September 16, 2011
A Bloomberg National Poll shows that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is the most popular national political figure in America today.
“Nearly two-thirds of Americans hold a favorable view of her and one-third are suffering a form of buyer’s remorse, saying the U.S. would be better off now if she had become president in 2008 instead of Barack Obama,” reports Bloomberg.
The establishment co-opted Tea Party also favors Clinton over Obama, according to the poll. 44 percent say the U.S. would be better off with Hillary Clinton as president, even though 59 percent of respondents hold an unfavorable impression of the former first lady.
The poll is another indicator of the political naivete of many Americans, including the Tea Party. Both Clinton and Obama are establishment Democrats and there is very little difference between them on policy.
Obama’s cabinet is comprised largely of globalist one-worlders hailing from the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, the Federal Reserve, the Bilderberg Group, and large banks. His foreign policy is nearly indistinguishable from that of his predecessor.
Hillary Clinton is committed to realizing the globalist agenda no less than Obama. In 2009, Clinton visited a CFR satellite of the New York “mothership” in Washington and paid homage to Richard Haass, CFR president, and the globalists. “We get a lot of advice from the Council,” Clinton beamed, “so it means I won’t have as far to go to be told what we should be doing and how we should think about the future.”
Before migrating to the CFR, Haass was the director of policy planning at the State Department where he was a principal adviser to Secretary of State Colin Powell.
Clinton fawns over Haass and the CFR in 2009.
There is virtually no difference between Hillary Clinton and Barry Obama – both are working toward the same goal: destroying U.S. national sovereignty and merging the country into the world government framework long planned by the CFR, the Trilateral Commission and the banks and transnational corporations that run them.
Clinton’s sudden popularity, at least according to the Bloomberg poll, reflects the growing dissatisfaction with Obama, who was elected largely due to widespread dissatisfaction with George W. Bush.
If we look beyond this popularity poll, we see that no mater what horse the elite put in the rigged establishment political game the outcome is the same, as Carrol Quigley, the history professor at the Foreign Service Schools of Georgetown University explained. “Since 1925, there have been substantial contributions from wealthy individuals, and from foundations and firms associated with the international banking fraternity, especially… organizations associated with J. P. Morgan, the Rockefeller and Whitney families” that have worked to install an Anglo-American power structure dominated by banksters and the mega-wealthy elite in America and Europe.
If the Democrats manage to run Clinton instead of Obama in 2012 – and unlikely prospect, but one increasingly discussed – and she wins the election against whatever establishment Republican is selected, in four years polls will reflect yet more widespread dissatisfaction with the president.