Hillary Clinton is disliked and distrusted by a large number of Americans and not just Republicans. One should never forget that it was strictly Democrats that threw Hillary “under the bus” in 2008 and nominated an all but unknown Senator from Illinois to run for president This occurred at a time when Hillary would almost certainly have won the general election hands down had she been nominated. It is apparent that Democrats know Hillary and who she really is far better than do Republicans.
In 2016 we again see Hillary pursuing her lust to occupy the White House. However, without the votes of the special Democrat “Super Delegates”, Hillary is nowhere close to the 2,384 delegate votes required to become the Party’s nominee. Adding the vote shortage issue to the increasing public coverage of Hillary’s numerous documented scandals, begs the question, “Are the Democratic power brokers rethinking their position or was Hillary ever in their plans in the first place?”
It is very important to understand exactly who the Democrat “Super Delegates” are and who they really answer to.
Throughout its existence, the Democrat Party has always been the Party of a small group of elites, (“Party Bosses”) whose approach to governing is for them to direct everything from the top down. Their claims to the contrary notwithstanding, the individuals who run the Democrat Party, basically consider the voter as something of a necessary evil to be manipulated and controlled as determined by those “Party Bosses”. These “Party Bosses” consist primarily of Democrat governors, senators, congressmen, mayors and other officials of counties and large cities and large donors. These “Party Bosses” play a major role in the selection process of the “Super Delegates” with many of them holding such position, themselves.
The “Super Delegate” system exists for one reason and that is to keep control of the candidate selection process in the hands of the Bosses should the voters not select the candidate of their choice. In order to accomplish this, the “Super Delegates” have the option of voting for any candidate, even on the first ballot, where Regular delegates are required by party rules to vote in accordance with their state’s primary election results. Also, “Super Delegates” are allowed to abstain from voting on the first ballot should the “Party Bosses” choose to force an “open” or brokered convention entirely separated from the expressed wishes of all who voted in their state’s primary elections.
Although the Democrat convention is still two months away and anything could change in that length of time, what we are currently seeing must be disconcerting to the Party Bosses. As little as a month ago, the “Mainstream Media” (MSM) polls showed a double digit lead for Hillary over Donald Trump. In the past week the same (MSM) is admitting to the difference being either “too close to call” or even a small lead by Mr. Trump.
Experience has shown that an admission like that by the MSM actually indicates a large and growing lead over whichever candidate they are supporting. We also have the situation where a tired, 1960s Communist* retread like Bernie Sanders has been beating Hillary in the actual vote count in state after state. Should Bernie win and win decisively in the winner take all California Primary next week where 475 delegates are at stake, the above mentioned concern could well shift to outright panic, or will it?
Consider a possibility where the Bosses have been waiting for just such a situation to manifest itself in order to provide the ammunition needed to once again throw Hillary “under the bus”. It is very likely that a number of the same Bosses were around and participated in her loss back in 2008 and, in all likelihood have not changed their opinions of her during the succeeding eight years**.
For decades Hillary’s scandals have rarely received the attention by the MSM that was warranted given their serious nature. However, when last year she again began to seek the presidency, the attitude of the MSM appeared to change. The Benghazi fiasco and the attempted cover up, was almost immediately followed by “Servergate” and both resulted in actual coverage by the MSM. More recently, the collection by the Clintons of large speaking fees and even larger donations to their foundation has “suddenly” caught their attention as well. The MSM only rarely will speak or print a word without the approval of the Democrat Bosses so one might certainly wonder what may have changed.
If the Democrat Bosses are planning to dump Hillary for the second time, what is their plan? These are people for whom everything is politics and nothing gets in the way of their attempting to win at all costs. By forcing a brokered convention, the Bosses would put themselves in a position to select the candidate they see as a potential winner in November. Doing so, however, could well result in a major negative outcome. It seems very unlikely that the Bosses ever expected the success that Bernie Sanders has achieved to date in running against Hillary. Given the nature of a number of Sander’s followers, handing the nomination to someone besides Bernie could easily result in a repeat of the riot that occurred in Grant Park during the 1968 Democrat Convention in Chicago. What then, if anything, are the Bosses planning?
Support Canada Free Press
Nominating Bernie Sanders would guarantee the loss of the White House to Donald Trump. Sanders would probably lose by a much greater margin than would Hillary should the Bosses relent and allow her to run. Unfortunately, much of America may be very confused politically, today but are not yet disposed to elect a Communist* to the office of president. The Bosses know this and also know that “Bernie” would be very difficult for them to control as he is definitely outside of the Democrat establishment. Who, then, might the Bosses have in mind as a candidate that might keep the Sanders’ followers from rioting and who would stand a strong chance of beating Donald Trump in November? Consider if you will, Caroline Kennedy.
Caroline Bouvier Kennedy is now fifty eight years old and has three grown children. She is the sole surviving child of John Fitzgerald and Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy and the niece of the late Robert and Ted Kennedy. In the 2008 presidential election, Caroline endorsed Democratic candidate Barack Obama for president early in the primary race and later campaigned for him in several states. She campaigned for him again in his 2012 re-election bid. In 2013, President Obama appointed Caroline Kennedy as ambassador to Japan where she has served successfully.
Ever since the assassination of Jack Kennedy, the Kennedy name has been a virtual guarantee of election success for various Kennedys regardless of qualification or any negative baggage that they may have carried. Caroline not only has the Kennedy name with a capital “K”, being JFK’s daughter, but apparently has not accumulated any negative baggage. She holds a Bachelor’s degree from Harvard and a Law Degree from Colombia. Her political views would appear to be primarily those of the Democrat Establishment and not nearly as power driven as those of Hillary Clinton or as radical as those of “Crazy Bernie”. She would also be the first female candidate for the office of president and we all know too well how successful the Democrats were when they ran the first black candidate for that office.
Is a Caroline Kennedy candidacy what the Bosses have been planning all along? As we know, a very large number of both Republicans and Democrats feel very negatively toward Hillary Clinton. To date Hillary’s campaign has served to fan the flames of that distrust among many Democrat voters as the success of an outsider like Bernie Sanders clearly would indicate. Imagine the enthusiasm of Democrat voters should they find themselves able to “pull the lever” for Caroline Kennedy. Also, all of Mr. Trump’s campaigning against Hillary between now and the Democrat convention would have been for naught. Could it be that Mr. Obama’s recent trip to Japan included a meeting with Ambassador Kennedy to advise her of this possibility? Mr. Trump would certainly have his work cut out for him. It is definitely “Something to Consider”, and, even more so, something to definitely fear.
*In the mid-late 1960s the author met a Hungarian gentleman that had escaped from his country following the Soviet invasion some ten years earlier. He used a quotation that has stuck over the years which reads: “A Socialist is what you call a Communist at a cocktail party in order to be polite”.
**See the Author’s article “Sharing Power”, as published by Canada Free Press on March 9, 2015, suggesting an explanation for the Democrats dumping of Hillary in 2008.
