Let Hillary Clinton roar

[MrsCoffee]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/13/opinions/let-hillary-clinton-roar-bordo/index.html

By Susan Bordo
Updated 3:54 PM ET, Wed September 13, 2017

(CNN)Something very strange is going on in post-mortems about the 2016 election. On the one hand, the hard evidence is piling up that a combination of factors largely outside of Hillary Clinton's control were responsible for her loss to Donald Trump. On the other hand, many apparently don't want Hillary Clinton to talk about any of that.

Every day, we hear fresh reports of the extent and insidious nature of Russian interference in the promotion of fake news stories and nasty accusations about Hillary Clinton's character -- a smear campaign that was bound to have had an effect on voters' perceptions (why else would the Russians invest so much energy and money?). But when Clinton mentions the Russians, she's accused of shuffling responsibility away from herself.

Studies by respected think tanks such as Harvard's Shorenstein Center have documented a negative bias against Clinton in ordinary news reporting. This was not "fake news" but a daily, repetitive media buzz of (often GOP-inspired) "scandals" and "suspect" activity, which always had Clinton hiding something, from her basement server to her pneumonia. And this obscured coverage of her policy speeches and core messages.

But she dare not talk about that, lest she be seen as boo-hooing about unfair treatment by the press.

-snip-

Interesting that no one criticized the authors for "looking backward" when "Shattered," a book that puts the blame squarely on Clinton and her campaign, was published. Or when Bernie Sanders, who now suggests "it's a little bit silly" to talk about the election, published his own diagnosis a week after the election. Yet on Sunday, Susan Chira, in The New York Times, called Hillary Clinton "the woman who won't go away," and as I write this, the day after publication of Clinton's new book "What Happened," the annoyed, often vicious customer reviews are piling up on Amazon.

[Gothmog]

1. K&R

[NastyRiffraff]

2. Apparently, only Sanders is allowed to comment on the election

He does have the "right" race and gender, after all.

[mopinko]

5. and he is the "victim" of the big bad witch.

so, it's all good.

[Roy Rolling]

6. Why do you have to go there?

This is not about Bernie Sanders. That is exactly how the right-wing wishes to frame things--discord between Sanders and Clinton. Don't help them, please.

[MrsCoffee]

10. Because, as mentioned in the article, it highlights the difference in how she is treated.

That is not a right wing framing. It is just facts.

[NastyRiffraff]

38. You beat me to it!

Thanks. I'm pissed at the difference in the way women are treated, whether it involves Sanders or not. In this case, Sanders is shown to be treated differently. The man gets to scold and point his finger, get angry, interrupt constantly, even show up in rumpled clothes and his hair a mess. Had Hillary done that...well, we can imagine.

[left-of-center2012]

11. "This is not about Bernie Sanders"

Exactly.

The more time spent attacking Bernie,
the less time spent defeating the GOP in 2018 and 2020.

[MrsCoffee]

12. How is pointing out that Bernie was treated differently attacking Bernie?

What the hell.

[NurseJackie]

14. It's not. Why are facts threatening to them? Weird, huh?

[calimary]

48. No kidding.

[R B Garr]

15. Exactly. This is why the "popularity" comments are all so hollow, because

he is protected from even the slightest observations, let alone criticism. There were polls that included that caveat about him last year -- his "popularity" was largely because he was never attacked.

Now we have our national ticket candidate finally sharing her thoughts and experiences, and it's still not acceptable. Can you imagine if his fans had to endure attacks anything close to what Hillary faced. It's truly absurd and just not sustainable.

Go Hillary! I'm glad she is finally sharing her story.

[RiverStone]

20. Does Hillary suggest stratigies to win in 2018?

I have not read her book a d this is not an attack, just a question.

The take away I'm hoping for is someplace in the mix, her reveals/mistakes offer ideas needed to win in 2018.

[R B Garr]

22. What I read loud and clear so far (haven't read it yet, just internet excerpts) is

to quit smearing Democrats and hobbling them with cynical lies. That already makes a lot of sense to me.

[left-of-center2012]

27. Not that I read

It's all on 2016

[Hekate]

31. When the country was attacked on December 7, 1941, it was understood as an Act of War

Was it useful to "look backward"?

As in: Why did this happen? How was it carried out? Who in Japan was supporting this? What were the ties to Germany and Italy? Were there any US citizens supporting the ideologies of, say, Hitler? Was there infiltration into the US government itself? How badly had our internal security been breached?

Do you think FDR et al. simply started the draft and the munitions plants without asking these questions?

WE WERE ATTACKED BY A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT AND ITS AGENTS LAST YEAR. Sure, a Democratic candidate "lost" the presidential election, but she is also one of the finest analytic minds in the business. Should we be telling her she has nothing to contribute? Why?

She not only has every right to speak out, but why on Earth would we deprive ourselves of her voice at this time? Why?

[MLAA]

32. +1

[lunamagica]

40. Great analogy!

[ehrnst]

45. You mean like Al Gore and Jimmy Carter did in their postmortem books?

Any time that HRC points out the attacks on her by certain politician on the left, she is told that she's BEING DIVISIVE and we have NOTHING TO LEARN from that sort of actual words pointing it out.

I think that her perceptions do much towards learning what alleged Democrats should not be doing to weaken their own candidate's chances.

[stevenleser]

59. The voters treated him differently. Hillary got 4 million more votes.

The DNC had nothing to do with that.

[RiverStone]

18. Agree x 100! n/t

[ehrnst]

17. Sanders called her looking back over the election "silly," after he did it himself

I suppose he's doing the right wing's bidding as well, if what you say is true.

[Hekate]

33. He took time out from the GE campaign to write his own book. Hmmmmm

[ehrnst]

43. Probably on the plane.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/bernie-sanders-private-plane?utm_term=.yxylmeo18#.mxLoA2Zvj

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

55. It's inevitable... like night follows day.

[RiverStone]

16. Apparently, some want to keep the B vs H battle going forever

How does thus help us win in 2018?

[ehrnst]

19. How does not understanding what happened in 2016 help us in 2018? (nt)

[left-of-center2012]

28. How does thus help us win in 2018?

Maybe it's all a GOP/Russian plot to defeat Democrats?

[QC]

35. Some people don't want us to win in 2018. n/t

[ehrnst]

46. Yep.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

56. It doesn't... it's way past time to move the fuck on!

Instead of re-opening old wounds.

[niyad]

24. exactly

[oasis]

3. "And the TRUTH shall set you free".

[oasis]

25. K and R

[Pacifist Patriot]

4. Excellent opinion piece.

Thanks for posting!

[llmart]

7. Yeah, and CNN was just as culpable....

"a daily, repetitive media buzz of (often GOP-inspired) "scandals" and "suspect" activity, which always had Clinton hiding something, from her basement server to her pneumonia."

[nikatnyte]

8. No Y chromosome

Why is HRC being treated differently? Look no further than her gender. Misogyny is alive and well in the good old USA. (Perhaps a bit simplistic an explanation, but largely true.)

[niyad]

23. and yet, even here, people will deny the virulent misogyny vehemntly.

[YoungDemCA]

69. Yeah, there's no possible reason to criticize Hillary Clinton other than because of her gender.

Ya nailed it there. Genius!

[hamsterjill]

9. In my book, Hillary can do anything she damn well pleases.

She has EARNED it!

[leftofcool]

26. +1000

[calimary]

49. Damn right, dammit!

[TNNurse]

13. Well said.

[niyad]

21. k and r

[byronius]

29. You know, I've always been immune to the Hate Hillary thing.

I tend to trust my own innate judgment about people, having learned in general that the larger and louder the chorus the less they probably know. A little history should serve to point out that often the single small voice is closer to truth than the thousand cacaphonous brays, that smear is a standard technique to be guarded against, that enormous and impressive edifices built to the sky often crumble away after a time because the foundations were sand --

'Common sense.' Common sense told me Barack Obama was a dedicated civil servant. Common sense tells me Hillary is a dedicated civil servant. It's what I care about. Civil service. Dedication to the American Idea, which should in its purest form guide humanity to better and better futures. That's what I love. That's what I see in those two people. Dedicated, thoughtful, civil service.

Yes, humans make mistakes, and we need to choose leadership for competence. She had it. She would have helped. Considering the purposeful degradation of civil life and the tattered state of our democracy, we were lucky to have someone like her -- just like we were sooooo lucky to have Barack Obama.

Good critical thinking is essential to growing beyond the standard primal mob-mind that was so important a million years ago but now threatens the species. The facts are on her side, and no steady stream of invective from the well-pressed should be able to sway the heart of True Americans.

[TeapotInATempest]

30. Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

I work in a field in which we ALWAYS have post-mortems after an incident, and create reports with a "Lessons Learned" section, to help ensure a similar incident does not occur again.

Why does anyone expect 2018 - or 2020 for that matter - to be any different if we don't first "look backward" at all the factors that caused this mess in the first place? I, for one, welcome input from the person who actually has first-hand knowledge of what occurred, just as I would insist upon including it while conducting an incident investigation.

[Hekate]

34. +1

[Cuthbert Allgood]

37. It would be nice if somewhere Clinton said "I should have gone to Wisconsin."

And address some of the other mistakes she made instead of passing it off everywhere else. Then we would have a real post-mortem. Because I don't think the Russians set up the Illinois border and kept her out of the state. And her being here would likely have won this state for her. Many people told her that, but she didn't listen. Which apparently isn't her fault.

[NurseJackie]

39. Good grief.

[lunamagica]

42. Has Sanders acknowleged any mistake in his campaign? Any mistake at all?

[treestar]

61. Oh no, in fact, Bernie was "cheated"

out of the nomination. He made no mistakes. Everything was the DNC's fault.

[ehrnst]

47. Did you read the book?

I certainly hope that people who say that we should "look forwards not backwards" have something other to offer than to "visit Wisconsin" as though that will make all the difference.

And I think that you're maybe just missing a little something else that was going on in Wisconsin...

https://www.thenation.com/article/wisconsins-voter-id-law-suppressed-200000-votes-trump-won-by-23000/

And didn't all that focus on "well Al Gore should totes have had a big enough lead in Florida to overcome all those hanging chads and malfeasance" do so much to help John Kerry to victory in 2004?

And it's not like she lost the popular vote by a landslide, and blamed it on long-standing state level policies that required people to read websites or their open their mail to understand.

[JI7]

52. the visit wisconsin thing is bs. it might make sense if Feingold had won and Clinton lost

but feingold lost the state also.

and the place has been infested by scott walker , priebus and paul ryan's influence in recent years.

the supreme court striking down the voting rights act had more to do with losses.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

62. Feingold told her she needed to come.

He said he needed the help. He, among others, saw what was happening and begged for help. And he got nothing.

Living here, I might have a better handle on things than those that don't. Or not, I guess. You all are pretty smart.

[ehrnst]

67. So you think that her visting would have overcome the voter suppression and saved him?

https://www.thenation.com/article/wisconsins-voter-id-law-suppressed-200000-votes-trump-won-by-23000/

This missed visit to Wisconsin becomes more mythically powerful by the day....

[Cuthbert Allgood]

68. She lost a state she never went to during the general election.

That's like Campaigning 101. Nobody should be shocked by that.

Maybe she would have picked up more votes. Is that so hard for you to cipher out ?

But, sure, it's not her fault even though her husband who won two elections told her to go and a guy who was a senator and is still really loved in the state begged her to come because he saw what was happening. Yeah, fuck those guys, apparently. What do they know? Of course they were right, but not because they were right, right, but because all these other things accidentally caused EXACTLY what they said was going to happen. What a coincidence.

Like Hillary, maybe you want to listen to people that actually live here.

[ehrnst]

70. I guess that visit IS magical if a person from WI says so...

[Cuthbert Allgood]

71. So Bill Clinton and Feingold were wrong?

Is that what we're saying?

There is NOTHING Hillary could have done to win Wisconsin? She couldn't have picked up 25,000 votes by actually visiting here? Why do politicians visit anywhere there if they can't get that small a number of votes with a few visits?

[ehrnst]

72. You've stated more than once that being from WI gives you

authority on the topic as the final word.

Why on earth would I listen to anyone who wasn't from WI?


https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=9596962

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=9596531


https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=9596537

[Cuthbert Allgood]

73. So you have nothing?

Right?

Don't want to point out the problems with what people told Clinton and basic campaign strategy? She took Wisconsin for granted and it backfired on her. Worse, she was told it was going south and ignored it. Why can't she admit it so that we actually learn from it. That is what everyone claims this is about.

[ehrnst]

74. Well, I'm not from Wisconsin - how could I have any credibility for seeing into alternate realities

concerning a trip to Wisconsin.

You keep saying that.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

63. Yeah, I'm aware of the voter ID law in my own state.

Feingold and Bill Clinton and a lot of others told her she needed to get here. She ignored that. How'd that work for her?

[ehrnst]

44. Because the feels! She is irritating to a bunch of MEN

and the women who draw their power and identity from the men that they align with...

[lunamagica]

41. Oh, how I love that headline!

Yes, let Hillary roar!

[Alice11111]

50. Do you think she has decided to shadow him, telling him

the right thing to do??

[DesertRat]

51. K&R

[BainsBane]

53. The reaction to her book

Is full of the very sexism, hypocrisy, and all around idiocy that made Trump president.
The attacks are as dishonest and devoid of content as they were during their the election.
I take it hem personally because I know they are as much about the millions who voted for her as Hillary herself.

I will never forget, and I will never forgive.

[LittleBlue]

54. People just don't like her enough to elect her as president

She had two chances, two more than most people, to win. Many of the factors in 2016 were out of her control. But she was the overwhelming favorite in 2008 and lost that too. People will say "but Obama was special." That makes two excuses for why she never became president.

Truthfully, it just wasn't in the cards for her. Too many people dislike her for her to win the presidency. Groper Don bragged about sexually assaulting women and being attracted to his daughter. Those are two disasters that would normally sink any candidate. Yet, he won against all the odds. Obama prevailed against astronomically long odds too. Unlike Littlehands, he didn't have a built in base of support. He was running in a Democratic primary against the Democratic anointed. There's a pattern here and it isn't Russia.

I sincerely hope that Hillary has the wisdom to do some self-reflection in her book. If the entire thing is just blaming other people, from Bernie, to Russia, to deplorables, fake news, Jill Stein, unfair media, etc etc then it's just misdirected blame. A full analysis is needed on why the same prohibitive favorite lost and election and a primary that were overwhelmingly in her favor, and try to find parallels based on history repeating, not making 12 different unique excuses.

[oasis]

57. Before she's done, her detractors will wish they had the power to

make her president. A present, Hillary has no reason to bite her tongue and dance around sensitive subjects. She posseses a huge intellect and now has a giant megaphone with which to say what's exactly on her mind.

Time to take names and kick ass. Look out world, here she comes.

[dlk]

60. The Misogyny is Still Very Real and Very Pervasive

How much evidence does it take? Like racism, it needs to be called out and confronted, head-on, to be overcome. Ignoring it won't make it disappear. In many ways, it's getting worse.

[m-lekktor]

64. "Shattered" is an excellent book!nt

[MrsCoffee]

66. .

[LAS14]

65. K & R