Well, the day Republicans have been dreading for years has finally arrived as Hillary Clinton has officially announced that she’s running for president. Like the Ted Cruz and Rand Paul announcements, this news should come as a shock to almost nobody.
Republicans tried their best for the past 2+ years to do just about everything they could to dissuade her from running, but their efforts were always going to be futile because she’s simply not afraid of them. Heck, she’s the only reason why they pretend to care about Benghazi.
It’s amazing, Republicans have put more effort into investigating four American deaths in Benghazi than they did figuring out why nearly 4,500 Americans died in Iraq in a war based on blatant lies by the Bush administration. George W. Bush and his administration not only fabricated “evidence,” they’ve admitted to war crimes – but Republicans want to hold Hillary Clinton “accountable” for one attack on an embassy?
Oh, and by the way, during the Bush administration we saw thirteen attacks on our embassies with 60 people dying as a result. But yes, by all means, let’s spend well over two years investigating an attack that’s already been investigated numerous times. Not that I’m trying to say that the loss of life that night in Benghazi wasn’t tragic, I’m just trying to put the hypocrisy of the Republican “outrage” over one attack into perspective considering what we saw during Bush’s eight years and how little Republicans seemed to care about any of it.
But just how terrified are Republicans of Hillary Clinton? Well, terrified enough to have basically been campaigning against her for nearly three years – something I’ve rarely seen in politics. The truth is, no matter what clown ultimately emerges from the circus that’s going to be the GOP presidential primary, she’s going to absolutely crush them. She’s already ahead of every potential Republican candidate in most polls and she hasn’t even been trying.
Meanwhile, most of these Republicans who are eventually going to run in 2016 have essentially been campaigning since 2012.
However, I know it’s not just Republicans who are saddened by today’s announcement, because I’m well aware of the fact that not everyone on the left is exactly thrilled with Hillary Clinton.
Let me address those people for a moment.
First, a president is only as “liberal” as the Congress we give them. It doesn’t matter if the president is Barack Obama, Elizabeth Warren or Hillary Clinton, they can’t do much if Republicans block anything and everything “liberal” that they want to accomplish. This is the main issue I’ve had with those who’ve whined that President Obama has “disappointed them.” If liberals had shown up in 2010 like they did in 2006 and 2008, this president would have had a Congress capable of pushing a more liberal agenda and he could have gotten more done – but they didn’t. They let Republicans take back control in Congress, then bitched and complained because President Obama suddenly wasn’t the “liberal warrior” they hoped he would be. When the truth is, liberal apathy in the face of tea party energy in 2010 is what kept President Obama from accomplishing a lot of what he could have if we had given him a Congress that would have worked with him.
For those who want Elizabeth Warren to run, it’s time you faced reality – she’s not going to run. And to you Bernie Sanders people, please stop; I love Bernie, but he’s not someone who’s ever going to be president.
The truth is, 2016 is one of the most important presidential elections in many of our lifetimes. There’s simply too much at stake in the face of the complete radicalization of the Republican party for liberals to throw a hissy fit because Hillary might not be everything they wanted.
2016 really breaks down into two choices:
- Do you want Hillary Clinton, someone who supports marriage equality; improving the Affordable Care Act; raising the minimum wage; equal pay for women; abortion rights; the separation of church and state; and immigration reform but might not be the perfect “liberal candidate” in all areas (though if we give her a Congress controlled by Democrats they can make her more liberal) – or –
- Do you want a Republican who literally opposes everything I just listed above, and will do just about everything within their power to undo any progress we’ve made these last six years, likely returning us to Bush-era economics and foreign policies.
Oh, then there’s always that tiny issue of potentially four Supreme Court Justices retiring within the next 2-10 years. Do some of these overly blinded by unrealistic idealism liberals really dislike Hillary so much that they’d rather someone like Jeb Bush or Ted Cruz be the president to potentially appoint four justices to the highest court in our land?
The only chance Republicans have is if liberals throw a giant temper tantrum because Hillary isn’t the end all be all of liberalism. The fact is, if we show up to vote in 2016, supporting the Democratic candidate for president – Republicans can’t win. The only way they can is if we allow apathy to dominate another election cycle, giving Republicans even more power. Just how many more times do we have to allow that to happen, while complaining about how we want a more “progressive nation,” before we realize that we are the ones preventing it from happening?
As long as liberals show up in 2016 to vote, Hillary’s official announcement that she’s running for president is the moment Republicans lost the 2016 election – because the only way Republicans win is if we let them.
And I cannot stress enough how important it is that we prevent that from happening.
Latest posts by Allen Clifton (see all)
- This is a Major Reason Why Republicans Often Deny Truth, Facts, and Reality - November 16, 2017
- Kellyanne Conway Melts Down After Fox & Friends Asks Her About Roy Moore (Video) - November 16, 2017
- It’s Important to Understand the Alt-Right’s Endgame - November 16, 2017