Reply #49: It is likely that she was not "that" perfect before or "that" bad now [View All]

I have a known non-supporter of HRC and I do not buy this new storyline.

Many of us watching with a more jaundiced eye did not see that her campaign was perfect for the first 9 months - though the press continually said it was. There were signs that they hadn't calibrated the level of response. They were really really far too angry and harsh against both teh Geffin letter and the psuedo Apple commercial. Especially the last one should have been publicly laughed off as beyond stupid - because that very action would call it false. But, none of the other campaigns have been perfect either. We do not have a candidate who can do this, because it is impossible.

In these times, it is becoming increasingly tough not to have any gaffes or errors in a campaign. the spot light is on for as much as 12 hours a day when they are campaigning. It is harder for Democrats than Republicans - the knowledge that the echo chamber awaits any faux pas has to be an enormous strain. This leads to people being visibly tenser and more cautious. Here, it led to trying to control that some of the questions she wanted to answer were planted. I disagree with it being done, but I understand why she would want it.

The media wants a story. They already did the HRC is perfect story and it is old and boring. Now, they want to make it more interesting. the problem is that the people running are serious people - this process is quickly becoming one of destruction. Even those who win are hurt by the increased negatives. Look at the favorable/unfavorable numbers that are posted way too often. What I see is that every viable candidate now has negatives that are growing faster than the favorables. This is not just one candidate.