The Patriot Post® · Is Hillary the Weakest Candidate?

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign strategy from the very beginning has been to present her ascension to the throne presidency as inevitable. She has contributed to the entitlement narrative by scoffing at any question related to her credentials, capabilities, or long list of scandals. The Democrat Establishment (there’s that word again) has done its best to rally around the Clinton flag. And the media has certainly played its part by reporting countless news stories representing Clinton as the 45th president-in-waiting. But all of that can’t make up for the fact that she’s a lousy candidate.

Unfortunately — or should we say fortunately — this hard work by the Clinton propaganda machine isn’t really resonating with the public. By taking a close look at some of the facts on the ground, it becomes apparent that Clinton’s campaign may be 50 states wide, but its support is just a few inches deep.

Take the black vote, for instance. Barack Obama enjoyed greater support among black voters than any other president in history. Black turnout in this year’s primaries, however, suggests that Clinton cannot count on nearly the level of support that Obama enjoyed in 2008 and 2012.

Clinton’s campaign repeatedly points out that she is dominating the black vote against Bernie Sanders. According to Charlie King, founder of the Black Voters Matter PAC, this “has masked the alarming fact that there has been a dramatic drop-off in black turnout in Democratic primaries.”

Even with his overwhelming support among blacks in 2012, Obama still eked out single-digit victories against Mitt Romney in key states like Florida, Ohio, Virginia and Pennsylvania.

It’s not just blacks who Clinton struggles to excite, either. Clinton is also doing poorly with white men. She was able to use the white male vote to her advantage in the 2008 primary contest against Obama, but in 2016 her focus on minorities and further-left positions on immigration and entitlements is increasingly alienating white men in major battleground states.

The argument can be made that white males are not the coveted demographic they once were. This voting bloc has shrunk in comparison to women and various minority groups, but even a Democrat needs a large chunk of them in order to win the presidency.

The trust and likeability issues are also beginning to do damage to Clinton’s campaign. In most polls, a clear majority of voters indicate a lack of trust. Infamously, the words most closely associated with Clinton in a poll last year are “liar,” “dishonest” and “untrustworthy.”

She claims to be for the working man, but together she and Bill Clinton have amassed a $130 million fortune since he left the White House — “dead broke,” of course. She also claims to support Main Street, but has no problem taking millions in speaking fees and campaign contributions from Wall Street.

Hillary may be talking the talk with “progressive” voters, but her primary opponent Bernie Sanders is walking the walk. He has secured the youth vote and the support of hardcore leftists who firmly believe that Clinton is just another member of the Washington Class. Even Elizabeth Warren, who was seen as the leftist alternative to Clinton before Sanders’ emergence, has held off endorsing Clinton.

Maybe Warren missed Madeline Albright’s admonition about that “special place in hell.”

In an attempt to circle the wagons around Clinton, Obama recently leaned on Democrat donors to rump up their support for his preferred successor. This is one of Obama’s roles as de facto leader of the party, but the seemingly desperate nature of his appeal indicated the level of alarm that is rising among Democrats about Clinton’s weak candidacy.

And let’s not forget that last year’s email server scandal is far from settled. The FBI may still recommend indictments, even if Obama’s Justice Department has already decided it will not pursue them. If the DOJ does ultimately choose politics over justice, the backlash from the FBI and the intelligence community may cause enough damage on its own to permanently throw Clinton’s campaign off track.

The status of Clinton’s campaign clearly shows that she is not in the invincible position we are being led to believe. Everything she has done since 2000, indeed, since becoming First Lady in 1993, has been geared toward her winning the White House. If she has failed to win over hearts and minds by this point, then when will she? Time, thankfully, is running short.