Cedar Park Dad wrote:xb12s wrote:The Annoyed Man wrote:You beat me to this. Here is my speculation:
She'll be Hillary Clinton's running mate in 2016.
That is scary.
No that means they lose 65% to 20%. JN is a hated figure by many on both the left and right.
I realize that, but this move is rehabilitative. There is perhaps no bigger hotbed of liberalism than the UC system, and particularly its management. As a former Californian, I can testify that it is corrupt too, but that's another story. Napolitano has 3 years to rehab her image in academia, by which time she'll be applauded for her "massive intellect," her "standing firm in difficult times," for "restoring integrity to the UC system," and for her "national defense and security credentials" which steals some of the republicans' thunder in that area. She'll be Hillary's Dick Cheney......minus the hunting accident....
And if elected, the dems get to replace Crazy Uncle Joe (Biden) with Evil Uncle Joe (Stalin). There is no way on God's green earth that Napolitano is going to just fade into academic obscurity. How on earth she got elected governor in Arizona is beyond me, and that, plus the fact that they keep reelecting John McCain is what makes me realize that Arizona.....
despite constitutional carry.....is no hotbed of either conservatism or libertarianism. I have completely eliminated Arizona from my short list of states I'd try to make it to if Texas were ever to fall. It will be part of Aztlan within 50 years.
Don't believe me? Look at this chart taken from her wikipedia page:
Code: Select all
Arizona Gubernatorial Election 2002
Party Candidate Votes % ±%
Democratic Janet Napolitano 499,284 46.2 +0.9
Republican Matt Salmon 478,935 45.3
Independent Richard Mahoney 84,947 6.9
Libertarian Barry Hess 20,356 1.7
Democratic gain from Republican Swing
Arizona Gubernatorial Election 2006
Party Candidate Votes % ±%
Democratic Janet Napolitano (Incumbent) 959,830 62.6 +16.4
Republican Len Munsil 543,528 35.4
Libertarian Barry Hess 30,268 2.0
Democratic hold Swing
In that 2006 election, there was obviously greater participation.....everybody's numbers were up. But the Libertarian participation went up approximately 49%, the republican participation went up 13.5%, but the democrat participation went up
92.2%!!!!! Her margin of victory went from 0.9% in 2002 to 16.4% in 2006. You have to ask yourself,
from whence did an additional 460,546 democrat voters suddenly materialize, in an allegedly conservative (ahem....
BORDER)
state?
Arizona is just a few short years, maybe less than 5, from being entirely in the blue column. And with "immigration reform" just around the corner—a newspeak term meaning "immigration corruption"—it will happen sooner rather than later.
I don't call Napolitano a toad just because she is head of DHS. I call her one because she is a corrupt individual, with no respect for either the Constitution, or the integrity of the democratic process, as demonstrated by her electoral record.
You want scary? ALSO according to her wikipedia page (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Napolitano):
In 2008, she was cited by The New York Times to be among the women most likely to become the first female President of the United States.
The entire arc of her career gives no indication that she would be in any way content with the
relative obscurity of a UC Regent. AT
MINIMUM, she'll be Hillary's running mate. Worst case scenario, she runs for POTUS herself.
She can beat Clinton. She has none of Clinton's scandals. She's not married to an egomaniac who cannot keep himself out of the limelight. If Clinton gets elected, you're not just electing her, you're reelecting Slick Willy. The only reason Napolitano has no political buzz right now is that she has held her cards close to her vest and so there is no news to report about her future political ambitions. Being single, she will not have any marital distractions. Being single and powerful, she will
absolutely get the feminist vote. Because of ongoing speculation about her sexuality, she will get the gay vote. She will get the latino vote (she was favorably disposed toward illegal aliens as Arizona's governor and was poor at defending the border). She'll get the black vote simply because she's a democrat. She'll get the white democrat vote from those who are exhausted by the Clinton name and think it is about time to get some "fresh blood" into the office. If you stop and think about it, Clinton and Biden (who will probably run again), and NY's Cuomo are really all that the democratic party has in currently recognized big names.......unless you consider Napolitano, who is their dark horse. Her only "negative" (in the eyes of democrats) is a friendship with, of all people, Sheriff Arpaio:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... rwear.html
She scares the crap out of me.