Clinton Flunks As Political Pundit

I’ve been most concerned about the incorrect statements from Clinton with regards to policy issues, especially when she distorts Obama’s positions, but there have also been other incorrect statements coming from her. If Hillary Clinton has any desires to become a political pundit after she loses the nomination, so far she is not doing a very good job in that department with two major errors after Tuesday’s primaries.

Clinton has been claiming that her husband didn’t clinch the nomination until June and speaking as if this year’s “long journey” is customary. The New York Times fact checked this and found she was inaccurate:

The 1992 Democratic campaign to defeat President George Bush started much later than this year’s campaign. Bill Clinton, then the governor of Arkansas, announced his candidacy on Oct. 3, 1991. Mrs. Clinton began her race last January, and her Democratic rival, Senator Barack Obama, entered the contest soon after.

The state-by-state primaries and caucuses started a month later in 1992 than they did in 2008. And the compact front-loaded schedule this year means that, unlike then, most of the country’s Democrats have already been to the polls.

Yet by March 20, 1992, the list of Democrats seeking the nomination had dwindled to the point where Phil Angelides, then the chairman of the California Democratic Party, said, “Today is really the day we start the general election campaign against George Bush.”

Less than two weeks later, on April 8, after winning the New York primary, Mr. Clinton’s deputy campaign manager, George Stephanopoulos, declared the process complete.

“It’s mathematically impossible for Brown to get the nomination, and it would take Tsongas about 90 percent of the remaining delegates to win,” Mr. Stephanopoulos said, referring to Senator Paul E. Tsongas of Massachusetts, who had already suspended his campaign, and Jerry Brown, the former California governor. Though Mr. Brown competed until the Democratic convention, Mr. Clinton was the presumptive nominee.

But even if you take June 1992 as the month when Mr. Clinton had it “wrapped up,” as Mrs. Clinton now says, only nine months had passed since he had entered the race. By June, Mrs. Clinton’s campaign would be in its 17th month.

Clinton has also claimed that a candidate cannot win the presidency without winning Ohio. The Washington Post  found that she was incorrect and provided multiple examples. This includes John F. Kennedy winning the 1960 general election and FDR winning the 1932 election after losing the Ohio primary. This will place Obama in good company.

Be Sociable, Share!

5 Comments

  1. 1
    steve says:

    Another good post … you’ve hit one of the things that bugs me most about the Hillary campaign: her attempts to control the media narrative. Her remarks about Ohio and the supposedly long 1992 primary season have been swallowed uncritically by the cable TV pundits.

  2. 2
    Ron Chusid says:

    I wouldn’t mind if the pundits bought these remarks uncritically if they’d take a more critical look at Clinton’s claims to be more experienced than Obama.

  3. 3
    Angelene says:

    Just another “what does “is” mean” from the Clintons. I hope this hits main media outlets and the people can determine if missy is going to be the president we want to believe in. NOT!!!

  4. 4
    Probus says:

    Ron, you are right about the experience factor. What is Clinton’s foreign policy experience? Serving as first lady of either AR or America doesn’t give her any foreign policy experience. On a recent conference call with reporters her campaign staff was unable to list her foreign policy experience. How does she come up with 35 years experience? It is a blatant lie and the media should call her out on it.

  5. 5
    Ron Chusid says:

    Probus,

    As I’ve pointed out in other posts, Clinton did not have national security clearance as First Lady. Of course we know she made the wrong call on the biggest foreign policy decision in recent years.

    Plus Obama has more total years of legislative experience. Obama’s experience teaching Constitutional Law, while Clinton was opposing unions on Wall-Mart’s board is also significant. This can be seen in the differences between the two on issues involving presidential power, civil liberties, and church-state issues. Obama’s experience as a community organizer both influences how he sees government and influences his political strategy, allowing him to beat the supposedly all powerful Clinton machine.

Leave a comment