We have never let Hillary Clinton speak for herself.

[StevieM]

~snip~


Say what you want about her politics — love her, hate her, or anything in between — throughout her career one thing is constant. No one has ever accepted Hillary Clinton’s right to speak for herself.

In the early 90s, it was all about how she was too liberal. It was the conventional wisdom that she was far more liberal than her husband. I still remember all the attacks on her for being an outspoken feminist, and the refusal to accept her desire to work for the public interest.

In the late 90s, she was attacked relentlessly for choosing to stay with her husband despite his affair. Never mind that being her personal choice. Then when she got into politics, she was smeared with all the usual tropes against strong women in politics: ambitious, calculating, ruthless.

(Is it any wonder that she reacted by forming a shell? The media, led by certain outlets we all know and love, spent a decade tearing her to shreds not just as a politician, but as a person. She emerged with a siege mentality which arguably handicapped her for the rest of her political career).

In 2008, she lost a heartbreaking primary. She dealt with defeat in an incredibly graceful way, endorsing her opponent unambiguously, with passion, and working her heart out to get him elected. After the election, she accepted an offer to serve as his Secretary of State.


https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2017/9/10/1697515/-We-have-never-let-Hillary-Clinton-speak-for-herself?detail=emaildkre

[planetc]

1. I'm glad someone else noticed this:

"In 2008, she lost a heartbreaking primary. She dealt with defeat in an incredibly graceful way, endorsing her opponent unambiguously, with passion, and working her heart out to get him elected. After the election, she accepted an offer to serve as his Secretary of State.
"

I remember this. She went away for a few days, adjusted her attitude no doubt, and returned with a full-throated endorsement of Mr. Obama. She was unambiguously for the Democratic primary winner. She demonstrated magnanimity and class. Now if we could just convince her to challenge the 2016 election results, we'd be in turmoil, but a much better turmoil than we're in right now.

[Progressive dog]

2. Hillary was both too liberal

and not liberal enough, depending on the politics of the audience. It was a continuous propaganda campaign against Hillary, filled with lies and some twisted partial truths.
Now we are stuck with the reality of a psychopathic xenophobe running our foreign policy and trade; a narcissistic misogynist as President of the USA where women can vote; a white racist as leader of a country where almost a quarter of the population is not white.
We also have a Congress that has majorities in both houses of people who are enablers of the lead psychopath and helped elect him.
With a little help from the Russians, we lost a chance to have a competent establishment President who would have worked hard to make our laws and policies more fair.

[Voltaire2]

3. She ran for president in 2016. Was she not speaking for herself?

If not who stopped her? Was she not in charge of her own campaign? If not, why not?

[Hassin Bin Sober]

5. Yep. She had rally after rally after private speech after private speech.

Hillary Clinton has never been aftarid to speak.

[Hekate]

4. KnR

[lunamagica]

6. They still want to control her! Sad thing is that stuff like this doesn't shock me anymore