Former President Bill Clinton — who has made some interesting, talking-point-busting observations in recent months — is reflecting on America’s prospects of electing a woman president. Given the failure of the only two female nominees, including his wife, Clinton suggested that perhaps it would take a Republican to push through the glass ceiling: “I think it would probably be easier for a conservative Republican woman to win,” he said, citing the example of Britain’s Margaret Thatcher and adding, “I still think we’ll have a female president pretty soon.” Clinton did also assert, however, his belief that Hillary would have easily won the presidency if she hadn’t lost the Democratic primary to Barack Obama five presidential cycles ago. “I think if Hillary had been nominated in 2008, she would’ve walked in, just like Obama did.”
He made these comments in an interview with CBS News while promoting a new book:
Bill Clinton suggests
The U.S. is more likely to elect a female president if the candidate is a Conservative Republican
than a Democrat woman … pic.twitter.com/QOo7QP1gim— Lawyerforlaws (@lawyer4laws) November 20, 2024
I responded to this analysis on Fox, warmly welcoming the idea of a conservative woman becoming the country’s first female president, but noting that the 42nd president’s argument sounds strangely familiar:
Former President Bill Clinton just suggested that it might take a conservative Republican woman to become the first female president. I love that idea, but I’m not sure he’s right. His argument, in fact, sounds familiar… pic.twitter.com/ImuQX2WiIt
— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) November 20, 2024
For years, I remember people making almost the same prediction about America’s first black president. It would have to be a Republican, they say, arguing that the country might be willing to accept a chief executive of color, but would need to ease into it with a conservative. The idea was that the nation’s electorate wasn’t “ready” for a black Democratic president. And then Barack Obama burst onto the scene, sweeping Democrats off their feet at the 2004 DNC in Boston then capturing both the party’s nomination and the presidency just four years later. Even though he spoke about unity, his vague “change” message was undergirded by quite a lot of progressive policy. He handily won his election in 2008 before clinching a second term. As it turned out, Americans were plenty ready for a black president on the left end of the spectrum. As much as I disliked his politics, Obama possessed charisma and oratory skills, and generally hit the right notes with voters. He also claimed his party’s crown in a year that an unpopular Republican administration was on its way out, and in which the economy took a nosedive right before the election. Events, plus talent, equaled a decisive Obama win.
In a similar vein, I’d posit that Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris’ problem was not that they are women. It’s that they lacked the talent and the timing to get elected. I happen to agree with Clinton that if his wife had been the nominee in 2008, she’d have won. Once the recession hit, and hit hard, there was basically no path to victory for John McCain at that point. ‘Racism’ didn’t block Obama from winning, and ‘sexism’ wouldn’t have stopped Hillary from being elected that year, either. But in a different electoral environment, her polarizing personality and lack of likability helped sink her in 2016. And despite all the preposterous cope about Harris running a “flawless” campaign, virtually everyone knows that’s not true. She was one of the least authentic, least adept candidates I’ve ever seen at any level. The bigotry of the electorate didn’t doom her. She doomed herself. America will elect a female president when a woman with political talent meets a beneficial moment, and that could happen with someone from either political party. I’ll leave you with another clip from my Fox appearance. Democrats may not win again any time soon if they remain delusional: […]
— Read More: townhall.com
It’s becoming increasingly clear that fiat currencies across the globe, including the U.S. Dollar, are under attack. Paper money is losing its value, translating into insane inflation and less value in our life’s savings.
Genesis Gold Group believes physical precious metals are an amazing option for those seeking to move their wealth or retirement to higher ground. Whether Central Bank Digital Currencies replace current fiat currencies or not, precious metals are poised to retain or even increase in value. This is why central banks and mega-asset managers like BlackRock are moving much of their holdings to precious metals.
As a Christian company, Genesis Gold Group has maintained a perfect 5 out of 5 rating with the Better Business Bureau. Their faith-driven values allow them to help Americans protect their life’s savings without the gimmicks used by most precious metals companies. Reach out to them today to see how they can streamline the rollover or transfer of your current and previous retirement accounts.
