Hillary Undermining Her Own Electability
There’s a fantastic article up on the New York Times’ site detailing McCain’s growing lead and the tight race between Hillary and Obama.
What I found particularly blood-boiling was reading Hillary’s degradation of Obama’s political record only because he was elected to one less term in the US Senate than she was.
“You know, I hear all these folks talking about who is and isn’t electable — and they said all the same things in New York,” she added, noting that voter support for her grew and deepened over time. “I trust the voters — frankly, that’s who matters.”
“One thing about me, I’ve already been through tough campaigns, and I think that says something about me,” she said. “My opponent hasn’t had to go through that baptism of fire . And in a general election, you know what’s going to happen to our nominee. Let’s not kid ourselves.”
[ full article]
It’s getting past the “oh that’s an interesting side note stage” and entering “FINE! You were elected to the US Senate one time more than he was, let’s move on.” It’s becoming obnoxious. And it overlooks the fact that he was elected to the State Senate three times PLUS once to US Senate. So, really he’s been elected to senatorial positions TWICE as much as Hillary. That doesn’t even start to delve into the differing socio-economic disadvantages that Obama had to face for his elections.
Hillary should stop beating that horse because it’s LONG since dead and, you know what Hillary, that’s not even a horse. If she thinks that counting how many times someone’s been elected to US Senate is the yard stick of “electable” then I suppose Bill Clinton never should have ran and Hillary should step aside for McCain because Mr. Qualified over there was serving in the US Senate before Bush Sr. was President.