Be prepared for a new book about Hillary campaign

[question everything]

Clinton campaign plagued by bickering

The following is an excerpt adapted from “Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton’s Doomed Campaign,” which will be released on April 18. Copyright © 2017 by Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes. Published by Crown, an imprint of the Crown Publishing Group, a division of Penguin Random House, LLC.

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/328405-clinton-campaign-plagued-by-bickering

[wildeyed]

1. I wanna read Traitor: Inside Donald Trump's Fifth Column

So now we are going to do What about her bickering instead of What about his collusion with Russia to undermine the integrity of our elections? Sigh. And god forbid a woman get cranky with her staff during a long and hard fought campaign... Exhibit A. This is why we hate the press.

[JHan]

2. Lol, true. We won't ever see that though but these authors are trustworthy

Based on their previous book. I am not surprised at the excerpt - I mean I've read enough biographies of LBJ to JFK to FDR to Eisenhower ....politicians have their moments, people of power - great people - have a side to them that just comes with the territory. Based on the excerpt I am glad she didn't speak out against trade - she would have been wrong if she did. The zeitgeist of last year was such that a pragmatist would be demonized no matter what. There was a lot out of her control and quite a bit in her control as well. I just find it curious how quickly the authors came out with this book. Their last effort was Hillarys stint as sec of state and its a weighty and lengthy read. Will have to wait and see how this is received.

[wildeyed]

3. Yes. Voters wanted to be lied to.

Anything less was 'corrupt' and 'establishment'. Don't you love how DT is all like "Wow, healthcare is sooooo complicated! Who knew? Oh wait, HILLARY CLINTON KNEW. But when she said so, she got hammered for not being 'visionary' on the left and for being 'socialist' on the right. Now everyone pretty much agrees she was correct.

Oh well, imagine the beating she would be taking now if she did win. I guess voters need to hit bottom with their GOP voting ways. I keep thinking we are there, but no, not at the bottom yet. Sad....

[JHan]

4. You know what I was impressed with ? remember that leaked audio?

Where she said she didn't want to promise more than she could deliver?

How rare is that? I was floored.

Also, there are a lot of misguided arguments about the "establishment". smh.

[wildeyed]

5. In general, there seems to be much confusion

over what is desirable and what is actually possible. We KNEW that the GOP health 'plan' they have been flogging for eternity was not a real possibility because MATH. You cannot lower taxes, keep coverage for pre-existing conditions AND get rid of the individual mandate. Not possible. Same for Sanders' plan. It was too expensive and would never make it through the congress, even if Dems had majorities. Clinton told the truth. Her plan was incremental because you can only get small increments of improvement on something as big, expensive and complicated as health care. But too hard for voters to comprehend, I guess.... They liked the lies, so instead we are going to get more stupid gridlock and and GOP obstructionism even though they control EVERYTHING! This is so stupid and pointless, I can't even... But this is what people voted for. All or nothing. So they get nothing.

And then there is the issue of experience. As you get more experienced and build more coalitions, you become "The Establishment". It's part of the winning thing.... The people who are not part of the establishment are either not serious players or they lost too many elections.

Oh well. They will learn. Some of the young idealist in my town who talked a bunch of smack during the last primary are getting seriously involved now, which I think is GREAT. We really do need some new blood, but also, in 2-3 years I can laugh and say "It's harder than it looks, right? I told you so!" THEY will be the establishment soon

[JHan]

6. Here's a joke,,

I'm 22 and already get painted as "establishment". I've Lost count of the times I've been called a shill by some of my peers who are real quiet these days

[wildeyed]

7. Oh wow.

I don't think you can be 'establishment' at 22 unless you parents are serious big shots. Even then it would be hard. I mean, legally, you could only take a drink last year!



I am older, but have many younger friends who know I am wildly political and not in an establishment way. But I am very realistic too. Some might call it cynical, but I just don't expect much from politicians, in general. It is called 'politics' for a reason. It is POLITICAL. Consensus must be found in a democracy. That means compromise. Not hard to understand, IMO. Doesn't make me a shill or the establishment.

I am cold AF when I look at a politician. What can they realistically accomplish? How much can they be pressured on issues that matter to me? I don't have to fall in love. In fact, I TRY to keep it really business-like in my head. I felt guilty for liking Obama so much. It seemed like a total repudiation of my activist commitment. Politicians are there to be pressured. You don't LIKE them! If you do, they can use you instead, give you less than you earned through GOTV or protests. Not smart.

I respect Hillary Clinton. A bunch. She would have been a solid, smart, hard working, competent leader. Not sure why that wasn't enough. I find both Trump and Sanders to be loud and really high maintenance. Their policy positions are unrealistic. I didn't think either was open to outside pressure, either. They are both up in their own heads a bunch and don't listen to other POV or find consensus well. Oh well. It is what it is....

[JHan]

8. I'm a rich coastal elite without being a rich coastal elite lmao.

Politics is nasty, partisan and corruptive. There's a ton of horse trading and compromise.

The flaw with a lot of idealists is assuming that there's some unicorn politician who will not be affected by the realities - which is impossible - but the thinking is also flawed because the key is knowing how to navigate corridors of power to implement what you want done, agendas die at the altar of purity.

As a previous hillary skeptic ( and I was real skeptical) I now respect her as well. And you have to do research. Bad press about Hillary harangues and stalks you. So I decided to do some work and look more deeply into her record, her stances, the views of people - friend and foe - who worked with her and came away with someone I could enthusiastically vote for.

And about Sanders - if he won the nomination and became President, he would have turned out a lot like Obama. He and Obama campaigned as gadflies ( Sanders ended up being a bit more divisive because he lacks Obama's ability to be populist without targeting or singling out groups and Sanders' impetus is outrage).. As soon as Obama reached the executive branch, he turned centrist. This is the reality. Progressives must remember that every incremental change is progress forward and we can't risk undoing progress that did not come about cheaply.

[wildeyed]

9. I always knew that Obama was a political moderate

and a bit hawkish on foreign policy, even during the campaign. He did say so. I was in love, but not so much in love that I didn't read his policy positions. The reason I supported him so enthusiastically and so early on was his promise to make us the UNITED States of America. I knew that being united meant compromise. And I was ok with that. Unfortunately, Mitch McConnell and company had other plans. They would rather wreck our democratic institutions than compromise. That was where I was blinded by love. I thought everyone would succumb to his charisma and that they wanted the country to be united and strong too. Wrong. So deeply, painfully wrong about that one....

But I felt like I got pretty much what I bargained for with Obama. He was inexperienced at the beginning, just like Clinton supporters warned us about. But he had the temperament and intellect to grow into the job. Which he did. And he got the ACA passed. People were mad that it wasn't single-payer, but he did it without a single Republican vote. Single-payer didn't have the votes, was never going to have the votes. It was ACA or what we had before, which was HORRIBLE. Passing ACA, as imperfect as it is, was a huge accomplishment. A legislative accomplishment that Trump will never be able to mimic.

Sanders main flaw as a politician is his inability to enlarge his base of support. People who like his message really like his message. But part of his message was he never changes his message which means that he could not enlarge his message for those who do not respond to his original message. As an activist, I disliked him BECAUSE he never varied his message. It was clear that he had different priorities than I did and was not persuadable to any other POV. He is not interested in building consensus, which limits him immensely as a politician.

Don't get me wrong, I would have supported him ENTHUSIASTICALLY if he won. But I doubt he would have gotten any of his agenda done. In fairness, not sure that anyone could get anything done in the current climate. But his policy positions just don't work in any realistic scenario.

As far as Hillary Clinton, I have been following her career since I was young so I already knew that much of the negative press was manufactured. I have decades of practice with rolling my eyes at fake news about Hillary Clinton. I just tune the BS about her out automatically now. Yeah, she is not perfect. But she is not the conniving beotch that people make her out to be either.