Hillary Clinton is the Scott Walker of national politics: Identifying special interests with big money and pitching ‘give me money, I’ll do whatever you want.’
But the desperation of thecoronate-Hillary Clinton-now project is now apparent.
Hillary Clinton has unfavorable v. favorable ratings of minus-14 points, (Huffington Post).
The American people have lingering trust issues with Hillary Clinton.
The critical 18-29 demographic think Clinton is corrupt and dishonest.
So, naturally the DNC and surrogates today are blaring March 15 is the day we get-behind-Hillary Clinton, no matter that most of United States would not have voted including New York, most of the north and the west coast, (Democratic Strategist).
Why the rush? Why call for excluding most Democratic-voting citizens in their right to choose their president.
The previous Quinnipiac poll, from 12/16 – 12/20, had Clinton up by 31.Trump is now up by 20. The previous Quinnipiac poll, from 12/16 – 12/20, had Trump up by 9.
“They’re worried about what the popular response to Sanders shows them about Clinton’s vulnerabilities in November,” Edward-Isaac Dovere and Gabriel Debenedetti write in Politico.
Gail Sheehy on Clinton:
“Among those unlikables consistently repeated to me by women who are conflicted about her: not authentic; can’t trust her; she lies; she’s establishment; she’s a hawk.”
I see she’s adopted the rebranding “gun safety.” “Gun safety” has traditionally meant handling your guns safely, but now it’s supposed to mean what has more commonly been called “gun control.”
“Safety” sounds nicer than “control.” “Control” is what a repressive state does to a cowed citizenry and what sexist men want to do to women. It’s what puts the freak in control freaks. But “safety” feels like a caring mother, a loving partner, a beneficent government.
Clinton has been immersed in politics for decades, and yet the panel managed to make the contrast between her manner and the ways of Washington look stark. She appeared to be a sensible outsider. At 7:15 P.M., nine hours after the hearings began, Martha Roby, of Alabama, asked Clinton about her movements when she went home on the night of the attack. “Were you alone?” she asked. Yes, Clinton said. “The whole night?” Clinton started to laugh once more. “I don’t see why that’s funny,” Roby said. Not funny, perhaps, but, like the Benghazi committee itself, absurd.
Clinton had her moment with a one-liner too when making it clear she cedes no ground to Sanders. She stated ‘I’m a progressive. But I’m a progressive who likes to get things done,’ And she knows we need to find a credible way to fund the programs we propose. Sanders just has no clue about the paycheck for what he is planning.
Now, I’ve got to admit… the memo is kind of correct. It’s too late for Biden to jump in. Without a significant stumble by Clinton, the debate drives home how wrong it would be for Biden to step on her now. Bernie Sanders can’t be President. He’s a socialist! He gave a wonderful paean to socialism last night. And who were those other guys on the stage? I mean, really, who the hell were they? Other than Martin O’Malley. Gee, he looked handsome and tall, and he was really trying to register an impression. And you’ve got to give him credit for at least being a Democrat, which is not a distinction any of the other men on the stage seem to have. You’d think that would be a bare minimum for the Democratic nomination. We’ll see if O’Malley gets any traction in the polls, now. It’s unlikely. The acceptance of Hillary is jelling. So sayeth the memo.
Strip away the exaggerated language and there’s nothing abnormal here. There’s nothing wrong with Hillary getting angry and yelling. There’s no detail to what she said that “left staff members in tears and unable to work.” You’d think staff members would be plenty tough and able to serve as sounding boards as the candidate ventilates. As for “even violent,” what does that mean? Are we talking about physical assaults? If not, don’t use that word.
The quip from incoming house speaker Kevin McCarthy says all that needs saying when it comes to the ongoing, continual, meaningless political game the Republicans are playing with Benghazi. Republicans have cheapened the narrative over Benghazi and proved they are intent only on playing in the shallow end of the pool. What they should be more concerned about is how this plays with an electorate that is not in the mood for more of the same from congress. Using committee hearings on Benghazi for political gain does not restore the institution of congress or move this nation forward.
I wonder if Hillary Clinton is watching Fiorina’s rise and trying to learn something about how a woman can present herself in an exciting, compelling way. Robinson, I suspect, would only like to say that it’s those terrible Republicans who respond to anger, but Democrats are responding to Bernie Sanders and he always sounds and looks angry. (Take any video of him, pause it randomly and repeatedly, and marvel or giggle at how every freeze frame is another angry face.)