Please go away already. Even with the Trump disaster I still don't want her either. Go away, please!
18
I wonder if the thousands of victims killed, maimed or made refugees by the American bombing campaign in Libya, for which Mrs. Clinton advocated so forcefully as Secretary of State, would make of these tender hearted, anxious appraisals of whether the arch hawk Hillary is feeling depressed.
Save your pity for them.
11
Oh how Republicans have loved to loathe Hillary Clinton. Ever since she was first lady, and dared to help on policy issues including health insurance, and said about her career in legal services, "I could have stayed home and baked cookies ... " she's been stomped on and stomped on for being a good person who wanted to end housing discrimination, to get healthcare to children, and to live her life as a professional woman out to change public policy on behalf of real people, not just major corporations or fossil-fuel industrialists.
One of the best graphics I saw during her campaign was the graphic "I could have stayed home and baked cookies" emblazoned above the stage with pride.
But instead of embracing her and voting for her progressives have also taken to loathing Hillary Clinton, too, and it is the most deeply depressing thing this Democrat has ever seen. It is as if she never spoke. Never said she would raise the minimum wage. Never said she would expand healthcare. Here they are in this comment section stomping and stomping on her, just as ignorantly and hatefully as the GOP.
I am beginning to think progressives have been infiltrated by GOP operatives.
55
Just. Go. Away.
13
No grils aloud.
This book is an insult to all intelligent citizens of this country. As usual, this politician never thinks and cares about the people she has destroyed, yet has the audacity to write a self-serving book. As far as I'm concerned, you are in the history of horror politics.
12
Millions of men and women from around the world came to the US leaving their homes behind because their homes were in dark places where the light of reason no longer shone.
We didn't stay in our home countries to battle the darkness because we understood that the forces that shape social change are much larger than anything an individual can conquer. The forces of darkness are heavy, all-encompassing, and impossible to overcome - all you can do is leave them behind.
The time has come for ambitious young Americans to realize that darkness is already swallowing their country, and do what millions of others did in the last two centuries. Go abroad, young man, and don't look back. Learn as much as possible, and leave. The World is large and in many places the light of reason still shines.
3
She has raised and paraded her [and the left's knee-jerk] line-up of "ism's" to explain her personal failings and failure.
This is exactly why she lost - just explained on a meta-level that she will never grasp.
5
Senior writes: "Far more controversial and complicated, surely, is the rest of “What Happened,” starting with Clinton’s arguments about the role of misogyny and sexism in the election. It’s hard to buy the idea that she suffered disproportionately from charges of untrustworthiness or inauthenticity simply because she was a woman."
----------------
I disagree. Trump, who admitted to sexually groping at least one woman and whose disrespect for women generally was on full display during the campaign, stirred up anti-feminist sentiment among his supporters and used intimidation tactics during the debates. Along with Comey, Russia, fake news, and other forms of manipulation, misogyny and sexism were unquestionably factors in the outcome of the election.
----------------
I disagree. Trump, who admitted to sexually groping at least one woman and whose disrespect for women generally was on full display during the campaign, stirred up anti-feminist sentiment among his supporters and used intimidation tactics during the debates. Along with Comey, Russia, fake news, and other forms of manipulation, misogyny and sexism were unquestionably factors in the outcome of the election.
36
@Chris M: The only candidate who fueled the campaign with hate speech was Trump.
4
You say that "The Clinton brand was tarnished among black voters" and then link to an article "The First White President" by Ta-Nehesi Coates. Can we just call out the real problem? Coates and others tarnishing Clinton's reputation with their insistence of injecting identity politics into the political arena. What did Clinton do but mention "super-predator" once two decades before and was married to a president who signed a 1994 Crime Bill.
It was the most overrated issue of the year after Hillary Clinton's emails, as far as I'm concerned. Nearly two-thirds of the Black Caucus voted for the Crime Bill. “Super-predator" single paragraph from single speech from 22 years earlier. First she invokes how historically the US went after the mob. Was she attacking Italians? And didn't she not invoke the historical racism and poverty that can lead to criminal behavior such as gangs? ("We can talk about why they ended up that way..."). She was nuanced. She was smart. She wasn't racist. What changed in 2016, and the years prior, was the bar that was raised to be an "acceptable progressive" in this country. Unfortunately, it's far too left from the rest of the country operating in the land of "common sense."
26
I don't understand (nor agree) with some of this author's descriptions of Hillary .... 'dig' at Biden when she writes that she knew Obama had high regard for him and so was complimented that Obama chose to endorse her? 'angry' when she writes about all the negative and bad things Trump said during the campaign and since election? 'score-settling' when she is writing what she thinks is an account of her experience where the result wasn't what she wanted? These are negative, critical, judgmental words .... and they aren't said by Hillary. Ms Senior ... I would love if the journalists and writers would just be honest and genuine. And, admit to being positive about this exceptional woman!
28
Sarah Sanders said it best:
Sanders offered her thoughts on the tome, which gives Clinton’s account of her presidential campaign last year, when Yahoo News asked if President Trump plans to read it.
“Whether or not he’s going to read Hillary Clinton’s book, I am not sure, but I would think that he’s pretty well versed on what happened. I think it's pretty clear to all of America. I think it’s sad that, after Hillary Clinton ran one of the most negative campaigns in history and lost, and the last chapter of her public life is going to be now defined by propping up book sales with false and reckless attacks. I think that that’s a sad way for her to continue.”
15
I'm endlessly astonished by the rage and animosity directed at Hillary Clinton by a wide swath of Americans. She's so obviously RIGHT: without Comey she would have won; without Russian interference she would have won; without Bernie Sanders dumping garbage on her reputation ("the establishment") and continuing long after he'd lost, she would have won. Ten months after the election, public intellectuals would now deny her the right to freely and openly tell her story her way, presenting her analysis about what happened. Some insist that she should deny herself freedom of speech because that would be better for the Democratic Party. Hillary, we're told, isn't being honest with herself, isn't accepting responsibility. No, no, and no. From where many of us sit, it's the public intellectuals who are tossing another metric ton of mud on Hillary who refuse to accept responsibility for completely missing the point of this election. Compare the inexplicable tornado of stories about where HRC parked her email server as Secretary of State, vs. the relatively paltry number of stories (pre-election) about the reams of ethics violations strewn across Trump's life like the debris in the wake of Hurricane Irma. Clinton DID NOT lose the election. She was NOT a "terrible" candidate. The election was STOLEN -- by a buffoonish conman, a hubristic FBI director, a hostile foreign government, and a frenzied, bottom-feeding media promoting the most false equivalence we've ever seen.
67
Wow and wow! It's deja vu all over again for me as I recall the hatchet women who were the willing water carriers when any of the male hegemony needed to cut off an uppity woman at the knees. So Ms Senior "can't buy the idea that [Hillary Clinton] suffered disproportionately from charges of untrustworthiness and inauthenticity simply because she was a woman?" If that's true, I wonder if either Senior is still in her twenties or perhaps she doesn't want to accept that misogyny is epidemic in the political or business worlds because she's managed to escape it by (metaphorically) sleeping with the enemy. I'm retired from that world, but I remember many instances when women did the dirty work of keeping other women down. In the recent election, many of Hillary's most vicious detractors were women, spurred on by the Trump and Sanders factions. It's way past time for women to stop eating our own.
38
It never ends! When will Mrs. Clinton ever take any responsibility for her actions, choices, strategy. It's always someone else's fault; their prejudice, misogyny, conspiracy, stupidity, on and in it goes. What about her decision to basically take the Midwest for granted, for ex. never visited Wisconsin after April 2016. Yes Comey did her no favors but she never should have had a separate server to begin with. That just opened the door to what transpired.
Please enough of the Clintons. Go all the way to ole Billy Boy and his philandering which compromised Gore's campaign and voila we were left with Bush 41, a disaster we are still recovering from. And now due to Hilary's incompetent campaign, we are left with that miscreant occupying 1600 Penn. Ave. Do the Democratic Party a favor and cede the platform and spotlight to others and just keeping walking in the woods in Chappequa.
13
I wonder what Hillary's place in our history will be years from now. I find interesting that for some people, including some in this newspaper, she is just never right enough; never good enough; too much of this or too much of that: she is just never right enough. What ever amount of suffering and humiliation happens to her, is never enough because her flaws as a person are bigger, larger and simply come up as too many. We, in the privacy of our own hearts, are never that bad. Anyone but Hillary: and we have Trump now, who does not even reach the standards to be able to clean Hillary's shoes. I have stop trying to illustrate to others why I think she was the best choice: I am done trying. I am done talking about why this election was a mistake and waiting for others to understand. In my book, Hillary is what it is: an imperfect human being capable of greatness. The woman who should have been our first female president.
50
Still wondering how the polls were so far off. The night of the election I remember the arrow indicating the chance of who was going to win literally spin all the way around from Clinton to Trump.
A terrible wave a nausea and disbelief came over me.
These last seven months have pretty much proved there is no anti-emetic to take care of the still lingering nausea.
20
@MIMA,
"Still wondering how the polls were so far off."
And still don't get it?? They were cooked.
12
This is a poorly written review, in so many ways, but just look at these two paragraphs, stare at them and try to make sense:
Senior writes: "Her digs at Trump are not surprising. But her dig at Joe Biden is. Over lunch in 2014, Clinton explains, Barack Obama made it clear that he believed she was the Democrats’ best hope to keep the White House. “I knew President Obama thought the world of his vice president,” she writes, “so his vote of confidence meant a great deal to me.”
It’s a grim reminder of the worst we’ve read about Clinton: She needs a separate storage unit to hold her grudges — and her sets of tiny knives."
What? What dig at Biden? The grim reminder of the "worst we've read about Clinton" is that she thanks President Obama? For a vote of confidence? What is Jennifer Senior talking about?
If the vote vote for president had been up to the founding fathers - Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, Wilson, Madison and Hamilton et al - Hillary Clinton would have won unanimously against the unspeakable, who represents none of the ideals they strove so hard to articulate.
31
"What? What dig at Biden?"
Seriously? You don't get it?
3
The ONLY thing that will repair this tremendous loss, is this;
Registering NEW people as Democrats.
It's the only thing that'll works against Trump!
NOTHING ELSE
ESPECIALLY IN: Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan
So, spend money on VOTER DRIVES rather than on protest marches. And don't waste your money and time on protest marches unless ………….these are ALSO voter registration drives. Otherwise, take that money, and give it to any charity fighting Voter Suppression and Voter ID laws. Being a keyboard activist is EASY. Costs NOTHING. Shelling out cash to REGISTER new people as Democrats is harder.
Yes, this was #DontBooVote, the extended version. (Thank you, Barack Obama).
In the meantime you can always boycott companies & CEO’s who are supporting Trump! Check out the #GrabYourWallet and #TargetedBoycotts hashtags.
9
I've had more than my fill of Hilary Clinton. How anyone can be inspired by her is beyond me. She might not have won the election, but she can still cash in on her cult of personality. Who cares?
A Democrat.
9
"We’ll be arguing about these questions for decades, surely." I hope not. Why should we? As one wise woman said (it was not about the 2016 election but it might as well have been), "What difference at this point does it make?"
Elections turn on all kinds of issues. They are complex. And with complex things there are no simple cause and effect relationships. Lots of factors combine to result in the outcome, and it is largely pointless to try to identify which factors were key.
Take the battle of Waterloo. What caused the French to lose and the British to win? You could debate that endlessly. The weather? Poor planning? Poor execution? Bad luck? Or was, as the Duke of Wellington supposedly said, the battle won on the playing fields of Eton?
Why should we, and Hillary Clinton, worry about the past when it is only the future that we can change? She should focus not on "what happened", but what will happen. Then she will have written a book worth reading.
5
Perhaps a better book would have been "What Happened?"
4
I would like to explain, for the many millions who understandably may not be bothered about HRC’s private email server, why it was a very big deal indeed.
The media should have mentioned a law, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which requires every US corporation that does business internationally to have a formal and rigid compliance program that costs American businesses billions of dollars to maintain and rigorously enforce. The DOJ prosecutes vigorously and rakes in hundreds of millions of dollars a year in penalties.
I was the director of such a program for 6 years. So I know that any US corporation doing business internationally would have fired immediately any employee (and especially an executive) who was discovered to be using private email (let alone a personal server) to conduct company business. I have seen it happen more than once. Such a practice is a wide open door to bribery and corruption, which is rampant and routine in many many countries, and personal email is a great way to do it. If the company was caught (and they usually are, due to whistle-blowers who want to distance themselves from wrongdoing,) the penalty would be severe. If they claimed ignorance, that’s an even graver sin and subject to even more heavy penalties.
So I was absolutely gobsmacked when our own Secretary of State used her personal email to conduct the most serious international business of all for the biggest company in the world!!
21
Were you equally gobsmacked when Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice did the very same thing? I'm betting not.
19
I think your far fetched sleigh of hand analogy need a fair bit of work.
5
they didn't
7
People like heroes, but even more they like to gloat when heroes fall. This is a sad part of human nature. Further, some people like to kick other people who are already down. It is cruel. OK, so Hillary lost the election. Listen to what she has to say. She wants to explain to the rest of us her view. Do not criticize her and blame her for her loss. I especially do not like comments that she should go away. Why? She has every right to do what she wants with the rest of her life, and this includes taking on various public roles. This is a free country. Also, people need to respect other people. It is disrespectful to tell anybody to go away. Remember that she ran for the President of this country. How many people have accomplished that? If you did not like Hilary, you had choices at the election to vote for others. Now, let her be.
17
I'm so impressed that so many people know EXACTLY how a national presidential campaign should be run, and would never make a mistake! Because of course sexism had nothing to do with it. If only Hillary had seen all the resumes of the genius commenters here, she'd be in the White House for sure. Seriously, none of you could possibly imagine what it's like. Unless, of course, you read her book and learn something.
22
I voted for Hillary, but there were just too many time during the election year I thought to myself, after an obvious misstep, "What was she thinking?"
Hillary Clinton simply lacks common sense. She had to be more perfect then Trump, but really, should that have been so hard? Her own, (obvious), greed, superficiality, and hubris nullified his character flaws.
And, at the final debate, she should have "come out of her bag" and called him out on his skulking behavior. "What are you doing? I'm trying to answer a question here!" Instead, she just let him misbehave and ignored his obvious bullying. "You can do this at a beauty pageant, but this is a Presidential debate and I won't tolerate it."
She could cast a vote for the Iraq war, but when she needed to really show some spine she let a Donald Trump bully her.
10
The most incompetent major party candidate in decades. Maybe since Dukakis or Landon.
Voters saw thru her failures: leading health reform when she was First Lady, on the wrong side of the Iraq vote, losing to Obama, Benghazi, Emails, barely beating Sanders etc. and finally losing to Trump--by losing the Electiral College!!
What were her big public service accomplishments? The failures are there. The successes not so much. Just because you had a job doesn't mean you did it well.
and her incompetence is What Happened
12
The reasons Hillary lost? Fairly simple:
1.- She ran an atrocious campaign
2.- The GOP managed to make stick many of their pernicious propaganda against her.
3.- Hillary managed to keep all her issues boiling and close to the surface with her mismanagement of the issues she faced.
Hillary is too arrogant to take blame early and decisively in order to put her issues to rest.
She and/or her staff were also incapable of reacting to the advice that people said they gave them on the campaign problems.
Although I voted for her, I would be happy to never hear from her again as to why she lost or what her political thoughts might be.
14
She ran a courageous campaign. She warned the country about the dangers of a Trump presidency. There is nothing that Trump has done as president to imperil our constitutional democracy that Hillary Clinton didn't warn us about. Of course, she made midtakes; every campaign makes mistakes. But she was right on the big, critical issues. The American people were taken in by a demagogue-- a dangerous puppet of Vladimir Putin. That wasn't her fault. That was our fault.
31
Does this review make me understand what HC is trying to say in this book? Perhaps, somewhat, maybe. Does this reviewer write coherent sentences? Not entirely. Is the review up to the standards from such pieces we've come to expect from NYT? Probably not.
I am bewildered by the "style" of this review which takes over the substance. I started to worry about the run-on sentences rather than pay attention what was being said. If one of my undergraduates turned something like this in as an assignment, I would be concerned.
So did the reviewer like the book? Not at all sure. Does the reviewer recommend that we read this book or not? Discuss.
7
It's not a review. NY Times should make that clear. The actual review, with a bio of the reviewer stating his or her credentials, will probably be in the Sunday book section.
2
She even blames her classmates in a school for making fun of her wearing glasses... Is it still possible to find more fundamental reasons for her loss?
11
Every single day Hillary Clinton reminds us why it is she actually lost. There's a reason why election losers don't write books, because no one wants to read bitter missives. GO AWAY HILLARY, PLEASE.
18
It should be "who she says," not "whom she says." I know, a bit of trivia, but I liked it when newspapers knew English really well.
3
"Why believe her?" - The most succinct review! Thank you.
9
Will she donate the proceeds of this book to charity? Or is it solely for her benefit?
4
Hillary just said in an interview that she doesn't care what harm she will bring to Democratic party - she will continue her explaining and complaining crusade in spite all detractors and reasons, and nobody will be able to silence her.
13
And why would anyone "be able to silence her?" She is entitled to tell her own story. Free speech is a right guaranteed to all Americans by the First Amendment to the Constitution.
Surely no one would think a candidate for the presidency should not tell her story. As to "what harm she will bring to Democratic party (sic)?" Why would telling the truth about what she endured bring harm to anyone?
14
what a shame the Trump was elected, the damage he is doing may be irreversible.
Its hard for me to understand the depth of hostility to Clinton, even now, who though not especially likable as politicians go, is also not especially unlikable. I think part of the vituperation she still gets is due to the legacy of decades long relentless bashing ever since her husband ran for President, and some is due to "progressives" that didn't vote for her when Sanders lost and know that was a mistake but rather than admitting it they get even more hostile to Clinton.
18
Agree. Those who voted for Old Bernie are unable to be frank about their candidate or about the reasons they despise Hillary.
9
In the end, it was Hillary Clinton and her campaign that lost the election. I voted for her and would again. But I think that PA, MI, and WI are states that deserved more time, money, and going beyond the big cities, which were hers to begin with.
Having said that, I do think that other factors played some role. I believe Comey's July editorializing after determining that no persecutable crime had been committed was beyond the pale. Same with his October surprise.
I believe the 25+ years of criticism by and extensive coverage of non-scandals by the so-called liberal media (NYT,WaPo, MSNBC, etc) took a toll on her reputation. And, needless to say, her husband's personal recklessness tarnished Hillary as well, because...well, he only went after other women because Hillary wasn't being the proper wife, now didn't he?
She should have won and she has accepted ultimate, total responsibility for the loss. To cite other factors is fair, not just for her personal purposes but as a cautionary tale about electoral politics in the USA.
With Trump's election, the "last best hope of mankind" took a major body blow. Unfortunately, it was self-administered.
4
I look forward to reading this book (when I can afford it), but in the meantime, I'm sure it will create as much controversy as Clinton did, herself, when she ran for president. I never saw such relentless hatred of a candidate in my life. She was treated very poorly over a lot of allegations into false wrong-doings. And if Comey hadn't resurrected the email scandal just weeks before the election, I feel that she would now be sitting in the White House.
15
"...she couldn’t find a better way to speak to the fears of the white working class — which she does admit, though she doesn’t think it cost her the election." So she STILL doesn't understand that with more effort to reach out to rural white voters she would have pulled out this election? Unbelievable lack of insight! She was far from a perfect candidate but she got the popular vote and could have squeeked by in rural communities is she actually cared about those voters, which unfortunately, I don't believe she did.
3
hillary. the gift that keeps on giving.
9
While participating in the Women's March in Washington, D.C., I wondered how many of the marchers voted for Sanders or Stein--and how many regretted their choice.
10
If they voted for Sanders in the primary, why should they regret it? Primaries exist to choose candidates. Too bad that Hillary, the Clintonistas and the DNC can't accept that.
10
I would vote for her over and over and over again.
I, like Hillary, never understood and still do not understand the irrational dislike (Ok hatred) of her. I would often ask people "what did she ever do to you for you
to have such animus towards her?" I would get a blank look.
Despite all that she WON the most votes of the American people.
I am happy she wrote this book and look forward to reading it, and hearing from her in the near and far future.
20
I worried so much that she would be assassinated if she were elected.
2
I look forward to reading this book. It's good to hear that she tell the Times off. Something long overdue.
4
"One thing we know for certain: History conspired against Clinton."
????!!!?????????????!!!?????????????????????????!!!?????
I cannot believe that a thinking human being wrote such a ludicrous sentence.
9
Nobody can argue that publication of the book of this great woman is the most important event of 2017.
3
We had a stark choice in 2016 - a neophyte with no experience and no plan versus the most qualified person ever. Putin made the choice to put the neophyte in the White House, but the American people chose the qualified person. We must thank Hillary Clinton for standing up against a barrage of hatespeak and lies targeting her for the 2 years prior to the election, for her integrity against constant lies about her record and her emails, and for caring about the US so much that she wrote this book to get the facts into public view. What we need now is the rapid conclusion of the Mueller investigation, indictments of all who colluded with Putin, and a new election in 2018, conducted using AMERICAN votes, paper ballots with codes so the individual voter can trace that their vote was both counted and counted as cast, and federal oversight of our broken electoral system. We can no longer leave it at the state level, where corruption makes the hackers job super easy. Thank you Hillary - you saved us from future illegitimate presidents!
11
What happened is we need to change our electoral college system. It's like affirmative action for the political far right. And the now radical Supreme Court will keep big business rule by equating business with people. One person, one vote. The majority must rule. And those not in it should have to extend a human hand to help better programs for all succeed.
6
This morning I tuned halfway into an NPR segment to hear the depressingly familiar speech patterns of a woman being interviewed. The nervous laughter, the forced camaraderie with the female interviewer, the “uh”s, the “you know”s -- the 1,001 ways that successful professional women verbally diminish themselves to avoid “threatening” the men or intimidating other women.
When I realized it was Hillary Clinton, my depression only deepened.
This reviewer claims that in 'What Happened' readers “will now see, for the first time, what it looks like when Clinton doesn’t spend all of her energy suppressing her irritation.”
We may see it in the book, but from her spoken words, we still do not hear it. After all these years, she has yet to learn that no amount of groveling will appease the haters.
3
That's strange. I tuned into a panel program on a TV news station and all I heard were the male panelists talking over and ignoring the points made by the female ones. Turning the statements of fact spoken by the women into weapons of crass destruction, because some men have taught themselves that they have the right to talk over, ignore, debase, insult, humiliate, puown and patronize any woman. Including one who has served as First Lady, Senator, Secretary of State and Democratic Party nominee for the White House, an office that she actually won. I have decided to answer the childish behavior of such men by asking: What important role in government did you ever hold, and what legislation did you ever work on? For 99.99%, the answer is none - so they are not even close to Hillary Clinton's experience, and have no context to criticize her. So - I ignore, talk over, patronize and put them down. It's on.
5
People expect Hillary to analyze and explain why she failed and list her many mistakes. As if a candidate should be perfect and run a superior campaign and voters would not need to think but cast their votes magnetically.
But because voters were superficial and light and gullible in their evaluation of the candidates, they now have Trump. To enjoy democracy, you have to earn and deserve it and do a proper job of knowing who you vote for. Both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have had very public lives in the last 30+ years and expressed many times their views on many subjects (sometimes in simplistic ways, which is information in itself). So voters had plenty of material to help them decide, without having to rely on campaign stuff.
No need for a big book to understand What Happened, although I am happy for Hillary if she makes money and keeps on pushing her views as a result. Answer for me is simple: voters did not do their job and chose to play Russian roulette.
9
"It’s hard to buy the idea that she suffered disproportionately from charges of untrustworthiness or inauthenticity simply because she was a woman."
Really? I find it hard to buy the idea that any semi-rational person who lived through that last election could possibly believe that sentence. Even if such a person wrote it herself.
14
I thought of what her husband said recently when he appeared together with 43rd (Bush Jr.) at a symposium.
Her husnand said, "a successful presidential election campaign is about letting voters know that the election is about them and not the candidate."
Many in the media took this as a jab at the POTUS.
But he really was analyzing failures of his wife's campaign.
And this book is a testament to what the 42nd said.
Its all about her and not the people or the country.
She lost because most voters saw this - and her constant referrences to winning popular votes adds to this perception of her. She won but people lost.
10
Wrong. Most voters voted for Hillary Clinton. Clinton beat Trump by more votes than Truman beat Dewey in 1948; by more votes than Jack Kennedy beat Nixon in 1960; by more votes than Nixon beat Humphrey in 1968; by more votes than Carter beat Ford in 1976; and most assuredely by more votes than "President Gore" beat Governor Bush by in 2000. Hillary Clinton lost for one reason only: a relic of our first slave holding constitution which put in the electoral collage to pacify the white slave holding states, so they would join the union. There is a certain bitter poetic irony in that.
13
Those Harvard figures of the media coverage during the election showing that Trump got issues and policy proposals honored, Hillary the scandals, are no proof of misogyny.
Trump's takes on issues were sensational and new, so of course the media flew on it, whereas hers were old p.c. news and boring.
Their differing campaign strategies: Trump almost whored the media, Clinton ducked them (no press conferences e.g.) for fear of questions about the scandals making her look bad. Trump was prepared to out-bully such questions and to push them into an unheeded corner with new, deflecting braggadocio, fresh, record setting display of daring, mad brazenness, challenging pc norms, Clinton had to wrestle visibly with a pained conscience, Trump successfully, seemingly fearlessly, bluffed and shouted it down, and wore negative press as a badge. Just that attitude divide all by itself might have made the difference at the polls.
Both were baggaged, but Hillary's baggage was that of a decades long Washington insider, a mythical figure not looked upon kindly, and Trump's baggage was outshone by his make-believe facade as a successful businessman.
Trump made a promise grand slam for Rust Belt jobs, for white spite, to the pro-life pious, and to drain her big donor swamp. Hillary: women's issues - and incremental change, what a blast of a promise!
No small feat she still won the popular vote, proving Americans to be way more grown-up as the faux kindergarten noise spread by its media.
7
Hillary is arrogant, losing because she would not address issues pertinent to the Middle Class. The rust belt does not find her relevant. She lost the last two campaigns by letting Ivy League Preppies run her campaigns.Wall Street financed her. Old friends from the 1992 and 1996 Bill Clinton campaigns told her to visit the small cities in the Mid-West; she ignored them to her peril. Save yourself $19.00 and don't buy a book. Who REALLY needs to hear her whinging yet again. Move on and rebuild.
18
If you want to know What Happened, read Shattered
7
She was too busy dancing with Beyonce and having parties at Gearge Clooney's house than meeting working class Americans at the diner for a cup of coffee. She showed her true liberal agenda when she said she was going to put coal miners out of work. She can blame anyone she wants but the facts are she was a liberal candidate with a lot of negative baggage who couldn't beat a reality show clown.
14
It strikes me that the "thumping of Trump" in the book is counterproductive.
Yes, Mrs. Clinton, Trump is a complete buffoon, but the sad fact is that he beat you for the presidency. You'll have to spend the rest of your life asking yourself just how you managed to lose to that clown.
Oh, I forgot, it's everybody else's fault but yours.
13
Wheh we had two bad candidates with similar traits of irresponsibility, entitlement and aggrandizement the choice in either case was terrible. While the current denizen in the office is displaying utter incompetence, Hillary Clinton would have characteristically demonstrated how unfit she was for this office by tone deaf displays of power usurpation & political incompetence.
She should now shut up and move out of the spotlight because no one wants to hear her blame others for own incompetence.
10
I want to hear. And she's not going to "shut up." This comment is a typical example of the kind of rude discourtesy so popular nowadays.
7
"Similar traits of irresponsibility" - wow. Please point out to us when Hillary Clinton:
- went bankrupt 6 times
- was unfailtful to at least 2 spouses
- refused to honor contracts, so that the contract holder had to sue for pennies on the dollar
- told lies about Muslims in Jersey City celebrating on 9/11
- admitted to fraud for a fake university - and celebrated paying $25M on a $40M requested payout
- boasted about sexual assault
- marched into dressing rooms because she felt all the people there were hers
- pretended to author a book written 100% by another
- denied links to Russia, when Russians are crowing about how they used them to put her into power to serve them
The list goes on and on and on. This fake notion of equivalency is part of the Putin playbook. Wake up. It may already be too late, but try to wake up.
9
Whatever Hillary is or is not, whatever she writes or left out, whatever she feels or doesn't, has no bearing. America voted for a man who cheats on his taxes, tells volumes of lies before 5 AM every morning, is classless and childish beyond belief. Trump the national disgrace.
9
Given that we've never seen his returns, how can you say he cheats on his taxes?
1
I hate Hillary. Always have. Always will. Something rubbed me the wrong way when I first saw her on television back in 1992, and the irritation has only gotten worse over the years. Nowadays I can't stand the sight of her. Thank God she's not president.
Why? Who knows. It's not misogyny. I like -- and have voted for -- plenty of other women politicians, on the left and the right. It's not her politics. Nothing about her politics bothers me a bit. It's a mystery.
Funny thing is, I felt much the same way about Donald Trump when I first saw him running for president. I was dimly aware of the guy before that, but knew little about him. The more I saw him on television, and saw his phony hair and pudgy face, the more I hated him.
But at some point I started to like the guy. Maybe it was seeing his children and his wives (current and ex) and hearing about how he wasn't such a nasty guy after all. I ended up voting for him. I like (mostly) what he has done so far. I hope he gets better at the job as he goes along.
As for Hillary, I wonder why she wrote a book like this. Did she need the money? Did she need to get things off her chest?
Because if she really were the politician she pretends to be, this book would be about the issues she campaigned on. She would be out there trying to sell those issues to the public. Maybe like another loser, Bernie Sanders, is doing.
But no. To Hillary Clinton, it's all about her. Sad.
12
@John Smithson: You voted for Trump and "like (mostly) what he's done so far". Really, really sad.
9
It's the money.
1
I'm surprised Mrs. Clinton had time to write a book. I was certain she and Bill would have been spending all their time after the election doing good deeds with the Clinton Foundation.
9
LOL. my coffee came out my nose. Thank you.
3
As usual, so many people to blame it's hard to know where to start: Comey, Obama (really?), Putin, the NYT, Sanders...
Nothing new in any of that, but now we are treated to a new joke: Sanders stole HER arguments: "One of the things that drove Clinton bonkers about Bernie Sanders was that he always managed to outdo her proposals with something larger and less feasible. “That left me to play the unenviable role,” she writes, “of spoilsport schoolmarm.”
Sure: universal health care, $15 min wage, free public higher education, etc all HER ideas. Funny she never proposed them and only mimicked him. Even when it came to a few realistic words about the middle East, he broke the ice, and she then mimicked him.
PS- a sad reminder of the Times's hostility to Sanders that the word "bluster" is used to describe this.
17
She never showed any humility. She gave an aura of arrogance - my way is the only the right way. Being smartest knife in the shelf does not mean you are the only one who can cut. I assume she would have had learnt by know, she is too arrogant to realize.
6
If Clinton cares about what happens next, she should donate all proceeds from book sales to the Resistance.
5
To achieve this debacle, a billion dollars was spent on bad advice and pseudo-scientific hand-waving. An entire parasitic industry of supposed wizards has evolved to feed off this never ending flow of cash from both parties and the people who run it are more in the nature of disinterested agents than political henchmen. Do they really care that Hillary lost? For them, it's just on to the next gig, never having paid a price for their failure. Ditto for all the Nates out there, still prognosticating shamelessly.
5
Clinton very obviously is not and was not "the worst example possible for women." If that were the case, I should rightfully hate to see my own daughter become Secretary of State under this country's first black president. In fact, the opposite is true. This unashamed hatred and dismissal of Clinton on the part of supposedly liberal women sounds an awful lot like the "lock her up" chanting of Trump's rallies, to my ears. And I do have to wonder what women who should be old enough to know better saw in Bernie Sanders, after all. What exactly was he going to do for them? Wasted energy and wasted votes, every one of them.
7
what this old lady saw in Bernie Sanders was that he was not Hillary Clinton. I would have liked to have more of a choice than the two of them by the time the primary was held in my state, late in April, but the DNC didn't see their way to supporting or allowing that.
3
That many commenters here:
a) clearly haven't read the book but are ready to make sweeping statements about its content
b) slam Clinton for writing a book about the election that is "about herself" [er, who else would she write about?]
c) trot out their own sad and self-justifying reasons for hating her which are overwhelmingly subjective, untrue and sourced from the right-wing media and the Russians
Shows us why we now have the most corrupt, least competent, most divisive and laziest president in history.
21
By any measure Hillary is many light years ahead of Trump.
Any one who says otherwise is biased and could not careless for the qualifications for for the highest position in the nation..
I mean, would a trump supporer let a quack do open heart surgery on him/her?
7
Please just go away Hilary. I know by asking to do it quietly is asking too much. But can't you just disappear, ride off into the horizon. Trump as president is mainly your fault. You need to go away, now for the sake of Americans and the world.
10
I ask the same everyday. "What happened?" Too late now, we have to deal with Trump for God knows how long. I think she would be a great President like Obama and her husband Clinton. We missed a great opportunity to get this country ahead of its time. Now we're back to the middle ages racist Republican agenda, what a shame!!
9
What Happened ..... I Happened ....... I Happened It
Hillary picture The Donald Thy Putin
Story told completely.
I wish she were our president instead of the author of this book. We would still be strengthening our environmental laws. Transgender people's equal rights would have been protected. We would not have had to endure a lying, rude commander-in-chief who thinks there are good Nazis. The world would still respect us. I will read this book and weep.
12
Benghazi.
1
Why did Hillary lose?
"Pride goeth before a fall."
Any questions?
6
My comment was meant to be sarcastic.
Seems like a lot of Secretary Clinton's detractors here and elsewhere are "low-information" readers. It's clear they haven't bothered to get acquainted with the facts: her outstanding record of service, her accomplishments, and her platform. What gives people the license and arrogance to pick apart, belittle, and disrespect someone when they don't have skin in the game and don't even bother to read beneath the headlines to the substance? When they haven't accomplished anything close in comparison? My only nit is that despite everything Sec. Clinton had going from her -- she couldn't command her own message and narrative. She was simply outgunned by 24 X 7 right wing media and Republicans (and even some Democrats) shameless and relentless attacks
-- which made her the foil for every imaginary thing people were willing to throw up. In a way she stood in for America's shadow; its hatred of women, its contempt of those willing to stand up and be powerful and speak the truth. She was also set up because the DNCC ran a traditional campaign and ignored the message galvanizing Bernie and Trump supports. Finally, it doesn't help that our U.S. election system(s) are insecure and set up to fail and vote suppression is rampant. These truths will sadly w carry forward without drastic correction.
11
This sounds exactly like the Tracy Flck argument.
2
Low information? Tell us, what did she accomplish in her years in the Senate, or as Sec. of State? In the Senate her one accomplishment was to vote for the war in Iraq only because she hadn't the courage to stand against a foolish, foolish war. Now she has the blood of thousands on her hands. Though I doubt she cares or ever gives it a thought. Some four thousand Americans dead. She could have stood and said something then. If she had she's be POTUS today, but she hadn't the courage then or now.
As Sec. of State, she gave up what allies we had in the Middle East and then tried to hide behind her underlings when Benghazi came. She through Rice under the bus as did Pres. Obama. This is why Donald Trump is President; Americans are tired of the BS, of the cowardice. We need a man on a horse. Thank God for Donald Trump, he may be the most inarticulate president to date but he is not an out and out liar.
4
I'm a bit surprised at the number of commenters who believe that Ms. Clinton lost solely , or, largely because of mysogeny . Undoubtedly, that played a role, perhaps a large role. However, Clinton made her fair share of mistakes during the campaign. One of them continues...she seems unable or unwilling to take responsibility for her shortcomings.
Just as it's not always about race, it's not always about sexism. Sometimes, it's largely because of self made errors.
8
Clinton's new book reminds us once again why the people rejected her as a candidate despite the slug-like nature of her main opponent. She treats her entire political project as a personalist exercise, with no hint of a Cause or a glamorous ideology. Instead, centrist corporatism, neoliberal compromising, and elitist entitlement were put on a pedestal of lies, pettiness, and anti-left election rigging and handed over to the public as a third-class meal which people were expected to accept due to the even worse fare on offer on the far right. People rightly threw this poisonous concoction down the drain, hopefully it doesn't bubble up in future years.
21
It seems to me that most people who bandy the term "neo-liberal" these days have no idea what that term actually means. Comparing Hillary Clinton to Augusto Pinochet or Margaret Thatcher is so far off base as to merely raise eyebrows as to the pseudo-intellectualism that pervades in certain political circles, like the self righteous Bernie Buster crowd that elected Trump our President.
9
I would say that Clinton's analysis of the mix of forces that prevented her from winning is persuasive: Comey; press coverage, particularly the saturation coverage of her emails; and the Russian interference. That constitutes a rather formidable trifecta.
I would only emphasize—not enough has been said about this—the role of the New York Times in the negative coverage of her emails. It seemed obsessed with this non-issue. I would rank the Times's failures here with its coverage of the non-existent WMD's in the run-up to the Iraq War. It seems that in moments that rally matter, the Times is all too eager to demonstrate its reactionary bona fides.
28
Not to forget putting Hillary Clinton through those weeks of republican interrogation, a Spanish inquisition like display of male stupidity and arrogance.
They cry Benghazi! Benghazi! When the republicans were the ones who were ruthlessly cutting the State Department's budget and impacting security
What a bunch of self-serving hypocrites lining the purses of their masters and waiting to cash into the big lobbyist money.
12
Her private email server was absolutely NOT a "non-issue" for me. Having been employed by global corporations, I know that any executive responsible for international sales would have been fired immediately for using a personal server to conduct company business. It leaves the door wide open for bribery and corruption, and big US corporations must have compliance programs in place to conform to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. In fact, I've seen the breaches and the firings myself. And this was the US Secretary of State!
4
Her emails are not a non issue. Regular bank employees get fired for doing even one percent of what she did.
4
Does she happen to mention why she dropped off the face of the earth for the three weeks following the amazing, powerful Democratic Convention??? All that momentum, gone
5
Every day there is some fresh Hell emanating from the White House and the GOP. I never thought before until the last election that the GOP represented not only the wealthy but also the Nazis, KKK, white supremacists, religious nutjobs, bigots, anti semites and woman haters.
How I wish that Hillary Clinton was president with a healthy democratic majority!
I don't live in an American version of Nazi Germany, and I don't want to go back to the 1950s like some do.
21
she was an awful candidate who ran a poorly organized campaign. the same way she ran her 2008 campaign. she learned nothing but she expected a different result? "those who don't learn from the past are condemned to repeat it" [george santayana]
19
Donald Trump is good enough to remind me about every other day why I didn't vote for him. After recent interviews and the present book, Hillary Clinton has been good enough to remind me why I didn't vote for her.
5
I was dismayed to find this article in the Arts section of my daily digital Times. What this book has to do with Art I'll never know.
12
This thought continues to linger :
Does this country, this electorate deserve a immensely qualified president like Hillary?
14
No, absolutely not. We're bad, but not that bad. We didn't deserve her.
She still doesn't really get it. Based on her defensiveness, deflections, and overall lack of introspection, a better title for "What Happened" would be "What Happened?"
18
I don't know if I will read it. I want assurance that there's something really new in there - something insightfull - and I cannot believe that there is 500 pages of material worth wading through. Actually, I can't think of any politician who could keep anyone mesmerized for that long focusing on him/her self, and it is wise to s pick your subjects and stick to the ones that matter the most.
I supported her. I do not want to hear rants. Witty, dark putdowns - definitely. Perhaps she should have waited a while before rushing to print. Perhaps she needed a tougher editor or a review group to offer criticism. So many times, the Clintons both tend to manage to hang targets on their own backs, while supporters cringe.
I don't BTW think she is wrong that sexism played a role, along with economics. It eagerly took control of stereotypes already spread - that she was a shrew in private, for instance, helped along by Trump's continual rants and chants. We have an array of republican leaders who clearly lie and obfuscate, take money from wealthy contributors, and follow the gospel of lobbyists for the Citizen United "individuals", and who escape censure and public attack. And they all escape the early obsessions with her appearance..
12
The email server issue was never an issue for this Liberal and I suspect millions of others like me. I dont buy it, even though Comey should be expelled from DC forever for his poor judgement.
What alarmed me about HC was her deep corporate insider vibe, which was impossible not to observe every time she spoke to a camera. She lost me there and her campaign was non-stop utterly tone-deaf about what Dems are about these days.
Trump is an epic. daily. disaster. but I would have preferred Elizabeth Warren 1000X more than Hillary Clinton. Fingers Crossed.
9
I agree with most of what you say, but perhaps the media should have explained better to the "millions of others" why the email server was a very big deal indeed. I was shocked that they didn't. There is a law, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, that requires every US corporation who does business internationally to have a formal and rigid compliance program that costs American businesses billions of dollars to maintain and rigorously enforce. The DOJ prosecutes vigorously and rakes in hundreds of millions of dollars a year in penalties. I was the director of such a program for 6 years. So I know that any US corporation doing business internationally would have fired immediately any employee (and especially an executive) who was discovered to be using private email (let alone a personal server) to conduct company business. I've seen it happen more than once. Such a practice is a wide open door to bribery and corruption, which is rampant and routine in many many countries, and personal email is a great way to do it. If the company was caught (and they usually are, due to whistle-blowers who want to distance themselves from wrongdoing,) the penalty would be severe. If they claimed ignorance, that's an even graver sin and subject to even more heavy penalties.
So it's OK for the Secretary of State to conduct the most serious business of all for the biggest company in the world?!?
1
Why is the 3 million popular vote number always mentioned in Times articles but not the landslide 304-227 electoral vote?
It's clear evidence of bias.
It's like reporting on the number of touchdowns in a football game, while ignoring the score.
It's clear evidence of bias.
It's like reporting on the number of touchdowns in a football game, while ignoring the score.
17
because the number of PEOPLE in that "landslide" was around 70k. when you emphasize 70k over 3 million, the bias is inarguable
18
Everyone knows the score already!
1
The reason why the electoral vote is not mentioned as much as you apparently wish, is because the electoral vote is a phony vote. It's biased. It has the same bias as the vote in the U.S. Senate, with states such as Wyoming getting two senators along with California's two senators. Do the math. Deducted two votes for every state Trump won and Clinton won. Yes, Trump still wins. But nowhere near the landslide you claim. Go back further. Gore beats Bush in 2000.
4
Perhaps Hillary Clinton is the reason she did not win in a landslide.
But there are several dozen reasons why she did not win by 3,000,000 actual votes. Misogyny, years of baseless demonization, Putin's thefts and propaganda apparatus, self-righteous self-proclaimed pure progressives taken in by the preceding, the gerrymandering that gave Trey Gowdy a committee chairmanship, James Comey's scrupulousness, an Electoral College that hasn't worked as intended since 1796, overconfidence among local Democrats. Put me in there -- I could have knocked on many more doors.
But there are several dozen reasons why she did not win by 3,000,000 actual votes. Misogyny, years of baseless demonization, Putin's thefts and propaganda apparatus, self-righteous self-proclaimed pure progressives taken in by the preceding, the gerrymandering that gave Trey Gowdy a committee chairmanship, James Comey's scrupulousness, an Electoral College that hasn't worked as intended since 1796, overconfidence among local Democrats. Put me in there -- I could have knocked on many more doors.
13
"an Electoral College that hasn't worked as intended since 1796,"
The Electoral College worked exactly as designed. It kept a candidate from being elected by two states with huge populations with the aid of a couple of much smaller ones allowed to assist. One must appreciate the brilliance of the Founders who foresaw this happening even in their own lifetimes.
The Electoral College worked exactly as designed. It kept a candidate from being elected by two states with huge populations with the aid of a couple of much smaller ones allowed to assist. One must appreciate the brilliance of the Founders who foresaw this happening even in their own lifetimes.
2
The really scary thing is that a deeply corrupt person like Hillary Clinton came so close to being elected President.
Two unforeseen events derailed her coronation.
In March 2013 Guccifer hacked Blumenthal emails which showed that Clinton was using a private email server.
This was 5 years after she had set up using an alias.
It became obvious that she had been using her Secretary of State office to enrich herself to the tune of hundred of millions by fattening up the Clinton Foundation which she and her family control.
Progressives came up with the usual rationalizations like they did with Monica in the Oval Office.
Comey I and she still lead the race.
Then came a 15 year old girl and Weiner and the FBI investigating sex crimes finds hundreds of thousands of Hillary emails conveniently hidden under a file labelled household.
Comey II.
Everyone had had enough.
Then came Trump.
Two unforeseen events derailed her coronation.
In March 2013 Guccifer hacked Blumenthal emails which showed that Clinton was using a private email server.
This was 5 years after she had set up using an alias.
It became obvious that she had been using her Secretary of State office to enrich herself to the tune of hundred of millions by fattening up the Clinton Foundation which she and her family control.
Progressives came up with the usual rationalizations like they did with Monica in the Oval Office.
Comey I and she still lead the race.
Then came a 15 year old girl and Weiner and the FBI investigating sex crimes finds hundreds of thousands of Hillary emails conveniently hidden under a file labelled household.
Comey II.
Everyone had had enough.
Then came Trump.
13
Yes and now we have you trolls making up excuses for Trump and linking things together erroneously.
So I guess we have you to thank for the worst administration ever, the dumbest and most incompetent president ever and a so-called drained swamp now fuller with enough incompetence to sink a navy fleet.
Thanks for re-defining corruption for us. It says a lot about you.
So I guess we have you to thank for the worst administration ever, the dumbest and most incompetent president ever and a so-called drained swamp now fuller with enough incompetence to sink a navy fleet.
Thanks for re-defining corruption for us. It says a lot about you.
28
Thanks for redifining troll for me. Actually, you did not, stating facts was defined as trolling all this past election cycle by Hillary supporters.
4
@True Observe,
And of course having classified government emails on a private computer of a sex addict, who doesn't have a security clearance, in his private home is not a big deal. After all, a Secretary of State of USA obviously doesn't have a government printer to print out her classified emails and gives them to her aide to bring them home and ask the aide's husband to print them out in his house.
SOS of the the most advanced country on Earth!
And of course having classified government emails on a private computer of a sex addict, who doesn't have a security clearance, in his private home is not a big deal. After all, a Secretary of State of USA obviously doesn't have a government printer to print out her classified emails and gives them to her aide to bring them home and ask the aide's husband to print them out in his house.
SOS of the the most advanced country on Earth!
1
" ... the ever-present animus toward her, which remains, she writes, something she doesn’t fully understand ... Or that her campaign, in spite of its extensive networks and deep pockets, failed to detect that something on the ground was wrong." As an Independent, I was strongly against Mr. Trump, who was/is woefully unqualified, both by experience and personality. But I could not vote for Ms. Clinton, a primary reason being her exorbitant "speaking fees" from Wall Street firms. She admits it was bad "optics", but that way understates the effect. It made me and many others hark back to her President husband's pardon of Marc Rich, whose wife was a major contributor to Ms. Clinton's Senate campaign. Its a matter of character and ethics, not just "optics". As Forbes reported in early 2016: "In all, there were $153 million in Bill and Hillary Clinton speaking fees. Mrs. Clinton was paid dearly by Wall Street, suggesting a conflict of interest despite her recent distancing." Sounds like the price of poker has gone way up since her husband's president days: " (Bill) Clinton's critics alleged that (Marc) Rich's pardon had been bought, as Denise Rich had given more than $1 million to Clinton's political party (the Democratic Party), including more than $100,000 to the Senate campaign of the president's wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton ... Former President Jimmy Carter, a fellow Democrat, said, 'In my opinion, that was disgraceful.' " (Wikipedia)
11
What Happened is simple: you don't win elections by courting the vote of Starbucks-sipping, iPhone-tapping, NYT-subscribing voters. You pay attention to the middle class (especially in swing states) and learn for yourself, first hand, that they need, more than anything else, to also be given attention. After nearly a full year, the Democratic Party still has not figured this out, and it will cost them in 2018 and 2020.
20
LOL! The middle class doesn't drink Starbucks, use iPhones or, like you, read the Times?
13
The NY Times seems to have already chosen the candidate they will be pushing and endorsing for 2020. They caught up with Kamala Harris in The Hamptons recently. The Dems and the paper are off to another clueless start
11
I'm middle class and do all of those things--and always have. LOL indeed. Even my father, who was orphaned and had to end his formal education after the 8th grade, read newspapers every day. He was also a working-class man who liked fine food and exquisite clothes. I think the name-calling Fox News "elite" would do themselves a favor by picking up a newspaper every once and a while. Maybe then Rupert Murdock and Donald Trump wouldn't be laughing (at them) "all the way to the bank," as my dad used to say.
2
I will read this book because I admire her.
20
While reading the book I was stunned at how the press had bungled its roll-out. It's so well written and displays the Hillary that WAS THERE but that so many refused to see because they could not see beyond the media, Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump's definition of her. I grew to support her because they attacked her - she was my pragmatic choice but during this election I did research, watched and listened to her speeches and uncovered a much different Hillary than the one most people appeared to be seeing. This book shows that person I supported and voted for. I will never trust the white men on the left I used to have so much faith but who let me, and us, down this year in their treatment of her and that includes Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Michael Moore, Bill Maher and others. Now I know what a true leader looks like in Hillary Clinton.
18
I will read the book to see for myself the HRC that I never managed to see during her campaign.
I wished she was more candid, more unguarded, and more reflective, and less calculating during her campaign. I wish she didn't dance around the server controversy with just perfunctory remarks like "it was a mistake". Realizing the fiasco that Trump was, would be, and still is, I never wavered in my support for HRC. But that did not mean that I liked her. At times I forced myself not to actively dislike her.
I wished this version of HRC was on display before, not 11 months after her terrible loss to Trump. History is so much full of What-ifs. Let's put one more to the list.
I wished she was more candid, more unguarded, and more reflective, and less calculating during her campaign. I wish she didn't dance around the server controversy with just perfunctory remarks like "it was a mistake". Realizing the fiasco that Trump was, would be, and still is, I never wavered in my support for HRC. But that did not mean that I liked her. At times I forced myself not to actively dislike her.
I wished this version of HRC was on display before, not 11 months after her terrible loss to Trump. History is so much full of What-ifs. Let's put one more to the list.
1
What do I know? Probably not much. But it seems to me that one of HRC's problems is that she was Janus-faced. She was ambitious but denied that she was ambitious. She was positioning herself to run for President but for a long time denied she was campaigning for President. She had a bad habit of doing one thing and telling us another. She lacked authenticity and credibility which she could have fostered if she hadn't limited or refused to do press conferences during the campaign. And that awfully divisive slogan "I'm with Her," says much about a campaign that was more about ego gratification than about the citizens she was supposed to ostensibly serve.
The Donald, on the other hand, was as flawed a candidate as there ever was one. However, what we saw was what we got, and he never pretended to be something he wasn't.
When picking between the lesser of two evils, that may have made all the difference and worked in Trump's favor.
People are tired of politicians. That was one of the most important messages that came out of the campaign.
The Donald, on the other hand, was as flawed a candidate as there ever was one. However, what we saw was what we got, and he never pretended to be something he wasn't.
When picking between the lesser of two evils, that may have made all the difference and worked in Trump's favor.
People are tired of politicians. That was one of the most important messages that came out of the campaign.
13
"The Donald, on the other hand, was as flawed a candidate as there ever was one. However, what we saw was what we got, and he never pretended to be something he wasn't. "
This, this, this cannot be said enough. Every Trump voter I know said the same thing.
This, this, this cannot be said enough. Every Trump voter I know said the same thing.
4
What happened? Almost half of registered voters didn't vote, that's what happened. What happened was a lazy, disengaged electorate, who can't even muster the energy and moral drive to go vote. Let's make voting mandatory, like Australia, and we'll see a vast change in how this country is run.
15
Yeah - vast change all right - change for the worse! Forcing people to vote with the iron fist of the state would not turn out well.
1
I was wondering.... did Hillary write this book or some well paid and lazy ghost writer who went for the low lying fruit and the cheap shots. It looks like we may have another go around about this book when its origins become known.
5
Actually, Clinton is far more educated and competent to write her own books and has, unlike Trump who needs ghostwriters to do it for him. It's well known he contributes little to his books and quite evident how limited his thoughts and language are. He doesn't read either.
6
In true Hillary (woman of the people) fashion she let her adoring fans wait an hour for her book signing today. And she wonders why people "don't get her." Do the Clinton's even own a mirror?
15
She did not campaign well. It was a self admitted weak point and she did not compensate for that weakness. Trump dominated the news cycle day in and day out; week in and week out. I kept asking, "Where is Clinton?"
5
Dark humor from a terrifyingly dark neocon priestess.
I'm glad the loss to Trump gave her the opportunity to write this book rather than engineer more bloody dangerous disasters abroad.
I'm glad the loss to Trump gave her the opportunity to write this book rather than engineer more bloody dangerous disasters abroad.
11
Uh...ok.
3
Rightly or wrongly, too many people hated Hillary to the point that they let their dislike overtake their common sense at the polling both. And now look at the mess we have.
Enough with her whining about Comey, regardless of whether what he did was wrong, or whether it actually tipped the scales. And enough whining about Bernie Sanders. Doesn't she realize that the primary process is adversarial? Why did she have to be the pre-ordained candidate on the Dem ticket? Oh, Thank you Debbie Wasserman Schultz; some of the blame lies at her doorstep.
Hillary should go away. And it would be helpful if she also tried to understand that she, and the visceral reaction she caused, that was the root of the problem. Rightly or wrongly, she bears much of the blame for the current state of affairs in this country, and for the scary trajectory that the entire world is moving along.
Enough with her whining about Comey, regardless of whether what he did was wrong, or whether it actually tipped the scales. And enough whining about Bernie Sanders. Doesn't she realize that the primary process is adversarial? Why did she have to be the pre-ordained candidate on the Dem ticket? Oh, Thank you Debbie Wasserman Schultz; some of the blame lies at her doorstep.
Hillary should go away. And it would be helpful if she also tried to understand that she, and the visceral reaction she caused, that was the root of the problem. Rightly or wrongly, she bears much of the blame for the current state of affairs in this country, and for the scary trajectory that the entire world is moving along.
8
Besides being the victim of a rigged election - Hillary Clinton would have been better served by presenting her major proposals - weather education - healthcare etc - tax cuts for the middle - class how this would be accomplished and nothing else - by that I mean not even mentioning anything about lumpy - she should have run on a simple well defined platform and given the lump no press at all from her end.
1
Hillary Clinton's new book. What Happened? An in-depth catharsis about why she stunningly lost the election to that "reality star clown" Donald Trump. It clearly wasn't her fault.
On her blame list: James Comey. Vlad Putin. Julian Assange. Bernie Sanders. Joe Biden. Matt Lauer. Mark Zuckerberg. Baskets of deplorable men. Well. All white men. Plus Barack Obama. So. What happened? Men happened. Of course.
On her blame list: James Comey. Vlad Putin. Julian Assange. Bernie Sanders. Joe Biden. Matt Lauer. Mark Zuckerberg. Baskets of deplorable men. Well. All white men. Plus Barack Obama. So. What happened? Men happened. Of course.
7
She offered nothing by way of substance for people to latch on to. And what she did offer (college assistance) was more in response to Bernie's free college platform. People who were hurt in 2008 by misbehavior by big banks mistrusted big pay days she received from her Wall Street speeches. She did nothing to differentiate herself from Obama or Sanders. She did nothing to make herself a better choice than Trump by offering positive messages. Instead, she gave those on the fence "Deplorable" reasons to vote against her or stay home. And now she does nothing but whine about it. Yes, she absolutely should have told Trump to back off on stage. Maybe then the big bad misogynists would have respected her as a fighter instead of the elitist she appeared (and still appears) to be.
7
@Carol Colitti Levine<,
You're wrong - she's blamed the Women Marchers too.
You're wrong - she's blamed the Women Marchers too.
3
My comment was meant to be sarcastic. Not literal.
1
Why just look at two-terms only thereby excluding Truman's succession to FDR (as well as Johnson's to Kennedy)? Even Republicans haven't had two presidents in a row since G.H.W. Bush succeeded Reagan.
1
Truman and Johnson succeeded because their predecessors had died. When Truman subsequently ran for a full term in 1948 and when Johnson ran for a full term in 1964, they were the incumbent. The sentence in question specified "non-incumbent".
2
“Clinton also blames sexism, citing a 2014 Pew Research Center poll that showed just how few voters hoped to see a female president in their lifetime.”
It is instructive to look at what the 2014 Pew Research Center poll actually found. It said: “38% of all adults say they hope the U.S. will elect a female in their lifetime; 57% say it doesn’t matter to them.”
In other words, a total of 95% percent of the poll respondents either favored or were indifferent whether a female would be elected President. That is, only 5% of the Pew survey respondents could be said to be opposed to seeing a female President!
There is nothing to support the conjecture that more voted against her because of her gender than voted for her. Indeed, Pew’s survey data strongly supports the opposite. In other words, the data she cites indicates that she very well may have lost despite being a woman rather than because she is a woman.
The important point is that I do not know, you do not know and Hillary does not know for sure that, on balance, she lost because she is a woman.
Losing to such a creep as Trump maybe enough proof to her that misogyny was a key factor in her loss. But holding firm to such an unsupportable assertion (and misusing available data to support that assertion) tells us nothing about what actually happened but does call into question her objectivity about anything concerning the election.
It is instructive to look at what the 2014 Pew Research Center poll actually found. It said: “38% of all adults say they hope the U.S. will elect a female in their lifetime; 57% say it doesn’t matter to them.”
In other words, a total of 95% percent of the poll respondents either favored or were indifferent whether a female would be elected President. That is, only 5% of the Pew survey respondents could be said to be opposed to seeing a female President!
There is nothing to support the conjecture that more voted against her because of her gender than voted for her. Indeed, Pew’s survey data strongly supports the opposite. In other words, the data she cites indicates that she very well may have lost despite being a woman rather than because she is a woman.
The important point is that I do not know, you do not know and Hillary does not know for sure that, on balance, she lost because she is a woman.
Losing to such a creep as Trump maybe enough proof to her that misogyny was a key factor in her loss. But holding firm to such an unsupportable assertion (and misusing available data to support that assertion) tells us nothing about what actually happened but does call into question her objectivity about anything concerning the election.
12
Unconscious bias and sexism has been repeatedly proven to be quite real. Very few people even u detstabs their own unconscious bias, let alone be willing to admit to it on a poll.
6
Re Jill:
People can also be unconsciously biased in favor of seeing a woman be President.
The Pew result indicated that 5% of respondents did not accept or react favorably to the idea of a woman being President. But 38% consciously expressed their hope to see a woman President. It is hard to believe that among these 38% that there were enough who were deluding themselves about their real feelings or who would be embarrassed to reveal their real feelings in a poll that it would reverse the poll results. The poll was overwhelming: 5% "sexists" and 35% pro-women--more than 7 to 1 where gender would work in favor a woman Presidential candidate.
The real problem is Hillary's citation of data that strongly seems to refute the point she was trying to make. An honest mistake or a cynical regard by her of the gullibility of her readers?
People can also be unconsciously biased in favor of seeing a woman be President.
The Pew result indicated that 5% of respondents did not accept or react favorably to the idea of a woman being President. But 38% consciously expressed their hope to see a woman President. It is hard to believe that among these 38% that there were enough who were deluding themselves about their real feelings or who would be embarrassed to reveal their real feelings in a poll that it would reverse the poll results. The poll was overwhelming: 5% "sexists" and 35% pro-women--more than 7 to 1 where gender would work in favor a woman Presidential candidate.
The real problem is Hillary's citation of data that strongly seems to refute the point she was trying to make. An honest mistake or a cynical regard by her of the gullibility of her readers?
@Leonard Miller,
Yeah, but Hillary said it's men who forced their wives and daughters to vote for Trump.
Yeah, but Hillary said it's men who forced their wives and daughters to vote for Trump.
The timing of this book could not be worse - as the Russia investigation moves forward, she has taken the time to delegitimze Comey. No reason to publish a book this quickly other than to show that her attention is focused on her desire to vent spleen (however well justified) instead of on the bigger picture. I kind of expected better than this, given her really tremendous credentials as a stateswoman.
2
her purpose was to make $, not help an investigation
5
"No non-incumbent Democrat has succeeded a two-term Democratic president since 1836"
But plenty of Republicans have. This is structured to make people think that we very rarely have a president of the same party as an outgoing president succeed a two term president... that is untrue, it happens quite often.
Lincoln (R) (2 terms, taken over by Andrew Johnson after assassination) - Succeeded by Grant (R) (2 terms) -- Then Hayes (R), Garfield (R), Aurthur (R)
Then there is McKinley (R) 1 term - followed by - Teddy Roosevelt (R) 2 terms, followed by Taft
Then Harding (R), Coolidge (R), Hoover (R)
Then Roosevelt (D) 4 terms - Truman (D) 2 terms
Then Nixon (R) followed by Ford (R)
Then Reagan (R) followed by Bush (R)
Not unusual in the least for this to happen...
But plenty of Republicans have. This is structured to make people think that we very rarely have a president of the same party as an outgoing president succeed a two term president... that is untrue, it happens quite often.
Lincoln (R) (2 terms, taken over by Andrew Johnson after assassination) - Succeeded by Grant (R) (2 terms) -- Then Hayes (R), Garfield (R), Aurthur (R)
Then there is McKinley (R) 1 term - followed by - Teddy Roosevelt (R) 2 terms, followed by Taft
Then Harding (R), Coolidge (R), Hoover (R)
Then Roosevelt (D) 4 terms - Truman (D) 2 terms
Then Nixon (R) followed by Ford (R)
Then Reagan (R) followed by Bush (R)
Not unusual in the least for this to happen...
1
Candor, authenticity, easy to relate to, are all things we seek out in our best friends and something sorely missing in the shadowy world of American politics.
5
what makes you think, when she blames everyone but herself, that she is not being candid?
1
According to some reviews she does not blame Bill either. I think there were any number of ways he hurt her.
HRC had the entire Democratic, Republican, media, business, tech, & global establishment on her side. She had had the most formidable political machine of the past 30 years. She raised more money than any other Democratic candidate for POTUS, over 900 million dollars. She out spent Trump 3-1. She had substantially more troops on the ground. She had President Obama at the height of his popularity not only anoint her as his successor but campaign by her side. She had her husband as well as Michelle Obama pleading her case. She won all three debates. Her opponent put his foot in his mouth every time he walked out the door. She had every conceivable advantage, more advantages than anyone who has ever run or probably ever will run for President. Yet she still lost. Perhaps she didn't win because she one of the most divisive and unpopular candidates to ever run for POTUS. This is something her supporters simply can't admit. Any other Democratic candidate man or women with all of these built in advantages would have won by a landslide. Don’t you think VP Biden could have won with this edge? Looking back the race seem to come down to 4 states. Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania & North Carolina. Those were crucial states for Trump’s campaign. If he won all four, he was the next POTUS. If he lost one, it would have been hard for Clinton to lose the general election. HRC couldn't even win one of the four. Face it HRC ran a poor even tone deaf campaign that's why she lost the election.
22
Only the genius of the American political system could have offered the voters a choice of leaders between the apparently two most disliked personalities in the entire country. Are we not an exceptional nation?
11
She should NOT have have run. There is NO reason to go back in White House after living EIGHT long years and participation in 42nd every major decision.
5
We dodged a bullet by not electing her. She lost because she was out of touch with the American people. She offered no message that had the pull toward difference that both Sanders and Trump offered. Her hubris and arrogance, and, oh yeah, her sense of entitlement cost her the election. I wish she would go away. So glad I did not vote for her. Didn't vote for Trump either, but I much prefer him to her.
11
Well Susan, you certainly deserve the president you got.
9
Oh, Hillary, let it go. Your time in politics is up. It was misused. Give an honest "mea culpa" and move on. It's over. Now you can spend more time at home with husband Bill, perhaps bake some cookies for your man.
7
I love the New York Times and consider it among the world's most important institutions. That said, this paper has been exhibit A in the dishonest, hysterical coverage of Secretary Clinton and her husband for decades now. She's been more than patient with you people.
13
Bill and Hillary are fundamentally dishonest people. To say the New York Times should not cover their many transgressions in to imply they should be like Pravda under the old USSR.
9
in her book she also blames the NY times too!
4
Yes, Hillary is right when she says that the Times coverage of her was schizophrenic. But not in the way she thinks.
1
I'm just halfway through this absorbing book but I can already tell that most of these critical comments are coming from people why haven't and will not bother to read it. Are you waiting to hear what Rush says about it? Or Trump? Or maybe our co-president, Mr. Putin?
19
we are waiting for a book review from someone who is not a sycophant.
10
My word, who cares?
She's cooked, finished, washed up, kaput, etc., et. al.
She's cooked, finished, washed up, kaput, etc., et. al.
13
Ms. Senior - does Ms. Clinton mention how many votes she might have lost from her "basket of deplorables" comment? Or her treatment of classified documents on her personal in-house email server? Or perhaps the black vote she didn't get from folks who remembered her "hard-working white folks won't vote for him" comment in the '08 primary? Or Bill's comment in '08 after her loss in South Carolina, that "Jesse Jackson won South Carolina too." How about her ever so clumsy lies like, "We ducked sniper fire in Kosovo" and "I was named after Sir Edmund Hillary" and "I feel fine - it's a beautiful day in NY?"
Ms. Senior, do you have an opinion on the emotional health of a defeated candidate who can't just retire from public life with dignity, instead of delivering pathetic excuses and bitter complaints in all directions?
Ms. Senior, do you have an opinion on the emotional health of a defeated candidate who can't just retire from public life with dignity, instead of delivering pathetic excuses and bitter complaints in all directions?
20
People here want to talk abot misogyny and blame her loss on that, Hillary Clinton turned a lot of women off way before the deplorables comment, or the Bernie bros description of anybody who didn't want to see her crowned. Way back when Bill Clinton was running in 1992 her arrogant comment about being expected to stay home and bake cookies was one of her more prominent errors in winning friends and influencing people. Some women did stay home. Other women went out to work in demanding jobs and still came home and got dinner ready and even baked cookies. She showed how out of touch she was with that remark and what a sham her supposed concern for women really was. While she could make a noise about the treatment of women around the world, she had no idea how ordinary American women worked and lived. That is why
so many of them voted for Trump.
so many of them voted for Trump.
3
Little by little, day by day we find more evidence that the Russians went
deeper and deeper than we're being told, or perhaps know...
How sonon before we get the news that they DID get into the rolls and
did certainly sway the election.
Trump has always known it, who else does even now.
And HOW shall we be told?
deeper and deeper than we're being told, or perhaps know...
How sonon before we get the news that they DID get into the rolls and
did certainly sway the election.
Trump has always known it, who else does even now.
And HOW shall we be told?
10
There are countless women in the world confront gender bias every single day.
It's heartbreaking.
My hope for future is that our dare devil millenials shatter all ceilings.
It's heartbreaking.
My hope for future is that our dare devil millenials shatter all ceilings.
8
Can't wait to read it and get it for countless demoralized friends, co-workers, my doctor, dentist, everyone who is writhing in agony along with Hillary. We are all saddened beyond belief at the carnage and horrors the misogynist GOP have unleashed with their monstrous failing candidate and sickened by their animosity towards a great leader denied a role she would have excelled in. America's loss!
20
Hillary sycophants continue to call her "one of the most qualified candidates to ever run for the presidency." She was simply qualified, nothing more. Compared to about 90% of others to have ever entered that ring, she is not some superstar of qualifications. She was a Senator and a Secretary of State. Whoop-de-doo. Look at the qualifications of the other candidates in history and most have had similar or even more impressive jobs on their resume. Heck, even Sarah Palin was a governor! This "most qualified" nonsense is just that. The only candidates that perhaps had less experience in the 20th and 21st century were Obama and Trump and she herself LOST to both of them. This alone depicts how awful she was as a presidential candidate.
If the D's thought it was a woman's "turn" because a woman was due, the DNC should have rigged the nomination for someone like Warren, Gillibrand, or Klobuchar... women with experience AND dignity, and not weighted down by self-imposed stupidity (email nonsense and 23 or more $250,000+ speeches in the two years before she threw her hat into the ring, to name just two; moronic hubris). Goodbye HRC; hopefully all Clintons are done running for something.
If the D's thought it was a woman's "turn" because a woman was due, the DNC should have rigged the nomination for someone like Warren, Gillibrand, or Klobuchar... women with experience AND dignity, and not weighted down by self-imposed stupidity (email nonsense and 23 or more $250,000+ speeches in the two years before she threw her hat into the ring, to name just two; moronic hubris). Goodbye HRC; hopefully all Clintons are done running for something.
20
Really? Elizabeth "I'm a nasty woman" Warren or Kristen "potty mouth" Gillibrand? These are your examples of women with dignity?
And the Democrats wonder why the rest of the country reviles their elitism so.
Read the chapter in Hillary's book entitled "The Election." It starts with her name-dropping every left-wing pop star in the country. How is her relationship with Lady Gaga relevant to the lives of average Americans?
Short answer: It's not. But, the way she presented it on the eve of the election, while Donald Trump was in Michigan talking to working-class people about bringing back their jobs, makes very, very clear why her tone deafness cost her and the Democrats the election.
Democrats have no dignity. They are elitists who believe they are entitled and are willing to do whatever it takes to get whatever they want. In other words, they are willing to compromise others' dignity in their pursuit of raw power.
Until that changes, even Donald Trump won't be enough to turn things around for them.
And the Democrats wonder why the rest of the country reviles their elitism so.
Read the chapter in Hillary's book entitled "The Election." It starts with her name-dropping every left-wing pop star in the country. How is her relationship with Lady Gaga relevant to the lives of average Americans?
Short answer: It's not. But, the way she presented it on the eve of the election, while Donald Trump was in Michigan talking to working-class people about bringing back their jobs, makes very, very clear why her tone deafness cost her and the Democrats the election.
Democrats have no dignity. They are elitists who believe they are entitled and are willing to do whatever it takes to get whatever they want. In other words, they are willing to compromise others' dignity in their pursuit of raw power.
Until that changes, even Donald Trump won't be enough to turn things around for them.
4
So apparently Barack Obama told Hillary Clinton "that he believed she was the Democrats' best hope to keep the White House." Why does her reporting this, and recognizing all it meant, constitute a "dig at Joe Biden?"
14
Hillary Clinton worked on Nixon's impeachment inquiry. You want a root cause for resentment, you can start there.
6
May I suggest Hilary lost for a number of reasons:
1.Emails
1.Emails
5
A column by Thomas Frank in the Guardian provides a compelling argument as to why Clinton ended up losing to a reality TV carnival barker.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/hillary-clinton-apos-book-clear-090031813.html
Or, the memorable line in the movie Patton "George, your biggest enemy is your own big mouth" could be a metaphor for Hillary Clinton's own defeat.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/hillary-clinton-apos-book-clear-090031813.html
Or, the memorable line in the movie Patton "George, your biggest enemy is your own big mouth" could be a metaphor for Hillary Clinton's own defeat.
7
The Frank column in the Guardian is pretty terrific. It points out, among things, that the book has no mention of Goldman Sachs or Walmart.
5
I wish they'd hire Frank to do an op-ed column here. Will never happen, would upset way too many horses around these parts.
Quick, name another presidential election loser so self-absorbed as to write a book about the loss.
I'm waiting....
I'm waiting....
11
Mitt Romney did a movie.
3
She couldn't get voters enthusiastic about her, which she seems to NOT understand. Maybe if we look at that issue we could get "What Happened". She still blames the world and not herself. What do you call that...disingenuous ? She didn't seem to mention the deplorables she so aptly characterized during the campaign. Maybe she wasn't sure how the electoral college worked ? Another bizarre tale of finger pointing.
6
Why should Clinton be humble? Was McCain humble? Gore? Kerry? Romney? Maybe because, as a woman, and particularly an older woman, she had no business running at all. Maybe the fact that she displayed confidence and authority were offensive to the status quo that requires a woman to apologize or "tone it down"- particularly when she is the smartest person in the room.
As a woman professional a few years younger than Hillary, I know what happened to her- just as women viewers of the 2nd debate were quick to recognize that Donald Trump was stalking. She was hated because she did not accede to the demand that women in public life be especially "likeable," i.e. grateful and self-effacing.
The NYT inflated the so-called email scandal, which reduced to whether Clinton should have been so "arrogant" as to afford a private server- other than use Gmail as did Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice. Clearly, the state department was well aware that the mail was coming from Clinton.com, yet did nothing. So what was her crime? Not anticipating that the media would inflate the story, or the Republicans exploit it? Will the media now demand the Clinton apologize for her book? While the NYT review is favorable, I hear rumblings elsewhere, -certainly in these comments-that suggest that Clinton will be held to task for not retreating.
History will judge us harshly for the way that we have treated Hillary Clinton, who nonetheless won the popular vote and would have been a fine president.
As a woman professional a few years younger than Hillary, I know what happened to her- just as women viewers of the 2nd debate were quick to recognize that Donald Trump was stalking. She was hated because she did not accede to the demand that women in public life be especially "likeable," i.e. grateful and self-effacing.
The NYT inflated the so-called email scandal, which reduced to whether Clinton should have been so "arrogant" as to afford a private server- other than use Gmail as did Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice. Clearly, the state department was well aware that the mail was coming from Clinton.com, yet did nothing. So what was her crime? Not anticipating that the media would inflate the story, or the Republicans exploit it? Will the media now demand the Clinton apologize for her book? While the NYT review is favorable, I hear rumblings elsewhere, -certainly in these comments-that suggest that Clinton will be held to task for not retreating.
History will judge us harshly for the way that we have treated Hillary Clinton, who nonetheless won the popular vote and would have been a fine president.
46
As another older woman familiar with what Hillary Clinton faced in a profession dominated by men - well said - you hit it on the nail!
13
if want to see harsh, you should see the way she blames others in her book for her own ineptitude in losing the election. it was everyone else s fault but herself. that is harsh.
6
Exactly!
How many women denied their well deserved opportunities?
Many. The one that breaks my heart is Roslind Franklin.
Many. The one that breaks my heart is Roslind Franklin.
6
She lost because she's a fraud, always has been a fraud.
Building a plausible resume doesn't mean you're a policy wonk genius.
Walking into the other guy's space and then theatrically shuddering about the creep breathing down your neck doesn't explain how the creep you stayed married to doesn't turn your stomach.
Making your feckless kid go out and lie to the old folks in NH about how Bernie was gonna take away their Medicare is not being a principled campaigner.
But hey. When the coffers don't seem full enough, the Clintons write books.
Don't worry. Plenty out there will buy them.
Building a plausible resume doesn't mean you're a policy wonk genius.
Walking into the other guy's space and then theatrically shuddering about the creep breathing down your neck doesn't explain how the creep you stayed married to doesn't turn your stomach.
Making your feckless kid go out and lie to the old folks in NH about how Bernie was gonna take away their Medicare is not being a principled campaigner.
But hey. When the coffers don't seem full enough, the Clintons write books.
Don't worry. Plenty out there will buy them.
17
My post-mortem political book would be titled -
'Not with him, not with her'.
We're in the death sprial of 2-party politics in this country.
'Not with him, not with her'.
We're in the death sprial of 2-party politics in this country.
4
That's no bad thing.
2
My title is, "The Godess That Failed." Not original but except for the failed part it is how too many people see her.
"It’s hard to buy the idea that she suffered disproportionately from charges of untrustworthiness or inauthenticity simply because she was a woman." Yet that was what happened, and you, especially as a woman, should know that. Trump and the GOP have made it blatantly obvious what they think about women and their place in our society - closed mouth, barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen.
17
With her remark about baking cookies back in 1992 Ms Clinton showed that she had little empathy or sympathy for wome. who were in that situation.
I've heard criticism that this is a "money grab," but I think that's bogus. The book is therapy for Hillary Clinton. She gets it all off of her chest. I hope she feels better, but it seems awfully petty and selfish. If she was really serious about being an agent for positive change in the world--which was ostensibly her raison d'être for the past 20 years--how does this book help?
3
A smarter topic for this money grab book would be to discuss what she plans to do now and in the future. Shame on her, and her editors, for taking advantage of her supporters who won't get over this loss for years..
1
i voted for her and while i'm certain that she would have been about a million times better president that the one we have i felt deep anxiety for her candidacy from the very beginning
she was as they say a target rich environment to run against
i hope she has a fine life and i don't hate her but i hope to never hear of anyone named clinton running for office again
she was as they say a target rich environment to run against
i hope she has a fine life and i don't hate her but i hope to never hear of anyone named clinton running for office again
3
Two disastrous policies from the Bill Clinton administration will always haunt Hillary: mass incarceration and the abolition of FDR's Aid to Families with Dependent Children. The first stripped black families of their fathers and brothers; the second eliminated welfare throwing millions of families into extreme poverty.
Hillary lost because she is disliked and mistrusted--and for good reason. Maybe next time the Dems will nominate a candidate who is serious about wealth taxes and inequality.
Hillary lost because she is disliked and mistrusted--and for good reason. Maybe next time the Dems will nominate a candidate who is serious about wealth taxes and inequality.
5
Bernie Sanders + James Comey + Vladimir Putin = Trump.
Sanders, not even a Democrat, running in the Democratic primaries made a theme of trashing Secretary Clinton with nasty innuendos of corporate corruption. But when she finally confronted him personally in one of their last debates to name a single vote or policy change due to contributions, he lamely changed the subject. But the damage was done which was also a theme of his Bernie Bots and other anti-Clinton forces. She's corrupt. This was the Big Lie perpetuated also by one of The Most Corrupt candidates in US history Donald J. Trump! Let's hope that the Dept of Justice Special Counsel will follow the Russian money to Trump Tower in NY. Let's see who IS the real corrupt politician in America and why he praised Putin at every opportunity.
Sanders, not even a Democrat, running in the Democratic primaries made a theme of trashing Secretary Clinton with nasty innuendos of corporate corruption. But when she finally confronted him personally in one of their last debates to name a single vote or policy change due to contributions, he lamely changed the subject. But the damage was done which was also a theme of his Bernie Bots and other anti-Clinton forces. She's corrupt. This was the Big Lie perpetuated also by one of The Most Corrupt candidates in US history Donald J. Trump! Let's hope that the Dept of Justice Special Counsel will follow the Russian money to Trump Tower in NY. Let's see who IS the real corrupt politician in America and why he praised Putin at every opportunity.
24
Clinton had damaged herself long before the last debate with Sanders, who did the Dems and Clinton a favor by not running as a third party candidate. It really makes one wonder at the political acumen of the DNC or of the candidate herself, the most qualified person ever to run for president, mot to realize this.
1
Sanders trashed her all during the primaries which had an effect on voters.
2
I will always love Hillary Clinton. I wish her the best in her life.
21
She EXPECTED to be handed the Presidency by the Democrats and the country and did absolutely nothing to earn the votes it took to get it.
That's "What Happened"
That's "What Happened"
18
What amazes me is the phenomenal standard demanded for Hillary Clinton, as reflected by the comments here, in terms of competency, appearance, taking personal responsibility, etc. etc. by a country that elected the most incompetent, crude and immoral individual that even the most cynical political satirist could have ever imagined. The blame for this elected monstrosity, for which many people through out the world will suffer, rests on the shoulders of the apathetic, proudly uninformed U.S. voters that do not value their right and responsibility to elect good people to office.
37
Clinton had to sail through the comments of "Crooked Hilary" and "Lock her Up" and never denounced her opponent in a disgraceful way once during the campaign, while the fellow Republicans succumbed to Trump's bullying attitude ( Remember Rubio's comment on "Small hands"). The very fact that people identify Hilary Clinton by her strong individualistic traits and accomplishments not just by the tag of former first lady itself is her great success. We can analyze 'What Happened" anyway we want, but the sad fact that remains hard to digest till this day is "Hilary Clinton did not happen for United States of America"
10
For history, Ms. Clinton absolutely needed to write this book. If she hadn't, future historians wouldn't have had the perspective of the first major party female presidential candidate, and the one who lost to an unqualified reality show star while beating him with three million more votes. An important piece of this amazing time that will be written about for as long as America exists would have been lost. So, yes, the book needs to exist, not just for the country, but for the person who in writing it processed her very stinging loss.
9
Not a fan (nor did I vote) for Sec. Clinton, but where was this fight during the campaign? It was shocking to watch someone with her experience look timid at times, not quite sure why the "fire" in her is so late to the party.
2
Because in the campaign, we saw her.
A book is assembled in private. It may have many contributors. I'd take her as I found her, not as she hopes to make us see her.
A book is assembled in private. It may have many contributors. I'd take her as I found her, not as she hopes to make us see her.
4
Different people blame different things depending upon their views and agendas, but the data showed that two things decided this election:
1) What people voted for: More than anything, the electorate wanted change. Clinton was seen as a continuation of the prior Democratic administration.
2) Who voted: The biggest difference was education. Trump got his "poorly" educated and Clinton got the higher educated. The less educated turned out in large proportions and Trump totally dominated them.
Other factors were nothing compared to these, according to the data.
1) What people voted for: More than anything, the electorate wanted change. Clinton was seen as a continuation of the prior Democratic administration.
2) Who voted: The biggest difference was education. Trump got his "poorly" educated and Clinton got the higher educated. The less educated turned out in large proportions and Trump totally dominated them.
Other factors were nothing compared to these, according to the data.
8
Fifty years' time will not only bring enough distance for historians to finally be interested in Hillary's perspective, but also provide the wisdom of fifty years' worth of hindsight and investigation. For example, by that time, we should know just how much influence the Russians had on the election (did they just permeate FB and Twitter with click-worthy fake news or did they also hack
into voting machines?) and whether our current POTUS committed treason via collusion. Time will tell. She won nearly 3 million more votes, yet lost the Electoral College by over 60 - that's not normal.
As for Hillary's book - good for her. She should be allowed space to give her defense and explanation as a way of helping all of us get past this. Some of her explanations, defenses, and theories may be superfluous or faulty, but it makes perfect sense that she'd present them. And, again, we'll all know more as time and evidence progresses.
Like an artist who dies penniless, but is later discovered to be a genius, Hillary Clinton may need the salve of time before her true value is discovered. In fifty years, I fully believe Hillary Clinton to be admired with almost saint-like reverence. Unfortunately, it seems most of us are far too dense and short-sighted to see her value now.
into voting machines?) and whether our current POTUS committed treason via collusion. Time will tell. She won nearly 3 million more votes, yet lost the Electoral College by over 60 - that's not normal.
As for Hillary's book - good for her. She should be allowed space to give her defense and explanation as a way of helping all of us get past this. Some of her explanations, defenses, and theories may be superfluous or faulty, but it makes perfect sense that she'd present them. And, again, we'll all know more as time and evidence progresses.
Like an artist who dies penniless, but is later discovered to be a genius, Hillary Clinton may need the salve of time before her true value is discovered. In fifty years, I fully believe Hillary Clinton to be admired with almost saint-like reverence. Unfortunately, it seems most of us are far too dense and short-sighted to see her value now.
7
What if the Democratic Establishment had supported both Bernie and Hillary equally and set an example of what Democracy is supposed to be.... I'm not sure she won fair and square so honestly - who cares about reading "What Happened" - What happened was that the Democratic Party undermined the Democratic Process, The Republicans misrepresented their regard for the forgotten working class (nothing new there) We have an uneducated, misinformed, misled electorate in the Republican Party. We have a Democratic Party that has lost its' focus. The only solution is to pass election reform and pull back on the peddling of our democracy. Hopefully we have the will to this long uphill task.
7
Mrs. Clinton needs to give the public a long, long break. In fact, I'd be very grateful if all the Clintons went into quiet public service for at least 10 years. I voted for Mrs. Clinton without enthusiasm, & it's apparent more than ever what a tin ear she has for understanding what have might have made her a better candidate & better human being: a genuine, demonstrable regard for the public good instead of her addiction to self-righteous rumination. I could not have been more appalled by the 2016 election results, & I lay most of that disgust squarely at her feet. Please, please, Mrs. Clinton, go work in a soup kitchen or as a hospice counselor---when you get the training, of course---& break my horrible fever dream of how wanting you were & are in so many important ways. Thank you. Best wishes.
12
Hopefully this is the last we will hear of Hillary and her Establishment group and old ideas and even older excuses. While a Democrat who voted for her, what is needed now is a brand new approach, with the younger generation of Democratic leaders, and new prescription and new ideas that sadly were missing form her book. We can do this, not that hard.
12
It seems almost fitting that Hillary Clinton's rehash of the 2016 election would appear in the same moment that so many are facing dire circumstances as a result of hurricanes, wildfires, and earthquake.
If only her pent-up 'irritation' could find a more beneficial channel rather than an endless loop of shared grievances. Knowing that for many people she was the only 'choice' she directed her energies in a 24/7 take down of Trump, only stating the obvious, rather than setting before voters compelling reasons to vote for her.
She is not alone in having to make a fresh start.
That she cannot see beyond her own concerns, or take responsibility in any situation are critical failings even for those who, in voting for her, acted against their conscience.
If only her pent-up 'irritation' could find a more beneficial channel rather than an endless loop of shared grievances. Knowing that for many people she was the only 'choice' she directed her energies in a 24/7 take down of Trump, only stating the obvious, rather than setting before voters compelling reasons to vote for her.
She is not alone in having to make a fresh start.
That she cannot see beyond her own concerns, or take responsibility in any situation are critical failings even for those who, in voting for her, acted against their conscience.
9
However Hillary Clinton's book is received by her readers, her book has enormous political and historical significance. I am one of those Democrats who was stunned and bewildered by her defeat, having believed throughout the campaign that my fellow Americans, would, ultimately, not vote to elect an incompetent, malevolent, immoral man to be President. We were wrong, and we sorely need Hillary's perspective on why we were wrong. The outcome of this election is that demagoguery won over competence and experience. Xenophobia, racism, anger and resentment won over solid values of equality and respect for diversity. It was and is tragic for our nation. We must look to those who were most intimately and actively involved in the campaign for knowledge, wisdom and experience so that we can prevent such an outcome from ever happening again. For this, I thank Hillary Clinton and look forward to reading every word in her book.
15
Gee, Jenna, why would you think that? They elected Bill Clinton twice, didn't they?
He was in no way morally superior to Trump, nor was his Presidency a beacon of moral courage. And Her was right at his side...
He was in no way morally superior to Trump, nor was his Presidency a beacon of moral courage. And Her was right at his side...
9
The fact that you say you're "bewildered" at her loss regretfully speaks volumes.
4
Perhaps what happened, instead of it being Russia or Sanders, was that America was done with neoliberalism, and that she was the wrong candidate at the wrong time. At just about every turn she turned down millions of potential left-leaning voters by rejecting popular social positions to focus on centrist/right-leaning ones (namely, her refusal to recognize the DAPL or Flint situations, Single-payer healthcare, etc). She picked the most milquetoast, unheard-of running mate who came with his own plethora or issues. She figured she was guaranteed in for Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, and didn't even bother trying to win Ohio. People (including Clinton) complain 'why didn't the millenials get out and vote?' Meanwhile they (the Democratic Party co-opting with Clinton) gave us one of the least likable candidate in history and basically demonized millenials into either forcing a vote with a perverbial knife to their throats, or into abstaining from voting altogether. And yet she hasn't learned a single thing since the election, as we're all bound to read in this surely tedious tome she's published.
8
I'm no Hilary-supporter, but I'm dismayed by the irrational and vituperative comments on this article that so many have up-voted. The problem isn't Hilary, it's us.
21
no, it is the way she so viciously blames everyone else but herself.
8
You can't have watched Nate Silver's website every day leading up to the election and not concluded as he did that the Comey letter was a major factor in her loss. Before the Comey letter it appeared as if she might win even red states like Georgia and Arizona. After the Comey letter her poll numbers everywhere dropped dramatically, and any edge she might have had in red states disappeared overnight. All the other personality traits people cite as reasons for her loss simply pale in comparison to that letter to Congress and it's public release by Republicans.
16
I have mentioned this in some of my comments.
Sanders and many who supported him made what they call "income inequality" the issue and that corporate America is to be blamed and every person having any connection with corporate America as being evil.
Sanders biggest charge against Hillary was that he claimed she was part of this evil group of people and was therefore evil.
That claim being made by Sanders made it easy for Trump to make the same claim even when he was part of corporate America.
Hillary Clinton lost some votes because of this and maybe as a result lost the election she deserved to win.
Sanders and many who supported him made what they call "income inequality" the issue and that corporate America is to be blamed and every person having any connection with corporate America as being evil.
Sanders biggest charge against Hillary was that he claimed she was part of this evil group of people and was therefore evil.
That claim being made by Sanders made it easy for Trump to make the same claim even when he was part of corporate America.
Hillary Clinton lost some votes because of this and maybe as a result lost the election she deserved to win.
7
I voted for Bernie in the Oregon primary but had no qualms voting for Hillary in the general election. If she had won, which she technically did in the popular vote, the pundits would crow about the brilliant campaign she ran. Tripped up in the electoral college, Clinton has been vivisected more than any other presidential candidate, including Al Gore (who also ran a lousy campaign because he lost which he technically did not). Has she been held to a different standard because she was the first woman presidential candidate? Hard to say, but I don't recall any other candidate in recent history who was pilloried as much as Clinton. A flawed candidate? Aren't they all? Goldman Sachs et al, a doyenne of Hollywood stars, etc., Hillary would have been a capable and principled president. But now...
14
I'm absolutely astounded by the number of commenters, even her supporters, who just want Hillary "to go away."
My biggest complaint about her candidacy was her fatal lack of feistiness and vehemence, such as Elizabeth Warren possesses. But just consider what Clinton DID possess: a thorough knowledge of how the legislature operates; a first-hand view of the White House; foreign affair knowledge to rival anyone's; deeply held moral convictions, such as the right to an abortion, the reasoning for which she explicated brilliantly during the debates; a deep determination to control gun sales; and her demonstrated ability to work well with other, even those with contrary views.
I want to know what she felt during the campaign. I want to know how she dealt with the post-mortem of her loss. (If it was crushing to her supporters, what must have it felt like to her?) I want to know her plans for the future. No, I do not want her to just "to go away." Too often that is what's expected of women. Stay on course, Hillary! You may have another act.
My biggest complaint about her candidacy was her fatal lack of feistiness and vehemence, such as Elizabeth Warren possesses. But just consider what Clinton DID possess: a thorough knowledge of how the legislature operates; a first-hand view of the White House; foreign affair knowledge to rival anyone's; deeply held moral convictions, such as the right to an abortion, the reasoning for which she explicated brilliantly during the debates; a deep determination to control gun sales; and her demonstrated ability to work well with other, even those with contrary views.
I want to know what she felt during the campaign. I want to know how she dealt with the post-mortem of her loss. (If it was crushing to her supporters, what must have it felt like to her?) I want to know her plans for the future. No, I do not want her to just "to go away." Too often that is what's expected of women. Stay on course, Hillary! You may have another act.
15
Agreed. And anyone who calls for Mrs. Clinton to "go away" might get some perspective from Jon Meacham's analysis, published today in this newspaper, of the writings of previous defeated presidential candidates.
11
It's no surprise that anti-Hillary people want her to shut up and go away -- they've wanted that for at least 25 years, although their irrational ruminations about her "crimes" have grown significantly more lurid over time -- but what about the majority of voters who want her to be president? Don't we matter at all? I'm glad she's following her heart, doing what she wants, and paying no heed to her unhinged critics.
Whatever one's opinion of Hillary or her campaign, the reviewer hit on the important point that Hillary is the only person ever to go through a major party campaign for president as a woman. Getting her inside perspective on that should be fascinating reading; indeed, if some of the comments here are anything to judge by, her perspective on that singular experience will be the only one we have for many decades to come.
Whatever one's opinion of Hillary or her campaign, the reviewer hit on the important point that Hillary is the only person ever to go through a major party campaign for president as a woman. Getting her inside perspective on that should be fascinating reading; indeed, if some of the comments here are anything to judge by, her perspective on that singular experience will be the only one we have for many decades to come.
14
I consider myself as a liberal who is left of Lenin. I couldn't bring myself to vote for Ms. Clinton and my reason was when Mr. Bill Clinton was involved with a 21 year old intern and media was haunting a 21 year old girl she never came to her rescue. Ms. Lewinsky was a 21 year old girl who was smitten by world's most powerful man but the coverage in the media and Clinton surrogates was as if Monica Lewinsky was some kind of a monster.
10
Facts: Secretary Clinton won the popular vote by more than 3 million. Because she did not win the Electoral College, she lost the election.
Despite high unfavorable ratings, she won nearly as many votes as Obama and was the third-highest vote winner in history. He's a rock star of course; she's a hated loser. There was also Russia. Plus she was the first female candidate -- ever. As with Obama and race, the question was never whether gender would influence this election, but how.
These facts and factors turn a black-and-white narrative grey; they're issues that ripple well beyond Clinton, and we're clearly still not willing to address them. It seems like she's trying to.
It's easier for us to stick with the villainess/out-of-touch, unlikeable, good-vs.-evil (Bernie and Comey of course should not be criticized) image. Forget her platform: she was guarded and reserved and wouldn't tell us "who she is".
Now that she's unloading and analyzing, she's being criticized for speaking honestly (or for speaking at all) or refusing to self-flagellate and simply declare it was all her fault -- as if there were no other factors at play in 2016. She won 65.9 million votes, but she's a sore loser who should shut up and stick to charity (according to a recent poll).
Clinton has a lot to offer in reflecting on the most controversial election in American history -- an election we need to reflect on as a nation. It's not just Clinton who needs to move beyond blame. We do as well.
Despite high unfavorable ratings, she won nearly as many votes as Obama and was the third-highest vote winner in history. He's a rock star of course; she's a hated loser. There was also Russia. Plus she was the first female candidate -- ever. As with Obama and race, the question was never whether gender would influence this election, but how.
These facts and factors turn a black-and-white narrative grey; they're issues that ripple well beyond Clinton, and we're clearly still not willing to address them. It seems like she's trying to.
It's easier for us to stick with the villainess/out-of-touch, unlikeable, good-vs.-evil (Bernie and Comey of course should not be criticized) image. Forget her platform: she was guarded and reserved and wouldn't tell us "who she is".
Now that she's unloading and analyzing, she's being criticized for speaking honestly (or for speaking at all) or refusing to self-flagellate and simply declare it was all her fault -- as if there were no other factors at play in 2016. She won 65.9 million votes, but she's a sore loser who should shut up and stick to charity (according to a recent poll).
Clinton has a lot to offer in reflecting on the most controversial election in American history -- an election we need to reflect on as a nation. It's not just Clinton who needs to move beyond blame. We do as well.
117
Very significant fact: you don't get elected President by winning the popular vote. You need to win in the electoral college. You need to have broad support, not only more than 3 million plurality in California.
8
Incredible comment! Thank you!
2
that high vote tally you cite came to only 1.9 percent of the pop vote. a spider monkey could have better against Trump.
1
To be honest, if she hadn't married Bill Clinton we would never have heard of this woman.
23
Not true. She worked as a key investigator for Starr on the Watergate investigation. And she was voted one of the top lawyers in USA by the trial lawyers association. Plus she did critical work for defense and protection of women and children.
We would have known about her, even if her name had remained Rodman and she never had detoured into Arkansas.
We would have known about her, even if her name had remained Rodman and she never had detoured into Arkansas.
12
Rodman?
1
"What Happened: The Dishonest, Delusional, Desperate Diatribe of the Worst Presidential Candidate in History" by Hillary Rodham Clinton
Now that that's off her chest, can Hillary please SERVE the Democratic Party, the progressive agenda, her nation and the cause of peace in the world and just, please, go away?
Now that that's off her chest, can Hillary please SERVE the Democratic Party, the progressive agenda, her nation and the cause of peace in the world and just, please, go away?
20
Go read Jon Meacham in the Times today.
1
For many voters, it was payback time for the Clintons conning them in the 1992 Superbowl interview.
She backed up Bill about Gennifer Flowers.
Then came Monica and the Oval Office.
Proving that Hillary was not truthful.
2016 was the first chance voters had to get back at the Clintons.
She backed up Bill about Gennifer Flowers.
Then came Monica and the Oval Office.
Proving that Hillary was not truthful.
2016 was the first chance voters had to get back at the Clintons.
9
Obama....why didn't you let Biden have his shot? The world would be different.
9
wonderfully said. but remember Clinton still controlled the DNC through her sycophant followers so what Obama did probably would not have mattered. Hillary would never have stepped aside for anyone.
3
What happened - you happened! Get over it and move on. Could you imagine audio version of this book? I would rather be waterboarded. Here's HRC current blame list: Bernie Sanders, The FBI, James Comey, The Russians, Vladimir Putin, "Anti-American Forces," Low information voters, Everyone assumed she would win, Obama winning twice, Misogynists, Suburban women, The New York Times, The Media, Cable News, Netflix, Facebook, Twitter, WkiLeaks, Fake News, Joe Biden and my personal favorite Macedonian content farmers!
14
misogyny - russian interference - voter suppression - the ascendancy of the fat white and stupid voter - and russian hacking of the vote (it will be proven eventually) and you have lumpy as president.
8
Tell you what: since Hillary will not shut up, and continues to blame others for her innumerable foibles and failures, let us go ahead and designate Halloween as THE GREAT PITY FOR HILLARY DAY. The drink of the day will be CHARDANNAY – doing ‘Hillary slurps’. We need to use the following as the Holiday Theme Song!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHQLQ1Rc_Js
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHQLQ1Rc_Js
9
The toxic sexism exhibited by elements on the left - mostly white male and some female - perfectly mirror the misogynistic trump supporter. Reading the comments section of this or any NYT piece about Ms. Clinton makes me angry, sad and fearful - for both my future work prospects and my smart and talented little girls - who will be hated, scorned, viciously savaged and smeared if they dare to throw their hat in the ring and openly want to ascend to the top - of any organization they are in. I understand why these elements on the left want Ms. Clinton to go away - hard to call yourself a feminist ally when you are throwing out words like "entitled" "coronation" "shut up and go away" "ambitious - but in the bad old woman way" about Ms. Clinton. She is an ugly mirror to my fellow lefties who are as sexist as any Trump supporter. I hope she never stops speaking out. Sexism cost her this election. Period. There is nothing she could do accept change her gender to satisfy these people
142
Sexism was only a cherry on the sundae; it did not lose to Trump.
8
Only a sexist would believe that all "lefties" supporting Bernie over Hillary are sexists.
19
@Scott - spoken like a true man - it pains me to see self described liberals so totally unaware of their own bias.
4
Only a loser calls 'sexism' when competing for the most important job in the world. There are no excuses at that level - only winners and losers. Hillary is a loser in fact and, evidently, in constitution.
63
So... sexism only impacts lower level jobs? Yep, that makes sense.
7
For someone who, we are often told, is so strong, Hillary sure seems to get intimidated and out flanked at almost every turn.
8
Of course there is no sexism says the man who has no idea what sexism is or what role it plays in US culture, politics and business.
7
I'm really looking forward to this book. I don't want to move on without having an adult conversation about what happened.
I remain completely angry about the Trump election and the degree to which Bernie Sanders' absurd vilification of HRC contributed to an environment where some people (I'm looking at you, Susan Sarandon, but you are just the most infamous example) suggested that that Swindler Trump and HRC were equally bad choices. Then the election is lost because HRC (by far the better candidate, by any rational measure) was scorned by the people who should have known the damage Trump would cause. They acted like brats (see: Democratic Convention), and yet they still blame her, because of course they do.
Comey also shares responsibility for our present fiasco, but at least he seems mildly conflicted about it.
I remain completely angry about the Trump election and the degree to which Bernie Sanders' absurd vilification of HRC contributed to an environment where some people (I'm looking at you, Susan Sarandon, but you are just the most infamous example) suggested that that Swindler Trump and HRC were equally bad choices. Then the election is lost because HRC (by far the better candidate, by any rational measure) was scorned by the people who should have known the damage Trump would cause. They acted like brats (see: Democratic Convention), and yet they still blame her, because of course they do.
Comey also shares responsibility for our present fiasco, but at least he seems mildly conflicted about it.
141
An "adult conversation" does not mean blaming everyone else on Earth, in writing, while simultaneously claiming to accept "complete responsibility." Those aren't compatible, and any adult could tell you that.
13
Did we attend the same primary election? It seemed to me that Sanders was courteous and highly respectful to Clinton throughout. Of course he disagreed with her on some things, largely nuances, but I sure didn't hear any "absurd vilification." I thought Hillary was more electable and would do a much better job of governing. But I respected Sanders and was glad that he pressed his points of view.
How did the New York Times hurt Hillary?
1) By the insistence on false equivalency. There was NO equivalency between Donald and Hillary, but you pretended there was. Why? Who made those editorial decisions?
2) By failing to provide the background on why various actors in the horrible drama were determined to destroy Hillary. E.g., how little you wrote about Old Bernie and "Doctor" Jane. And how little (nothing?) you wrote about the influence of Opus Dei on the FBI. Why did Comey step up in the last minutes of the campaign to ensure Hillary's loss? Look at Opus Dei. (At the same time take a look at the cult's influence on Geo. W. Bush's "victory.")
1) By the insistence on false equivalency. There was NO equivalency between Donald and Hillary, but you pretended there was. Why? Who made those editorial decisions?
2) By failing to provide the background on why various actors in the horrible drama were determined to destroy Hillary. E.g., how little you wrote about Old Bernie and "Doctor" Jane. And how little (nothing?) you wrote about the influence of Opus Dei on the FBI. Why did Comey step up in the last minutes of the campaign to ensure Hillary's loss? Look at Opus Dei. (At the same time take a look at the cult's influence on Geo. W. Bush's "victory.")
13
"Former FBI director Comey gets it on the chin; so does the mainstream media, this newspaper very much included."
This statement made by this New York Times reporter is absolutely unbelievable. The Editorial Board of the New York Times endorsed her for President. Paul Krugman should have been able to draw a paycheck from her campaign funds. After the New York Times Editorial Board wrote an editorial in Feb. 2016 calling for her to release the transcripts of her speeches made to Wall Street banks and other major corporations in exchange for several million dollars, Hillary Clinton refused to do so. And, then, the entire New York Times went stone-cold silent on the issue.
This statement made by this New York Times reporter is absolutely unbelievable. The Editorial Board of the New York Times endorsed her for President. Paul Krugman should have been able to draw a paycheck from her campaign funds. After the New York Times Editorial Board wrote an editorial in Feb. 2016 calling for her to release the transcripts of her speeches made to Wall Street banks and other major corporations in exchange for several million dollars, Hillary Clinton refused to do so. And, then, the entire New York Times went stone-cold silent on the issue.
29
I'm sure Mrs. Clinton misses the mark on some of her assessments, but her perspective is important and worth understanding. Quite honestly, I find it ridiculous that her assertions that misogyny and sexism played a role in the outcome of the election are characterized here by the author as "controversial." Also ridiculous is the notion that she should take total responsibility for the loss when there were so many external factors playing against her that contributed to continued, and (arguably unjustified) animus towards. Of course, she was an imperfect candidate - the ultimate winner of the electoral college was also an imperfect candidate to say the least. I'm glad Hillary is finally unbound to some extent and can now honestly speak about "What Happened."
4
Hillary Clinton does not have that thing (personality, body language) that makes great politicians like John F. Kennedy, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama and that makes movie stars movie stars. HRC did not capture anyone's imagination. She always speaks in corporate speak and is always very guarded in her comments. She doesn't come across as genuine. She appears to be talking down to people and not with them. To use a corporate speak term, she doesn't show any fire in the belly. I would like to know who made the decision to have Tim Kane as her running mate. Talking about bland and no fire in the belly, that's Tim Kane. She should have chosen a young hispanic politician like Julian Castro, but Hillary probably didn't want to be upstaged. Yes, everything in Hillary's book outlines why she lost to an over the top Bloviator, but she herself should have been more upfront early in the campaign concerning the email server and explained more clearly what she stood for. Clinton should have dominated the room when debating Sanders and Trump. She should have cut the legs out from under Sanders and Trump, but Hillary saved her candor for her book. A little more candor and rough and tumble campaigning may have helped her win the election.
12
As a physician, I find it dismaying that Ms. Clinton appears to be making a joke about a highly addictive drug, Xanax. I'll bet that she wouldn't make a similar joke about friends recommending she take opioids to help deal with her defeat.
Benzodiazepines like Xanax are far over prescribed in this country and are also factors in at least 30% of opioid overdose deaths. Not exactly funny drugs.
Benzodiazepines like Xanax are far over prescribed in this country and are also factors in at least 30% of opioid overdose deaths. Not exactly funny drugs.
10
President Elect Hillary Clinton should be inaugurated when the extent of Trump's Russian-assisted vote fraud is fully revealed. I hope she's still ready to serve. Were votes changed? YES! By Russian hacking of local election boards' computers and disqualifying legitimate voters in advance. who would likely have voted for Clinton and other Democrats. Add that to Russia's phantoms who bought all those facebook ads and the like. The 2016 election was not lost - it was utterly stolen.
7
"By Russian hacking of local election boards' computers and disqualifying legitimate voters in advance. who would likely have voted for Clinton and other Democrats. " And your source of the actual proof of this (not just innuendo and rumor and hope) is what, exactly? The government sure hasn't been able to definitively state this!
7
"Add that to Russia's phantoms who bought all those facebook ads and the like."
If your vote is influenced by ads on Facebook, you are not, and never will be, an informed voter. Wow.
If your vote is influenced by ads on Facebook, you are not, and never will be, an informed voter. Wow.
7
No doubt Hillary Clinton won the debates. No doubt that was quickly forgotten amidst the subsequent distractions of Comey's letter to Congress, the Russian hacking, and the rise of Obamacare premiums. No doubt sexism played a role. No doubt she won the popular vote. None of that matters. What does matter is that Hillary Clinton knew full well that here email indiscretions made her the least electable Democratic candidate but chose ego gratification. And now after her abysmal non-campaign Democrats are left to ponder the damage that has been done and will be done. Meanwhile Hillary Clinton adds insult to injury and assuaging the blow to her ego continues to take precedence.
8
Better that we spend our time looking for answers to what ls ahead .
8
I feel I learned more about why Hillary Clinton lost the election by visiting my family in Texas this summer than I would by reading her book. Over the years, Fox News and right-wing media have done an effective and thorough job of making Hillary Clinton seem one-step removed from the Anti-Christ. Although my family members who voted for Trump answered negatively when I asked whether they thought he was either a smart or a good person, they absolutely loathe Clinton. When my sister-in-law started talking about what Clinton did to those poor people in Benghazi, as if Hillary herself was leading the invasion of the diplomatic compound, I realized no one could convince them differently.
42
Which makes the 2016 primaries all that much more painful. It didn't have to be her.
3
The precious left set her up to lose. You can't go BernieBro left when the country is governed to the right of center. The Dems lost the traditional blue collar workers and well... lost. You can't blame that on her. What you can blame on her is she ran a bad campaign - one stumble after another after another.
6
Interesting, because poll after poll shows Bernie would have won the blue collar workers.
3
Like many on the Left, I held my nose and voted for Hillary. I also consider myself a feminist. The idea that questions about her character are due to her being a woman is hogwash. People didn't like Hillary for the same reason they didn't like Bill. Over the years, both have proved themselves to be opportunists, constantly on the make, constantly changing positions to meet the times, plus reluctant to tell the truth. Hillary's campaign slogan, "I'm With Her" pretty much summed up what was at stake. It was always only about the Clintons wanting to regain power, not the American people...The woman lost to a man with a 37% approval rating. There is no one to blame but her.
29
Something seemed mighty fishy with Clinton's campaign slogan because the arrow pointed to the right. Subliminal message, perhaps?
1
The fact is that she ran a very poor campaign, managed and directed by "operatives". Both she and they were tone-deaf to what was going on with the white working class, who have been going nowhere economically for way too long. The wake-up call should have been the Sanders campaign. How did a 74 year-old socialist from nowhere wind up with so much support? Instead of dismissing both his and the Trump campaign as "reality shows", she should have been thinking hard about what that meant for the current state of the electorate.
14
Ms. Clinton only solidifies her persona as one of the most widely disliked candidates in history. Hopefully, the democratic party has learned a thing or two and will offer real people as candidates in the future. There simply is no excuse for "what happened". She lost to Donald Trump.
15
Whatever we think about Clinton and her book, compare it with whatever Trump may produce after he's out of office? "My Greatest Tweets"? "The Art of the Steal"? Or worse yet, a Reality TV series, starring guess who...?
4
I listened to her on the latest episode of Pod Save America. She knows she and her campaign made a lot of missteps but hearing her candor when she laid out all of the obstacles she/they faced and the false equivalencies of her email "scandal" with literally everything else Trump did and said was remarkable.
8
"Or that she should have appeared in more rural areas. Or that she couldn't find a better way to speak to the fears of the white working class...." BOOM!!
Did she go to Clay County, Kentucky, where 60% of the citizenry received insurance coverage - and gave Trump 87% of its votes - was because their former DEMOCRATIC governor, Steve Besmear, opted in to Medicaid expansion?
Did she tell citizens in Appalachia that they were the children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of John L. Lewis? How dare they even think of voting Republican?
Did she visit rural Alabama, or Mississippi, or South Carolina? Did she speak to poor black farmers and laborers who've been promised - but haven't received - a bigger piece of the pie?
Or did she stay on safe ground, visiting Philadelphia a couple of times, but leaving the rest of the state to Joe Biden? Wisconsin? Michigan?
Nov. 9, 2016 was one of the worst mornings of my life. Does some of the blame fall on others? Of course. But you can't run a country visiting only those places that are toss-ups. She may have lost bigly in both of the Dakotas, but a visit here and there surely would've shrunk the margins.
Did she go to Clay County, Kentucky, where 60% of the citizenry received insurance coverage - and gave Trump 87% of its votes - was because their former DEMOCRATIC governor, Steve Besmear, opted in to Medicaid expansion?
Did she tell citizens in Appalachia that they were the children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of John L. Lewis? How dare they even think of voting Republican?
Did she visit rural Alabama, or Mississippi, or South Carolina? Did she speak to poor black farmers and laborers who've been promised - but haven't received - a bigger piece of the pie?
Or did she stay on safe ground, visiting Philadelphia a couple of times, but leaving the rest of the state to Joe Biden? Wisconsin? Michigan?
Nov. 9, 2016 was one of the worst mornings of my life. Does some of the blame fall on others? Of course. But you can't run a country visiting only those places that are toss-ups. She may have lost bigly in both of the Dakotas, but a visit here and there surely would've shrunk the margins.
6
When all is said and done, there are three things that count in a campaign: message, message and message. Yes, Clinton faced some significant challenges from Comey's interference to Russian interference to Bernie's maniacal insistence on running against her to June to male voters', um, discomfort with a woman President. However, other candidates, winners and losers alike, have faced their own, often equally tough headwinds. When all is said and done, Hillary failed to excite her own base of voters to turn out or to persuade many of those on the fence. I'm against the mad man, and I promise you more of the same, just didn't cut it quite enough -- and not just in PA, MI and WI but everywhere.
1
I'm female, late 30s, with advanced degrees and I work as a research methodologist. I've worked in international aid. I put myself through college. In other words, I am the demographic that should have voted for her. However, I wrote in Bernie Sanders on the ballot.
I came of age during the Clinton scandals. I watched as Hillary Clinton used the power and influence gained from her husband's position as president and former president to run for Congress, run for president, position herself to be the Secretary of State, and run for president again. I've remarked on the similarities of this state of affairs to banana republics. I've questioned what Hillary Clinton would have done had she not benefitted from her husband's achievements. In my opinion, she is just as much a beneficiary of privilege as any individual whose path is paved for them, other presidents and candidates included. And, given that Trump's sexist behavior and comments reminded me of Bill Clinton, I simply did not want to live through another 4 years of Clintons in the White House.
I watched the debates where I saw her outmaneuvered by Bernie Sanders simply by how he presented himself. Sanders offered a vision while Clinton offered heavy handedness. Though Sanders had his weaknesses, and many of his policies swung too far left for me, I simply viewed him as the better candidate.
What went wrong? She was the wrong candidate.
I came of age during the Clinton scandals. I watched as Hillary Clinton used the power and influence gained from her husband's position as president and former president to run for Congress, run for president, position herself to be the Secretary of State, and run for president again. I've remarked on the similarities of this state of affairs to banana republics. I've questioned what Hillary Clinton would have done had she not benefitted from her husband's achievements. In my opinion, she is just as much a beneficiary of privilege as any individual whose path is paved for them, other presidents and candidates included. And, given that Trump's sexist behavior and comments reminded me of Bill Clinton, I simply did not want to live through another 4 years of Clintons in the White House.
I watched the debates where I saw her outmaneuvered by Bernie Sanders simply by how he presented himself. Sanders offered a vision while Clinton offered heavy handedness. Though Sanders had his weaknesses, and many of his policies swung too far left for me, I simply viewed him as the better candidate.
What went wrong? She was the wrong candidate.
19
When a politician like Hillary Clinton starts saying that she is not running, that's when you know that she will be running in 2020. The book is a precursor to her Presidential campaign. Knowing that she won the popular vote, she's tough and will fight for her denied victory.
1
I am a long-time Hillary loyalist, but I fervently hope she does not run again.
She would have been an extraordinary president -- even more so than Obama, I believe -- but she was not and will never be an effective candidate. Americans do not elect competence; they elect charisma, and grotesque as his is, Trump has it and she does not.
She would have been an extraordinary president -- even more so than Obama, I believe -- but she was not and will never be an effective candidate. Americans do not elect competence; they elect charisma, and grotesque as his is, Trump has it and she does not.
She lost for all of those reasons. But, each person who voted for Trump or chose not to vote had a different one of those reasons.
1
Get the hook! Jeesh. No lessons learned. Nothing to inspire hope or action. And therein lies the problem with HC and her campaign. Like many people writing in, I voted for her. Won't do it again. There are many, many competent, feminist, inspiring women and men prepared to challenge the status quo. She is not among them. Her campaign was a handmaiden to the current disastrous political situation. When will the Democratic establishment face this simple fact? For inspiration on concrete political action, please see the film on Dolores Huerta. Now, there's a woman you might learn something from.
3
No one will count how many of the votes "for" Hillary were votes against Trump. Had she run against any reasonable Republican candidate she could have counted the states she won on one hand.
She still cannot see the flaws she started with - just another sign she was unfit for the office.
She cheated and connived her way into the nomination in cahoots with the DNC, thwarting a passionate, popular alternative to Trump who had far more electability than she did. That she could not cheat her way past Trump in the general election is the only reason she's not in the White House now.
She still cannot see the flaws she started with - just another sign she was unfit for the office.
She cheated and connived her way into the nomination in cahoots with the DNC, thwarting a passionate, popular alternative to Trump who had far more electability than she did. That she could not cheat her way past Trump in the general election is the only reason she's not in the White House now.
14
Very reluctantly, and only because of the GOP candidate, HRC got my vote--but I NEVER heard her articulate WHY I should vote for her. I never really heard her say--emphatically--THIS is what I'm gonna' do and I need your help to do it.
6
Started listening to this book on my to work this morning and was wiping away tears the entire drive. Not so much because of what she said, but because it just reminded me of what a brilliant, qualified, compassionate individual we could have had as president.
11
Clinton's"carefully thought-out policies and painstakingly built coalitions" did not address "Americans anger and resentment' or show her understanding of the depths of the dissatisfaction with the status quo and her part in it.
In regard to her criticism of Sanders, he aimed high while she aimed low. Clearly, on issues where she was emotionally and politically invested-women's and children's issues-she aimed high and criticized those who aimed low.This difference was clear to Sanders' supporters.
In regard to her criticism of Sanders, he aimed high while she aimed low. Clearly, on issues where she was emotionally and politically invested-women's and children's issues-she aimed high and criticized those who aimed low.This difference was clear to Sanders' supporters.
7
I wholeheartedly disagree with the sentiment Ms. Clinton should simply "go away." If the public space has room for the Kardashians, certainly we can allow some room for one of the most careful, studied students of the Executive Branch in our lifetime. We need her insight, and I'm glad she is providing it.
Whether she is objectively correct in her analysis, which no one really knows, is far less important than the front-row account of her experience.
Whether she is objectively correct in her analysis, which no one really knows, is far less important than the front-row account of her experience.
6
we need her insights as much as we need those of the Kardashians.
3
She would have made a fine President. Our nation lost a lot with her defeat and Trump's win. Just the cabinet and the regulation changes alone consequent to the appointments would be "enough." I hope the people, states, courts and Congress will limit the damage that will be repaired after the elections in 2018 and 2020.
10
“I was running a traditional presidential campaign with carefully thought-out policies and painstakingly built coalitions,” she writes, “while Trump was running a reality TV show that expertly and relentlessly stoked Americans’ anger and resentment.”
This sums up what was wrong with the Clinton campaign, a stubborn determination that politics are done a certain way when it was clearly evident that people no longer trusted nor wanted politics as usual. They expected voters to adapt to the candidate. An opportunity to make real change was passed over in a refusal to adapt messaging to new popular perceptions and expectations.
This sums up what was wrong with the Clinton campaign, a stubborn determination that politics are done a certain way when it was clearly evident that people no longer trusted nor wanted politics as usual. They expected voters to adapt to the candidate. An opportunity to make real change was passed over in a refusal to adapt messaging to new popular perceptions and expectations.
7
True - but isn't it also true that Clinton does not have a long history of working for the policies she advertised in the campaign?
If she were truly committed to serving America, she might have stayed in the Senate and worked for those good causes - she might have become the second coming of Ted Kennedy whose flaws prevented him from the Presidency, but who became a respected statesman. A successful career like that would surely inspire generations of women.
But her lifelong behavior, brought into sharp focus by her actions since losing to Trump, demonstrate that her character is totally lacking.
If she were truly committed to serving America, she might have stayed in the Senate and worked for those good causes - she might have become the second coming of Ted Kennedy whose flaws prevented him from the Presidency, but who became a respected statesman. A successful career like that would surely inspire generations of women.
But her lifelong behavior, brought into sharp focus by her actions since losing to Trump, demonstrate that her character is totally lacking.
3
" One of the things that drove Clinton bonkers about Bernie Sanders was that he always managed to outdo her proposals with something larger and less feasible. "
So when Sanders supported single payer health care, that was a bad thing because it would, in her words, never happen? The fact is that the Clintons (both of them) have made a career, along with many other centrist Democrats, in pulling the party to the right, persuading us that traditional Democratic goals were not only not achievable right now, but would never be achievable and so we shouldn't even strive for them.
So when Sanders supported single payer health care, that was a bad thing because it would, in her words, never happen? The fact is that the Clintons (both of them) have made a career, along with many other centrist Democrats, in pulling the party to the right, persuading us that traditional Democratic goals were not only not achievable right now, but would never be achievable and so we shouldn't even strive for them.
14
We have one thing to be thankful for Clinton's election of Trump to the Presidency. Now the Republicans have demonstrated that they are incapable of governing, incapable of "correcting" health care, discussion is growing for the reasonable, world-wide implemented solution of variations of single-payer for health care for all - guess which primary candidate argued for it, and which said "it would never happen."
Among all the discussions of Clinton's faults, a very serious one, her bad judgment, is not nearly discussed enough.
Among all the discussions of Clinton's faults, a very serious one, her bad judgment, is not nearly discussed enough.
2
@C. Richard
Thanks for that. She has the most consistently godawful judgement of any Democratic candidate i've seen in my lifetime.
Thanks for that. She has the most consistently godawful judgement of any Democratic candidate i've seen in my lifetime.
1
Did she urge that the electoral college be gutted in future?
Someone who will never run again would be good to lead that effort.
I think she would be a good Secretary General of the UN.
Someone who will never run again would be good to lead that effort.
I think she would be a good Secretary General of the UN.
6
The real problem in society today, which receives only glancing treatment in the book, is the utter resentment people feel today. This review and the news media in general seem to willfully ignore the resentment of disenfranchisement many different groups feel for different reasons,--reasons that do not have to do with race and gender. All it takes is a visit to the interior of this country (which I define as beyond the coasts) to see that a great many people, perhaps the majority of people in this country, have felt lectured and berated for many years. That's what happened.
6
There's no question in my mind that Mrs. Clinton is brilliant. However, her assumption that candidate Trump would follow the same playbook that she was using was a huge mistake. Like it or not, Mr. Trump knew how to reach voters who felt that Mrs. Clinton just wasn't "right" to represent them or their needs. My best advice to future candidates is to expect independent, free-wheeling campaigns in the future. The world has changed and we can't go back.
27
You might reconsider her brilliance - as you point out, her "brilliance" at getting elected was very dark indeed.
4
I gave up trusting NYT's book reviews since the awful one on Hitler that compared Trump to him-and idea the author of the book repudiated. Clearly book reviews, theater, movie reviews, even sports are all centrally directed in this publication.
H. Clinton's time was in 2008-she unbelievably lost to Obama. Why the Dem party gave her another whirl is beyond me-and they complain about Trump-get a better candidates. What are we building dynasties here? The idiot second G Bush was bad enough-why Hilary C-because her husband (impeached) was President?
I thought Hilary a bad Sec. of State.-the Clinton Foundation an investigation waiting to happen, the private server arrogant and illegal, her political skills tone deaf, and the fact she was a woman had nothing to do with her LOSS-and will these people stop bringing up the popular vote-change the system!!
Ironically I predict a conservative woman will be the first female President-looks like Nikki Haley.
H. Clinton's time was in 2008-she unbelievably lost to Obama. Why the Dem party gave her another whirl is beyond me-and they complain about Trump-get a better candidates. What are we building dynasties here? The idiot second G Bush was bad enough-why Hilary C-because her husband (impeached) was President?
I thought Hilary a bad Sec. of State.-the Clinton Foundation an investigation waiting to happen, the private server arrogant and illegal, her political skills tone deaf, and the fact she was a woman had nothing to do with her LOSS-and will these people stop bringing up the popular vote-change the system!!
Ironically I predict a conservative woman will be the first female President-looks like Nikki Haley.
6
Yes, Trump is a creep. Yes, his campaign may well have colluded. Yes, some folks voted against you because of your gender ( though many surely voted for you because of gender, too).
But c'mon, Hill, you had no business losing to this putz.
You called roughly 25% of the electorate Deplorable and--even worse from a self-described Christian--Irredeemable. You promised to end miners' jobs. You ran a lackluster, tone-deaf, sense-of-entitlement campaign. You and Wasserman -Schultz fixed the system so no one else had a chance for the nomination, though Bernie generated genuine enthusiasm of the sort that might well have won PA, MI and WI from Trump. You had a tired, Limousine Liberal message.
You managed to lose to a guy who was --and is-- a joke. Sorry, that's on you.
But c'mon, Hill, you had no business losing to this putz.
You called roughly 25% of the electorate Deplorable and--even worse from a self-described Christian--Irredeemable. You promised to end miners' jobs. You ran a lackluster, tone-deaf, sense-of-entitlement campaign. You and Wasserman -Schultz fixed the system so no one else had a chance for the nomination, though Bernie generated genuine enthusiasm of the sort that might well have won PA, MI and WI from Trump. You had a tired, Limousine Liberal message.
You managed to lose to a guy who was --and is-- a joke. Sorry, that's on you.
19
I've heard all the complaints, innuendo, sarcasm and viewpoints about Hillary (and have heard them all for the last 20-30 years). I'd take her and First Man Bill every day of the week and twice on Sunday over the mobster family squatting in the White House at present.
13
It's not much of an endorsement of our politics that Clinton or Trump was the choice we had.
3
I don't care why she lost or how she feels. I just want her to quit sucking out all the air in the room destined for Democrats and get off the stage. If she wants to commisserate among her peers, so be it. But don't poison the rest of the Democratic well. We need to elect someone besides Donald J. Trump in 2020, and in the meantime, we need to elect promising young Democrats in 2018 - all around the country.
Hillary Clinton is an attention demanding, self-centered demagogue who is detracting from the goal of saving the world from global warming. The best thing she can do for democracy is to shut up.
Hillary Clinton is an attention demanding, self-centered demagogue who is detracting from the goal of saving the world from global warming. The best thing she can do for democracy is to shut up.
12
"...the ever-present animus toward her, which remains, she writes, something she doesn’t fully understand."
A few reminders might help.
1. She and Slick Willy lied again and again--whoppers--about "sex with that woman"--proving her own disregard for truth rivals Trump's.
2. The thought of his lurking again in the WH is awful--not to mention giving him a platform.
3. The Clinton Foundation--it's donors, administrative budget, Chelsea's income, apartment and jailed ex-Congressman father-in-law.
4. Her closed door speeches--a fine line between payment and bribery.
5. "School marm" to Sanders "revolution" is old rigged neo-feudalist system vs real democracy--aka "Democratic Socialism". The very words are anathema in American politics--due to a century or more of propaganda by the feudalists. Capitalism is feudalism. Democratic Socialism is government FOR the common people. The US has always been a mixed economy--public AND private enterprise--continually in dialectical development.
6. The self obsessed, always deny responsibility; it wasn't anti-woman--it was anti HRC and Co.
However, she gets full marks for attention to detail--boy can she cram for exams--and for her audacity--aka those organs distinguishing bulls from cows. But in this respect too--Trump outdoes her--more whoppers.
The real puzzles are 1. Obama's support of her--as Sec of State (was it "keep your enemies closer") and as his successor. 2. His aversion to "Comrade Sanders" --poisoning his well.
A few reminders might help.
1. She and Slick Willy lied again and again--whoppers--about "sex with that woman"--proving her own disregard for truth rivals Trump's.
2. The thought of his lurking again in the WH is awful--not to mention giving him a platform.
3. The Clinton Foundation--it's donors, administrative budget, Chelsea's income, apartment and jailed ex-Congressman father-in-law.
4. Her closed door speeches--a fine line between payment and bribery.
5. "School marm" to Sanders "revolution" is old rigged neo-feudalist system vs real democracy--aka "Democratic Socialism". The very words are anathema in American politics--due to a century or more of propaganda by the feudalists. Capitalism is feudalism. Democratic Socialism is government FOR the common people. The US has always been a mixed economy--public AND private enterprise--continually in dialectical development.
6. The self obsessed, always deny responsibility; it wasn't anti-woman--it was anti HRC and Co.
However, she gets full marks for attention to detail--boy can she cram for exams--and for her audacity--aka those organs distinguishing bulls from cows. But in this respect too--Trump outdoes her--more whoppers.
The real puzzles are 1. Obama's support of her--as Sec of State (was it "keep your enemies closer") and as his successor. 2. His aversion to "Comrade Sanders" --poisoning his well.
9
Agreed on the real puzzles re: Obama. I think Bernie threatened him -- that Bernie would accomplish the populist agenda he had run on and abandoned.
3
Re: real puzzles. Has anyone asked whether Obama's choice of her for SoS was part of a deal to burnish her resume for her presidential run, after which she would appoint Obama to the Supreme Court?
Don't get me wrong - I would love to see him on the SC. But sometimes the best laid plans ...
Don't get me wrong - I would love to see him on the SC. But sometimes the best laid plans ...
1
If you want to know what's wrong with Hillary, think about the campaign / spin message, "The most qualified candidate ever to run."
Thinking about American history for more than a few minutes shows this is silly. More qualified than people who've served in Congress for decades? More qualified than Vice Presidents?
But that sentence continues to stated--and believed--by her most faithful.
And it's that split--between what her most faithful believe, and the rest see ad believe--that cost her the election.
Thinking about American history for more than a few minutes shows this is silly. More qualified than people who've served in Congress for decades? More qualified than Vice Presidents?
But that sentence continues to stated--and believed--by her most faithful.
And it's that split--between what her most faithful believe, and the rest see ad believe--that cost her the election.
75
So true.
2
best comment on thread
3
"The most qualified candidate ever to run."
======================
That was always a joke. During her 8 years in the Senate she got three bills passed, naming a post office, naming a section of a highway, and designating a national landmark.
Her claim to fame as Sec State was racking up airline miles. The embarrassing Russian reset, the Libyan disaster, ………..please.
======================
That was always a joke. During her 8 years in the Senate she got three bills passed, naming a post office, naming a section of a highway, and designating a national landmark.
Her claim to fame as Sec State was racking up airline miles. The embarrassing Russian reset, the Libyan disaster, ………..please.
5
What Hillary refuses to accept is that Sanders was ultimately an aspirational candidate for millennials and other Americans bone tired of tepid incrementalism.
Hillary, in contrast, was the candidate of "too little, too late" - or settle for what I say you can have, not that which everyone else in the industrialized world already has.
Hillary chided Sanders' fervid evangelism for single-payer - and now Max Baucus, the godfather of the ACA, has hopped aboard the "Medicare for all" bandwagon.
Sometimes you gotta have the courage to lead, and not merely govern from behind.
Elizabeth Warren in 2020.
Hillary, in contrast, was the candidate of "too little, too late" - or settle for what I say you can have, not that which everyone else in the industrialized world already has.
Hillary chided Sanders' fervid evangelism for single-payer - and now Max Baucus, the godfather of the ACA, has hopped aboard the "Medicare for all" bandwagon.
Sometimes you gotta have the courage to lead, and not merely govern from behind.
Elizabeth Warren in 2020.
21
You obviously don't get it. Ms. Clinton's ideas and proposals are too important to be wasted upon mere citizens with nothing more than a single vote.
They wouldn't get it.
Alas, she blundered badly by not releasing transcripts of all of the paid speeches she gave before private citizens eager to share their money, in addition to their votes.
She underestimated the intelligence of the American electorate, but ironically was richly rewarded for it.
They wouldn't get it.
Alas, she blundered badly by not releasing transcripts of all of the paid speeches she gave before private citizens eager to share their money, in addition to their votes.
She underestimated the intelligence of the American electorate, but ironically was richly rewarded for it.
3
I'll pass on the woman who lied about being a Cherokee to get a spot on the Harvard faculty that should have gone to an actual Native American.
5
Agreed with everything, except Warren for 2020. She should have supported Bernie and lacked the courage to do so.
3
This seems a well-balanced review, although I haven't read Clinton's book yet, and may not bother - she seems irrelevant to the serious issues that now face us. The paragraph on Joe Biden seems unfair, however. To write that Obama saw Hillary as the stronger candidate is hardly a "dig" at Obama's genial vice-president, even though some saw him as likelier to win.
Clinton's electoral college defeat actually turned on narrow vote margins in three Northern Mid-West states: Wisconsin, Michigan, and (I believe) Ohio, where disaffected white, working-class voters were said to have swung to Trump out of economic distress, which they mistakenly blamed on Clinton's alleged favoritism toward minorities and support of Free Trade - sponsored by both parties, but denounced by Trump. Following the advice of her strategists, Clinton neglected those states in her campaign visits, and might well have won had she paid them more attention. But Republican dirty tricks, like voter suppression and the "Crooked Hillary" campaign, along with Comey, produced the fluke of electing the candidate who had 3 million fewer votes. Hillary lost more by failing to turn out her own base in greater numbers, rather than by anything Trump did (he expected to lose, and is still in a happy daze). In 1992 Bill Clinton won with 42% of the vote (less than Trump's 46%) due to the fluke of Ross Perot's anti-free-trade candidacy, so turn-about is fair play, I guess. That's just the way the ball bounces.
Clinton's electoral college defeat actually turned on narrow vote margins in three Northern Mid-West states: Wisconsin, Michigan, and (I believe) Ohio, where disaffected white, working-class voters were said to have swung to Trump out of economic distress, which they mistakenly blamed on Clinton's alleged favoritism toward minorities and support of Free Trade - sponsored by both parties, but denounced by Trump. Following the advice of her strategists, Clinton neglected those states in her campaign visits, and might well have won had she paid them more attention. But Republican dirty tricks, like voter suppression and the "Crooked Hillary" campaign, along with Comey, produced the fluke of electing the candidate who had 3 million fewer votes. Hillary lost more by failing to turn out her own base in greater numbers, rather than by anything Trump did (he expected to lose, and is still in a happy daze). In 1992 Bill Clinton won with 42% of the vote (less than Trump's 46%) due to the fluke of Ross Perot's anti-free-trade candidacy, so turn-about is fair play, I guess. That's just the way the ball bounces.
36
Worth noting: Sec. Clinton would have won Michigan if she'd only received 5,353 + votes, Wisconsin +11,375 votes, and Pennsylvania + 22,147 votes. As computer experts MIT Prof. Ron Rivest & UC Berkeley Prof. Philip Stark pointed out. “We know that the national results could be tipped by manipulating the vote count in a relatively small number of jurisdictions — a few dozen spread across a few key states. We know that the vast majority of local elections officials have limited resources to detect or defend against cyber attacks. And while pre-election polls have large uncertainties, they were consistently off....Various aspects of the preliminary results, such as a high rate of under votes for president, have aroused suspicion."
(1) "Still Time for an Election Audit” - Prof. Rivest & Prof. Stark op-ed
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/11/18/election-audit-paper-m...
(2) "The Insecurity of America's Old and Underfunded Voting Systems" www.npr.org/programs/fresh-air/2017/07/20/538312289/fresh-air-for-july-2...
(3) https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-13/russian-breach-of-39-...
(1) "Still Time for an Election Audit” - Prof. Rivest & Prof. Stark op-ed
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/11/18/election-audit-paper-m...
(2) "The Insecurity of America's Old and Underfunded Voting Systems" www.npr.org/programs/fresh-air/2017/07/20/538312289/fresh-air-for-july-2...
(3) https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-13/russian-breach-of-39-...
1
Senior's mention of what she called Clinton's "surprising...dig" at Joe Biden puzzled me: "I knew President Obama thought the world of his vice president, so his vote of confidence meant a great deal to me.” I can't seem to read that on the page as a dig. Maybe tooting one's own horn? Maybe, at a stretch, "Joe was his favorite, but I was top student"? What gives, here?
32
Just a minor point but in the list of reasons why she lost one should consider a backlash against some of Obama's decisions. For example, there are 300M+ Americans of which a tiny, tiny, tiny percentage are transgender or gender-confused. Obama said these people could go to the bathroom of their choosing, i.e. wherever they felt most comfortable. That decision ignores the rights of the 299.9M Americans who prefer to "go" in a gender-specific bathroom. If you have a 13 year-old daughter who visits the ladies room and a 40 year-old man walks in, you are bound to think that this is the most insane policy ever concocted. This type of idiocy turned many off...even many Democrats.
23
How do you feel about an old man walking into your daughter's locker room intentionally and unannounced and telling her and her half-dressed friends 'Don't worry,I've seen it all before'. What kind of voter goes for that candidate? SMH at your post.
7
@Lick: How do you know that 299.9M Americans want a gender-specific bathroom?
3
A very, very, minor point.
With some luck, Hillary Clinton will go on to lead an enjoyable life with her family and grandchildren. In time, her election loss will be explained with some degree of truth by future historians. From her subjective point of view, it will seem relatively unimportant, like a sour cigar.
Objectively, however, her loss will have huge consequences: the breakup of the Republican Party and possibly the Democratic; a disturbed and unpredictable person in the White House, with access to the nuclear codes; divisions in our disunited states growing ever sharper; increasing inequality; more severe storms and droughts.
Our long, national nightmare is far from over.
Objectively, however, her loss will have huge consequences: the breakup of the Republican Party and possibly the Democratic; a disturbed and unpredictable person in the White House, with access to the nuclear codes; divisions in our disunited states growing ever sharper; increasing inequality; more severe storms and droughts.
Our long, national nightmare is far from over.
17
No book released this soon after such a cataclysmic event could possibly offer any insight. Learn from the master (Obama). Insight takes time.
I donated to Ms. Clinton's campaign--several times!--and voted for her. This book release is objective evidence of her lack of insight.
I donated to Ms. Clinton's campaign--several times!--and voted for her. This book release is objective evidence of her lack of insight.
11
Except the "master" told Biden to get out of Hillary's way. How "masterful."
1
Only a thin skinned narcissist would have a need to blame others for her loss. Comey, Saunders, her advisors, everyone but HRC. It is becoming obvious that Hillary's main interest is Hillary and preserving a legacy that she believes needs to be protected. Politics is actually a pretty simple game, the person that says the words that the voters want to hear wins. Hillary was tone deaf. Her type of politician consults a focus group every morning to decide which side of the bed to get out of. Hopefully she'll just go away now and let the Dems rebuild.
15
"It’s hard to say whether readers will buy these explanations." That's what it comes down to. The evidence follows the conclusion. Were this country able to see things differently - - correctly - - we'd be living in a different world. And our lives would be a lot better.
2
I read the "Shattered" book and it did not really throw any new light on why she lost. From this review it appears this book is more of the same with the usual excuses and rationalization. It seems the reviewer is bowled over by the historical aspect of the election. Just remember Dewey is a historical figure also and for pretty much the same over confidence and hubris as Clinton.
8
"Listen, Liberal" is the book that sheds light on why 2016 happened.
It;s her right to write a book and the public's right to purchase it. She wants to earn money and this in large part is what it is (no matter what anyone says) yet it is her time to come clean and write her history as she wants to see it. That is her right, as well. So, it's published and that's the end of it. And of her.
4
What Happened?
As Hilary said about Benghazi: What difference at this point does it make?
Democrats need to get their house in order, or split into two parties, and move on. Like it or not, for whatever reasons, Trump won; get over it HRC.
As Hilary said about Benghazi: What difference at this point does it make?
Democrats need to get their house in order, or split into two parties, and move on. Like it or not, for whatever reasons, Trump won; get over it HRC.
12
Definitely not a HRC fan and surely some sexism played a part in her loss to the fool we now have as our President but I just want to hear someone say she was the perfect candidate for Trump to run against. Whether it was refusing to disclose the fees earned and contents of her speeches to Wall Street or something else, Trump's behavioral always had a HRC analog. Example, her husband's prior bad behavior with woman and HRC's role in vilifying the "bimbos" made it hard to attack Trump for his cretin behavior towards woman. I think I might like the private HRC, not so sure about the public HRC who always comes away feeling calculated and a bit cynical.
6
It is almost unbelievable reading the vicious and unfair comments that Hillary's book has provoked. Are these people happy to have an ignorant, racist, misogynist, homophobic con artist in the White House? The man is not only causing misery to millions but is so obviously occupying the most important position in the world merely to enrich himself and the motley crew he calls his family. The attacks on a woman who has given her entire life to public service are pathetic and disgraceful.
381
these comments are vicious because, thanks to her, Trump is president. a simian could have defeated Trump but thanks to her ineptitude she could not.
4
Legitimately disliking Donald Trump does not equate into conversely liking Hillary. Many of us dislike them both even if for different reasons.
4
I more or less like Hillary and voted for her but- NO, giving speeches on Wall Street for millions of dollars is not "giving her entire life to public service".
For that matter, using the government issued email and blackberry instead of your own private one would have been a better homage to public service.
For that matter, using the government issued email and blackberry instead of your own private one would have been a better homage to public service.
1
It should be obvious that the principle reason that Trump won was his seemingly politically incorrect position of excluding Muslim immigration to the US. Atleast, it is to me. The NYT reviewer alludes to Clinton's own perception of this as a (non-decisive) factor in her loss when reporting that in her book Clinton bemoans that she "couldnt find a better way to speak to the fears of the white working class."
Well, I'm not sure how"white working class" is defined these days. I assume it is more inclusive than "blue collar", however, to the extent it is meant to exclude whites of all educational and socio-economic strata, it is too narrowly defined. The fear of Muslim terrorism by all voters was grossly under estimated. In August of 2016, blogster Sam Harris wrote the following piece spedcifying exactly what Hillary should say about this "muslim thing." https://www.samharris.org/blog/item/what-hillary-clinton-should-say-abou... . It's too bad Clinton didn't follow this advice. Contrary to what Hillary says, I believe it would have changed the outcome and helped to reveal Trump for the demagogue he is.
Well, I'm not sure how"white working class" is defined these days. I assume it is more inclusive than "blue collar", however, to the extent it is meant to exclude whites of all educational and socio-economic strata, it is too narrowly defined. The fear of Muslim terrorism by all voters was grossly under estimated. In August of 2016, blogster Sam Harris wrote the following piece spedcifying exactly what Hillary should say about this "muslim thing." https://www.samharris.org/blog/item/what-hillary-clinton-should-say-abou... . It's too bad Clinton didn't follow this advice. Contrary to what Hillary says, I believe it would have changed the outcome and helped to reveal Trump for the demagogue he is.
2
HRC won the election by a comfortable historical margin. 77,000 voters in three states allowed at 18th century anachronism to give us another non popularly elected POTUS. These are the facts historians will be dealing with when they analyze how democratic government collapsed in the early 21st century.
13
Enough with the "she won" stuff. She knew the rules and how the system functions. Trust me, if the situation was reversed you would be lauding the wisdom of the EC.
6
she won with 1.9 percent of pop vote. Obama beat Romney with 5. a chimpanzee could have done better.
1
nonsense the ec will be the death of us yet. You really think al gore and hrc would not have made a major difference for our collective future?
http://www.npr.org/2017/09/12/549430064/transcript-hillary-clinton-s-ful...
Listen to her interview on NPR. It is quintessential Clinton. Unwilling to give an inch. Unable to come to real terms with how she failed to connect to voters. Blaming Sanders for his "personal" attacks. Jumping on history as the reason why it was difficult to win. Using Comey as an excuse.
Truth was she didn't understand how angry, frustrated, and fed up the electorate was. After 40+ years they had every right to be. Especially when she ascended the ladder to .1% status while they were living in misery.
Smartest person in probably just about any room she walks into? Sure. But tone deaf when it came to understanding who attended Sanders and Trump rallies, what they wanted, and how she could co-opt them and address their needs in a personal way that would make them want to vote for her.
Sorry, but that's political job one. And she didn't do it.
Listen to her interview on NPR. It is quintessential Clinton. Unwilling to give an inch. Unable to come to real terms with how she failed to connect to voters. Blaming Sanders for his "personal" attacks. Jumping on history as the reason why it was difficult to win. Using Comey as an excuse.
Truth was she didn't understand how angry, frustrated, and fed up the electorate was. After 40+ years they had every right to be. Especially when she ascended the ladder to .1% status while they were living in misery.
Smartest person in probably just about any room she walks into? Sure. But tone deaf when it came to understanding who attended Sanders and Trump rallies, what they wanted, and how she could co-opt them and address their needs in a personal way that would make them want to vote for her.
Sorry, but that's political job one. And she didn't do it.
19
@Adirondax,
"Smartest person in probably just about any room she walks into? Sure."
Could you please share how this fairy tale was invented?
"Smartest person in probably just about any room she walks into? Sure."
Could you please share how this fairy tale was invented?
3
HRC assuming the role of top victim in the party of victimhood.
15
The fact that she chose to write this book with this title - as if she knows what happened just 9 months ago - says it all. The record shows that the election did not turn on Russian hacking, and the election did not turn on the two-faced lunatic Comey. The election turned on the use of the word "Deplorable". Her word. In one word, one comment, she solidified everything that every uncommitted voter thought of her - her arrogance, her not simply insensitivity but complete disdain for anyone who did not agree with her, her thought that anyone who was not in line with her agenda was a Neanderthal. And the polls turned on a dime that week. Contrast with two people who won unwinnable elections - her husband, and especially Barack Obama, who opened a big umbrella and made sure everyone knew they were welcome. This country that people think is now run by old bald white men and white supremacists voted twice to elect a Black man. I voted for her, but she lost a layup election to a buffoon because she was a tremendously flawed candidate from the start, and she did nothing in the election but emphasize her negatives. She did not lose because she is a woman - she lost despite the fact that she is a woman. And until the Democrats and so called "progressives" begin blaming themselves for choosing this flawed candidate, we will continue to have this buffoon and his enablers.
13
She made it very clear that she was talking about people such as the tiki torch bearers who marched though Charlottesville shouting antisemitic threats and wearing MAGA hats. Maybe calling white supremacists and the KKK "deplorable" was a mistake. But it was certanly accurate. They are despicable people who view Trump as inspiration and affirmation. Is it truly arrogant to point that out? I think it would be pathetically mealy-mouthed to shy away from it.
4
Where are these records that you speak of? Fox news? Bannon? The incredibly sexist, misguided rants you are reading in these comments? I am sick to death of the packaged hate filled responses of the Hillary haters. They say the same talking points they picked up off facebook or wherever misguided sheep find their "thoughts". I voted for her and would again. If she had been elected do you really think we would be in the hot mess we are in now? I think not! Never say flawed again!!
1
Thank God this book is written by a private citizen and not the President of the United States.
6
If anyone doubts that sexism affected this election, just read through this comment section.
318
Or watch the treatment of Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren on the floor of the US Senate.
2
And we're back to the tiresome old trope of any dislike or disagreement with Hillary is only due to sexism and that's why she lost. Nonsense.
7
to witness true sexism you should have visited her website during the election. there was more, literally, geared towards the transgender than males, particularly this of European decent. if that is not sexism, what is (and the sad part is Clinton and her followers don't even recognize it as such)
4
Does the book have an addendum with the Goldman Sachs speeches she refused to release during the campaign? What in the world did she say to these banksters and fraudsters?
HRC gave us the calamity we are now enduring, no wonder she went to bed after the election.
On a final note, the United States must abolish the electoral college.
HRC gave us the calamity we are now enduring, no wonder she went to bed after the election.
On a final note, the United States must abolish the electoral college.
11
The Electoral College has the main value of stopping our elections from being decided by a handful of states. That would be a disaster.
3
Perhaps we should ask some of the fraudsters and banksters that now occupy positions of great power in the government, thanks to the swamp-master POTUS? Her speeches, her emails...none of these things would have prevented a white man of similar age and experience from easily winning the WH. That, is the truth.
1
What did she and Bill have to say that was worth $250 Million over ten years?
3
HRC must retire. She is becoming a burden even on herself.
10
Good review. I look forward to reading this book.
I just wish she were our president right now. What a disaster Trump has been! Even if he were merely a mediocre president—that low bar is nowhere within his reach—he could never begin to approach the experience, wisdom, emotional maturity and tireless energy that Ms. Clinton has.
What a lost opportunity.
I just wish she were our president right now. What a disaster Trump has been! Even if he were merely a mediocre president—that low bar is nowhere within his reach—he could never begin to approach the experience, wisdom, emotional maturity and tireless energy that Ms. Clinton has.
What a lost opportunity.
7
Crooked Hillary spent years trying to destroy America! She charges book buyers for signing her book!
She is only interested in more power and wealth!
Her lies and scandalous behaviors cost her the election!
Thank God for President Trump! He stands behind what's good for America!
America First! MAGA!
She is only interested in more power and wealth!
Her lies and scandalous behaviors cost her the election!
Thank God for President Trump! He stands behind what's good for America!
America First! MAGA!
3
Open your eyes. Trump appealed to his followers by fanning their feelings of racism, fear and hatred. He received support from Russia because they knew he would be an easy adversary to deal with and control. He lies constantly. He is enriching his businesses through the office of the president. He spends an exorbitant amount of time playing golf, at considerable taxpayer expense. Many world leaders (except Putin) avoid him at summit meetings. He's an embarrassment to our country on the world stage.
We've never had a president as awful as Trump. Never.
We've never had a president as awful as Trump. Never.
2
Where's the discussion of the "bad optics" (as Hillary Clinton has so quaintly phrased her practice) of taking $23 million from Wall Street banks and other major corporate interests in the form of $225,000 individual speeches in the three years leading up to the announcement of her candidacy for the Democratic Party nomination. After taking the money, she dismissed any criticism of this "wealth grab" by saying during the campaign repeatedly: "Anybody who knows me, knows that I can't be bought."
However, she now admits that all of this made for "bad optics" in the eyes of voters. And, when Bernie Sanders and some of the questioning Democratic Party presidential debates moderators asked her to release the transcripts of those same speeches (to which she had the forethought to contractually arrange her exclusive rights), she said she would do so on the condition that all presidential candidates (not only Bernie Sanders) including all 13 Republican presidential candidates would do so. Instead of just saying "No, I won't do so," she just created her own "catch-22" as if she thought the entire population of the United States was stupid. Now, she supposedly has written in her book that all of this simply created "bad optics" with the voting public.
Don't look in the mirror, Hillary. You won't like what you see.
However, she now admits that all of this made for "bad optics" in the eyes of voters. And, when Bernie Sanders and some of the questioning Democratic Party presidential debates moderators asked her to release the transcripts of those same speeches (to which she had the forethought to contractually arrange her exclusive rights), she said she would do so on the condition that all presidential candidates (not only Bernie Sanders) including all 13 Republican presidential candidates would do so. Instead of just saying "No, I won't do so," she just created her own "catch-22" as if she thought the entire population of the United States was stupid. Now, she supposedly has written in her book that all of this simply created "bad optics" with the voting public.
Don't look in the mirror, Hillary. You won't like what you see.
10
That thinking people doubt how much her gender has played into treatment toward her throughout her public career completely baffles me. Certain people were aghast when she tried to be an industrious FLOTUS back in the day - how dare she?! A suit wearing female brainiac & lifetime public servant versus a suit wearing male demagogue - what gives her the right?!
If you don't care for Clinton don't bother to read her book. But please stop telling women of a certain age to "retire already". It's not your place to make that decision. I for one am not a fan of Madonna but the frequently personal & harsh to the point of paranoid criticism she faces makes me want to support her doing her thing for as long as she wants. Same can be said for Clinton. Feminism, like affirmative action, exists as a counter to a non-inclusive culture. Powerful women aren't always right but they're always welcomed by true humanists.
If you don't care for Clinton don't bother to read her book. But please stop telling women of a certain age to "retire already". It's not your place to make that decision. I for one am not a fan of Madonna but the frequently personal & harsh to the point of paranoid criticism she faces makes me want to support her doing her thing for as long as she wants. Same can be said for Clinton. Feminism, like affirmative action, exists as a counter to a non-inclusive culture. Powerful women aren't always right but they're always welcomed by true humanists.
4
Powerful women are "always welcomed by humanists." You mean like Marine Le Pen? I agree that women and men should be judged--individually--by the same standards. And no one is telling Angela Merkel or Christine Lagarde or Elizabeth Warren to retire. And many of us rue the occasion of Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement. No, disliking HC doesn't automatically make one a sexist.
4
How unfortunate that Clinton apparently learned so little from her 2016 electoral fiasco. By her reckoning, we all should:
Blame Obama because in 2014 he said Joe Biden offered the best hope of retaining the White House. History shows he was right.
Blame Bernie for running at all and basing his campaign on a populist message that appealed to a large cross-section of voters--especially independents.
Blame the server issue which she acknowledged as her "biggest mistake" of the campaign; a comment that alone speaks volumes. And blame Comey and the Russians for disclosing emails that turned up on it.
Blame Trump for being an obnoxious, lying creep, which most--beyond the 30 percent deplorables--knew from the outset.
Ignore her $600k fee for speechifying to Wall Street bankers, helping fuel the popular "crooked Hillary" meme and underscore her sheer arrogance and entitlement. We ought to overlook Bubba's tarmac rendezvous with the AG; another display of Clinton arrogance.
She also gets a pass on her clueless campaign that dispatched Ted Danson and other Hollywood notables to lecture us on climate change while Trump took his message of mostly lies to rust belt blue collar workers who once comprised the core of the Democratic electorate.
Finally for the record, I was a Bernie supporter who voted for Clinton upon overcoming the urge to stick my fingers down my throat on her every campaign speech. Unfortunately, that's a pretty tepid endorsement of her personal brand.
Blame Obama because in 2014 he said Joe Biden offered the best hope of retaining the White House. History shows he was right.
Blame Bernie for running at all and basing his campaign on a populist message that appealed to a large cross-section of voters--especially independents.
Blame the server issue which she acknowledged as her "biggest mistake" of the campaign; a comment that alone speaks volumes. And blame Comey and the Russians for disclosing emails that turned up on it.
Blame Trump for being an obnoxious, lying creep, which most--beyond the 30 percent deplorables--knew from the outset.
Ignore her $600k fee for speechifying to Wall Street bankers, helping fuel the popular "crooked Hillary" meme and underscore her sheer arrogance and entitlement. We ought to overlook Bubba's tarmac rendezvous with the AG; another display of Clinton arrogance.
She also gets a pass on her clueless campaign that dispatched Ted Danson and other Hollywood notables to lecture us on climate change while Trump took his message of mostly lies to rust belt blue collar workers who once comprised the core of the Democratic electorate.
Finally for the record, I was a Bernie supporter who voted for Clinton upon overcoming the urge to stick my fingers down my throat on her every campaign speech. Unfortunately, that's a pretty tepid endorsement of her personal brand.
11
This is a rare example of a book specifically written to parse a failed major party presidential campaign that was authored by the candidate herself. I can't think of another recent example, in fact. This in itself makes it interesting, and a future subject of a lot of historical interest. Whether the book's analysis of the election was correct, or just self-serving really doesn't matter.
5
what is unique is the fact it heaps blame on everyone but herself.
5
Have you actually read the book? Because I have and she actually takes the blame for a lot of things. Maybe you should read the book instead of curated snippets online.
i would respect her a lot more if she spent her time working to make the country better - and getting rid of the electoral college and the absurd primary system and its super delegates - would be a great start
imagine if instead of dropping out and then spending her time on this book
hrc -along with her husband and gore- lent their considerable power to getting rid of the electoral college - without which both she and gore would have become presidents
how many voters are disenfranchised by the democratic primary system and the electoral college? - my vote for example has never counted - i have lived in two states - both of which always go to one party - no one every comes to my state -
how is a system where CA counts less than NH fair?
she should spend her time trying to fix this - she and her husband are multimillionaires many times over - they should make this their work
imagine if instead of dropping out and then spending her time on this book
hrc -along with her husband and gore- lent their considerable power to getting rid of the electoral college - without which both she and gore would have become presidents
how many voters are disenfranchised by the democratic primary system and the electoral college? - my vote for example has never counted - i have lived in two states - both of which always go to one party - no one every comes to my state -
how is a system where CA counts less than NH fair?
she should spend her time trying to fix this - she and her husband are multimillionaires many times over - they should make this their work
4
Electoral college lunacy - agreed.
It's not only that as things are now the EC unfairly advantages one party.
It's also that presidential campaigns focus almost exclusively on just a handful of swing states. The large majority of us in other states might as well be Jimmy Swaggart - we just watch.
It's not only that as things are now the EC unfairly advantages one party.
It's also that presidential campaigns focus almost exclusively on just a handful of swing states. The large majority of us in other states might as well be Jimmy Swaggart - we just watch.
Donald didn't win. Hillary lost because she failed to energize a large part of what should have been her base. Various parts of Florida, Philadelphia, Detroit, and Milwaukee didn't find her relevant and stayed home. So she lost in four states where she should have won. Now it's time for her to stay home. Why would anyone want to even read about her book, let alone read it? It's time for everyone to move on.
5
Still eagerly awaiting transcripts of those speeches she gave before the Wall Street Honchos.....maybe just the ones to Goldman Sachs first.
10
Since November last we have been saying like a mantra that Mrs. Clinton won the popular vote by nearly three million. There´s no denying it; indeed she did. But, if we compare her electoral map with that of president Obama, it´s clear that his vote was far more evenly spead out across the country than hers. This suggests that her appeal to the voters was less wide and less deep, far more concentrated in the left and right coasts. In sum, she was across the board a noticeably less attractive candidate than either Obama or the eventual winner. In sum, she is very nearly as responsible for the ensuing disasters as is the narcissistic gasbag in the White House.
3
The Bernie Bots won't like this. The Despicables won't like this. And the rightwing punditry industry won't like this.
But she's right.
But she's right.
19
Clinton is still lying to us and to herself. Will she never shut up?
11
"There is no substitute for victory." General Douglas MacArthur.
She should have this tattooed on her body. She wrote a large book
explaining that she lost with style. I wish she had written a book about
how she won a street fight and became President.
She should have this tattooed on her body. She wrote a large book
explaining that she lost with style. I wish she had written a book about
how she won a street fight and became President.
4
One of the things that drove Clinton bonkers about Bernie Sanders was that he always managed to outdo her proposals with something larger and less feasible. “That left me to play the unenviable role,” she writes, “of spoilsport schoolmarm.”
More than anything else Clinton failed to understand the very real differences between the overly complex and ungenerous policies that Obama offered and she continued and the simple, straightforward return to New Deal that Sanders advocated. And then the obvious question arises. If we could do it in the 1940's why not now?
More than anything else Clinton failed to understand the very real differences between the overly complex and ungenerous policies that Obama offered and she continued and the simple, straightforward return to New Deal that Sanders advocated. And then the obvious question arises. If we could do it in the 1940's why not now?
5
If Hillary admits that Comey's Oct. 28 letter was the end of her viability then she is tacitly admitting that her private email/server decision was what in fact doomed her candidacy. It's simple: no clintonemail.com, no Comey letter.
This is the frightening and irrefutable truth.
Something which was completely within her power to control and she failed to make the correct decision that would have ensured her victory. Russians, Trump, Bernie, Facebook, wikileaks... all of that would never have mattered had she made the correct and proper decision in January 2009 to use her state.gov email account.
That said, it means her book is several other chapters too long. Because the story of her loss begins and ends with the email.
This is the frightening and irrefutable truth.
Something which was completely within her power to control and she failed to make the correct decision that would have ensured her victory. Russians, Trump, Bernie, Facebook, wikileaks... all of that would never have mattered had she made the correct and proper decision in January 2009 to use her state.gov email account.
That said, it means her book is several other chapters too long. Because the story of her loss begins and ends with the email.
5
There's a difference between cause and fault. The email situation might be the cause of all those results, but it doesn't mean she was at fault, or at any rate at fault anywhere near the level to bring about all these consequences.
And thus tacitly admits to the problem with Bill's meeting with Lynch on the tarmac. Comey has now said that this meeting the day before the decision to indite seemed unscrupulous and "above the law." One thing about Comey is the man does his darndest to live ethically.
I personally decided I'd never vote Clinton after the tarmac thing. Surprised it doesn't get talked about more.
I personally decided I'd never vote Clinton after the tarmac thing. Surprised it doesn't get talked about more.
1
But she was the sole author of that one decision which became so consequential. And it's confounding that she didn't have the foresight to realize that it would be so scrutinized and criticized. It's so confounding because she willfully ignored her and Bill's history of scandal, mostly manufactured of course, but nonetheless the fully predictable product of a predatory press.
She admits in the book it was "dumb", but there are a lot more harsh words for what was such a catastrophically consequential decision. She was the head of an entire department, she should have been leading by example. That's what leaders do. Using the state.gov email was the only proper thing to do.
She admits in the book it was "dumb", but there are a lot more harsh words for what was such a catastrophically consequential decision. She was the head of an entire department, she should have been leading by example. That's what leaders do. Using the state.gov email was the only proper thing to do.
3
Nobody in the world can give us the perspective Hillary Clinton had, and has. We need to hear from her, if only so that we're better able to a) fight off horrific candidates like our current president, and b) elevate women to the equal footing we deserve. I can't wait to read this--I'm pretty much sitting on my stoop until the USPS delivers my pre-ordered copy.
7
Book quotes I've read indicate she largely blames Bernie and his voters (in addition to the other people she blames instead of herself). Bernie's response to these quotes was measured and dignified, "we need to look to the future now instead of holding onto the past." Sadly, Democrats failed to pick up on the power of the shift within their base. The DNC vibe was "It's HER time or else." Many Democrats didn't want Hillary after years of triangulation, quid pro quo and a "Democrat lite" coziness with Wall Street. Bernie was holding rallies with 30,000 people and she was at private dinners fundraising. The DNC couldn't even put her on stage until the end of the Democrat convention for fear that the crowd would boo! ....Yet somehow she blames everyone else. They expected Democrats to fall in line and vote for her because she wasn't Trump but it wasn't enough. This review of the book was enough for me. Vaya con Dios, Hillary.
5
It appears that Ms. Clinton is not one for giving mea culpas. Nor does this review indicate she places any responsibility for her loss on her husband. Thus the Clintons sail through her book unscathed by any meaningful fault for our present debacle cum commander-in-chief.
What would have been a more illuminating book for Ms. Clinton to write is the one entitled "What Didn't Happen"--a full and honest account why she didn't divorce Bill long ago for humiliating her and burdening her with his shameful (for a Democrat) turn to the Right in his welfare and criminal justice policies, and his seemingly corrupt actions like the pardon of Marc Rich. Such a book might also inform her admirers, of which I had been one, why she didn't do more appeal to both working class white voters and urban black voters, mainstays of past Democrat presidential wins.
What would have been a more illuminating book for Ms. Clinton to write is the one entitled "What Didn't Happen"--a full and honest account why she didn't divorce Bill long ago for humiliating her and burdening her with his shameful (for a Democrat) turn to the Right in his welfare and criminal justice policies, and his seemingly corrupt actions like the pardon of Marc Rich. Such a book might also inform her admirers, of which I had been one, why she didn't do more appeal to both working class white voters and urban black voters, mainstays of past Democrat presidential wins.
1
Of all the excuses for Hillary-hate, the lamest is denouncing her for not divorcing her husband. I wonder what the haters would have said about her if she HAD divorced him.
1
The candor is overdue and much appreciated. Hillary Clinton has the great misfortune of having grown up in one of most sexist subsystems in the US (Appalachia). Only the Catholic systems (and latent Islamic systems from African slaves) are worse. Also, the Sanders' "pie in the sky" thing is true (but could have been handled better by her).
This reads, though, like someone who is much less literate in political economy, history, law, etc., both in the US and globally, as I would have expected.
This reads, though, like someone who is much less literate in political economy, history, law, etc., both in the US and globally, as I would have expected.
2
Hillary Clinton has the great misfortune of having grown up in one of most sexist subsystems in the US (Appalachia).
======================
She grew up in Illinois, nowhere near Appalachia.
======================
She grew up in Illinois, nowhere near Appalachia.
4
Her family is from Appalachia on both sides. She identifies as Welsh Methodist before that, talking about how all her grandparents were immigrants (some not from Wales but that was apparently the dominant ideology).
4
You know, sometimes people just aren't that interesting. Or personable. Or likeable. It happens. Most of the time it doesn't matter, life goes on. Unless you're that person running for President of the United States. In the end with Mrs. Clinton, t's not much more complicated that that.
7
Which is why Mark Zuckerberg trying to run for president will be cringe inducing.
3
I wish she would spend her energy on something that would move the country forward --- like getting rid of the Electoral College.
4
I'm not sure if the writer of this article is trying to claim things were "said on both sides" but:
"It’s hard to buy the idea that she suffered disproportionately from charges of untrustworthiness or inauthenticity simply because she was a woman. "
It actually really is not hard to buy that idea at all. That's precisely what happened. None of us can say that misogyny is what lost her the election, but it certain, tangibly, contributed to her negative image. It is not a tough sell. She is the only presidential candidate that has been criticized for her "pant suits" (um, male candidates always wear "pant" "suits" as it were?), for being manipulative (all politicians are, but it's only okay to point it out when she is female?).
The author also does not seem to want to admit that "arena-filling showmanship rather than the quieter, detail-oriented realism" is a very stark, very obvious, masculine-feminine contrast. As tradition dictates: boys are loud, and rough, and tumble around. They yel and tell jokes and one-up each other. Then they are just being showmen. Good politicians. If a woman does she is shrill. She is catty. If she doesn't, she is "quiet and detail oriented". Which, shrug. Sorry missy, that just isn't how you do politics. I guess you just aren't cut out.
Any other criticism in the article is totally valid, but maybe don't bring up the misogyny bit unless you really want to examine it.
"It’s hard to buy the idea that she suffered disproportionately from charges of untrustworthiness or inauthenticity simply because she was a woman. "
It actually really is not hard to buy that idea at all. That's precisely what happened. None of us can say that misogyny is what lost her the election, but it certain, tangibly, contributed to her negative image. It is not a tough sell. She is the only presidential candidate that has been criticized for her "pant suits" (um, male candidates always wear "pant" "suits" as it were?), for being manipulative (all politicians are, but it's only okay to point it out when she is female?).
The author also does not seem to want to admit that "arena-filling showmanship rather than the quieter, detail-oriented realism" is a very stark, very obvious, masculine-feminine contrast. As tradition dictates: boys are loud, and rough, and tumble around. They yel and tell jokes and one-up each other. Then they are just being showmen. Good politicians. If a woman does she is shrill. She is catty. If she doesn't, she is "quiet and detail oriented". Which, shrug. Sorry missy, that just isn't how you do politics. I guess you just aren't cut out.
Any other criticism in the article is totally valid, but maybe don't bring up the misogyny bit unless you really want to examine it.
9
Hillary was a bad candidate who ran a bad campaign for a party that is disconnected from the people it purports to champion.
She ran against Donald Trump, a low demagogue whom she underestimated at every turn.
She deserved to lose.
Few analysts of the recent election will want to read self-serving whining from Hillary Clinton; I certainly won't be buying her book.
Retire to a life of ease with memories of the good things you did in your career.
Find dignity and peace. Go away
She ran against Donald Trump, a low demagogue whom she underestimated at every turn.
She deserved to lose.
Few analysts of the recent election will want to read self-serving whining from Hillary Clinton; I certainly won't be buying her book.
Retire to a life of ease with memories of the good things you did in your career.
Find dignity and peace. Go away
11
For heavens sake please go away.....
7
She should have taken the Xanax and had the therapy 20 years ago when Bill was caught with Monica. Then she might have walked out on that louse, shown the world that she was for real, and maybe gotten elected in 2016.
Or, at the very least, could have got over the trauma of being taunted for having fat ankles when she was 12 and made the rest of us pay for it for the next 5 decades.
Or, at the very least, could have got over the trauma of being taunted for having fat ankles when she was 12 and made the rest of us pay for it for the next 5 decades.
10
Brilliant woman, brilliant candidate. This wasn't a normal election. Russia helped to elect a puppet. A stupid, ignorant, hateful, misogynist, racist puppet. She won the popular vote. She won more votes than any white man in history. I can't wait to read this book and the next one and the one after that. America was robbed in broad daylight. She would have been a magnificent President.
12
Donald gets to tease former opponents anytime he pleases. Clinton has every right to throw stones too. It's a free country.
13
The world's smartest woman lost when she said she was going to put a lot of coal miners out of work...she lost when she said she was going to do away with the 2nd Amendment...she lost when she asked what it mattered about her failings in Benghazi...she lost when she gave the Russians nuclear material...Thank God she lost!! As bad as trump is slick hillie would have been infinitely worse for our great country.
3
The Obama administration, with HC as Sec. of State did its utmost to try to prevent Putin from getting back into power, and failed miserably. And it never occurred to Harvard graduate Obama and Wellesley and Yale Law graduate Clinton that Putin might want revenge.
Black voters stayed away in droves because the Clintons were instrumental in putting millions of young black men in jail.
"What Happened?" Seriously?
Please take your millions and go away, far away.
Black voters stayed away in droves because the Clintons were instrumental in putting millions of young black men in jail.
"What Happened?" Seriously?
Please take your millions and go away, far away.
4
Hilary won the Election.
The presidency was stolen, not just from her but the voters of the US.
It was a weird and perfect storm.
The presidency was stolen, not just from her but the voters of the US.
It was a weird and perfect storm.
17
Totally wrong. Presidential elections per the constitution are determined by the Electoral College, not the popular vote. Nothing was stolen from her.
11
Agree. Just as the Supreme Court nomination was stolen from Barack Obama and the voters of the US.
3
Sorry, Pecan, while it was grimy politics, it was not "stolen" as it is within the constitutional power of the Senate to not act upon a nomination if they so choose. Nothing legally compels them to act on any particular time table.
I understand this is a book review, but how come no one here is talking about the Electoral College? She did, after all, win the popular vote.
10
When we win the electoral college vote, it is proof of our founding fathers' brilliance and foresight, balancing the interests of the few and the numerous.
When we lose the electoral college vote, it is proof of an archaic, anachronistic system that needs to be changed immediately.
When we lose the electoral college vote, it is proof of an archaic, anachronistic system that needs to be changed immediately.
5
Abraham Lincoln became president because of the Electoral College. Got a problem with that too?
5
Hillary Clinton didn't care about the popular votr
3
Despite all of the interference and dirty tricks against Clinton, ultimately it was she who is responsible for losing the election. She surrounded herself with tone deaf handlers. She, in the years leading up to her run, accepted millions for speeches to amoral bankers, with whom she'd cozied up to for years. Instead of acknowledging her mistakes with the email server immediately (never mind that it should never have been an issue -- it was) instead of brushing it off and making inane jokes about it. She let Trump stalk her on stage without making a peep ("Donald, do you need to use the little boys room," would have been an easy one). She hammered at "identity" politics and minority rights, which turned off many voters who got tired of hearing about the problems of tiny slices of the populace. She ignored the economy, she made enemies of employees of coal companies, not the robber baron owners and the envrionmental ruin they cause. She actually said she wanted open borders (!?) at a time when American's (even many moderates and liberals) rightly or wrongly, were concerned about illegal immigration. Her DNC tried to politically drown Sanders... the list goes on. She blew it.
9
The most important sentence in this review - and the one that misses the point entirely.
``But one thing we know for certain: History conspired against Clinton.''
Yes, her history conspired against her.
The reviewer also notes that Clinton is now a ``private'' citizen. Let's hope it's private in capital letters.
The bottom line: She helped put a fool in the Oval Office.
``But one thing we know for certain: History conspired against Clinton.''
Yes, her history conspired against her.
The reviewer also notes that Clinton is now a ``private'' citizen. Let's hope it's private in capital letters.
The bottom line: She helped put a fool in the Oval Office.
6
I am one who admires Hilary, yet this morning when I listened to her interview on NPR, one part stood out to me - she said she talked about rates of suicides, earlier deaths, needing jobs, needing hope, but I suddenly realized that that is not how these people see themselves. They are libertarians, racists, misogynists, who will stand proudly on the rubble that their anti-government ideals bring them - these people would rather smash the world to bits than think of themselves as needing help. Man, it's a crazy world.
10
Hillary was the one of the most qualified candidates to ever run for the presidency. To understand what happened just watch the video of the nurse in Salt Lake being assaulted by a police officer. You see a woman calmly and rationally explaining the rules that protect her patients rights. The officer then explodes in a rage, screaming "We're done here." and handcuffs her.
Hillary calmly and rationally made her case for how she would make this a better country for all of us. Bernie Bros and Trump supporters alike shrieked "lock her up."
Misogyny brought us the reign of Trump.
Hillary calmly and rationally made her case for how she would make this a better country for all of us. Bernie Bros and Trump supporters alike shrieked "lock her up."
Misogyny brought us the reign of Trump.
558
Linking the election failure of HRC and the nurse video is indeed a worthy exercise, especially if one takes in account the relatively high number of upvotes. It demonstrates how difficult it is for HRC's supporters to grasp reality, to figure out what is comparable, to distinguish truth from false. It shows the ability of partisanship to distort facts into supporting arguments of one's political discourse.
Thank you - a perfect analogy. One we must continue to speak up about daily!
1
Bernie supporters did NOT shriek lock her up. They were too busy trying to get the DNC to play fair.
7
Hillary keeps grousing about how she lost the election because she's a woman.
I come into contact with many people in the public quite a few of whom told me before the election that they will be voting for Hillary BECAUSE she's a woman. One lady may have said it best, "before I die I want to see a woman as president".
My point? Hillary picked up roughly as many votes due to her gender as she may have lost.
She didn't lose because she's a woman. She lost because she's Hillary. Her biggest accomplishment was sitting in the Senate for her first six years, keeping her mouth shut and not getting into trouble.
Not to mention that I have to believe that Hillary was foisted onto Obama by the Democrat party to be secretary of state to keep her in the public eye anticipating a 2016 run. Once there in that job she was nothing but trouble and didn't make it to Obama's second term.
Remember this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgcd1ghag5Y&feature=youtu.be
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGg0VNLIgWs&feature=youtu.be
How about this:
"Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal"
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-...
I come into contact with many people in the public quite a few of whom told me before the election that they will be voting for Hillary BECAUSE she's a woman. One lady may have said it best, "before I die I want to see a woman as president".
My point? Hillary picked up roughly as many votes due to her gender as she may have lost.
She didn't lose because she's a woman. She lost because she's Hillary. Her biggest accomplishment was sitting in the Senate for her first six years, keeping her mouth shut and not getting into trouble.
Not to mention that I have to believe that Hillary was foisted onto Obama by the Democrat party to be secretary of state to keep her in the public eye anticipating a 2016 run. Once there in that job she was nothing but trouble and didn't make it to Obama's second term.
Remember this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgcd1ghag5Y&feature=youtu.be
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGg0VNLIgWs&feature=youtu.be
How about this:
"Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal"
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-...
13
Most of us know why she lost, though it's sad that apparently she still doesn't get it. So why spend the money and further fatten her bloated money bags for nothing?
11
History will perhaps judge her defeat differently. Had she won, this opinionated, self-righteous woman would have governed America differently than Mr. Trump and perhaps she might have steered world events in another direction.
In 2056, 50 years from the election of Mr. Trump, students may learn historical events that caused N. Korea to launch nuclear weapons against S. Korea, Los Angeles and Chicago. They may learn of the suspension of habeas corpus, the institution of military rule, the eviction of Mexicans from US Soil, the imprisonment of "terrorists" who criticized the president in times of war. They will learn how the US became an impoverished, backward, poor nation swamped by massive floods, poisoned by nuclear war, how millions were killed by unnecessary tweets from an unhinged, ignorant and unsuited man in the Oval Office.
Yes, it was all worth it to defeat "crooked Hillary."
In 2056, 50 years from the election of Mr. Trump, students may learn historical events that caused N. Korea to launch nuclear weapons against S. Korea, Los Angeles and Chicago. They may learn of the suspension of habeas corpus, the institution of military rule, the eviction of Mexicans from US Soil, the imprisonment of "terrorists" who criticized the president in times of war. They will learn how the US became an impoverished, backward, poor nation swamped by massive floods, poisoned by nuclear war, how millions were killed by unnecessary tweets from an unhinged, ignorant and unsuited man in the Oval Office.
Yes, it was all worth it to defeat "crooked Hillary."
7
No Trump fan here, but what other candidate who was never elected President felt the self-aggrandizing need to write a book about their failed campaign rather than simply move on?
As was said of Neville Chamberlain regarding his long list of failures
'You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!'
http://quotegeek.com/personalities/oliver-cromwell/4330/
As was said of Neville Chamberlain regarding his long list of failures
'You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!'
http://quotegeek.com/personalities/oliver-cromwell/4330/
12
I would prefer Neville Chamberlain to Ms. Clinton, I'm afraid.
From this review the book sounds exactly like what I would expect from Mrs. Clinton, a whole bunch of blame being heaped on others for why she lost and no insight into how her own actions were to blame for the loss.
I'll pass.
I'll pass.
24
For decades US workers, blue and white collar have been more highly paid than such workers in other parts. Globalization is gradually putting an end to this privilege.
So how does a political leader pick his/her way through the minefield. If he/she jumps on the stump and tells us to expect less, there we have a big loser. Regarding economics, Clinton mostly sat down and shut up.
Another approach is to blow smoke and fill the air with lies. That would be Trump.
"Truth" is electoral poison, lies are like catnip. In essence, politicians are paid to offer delightful lies.
So how does a political leader pick his/her way through the minefield. If he/she jumps on the stump and tells us to expect less, there we have a big loser. Regarding economics, Clinton mostly sat down and shut up.
Another approach is to blow smoke and fill the air with lies. That would be Trump.
"Truth" is electoral poison, lies are like catnip. In essence, politicians are paid to offer delightful lies.
6
No mention of the shady Clinton Foundation? Giving talks to Wall Street for more money than others will make in decades? Though I voted her - the lesser of two evils - if she can't see that vast wealth she and Bill made off their political connections, then she's delusional. And it shows. She's angry at Bernie -for what? Stating what we all felt; she's too connected to money.
29
Unfortunately, Hillary won't touch - or rather is incapable considering - how nepotism, crony politics, and Wall Street-corporate fealty led the Democrats to engineer the 2016 coronation of one of the most divisive contemporary US politicians. Suggesting it was Hillary's 'time' by virtue of her loss in 2008 or anything else was arrogant nonsense.
Sanders courageously stepped into the political vacuum while establishment Democrats - other than 3rd tier stand-ins for a real challenger - deferred to the DNC and the deep pockets of the Hampton crowd and other donors representing the 1%.
Anyone who seriously believes that Sanders' campaign hit below the belt - despite his clear defence of Clinton against Republican attacks in the primary season and his active campaigning for her after - needs to review the dirty campaign that Hillary and her surrogates conducted against Obama in 2008.
What happened? Clinton was defeated because she underestimated the challenge Trump posed, the cynicism of much of the historic Democratic base toward neoliberal Democratic social and economic policies, and the diminished income and future of a significant segment of the 'Independent' and Democratic electorate.
Sanders courageously stepped into the political vacuum while establishment Democrats - other than 3rd tier stand-ins for a real challenger - deferred to the DNC and the deep pockets of the Hampton crowd and other donors representing the 1%.
Anyone who seriously believes that Sanders' campaign hit below the belt - despite his clear defence of Clinton against Republican attacks in the primary season and his active campaigning for her after - needs to review the dirty campaign that Hillary and her surrogates conducted against Obama in 2008.
What happened? Clinton was defeated because she underestimated the challenge Trump posed, the cynicism of much of the historic Democratic base toward neoliberal Democratic social and economic policies, and the diminished income and future of a significant segment of the 'Independent' and Democratic electorate.
28
What a beautifully written review. Thank you!
5
While Trump is organizing the recovery from hurricanes, Hillary is rehashing last year's election.
It's also unsettling that a news organization such as CBS is paying her millions to publish this book and giving her free air time on their news programs such as CBS Sunday Morning. Her loss must have cost CBS millions on their book publishing deal, which explains their complete lack of objectivity during her campaigns against Sanders and Trump.
It's also unsettling that a news organization such as CBS is paying her millions to publish this book and giving her free air time on their news programs such as CBS Sunday Morning. Her loss must have cost CBS millions on their book publishing deal, which explains their complete lack of objectivity during her campaigns against Sanders and Trump.
13
I believe that NYT and others improperly tried to sway the election by printing "NEWS" that she has a 98% chance of election.
It seems like a thinly-veiled attempt to suppress fence-sitters, who detest Clinton, from voting.
I believe it worked in no small way, but not in a big enough way sink Trump.
Thank goodness. I really don't like Trump but I really, really detest Clinton(s).
It seems like a thinly-veiled attempt to suppress fence-sitters, who detest Clinton, from voting.
I believe it worked in no small way, but not in a big enough way sink Trump.
Thank goodness. I really don't like Trump but I really, really detest Clinton(s).
3
it was not 98percent. only about 93.
1
Hillary Clinton is right that she was up against a Reality TV personality, a carnival barker. a showman. She is not an entertainer, that is for sure. And unfortunately, in this country, entertainers win. She is also right about James B. Comey, the negative press and Bernie Sanders. And she is right about Donald Trump. But her campaign made a huge mistake in not spending a lot more time in Wisconsin, Michigan and the western parts of Pennsylvania. They took those states for granted.
12
Clinton's description of Trump is far too kind. She should have iterated the probability that he is mentally impaired. But she's dead right that "...in this country, entertainers win."
This dreadful election exposed - to the astonished gaze of many bien-pensants -- the power of a large chunk of the electorate. Americans who are deeply anti-social, Jew-hating (I do not use the polite and inaccurate term "anti-semite"). disdainful of all but uneducated whites like themselves, misogynist, incapable of critical thinking; of looking two steps ahead of today.
Is this who we are?
This dreadful election exposed - to the astonished gaze of many bien-pensants -- the power of a large chunk of the electorate. Americans who are deeply anti-social, Jew-hating (I do not use the polite and inaccurate term "anti-semite"). disdainful of all but uneducated whites like themselves, misogynist, incapable of critical thinking; of looking two steps ahead of today.
Is this who we are?
1
Full disclosure: I am one of the majority of people who supported Bernie during the primaries and then voted Clinton in the general election.
Clinton has said in post-election interviews that she accepts "absolute personal responsibility" for losing the election. That acknowledgment is not compatible at all with the nature of her new book (at least the parts described here). "Absolute" is defined as "not qualified or diminished in ANY way; total." Clinton has a right to tell her side of things just like anyone else. But she can't point fingers at the media, Sanders or even Trump while simultaneously claiming to take absolute responsibility for what happened.
The odd thing is, while I do believe Clinton's naturally defensive nature gave her a tendency to prevaricate and stonewall on a level that exemplifies everything most people despise about politicians, there's little criticism of Clinton that cannot be said 10 times over about Trump. Still, if one is claiming to be absolutely and personally responsible for something, they have necessarily abandoned the idea of holding other people or factors even partially responsible. It seems that while Clinton SAYS she is "absolutely" responsible, she really feels that she is only "partially" responsible (and a relatively small part at that).
Clinton is, after all, only human and accepting responsibility for failures is very difficult. At least she tried. Again, Trump's failures in this regard are incomparably worse.
Clinton has said in post-election interviews that she accepts "absolute personal responsibility" for losing the election. That acknowledgment is not compatible at all with the nature of her new book (at least the parts described here). "Absolute" is defined as "not qualified or diminished in ANY way; total." Clinton has a right to tell her side of things just like anyone else. But she can't point fingers at the media, Sanders or even Trump while simultaneously claiming to take absolute responsibility for what happened.
The odd thing is, while I do believe Clinton's naturally defensive nature gave her a tendency to prevaricate and stonewall on a level that exemplifies everything most people despise about politicians, there's little criticism of Clinton that cannot be said 10 times over about Trump. Still, if one is claiming to be absolutely and personally responsible for something, they have necessarily abandoned the idea of holding other people or factors even partially responsible. It seems that while Clinton SAYS she is "absolutely" responsible, she really feels that she is only "partially" responsible (and a relatively small part at that).
Clinton is, after all, only human and accepting responsibility for failures is very difficult. At least she tried. Again, Trump's failures in this regard are incomparably worse.
84
I don't think it's fair to read into each of hillary's words as though there's no room for nuance - she took responsibility, but the phrasing she used doesn't automatically imply she meant "not qualified or diminished in any way; total" responsibility for every single event or outcome. When people speak, even politicians like Hillary Clinton, they do not necessarily check the oxford english dictionary to ensure it is compatible with every possible interpretation. She could easily have just meant she "absolutely" takes personal responsibility.
In truth, it doesn't even make sense that hillary could be solely responsible for something as vast and complex as the result of a national election, and to assume she meant she was is to misunderstand the nature of such a complex event.
People seem to want Hillary to say "It was all my fault and only my fault and nothing that happened during this election that was beyond my control could possibly have had any impact on the result. Oh and Bernie Sanders is amazing."
In truth, it doesn't even make sense that hillary could be solely responsible for something as vast and complex as the result of a national election, and to assume she meant she was is to misunderstand the nature of such a complex event.
People seem to want Hillary to say "It was all my fault and only my fault and nothing that happened during this election that was beyond my control could possibly have had any impact on the result. Oh and Bernie Sanders is amazing."
4
@Anonymous: I agree with a lot of what you say. I DON'T believe Clinton actually IS "absolutely" responsible for losing the election, I just maintain that she CHOSE to make an unqualified statement that she was absolutely responsible. In fact, few people bear "absolute" responsibility for anything unless that responsibility is artificially placed upon them as a matter of law (ex: I understand that people can be held absolutely responsible for writing a bad check even if they wrote it in good faith and had good reasons for believing it would clear).
That said, I respectfully disagree with your statement that I am being unfair in my comment above. In general, whether in Oxford's dictionary or in casual conversation, the word "absolute" cannot reasonably be interpreted as "not absolute." In the specific case of Clinton, one of the things I like and admire most about her is her near obsessive and well-documented commitment to preparing for debates, interviews and even farcical 11-hour Congressional hearings. She is also a career politician and trial lawyer. She parses words or makes absolute statements by design, not impulse.
That is not me holding her to a standard of perfection. I think it was an understandable mistake to DECIDE to portray herself as absolutely responsible for the election loss in light of the many factors that led up to it, but that does not mean she was not consciously aware of the unqualified nature of her statement when she made it.
That said, I respectfully disagree with your statement that I am being unfair in my comment above. In general, whether in Oxford's dictionary or in casual conversation, the word "absolute" cannot reasonably be interpreted as "not absolute." In the specific case of Clinton, one of the things I like and admire most about her is her near obsessive and well-documented commitment to preparing for debates, interviews and even farcical 11-hour Congressional hearings. She is also a career politician and trial lawyer. She parses words or makes absolute statements by design, not impulse.
That is not me holding her to a standard of perfection. I think it was an understandable mistake to DECIDE to portray herself as absolutely responsible for the election loss in light of the many factors that led up to it, but that does not mean she was not consciously aware of the unqualified nature of her statement when she made it.
"Full disclosure: I am one of the majority of people who supported Bernie during the primaries"
Full disclosure: Bernie lost. Hillary got 3 million more votes than Bernie.
Full disclosure: Bernie lost. Hillary got 3 million more votes than Bernie.
I suppose someone should say this. I do not have anything against a woman as President. In fact, I voted for Jill Stein. What I do object to, however, is the way Mrs. Clinton ran her campaign for women only. Her slogan "Stronger Together" seemed to me to specifically exclude men. Her rallies seemed to consist only of women. To me, her campaign was sexist. She was definitely a better candidate than Trump, however, it was not smart to alienate half of the electorate with a sexist campaign. It was distasteful, and in the end, very harmful for the country.
6
Does a Stein voter have standing to complain that Clinton's campaign was "very harmful for the country." What about your vote? And the insistence of your candidate in remaining in the race?
4
"She blames racism, too, which she considers inseparable from economic anxiety, because her courting of immigrants and voters of color might have given the impression that she put their economic interests before those of disenfranchised whites."
I would put it a little differently. I think Clinton and the Democratic party as a whole have put their desire for immigrants' votes above the economic interests of working class Americans, of all races.
There is no need to invoke "racism" here, and in fact it makes little sense in describing the millions of voters who voted for a black man for president and then turned around and voted against Clinton.
How about just sticking with "economic anxiety," which is real and justified. Working class Americans know the Democratic party is not an effective advocate for their economic interests.
I would put it a little differently. I think Clinton and the Democratic party as a whole have put their desire for immigrants' votes above the economic interests of working class Americans, of all races.
There is no need to invoke "racism" here, and in fact it makes little sense in describing the millions of voters who voted for a black man for president and then turned around and voted against Clinton.
How about just sticking with "economic anxiety," which is real and justified. Working class Americans know the Democratic party is not an effective advocate for their economic interests.
13
ridiculous. EG: who are the main beneficiaries of the Affordable Care Act, if not the white working class? And Trump's tax proposals -- eg, special breaks for pass-through income -- are hardly to advance the interests of the white working class.
2
I never said Trump or Republicans are advancing the economic interests of the working class. Obviously, they aren't. The Republicans are and will likely remain the party of the wealthy.
But for that very reason, we need a Democratic party that is an effective defender of the economic interests of workers. We haven't had that in awhile.
Sure, the Affordable Care Act benefited many working class and middle class people. It was a real achievement. But it doesn't have much company if we look at Democrats' legislative record in recent decades.
Let's not set the bar too low here. Every other developed nation in the world guarantees basic health care to its citizens. Every single one, but us. In most cases, they go well beyond this and provide excellent medical care for all their citizens.
Why don't we? Is it because Americans don't want guaranteed health care? No. It's because Democrats, for the most part, can't deliver on policies that improve economic security and share wealth more equitably. It's because we've put too many Clinton types in leadership positions over the years.
Time for a real progressive Democratic party, jng. It will be good for the country.
But for that very reason, we need a Democratic party that is an effective defender of the economic interests of workers. We haven't had that in awhile.
Sure, the Affordable Care Act benefited many working class and middle class people. It was a real achievement. But it doesn't have much company if we look at Democrats' legislative record in recent decades.
Let's not set the bar too low here. Every other developed nation in the world guarantees basic health care to its citizens. Every single one, but us. In most cases, they go well beyond this and provide excellent medical care for all their citizens.
Why don't we? Is it because Americans don't want guaranteed health care? No. It's because Democrats, for the most part, can't deliver on policies that improve economic security and share wealth more equitably. It's because we've put too many Clinton types in leadership positions over the years.
Time for a real progressive Democratic party, jng. It will be good for the country.
1
I feel bad for Hillary Clinton. James Comey, Russian meddling, Bernie Sanders, and the email scandal will eventually be footnotes in the history books, but Hillary Clinton will always be remembered as the person the lost to Donald Trump.
4
I, like others writing on this page, voted for Secretary Clinton. But I did so with great trepidation and a belief that she was unable to own up to her own serious and ominous mistakes as Secretary of State and US Senator. She voted for the invasion of Iraq as a Senator and urged President Obama to intervene in Libya. Her peculiar attraction to the military was worrying and she seemed to be someone who as President would further the militarization of America's foreign policy. Naturally this would mean the continuation of America's attempt at nation building while exporting our political and economic arrangements everywhere in the world and galloping around the globe intervening militarily . Secretary Clinton's supporters were constantly gushing, as they contemplated what office they would occupy in the West Wing once the irritation of an election was concluded, that Ms. Clinton was the most qualified candidate in US history. Unbelievable!! Ms. Clinton ran twice and lost twice. She was neither a good politician or candidate and incredibly seemed to sideline the best politician in the US, the twice elected Presidet, her husband Bill Clinton. I only wish that Governor Jerry Brown had run and won the nomination and will consider running in 2020.
3
"More persuasive is Clinton’s contention that presidential politics, especially compared to parliamentary politics, favors arena-filling showmanship rather than the quieter, detail-oriented realism she prefers."
Old news. Nothing insightful.
Old news. Nothing insightful.
2
"It’s hard to buy the idea that she suffered disproportionately from charges of untrustworthiness or inauthenticity simply because she was a woman." It's not hard to believe. Read the next sentences. Yes, others have been accused of "untrustworthiness or inauthenticity." Yes, she suffered disproportionately. Yes, it was because she was a woman.
People who are certain that Clinton lost because she was inauthentic or because liberals picked on the rust belt might consider what it says that the Electoral College chose a bullying bragging billionaire born in New York with a well documented history of exploitation and greed over a genuinely middle class-born woman with a long authentic history of battling for the little guy.
And yet, though she did not "win" she did win the votes of a majority of Americans.
People who are certain that Clinton lost because she was inauthentic or because liberals picked on the rust belt might consider what it says that the Electoral College chose a bullying bragging billionaire born in New York with a well documented history of exploitation and greed over a genuinely middle class-born woman with a long authentic history of battling for the little guy.
And yet, though she did not "win" she did win the votes of a majority of Americans.
18
a long authentic history of battling for the little guy
================
It's obvious to most of us that Hillary has a long authentic history of stuffing her pockets with money
================
It's obvious to most of us that Hillary has a long authentic history of stuffing her pockets with money
1
One thing I feel more than anything after this election is that our system is simply too undemocratic. It's incredible, hard to believe, that a candidate could win the popular vote by almost 3,000,000 votes and still not be president. Twice in this century Democrats have had the larger vote total and still did not gain the presidency. That is simply not fair and not right. And the fact that California with a population of 40,000,000 has two senators just like Wyoming with its population of 600,000 is also hard to keep accepting. We need major, fundamental democratic reform and people need to begin insisting on it.
14
California does have the advantage of voting as a bloc so winning California by even one vote provides a swing of 110 electoral votes. California would be the most sought after prize if it didn't automatically give all its electoral votes to the same party. When California was a swing state 30 years ago, it received the lions share of campaigning. Now it's just the place where candidates go for money. It's a tragedy that Hillary visited California 70 times when it wasn't in play and Wisconsin only once. Hard to blame that blunder on the Russians.
6
How do you write a best seller about losing the Presidency to a game show host- and be serious?
23
Welcome to America 2017
Seriously doubt this will be a best seller
Not surprisingly Clinton fails to grasp the two fundamental problems with her candidacy: 1) she was the wrong woman at the right time. Yes the issues she points out are valid but her baggage - most especially her newfound wealth, dependent partly on speechifying - did, on its face, prevent many voters from identifying with her and considering sensitive to their problems and 2) she was unable to articulate a catchy, concise message/slogan that conveyed her core position. She had some of the so-called most creative Democratic communicators on her team and it remains a mystery as to why they, and she, couldn't create a message as effective as "Yes We Can" or "Make America Great Again."
33
No, Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton was the right woman at exactly the right time - that is why Putin was so scared he helped get The Con Don elected.
Brainwashed fox so-called news watchers and brainwashed news people who care only about keeping their jobs are the real culprits - particularly the women who kept harping on e-mails and other inconsequential information instead of telling Americans what her great plans were.
Sexism and racism are rampant in America and, since the vast majority of us to not agree with either, it's time for WE THE PEOPLE to elect "leaders" who will put an end to both. NOW!
Brainwashed fox so-called news watchers and brainwashed news people who care only about keeping their jobs are the real culprits - particularly the women who kept harping on e-mails and other inconsequential information instead of telling Americans what her great plans were.
Sexism and racism are rampant in America and, since the vast majority of us to not agree with either, it's time for WE THE PEOPLE to elect "leaders" who will put an end to both. NOW!
44
They couldn't come up with a message because the principal couldn't answer the basic question--"Why am I running?"--with anything other than "It's my turn." The motto "I'm with Her," while the exact opposite of what a powerful message would have been ("She's with Us!"), actually was rather fitting.
I voted for Hillary, but want her to retire from the world stage. This morning on NPR I heard her being interviewed about her new book. She was cringeworthy—insisting on staying in the public eye, thinking she’s still relevant. During the Republican ‘debates’ I was surprised that none of Trump’s competitors found a way to cut him off at the knees. That Hillary, with all her experience, ego, cunning, and elitist education at Wellesley and Yale, also couldn’t figure out how to castrate Trump proves she’s simply an ‘also ran’ and not the major figure she thinks she is.
101
Wow. And who are you to determine that she has nothing more to contribute? What have you contributed?
Well, had she "castrated" Trump, it would have simply fed into those who hated her for being as stubborn about her plans as any man, you know, for being a demanding, opinionated woman.
You also seem to object to a woman having a top education, I see. Not too feminist from my perspective.
And someone who has put energy into many areas over the years - medical reforms, children's rights. International affairs - certainly at 70 doesn't have to retire to a rocking chair.
She has flaws and she has strengths. Good luck on finding a candidate: female, with perfect views, magically pure funding and charisma.
You also seem to object to a woman having a top education, I see. Not too feminist from my perspective.
And someone who has put energy into many areas over the years - medical reforms, children's rights. International affairs - certainly at 70 doesn't have to retire to a rocking chair.
She has flaws and she has strengths. Good luck on finding a candidate: female, with perfect views, magically pure funding and charisma.
Did you watch the debates? Hillary slaughtered Trump in every one of them. These were the most one-sided debates in American history. The fact that a large minority of the American people couldn't recognize that or didn't care is an indictment of them, not an indication that Hillary failed.
HRC claims she ran a traditional Presidential campaign with carefully thought out policies and coalitions. I think not. Every campaign commercial of hers that I saw showed Trump giving a speech and CHILDREN reacting in disbelief. Her campaign was entirely that Trump, and his supporters, were unworthy of of consideration. It was purely anti-Trump. Her only message was that she was not Trump. And what type of coalition excludes White males? Did she forget about them? Not a day, and a Tweet, goes by that I am not astounded that Trump is President. This book will remind us of what an unworthy candidate was HRC and how Trump won.
56
As Nate Silver recently pointed out, Hillary ran the most negative campaign in history
http://freebeacon.com/politics/nate-silver-clintons-2016-campaign-negati...
http://freebeacon.com/politics/nate-silver-clintons-2016-campaign-negati...
It is difficult to work up much sympathy for Mrs. Clinton, though in the face of Trumpist monomania a Clinton presidency feels more palatable now than it did a year ago. She and her husband and their clueless circle of insiders embody much of what is wrong with establishment politics--I won't bother enumerating the lies and half-truths, the disdain for the concerns of working people, the obsession with money. But I do find insupportable the notion that her loss in November had anything to do with the press. I read the Times and Post and the mainstream blogs daily throughout the primaries and the run up to the general election, and, while there were legitimate reservations expressed about her handling of the private email server (even Obama was appalled by Clinton's cluelessness), press coverage was by and large respectful and supportive. Mrs. Clinton lost because she ran a terrible campaign; her aides gave her bad advice, she trusted algorithms more than voters, and she didn't articulate a message that resonated with millions of Americans who are hurting. The three million popular votes are a distraction--she should have beaten Trump by ten million votes, and would have, if her political instincts had been better.
51
Mrs. Clinton disappeared from the campaign trail for a long time after the convention. She gave no press conferences and held no rallies. . The Donald was making two and three appearances every day, flying all over the country, attracting yuuuge crowds, and talking to the press. If she didn't get much press coverage she had only herself to blame as she gave the press and the voters nothing. Her campaign was certainly backed by the MSM when it came to endorsements.
3
I hope Americans are prepared to take a good hard look in the mirror when the next woman runs for President and people start looking for excuses why they just can't vote for her.
53
From one woman in response to another: biology is not the deciding factor on which most people base their votes, or, I hope, choose a candidate. How'd you like Carly Fiorina?
We need a canny, direct, intelligent, plain-spoken, bold leader, and since those people seem to be few, gender--or race--make absolutely no difference.
We need a canny, direct, intelligent, plain-spoken, bold leader, and since those people seem to be few, gender--or race--make absolutely no difference.
10
Many who did vote for her did so reluctantly, and only did so because she wasn't Trump. She didn't lose because she was a woman, she lost because she was Hillary Clinton. I voted for her, but I have never felt so wrong about a vote in my life, and I have never before voted for a candidate simply to keep another particular candidate from winning. She should do whatever she wants and write as many books as she wants in her retirement, but if she pushes to run for any office again, and the DNC again anoints her, count me out as a Democrat.
4
If the next woman candidate runs a clueless campaign copied from Clinton she will have the same result. If the die hard Clinton fans keep blaming her loss on that by now much overused word "misogyny" their candidate will lose voters. If the campaign is all about some dumb glass ceiling, if the campaign is about "being with her," condemning other women who don't vote for the woman candidate to hell, and call all opponents, whether they are Dems, Independents or Repbulicans names like nutty, deplorable, it will cost them voters.
Most of all, this woman can't tell you why she wants to be president other than to make some kind of history, it she can't speak about the Democratic platform and positions but just lists the shortcomings of her opponent she will lose voters. Most voters don't go online and read the platform. If she decides she can take a vacation from campaigning in the middle of the summer she will probably lose just like Clinton and no voter will feel guilty about not voting for her,
Most of all, this woman can't tell you why she wants to be president other than to make some kind of history, it she can't speak about the Democratic platform and positions but just lists the shortcomings of her opponent she will lose voters. Most voters don't go online and read the platform. If she decides she can take a vacation from campaigning in the middle of the summer she will probably lose just like Clinton and no voter will feel guilty about not voting for her,
3
Saw the TV interview - will not buy your book.
I voted for you by default - Hobson's choice.
You were so insulated from reality in your campaign - you understood young, tech rich, non white upper middle class.
Your never did and still don't understand the white, under $50,000, working man & woman, some with or without college, but having brains to know you did not understand their lives and needs and NEVER WOULD!
Yes, you lost the election with the last dump of e mail issues but even without that event, trump would still have won because you never tried to understand OUR ANGER AND ISSUES.
We are fiscally conservative but socially progressive. But we weren't young and rich and pretty enough for you.
We didn't want to hear Makalmore or whatever pop star at your events we wanted to hear ISSUES AND IDEAS!!
You and your ego lost the election - i can't believe your staff was so kool aide drunk they didn't slap you into reality.
I voted for you by default - Hobson's choice.
You were so insulated from reality in your campaign - you understood young, tech rich, non white upper middle class.
Your never did and still don't understand the white, under $50,000, working man & woman, some with or without college, but having brains to know you did not understand their lives and needs and NEVER WOULD!
Yes, you lost the election with the last dump of e mail issues but even without that event, trump would still have won because you never tried to understand OUR ANGER AND ISSUES.
We are fiscally conservative but socially progressive. But we weren't young and rich and pretty enough for you.
We didn't want to hear Makalmore or whatever pop star at your events we wanted to hear ISSUES AND IDEAS!!
You and your ego lost the election - i can't believe your staff was so kool aide drunk they didn't slap you into reality.
34
So, what are your issues? Why are you so angry? DId you look at her fiscal policies? They were fiscally conservative in keeping the deficit low and restoring the treasury and making sure the wealthy paid their fair share. The Tech rich non white upper middle class? Thats what this country is now. White rural and under $50k? sure I get you have issues and anxieties and both she and Obama tried to address them with job re-training programs that would have trained you for jobs in the new economy and helped you go to school or skilled trades. Did you read those policies? She spoke of them often. Even during the debates. So again I ask, why are you so angry? What issues that mattered to you did she not cover? Because her campaign platform addressed lots for you.
7
You were clearly not listening, since Clinton came with plenty of ideas to combat the many problems of working class people. All we heard from Trump was a bunch of one-liners and lies.
6
So Because you didn't like the hamburger you ordered the dung sandwich instead??? I learned a long time ago that anger makes you do stupid things. Maybe one day you'll learn that lesson as well.
3
Thank you for the analysis of Hillary's book.
I voted for her only because she is more intelligent and experienced than the clown we now have as a president. I won't buy the book because Hillary Clinton still doesn't get it that one of the main reasons she lost the election is because the new, rich Progressive Democratic Party represented by the Clintons and Obama long ago lost the appeal to the values it held out to the working class of America.
Even if that appeal were somehow regained, I doubt America can get deprogrammed to overcome the almost 30 years damaging effect of their hypnotic trance to opinions instead of constructive thought and their allegiance to one party rule of the Republican Party in America.
If you think I'm wrong, just look at the pictures of the fanatical screaming True Believers at Trump's recent gathering that was pictured in the New York Times.
I voted for her only because she is more intelligent and experienced than the clown we now have as a president. I won't buy the book because Hillary Clinton still doesn't get it that one of the main reasons she lost the election is because the new, rich Progressive Democratic Party represented by the Clintons and Obama long ago lost the appeal to the values it held out to the working class of America.
Even if that appeal were somehow regained, I doubt America can get deprogrammed to overcome the almost 30 years damaging effect of their hypnotic trance to opinions instead of constructive thought and their allegiance to one party rule of the Republican Party in America.
If you think I'm wrong, just look at the pictures of the fanatical screaming True Believers at Trump's recent gathering that was pictured in the New York Times.
6
As a Californian I was lucky because I could stand on principle and not vote for HRC knowing that Trump could not win the state. She was and is a mess. I haven't read her book and don't plan to waste my time with her excuses and self -justifications - her lies and delusions. The excerpts that have been publicized are enough to turn one's stomach. She would do better to hang her head in shame and walk off into the sunset.
39
"It’s hard to buy the idea that she suffered disproportionately from charges of untrustworthiness or inauthenticity simply because she was a woman."
It pains me to see these words coming from a female writer... in the New York Times, no less.
A recent Harvard analysis of the media coverage during the election shows that about 60% of Trump's media coverage was about his issues and policy proposals, while for Hillary, around 60% of her coverage was about scandals. This despite Trump's scandals being more numerous and more severe in nature. Evidence that this woman was disproportionately distrusted in the media compared to her male counterpart is rarely presented so clearly.
Unfortunately, this reviewer made the same mistake the Times did during the election: focusing on a perverse personality analysis of Hillary Clinton in the name of "balance" instead of focusing on what happened.
It pains me to see these words coming from a female writer... in the New York Times, no less.
A recent Harvard analysis of the media coverage during the election shows that about 60% of Trump's media coverage was about his issues and policy proposals, while for Hillary, around 60% of her coverage was about scandals. This despite Trump's scandals being more numerous and more severe in nature. Evidence that this woman was disproportionately distrusted in the media compared to her male counterpart is rarely presented so clearly.
Unfortunately, this reviewer made the same mistake the Times did during the election: focusing on a perverse personality analysis of Hillary Clinton in the name of "balance" instead of focusing on what happened.
535
Are you saying female writers should have a parti pris?
1
Part of this imbalance lies in the fact that Trump's takes on issues were sensational and new, whereas hers were old p.c. news and boring.
Another part is produced by their own differing campaign strategies: Trump almost whored the press, Clinton ducked it (no press conferences e.g.) for fear of questions about the scandals making her look bad. Trump was prepared to out-bully such questions and to push them aside and into an unheeded corner with new, deflecting braggadocio, fresh record setting, scandalous display of daring, crazy brazenness, challenging political correctness norms, Apparently Clinton had to do some serious wrestling with a bad conscience, Trump not so much, as he successfully and seemingly fearlessly bluffed and shouted it down. Just that attitude divide, all by itself, might have made the difference at the polls.
Both were baggaged, but Hillary's baggage was that of a decades long Washington insider, a mythical figure not looked upon kindly, and Trump's baggage was outshone by his make-believe facade as a successful businessman.
Trump added a promise for the Rust Belt, for white spite, and for the pro-life pious, Hillary for women's rights and issues (and incremental change, what a blast of a promise!).
No small feat she still won the popular vote, at the face of it. America is way more grown-up as the kindergarten noise spread by its media.
Another part is produced by their own differing campaign strategies: Trump almost whored the press, Clinton ducked it (no press conferences e.g.) for fear of questions about the scandals making her look bad. Trump was prepared to out-bully such questions and to push them aside and into an unheeded corner with new, deflecting braggadocio, fresh record setting, scandalous display of daring, crazy brazenness, challenging political correctness norms, Apparently Clinton had to do some serious wrestling with a bad conscience, Trump not so much, as he successfully and seemingly fearlessly bluffed and shouted it down. Just that attitude divide, all by itself, might have made the difference at the polls.
Both were baggaged, but Hillary's baggage was that of a decades long Washington insider, a mythical figure not looked upon kindly, and Trump's baggage was outshone by his make-believe facade as a successful businessman.
Trump added a promise for the Rust Belt, for white spite, and for the pro-life pious, Hillary for women's rights and issues (and incremental change, what a blast of a promise!).
No small feat she still won the popular vote, at the face of it. America is way more grown-up as the kindergarten noise spread by its media.
2
Mrs Clinton, like most of her followers, is really good at playing the victim.
1
A lot of people seem to be questioning her right to even write this book. Do you think they'll voice the same objections when Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders writes their books? Do you think those books will be subjected to the same sort of line by line scrutiny? Once again Clinton is being held to a different standard than everyone else. Let's face it. The people who are criticizing Clinton for writing this book would be finding some reason to criticize her anyway.
She's earned the right to have her say about the campaign and I'm glad she wrote this book. I'm also glad she's made it clear that she won't be running again. Now it's time for Biden and Sanders to make the same announcement. These people all have a place on the political landscape, but their time as Presidential candidates is over. All three of them need to put their energies towards supporting a new generation of leaders.
She's earned the right to have her say about the campaign and I'm glad she wrote this book. I'm also glad she's made it clear that she won't be running again. Now it's time for Biden and Sanders to make the same announcement. These people all have a place on the political landscape, but their time as Presidential candidates is over. All three of them need to put their energies towards supporting a new generation of leaders.
56
I have a problem with Hillary Clinton charging upward of $600 a ticket to see her at her book tour. I have even heard of prices of $3000. She already has plenty of money. So why the steep prices? So she can talk to more of the elites and not hear the voices of the common folk? Moves like that are why she lost the election to Donald Trump.
8
Sanders' book might be scrutinized because he was actually a candidate. Neither Biden or Sanders lost to a clown who shouldn't ever have been a candidate. Those examining the book want to know how a candidate who was touted (wrongly) as 'the most qualified candidate ever to run for president" could have blown what was supposed to be a sure thing. Three million votes, or even 10 million votes in California aren't a win and theClinton team should have known that, Inquiring minds want to know.
3
Petra, she's certainly being true to greedy form!
What went wrong? From the beginning of the cycle the DNC supported the worst candidate they could have found by strongly discouraging viable alternatives, especially those from the new generation of potential leaders. This was an election for the Democrats to lose and by demanding that an individual despised by a large segment of the voting population be their nominee, they gave the election away. The loss was not the fault of Ms. Clinton. It was the fault of the DNC as any other democratic candidate would have won the presidency and likely contributed to a down-ballot sweep. There were always too many "Never Hillary" voters.
14
Americans have been/are so desperate for a leader that will act in their best interests--especially in terms of making a living and evening the playing field in a common sense way--that the majority would put that above race or gender prejudice. The fact that Barack Obama was elected by overwhelming majorities, twice, puts the lie to HC's assertion that sexism played a defining role in her defeat. It wasn't that she is a woman. It's that she is Hillary Clinton.
18
/The fact that Barack Obama was elected by overwhelming majorities, twice, puts the lie to HC's assertion that sexism played a defining role in her defeat./
Who knew Obama was a woman?
Who knew Obama was a woman?
French nation, British nation, EXTRAPOLATION.
It was a rough start from before the campaign with her coy "I haven't decided if I'll run" for months and months on end.
No doubt being a woman she actually got far more votes than she would have as a man, so her arguments fall pretty flat.
And her surrogates did her no service whatsoever ... when Robby Mook or Jennifer Granholm appeared on Morning Joe it was downright embarrassing.
Wish her well - her intentions are generally noble, and someone you probably want on "the team", but President - not so much.
No doubt being a woman she actually got far more votes than she would have as a man, so her arguments fall pretty flat.
And her surrogates did her no service whatsoever ... when Robby Mook or Jennifer Granholm appeared on Morning Joe it was downright embarrassing.
Wish her well - her intentions are generally noble, and someone you probably want on "the team", but President - not so much.
5
The absence of reader commentary on this article demonstrates to me that Hillary and her sorry book have joined the "forever has been.” club. 21st century America's preference for showboat personalities projecting bad-boy audacity (sorry, ladies) takes its cues from Saturday Night Live.
What a president actually DOES in office may be a mystery but let him wink and tell sly jokes and the office will remain yours, guys. Oh yes, and be very rich, get mad easily, and dress a little oddly too. That's a really irresistible combination.
What a president actually DOES in office may be a mystery but let him wink and tell sly jokes and the office will remain yours, guys. Oh yes, and be very rich, get mad easily, and dress a little oddly too. That's a really irresistible combination.
6
As a librarian, I had early access to this book and read what I could before I just couldn't take anymore. This isn't a feminist manifesto; it's a whiny screed by a sore loser whose sense of entitlement runs so deep that she believes the universe conspired against her to keep her from becoming the historical icon that she is sure she is and deserves to be.
In short, Donald Trump is now the president, because Hillary Clinton was anathema to middle class voters who resented her condescension and elitist presumption that she should be crowned the first female president by a fawning public and media that understood just how wonderful, accomplished, and historically significant she was.
Well, guess what? Yeah, not so much.
This book is all the proof anyone needs as to why Hillary Clinton wasn't elected and why she should never be elected to anything ever again. She has never taken responsibility for any failure or anything negative in her entire life, so why should she start now? She casts blame. It's who she is.
This book shows that, in the event North Korea launched a nuke and Hillary were president, somehow she'd manage to make herself the victim, even while hundreds of thousands burned with radioactive fire.
Hillary Clinton is deplorable. This book proves it beyond the shadow of any doubt.
In short, Donald Trump is now the president, because Hillary Clinton was anathema to middle class voters who resented her condescension and elitist presumption that she should be crowned the first female president by a fawning public and media that understood just how wonderful, accomplished, and historically significant she was.
Well, guess what? Yeah, not so much.
This book is all the proof anyone needs as to why Hillary Clinton wasn't elected and why she should never be elected to anything ever again. She has never taken responsibility for any failure or anything negative in her entire life, so why should she start now? She casts blame. It's who she is.
This book shows that, in the event North Korea launched a nuke and Hillary were president, somehow she'd manage to make herself the victim, even while hundreds of thousands burned with radioactive fire.
Hillary Clinton is deplorable. This book proves it beyond the shadow of any doubt.
51
Reading many of the comments already posted, I am still aghast at the hatred directed at this woman who is the most qualified candidate to run for president in my 69 year old life. The massive effort, decades long, to undermine her as a person, a politician and spouse is shocking. Maybe you think you know why you despise her. Consider that others, including non-Americans, have provided you with reasons that are fake news.
74
There is a big difference between being qualified to hold the office of POTUS and being a capable candidate. The latter requires that people trust you and like you. She just wasn't trusted and liked enough. Have you forgotten the time she tried to convince folks that she had landed in Bosnia under sniper fire? That was at best a misremembering and more likely just an outright fabrication. People don't forget that kind of thing. So try to understand that for many folks there was a lot there not to like and it was totally unrelated to her karyotype. Even though she got my vote I know perfectly sane, progressive friends of mine that refused to give her theirs.
More qualified than Kerry? How's that? Either Bush? Dukakis? Kennedy, Carter, Truman, Eisenhower, Stevens, Nixon, Johnson, Humphrey, McGovern, McCain, Goldwater, Reagan, Mondale? How exactly was she the most qualified person in the past 69 years?
Funny thing, the only two candidates less qualified than her, Obama and Trump, both beat her. Explain that? Then again, don't bother; she does with her book and the reason she lost is because, as her book explains, she thinks she was not at fault... which is the reason she lost the presidency twice!
Funny thing, the only two candidates less qualified than her, Obama and Trump, both beat her. Explain that? Then again, don't bother; she does with her book and the reason she lost is because, as her book explains, she thinks she was not at fault... which is the reason she lost the presidency twice!
1
Funny thing, this, reading comments here and elsewhere, including social media, all along the lines of "who does she think she is writing a book"?
Yet one can bet the farm those very same self-appointed critics never peeped when Mitt Romney, John McCain, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, etc. all wrote books about absolutely nothing at all. Newt Gingrich, as a matter of fact, had just published his latest rants while he and Callista "campaigned" for the presidency all around the country promoting the book at various campaign venues.
But when a woman (who was historically the country's first female presidential nominee, our former First Lady and Secretary of State) writes a book, oh gasp. What a self-centered, brazen hussy to think she was ever "allowed" to do that.
Yet one can bet the farm those very same self-appointed critics never peeped when Mitt Romney, John McCain, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, etc. all wrote books about absolutely nothing at all. Newt Gingrich, as a matter of fact, had just published his latest rants while he and Callista "campaigned" for the presidency all around the country promoting the book at various campaign venues.
But when a woman (who was historically the country's first female presidential nominee, our former First Lady and Secretary of State) writes a book, oh gasp. What a self-centered, brazen hussy to think she was ever "allowed" to do that.
63
Al Franken describes Hillary as incredibly hard working and generous with her time to help others. John McCain, it seems, was an occasional drinking buddy. We have a portrait of an excellent policy wonk, a mediocre campaigner, and fuzzy messaging. We also have a press, that again and again, turned this campaign into a WWF contest; never digging deeply into Trump, because to dig deeply into Trump, would have ended his candidacy, and their ratings pronto. Never digging into policy, because policy was boring. Bernie and Hillary had a voting record that was 90 percent identical. I think she would have done well.
54
All I hear is a teenager who thought the quarterback would take her to the prom, but who asked the loud flashy girl instead. Grow up Hillary! America is over you.
18
Vladimir Putin chose the President of the United States in 2016.
Putin's attack on the United States last November is a much bigger deal (with all due respect to and with honor for those killed) than Pearl Harbor.
It cannot stand.
Putin's attack on the United States last November is a much bigger deal (with all due respect to and with honor for those killed) than Pearl Harbor.
It cannot stand.
19
As a conservative (or at least, what used to be considered one before it was hijacked by Breitbart wingnuts and the like), it pained me to vote for HRC, but I just couldn't bear to vote for the man/child occupying the office now. But this latest effort from her to "Hillarysplain" things to us reminds me of why I couldn't stand her. A self-serving trip down the River DeNial. Oh yeah, there's some sort of acknowledgement of responsibility for the outcome of things, but one always gets the feeling that in the back of her mind, behind any small share of acceptance, she's saying to herself, "Well yeah, but....".
Please. Go. Away.
Please. Go. Away.
6
Hillary's operatives ruthlessly sabotaged Bernie. However, she can't stop shedding tears for herself, because she feels that the election was stolen from her. Hm ?
31
To the pundits whose grave responsibility to be thoughtful took a back seat to sexism so deep they couldn't even see it; to the "journalists" who drove the iffy electorate away with the barrage of non-story email articles; to Bernie and his blowhards who repeated cynical attacks about Wall Street speeches but never found evidence that her speeches influenced her Senate votes nor actions as a secretary of state (never mind asking Bernie to present evidence as they now demand of Trump) ); to CNN and MSNBC and the other mainstream television outlets giddily counting the cash raked in by high ratings for yellow journalism tactics; and to anyone who thinks that history is not worth revisiting, especially by a consequential player, try alternate nostril breathing, get a grip of yourself, take responsibility for your part in destroying the best chance we all had to continue to make this a more perfect union. Hillary has taken responsibility for her part, and if you don't think she is remorseful enough, and if you think she is casting blame on the wrong people, then I am preparing for another devastating loss in 2018.
33
If her Wall Street speeches were so innocent, why wouldn't she release the transcripts? She said during one debate that she would as soon as Sanders released his, ignoring that he had none to release. She's a phony through and through.
I voted for her and wish that she had won. However, her few interviews since the election, have contained quite a bit of blaming and very little humility. Being the smartest person in the room, man or woman, isn't enough.
If Ms. Clinton had any hopes of another campaign, this may have sunk them.
If Ms. Clinton had any hopes of another campaign, this may have sunk them.
90
She doesn't. She will use her voice to really help create change in America - with or without the media/press on her side. The same way Elanor Roosevelt did.
6
She's no Eleanor Roosevelt. Not even close.
10
That time when Eleanor Roosevelt personally racked up a quarter of a billion dollars in speaking fees (plus more than $2 billion for her "charity") from special interests while she was in or contemplating a return to "public" "service"?
3
The sophomoric, brainwashed people of the press and other media continue to expect Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton to "confess" her sins - confess what SHE did wrong.
THEY are the ones who knowingly gave us The Con Don and his Top 1% Global Financial Elite Robber Baron/Radical religion Good Old Boys Cabal. Their owners are part of it - about a dozen people who control the major media in the world. Rupert Murdoch - fox so-called news, the Wall Street Journal and London Times - owns nearly half the television in the world.
Thank You, Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton for having the courage to speak out. Socially Conscious Women and Men across America and around the world are reading, listening and taking action to stop the corruption that put
The Con Don into office.
You Go, Girl! Do not let the media stifle or suppress your knowledge and ideas again.
THEY are the ones who knowingly gave us The Con Don and his Top 1% Global Financial Elite Robber Baron/Radical religion Good Old Boys Cabal. Their owners are part of it - about a dozen people who control the major media in the world. Rupert Murdoch - fox so-called news, the Wall Street Journal and London Times - owns nearly half the television in the world.
Thank You, Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton for having the courage to speak out. Socially Conscious Women and Men across America and around the world are reading, listening and taking action to stop the corruption that put
The Con Don into office.
You Go, Girl! Do not let the media stifle or suppress your knowledge and ideas again.
52
HRC is not a strong woman. She has fully embraced victimhood. How very sad for her and the young woman who used to look up to her.
7
Great review! I can't wait to read the parts where she discusses the NYT's buffoonishly poor coverage of the campaign, which all the way up to the [panicky] end stages disparaged HRC, promoted Trump, undervalued Biden, gave Obama and Comey a free pass to damage the race by omission and commission, and completely, utterly, failed to see / hear / report on the massive Russia-fake news-online-attack on America. This woman, extraordinary in whatever terms you want, made history and the NYT response was one gossipy attack after another, like a group of jealous junior-high students.
It's made my household a far bigger fan of Washington Post, and that's a first, too.
It's made my household a far bigger fan of Washington Post, and that's a first, too.
31
"We’ll be arguing about these questions for decades, surely."
Please spare us. Let's focus on the future. Secretary Clinton - and the rest of humanity - would have been better served if she wrote this book as therapy, kept it to herself, and then enjoyed the rest of her life.
Please spare us. Let's focus on the future. Secretary Clinton - and the rest of humanity - would have been better served if she wrote this book as therapy, kept it to herself, and then enjoyed the rest of her life.
176
Please speak for yourself, not humanity. Glad Secretary Clinton spoke up and out. She -- and the rest of "us" of humanity-- have been silenced enough.
9
It's only been 9 months-- not 9 years. How about we skip the disdain, Georgetown Grad, and reflect on what her candidacy meant for this nation? After all, she went further than any woman before her, and whether you personally are impatient with her or not, she might have a few valuable insights.
1
I'm sure you would do much better if you suffered a similar public defeat and humiliation.
Seeing the Jane Pauley interview brought back the pain and disappointment as did reading this review. Many of these comments give me the same intuitive feeling that I've had for a long time which is that the demonization of Hillary which began in the 90s has been insidious and most effective. I had to work at finding news and reports that did not reflect those largely irrationally negative attitudes which are blown out of proportion. She's human and has made mistakes, but so have we all. On Facebook most days of the campaign, I saw posted by the Hillary campaign, short videos of her meeting with various small groups in which she discussed their problems and possible solutions. So, over time, my perception of Hillary was shaped in a more positive way. And I thought it would really be interesting to watch her solve problems. Toward the end of the campaign, this newspaper had an article about a group of Hillary's close friends from her school days, illustrating how she had maintained these friendships over the years. A woman who has close women friends of long years duration is not the same one perceived by those who are yelling to lock her up. I see Hillary as a person who wants to solve problems and take care of people and I wonder, apparently as does Hillary, why this person has been so misunderstood. My main point here is that I had to work at finding the real person underneath the mostly obscene circus that our campaigns have become.
48
We knew before "What Happened" that Hillary Clinton was a fake, phony, fraud. This review does nothing to change that, try as the reviewer might with the "history conspired" and other nonsense.
Most interesting to me concerns Obama/Biden/Clinton. "What Happened" largely confirms that upon his election in 2008 Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton made a deal. Barack Obama would appoint Mrs. Clinton Secretary of State. She would not oppose him for the 2012 Democratic nomination. He would then support her for the 2016 Democratic nomination.
This way the president would get Hillary Clinton out of his hair as a possible Democratic presidential opponent for eight years. Out of the country as well as she traversed the world as secretary of state. Mrs. Clinton, in addition, would be tied to Obama Administration policies as a part of the Obama Administration.
Upsides for Mrs. Clinton: She could burnish her White House qualifications as secretary of state, although she could be sure to be on the scene when that worked to her advantage, as when she sat in the White House war room during the raid on Osama bin Ladin. Best of all, she would have the president’s blessing, to the exclusion of other candidates or potential candidates, to be the 2016 Democratic president nominee.
Nice for Mrs. Clinton, nice for President Obama, not so nice for Joe Biden, who carried Barack Obama's water for eight years and then, as preordained by the Obama-Clinton deal, got thrown under the bus.
Most interesting to me concerns Obama/Biden/Clinton. "What Happened" largely confirms that upon his election in 2008 Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton made a deal. Barack Obama would appoint Mrs. Clinton Secretary of State. She would not oppose him for the 2012 Democratic nomination. He would then support her for the 2016 Democratic nomination.
This way the president would get Hillary Clinton out of his hair as a possible Democratic presidential opponent for eight years. Out of the country as well as she traversed the world as secretary of state. Mrs. Clinton, in addition, would be tied to Obama Administration policies as a part of the Obama Administration.
Upsides for Mrs. Clinton: She could burnish her White House qualifications as secretary of state, although she could be sure to be on the scene when that worked to her advantage, as when she sat in the White House war room during the raid on Osama bin Ladin. Best of all, she would have the president’s blessing, to the exclusion of other candidates or potential candidates, to be the 2016 Democratic president nominee.
Nice for Mrs. Clinton, nice for President Obama, not so nice for Joe Biden, who carried Barack Obama's water for eight years and then, as preordained by the Obama-Clinton deal, got thrown under the bus.
8
Why Hillary Clinton insists on continuing to cultivate a Miss Havisham image for herself is puzzling. Will we be confronted with the image of her decaying inauguration cake into perpetuity? For heaven's sake, let it go.
25
One could write a far better, sincere, better thought book by gathering and analyzing readers' comments. This books is another massive waste of ink and paper that anyone will be able to purchase for $.50 eight months from now.
11
"she is both coroner and corpse". Very nice.
2
I do really hope Hillary Clinton will step aside and not run for office again - either at the state or national level. Two rounds of running for President of the United States is enough and she did her stint as a Senator from New York. She has "been there, done that and has the tee-shirt(s)" I am sure.
Should-a, would-a, could-a and if only - only goes so far. I won't buy the book - I lived through it.
However, I am waiting for Special Counsel Robert Mueller to present his findings on Russian election fraud and Trump's involvement, if any.
Should-a, would-a, could-a and if only - only goes so far. I won't buy the book - I lived through it.
However, I am waiting for Special Counsel Robert Mueller to present his findings on Russian election fraud and Trump's involvement, if any.
1
I have no patience with the argument that Clinton should "just go away". Like any high profile defeated candidate, she has every right to sup at the table with lucrative business opportunities, including book deals. Whether it's the "right time" is between Clinton and the publisher's marketing department. Even in defeat Clinton is held to different standards.
That being said, I usually don't bother with memoirs by politicians. Rarely, if ever are they not ghost written. However, What Happened may prove to be irresistible.
That being said, I usually don't bother with memoirs by politicians. Rarely, if ever are they not ghost written. However, What Happened may prove to be irresistible.
17
Clinton probably would have made a very competent president, and we would now be reading about how many Democratic Senators representing states that she lost might lose in 2018.
That said, there needs to be an acknowledgment by supporters of both Trump and Clinton that there were many who voted for the other to simply vote against a certain candidate. In the end, more people voted against Clinton than against Trump. This election will be read as an affirmation of no one.
That said, there needs to be an acknowledgment by supporters of both Trump and Clinton that there were many who voted for the other to simply vote against a certain candidate. In the end, more people voted against Clinton than against Trump. This election will be read as an affirmation of no one.
8
She never took off the gloves, thinking she was a shoe-in, and didn't want to rock the boat at the end; big mistake.
On "what happened" in the book, does she go into what the DNC did to sabotage Sanders? How about Clinton's questionable activities in Haiti, and how the anti-HRC voting block of Haitians in Florida may have swayed their state's, and consequently the electoral college's, results?
On "what happened" in the book, does she go into what the DNC did to sabotage Sanders? How about Clinton's questionable activities in Haiti, and how the anti-HRC voting block of Haitians in Florida may have swayed their state's, and consequently the electoral college's, results?
1
She would have been a good president, but she was an awful candidate, and we don't elect presidents. We elect candidates. In this day and age that makes a difference. When she was on CBS Sunday Morning she was asked whether her comment on Trump supporters, “You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right?" She dismissed that comment as nothing, and to me, that was and is the whole problem with Clinton. When dealing with the real world, we don't get to pick and choose. That comment - aside of whether it is accurate or not - was so dismissive to voters, that the subtext was clear. She was going to be part of the village, but only on her terms. For Clinton it was going to be a gated community - a bubble - rather than inclusive. She doesn't realize the damage that comment did to her own campaign. The idea is to attract and welcome voters, not dismiss them. Getting people who agree with you to vote for you is easy. Getting people to take a chance is a whole other skill. Sadly, Trump had that skill. Clinton did not.
5
I voted for Ms Clinton. In spite of the emails and all the other negative things. She was a shoe in to win I felt. I think she felt it too. Someone should have told her that "It would never happen in their lifetime". It could have made her more determined. As it was, so took a wait and see attitude and perhaps rested on her favored poll ratings.
The James B. Comey investigation never affected me but I do remember feeling fed up with the topic. It also didn't help that we had the first successful Socialist candidate ever to split the vote among Democratic voters. The Trump campaign was a farce but vicious. "Lock Him Up"!
It could happen.
The James B. Comey investigation never affected me but I do remember feeling fed up with the topic. It also didn't help that we had the first successful Socialist candidate ever to split the vote among Democratic voters. The Trump campaign was a farce but vicious. "Lock Him Up"!
It could happen.
5
This election, at least for our shrinking middle class, was once again about jobs.
Hillary came down on the wrong side of NAFTA, a law which created a middle class in Mexico at the expense of our own. Her early support of the Pacific Rim trade agreement (notwithstanding her later flip flop) told working class voters that she would let countries in the Pacific grow their economy at the exoense of what is left of our manufacturing base.
It's all about jobs and always will be in America.
Hillary came down on the wrong side of NAFTA, a law which created a middle class in Mexico at the expense of our own. Her early support of the Pacific Rim trade agreement (notwithstanding her later flip flop) told working class voters that she would let countries in the Pacific grow their economy at the exoense of what is left of our manufacturing base.
It's all about jobs and always will be in America.
9
Mr. Trump would have beaten any Democrat. People are sick of the swamp. including the RINOs. President Trump will win again in 2020. More conservatives will be elected to congress also.
4
"Whuu-happun'd?
1. Constituents = deplorables
2. Goldman Sachs et all - "it's what they offered"
3. Canadian Book Tour = $2454 per person to get "exclusive VIP tickets"
4. $675,000 = 3 speeches at Goldman Sachs
5. Election Hacking by Putin = Former NSA experts say it wasn’t a hack at all, but an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system. Timestamp analysis proves that it’s impossible for Russia or anyone else to have externally hacked the DNC computers. The stamps recording the download indicate that it occurred in the Eastern Daylight Time Zone at approximately 6:45 pm. This confirms that the person entering the DNC system was working somewhere on the East Coast of the United States.
6. Election Loss = Bernie's, FBI's, NYTimes', Putin's, DNC's fault - not hers.
7. The Hill blog asks" how come Bill Clinton was paid half a million dollars to give speech in Russia pending the "sure thing" Hillary election?
8. What about the $2.35 million “contribution” that the Clinton Foundation received after Secretary of State Hillary allowed the Russians to buy a controlling stake in the Uranium One company, which owns 20 percent of US uranium supplies, with mines and refineries in Wyoming, Utah, and other states, as well as assets in Kazakhstan, the world’s largest uranium producer?
9. Missing Emails = "not my fault"
10. Ratline of weapons to Syria thru Turkey to toss out Assad = "not my fault"
11. Subverting the Sanders campaign = "not my fault"
It all makes you wonder, eh?
1. Constituents = deplorables
2. Goldman Sachs et all - "it's what they offered"
3. Canadian Book Tour = $2454 per person to get "exclusive VIP tickets"
4. $675,000 = 3 speeches at Goldman Sachs
5. Election Hacking by Putin = Former NSA experts say it wasn’t a hack at all, but an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system. Timestamp analysis proves that it’s impossible for Russia or anyone else to have externally hacked the DNC computers. The stamps recording the download indicate that it occurred in the Eastern Daylight Time Zone at approximately 6:45 pm. This confirms that the person entering the DNC system was working somewhere on the East Coast of the United States.
6. Election Loss = Bernie's, FBI's, NYTimes', Putin's, DNC's fault - not hers.
7. The Hill blog asks" how come Bill Clinton was paid half a million dollars to give speech in Russia pending the "sure thing" Hillary election?
8. What about the $2.35 million “contribution” that the Clinton Foundation received after Secretary of State Hillary allowed the Russians to buy a controlling stake in the Uranium One company, which owns 20 percent of US uranium supplies, with mines and refineries in Wyoming, Utah, and other states, as well as assets in Kazakhstan, the world’s largest uranium producer?
9. Missing Emails = "not my fault"
10. Ratline of weapons to Syria thru Turkey to toss out Assad = "not my fault"
11. Subverting the Sanders campaign = "not my fault"
It all makes you wonder, eh?
20
Thank you! Your post reminds me of "Tractatus logico-philosophicus".
On a side note, a number of comments from those I presume to have been Sanders supporters, here and in the past, suggest that Bernie's failure to capture the nomination was somehow Hillary Clinton's fault. Please conduct the honest self-assessment of Bernie's campaign strategy that you prescribe for Clinton.
A few of the more obvious points to note about the Sanders campaign -
- Essentially no strategy to compete in the South, allowing Clinton to roll up significant delegate wins throughout the region
- Almost no specifics shared regarding how to pay for vast social programs touted during the campaign
- As Clinton locket up the nomination, a delusional insistence to supporters, week after week, that there was a strategy to "flip" hundreds of Super-delegates, all the while continuing attacks on Clinton, and continuing the fundraising drumbeat.
Yes, some have maintained that Hillary Clinton has whined about the election outcome as not her fault - my point is that this criticism can be made of Bernie Sanders with regard to the nominating contest.
A few of the more obvious points to note about the Sanders campaign -
- Essentially no strategy to compete in the South, allowing Clinton to roll up significant delegate wins throughout the region
- Almost no specifics shared regarding how to pay for vast social programs touted during the campaign
- As Clinton locket up the nomination, a delusional insistence to supporters, week after week, that there was a strategy to "flip" hundreds of Super-delegates, all the while continuing attacks on Clinton, and continuing the fundraising drumbeat.
Yes, some have maintained that Hillary Clinton has whined about the election outcome as not her fault - my point is that this criticism can be made of Bernie Sanders with regard to the nominating contest.
1
From the reviews & the interviews (Thomas Frank; NPR) the book sounds mostly like a collection of pity party pouts. The USA needs that for leadership? Voters ruled. Move on already.
12
Maybe She's just not as popular a candidate as she thinks she is.
The proof is in the pudding- look at our president. Average Americans are not racist, pro-Nazi neanderthals. They are not as gullible as the hardcore democrats lament. Most Americans are considered middle of the road, between parties. And yet- we voted for Trump. Even without the Russians meddling, James Comey, etc, it still would have been a close election, so that's no excuse. Why doesn't that speak more to Hillary and the Democratic party? The vorting public seea it, the politicians still don't. We voted for an unknown, a blank sheet of paper who is arguably a fascist, just because we are fed up with the Democratic candidate, and both parties in general. Instead of writing a memoir of excuses and regrets, hows about doing something productive and overhauling the party, getting some new faces out there whose names are not Clinton (or Bush).
The proof is in the pudding- look at our president. Average Americans are not racist, pro-Nazi neanderthals. They are not as gullible as the hardcore democrats lament. Most Americans are considered middle of the road, between parties. And yet- we voted for Trump. Even without the Russians meddling, James Comey, etc, it still would have been a close election, so that's no excuse. Why doesn't that speak more to Hillary and the Democratic party? The vorting public seea it, the politicians still don't. We voted for an unknown, a blank sheet of paper who is arguably a fascist, just because we are fed up with the Democratic candidate, and both parties in general. Instead of writing a memoir of excuses and regrets, hows about doing something productive and overhauling the party, getting some new faces out there whose names are not Clinton (or Bush).
5
I really liked your comment ... so true.
The Cliff Notes on why HRC lost (from the NY Daily News)
1. Bernie Sanders, for attacks on the campaign trail that “caused lasting damage” to her run. The Vermont senator — who famously gave Clinton a huge break by saying he wouldn’t focus on her “damn emails” — “had to resort to innuendo and impugning my character.” “It was beyond frustrating that Bernie acted as if he had a monopoly on political purity,” she wrote.
2. “Bernie Bros” for “harassing my supporters online” with attacks that were “ugly and more than a little sexist.”
3. Green Party Candidate Jill Stein, who “wouldn’t be worth mentioning” had she not taken tens of thousands of votes in swing states that Trump won. There "were more than enough Stein voters to swing the result, just like Ralph Nader did in Florida and New Hampshire in 2000."
4. “Sexism and misogyny,” which led to the victory of a “flagrantly sexist candidate.”
5. Russian President Vladimir Putin and Russian hackers, for working “to influence our election and install a friendly puppet.”
6. Former President Barack Obama, for not giving a national television address about the Russian hacking so that “more Americans would have woken up.” Also, for telling her to go easy on Sanders, which made her feel like she was “in a straight jacket.”
7. Former Vice President Joe Biden, for saying the Democratic Party “did not talk about what it always stood for" after campaigning for her.
.....
1. Bernie Sanders, for attacks on the campaign trail that “caused lasting damage” to her run. The Vermont senator — who famously gave Clinton a huge break by saying he wouldn’t focus on her “damn emails” — “had to resort to innuendo and impugning my character.” “It was beyond frustrating that Bernie acted as if he had a monopoly on political purity,” she wrote.
2. “Bernie Bros” for “harassing my supporters online” with attacks that were “ugly and more than a little sexist.”
3. Green Party Candidate Jill Stein, who “wouldn’t be worth mentioning” had she not taken tens of thousands of votes in swing states that Trump won. There "were more than enough Stein voters to swing the result, just like Ralph Nader did in Florida and New Hampshire in 2000."
4. “Sexism and misogyny,” which led to the victory of a “flagrantly sexist candidate.”
5. Russian President Vladimir Putin and Russian hackers, for working “to influence our election and install a friendly puppet.”
6. Former President Barack Obama, for not giving a national television address about the Russian hacking so that “more Americans would have woken up.” Also, for telling her to go easy on Sanders, which made her feel like she was “in a straight jacket.”
7. Former Vice President Joe Biden, for saying the Democratic Party “did not talk about what it always stood for" after campaigning for her.
.....
4
8. Former FBI Director James Comey, for turning her campaign “upside down” in its final days with his renewed email investigation. “Was this a bad joke?” she writes. “What the hell was Comey doing?”
9. Anthony Weiner, whose teenage sexting scandal led to Comey's new probe, and to his wife and Clinton aide Huma Abedin yelling out, "This man is going to be the death of me!"
10. Clinton’s own statement about putting coal miners out of business, which Trump repeatedly used against her and she says was the campaign moment she “regret(s) the most.”
11. Her “basket of deplorables” statement about Trump’s supporters, which was “a political gift” to her opponent. People "misunderstood me to be criticizing all Trump voters."
12. Her use of a private email server as secretary of state, which she deems “dumb” in retrospect.
13. The ongoing scandal that erupted from her email use, which she deems “even dumber.”
14. The New York Times, for focusing on her emails in reporting that "affected the outcome of the election."
15. Her “traditional” presidential campaign, which was based on “carefully thought-out policies and painstakingly built coalitions” that could not compete with Trump’s “reality TV show that expertly and relentlessly stoked Americans' anger and resentment."
16. The “godforsaken” Electoral College, which went to Trump even though Clinton crushed him in the popular vote by nearly three million votes.
....
9. Anthony Weiner, whose teenage sexting scandal led to Comey's new probe, and to his wife and Clinton aide Huma Abedin yelling out, "This man is going to be the death of me!"
10. Clinton’s own statement about putting coal miners out of business, which Trump repeatedly used against her and she says was the campaign moment she “regret(s) the most.”
11. Her “basket of deplorables” statement about Trump’s supporters, which was “a political gift” to her opponent. People "misunderstood me to be criticizing all Trump voters."
12. Her use of a private email server as secretary of state, which she deems “dumb” in retrospect.
13. The ongoing scandal that erupted from her email use, which she deems “even dumber.”
14. The New York Times, for focusing on her emails in reporting that "affected the outcome of the election."
15. Her “traditional” presidential campaign, which was based on “carefully thought-out policies and painstakingly built coalitions” that could not compete with Trump’s “reality TV show that expertly and relentlessly stoked Americans' anger and resentment."
16. The “godforsaken” Electoral College, which went to Trump even though Clinton crushed him in the popular vote by nearly three million votes.
....
2
17. Herself, for not realizing “how quickly the ground was shifting under our feet” in the national mood.
18. Hillary hate. "I have come to terms with the fact that a lot of people — millions and millions of people — decided they just didn’t like me,” Clinton writes — though she doesn’t understand the dislike. “What makes me such a lightning rod for fury? I’m really asking . . . I’m at a loss.”
18. Hillary hate. "I have come to terms with the fact that a lot of people — millions and millions of people — decided they just didn’t like me,” Clinton writes — though she doesn’t understand the dislike. “What makes me such a lightning rod for fury? I’m really asking . . . I’m at a loss.”
Was Hillary Clinton the perfect candidate? Perhaps not, but, if intelligence, competence, experience and support for most of the principles I believe in are why I vote for someone, then she earned my vote, especially when given the alternative. What saddens me is how many of my liberal, progressive, educated, affluent friends, some of them women, couldn't force themselves to vote for her. Surely, the Jill Stein voters in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania would have made the difference. After decades of character assassination by the rightwing media and the self-absorbed leftwing media, such as "The Nation," she was reduced to everyone's punching bag. Add to that our well-documented cultural dismissal of older women - unless she is a "babe" - and single-issue voters on guns, gays and abortion, she didn't stand a chance, despite all the polls. Now, we are told that women's reproductive rights, racial justice, sensible gun laws and equal pay are "identity politics" should be abandoned if Democrats want to attract working class white voters. Well, I'm glad Clinton unequivocally championed these causes, and am proud that I voted for her.
661
I don't agree with your analysis, which is self-serving, or, rather, HRC-serving.
Secretary Clinton lost an election that was hers to win by making ordinary campaigning mistakes. She should have taken her husband's advice, a master strategist if there ever was one.
It was almost as if she had never heard of the Electoral College until the day after the election.
And I voted for her.
Secretary Clinton lost an election that was hers to win by making ordinary campaigning mistakes. She should have taken her husband's advice, a master strategist if there ever was one.
It was almost as if she had never heard of the Electoral College until the day after the election.
And I voted for her.
5
yes it is the "progressive" Left that is worrisome - those who held some sort of moral selfishness (or whatever you want to call it) out and did not vote Hilary in. The folks on the Right do not concern me as much.
2
You mention single issue voters, which was also one of her problems. She built her campaign around niche groups of people and failed to address the concerns of the large voting groups. Courting gays, feminists, and women's rights advocates is fine, but how did she expect white working class people to get on board with that message? A lot of people were not necessarily against what she was promoting, they just felt like she was more concerned about niche groups than the whole.
3
The majority of the comments here, as in so much of the ambient conversation I hear, expresses a weird sense of pleasure so many of us seem to enjoy in feeling superior to this accomplished woman.
19
I hate Hillary because she lost the election to Trump. I dislike it every time I see her on tv or read a the book excerpts where the editor cuts it down to a single issue for her losing. It makes it sound like all she does is deflects with a list of reasons where she wasn't at fault. She had my vote but somehow lost the few that counted more in three states. I'm going to buy her book because I'm hope for a whole picture. I want to see what she thinks and compare my own analysis to what she says led us to where we are today. Something went wrong I'm hoping for a more complete explanation.
4
What Happened. Try a of display of arrogance on the national stage dating to 1993 as an explanation.
First, by injecting herself as the president's spouse into health care reform, fumbling badly, and mobilizing heightened opposition to reform, to the detriment hundreds of millions of Americans.
Second, by deciding as early as 2003 that she was going to run for president. At that time she had all of two years of accountable experience in public office and no executive experience ever.
Third, by presuming to turn the presidency of the United States into a family business. If she had had her way, by 2017 the roster of presidents would have read:
1989-1993 George H.W. Bush
1993-2001 Bill Clinton
2001-2009 George W. Bush
2009-2017 Hillary Clinton
Shame on both the Bush and Clinton families! In 2016 they were both at it again.
First, by injecting herself as the president's spouse into health care reform, fumbling badly, and mobilizing heightened opposition to reform, to the detriment hundreds of millions of Americans.
Second, by deciding as early as 2003 that she was going to run for president. At that time she had all of two years of accountable experience in public office and no executive experience ever.
Third, by presuming to turn the presidency of the United States into a family business. If she had had her way, by 2017 the roster of presidents would have read:
1989-1993 George H.W. Bush
1993-2001 Bill Clinton
2001-2009 George W. Bush
2009-2017 Hillary Clinton
Shame on both the Bush and Clinton families! In 2016 they were both at it again.
5
Republicans were smarter than the Democrats because they weeded out Jen Bush early.
3
What happen doenst matter, what's happening and what's coming next is what counts. And the future of democracy doesnt lay with Clinton, it lays with Sanders and the likes, the progressive forces in the UK with Corbyn, in France with Melenchon, in Spain with Podemos. Enough corporate state and wall street pupets, it's time to give the term "progressive"its true meaning.
2
Hilary beat Trump by 3 million votes. But Trump's defeat was worse than that. He was actually beaten by 6 million votes when you include third party candidates. Trump got only 45% of the popular vote. So in reality he lost in a landslide. But so did we -- the majority, along with our democracy and cherished constitutional values.
18
Justin Trudeau is Canada's prime minister and he only got 39 percent of the vote.
5
Bill Clinton won the 1992 election with only 43% of the popular vote. Do you really believe he lost in a landslide?
1
I am glad she wrote this book. She worked hard and won the popular vote. A blowhard ranting egomaniac with aptitude in nothing beat a knowledgeable, experienced, and eminently qualified candidate. As a private citizen, she has every right to write a book offering her perspective and account of the long journey of running for President of the United States. The bottom line is she is like many of us: A real person. Flawed, full of well-meaning impulses, incredibly hard-working, darned intelligent, and reflecting on not getting the job she applied for. I will buy the book to inform my opinion of this sad chapter of American history. She is a hero to me, and I am sure will be to future generations.
34
Who is going to buy this book? Democratic party members, on mandate from the cadres?
6
How does one interpret "candor" from a professional liar?
10
Whatever one wants to say about Hillary Clinton's book, at least one can assume she wrote it herself, unlike Trump's many "books."
13
And that would be one more wrong assumption.
4
many of the books Clinton claims adamently to have written she did not. look at even the simple it takes a village, nevermind the 800 page book she "wrote" while secretary of state. Trump and Clinton are similar in this regard.
1
I voted for Hillary, and it's obvious she would have been a much president than tRump. But by publishing this book so soon, when virtually no one wants to look back on such a dispiriting and unpleasant election, she displays the same political tone deafness that contributed to her defeat.
8
Well said.
Jennifer Senior writes the following about Ms. Clinton's new book:
"Why believe her? In her previous books, she measured her words with teaspoons and then sprayed them with disinfectant."
"Are there moments when “What Happened” is wearying, canned and disingenuous, spinning events like a top? Yes."
"Does it offer any new hypotheses about what doomed Clinton’s campaign? No."
Yet she still asserts that "What Happened" is worth reading. That is a confusing bit of advice since Ms. Senior seems to be able to answer the question of what happened when she writes: "It’s possible that a more inspired candidate would have won the electoral college, simple as that. Or that the Clinton brand was tarnished among black voters. Or her campaign, in spite of its extensive networks and deep pockets, failed to detect that something on the ground was wrong. Or that she should have appeared in more rural areas. Or that she couldn’t find a better way to speak to the fears of the white working class."
Since the book is about the 2016 election, does Ms. Clinton provide any insights into the primaries and nomination process conducted by the DNC? That would be interesting as it appears the nation is already cycling towards another national election, but I suspect Ms. Clinton has little to share on those issues.
Do I need to "see, for the first time, what it looks like when Clinton doesn’t spend all of her energy suppressing her irritation"? I do not think so; certainly not for 500 pages.
"Why believe her? In her previous books, she measured her words with teaspoons and then sprayed them with disinfectant."
"Are there moments when “What Happened” is wearying, canned and disingenuous, spinning events like a top? Yes."
"Does it offer any new hypotheses about what doomed Clinton’s campaign? No."
Yet she still asserts that "What Happened" is worth reading. That is a confusing bit of advice since Ms. Senior seems to be able to answer the question of what happened when she writes: "It’s possible that a more inspired candidate would have won the electoral college, simple as that. Or that the Clinton brand was tarnished among black voters. Or her campaign, in spite of its extensive networks and deep pockets, failed to detect that something on the ground was wrong. Or that she should have appeared in more rural areas. Or that she couldn’t find a better way to speak to the fears of the white working class."
Since the book is about the 2016 election, does Ms. Clinton provide any insights into the primaries and nomination process conducted by the DNC? That would be interesting as it appears the nation is already cycling towards another national election, but I suspect Ms. Clinton has little to share on those issues.
Do I need to "see, for the first time, what it looks like when Clinton doesn’t spend all of her energy suppressing her irritation"? I do not think so; certainly not for 500 pages.
78
I second the motion.
1
Ouch. An apt and considered criticism of the book review. fkohl, you should post more comments.
With all due respect, nobody was going to take the nomination from Hillary, especially a carpetbagger like Sanders, who has insulted the party for decades...the idea that the DNC needs some kind of overhaul of it's nominating process is nonsense spun from Bernie's mouth...the fact is he as much as anyone, with his 'both parties are morally corrupt' falsehoods, is the reason Trump won.
In 1998 Jesse Ventura beat two heavily funded and well minted candidates: Norm Coleman who became a US Senator and Skip Humphrey, the son of Vice President Hubert Humphrey. Watching the 2016 Presidential campaign unfold I was struck by the similarities to the Ventura campaign—and I wrote in NY Times comment forums on several occasions. I had listened to Ventura when he was a sports talk radio host in Minneapolis. He had some good political ideas but he was also unhinged personally. Ventura used the same advertising agency that ran Paul Wellstone's insurgent campaign against 6 term Republican Senator Rudy Boschwitz. Northwood's advertisements for Ventura featured the Jesse Ventura action figure, need I say more.
The campaign appealed to the disenfranchised voter who normally wouldn't show up on election day. Both of the mainline candidates came away scratching their heads. There is nothing you could say that made sense. Except that they weren't Ventura: they were normal, boring, smart candidates. Everything Ventura was running against.
Hillary met the enemy and it was her. I voted for her. A lot of people voted for her but it didn't matter. It didn't matter for Norm Coleman or Skip Humphrey. Someone needs to out Trump Trump or he needs to fail badly in the executive branch like Jesse Ventura did in Minnesota to become a one term Governor. You don't want to vote for your president to fail because America would suffer. But I don't know who could Trump Trump.
The campaign appealed to the disenfranchised voter who normally wouldn't show up on election day. Both of the mainline candidates came away scratching their heads. There is nothing you could say that made sense. Except that they weren't Ventura: they were normal, boring, smart candidates. Everything Ventura was running against.
Hillary met the enemy and it was her. I voted for her. A lot of people voted for her but it didn't matter. It didn't matter for Norm Coleman or Skip Humphrey. Someone needs to out Trump Trump or he needs to fail badly in the executive branch like Jesse Ventura did in Minnesota to become a one term Governor. You don't want to vote for your president to fail because America would suffer. But I don't know who could Trump Trump.
3
Yes. Comey's effectively making Anthony Wiener the face of the Democratic Party for the last 10 days of the election almost certainly made the difference. But losing most of the Midwest and Pennsylvania to a man like Trump was/is the main story. The lesson, I think, is don't let the DNC pre-nominate candidates. They love insiders. Voters don't. The liabilities of the "Clinton brand" should have been obvious. The other factors you mention only make this decision seem more arrogant,
4
I'd have keeled over dead if the Times had realistically assessed the apparent casting of blame towards everyone but the author. I'll also keel over dead if this comment makes it through to post.
6
Rest in peace, Elysse.
2
Losing must be very hard, especially when just about everyone assumed Clinton would win. Unfortunately, she blames everyone but herself and those around her. Her disingenuousness and no doubt related resistance to therapy continue to astound. Senior's review hints at this with this awkward phrasing, "the ever-present animus toward her, which remains, she writes, something she doesn’t fully understand." Clinton would be better off putting down her "tiny knives" and examining her "storage unit of grudges." Then she might truly find clarity and sympathy.
110
Clinton should acknowledge her mistakes, but she would be denying reality if she ignored all of the external factors over which she had no control that contributed to the outcome. Why is it so hard for people to accept, simultaneously:
1. That she made mistakes, AND
2. There were several external factors over which she had no control that contributed to the outcome.
The irrational hate for her is REAL, not imagined. I don't understand it either.
1. That she made mistakes, AND
2. There were several external factors over which she had no control that contributed to the outcome.
The irrational hate for her is REAL, not imagined. I don't understand it either.
Yes, because nothing endears a female public figure to the general populace like the perception that she's one therapy session or missed med away from a mental breakdown. She owes us nothing more to earn our sincere sympathy. Why should she have to have super-human qualities like grudgelessness in order to win anyone's approval? With all the hateful, sexist rhetoric that has surrounded her throughout her public life, it is no wonder she has grudges and would avail them to us only once she's finally done running for public office. I, for one, am impressed she's been able to keep those "tiny knives" hidden for so long. Does it make her appear less approachable, more guarded and private, perhaps. But it also makes her more downright impressive. She can keep going, keep fighting no matter what is slung at her.
7
I'm at chapter 12 and this is not my impression of the book. Have you read it? The portion where HRC mentions that Obama told her that he believed she was the best option for president did not come off as little grudges. She said that she knew the high regard Obama had for Biden and other potential nominees and he asked her to run. That fact meant a lot to her. It wasn't a damn grudge against Biden. I'm still at the beginning and of course HRC does quite a bit of complaining, but I don't see the animus that this reviewer puts forth and the section used to illustrate it falls flat. I recommend reading the book.
4
Comey indeed let the Democratic Party and the country down.
If he had rightly said that he was in favor of indicting HRC for her e-mail misdeeds the Party would have replaced her with let us say Biden and he would have won in a landslide.
We never saw her here in WI during the campaign. I hope she has the self awareness not to show up here to make money touting her book.
HRC lost to the most unpopular and unqualified Republican candidate in modern times.
Even if Putin had KGB thugs in every polling place, Comey had not said HRC was irresponsible in her e-mail dealings and Sanders had not been so widely appealing she still should have won.
It was a terrible campaign and a very bad campaigner.
If he had rightly said that he was in favor of indicting HRC for her e-mail misdeeds the Party would have replaced her with let us say Biden and he would have won in a landslide.
We never saw her here in WI during the campaign. I hope she has the self awareness not to show up here to make money touting her book.
HRC lost to the most unpopular and unqualified Republican candidate in modern times.
Even if Putin had KGB thugs in every polling place, Comey had not said HRC was irresponsible in her e-mail dealings and Sanders had not been so widely appealing she still should have won.
It was a terrible campaign and a very bad campaigner.
1
For all the deniers in this post column, it is obvious that you/they have not gotten rid of your vitriol. Hillary has every right in life to tell her story, as much as the rest of us have to say it and be validated. Agreement or not with her platform, you already defeated her on the campaign, now you want o defeat her on her writings. YOU get over it and await your reward for the choices you made.
13
She obviously has the right to have her book prominently promoted by the New York Times, and many other rights you and I don't have. Hence people's discomfort with reading it.
5
Three words come to mind whenever I think of Mrs. Clinton - "Takes no responsibility". It is always the fault of someone else.
12
Same old arrogant blindness and bile we have come to accept from the Clintons. They and the DLC they established have all but destroyed the Democratic Party, turning it from its populist roots to being the party of Wall Street and upper management. It's time for the Democratic party to move on from that dark era, refocus on its roots and return to representing working people.
10
This is why we have Pres Trump. It's all about 'me' to Hilary. Perhaps she should have written a book called "What Democrats should stand for". This is why we will have eight years of the Don.
4
Why enable public comment on this book review and give the "go away" contingent yet another opportunity to vent their sorry spleens?
2
I am one of those women who was devastated by her loss to a serial predator. I could not understand how any decent human being could vote for DJT...until I read Ta-Nehisi Coates' article in the Oct Atlanic, The First White President. For me this explains her loss as much as anything.
5
She is an incredibly resilient woman. I marvel at her strength. If I (and most people, male or female) had to deal with the unremitting storm of utter crap, we'd have become alcoholic recluses long ago. I've also never understood the"Nobody likes her" line. She has many long-time friends and people I know that know her say nothing but great things about her kindness, wit, and ability. Gee, what COULD be the problem?
21
Brilliant. Crooked Hillary and Whiny Hillary Have just discovered one more way to make money off the rest of us. Spend the rest of her life selling her whining and moaning.
Just go away. Please, just go away. --- and on the way out, please give back the Party you stole to Bernie.
Just go away. Please, just go away. --- and on the way out, please give back the Party you stole to Bernie.
10
I am one of those very upset by her defeat, still, but this morning on NPR when I heard her talking about how many suicides there are, need for jobs, misery and suffering, I suddenly realized that the people she is speaking about don't see themselves that way - they are proud libertarians, misogynists, racists. anti-science and anti- government people who don't want your sympathy. The way she saw them was going to get these people a leg up in life, but they would rather trash something and stamp on the rubble than see themselves as an underclass.
9
Just reading this review made the tears and utter disappointment return for me. I can't imagine what reading the book will do to me.
297
I can't imagine bothering to read the book, but I do wonder if she discusses her shameful speaking fees and how they helped an ancient one-trick socialist seem like a worthy candidate. When she says, "I was running a traditional presidential campaign..." it does make me wonder why she ran it without consulting someone with an awareness of show biz.
5
Dry your tears. HRC as private statesperson can be a great resource and influence going forward, if we can move beyond the fails of the 2016 campaign and election. Media isn't helping with that, but they could. Now, like anybody else, she should speak up to the atrocities we are seeing in the WH, DOJ, EPA and on and on. "What Happened," happened. Will buy this book to show support that speaking out is a good thing. To "just shut up and go away" is the worst possible solution for any of us. Because of her experience and knowledge, she does have a responsibility to speak, and she has recognized that.
4
Save yourself the trouble and the money and don't read it. Here is the cliff note... "What happened"... "everyone failed me."
3
Part feminist manifesto, huh?
THAT is why she lost.
Feminism has become toxic. It disparages men and masculinity. It lies about gender wage gaps andit exaggerates campus rape statistics while removing due process rights for men.
Women's health gets 10 time the funding as men's health.
Men get 63% more jail time for the same crime.
Men are 90% of all civil workplace fatalities.
It demands special rights for girls in SMET and ignores the plight of boys and READING.
I will never vote for a feminist. I will vote for a woman (right or left) who espouses EAGALITARIANISM.
FEMinism is a gendered word and it is sexist.
And that is why she lost.
THAT is why she lost.
Feminism has become toxic. It disparages men and masculinity. It lies about gender wage gaps andit exaggerates campus rape statistics while removing due process rights for men.
Women's health gets 10 time the funding as men's health.
Men get 63% more jail time for the same crime.
Men are 90% of all civil workplace fatalities.
It demands special rights for girls in SMET and ignores the plight of boys and READING.
I will never vote for a feminist. I will vote for a woman (right or left) who espouses EAGALITARIANISM.
FEMinism is a gendered word and it is sexist.
And that is why she lost.
31
You're entitled to your own opinion but NOT YOUR OWN FACTS!!
2
Where on the planet do you get these stats? Specifically the one related to health funding, although it's highly disputable that there's any preferential treatment for girls' STEM education.
1
I'm truly baffled by your rant. There is nothing phony about gender wage gaps. Get a grip.
2
I voted for Hillary, but in the end, she proved to be the wrong candidate and was arrogant in her presumptions of winning. When she should have been pounding the battleground states, she wasted time in places like Arizona. I find her book on this topic to be self serving.
159
Well, at least you bought it and read it. Didn't you?
4
I believe she spent a good deal of her time fund raising at expensive parties. There is only so much a girl can do.
3
Yep. Agreed Arizona was a waste of time considering what Republican election officials did to suppress the vote, reduce the chances of people being able to vote, and have their votes actually counted. A strategy by the way, that's also succeeded in other states:
1) http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2017/03/22/recorders-o...
2) https://thinkprogress.org/county-supervisor-unanswered-questions-in-why-...
3) https://navajotimes.com/opinion/essay/guest-essay-im-taking-stand-vote-s...
1) http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2017/03/22/recorders-o...
2) https://thinkprogress.org/county-supervisor-unanswered-questions-in-why-...
3) https://navajotimes.com/opinion/essay/guest-essay-im-taking-stand-vote-s...
2
The book is just a money grab for a career that is receding as fast as the waters of hurricane Irma.
What did she say after taking the money for the twenty minute speech at Goldman Sachs? "It's what they offered."
We all know, painfully, "What Happened."
What did she say after taking the money for the twenty minute speech at Goldman Sachs? "It's what they offered."
We all know, painfully, "What Happened."
138
Reminds of Joel Olsteen, "nobody asked". They all have their fans though.
Hope you are having fun with the new Goldman Sachs administration and the repeal of the Consumer Protection bureau. Thats what's happening.
4
The election was lost, in part, by small minded voters who personalize and prefer their hatreds over policy. I talked to liberal women who thought Hillary was uppity and voted for Jill stein who was obviously an empty vessel looking for attention. Women can be competitive in a way that distorts their judgement and hurts their sisters and America. These smug women still tell me they did the right thing putting down a magnificent public servant. I change the subject now or just avoid them.
For those trashing Hillary Clinton, no need to worry about it. But please keep your thoughts handy when you buy a defective product and can't do nothing due to laws or regulations protective of private industries or when your child gets some type of cancer related to contaminated water or when the next financial crisis hit. The worst personal trait of Americans is their believe that they are superior to everyone else and therefore saved from the daily struggles of others. It just takes a combination of factors to take the country in the wrong track. It's not rocket science, it's history.
224
Don't kid youself, Hillary and Bill were out for themselves. Always have been and always will be. Now, they'll try and shove Chelsea down our throats to continue their so called legacy
7
I will read this book because Hillary is brilliant, savvy, reflective, and extremely knowledgeable. What I hope is in the book, but left unsaid in the review, is her take on what seem to me are the omnipresent and now very wealthy political advisers who ushered her, and countless other Democrats, down the drain. It seems totally inexcusable that they let the Republicans have free rein to assassinate Hillary's character. Inexcusable that they had her campaigning in Texas while crucial parts of the industrial Midwest were falling to Trump. And inexcusable that after watching 16 Republican candidates trying their unsuccessful tactics against Trump, they had Hillary doing the same. The race should never have been close enough for Comey to nail the coffin lid shut.
320
Reply to Kiethofrpi: But doesn't she have the final say? She was the boss and one with a great deal of experience. Nobody led her down the garden path.
1
"It seems totally inexcusable that they let the Republicans have free rein to assassinate Hillary's character."
She did a nice job herself.
She did a nice job herself.
Hindsite is ALWAYS 20/20.
Clinton is a serial lying, money laundering, influence peddling, self-serving cynic, who enriched herself beyond anyone's wildest imagination at the expense of the American taxpayer. How these facts seem to escape her or Jennifer Senior, is the mystery that should be discussed for years to come.
51
And yet you know this while 35 years of Javertian, er, pardon me, Republican and FBI investigations, and millions of dollars spent have turned up no indictments, charges or convictions.
Talk about "at the expense of the American taxpayer."
Talk about "at the expense of the American taxpayer."
9
You know her well, huh? Don't like much her either, I can tell.
1
I don't believe there has been any examination into the vote counts in Pennsylvania, MIchigan and Illinois. Knowing that the Russians hacked into DNC's e-mails, what is the assurance that there was no way to manipulate the election count, particularly with some of the newer polling machines? Could so many women actually have voted for Trump, particularly after so many of his outrageous comments? Maybe so, but it would at least be comforting to know the vote numbers were at accurate.
27
I have my doubts too. But Hillary won Illinois and lost Ohio.
It's the states with the steel towns Pittsburgh, Youngstown, Detroit that went to Trump by very small numbers.
It's the states with the steel towns Pittsburgh, Youngstown, Detroit that went to Trump by very small numbers.
1
Whoops! I forgot to include Wisconsin.
Hill and Bill - the gifts that keep on giving.
17
tRump - the thief who keeps on taking.
9
The review omitted the heaping helping of sour grapes that she spat at Bernie and his millions of supporters. And failed to note the well documented cases of polling place and caucus shenanigans.
64
I'll wait for the book to be in the "Bargain" section, before I buy it. Until then, I hope Hillary Clinton will fade away and let us rest. She lost, with every advantage. She let us down.
32
The New York Times is at its best, which is remarkably good, when a reporter or reviewer stands on the fulcrum at the point of perfect balance and tells us a story.
5
This is beautifully written review.
6
At age 59, I proudly cast my ballot for HRC. I had voted for her in 2 primaries. She was the best hope for women, Democrats & Independents. The country lost on Election night. Her book will top the growing stack of anti-Trump & anti-Republican media. Hillary has cleared the path for the first female President, long overdue in a land that calls itself "exceptional." Madame President will happen in our lifetime.
77
"...Career riding on her husband's coattails and connections". Not. Sec. Clinton's life of distinguished public service and accomplishments would be outstanding by any yardstick. Worthwhile to get acquainted with the facts:
http://addictinginfo.com/2015/04/13/heres-a-list-of-hillary-clintons-acc...
http://addictinginfo.com/2015/04/13/heres-a-list-of-hillary-clintons-acc...
4
Who is the best example of a woman? Pray tell. And do you think they'd win? That misogyny wouldn't affect them too?? And she "rode the coattails and connections of her husband"? Really. You really think she won the US Senate, Barack O. picked her as his S of S and she won the Democratic nomination ALL because she was Bill. C.'s wife?? No talent of her own? No intelligence That is one far out there analysis. Dispiriting, too because you have such a warped perspective of her courage and her perseverance in the face of such unrepentant hate and disparagement. Qualities I'm pretty sure you admire in a man.
4
At age 60, I proudly cast my primary ballot for Bernie Sanders. Hillary was always a terrible candidate and doomed to lose. She is the worst example possible for women: someone who spent her career riding on her husband's coattails and connections. Please let her disappear from the public stage.
38
Secretary Clinton needs to pick herself up, dust herself off, and prepare to re-take the White House for the Democrats in 2020. Third time lucky.
9
God no. We can't afford to hand the Republicans another victory.
3
sexism?
misogyny?
44% of women voted for trump,
who "everyone" clearly knew was
a misogynist, a sexist and the least
qualified candidate in history. 44%!
when secretary clinton decided not
to address her supporters on election
night, she proved she was not a leader.
misogyny?
44% of women voted for trump,
who "everyone" clearly knew was
a misogynist, a sexist and the least
qualified candidate in history. 44%!
when secretary clinton decided not
to address her supporters on election
night, she proved she was not a leader.
19
She lost, at least in the electoral college. Analysis is underway (i.e., a search for someone to blame). It's long-past time to move on. In those immortal words, "Mistakes were made." I don't want to hear any more from Clinton or Kaepernick or Bannon or their ilk. Let's move on to something better.
20
What's the purpose of the electoral college when they can't prevent a clearly horrible and inadequate Trump from assuming the presidency?
6
It's to give the slave states, sorry, the red states more power.
Its to prevent Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York from electing the president.
1
I wanted the Dems to win and did vote for Hillary but my take of her loss is too much baggage. There was just one thing or another to dissuade almost everyone.
35
After almost 40 years of right wing nut jobs attacking her, it was going to be a hard slog. Considering it all, she was magnificent. If not for gerrymandering and weird right-wing anti voting actions Hillary Clinton would be president. But now we have the culmination of the GOP with a bunch of grifters, thieves and nutjobs running the country into the ground while they stuff their wallets and pockets with U.S. treasure while cutting services for the citizens and cutting taxes for themselves and their wealthy cronies. Koch Bros. anyone?
7
This isn't the first time (nor the last) that a Presidential candidate has written a book. Usually though that book is mostly *memoir / auto-biography*. Clinton, of course, has already written those books. It seems interesting and perhaps very gender-typical to feel the need to explain why things happened they way they did - almost like Clinton's own emotional compass will only be re-set once her side is heard and understood. I totally get that, but if she is listening I want her to know this: you fought hard, and true, and you will be remembered with reference and respect. You owe us nothing.
36
And, we owe her nothing..............
4
Why didn't she just title it "Excuses are like.....and my excuses stink the worst". She has yet to blame herself for what had to be the most arrogant campaign in recent history, thinking she had the election in the bag, when she couldn't be more out of touch with what the the majority of the nation wanted. When you brand your opponents supporters as "deplorables" do you really expect them to support anything you propose?
77
She should not have said 'deplorables'. Nazis, KKK, white supremacist, bigots, misogynists are DESPICABLES!
4
She didn't lose the vote.
She therefore did not lose the majority because she was "out of touch with the what the majority of the nation wanted".
Most of he nation wanted her.
She therefore did not lose the majority because she was "out of touch with the what the majority of the nation wanted".
Most of he nation wanted her.
4
Oh, Hillary give it up ... no one cares. History will write itself.
96
Speak for yourself.
5
So Hillary is the one candidate who should never write or speak again? Typical woman demeaning remark. The desire to shut women up remains in the minds of many weak men and women but the power to shut women up is long gone. This is a time for good women to talk nonstop until the bigots run out the door.
2
Hopefully it will honor "Herstory" :-)
1
What can be said, by anybody. She blew it. She blew it by not living up to the (old) Democratic Party, by not optic for change, by pretending all is well, by not promoting a positive program -- minimum wage, health-care for all, feel state college, curb the banks. She really was not interested in any of these. So she blew it.
77
"The best, most poignant parts of “What Happened” reveal the Hillary Clinton that her inner circle has assured us was lurking beneath the surface all along"
She might have won, had she shown us that.
She might have won, had she shown us that.
107
Hum...Is that also required of a male candidate I wonder...
10
The media would have crucified her if she did show us that. Look a the "deplorables" moment. That was the real Hillary. And what did she get for it? The same thing she got when she said "I guess I could stay home and bake cookies" in the 90s... a media firestorm of negative coverage on the left in the name of "balance" and hateful rhetoric from the right.
9
you're not her inner circle, friend or acquaintance, so she does not owe you, me or anyone that. except her family and friends.
5
I wish more attention were being paid to Bernie Sanders Guide To Political Revolution, a new book by the Vermont senator which serves as an upbeat and encouraging guide to young voters about how government works and how to change the future. Instead, we'll get endless reviews of and chatter about Hillary's book, a bitter and self-pitying reminiscence that smacks of hucksterism.
142
Yea, let's support the demagogues who promise the moon on a wing and a prayer. :/
37
I am not happy with Sanders' Revolution group 's influence here in Montana. They supported a weak candidate for our lone congressional seat-maybe because he had done folk concerts locally for Bernie here.
I am Hillary's age snd , yeah, she reminds me of soneone who would have had no time for me in high school. Still, I wonder what accomplishments Bernie has done except bring hone the bacon for Vetmonters-any senator's job. I went to his rally here and people cheered the most when he promised free college.
And , moving to today, the Drmocratic Party seems torn into angry factions-and Bernie is not even a Democrat. Clinton made big mistakes in her csmpaign and the Russians did their best to turn people against her. Still, I wish Sanders had not run. For all his firey rhetoric, it felt like it was all about him. I still
don't understand why he would not release his tax returns. When I asked my daughter that ( and other Bernie criticisms) during the primary, she cursed at me-sonething she has never ever done before. He seemed to have that affect on people.
I am Hillary's age snd , yeah, she reminds me of soneone who would have had no time for me in high school. Still, I wonder what accomplishments Bernie has done except bring hone the bacon for Vetmonters-any senator's job. I went to his rally here and people cheered the most when he promised free college.
And , moving to today, the Drmocratic Party seems torn into angry factions-and Bernie is not even a Democrat. Clinton made big mistakes in her csmpaign and the Russians did their best to turn people against her. Still, I wish Sanders had not run. For all his firey rhetoric, it felt like it was all about him. I still
don't understand why he would not release his tax returns. When I asked my daughter that ( and other Bernie criticisms) during the primary, she cursed at me-sonething she has never ever done before. He seemed to have that affect on people.
8
Sanders' new book? I'd rather read Mao's little red book. Or Lenin's "the state and revolution" At least they wont profit by it.
5
This review, along with every thing else I've ever heard Clinton claim, proves that Hillary is the least self-aware person who aspired to be a world leader. She just doesn't get what she lacked as a candidate and as a leader. Let's face it, elections are about popularity, and she was unpopular. She blames sexism but the truth is that she never came up with a single good idea or an inspiring message. She is so adept at blaming others. I want an apology to the people from Clinton for screwing up the most crucial election in the planet's history. Instead, she offers an apology for why she failed. The Clintons were damaged goods after the Lewinsky saga and Hillary's controversial stance on it as well as her anti-feminist treatment of Monica. All these little and big things, combined with her lack of a message, hurt her. But no, it is always about her, never about the world, about the people she is supposed to serve. I wish she'd go away and not keep coming back to remind us about her blind ambition. I am a feminist. At one time, when Bill first ran for president, I liked Hillary. But then I got disenchanted. I wrote an op-ed which was published in the LA Times about why third-world feminists (I am one) were disappointed with Hillary's attitude toward Lewinsky. Either she has to drop the feminist mantle or judge herself as a feminist. She can't have it both ways.
115
the least self-aware? the very least? Less self-aware than, say, Mr. Trump? Than George W. Bush? Than Ted Cruz? Than Chris Christie?
And all about herself? Not about those 39 detailed policy proposals on her campaign website?
Clinton had her flaws, but they are dwarfed by the flaws of her victorious opponent. She was and is a serious person. And people who know her like her. Again unlike Mr. Trump, she has friends from every phase of her life.
And all about herself? Not about those 39 detailed policy proposals on her campaign website?
Clinton had her flaws, but they are dwarfed by the flaws of her victorious opponent. She was and is a serious person. And people who know her like her. Again unlike Mr. Trump, she has friends from every phase of her life.
11
Anti-feminist treatment of Monica? You can't be serious. The woman was a wretch, and ultimately deserved the scorn she received. While it's true that Bill Clinton fell for the allure of "Monica," as you call her, he was weak willed in that regard, a human foible. But nevertheless Bill Clinton was very good, I would say great president (remember, no wars? a strong economy, etc.) surrounded by an excellent staff and cabinet. Add Linda Tripp into the Monica mix, and coupled with a treacherous Monica we had the ruins of a Clinton presidency. This was not, after all, simply an affair with a married man that ruined a household. It was an intrusion into the Presidency of the United States, the most powerful office in the world, by a worm-like woman, no more and no less. It had nothing to do with feminism. I would add one more thought here: I assumed Hillary would use some of the brain trust/war room that Bill had at his disposal, and with that support I thought she would easily win. But it seemed she never tapped into it, and her own staff was not, apparently, up to the task.
4
"elections are about popularity, and she was unpopular." But, she won the popular vote by nearly 3,000,000. The Trump campaign, abetted by its Russian friends, succeeded in animating voters who had not participated in the process before (or only sporadically so) in strategic districts. Taking the upper Midwest for granted was a huge mistake for Team Hillary.
10
Well, I will have to read the book to see if she somewhere even suggests that her actions (Wall Street speeches, private server, etc) made much Sanders' and Trump's campaign rhetoric possible. Hopefully, in all of the blaming, there are some nuggets of thoughtful and incisive explanation. She was a poor candidate, and the wrong candidate at this point in history. The times called for change if not upheaval; it should have been Sanders vs Trump. It wasn't, but change won anyway.
As for what is next...please, please, please just go away.
As for what is next...please, please, please just go away.
As for what is next...please, please, please just go away.
As for what is next...please, please, please just go away.
80
I completely agree with your comment except for one thing. I'm not planning on reading the book.
22
to RJR
I guess that is the reason you love the Mayor so much as you left all those comments last week that supported him for all the wrong reasons.
I guess that is the reason you love the Mayor so much as you left all those comments last week that supported him for all the wrong reasons.
I am a fan of H.C. but not a fan of dynastic politics. This review doesn't touch the issue but weak democracies tend to elect spouses, siblings, et.Al. HIllary Clinton is qualified no question, and it would have been breathtaking to see this sexist country finally elect a woman president but, dynastic politics? No thanks.
8
Tell that to John Quincy Adams.
1
Thanks for the review; my can't look away from the car wreck instinct has now been sated and I can read something else. While I agree with Clinton's stated reasons/explanations/excuses for what happened, they played minor roles. There should never have been such a slim buffer that could not have absorbed the Comey letter. Clinton's hubris still prevents her from seeing what's there to be seen: that SHE and her high horse attitude is THE reason. Imagine not taking the advice of the most savvy politician of our time - her husband - and dispensing with campaigning in a state like Wisconsin, which elected Scott Walker, and instead trying for a slam dump by courting Arizona voters. Here's the bottom line that says it all. Trump had a slogan, as meaningless as it was, "Make America Great Again," which if nothing else was a concept. Clinton: "I'm With Her." Then and now, it's all about her. Sigh...
126
You sure did buy in to the RWNJ character assassination of Hil, didn't you? :/
20
Her slogan was "Stronger Together".
27
Fact check: Her primary campaign slogan was "Stronger Together". It was about you.
22
"Her digs at Trump are not surprising. But her dig at Joe Biden is. Over lunch in 2014, Clinton explains, Barack Obama made it clear that he believed she was the Democrats’ best hope to keep the White House. “I knew President Obama thought the world of his vice president,” she writes, “so his vote of confidence meant a great deal to me.”
How is this a dig?? If there was more to the conversation or Clinton’s thoughts on the matter, the author should have included it. She praises Biden via Obama. Of course, his vote of confidence meant the world to her. Should she have said, "Hey Mr. President, what about Joe?" Where's the dig?
How is this a dig?? If there was more to the conversation or Clinton’s thoughts on the matter, the author should have included it. She praises Biden via Obama. Of course, his vote of confidence meant the world to her. Should she have said, "Hey Mr. President, what about Joe?" Where's the dig?
123
Thank you. This was the only part of this well done book review that I totally did not understand.
7
Thanks for the review of "What Happened"; now I won't need to buy it in the discount section of The Dollar Store next month.
26
"Its hard to buy the idea that she suffered disproportionally from charges on untrustworthiness or inauthenticity simply because she was a woman." Really? Perhaps Ms. Senior was not paying attention in the 90s. Ms. Clinton has been subjected to greater scrutiny, held to higher standards, and faced more criticism than any politician in modern times, and perhaps ever. And there is only one explanation for the disparity.
213
see article about two women who used a male name and got way more money for start-ups than when using female names
https://www.fastcompany.com/40456604/these-women-entrepreneurs-created-a...
- I think that was last week. I heard SO MaNY men say, not Hilary, she's shrill (she's not even close to being shrill, which is an actual thing, a high note..she is pretty deep-toned on the whole) and never Hilary again. A LOT of misogyny, and that includes misogynistic women, was directed at Hilary...
https://www.fastcompany.com/40456604/these-women-entrepreneurs-created-a...
- I think that was last week. I heard SO MaNY men say, not Hilary, she's shrill (she's not even close to being shrill, which is an actual thing, a high note..she is pretty deep-toned on the whole) and never Hilary again. A LOT of misogyny, and that includes misogynistic women, was directed at Hilary...
16
Thank you! This completely out-of-touch comment stuck out like a sore thumb in an otherwise thoughtful and well-written review.
3
Yes, that's true. And it would be confounding to hear a female commentator doubting the effects of patriarchal sexism on this election, had I not heard this many ties over the past year or so. Some of the comments I personally heard from women: "She might as well be a man." (I guess meaning she should be more lady-like.) - "She doesn't represent me." ( I suppose the Donald does.) - "That's the most sexing thing you can say!" (After I expressed my hope and excitement over having a woman in the White House.) I think we have learned how deep and pervasive sexism runs.
13
How is it that nobody else has weighed in on this review? I like that the author, Jennifer Senior, is balanced in her views offering both criticisms and understanding.
12
Balanced? Really. How does one describe "balance" when the author ends her "book review" reminding readers that Clinton received more popular votes? What does that have to do with the book?
13
@as "balanced" is not the same thing as ignoring facts.
2
read the article headline.
it's not a review.
it's a paean to secretary clinton.
(on a more practical note-
name three things of substance
that ms. clinton did as senator
or secretary of state....
times up!
neither can i.)
it's not a review.
it's a paean to secretary clinton.
(on a more practical note-
name three things of substance
that ms. clinton did as senator
or secretary of state....
times up!
neither can i.)
4
The only ones "dreading" the release of Secretary Clintons memoir are the ones responsible for electing 45. MSM, political purists and misogynists put Trump into the White House and this is reminder of their part in our current situation.
100
And Bernie Sanders.
8