Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Amaryllis

(9,524 posts)
Mon Sep 18, 2017, 09:03 PM Sep 2017

"Let Hillary Clinton roar." Need to face forces that are still there; not scapegoat her.

Let Hillary Clinton roar
by Susan Bordo

Editors's note: Susan Bordo is the Otis A. Singletary Chair in the Humanities and Professor of Gender and Women's Studies at the University of Kentucky. Her new book is "The Destruction of Hillary Clinton." The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

(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.

(Lots snipped)

The fact is, consumers of the popular media -- and not just Fox -- were virtually bludgeoned into dislike and suspicion of Clinton. Even the most sympathetic op-eds invariably would genuflect to her "flaws." The caricatures, no matter how ill-founded, became nailed into popular consciousness. So should we be surprised to see them surface yet again in reaction to her book?

The mainstream media has also yet to speculate -- let alone diagnose -- what seems perfectly obvious to anyone with an ounce of common sense: that Clinton's electoral college loss was certainly not primarily due to whatever mistakes she may have made, but an unusually multi-faceted and highly potent combination of disparate assaults: from the left, the right, the Russians, the FBI, a flagrantly lying opponent who made a chant of her suitability for prison, and yes, the media itself.

I mean, really: How could anyone have survived all that? It was, as she herself describes it, a perfect storm. Yet nearly 66 million stood by her, many of whom remain intensely devoted supporters.

When, too, has any election culminated in a greater disaster for democracy? No wonder the Democrats, the pundits, and the voters themselves are so eager to disown their own complicity and to cast Clinton as the sole cause of our present situation.

"She gave us Trump," disgruntled Sanders supporters like to say. No, Trump's win is the result of many things, and we would do better to try to unpack them with precision and a view to complexity rather than scapegoat Clinton or her campaign.

Hillary Clinton may have been a special kind of lightning rod, but the elements that brought her down are still bristling in our atmosphere, ready to strike again, and we need to face them. The fact is that is it only when we've done that that we will be able to truly "move on."

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

9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
"Let Hillary Clinton roar." Need to face forces that are still there; not scapegoat her. (Original Post) Amaryllis Sep 2017 OP
Bordo has a book called "The Destruction of Hillary Clinton". lapucelle Sep 2017 #1
Happy to rec this mcar Sep 2017 #2
K&R Scurrilous Sep 2017 #3
And there it is. Eko Sep 2017 #4
Not to mention Interstate Crosscheck and voter suppression by repubs. Hillary in her interview with Amaryllis Sep 2017 #5
K&R brer cat Sep 2017 #6
Yes. Now! Not in eight to twelve years... NurseJackie Sep 2017 #7
So true. But as usual Jakes Progress Sep 2017 #8
People who say "she gave us Trump" have to believe that Russia would have been fine pnwmom Sep 2017 #9

Eko

(7,272 posts)
4. And there it is.
Mon Sep 18, 2017, 09:36 PM
Sep 2017

""She gave us Trump," disgruntled Sanders supporters like to say. No, Trump's win is the result of many things, and we would do better to try to unpack them with precision and a view to complexity rather than scapegoat Clinton or her campaign."

If you take that reason away, "She gave us Trump" which also implies that the Democratic party did also, you take away the force behind "The model of the Democratic Party is failing". All of that discounts the involvement of the Russians in our election, the public FBI investigation into Clinton while having a serious private Trump investigation, gerrymandering, the media and the simple fact that more people voted for her and for Democrats in most elections. Clinton loosing is not a referendum on the Democratic party and it does not give power to the far left to the point that we need to bow our knees and take being called republican lite without fighting back from sections in and out of our party. The Democratic party is not republican lite, we are not corporate shills, we are not war mongers. We are the party that does the most for most Americans to make a better life and country, period.

Amaryllis

(9,524 posts)
5. Not to mention Interstate Crosscheck and voter suppression by repubs. Hillary in her interview with
Mon Sep 18, 2017, 10:18 PM
Sep 2017

Terry Gross says there was far more voter suppression that people realize. And this was the first election without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, which was gutted by SCOTUS.
And there are the problems with voting machines. So many factors that went into this loss.

NurseJackie

(42,862 posts)
7. Yes. Now! Not in eight to twelve years...
Mon Sep 18, 2017, 10:30 PM
Sep 2017

... let Hillary speak. She has something important to say. Every page. Every single page.

Jakes Progress

(11,122 posts)
8. So true. But as usual
Tue Sep 19, 2017, 12:00 AM
Sep 2017

people would rather follow the russian bots or the media whores than actually see and acknowledge the truth. Thinking is just so hard. You know?

pnwmom

(108,972 posts)
9. People who say "she gave us Trump" have to believe that Russia would have been fine
Tue Sep 19, 2017, 12:04 AM
Sep 2017

with Bernie as President, and would not have intervened to help their chosen candidate, DT.

Which is a very, very odd thing for Bernie supporters to think. Why on earth would DT have been fine with Bernie as President?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"Let Hillary Clinton roar...