Previous post
Even the New York Times has come to realize what we all knew a long time ago. Hillary Clinton really believed that she was inevitable during this election cycle, and she failed to take Bernie Sanders seriously.
Mrs. Clinton and her team say they always anticipated the race would tighten, with campaign manager Robby Mook telling colleagues last spring that Mr. Sanders would be tough competition. Yet they were not prepared for Mr. Sanders to become so popular with young people and independents, especially women, whom Mrs. Clinton views as a key part of her base.
Given her many political advantages, like rich donors and widespread support from Democratic Party elites, she is also surprised that Mr. Sanders’s fund-raising has rivaled hers and that her experience — along with her potential to make history as the first woman elected president — has not galvanized more voters.
“It was probably never going be a straight line — we hoped it would be but feared it wouldn’t be,” said James Carville, the Democratic strategist on Mr. Clinton’s 1992 campaign and a longtime friend of the Clintons. “She’s performed solidly enough, but it’s been a hard race.”
Several Clinton advisers are also regretting that they did not push for more debates, where Mrs. Clinton excels, to more skillfully marginalize Mr. Sanders over his Senate votes in support of the gun industry and the enormous costs and likely tax increases tied to his big-government agenda.
Instead, Mrs. Clinton, who entered the race as the prohibitive favorite, played it safe, opting for as few debates as possible, which were scheduled at times when viewership was likely to be low — like this Sunday at 9 p.m. on a long holiday weekend.
So, with weak poll numbers in Iowa and New Hampshire nearly lost, it’s time for a strategy change. Target: Bernie. And one of Hillary’s opening salvos was about as backhanded and jaw-dropping as possible.
For the full context, you can watch her disjointed and rambling explanation of her campaign’s “message.”
As Paste Magazine notes:
Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton’s biggest challenger in the Democratic presidential primary, has one son. His name is Levi, and he has three adopted grandchildren from China. When Sanders married his second wife, Jane, she had three children of their own, and those children now have four children of their own. Sanders considers all seven his grandchildren, as anyone would, even though he’s not related to them by blood.
Clinton, conversely, has one daughter, Chelsea, and Chelsea has a baby daughter named Charlotte.
(Let’s not forget that Chelsea is conveniently going to give Hillary another prop – I mean, grandchild – this next summer.)
There may be an innocent explanation, but the phrasing of her statement is clearly intended as a contrast to somebody, and when you consider both the context of the her entire answer, and the fact that the word “extraordinary” seems to have been purposefully used, it’s hard not to reach a simple conclusion—this was a reference to Bernie Sanders.
Two takeaways:
1) I’m really, really, REALLY not worried about little Charlotte Mezvinsky’s chance to have lots of “opportunities,” as her grandmother said. Seeing as Grandma and Grandpa Clinton have a net worth of $111 million, and the Mezvinskys aren’t exactly poor, as Chelsea’s husband Marc has been an investment banker and hedge fund manager. Little Charlotte’s family will have plenty of money to buy her and her sibling as much “opportunity” as they want.
2) While I am no Bernie Sanders fan, I was horrified by the insult to his grandchildren. And yes, they are HIS grandchildren. These are his son’s children. These are the grandchildren of his wife. If he calls them his grandchildren, then they are REALLY his grandchildren. How disgusting for Hillary to insinuate that these kids, because they aren’t biologically related to Sanders, are “less than” or not “real.” Does she realize how many people she has just insulted in one snarky swoop?
But she’s really hoping that the new “attack Bernie” strategy will pay off and distract people from the biggest Google search question that people are asking about her right now: “Will Hillary Clinton get prosecuted?” And only the bravest of journalists even dares touch that question, should they get an audience with the queen.
Why, Mrs. Clinton, what exactly was so upsetting about THAT question, hmmm?
This is all very interesting and entertaining. The only time the MSM/DNC axis overlooks criticism of a Democrat is when it comes from another Democrat. The rest of the time anything even slightly critical of Democrats is considered blasphemy. It reminds me of the 2008 Democrat primary where the racist Obama supporters waged nuclear war with the feminazi Clinton supporters – and won. Obama’s sole contribution to the nation was that he managed to topple the House of Clinton.
Nevertheless, there is zero doubt that Hillary! will win the Democrat nomination. The modern Democrat Party is a sewer of toxic identity politics. Hillary! is a woman, while her Democrat opponents are white straight men. Identity – meaning race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. – is everything to Democrats.
Rebecca says: It’s a mark of something that Sanders’ potential to be the first Jewish president in American history is not viewed as an asset under the laws governing identity politics.
Optimizer says: If I knew that I had forgotten. It’s hard to think of a Democrat as being of any religion, really.
It would be pretty hilarious if he won. They don’t admit it, but the Democratic party is extraordinarily anti-Semitic. The odd thing is that most Jews are liberals. My only explanation is that about half of Jews are only Jews ethnically – either not religious or outright atheists – and they embrace the urban elitist culture.
Jodi Giddings says: I’m adopted. And what Clinton said is highly insulting.
That said, it certainly reveals her true colors, doesn’t it? If you’re not of the Royal Clinton Bloodline, you’re nothing but a lowly muggle. It’s a wonder she didn’t advocate aborting Bernie’s adopted g-kids.
Optimizer says: It’s dishonest too. Bill Clinton wasn’t born with the name “Bill Clinton”. “Clinton” comes from his adoptive step-father.
Optimizer says: I endured viewing the thing and I take it back. She DOES seem to be suggesting that her grandchild is extraordinary while others (presumably Bernie’s) are not – which DOES show that she’s an asshole, but the idea that she’s saying that because they’re adopted or “step”, or whatever, has been completely made up by the chain of writers. That part actually reflects poorly on them, not her, in that it would even occur to them.
6 Comments