US Rep: Peter King: "Hillary Clinton would destroy Ted Cruz, GOP isolationists in 2016

Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) claims he thinks former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (D) would "destroy" some of his Republican peers in a potential 2016 matchup.

“I think she’s very strong on foreign policy, and I think that if we nominate someone from our isolationist wing of the party, she’ll destroy them,” King said. "We need somebody that can stand up to her."

Read More

So are we already seeing some panic from Republicans regarding 2016? I don't know how Ted Cruz would be able to run for president as he wasn't even born in the U.S. but if Peter King thinks that he has a shot at beating Hillary in 2016 then he needs to stop kidding himself because he has absolutely no chance. But I guess when your party tries to disenfranchise and isolate numerous voting groups, then even the Green party seems like a more viable option to them.

I don't see them getting the Women vote, the gay vote, the Hispanic vote, the Black vote, young voters, teachers, union members, environmentalists, college educated, who do they have left?

I guess they'll get the NRA vote

if Republicans decide to nominate a tea parter then they can kiss the White House goodbye in 2016. No question that the Republican party has problems, but we have a great challenge ahead because I don't think they will go quietly into the night, no matter the demographics!

Yes, it would be very difficult for the Republicans to market a candidate to win the White House. Also I thought there was a split between the Tea Party and the Republican party. Over issues like immigration, etc. I recall reading comments where members or supporters of the Tea Party who called Republicans "RINO's."

When the 2016 election rolls around we should know what happens. I don't expect Hillary being unstoppable if she decides to run for president.

reply to post by muse7

More propaganda.

Minding our own business now equals "isolationist"...

With military bases in a 100+ different countries, pre-emptive lie based money wars and now openly supporting (and arming) Al-CIAeda, the US could use a little (lot) more "isolationism".

Anyway, I'm going to stand with Rand (or its Third Party for me).

Originally posted by Phoenix267
Yes, it would be very difficult for the Republicans to market a candidate to win the White House. Also I thought there was a split between the Tea Party and the Republican party. Over issues like immigration, etc. I recall reading comments where members or supporters of the Tea Party who called Republicans "RINO's."

When the 2016 election rolls around we should know what happens. I don't expect Hillary being unstoppable if she decides to run for president.

The only candidates that I can see having a shot at getting elected are Chris Christie and Marco Rubio and sadly they are already being labeled RINOs just for being moderates.

The Republican party has a disease...it's called the Tea Party

reply to post by muse7


To be honest I'm skeptical of any popular politician. Whether they're good people or not. I only know so much of the Tea Party I cannot exactly criticize or support them without research. But I'm curious why do you call the Tea Party a disease?

Originally posted by muse7
The Republican party has a disease...it's called the Tea Party

And the Democratic party has a few diseases ... the Coffee Party, socialism, progressivism, communism, liberalism, racism, and a few other 'ism's that haven't even got names yet.

Both the Republican party and the Democratic party are one in the same ... two sides of the same coin. Both are corrupt and both have been infiltrated by big money people/corporations with agendas. There is very little difference between Bush43 and Obama. There will be very little difference between Obama and whoever is in office next.

I can't believe that there are so many people still subscribing to the 'my (R) or (D) political party is better than yours' bunk. I guess the propaganda by both the far left and the far right works. How sad.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by muse7
The Republican party has a disease...it's called the Tea Party

And the Democratic party has a few diseases ... the Coffee Party, socialism, progressivism, communism, liberalism, racism, and a few other 'ism's that haven't even got names yet.

Both the Republican party and the Democratic party are one in the same ... two sides of the same coin. Both are corrupt and both have been infiltrated by big money people/corporations with agendas. There is very little difference between Bush43 and Obama. There will be very little difference between Obama and whoever is in office next.

I can't believe that there are so many people still subscribing to the 'my (R) or (D) political party is better than yours' bunk. I guess the propaganda by both the far left and the far right works. How sad.

edit on 7/21/2013 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)

Your post is so rich

The fact that you listed Progressiveism and Liberalism as "diseases" is a joke. Do you know what those movements stand for? Or are you going by what you read on your right wing blogs or whatever you read?

I guess you're right though, the far left and far right do have very powerful propaganda machines working for them, and going by your post I think the far right takes the cake in the propaganda department

Hilary is toast if/when anyone brings up Benghazi and her involvement. Such as: Did you quit being Sec of State in order to distance yourself from your involvement in Benghazi in order to appear to have a "clean slate" for a Presidential run?

Obama would have been toast had Romney manned up and fully confronted Obama when brought it up in the second debate. And all he would have had to say was "You cannot us the protection of 'national security' as a cover for your blunder." That Romney did not press the issue, proved he was not man enough for the Presidency.

Originally posted by muse7
The fact that you listed Progressiveism and Liberalism as "diseases" is a joke.

The fact that you listed The Tea Party as a 'disease' is a joke.

Do you know what those movements stand for?

Do you know what the Tea Party movement stands for? Answer .. no.

Or are you going by what you read on your right wing blogs or whatever you read?

Or are you going by what you read on your left wing blogs or whatever you read?

Backatchya.

The Tea Party started out as a grass roots movement to have government stop radical spending. Both the left and the right were involved in it. The Tea Party now has large numbers of Christian fundamentalists involved. The effort to stop radical extreme spending remains the same however, the majority of it's members now have a Christian slant.

The Occupy Wall Street movement started out as a grass roots movement to stop big banking and big corporation infiltration and involvement in policies and government. Both the left and the right were involved in it. However, it was taken over by far left loons and George Soros money and it has been corrupted.

The right has the fundamentalist elements who want to preach THEIR moral values and change laws according to their beliefs (no marriage equality, etc) . Secular rule of law keeps this from happening.

The left has it's nanny-state lovers who want to preach THEIR moral values, take everyones paycheck and redistribute it as they see fit (which means bigger government and more corruption), and they want to tell everyone how to live while at the same time pointing at the Republicans and scream that the Republicans are the ones who want to tell people how to live.

LIke I said ... Same/Same.
Unplug from those (D) = Good and (R) = bad brainwashing sites you read.
(D) and (R) = SAME/SAME

reply to post by Ahabstar


Bingo!!!!!!!!!!! Billary I mean Hag-ary I mean Hillary chances to the white house are now gone, gone with the win and the Benghazi scandal.

I predict the Democrats will push another ethnic president because the time is right for that in American. I think we may see a lot more of Eric Holder as a substitute for Billary.

And as for the Republicans they actually have not candidates.

Originally posted by marg6043
I predict the Democrats will push another ethnic president

I agree with you. Bet they push Holder. He'll get the far left vote .. the black and other miniority vote ... and the votes of those who still think that 'democrat = good, republican = bad' Nevermind that he is up to his eyeballs in corruption and racism. They won't care. He's black and got a (D) after his name ...

Eric Holder literally has a race card in his wallet

reply to post by muse7


From this point forward the democrats will always win the presidential elections..it's going to take years to come up with a strategy that works....reason being your trial balloons will be the presidential elections so there is a great deal of down time between each election for fine tuning.

The young and the disenfranchised have realized their potential when it comes to voting and since those who vote republican and lets be hones the majority being probably 80% are white middle age to senior citizens will be outnumbered by all other ethnic backgrounds. I could be wrong with those numbers and I have no facts to back that up...but I will say regardless of what color republican runs the democrats despite all their blunders are going to come ahead time and time again.

Local government may be a different story but the people have spoken when it comes to getting out in mass. I personally think Hillary will destroy whoever she goes against simply because she's a Clinton, a women who was cheated on and came back on top and she's a democrat. All the wrongs she did will be wiped clean like in any election and like Obama the world will cheer hew victory just as they the world cheered for Obama...Some folks like the idea of a two party system? I for one despise it...

reply to post by FlyersFan


Hon, you said it beautiful, it doesn't matter if he is corrupted piece of crap or what kind of background scandals will be there to see, people vote by emotions and visual appeal.

He may not be the right candidate but hell he look good in TV.

The Hollywood ethnic type of candidates are now in style.

reply to post by chrismarco


Yes, you are right on the issue, most Republicans or the ones that are hard die Republicans are within the white middle age to senior groups and many are reborn Christians.

I remember reading that somewhere around, so now with amnesty coming around the corner the minority ethnic group will become the majority in the nation, with welfare in the eye of many and with the increase of the government services since Obama took office you can pretty much tell who will be voting for whom.

reply to post by chrismarco


The democrat party is better equipped and connected to connect with today's Americans. With many conservatives being critical of abortion, gays and gay marriage, etc. They distant themselves from the future voters who can be crucial to elect them into office. Which is why I believe the democrats would become successful in state and federal elections.

It really doesn't matter which party wins the Presidential election.

Either way America loses.

Actually all it takes is a person that makes a connection with the voters. Obama is the Democratic Party's worst enemy at this time.

For example: Despite Wall St. having record numbers, how many people do you know that are still out of work or scraping on a job that barely pays a living wage after all these years?

Or: Do you feel you will be able to prove a college education for your children so that they will have a better position in life than you have now?

Or: Do you feel you will die in abject poverty since 401K's were lost in the stock market crash of 2008, the Baby Boomers will bankrupt Social Security and you can not afford much more than basics today leaving no means to personally save for your retirement?

Or: Why do we still maintain an active military force in Afghanistan two years after Osama bin Laden was killed in Pakistan?

And for Holder: Was the lack of a full investigation stopped on Fast and Furious because Congress voted to fund Operation Gunwalker and the blow back from a full investigation would have meant that members of both the House and Senate would be accessories to treason for allowing arms sales that resulted in the death of law enforcement on both sides of the border? Namely Reid and Pelosi? Would you engage in similar cover ups via non-action if you were POTUS?

The trick of course is to actually get these people to agree to a public debate, rather than the dog and pony shows that they call debate in which softballs are pitched to ones they want to win.

Originally posted by Phoenix267
The democrat party is better equipped and connected to connect with today's Americans.

If average Americans would dump their love affair with the (D) and the (R), they would see that neither democrats or republicans in office can 'connect with today's Americans'. The level of corruption in the Obama administration is reaching legendary proportions. It's making the corruption of the Nixon administration like look child's play.

reply to post by FlyersFan


You're correct. But you have to understand it's easy to market and fool average people. They don't care about the ugly truth of reality. It's sad a lot of people in government are crooked liars who know how to deceive people. What's even worse is that people allow them to do it to them.

Hillary Clinton will be President if she runs. That said, I don't want her to run... I won't vote for her and I don't want her to be President.

My suggestion to the GOP, stop you're BS high school level rumor mongering, stop disenfranchising people, stop with the dirtiness that rolls off you so visibly. You're ensuring Democrat victories all around in 2014 and 2016.

My advice to Democrats, stop being so easily fooled by the "we're the good guys" routine and actually look at the policies that have come into effect under a Democrat White House.

My advice to Americans, stop being so politically lazy... do your research, find candidates that will serve the people, not just as President but in the House and the Senate. Stump for them, buck this corporate controlled false choices nonsense... we don't need network coverage of candidates and campaigns, for now at least we still have the internet and we have live streaming and citizen journalists.

We can get this right, if we really want to. If we work really hard.