15 Comments
User's avatar
тна Return to thread
James Ackerman's avatar

You know, I'm kinda glad Jordan is the one leading the quixotic committee because the f*ckers who lead the Benghazi investigations all got burned by it in the end. Jordan's fall will be even sweeter to watch

Expand full comment
KO in LA's avatar

If that is the outcome, we will all celebrate. But right now all I'm feeling is dread at the next couple of years. I don't know how others feel, but I can't express how sick to death I am of this circus. The idea of 2 more years of it makes me want to crawl into a hole or at least find some good series to binge watch and stay away from the news.

Expand full comment
orbit's avatar

How much high drama that House Republican investigative committees produce is this country's electorate willing to stomach?

Jordan's base will gobble that stuff up gleefully, no doubt.

How about the rest of us, especially independents?

Expand full comment
AustereRoberto's avatar

Wittes in Dog Shirt Daily makes that point too. Tend to buy it, calling it the Rep Sachs-Goldman thesis

Expand full comment
James Ackerman's avatar

Hillary was a terrible candidate in 2016, but she didn't lose because of those hearings.

Expand full comment
Paul Topping's avatar

Agree with the first part. While the hearings weren't the only thing against her, I believe they were a significant part of why she lost. Another one is her apparent reliance on "first female President" as her main platform point. While it would have been historic, it is a point that she should have let others make.

Expand full comment
Al Brown's avatar

To her credit, Hillary put in a bravura performance against that kangaroo court of a committee, and made them look like the dunces that they were. It still didn't help her though -- mud sticks, even if there's no more to it than dirt and water.

Expand full comment
Jeff S.'s avatar

If she had won in 2016, then the Republicans would not have lost the House nor the Senate. Hillary is for Republicans and Non-Aligned voters what Trump is for Democrats and Non-Aligned. The Republicans have never grasped that. If they had the ability to think outside the box, then they would have been able to see that an HRC presidency would have been the ultimate GOTV machine for Republicans. The difference between HRC & DJT, though, is the end goal--HRC wanted power, and DJT wanted attention.

Expand full comment
Al Brown's avatar

HRC would have been a competent President, and there wasn't much better on offer. I'm a Center-Right Independent, I never liked her much, but I'm still proud of my vote for her.

Expand full comment
Paul Topping's avatar

All politicians want power. Every President is a GOTV machine for the other party. I'm not a big fan of Hillary but she probably would have been an ok president, a bit like Biden in lack of inspiration.

Expand full comment
AustereRoberto's avatar

Sure, I'll buy that hurt too, but even the prosaic "visit the key swing voters" more. Blocking and tackling. With fractions of a percentage point being decisive gotta work all the angles...

Expand full comment
Paul Topping's avatar

And not counting on debate viewers to see Trump as a horrible candidate. She needed to fight back. While I appreciate her "I won't lower myself to his level" stance, she shouldn't just stand there and take it. She needed her staff to anticipate his antics and prepare her with zippy comebacks. She struck me as a lazy candidate.

Expand full comment
AustereRoberto's avatar

They hurt I think, but in an election determined by a few ten thousands of votes in a handful of states... They hurt her, and set her up for the Comey fiasco. ЁЯд╖тАНтЩВя╕П

Expand full comment
Paul Topping's avatar

Did they get burned, really? Hillary Clinton didn't get elected President so perhaps they got all they could have wished from it.

Expand full comment
James Ackerman's avatar

Considering both Chaffee and Gowdy had higher aspirations than just laying into Hillary, yeah, I think they got burned in the end.

Expand full comment
ErrorError