The nature of bad faith is that there is no right answer. The entire right-wing propaganda apparatus spent thirty years demonizing this woman, to the point people frothed at the mouth hearing fnords like “e-mail.” Where she was cautious and circumspect they performatively yawned and made up what she must really mean. Where she was blunt and sincere they clutched their pearls and wept crocodile tears. The only possible way she could’ve dodged that deluge of horseshit was by being someone else.
Meanwhile The Idiot would say ‘I’m gonna bake Muslims into sausage’ and the same propagandists would insist ‘He’s being metaphorical!’ so CNN was forced to spend five hours debating the nature of metaphor instead of airing one of her events.
Mind you, the woman has no shortage of actual flaws. In a wide field, her dishonest and decade-late crusade against mature video games would be enough for young voters to prefer anyone else. But the hyperfixation on individual Bad™ sentences will ruin anybody eventually. No human being can indefinitely shrug off being that guy who did the thing, and then that guy who denies doing the thing, and then that guy who avoids talking about doing the thing, and then that guy who never answered for doing the thing, if there’s Rupert filth-licking Murdoch blasting HE DID THE THING into the ears of morons, every waking hour. Whether the thing even happened does not count.
So here we are discussing the worst reading of an honest chart depicting the hole we are in… as if it’s her fault. Her. The woman who has never lost a popular election, but never held national office. She could tweet “Nice weather this morning” and there’d be a hundred assholes racing to go ‘Oh yeah?!’ about it. And any screenshot might get posted with a shitty title, like ugh, how dare this flawed public figure still exist.
She’s a scapegoat. She has been robbed of all benefit-of-the-doubt. People rarely take issue with her actions. Their problem is that it’s her.
There are two objective truths about American politics today: one, the Conservative base has never loved anyone so much as Trump; and two, the Conservative base has never hated anyone as much as Hillary. Not Pelosi, not AOC. So, I’ll agree with you that she could afford no mistakes. Thing is, Democrats aren’t - by and large - the raging hypocrites Republicans are. Trump gets away with anything with his base, whereas we (I’m assuming you’re liberal) can recognize Hillary’s gaffs.
But you can not downplay that one moment. Trump lost none of his base with “grab 'em by the pussy,” because his base already mostly agree with him in that sort of thing. But that speech with the coal segment was threatening a group of people who should have been voting Democrat; it was the nail in the coffin for Democrats as champions for the blue-collar class. It underscored years of Republican messaging about the liberal elite; it proved them right (in the eyes of that demographic).
Trump lost the Republican party no feminist votes with his comment; I think Hillary did lose votes, and maybe the election with hers. The open mike cock-up didn’t help; that was embarrassing for those of us supporting her.
Reagan started a turn in politics; I think Hillary’s mistakes completed the turn. About this graph? Sure, coming from anyone else maybe it wouldn’t have gotten quite the reaction. And that’s why what’s-their-butt above shouldn’t have gotten the downvotes: because you could predict the reaction. Hillary deserved better, but because of who she is and how she’s perceived, and how visible her comments are, she can’t afford to be cutting things close. The party can’t afford her giving any rope to conservatives to hang us with.
I do not disagree that Hillary’s presence is a net negative. But her presence is the negative.
What she does, or what she did, counts for approximately dick. “In the eyes of the Republican demographic,” she could say exactly what they wanted to hear, and it would still count against her. The Idiot lost no votes among the cult because they’re a fucking cult. They do not care what anyone says. They don’t mean things when they say words.
Fixating on words is the mistake. These people don’t give a shit what anyone says. They’re only looking at who says it.
Fretting about how people respond to her, once they’ve made clear they’ll respond to anything she says like she’s the devil, is not useful. The nature of bad faith is that there is no right answer.
The nature of bad faith is that there is no right answer. The entire right-wing propaganda apparatus spent thirty years demonizing this woman, to the point people frothed at the mouth hearing fnords like “e-mail.” Where she was cautious and circumspect they performatively yawned and made up what she must really mean. Where she was blunt and sincere they clutched their pearls and wept crocodile tears. The only possible way she could’ve dodged that deluge of horseshit was by being someone else.
Meanwhile The Idiot would say ‘I’m gonna bake Muslims into sausage’ and the same propagandists would insist ‘He’s being metaphorical!’ so CNN was forced to spend five hours debating the nature of metaphor instead of airing one of her events.
Mind you, the woman has no shortage of actual flaws. In a wide field, her dishonest and decade-late crusade against mature video games would be enough for young voters to prefer anyone else. But the hyperfixation on individual Bad™ sentences will ruin anybody eventually. No human being can indefinitely shrug off being that guy who did the thing, and then that guy who denies doing the thing, and then that guy who avoids talking about doing the thing, and then that guy who never answered for doing the thing, if there’s Rupert filth-licking Murdoch blasting HE DID THE THING into the ears of morons, every waking hour. Whether the thing even happened does not count.
So here we are discussing the worst reading of an honest chart depicting the hole we are in… as if it’s her fault. Her. The woman who has never lost a popular election, but never held national office. She could tweet “Nice weather this morning” and there’d be a hundred assholes racing to go ‘Oh yeah?!’ about it. And any screenshot might get posted with a shitty title, like ugh, how dare this flawed public figure still exist.
She’s a scapegoat. She has been robbed of all benefit-of-the-doubt. People rarely take issue with her actions. Their problem is that it’s her.
There are two objective truths about American politics today: one, the Conservative base has never loved anyone so much as Trump; and two, the Conservative base has never hated anyone as much as Hillary. Not Pelosi, not AOC. So, I’ll agree with you that she could afford no mistakes. Thing is, Democrats aren’t - by and large - the raging hypocrites Republicans are. Trump gets away with anything with his base, whereas we (I’m assuming you’re liberal) can recognize Hillary’s gaffs.
But you can not downplay that one moment. Trump lost none of his base with “grab 'em by the pussy,” because his base already mostly agree with him in that sort of thing. But that speech with the coal segment was threatening a group of people who should have been voting Democrat; it was the nail in the coffin for Democrats as champions for the blue-collar class. It underscored years of Republican messaging about the liberal elite; it proved them right (in the eyes of that demographic).
Trump lost the Republican party no feminist votes with his comment; I think Hillary did lose votes, and maybe the election with hers. The open mike cock-up didn’t help; that was embarrassing for those of us supporting her.
Reagan started a turn in politics; I think Hillary’s mistakes completed the turn. About this graph? Sure, coming from anyone else maybe it wouldn’t have gotten quite the reaction. And that’s why what’s-their-butt above shouldn’t have gotten the downvotes: because you could predict the reaction. Hillary deserved better, but because of who she is and how she’s perceived, and how visible her comments are, she can’t afford to be cutting things close. The party can’t afford her giving any rope to conservatives to hang us with.
I do not disagree that Hillary’s presence is a net negative. But her presence is the negative.
What she does, or what she did, counts for approximately dick. “In the eyes of the Republican demographic,” she could say exactly what they wanted to hear, and it would still count against her. The Idiot lost no votes among the cult because they’re a fucking cult. They do not care what anyone says. They don’t mean things when they say words.
Fixating on words is the mistake. These people don’t give a shit what anyone says. They’re only looking at who says it.
Fretting about how people respond to her, once they’ve made clear they’ll respond to anything she says like she’s the devil, is not useful. The nature of bad faith is that there is no right answer.
OK, full agree here, no qualifiers.