By Dave Andrusko
You know the many, many media supporters of pro-abortion Hillary Clinton were not just pretending to be nervous about her prospects when the Washington Post runs two stories today outlining her numerous and varied weaknesses.
And that doesn’t even count a piece in Salon.com in which Clinton is trashed for not “courting” the supporters of Democratic Socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders and an Associated Press story about how “Organizers of the Nevada State Democratic Convention said they had to rush to wrap up the ‘unruly and unpredictable’ event on Saturday after security became an issue and objects, including chairs, were thrown.” (Sanders’ supporters accused party leaders of “rigging the process against them” and “also questioned a credentials committee’s disqualification of 58 would-be Sanders delegates…”)
“The presidency is Hillary Clinton’s to lose. Here are 12 ways she could lose it”; and “Even supporters agree: Clinton has weaknesses as a candidate. What can she do?” both complement one another and, in places, are contradictory. But it’s easy to get the drift and the palpable concern: Clinton OUGHT to win and if only she and her husband Bill and their campaign listen to the Washington Post and the New York Times she can overcome all her shortcomings.
Any new inadequacies on display in the stories by James Hohmann and Anne Gearan/ Dan Balz, respectively? Actually…no.
Is it “snatching defeat from the jaws of victory” to “allow” herself “to get defined as an insider”? This is the kind of the theme of both stories.
Hohmann treats transparently obvious truths–that Mrs. Clinton is the insider’s insider, uninspiring, burdened with a penchant for “gaffes,” and married to a man who is capable of saying anything off the cuff–as if somehow they are qualities that have been made up by her enemies, rather than an accurate reflection of whom she (and Bill Clinton) actually are.
Gearan and Balz remind readers that because of Clinton’s advantage among “superdelegates,” it is virtually impossible for Sanders to win their party’s presidential nomination. But that doesn’t change that she is likely to lose more primaries this month, increasing concern that Clinton is a very weak candidate with a basket full of liabilities. To wit (to quote Gearan and Balz)
When Democrats assess Clinton, they tend to zero in on her communication skills: She is scripted and thin-skinned, they say. And with a sigh, they acknowledge the persistent feeling among a lot of Americans that they just don’t like her. Polls long have shown that many voters do not trust Clinton and that a majority view her unfavorably.
[Democratic pollster Peter] Hart said being seen as likable is “about the lowest bar” for a candidate, and yet Clinton has lower likability numbers today than she did when the campaign began.
It just gets more interesting by the day.