She was right. Say it. The Bruni edition

[lapucelle]

I’m talking to you, Frank.

While your support for Mrs. Clinton pre-November 9, 2017 was evident, it was often couched with helpful advice for the clumsy candidate.

Not so the day after:

"She was a profoundly flawed candidate unable to make an easy connection with voters. She was forever surrounded by messes: some of her own making, some blown out of proportion by the news media, all of them exhausting to voters who had lived through a quarter century of political melodrama with her."

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/09/opinion/donald-trumps-shocking-success.html

And then there’s this more recently:

"They’re still not sure how much of Trump’s victory had to do with Hillary Clinton’s flaws versus the party’s poor grasp of America, and the more they focus on the former, tattling for the tell-all book “Shattered” and then tittering over its revelations, the less they own up to the latter."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/10/opinion/sunday/can-democrats-save-themselves.html

Post-election Mr. Bruni has been walking a fine line that seems to ensure he is on the "correct" side. It reads like narrative shopping, this movement to and fro to as the conventional wisdom shifts from one standard story line to the next. He even suggested that Mrs. Clinton run for mayor so she could "settle scores", because, you know, that's what Hillary does.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/06/opinion/sunday/rumors-of-hillary-clintons-comebackhas

It has all led people to think, “Et tu, Bruni?’

Today’s column is a start, but it’s not enough. Now that the newspaper of record that employs you has eliminated the desk of the public editor (the editorial board's representative of the people) it’s time to step up.

https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2017/05/31/new-york-times-failing-its-readers-eliminating-public-editor/216720

Stop worry about being on the correct side. Be on the right side.

Silence = complicity

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029307974

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029311060
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029316314
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029325259
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029330347

[maxsolomon]

1. I read Bruni's piece this morning (in my print edition) and thought "yeah, duh".

it was clear as a bell over a year ago that she was a reasonable centrist and trump was a megalomaniac conning the entire GOP base.

her main flaw: HRC was a woman on a sexist planet.

[rock]

2. She was so flawed

She could only beat Trump by 3 million votes. Sad.

[Igel]

4. She couldn't beat him where it counted.

We sometimes don't like the system, but it's built on a few different ideas about how to protect minority views in ways that cut across the population in different ways in a decentralized fashion.

Makes it harder for one group to impose a deep-rooted or long-term tyranny--whether a person, a party, or an area.

[nikibatts]

6. I surmise that where it counted they and the Russians a cheated and contrived.

Where it counted, she didn't lose by much. close enough that bots in the right place at the right time could have persuaded folks to sit home or vote 3rd party.

[mopinko]

8. imagine the election w/o the bernie bros.

not talking about bernie, personally, but the flood of wedge drivers that appeared out of nowhere. (ok, out of moldova, but not out of american politics.)

[R B Garr]

3. K&R

Lots more will be walking back their empty criticisms of Hillary. They have been proven so wrong now that we see the monster that was unleashed on us and how he got where he is by vapid and constant denigration of our candidate.

[librechik]

5. Can we please blame Russia instead of Clinton?

Get with reality instead of what you feel you must believe because you bought in to the "Clinton is a lesser evil " crap. She was never evil, just female. For some people that's all it takes.

Votes in the wrong places (i.e. in urban areas) is racist and wrong. We are stuck in an antique voting paradigm that is far from democracy.

[lapucelle]

7. I just want the press to stop exonerating themselves

for their part in putting Trump in the White House. Their function in a free democracy is so crucial that their voice is protected by the very first amendment in the Bill of Rights. With that right comes the duty to report in the public interest. They abrogated their duty in pursuit of revenue and ratings. I'm calling them out.

Hillary warned us and the press mocked her and trivialized her concerns. She was smarter and better informed than they were; Instead of listening, they told us she was flawed and insisted that she take responsibility.

They knew what they were doing before the election. Their readers told them:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/11/public-editor/the-truth-about-false-balance.html

And their very own Liberal Conscience warned them as well:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/05/opinion/hillary-clinton-gets-gored.html?mcubz=1

Yet they were still doing it as recently as May:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/17/opinion/false-equivalence-between-trump-and-clinton-yet-again.html?mcubz=1

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/06/opinion/two-presidential-candidates-stuck-in-time.html

Hillary was right. They need to say it.