She apparently decided it won't be enough to rely on the 66 million people who voted twice for Barack Obama, many of whom are disillusioned by the failure of "hope and change." Obama promised an end to wars in the Middle East, a more prosperous economy for the average American and more harmonious race relations, but all three problems have only gotten worse.
Seeing as Clinton won't have the youthful exuberance that propelled Obama to his unlikely double victory, she plans to build a whole new electorate out of people who didn't vote for Obama. That was the gist of her speech in Houston last week, which her friends at MSNBC called a "far-reaching vision for expanding access to the ballot box."
Who are the new voters to whom Clinton wants to give "access to the ballot box"? They include felons and noncitizens, along with anyone who can't prove identity, citizenship or residence within the voting precinct.
She also plans to harvest millions of new votes by expanding the dangerous practices of same-day registration and early voting, which enable Democrats to badger, berate, bribe or bamboozle reluctant low-information voters to the polls. Democratic Party and union workers can identify reluctant voters and harass them until the party worker verifies that they have actually cast their ballots.
In her new book, "Adios, America," Ann Coulter asks a relevant question: "Should Democrats be given 30 million new voters?" Answering her own question, Ann says, "There is simply no reason for Republicans to legalize 30 million people who will vote 8-2 against them."
Though Clinton gave lip service to the notion that "every citizen" should vote, her Democratic allies are in court trying to stop every reasonable means of verifying a voter's citizenship. That's no surprise because, according to a recent Rasmussen survey, the majority (53 percent) of Democrats believe that noncitizens, including even immigrants who came here illegally, should be allowed to vote.
Clinton's commitment to voting by "every citizen" is belied by her earlier promise to "go even further" than Obama on amnesty for immigrants who came here illegally. By "go even further," she explained, she would include all 11 million-plus (not just Obama's 5 million), and she would give them full citizenship with voting rights, not just "legal status" with permission to work.
The Census Bureau estimates that 22 million noncitizen adults, both those here legally and those here illegally, are living permanently in this country. That's almost 10 percent of our population that is 18 or older, and more than half of those noncitizens are concentrated in just five states.
Arizona, which is on the front lines of illegal immigration, has been trying to require proof of citizenship as part of voter registration ever since that simple requirement was approved by Arizona's voters in 2004. The Obama administration refused to add the proof-of-citizenship requirement to the federal form that Arizona must use for "motor voter" registrations.
Clinton has assigned her top lawyer to sue Wisconsin to overturn its effective voter ID law, one of the best in the nation. But that's not all. The New York Times just reported that left-wing billionaire George Soros has agreed to pour $5 million into a national effort to protect and expand early voting.
Federal law provides that voting in federal elections take place in even years on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November, also known as Election Day. Just as no member of a jury should vote on guilt until all the evidence has been presented at a trial, voters should not cast their ballots before political campaigns are over.
The U.S. Constitution requires that the delegates to the Electoral College cast their ballots for president on the same day. Many states also continue to adhere to the tradition of Election Day's being on one day in November, not spread out over the ridiculous 35 days that resulted in a political circus in Ohio in 2012.
The integrity of elections is just as important as the universally accepted rules for jury trials, whereby jurors are asked to keep their minds open and withhold judgment until after closing arguments. Spreading out voting over an extended period of a month or more makes it impractical for poll watchers to monitor the voting for fraud.
Isn't it odd that most Democrats are in favor of busing churchgoers in some neighborhoods to polling booths but then insist that churches in Republican neighborhoods never try to influence an election?