General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Hillary a weak candidate? [View all]Pope George Ringo II
(1,896 posts)We're actually listing reasons she lost a campaign to the worst major-party Presidential candidate in American history. Put whatever asterisks on it you wish, but the bottom line is that she somehow lost to the worst major-party Presidential candidate in American history. Great candidates don't lose to a sniveling nobody like Donald Trump, even if they've been abducted by aliens.
Before that, she barely won the 2016 nomination as the only Democrat running. Say what you will about Bernie, I would hope that we're all in agreement that she was the only actual Democrat in that race and it was still all she could do to get the nod.
Before that, she let a guy come out of nowhere and take the 2008 nomination away from her. With the understanding that Obama ran a clearly brilliant and outright revolutionary campaign that year, a great candidate would have had that locked up years before and never let the Obama campaign get enough oxygen to be competitive.
She did win the 2000 NY Senate campaign as sitting FLOTUS. This was "taking care of business" and she has nothing to apologize for with that win, but it wasn't one for the ages.
In all frankness, I wish she campaigned half as well as she did anything else. Great FLOTUS, great Senator, great Secretary of State. Serious thinker, policy wonk who really enjoys problem-solving, actual human being with compassion, and a long list of other personal and professional qualifications. But at some point, your record as a candidate describes what kind of candidate you are. Her record says it's the only thing she doesn't knock out of the park, and it makes me want to cry. The only concern I had about her actual administration was that the GOP House was going to waste everybody's time by returning articles of impeachment during her inaugural parade. Campaigning is her tragic flaw, and the entire world is suffering the consequences.