General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Hillary's Email: How to deal with deleting selected items in a large amount of email. [View all]Igel
(35,320 posts)Instead of saying, "Everybody gives HRC all the good will, and suspicion and good judgment only matter for those who hate her" it should go the other way around.
"HRC has to prove that she'll make a good CiC, chief executive, principled negotiation in foreign affairs by demonstrating sound judgment as confirmation to those who love her, enough evidence to tip the balance for those who are uncommitted, and repudiatory evidence to at least quiet those who hate her.
"Evidence of actual bad judgment is really only important for those who already are committed to her, proof that she's not the best candidate. For everybody else, lack of excellent judgment is enough."
It's not like we need to find evidence to show she's not qualified for her coronation. All evidence goes into the hopper and is weighed, possibly weighted by partisan filters and MSM spin (as well as timing, context, etc.). What's needed is enough evidence that she's a sound enough candidate to be elected by 50% + 1 of those voting. Early on in the process, negative evidence is easier to deal with than positive evidence. It's something that (D) strategists do in trying to shape the image of opponents to make them unelectable in the general election, or remove possible strong contenders during the (R) primary phase of the selection process; it's something that they know in vetting and defusing anything that could derail a (D) candidate, either in the primaries or the generals.