanders?  Might O'Malley have tipped his hand to the DNC or Hillary?  Both Hillary and the DNC needed O'Malley just to schedule the debate, and to continue on with it had Sanders pulled a Trump and not shown up.

O'Malley just so happened to stay in the race long enough to split the democrat vote in Iowa, making it more possible for Hillary to squeak out a narrow victory there. Those 7 precincts that O'Malley garnered  in Iowa would have been up for grabs between Hillary and Bernie had O'Malley quit prior to Iowa, which could have made the outcome and the narrative of Iowa drastically different.

Why Is Iowa So Full Of It?

Iowa is nearly as littered with right wing fundamentalism as it is countered with far left leaning liberals (I said Iowa was full of it).  Although the evangelicals clearly dominate the population, Iowa's last 3 selections from the GOP have yet to survive the primary season to become the nominee.

Does that mean Iowa doesn't really know what they are talking about?

Oh, contrare.

What happens in Iowa is what we are talking about now, and in many ways will dictate what we talk about in the days to come.  How candidates finish in NH will be contrasted against the success or failure of Iowa.  If you can't appeal to either of these polar opposite voting blocks, you probably don't have enough appeal to stay in the race.

Exiting NH, the GOP field is supposed to whittle down drastically.

Supposed to.

In a normal world, Trump was supposed to pay the cost for not having a real ground attack in Iowa, and for not really being an evangelical in a state that mostly selects evangelicals as its choice for president. As it turned out, Mr. 'No ground game' Trump, was only 4 points away from joining the list of previous republican winners in Iowa that would have included Pastor Pat Robertson, Pastor Mike Huckabee, ultra evangelical Senator Rick Santorum and Trump.

As it turned out, ultra evangelical Ted Cruz went all in (probably cheated) just to beat Trump by 4 points and Rubio by 5.

Rubio raced in from the rear and nearly rear ended Cruz and Trump.  He did so well in fact, that Rubio is now describing Iowa like that race car driver who gets interviewed during the middle of a race delay while seated several cars back, but clearly the driver in the fastest car.

Actually?  That describes Rubios position perfectly, but let's put that into perspective some.

Rubio and Cruz finished exactly as the polls said they would.  Well, Cruz actually fell to second place in the polls during the closing weeks of Iowa, and engineered his own last minute ground attack to inspire his evangelical base in Iowa to help him do what he, nor Rubio, will likely do in NH.

 In other words, they both must celebrate and bloviate Iowa's success just to endure NH.  If NH becomes the slaughtering house evangelical candidates expect it to be (many long shot candidates don't even bother going to NH), Iowa will be the memory and the rhetoric that they hold unto as they press a gauze on their wounds and press on to Nevada or South Carolina- two upcoming states with polar opposite electorates much like Iowa and NH.

Was this "Official Public Record" stating the caucus habits
of Iowans and their neighbors a slimy approach to politics?
It turns out to be a ruse by Cruz to stimulate turnout.

Ben Carson was one of those evangelical's that did not head straight to NH, but went home to Florida for some rest and relaxation, and to plan for a March 15 primary victory in Florida instead of heading straight to an unfriendly state right after an untimely, possibly even unfair defeat.

According to both the Carson and the Trump campaigns (Carson's wife heard this happening herself), the Cruz campaign team shared and tweeted the heading home to Florida news (via a CNN report) about Carson in the middle of the caucus, apparently to scare Carson supporters into thinking that Dr. Carson was posturing for an exit, and Cruz was the next evangelical in line for those votes.

Cruz's team doesn't really deny sharing Carson's CNN divulged itinerary, but denies doing it as a statement about Carson's future candidacy. Although the mere mentioning of it during caucus voting feels shady, and sends some red flags as to how desperate Cruz was to live up to his Iowa expectations. The fake voter violation piece from the Cruz campaign team creates even more integrity concerns than the misinformation does.


Trump has tweeted the Iowa results as "illegal" and "stolen" by the Cruz team, calling for a new election. While many people feel that this is just more Trump spin to help rhetorically nullify the Cruz victory and the Trump defeat (Cruz call it a Trumpertrantrum), the Carson team is the team impacted most, and they are verifying the attack as having happened as well.

In the grand scheme of things, this is the season of expectations and of assessing the ability of each individual candidate to live up to, or exceed their individual expectations as a candidate relative to each state primary.  What evangelicals candidates achieve down South or in Iowa won't necessarily work in blue states. Meeting or exceeding the spot expected of you is about the extent of what it takes to win right now which basically means, keeping your donors intact.

Consequently, Rubio not only maintained his donors and his level of expectation, he equalled the production of the venerable Donald Trump.  What no one seems to accept is that this (Iowa, that is) speaks more positively about Trump than it does Rubio or even Cruz who mostly only did what Iowa has consistently done before.  Choose the evangelical.

If Hillary can simply minimize the impact of being in Bernies
backyard, she can win NH like Rubio did.  By default.
Hey Bernie....you barely beat me.  Hey Bernie.....Hey, Hey!!

Trump finished near the top, but was NEVER expected to really get people to caucus for him.

Hillary might have a similar struggle in NH where Sanders holds a huge lead in the polls. But for reasons of low expectation purely, Hillary has an opportunity to dance the Rubio if she can just do a little better than we think she can. Her ground game in Iowa suggests that NH will be worth the watch.

On either side of the isle, the conversation comes down to headcount.  Too many heads in the GOP  might soon put all but Trump down for the count, since Trump's stump speech is the only one noticeably different than any other GOP candidate in the field; and different is working for him right now.

As for the Dem's?  The lack of a substantive lead has forced Hillary to beg for more debates so she can contrast her message against that of Bernie Sanders. On one level, she has moved to the left of Sander's (gun control), but mostly she's claiming that he's too far left to be of functional value to the party or the real world, reminding Bernie that those rich Americans are Americans too.

Sanders has countered with a claim that Clinton is doing too much of a progressive tap dance as it relates to her campaign rhetoric despite close relationships with Washington's big money machines. Neither of them really win the primary season having to track too far to the left if they then struggle to find their way back to being progressively moderate, or moderately progressive enough for a general election.

For now, most of us are fully confused about what either term really means anymore


Are WE truly ready to take on the powers that be and take over our nation once and for all as Sanders suggests we do? Or will we calm down and let the powers be, but pressure them to be a little more fair? And which of the remaining candidates (other than Trump and Sanders), will show the moxie to call out big money while also begging them to help fund their elections? 

Popcorn please.  This should get good.

Rand Paul, Hillary Clinton Take Right Road On Iraq

Who is to blame for ISIS?

Isis used to be an inspirational childhood hero.

Well, that requires a trip through time.  You see back in the day, a production group called Filmation was responsible for Isis.  At least they were responsible for The Secret of Isis, a popular Saturday children's show that starred Joanna Cameron as the Mighty Isis, Isis, Isis.

Isis was created to inspire little girls, and Shazam inspired young boys to be positive members of the community.  Time and limited special effects sent most childhood heroes into the realm of animation and into distant memories for me until some evil terror group decided to reignite the name and the memories.  With a problem so complex, we could use the Mighty Isis and Shazam to team up and save the day.  Sometimes complex problems actually required they combine the show's so they both could show up.

Shazam needed a haircut.

It seems very few republicans in Congress have the memory to recall Isis of old, or the path that lead to the ISIS pestering Iraq, Syria and American sensibility.  Filmation may have created the original Isis, but WE all created the recent terror group when we agreed to allow a war hawk party to remain in power and heal us from the anger of 9-11.

At the time, polls consistently favored military action against Hussein while recent polls will tell you that only a third of American's still admit to the angered opinion polls that fed the war hawks and lead US into Iraq in the first place.


Why Voting Matters?

WE had a choice with the re-election of Bush and Cheney but allowed a broken electoral college system and a few hanging chads in Florida to give US exactly what WE deserved.  Elections are still not sacred,  evidenced by the low turnouts,  widespread use of outdated voting methods and machines and voter suppression in all the states that still think they can.

Isis used to be an inspirational hero with mystic powers.  Now, ISIS is an inspirational terror group that gets most of its power from the general fear of US imperialism.  ISIS didn't exist before we invaded Iraq and got rid of Sadaam Hussein because the recruit worthy fear wasn;t nearly as strong as it is now.  WE created that fear when we decided to bomb the hills of Afghanistan chasing a Bin Laden who was long gone and tucked into hiding before even considered our bomb brigade.

The WMD's of Sadaam were a lie, and president Obama's attempt to leave a residual force was rejected by a nation of people more afraid of US than the known evil's they have endured forever.  In many ways, the terror of ISIS is par for the course in a nation that still remains accustomed to the iron fist of Hussein.  Any person that would dare to lead Iraq at this dangerous time is a matyr waiting to be assassinated.  In addition, their previous experience was most likely in leading a small village or city of people, not a nation of violent extreme's.

Republican presidential candidates are one by one tripping over the issue of ISIS and trying their best to blame someone or something other than themselves.  Hillary is the ONLY candidate who nailed this answer to the wall by declaring that SHE got it wrong when it comes to Iraq, eliminating the ability to cross examine her on an issue in which the facts strongly support her answer.

The facts strongly support the recent comment of Rand Paul too, who has squarely placed the decision to invade Iraq (which is what ultimately created ISIS) in the hands of the GOP whom he described as war hawks who won't stop and measure the impact of such choices.  This is truth that will not endear him to many of his own during this march towards whittling the growing field of republican presidential candidates.  Millions of Americans are openly and silently applauding Paul for the courage of these words, but few of this crowd will help him win a republican primary.

Eventually, some of these revisionist politicians will be held to account for their cloudy view of history.  The wrong answer on war- past present and future- will not disqualify you from running for president, but it could easily disqualify you from winning.  American's may not be clear about what exactly to do about ISIS, however, we are certain that more of the same is a highly suspect answer to the question.

There is something to be said for politicians who understand the value of change and have the ability and humility to admit past failures with a clear vision, instead of wearing a clearly wrong decision as a badge of stubborn pride.

Well done Rand Paul.  From a moral stance, you've done this nation proud. Too bad it won't garner you anything of political value.

Rubio Could Carry Republican Banner...if they trusted him enough.

If you're looking for the best spokesperson in the realm of politics, he just entered the race.

While listening closely to the Marco Rubio announced entrance into the presidential race, I couldn't help but notice one unmistakable truth.  Rubio is the best message deliverer in the game, and Barack Obama would already be considered the best president ever if he had had Rubio to deliver his message over the years of his presidency.

Like a slick player of 3 card monte,  Rubio can suck you into a game that you already know the outcome of and hustle you nonetheless.  If given the chance, his advanced gift of gab will make him a formidable opponent for anyone. For example, when the question of why young Rubio would be a better selection than more seasoned Hillary Clinton or even Jeb Bush for that matter, Rubio posed the question and turned the question into a campaign declaration that "Yesterday Is Over".

When he followed up his announcement with a couple of interviews, his ability to spin every question in his favor proved that he wasn't using a speech writing trick as he maintained his deft slight of hand. Whatever your cause might be, Marco Rubio could be the best person to deliver the message in your favor. Rubio wrestled every known hurdle or potential blind spot with a reasonable response that will work sufficiently while on the stump, and he seems ready for the challenge of running to be president.

Disregard the message of Marco (if you can) and Mr. Rubio appears like gold.  Take a moment to get past his dazzling image and delivery and you realize that Mr. Tomorrow's Child might not be the president to remind us that yesterday is truly over.  In fact, if Marco Rubio were elected president tomorrow, he would have to undo yesterday's mess since  today, president Obama just released Rubio's home of Cuba from the government sponsored terror list.  Yesterday is over, but apparently yesterday's 50 year old agenda on Cuba will be just fine for Rubio.

If that's not confusing enough, Rubio is running from his natural ability to win the Hispanic vote by joining yesterday's message of blocking immigration. Republicans didn't always offer a vote on immigration, but now they will consider a vote if they can fix the border first. Fix the border (which will NEVER happen) and then republicans will consider voting to resolve America's immigration problem?  Since this obstructionist posture forced the current president to make an executive action on immigration, president Rubio would likely re-write that action to resemble yesterday's policies towards immigration as well.  As of yet, Rubio nor any other republican has offered a reasonable solution for the millions of Hispanics already living in America because they believe the steady trickle of South American immigrants are a more pressing matter? Although the future should offer this voting block to Rubio and the republican party, republicans seem resigned to continually reject today's Hispanic voters due to their stronger fear of tomorrow's Hispanic voters.

 Would be president Rubio was among the group of republicans that signed their name to the "Open Letter To Iran" and he seems just as resigned against Iranian negotiations as he is against South American immigrants and the well being of the people from his family's Cuban homeland. When you are raised with Castro hatred, you can't quite rationalize the fact that America has never caused the Castro boys to miss a meal due to our sanctions- just those left behind friends and family of the Rubio's.

Rubio never said that he preferred the broken health insurance system of yesterday, but he seems none to please with the insurance system of today as he insists on being one of those people who wants to "REPEAL AND REPLACE" ObamaCare tomorrow, because modify and improve sounds too much like the offer that Obama already requested of congress.  ObamaCare could use some obvious fixes that have arisen with the new law- like allowing interstate purchasing to drive pricing down even further. Rubio offered up that suggestion, but seemed oblivious how this idea only improves the strength of OUR new healthcare law- it does nothing towards repealing it.  So long as Rubio needs to sell his plan to republicans that want someone to do something about all of the Change that Obama keeps Hoping to leave as his legacy, Rubio's message needs only to convince them. Some of the people who Rubio still thinks he'll need in his corner still need to hear someone carry the repeal and replace banner, and Rubio can sell a dead horse to a cowboy if you force him to.

Rubio dazzled his way on and off of the stage and never offered any nuanced idea for tomorrow, but reminded us that yesterday is over nonetheless.  He did prove his ability to deliver a message, but he still seems absent of a unique vision for America and of proper hydration (what's with the water dude?). Rubio will be challenged through several cases of water as he fights to win the republican primary which will toughen him up to give Hillary hell, or bruise him so bad that he will never rise to the level of his promise.

Is now too soon for Rubio?

Who knows if now is Rubio's time because Rubio is not clearly defined as a leader as much as he is a great spokesperson for the message of leadership. Rubio will easily avoid a growing flip flop label because he can flip and flop so well.  He won't have the Christian conviction of Ted Cruz or the Libertarian resistance of Rand Paul, but he could be convinced to marry these ideologies and the republican party as well if his party trusted (or knew) his personal views enough to let him be their poster child.   They don't- so he won't.

But he could.    

Cruz Ignores History! Becomes First To Declare Himself For President

Ted Cruz is in.

He was forced to launch the Cruz missile because Scott Walker is winning the Tea Party skirmish while Jeb Bush is waging war for conservative donors, threatening to wipe out the competition before they ever get started.  Once again, the Bush family is engaging in a half-assed war as Jeb Bush soaks up republican money while simultaneously keeping his feet away from the deep waters that come with being a declared candidate.

As with any good military tactician, Bush is doing his best effort to control the republican roads that lead to the presidency, and his potential opponents are reacting.  Bush is dominating the money road because these roads get attacked on all fronts when the Libertarian and Tea Party segmentation of conservative ideology affirm their relevance during election seasons.  As a result of this segmentation, the Paul family (Ron and Rand) get to unofficially launch the republican race to the presidency by voicing Libertarian dissent and then fading into the darkness once republican in-fighters realize that their Civil war is too bloody to put forth a worthy general election candidate. Especially one named Paul.

Cruz is a dangerous weapon  because he will turn the tide of the republican unCivil war by placing the focus on him. What is becoming sadly apparent is that this Cruz is not one of the modern guided missiles that could make republican opponents surrender.  Although most recognize how widespread the appeal for Cruz is, it is also easy to recognize where the border of his appeal ends.

No! That was not a stab at Cruz's Canadian heritage. We will save that line of birtherism for Donald Trump to do since his own run for the presidency (teehee) might require he use it.  Cruz is as worthy to run for this dysfunctional post as anyone in this dysfunctional nation. As a politician, Cruz makes you feel that he's been waiting for this moment every since delivering that winning campaign speech in primary school. For hours- and years now, Cruz has been staring into the mirror, practicing for the day that he would deliver that winning speech to America.  When you watch him today, it's clear that he has spit shined and polished his message so well that he rubbed all humanity out of the delivery.

Convincing Believers

Does that T-shirt say "WE Want Rand"?

Those inclined to already believe in Cruz's message seem unaware that his hair and his delivery are way to smooth and way too deliberate to sincerely impact crowds that don't already believe. Cruz is preaching to a small group within the republican choir that came to hear him preach.  The other choir members, and most parishioners, are now realizing that they don't really care for the message since they lean Libertarian or don't lean much at all.  They all appreciate the passion of his delivery- which is what makes him the dangerous weapon he represents to fellow republicans- but this crop of conservative candidates don't need their strongest voice to be their least electable candidate--again.

Cruz jumped in to seize this chance to elevate himself above his least electable image by becoming the only one in the race right now. Jumping feet first into the deep waters will allow Cruz to carry the party flag and influence the republican brand.  Chris Christie seems incapable of clearing his traffic jam and getting back on the road to the Hillaryesque coronation that he was receiving prior to BridgeGate. Consequently, Scott Walker and Jeb Bush are the only remaining conservative candidates with general election appeal, and even Walker is proving himself way too appealing to the same passionate Tea drinkers that Cruz hopes to steal away with his announced candidacy. Walker is not as contrived as Cruz, but even Walker won't be electable in a general election if his union busting behaviors mobilize the unions against him. America's unions are clearly declining, but they're not dead yet.

As much as WE pray that the republican party will return to the age of reason and stop disrupting the direction of the party and of American politics in an irreparable way, the reality is that a leader of the republican party must rise up and carry the party message to the public at large instead of constantly convincing those who already believe.  Dismantling the republican party is actually the beginning stages of unraveling the two-party system that limits the voice of too many. Stephen A. Smith was right about the marginalization caused by the two-party system, however, does Smith also believe that having all blacks vote republican for one election will make republicans adjust their recent behaviors towards minority voters? Nationwide voter restriction measures suggests that republicans expect it will take more than Stephen A. Smith and other party faithfuls to win back the white house.

It's The  Stupid Two Party System, Stupid. 

Breaking the two-party system will demand the sacrifice of  upshoot alternative parties who must be willing to lose elections for the sake of party relevancy.  The Tea Party is holding on to relevance, but their Libertarian offspring is on a rapid rise.  Cruz or Walker might get their turn to elevate the Tea Party's role in the republican party, but I doubt it since not enough of America seems ready to lean to these extremes when it comes to selecting a president.  One day they might, but that day hasn't arrived, so Jeb Bush, or some regular dude like him will eventually be asked to win enough regular voters to give republicans a chance to get back into the white house.  Unless this is the election when Rand Paul runs as a Libertarian and Walker or Cruz run under the Tea Party banner, the two-party system continues functionally intact- which will likely mean a democrat in the white house and a republican controlled congress for years to come.

The Sacrifice of Change

Republicans are doing something noble for America even if they didn't originally plan it that way. Liberal leaning Progressives will be forced to follow suit eventually by creating party alternatives that will break the back of gerrymandering. What that requires is candidates and political ideologies that centrist-conservative voters will vote for. Although several Progressive parties have sprouted from democrat roots, democrats seem unwilling to take the pioneer path that the republicans are taking .  When it comes to presidential elections, democrats remain fully afraid of the futility of segmenting their vote and are resisting party alternatives for now.  Right or wrong, coronations remain the method of operation for democrats who will have several years before they must find a centrist progressive to carry the democrat banner. But that day seems inevitable.

Jeb Bush fills this role and is the most reasonable answer to the executive branch challenge for republicans, but his party seems uninterested.  Early feedback has Jeb securely controlling the inside elements of his party(money), yet he's unfamiliar to republicans who didn't follow his political career, and unfamiliar to those mythical independents who vote predictably despite shunning the two party labels. Jeb is also suffering from the strong familiarity that average Americans have of his brother and father.  As a result, he will need every bit of that financial support he's building to convince his own party to carefully consider the electability  of the candidate that they will soon ask America to choose from. By those standards, Bush is it.

Cruz is ignoring that electability issue while also ignoring America's disdain for Tea Party extremism. Most importantly though, Cruz seems to be ignoring the fact that timing your announcement to be a US president is vital to your prospects because getting to know the public while avoiding unnecessary exposure is a tricky balancing act.  The longer you are out there, the potential for bad stuff looms heavily, which is why the first person to announce almost never wins the race. Smart political operatives play this card game masterfully while cardboard stiff politicians easily confuse their partisan appeal with global acceptance.  Ideological statues who can deliver tape recorded speeches, but make you afraid that robots are running America, should never be the first to announce themselves as a candidate for the president of the United States of America, if they really have plans on winning.

Oops. Too late!

Pursuit of the Presidency: Hillary's Journey Will Go Through Land Of Barack Or Billville

Thanks to a stellar record that extends itself way back to before the Clinton presidency. Hillary Clinton has worked to make  a name for her self.  Although we know her name and thought we knew the person reasonably well, the next 2 years will reveal Hillary Clinton in a manner that we have never quite seen.

HRC - (Hillary Rodham Clinton), is an esoteric rebranding of Hillary by those who move to do such things upon the eve of an election.  An Amazon excerpt on HRC reads as follows:

Order Me Now!

"The story of Hillary’s phoenix like rise is at the heart of HRC, a riveting political biography that journeys into the heart of “Hillaryland” to discover a brilliant strategist at work. Masterfully unfolded by Politico’s Jonathan Allen and The Hill’s Amie Parnes from more than two hundred top-access interviews with Hillary’s intimates, colleagues, supporters, and enemies, HRC portrays a seasoned operator who negotiates political and diplomatic worlds with equal savvy." (Amazon.com)

It is hard to clearly calculate how a Hillary presidency might play out.  She has an advantage that none of her male predecessors ever enjoyed.  Hillary has just about done it all.  Hillary is both an insider and an outsider at the same time.  She knows the ins and outs but should be far enough from it all to maintain sufficient deniability.

 Hillary had an inside view of the enormity of being the president, and was a Senator, and Secretary of State.  She tried and failed at universal healthcare before Barack got it done so there are a few key areas of attack that Hillary may be prone to, but not many of them involve Hillary directly.

Ask Rand Paul.  He understands the strengths of this political engine, but what he doesn't realize is that what was once an 18 wheel diesel has become a freight train.  Hillary is undoubtedly going to be aided by the masterful skill and the positive record of her husband Bill, but he is the caboose of this train.  Hillary no longer relies on him as she might have prior to her latest round of seasoning.  If  Monica Lewinsky is revived, Bill could become the bane of her existence if his philandering becomes central to her trust quotient that is an element of being presidential. At least that is what Paul is hoping for.

Paul is more than a conservative, he is a republican rebel (aka Libertarian) so he must offer up red meat for his rebel republican base, which the attack on Bill represents. What is unclear is whether or not he will shift gears  to hook the Hillary caboose to the Obama legacy.  If Barack Obama is still fighting for the merits of his signature healthcare law, Hillary will hug up closely to Bill and avoid Barack like the plague.  If ObamaCare is thriving and not simply surviving, Hillary will have the best of both worlds to choose from, but may track back to Barack in order to define herself independent of her famous husband.

The biggest danger for Hillary is showing up too soon for this party.  Hillary could almost benefit her hopes by pretending that she may not actually run instead of leaning her head into the fray.  Today's modern media frenzy, which has seen the next presidential election start way too soon, is only valuable to the media outlets who need ratings.  To the candidates themselves, less is almost always better.  The longer you stay out in the battle, the more bruised you become.

HRC, the above mentioned book, is the beginning of the Hillary bruising.  In it, Hillary is depicted as a strategic, wheeling and dealing pragmatist. This book offers an insider perspective on the path to become the most powerful woman alive, but it reveals the toes that get stepped on along the way.  HRC shows the Clinton that we already expected and the unknown Clinton with a capacity for retribution.  With the Benghazi to Bridgegate comparisons, it is likely that Hillary will gain more comparisons to her potential republican opponent.  

The reality with Hillary is that she will be the only potential candidate treated as the foregone conclusion.  Her pathway to the presidency is paved in platinum and trimmed in gold.  If she isn't ready to start the walk yet, then her opponents will simply have to fire their bombs at her platinum pathway.

Related Post:  

Pursuit of the Presidency: Rand Paul Declared Himself A Presidential Candidate, And Called Out The Opposition

Pursuit of the Presidency: "Uncle Sugar", Mike Huckabee, Rises To The Top Of GOP Race

 .

Pursuit of the Presidency: Rand Paul Becomes Candidate, Calls Out The Opposition

For many republican candidates that are shining their shoes for a power shift in November, destroying Obama and his Care feels like a winning message.  If you are in a state that happened to block the medicaid expansion and gerrymandered the vote in your favor, you are expecting big things from the House and bigger things from the Senate elections.

Winning the House is a foregone conclusion, but the only way republicans take over the Senate is the abject failure of ObamaCare and not just screams of pending doom. For many republicans, ObamaCare offers  enough of a winning opportunity to have already gone "all-in" against it.

Rand Paul can't get off so easy.  He and his congressional cohorts are currently in a more systematic war against the Obama political machine.  They not only need to render him a lame duck, they need to roast him and glaze him in orange sauce.  The problem with putting heat to his message is that it burns the line that connects Hillary back to Obama. Like most things Obama, republicans will continue the attack no matter how personally damaging it becomes.

As for Paul, in order to best prepare himself for the battle ahead, he has acknowledged which Clinton he will run against.  If he is fortunate enough to run against the OG of universal care herself,  he could easily build an effective narrative.  This Clinton was in the white house when she first had the healthcare dream, and became a Senator when the law got enacted, pushing hard for the mandates that republicans now abhor. A failed ObamaCare will be tied to this Clinton for sure.

If you haven't noticed, Paul is not posturing to take on this Clinton at all.  He is posturing to take on the Clinton that got Obama elected simply for the power of "splaining things".  Paul is perfectly clear about the challenge before him, and understands who he represents.  Paul represents a party that will push him forward even if the GOP will not, so he has to talk like a conservative but fight for the Libertarian..  The Libertarian will functionally dismantle government, leaving behind whatever they deem "necessary".  In other words, he is the voice of a radical movement within mainstream America.

What does the voice of the radical sound like when fighting for an electoral advantage?  Take a listen.

Rand Paul chasing after Bill (not Barack) in attack of Hillary.

If for any reason his words sound harsh, think of them in the context of his options.  If he could pull up a nasty pie chart about the Clinton economy he would have already done that.  Bill Clinton is not only good at explaining stuff, he has the pie charts during his presidency to give him street cred, even against democratic enemies.  The only real line of attack that Bill offers up as a result of his presidential legacy is that of Lewinsky.  Republicans otherwise look at him as the unfair advantage of the other side.

The angry white man who is rapidly watching his nation being wrestled from his grip and is fighting to conserve the last memories of the land his father promised him. He has decided that he might not even listen if the message is not from the mouth of one of his own.  No one has destroyed the legacy of Bill Clinton enough to keep him out of the ear of those voters who every politician is hoping to influence.

Rand Paul is a few undeniable things.  He is number two on the GOP, likely to run poll (10% favor Paul).  He is also the most likely to run of them all, evidenced by many recent behaviors. Paul's Bill bashing is just the most recent campaigning signal. More than anything, Rand Paul is the person most clear about Bill's ability to neutralize Obama's connection to Hillary; most clear about  making Obama unnecessary in regards to his role on the stump.

There really is no question how hard Bill will work to fulfill this journey. He will become the rock beneath Hillary's feet.  Paul has to chisel Mt. Bill down to a sizable rock or he, and all other republicans, won't be able to get close enough to Hillary to even make it a fair fight.  Whatever you are seeing right now from Paul is the only card he has to play.

Next Post:  Pursuit of the Presidency: Is Hillary Following In The Legacy of Bill or Barack?

Previous Post:  Uncle Sugar, Mike Huckabee Rises To The Top Of GOP Race

NSA Phone Records Debate Ignites Government Conspiracy Theories

BeforeItsNews.com

Personally I am sick of everyone referring to the government like someone other than our friends and family who work there.

Maybe we regular people need to let those who think the government is run by the Mafia, hash it out with the Illuminati theorist, who can have a winner take all war with the Free Masoners.  Once we finish discovering who is our government I will call my school friend Dennes and ask him who he pledged an allegiance to when he joined the FBI.  Or my ex-coworker who works for the CIA now.  I loaned her some lunch money a few times so I'm sure she will spill the beans.

The sad part of this NSA record keeping debate is that we already have a widespread belief out there that the Free Illuminafia (I like that) is running things.  The fact that no improper use of these records has happened seems to be the small print on this story.  What many people are not getting about these phone records is that they exist.  If we don't grab these records as a collective action of everyone's best interest, then they stay in the hands of the companies who collect them, and vulnerable to............... whatever.

I am starting to think that people who like to complain and are reticent to get in the middle of this government (you and me and our friends and families who vote and elect representatives to vote for us) thing, are also the same people who are quick to believe in the Free Illuminafia theories.

 It makes it easier to wash your hands of it all.