Thread: 2374: Greg 2016
View Single Post
Old 04-27-2016, 08:39 PM   #5 (permalink)
Senior Member
DaveNJ's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 1,016
Originally Posted by Thataboy View Post
Which makes sense when you think about it. If Hillary wanted to use this as a tactic, why would she employ it after securing the Democratic nomination but not before? She already won, so what's the gain doing this?

From a shadiness standpoint, it makes no sense for Clinton to have been shady for the past six weeks. She's had the Democratic nomination on something like 95% lockdown since March 15th, when she effectively eliminated Sanders from contention. I said it then: she developed a campaign strategy designed around opening up a delegate lead that would simply be impossible to close provided she kept it close. She's barely been engaging Sanders since then, and for good reason. A boxer winning on points through eight rounds doesn't need a knockout, and neither did she.

I don't love Hillary, but I've got to wonder at what point sexism comes into play with something as competitive as politics. She's a politician, and our expectations regarding acceptable limits within competition for men and women are just different. Maybe that causes people to bite more on (later debunked) theories like this.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote