Skip to main content

Hillary Clinton Will Never Be The President

Got your attention, didn't I? But it's true. It's very simple: If you have some liability, some weakness, you need something powerful to cancel it out. You need goodwill, or humor, or exceptional intelligence. Hillary has at least 2 weaknesses: Her husband President Clinton, and her own unpleasant disposition, magnified by her impressive talent for pathological dishonesty and evasion. In short, people don't like her. People vote for people they like. We might say that the voting public has no good reason to like or trust someone, but if they do, they do. The American people are capable of overlooking a lot if they like you. Bill Clinton committed a felony while in office; did it matter? Nope. The people generally acted like it was the Republicans' fault that we even heard about it.

Reagan could have easily gotten impeached for Iran-Contra; doesn't matter. We liked him.

George W. Bush flat-out lied to us about their use of waterboarding; it won't matter. He'll be more fondly remembered than Clinton. Likability.

I recall in 2008, Hillary had a mildly unexpected primary win in Nevada, I think. I watched her speech. Everybody who wins has a line that touts the growing base of their appeal. They do it to energize supporters, and convince the differently committed that the train is leaving, so to speak. Hillary said something like, "And our coalition includes Republicans who've seen the light." I've never had such a negative reaction to a line, ever. It was tone-deaf. Here she was, trying to suggest that she's going to win, but essentially calling voters she'll need idiots for not supporting her earlier. She acts like she is a gift to the American people, and not the other way around.

I understand that all politicians have huge egos. It comes with the game. But you've got to be able to feign humility believably. She can't. At all. You can't win like that.

Let me say that the people do not resign themselves to their presidents, ordinarily. There has to be a large segment of people who wants to vote for someone. Tell me, which groups of people would find Hillary Clinton compelling that would not also find any other Democrat compelling? I don't see her overcoming the visceral dislike of Republicans. I don't see how she can own Obama's record without being torpedoed by it. (Benghazi, anyone?) She doesn't talk like a president; rooms don't crackle when she enters; she has power, but it's inertia, not the power of individuality.

I said Obama would be president a solid 2 years before the election. You can feel presidents coming, if you pay attention. It's a little more Student Council-ish than we'd like, but it's reality. The game of politics is distinct from the work of governing. Hillary doesn't have "it," and she never really did. Let's be real: if the "front-runner" gets beat by a freshman senator with no real accomplishments whatsoever, how fresh will she seem this time?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Dear Alyse

 Today, you’re 35. Or at least you would be, in this place. You probably know this, but we’re OK. Not great, but OK. We know you wouldn’t want us moping around and weeping all the time. We try not to. Actually, I guess part of the problem is that you didn’t know how much we loved you. And that you didn’t know how to love yourself. I hope you have gotten to Love by now. Not a place, but fills everything in every way. I’m not Him, but he probably said, “Dear daughter/sister, you have been terribly hard on yourself. Rest now, and be at peace.” Anyway, teaching is going well, and I tell the kids all about you. They all say you are pretty. I usually can keep the boys from saying something gross for a few seconds. Mom and I are going to the game tonight. And like 6 more times, before I go back to South Carolina. I have seen Nicky twice, but I myself haven’t seen your younger kids. Bob took pictures of the day we said goodbye, and we did a family picture at the Abbey. I literally almost a...

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...

My Thoughts On The Harrison Butker Commencement Speech

Update: I read the whole thing. I’m sorry, but what a weirdo. I thought you [Tom Darrow, of Denver, CO] made a trenchant case for why lockdowns are bad, and I definitely appreciated it. But a graduation speech is *not* the place for that. Secondly, this is an august event. It always is. I would never address the President of the United States in this manner. Never. Even the previous president, though he deserves it, if anyone does. Thirdly, the affirmations of Catholic identity should be more general. He has no authority to propound with specificity on all matters of great consequence. It has all the hallmarks of a culture war broadside, and again, a layman shouldn’t speak like this. The respect and reverence due the clergy is *always due,* even if they are weak, and outright wrong. We just don’t brush them aside like corrupt Mafia dons, to make a point. Fourthly, I don’t know where anyone gets the idea that the TLM is how God demands to be worshipped. The Church doesn’t teach that. ...