Hillary Clinton is back in the political spotlight.

After 2008, I really thought the female race had dodged the bullet of Hillary Clinton being the woman who would go down in history as the first female president, but apparently not. She’s at it again, well poised to make a run at the White House in 2016. As I watch 2016 unfold I have been primarily thinking three things about Hillary Clinton: She will run, she could win and I really hope she doesn’t.

Earlier this month, Clinton began a series of policy speeches clearly aimed at gearing up for a run in 2016. She gave the first one to the American Bar Association in San Francisco, choosing to address an issue that gave her the opportunity to project an extremely liberal idea. Speaking on voting rights, she said states like Texas in conjunction with the June Supreme Court decision that “struck at the heart” of the Voting Rights Act, are conspiring to pass voting laws that “disproportionately impact African-Americans, Latino and young voters”. It sounds like the same, classic, Hillary Clinton issues are about to take center stage.

But this time it’s different. Clinton seems to have an edge that she didn’t in 2008. This is because her far-left ideals that have brought her criticism in the past are being more widely accept by her Democratic constituency. The left is pushing farther to left and getting more extreme mostly due to the legacy of Obama. I mean, compared to the stimulus package and the Affordable Care Act, it’s hard to look like a crazy liberal these days. Anything shy of Obama is now considered moderate. Julian Zelizer of CNN reports:

The former first lady, senator, and secretary of state is in excellent position to run the kind of campaign that is true to her history, in large part because of the impact that President Obama has had in the past six years. Democrats are more confident about throwing their support behind a candidate who stands proudly for the key tenets of the liberal tradition: a belief that the government can help solve social problems in the United States.

So in short, Hillary Clinton only looks less extreme/insane because she’s being compared to a true extremist. And she can also pick up on the failures of the Obama administration (like the lack economic recovery and growing economic inequality) and create a pretty convincing platform geared towards women and minorities.

What Clinton and her loyal Democratic voters who now consider the far left of the political spectrum to be the center are missing, is the facts.

The truth is that in addition to riding the wake of Obama liberalism to appear more moderate, Clinton is purposefully bringing race to the forefront in order to create a racially polarized electorate. This was made very apparent in her address on Voting Rights. No one in his or her right mind thinks racism has vanished and of course racial discrimination still exists, but Clinton is creating a problem where there isn’t one.

First of all, the Supreme Court of decision on the Voting Rights Act struck very far from the heart of the legislation. It simply eliminated a part of the law that called for certain states to deal with a larger legal burden based on outdated data. Yet, Clinton is seeking to convince us that the Supreme Court and the Republicans are waging a racist war to prevent minorities from getting to the polls. She states that, “anyone who says that racial discrimination is no longer a problem in American elections must not be paying attention”

In reality, in regards to minority voting trends, it seems Hillary Clinton hasn’t quite been paying attention. According to a US Census study done in 2012, minority voting has skyrocketed.

In 2012, black turnout as a share of all eligible voters exceeded the turnout of non-Hispanic white voters—66.2% to 64.1%. Nearly five million more African-Americans voted in 2012 (17.8 million) than voted in 2000 (12.9 million). In both 2008 and 2012, black voters even exceeded their share of the eligible black voting age population. In 2012, blacks made up 12.5% of the eligible electorate but 13.4% of those voting.

But instead of paying attention to the facts, Clinton relies on antidotal evidence. She claims she’s particularly worried about the discriminatory practices in both North and South Carolina however, according to the same study black turnout exceeded non-Hispanic white turnout by statistically significant rates in both Carolinas. Furthermore, Georgia, Indiana and Tennessee have some of the strictest voter ID laws of the more than 30 states that have such laws, yet the Census report says black turnout exceeded that of non-Hispanic whites in 2012 in all three. So, there really is no actual evidence that voter ID laws prevent minorities from voting.

This is just another card for Clinton to add to her deck and play. She wants female voters- she has the “first female president card”. She wants minorities- she has the race card. If she can’t fuel her 2016 campaign on the economic platform, she and the Democrats will play up racial fears. She wants this racially polarized electorate to basically tell people they are being discriminated against.

Hopefully, Clinton’s cards will run out eventually and the American public will be left with the truth- and a Republican president.