Commentary's Peter Wehner notes, Hillary Is a Horrible Candidate.
With so much attention being directed at Donald Trump, for perfectly understandable reasons, it’s important that we not lose sight of the Democratic race and the front-runner for the nomination, Hillary Clinton.

She is an unusually, even an extraordinarily, weak candidate.

Mrs. Clinton is one of the rare politicians who gets worse, not better, the more she campaigns. As a candidate, she comes across as inauthentic, mechanical, and joyless. While she’s a fairly good debater, her speeches are painful to listen to – pedestrian, usually without elegance or eloquence, and tonally grating. (She thinks yelling is a way to convey passion.) She has no compelling rationale for her candidacy. Mrs. Clinton simply believes it’s her turn, her right after having been humiliated by her husband for so many years and on so many occasions. Her supposed strength, governing experience, is actually a weakness since her main “legacy” issues – HillaryCare, the Russian “reset,” the Libyan invasion, and the “Arab Spring,” to name just a few – are colossal failures. And she doesn’t inspire her supporters, who seem more dutiful than anything else. The passion and energy in the Democratic Party are for Bernie Sanders, not Hillary Clinton.
It's not as if we haven't had plenty of warning.

And even people who might ordinarily be Ready For Hillary aren't having any of Elphaba's cult of personality.  "But I think that if you’re going to march around proclaiming that so-and-so has fought hard for her constituents and gotten stuff done, you ought have half a clue of what she actually did."

Mr Wehner, however, fears that the Republicans are going to make an even worse mistake.
What Republican primary voters may learn at the end of this process is that as bad as Mrs. Clinton may be – and she is bad — nominating Donald Trump is viewed by most voters as worse. If they do, historians may well ponder why Republicans decided to kick away such a crucial and winnable election, against such a flawed candidate, on such a frivolous and dangerous man.
Perhaps that sort of conventional wisdom is still pertinent.  On the other hand, this may be a year in which the conventional nostrums cease to be relevant.  My version.  "What is the benefit of your deep well of knowledge where complex adaptive systems tend to do what they darn well please??"  Or, worded more simply by a caller to Rush Limbaugh today.
You keep electing these politicians -- whether they're Republican or Democrat -- and we keep ending up with the same thing," or in the case of the last eight years, nothing.  So it's about time. Let's try a businessperson.
Seven months to run.

No comments: