Democrats are known for finding a way to fuck up the best opportunities they get. This time around, that way is named Hillary Clinton. It’s not that she’s completely evil. It’s not that Hillary is so liberal she couldn’t win over independents in a general election. It’s that those independents think she is, and their perception is far more important than reality. Voters are immune to truth.
|
Hillary Clinton has been demonized by Republicans since she took office. You hear hicks and Confederate Flag-wavers rant about two people: Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton. They don’t even actually know anything about these two, except that Big Brother Fox tells them over and over again how bad and mean and Socialist they are. Kennedy and Clinton are the faces attached to every stigma the Democratic Party has, whether or not they earned those stigmas. Clinton is associated with everything left of Communism to these people. She will not appeal to moderates, merely because of her reputation. She is beyond unelectable. And when the Democrats have a golden opportunity like this one to take the ship by storm, she is essentially one of the only two possible candidates who could actually lose an election to a Republican.
Let’s put aside strategy for a minute. I’ll entertain the notion that I’m wrong. Let’s say she’s actually not an albatross around the Democrats’ necks. I still don’t understand how she could appeal to anyone as a candidate who stands out—in a good way. She’s not more qualified, not more burdened by conscience, not closer to the Constitution, not taking a stand on anything worth standing… that Obama isn’t taking a stronger stand on. Where is the appeal to her? Did I miss the part where she revealed she’s actually going to fight for anything other than the presidency? She’s “in it to win it”. She’s said time and time again how personal it is for her. She’s winning it for her. She is not fighting for us.
Not only that, but unlike Obama, she’s running an attack campaign. Obama has been noted for how hopeful his rhetoric is, and how nice he plays, how un-partisan he seems, and how he is devoid of malice toward the other candidates. Clinton, of course, attacks him ruthlessly, and frequently even attacks him for being too nice. …Who does this make you want to vote for? Why is anybody still polling in favor of Clinton? Do you cry yourselves to sleep at night?
|
We’re talking about a woman who compared Obama to Bush, effectively Reductio ad Hitlerum at this point. But the Godwin in her argument doesn’t make sense. It’s based on foreign policy experience: she thinks neither one had a whole lot when running for President. First, she has no more than he does, since First Lady hardly qualifies you to be a leading lady. Second, she supported Bush’s foreign policy for years, including her infamous war vote. If Obama is like Bush, she should be in favor of him. She is wrong (in saying he’s like Bush), hypocritical (in that she has no more experience than him in that regard), and inconsistent (in that she supported Bush in this area, but doesn’t support Obama). Obama would be in a much better place to Reductio ad Bushum her because of her initial support for Bush, but he’s above that because he’s not a cunt.
She’s sneering, she’s bitchy, she’s condescending… and in attacking Obama, has done the hilarious: attack hope. I’m not saying “Obama stands for hope; Clinton stands for not-Obama; therefore Clinton stands for not-hope.” I’m saying she’s actually attacked the concept that ideas can change the world, and patronizingly describes him as naïve. How little he knows of the political process! How quaint are his ideals! Vote for me, I have none! Well, if he knows so little, why is he putting up such an effective fight? Maybe people prefer his rhetoric of hope to your rhetoric of “everything is futile”. If you tell people voting for you is futile, well shit, don’t get surprised when they believe you!
|
Clinton is a hatemongering harpy, an unremarkable politician with unremarkable views running a messy and doomed campaign. If her campaign were a car, it’d be fueled on crushed hopes, shattered dreams, and baby hearts. Bottom line, she is the least strategic choice for that party that anybody could have possibly come up with, and might just utterly destroy all hope the Democrats have of kicking out the authoritarians for good.
She voted for the War in Iraq, she doesn’t think video games are protected by Freedom of Speech—what else do you have to know to make up your mind, Internet Person?
