How the ex-DNC chair ruined Clinton’s chance at 2020

anatta said:
The explosive book by the former head of the Democratic National Committee is rocking the political world with its tales of Hillary Clinton’s brazen corruption and tawdry deceits. To add extra punch to her insider’s account, Brazile is telling interviewers that Clinton’s 2016 campaign was “sterile” and a “cult,” and mocking it as sexless and joyless.

She even writes that she considered trying to replace Clinton as the nominee over health concerns after the candidate collapsed at the 9/11 anniversary ceremony, a fact that demolishes the myth that suspicions about Clinton’s condition were the sole province of conservative partisans.

To say the Clinton camp is furious at what they regard as betrayal doesn’t do justice to their outrage. They are attacking Brazile personally, accusing her of telling outright lies just to sell books.

Which is mighty rich when you consider the history of the Clintons.

Still, you can’t blame their distress because the stakes are huge. If it sticks, Brazile’s searing indictment of Hillary’s persona, ethics and political skills could prove fatal to her hopes for a 2020 comeback.

In fact, I believe that is the ultimate point of the book: to clear the Democratic decks for desperately needed new leadership and messages.

It’s easier said than done because Clinton’s comeback plan is not as crazy as it sounds. Until a new challenger comes along to knock her off the party pedestal, she remains the default Democrat.

She cements her position by playing the role of entitled victim and winner of the 2016 popular vote. In her own book and interviews, she spies a vast conspiracy against her, from Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump to James Comey to misogynists and racists and deplorables everywhere.

Even Barack Obama, whose Justice Department saw no evil when it came to Clinton’s reprehensible self-dealing involving Bill Clinton’s speaking fees and donations to the Clinton Foundation,
is nonetheless the target of *Hillary’s ire.

Yet Clinton is also looking forward, having started a new slush fund that could easily become a campaign super PAC. It’s called Onward Together, and she cited it in a volley of tweets where she claimed credit for the Democrats’ wins in the New Jersey and *Virginia governors races.

“Last night was a great reminder of what’s possible when we come together and fight for what we believe in,” she tweeted Wednesday. “So I wanted to take a few minutes to celebrate the extraordinary successes of a few groups I — and Onward Together — proudly fight alongside.”

Like it or not, that’s her story and she’s sticking to it until a challenger appears with a better on

Beyond laying bare how Clinton secretly took control of the DNC to ward off Bernie Sanders’ challenge and other foul plays, Brazile’s book is at heart a cry for somebody different in 2020.

As such, Brazile, a well-liked party veteran, has dared to stand up to the Clinton machine and tell Bill and Hillary their time has passed.

In theory, that shouldn’t be so hard. Obama is younger and more popular than both Clintons, and he’s made no secret of his plan to stay involved in organizing Dems for upcoming elections.

But Obama’s standing is not without its own drawbacks. The nationwide losses the party suffered under his tenure were directly owing to his leftward lurch, with his focus on the very rich and very poor. He talked about the middle and working classes, but his policies mostly worked against them.

That mistake opened the door for Trump, whose appeal to long-ignored blue collar voters and beleaguered families was the key ingredient in his Electoral College triumph.

For now, and especially after last week’s results, leading Dems believe they have a winning approach. They aim to motivate their base by endless bashing of Trump and assume the president will help them by continuing to split the GOP, which makes it nearly impossible for Congress to pass major legislation. They will also continue to play the Russia, Russia, Russia card.

In the short term, that might be sufficient. But 2020 is a long way off and the party is not likely to re-capture the White House without an appealing messenger and a forward-looking message of economic growth.

http://nypost.com/2017/11/11/how-the-ex-dnc-chair-ruined-clintons-chance-at-2020/amp/
Click to expand...

I was curious as to why Donna a loyal dem soldier would come out with this book devastating to Hitlery Clinton. I really can only think of one thing. She is clearing the path for someone else to run. Who that someone is, I guess is up for speculation, but I could see Moochelle Obama throwing her name in the ring at some point. Oh she plays coy like she doesn't want it. But, she wants it
 
Craig234 said:
That media time is the biggest reason he won.
Click to expand...


trump won because the republicans have gerrymandered , stripped of voting rights legal voters for decades


ITS COURT DOCUMENTED FACT


all the way to the SCOTUS


read the court cases at the Brennan justice center


the Russians microtargeted voting districts with FAKE NEWS designed for each small voting districts.


Trump won by arround 100,000 votes in just the nrightn districts to give mhim an electoral win not a majority win.



The republicns have been cheating for decades


its REAL
 
THIS MAN IS BEING MENTIONED AS THE NEXT DEMOCRAT PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE

liOC4xV.gif


​
 
evince said:
trump won because the republicans have gerrymandered , stripped of voting rights legal voters for decades


ITS COURT DOCUMENTED FACT


all the way to the SCOTUS


read the court cases at the Brennan justice center


the Russians microtargeted voting districts with FAKE NEWS designed for each small voting districts.


Trump won by arround 100,000 votes in just the nrightn districts to give mhim an electoral win not a majority win.



The republicns have been cheating for decades


its REAL
Click to expand...

trump won for a lot of reasons, the media the largest IMO. Gerrymandering wasn't why - that only affects district races, not statewide elections - though Republicans want to change that (if they had, Romney would have won in 2012).
 
PostmodernProphet said:
not at all......in one sentence you claim they are undertaxed, in the next that they are keeping the money out of the US because taxes are too high.....
Click to expand...

Yes, both are true. They are undertaxed; and they are doing what they're doing with that money because they want to be taxed even less than they already are undertaxed. You're defining the right level of taxes as what they say they want it to be.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
he won because the liberal media attacked him.......okay, I can see the logic in that......but why then are you blaming the voters instead of the liberal media?.....
Click to expand...

No, he won because he got so much free media coverage. Simply having his name, his rallies, his comments blasted over and over and over so much more than anyone else, boosted his ratings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top