 |
| http://www.terrellaftermath.com/ |
"That does not make her a good candidate.
"Here are the facts:
"Hillary lost. Indeed, she has lost every competitive race that she’s been in. This is what they call a clue. And it’s a clue that you need a better candidate. Hillary had every advantage in the world going into 2016. She had the money, the support network, and a virtually uncontested primary. She still lost.
"Hillary is a terrible candidate by the only metric that matters: She loses.
. . .
"Clinton has won three primary elections, none of which were competitive, at all. (2000 and 2006 senate and 2016 presidential). Her most serious competitor in 2000 dropped out, and in 2016 her most serious competitor was bent over and fucked by the DNC.
"She has won two general elections. 2006 was an easy reelection win in a safe blue state against a Republican unknown.
"2000 was her biggest challenge that she won. But even this race was pretty easy. Her principal opponent, Rudy Giuliani, dropped out after a health/infidelity scandal, and his replacement was dubious at best. She won with less margin than Gore took New York." . . .
More discussion, pro, and con.
No comments:
Post a Comment