It doesn’t surprise me in the least. That’s always been a big big part of the pro-Hillary equation.

But I would like to add that she does have one other big big accomplishment. Of course, it’s one that’s shared by most people in the world—and that’s this: she’s not Donald Trump.

I believe that is the accomplishment that will get her elected (sigh).

Questioning her achievements, I was told ‘it’s time for a woman!’ Questioning whether she was the best candidate the democrats could find, I was told, “it’s time for a woman!” They cried that my lack of enthusiasm was responsible for destroying the country, “It’s time for a woman!” Yadda yadda.

Most curiously, they were aghast that I would not have ‘stood by my man’ if I were in a relationship with someone like Bill or Weiner, what?

My husband, who was there too, and considers himself politically liberal, was shocked by their views, “All they care about is that she is a woman. They could not name one achievement.” And he could not think of one either.

Wanting to be President and actually having the competence are two different things. Hillary imbibed the kool aid of leftist/Alinsky theory in college. As she has trod that path of “Power to the people,” she has become more and more like a humorless commissar. Her ambition has known no bounds and her experience has taught her that a friendly MSM coupled with the short attention span of most people allows her to weather one scandal and failure after another without paying any price. I can think of no solid achievement in her career larger than her ability to fool a lot of people over a long period of time.

Her tenure at State was spent traveling hither and yon while dodging many of the responsibilities which were delegated to subordinates. The Obama policy of making friends with our enemies and ignoring our allies was carried out with out much pushback.

Her book, “Hard Choices,” about her tenure at State, was a reflection of her hard-bitten, humorless personality. As one reviewer put it: “The book is purely devoid of emotion; the closest it got to heartfelt genuine feeling was in discussing Richard Holbrooke’s death, but even that felt guarded. It is full of cliches, fact-of-matter statements, and few insights into decision-making, at least very, very few that sound genuine at all.” Her tenure at State was a box she was checking off as a part of her Presidential resume.

If she was honest and competent, I could see voting for her in this most dreadful of election campaigns. The fact that she is a woman just does not enter into the equation as far as I’m concerned.

What is it about Hillary that turns people off?
Slight modification (and I think more interesting): Why do DEMOCRATS not like Hillary? What is it about her that makes her different from other Democrat politicians who were lying grifters (and there have been a lot of them)?

I was tempted at first to say that an element of classism was involved; a resentment of the white trash Arkansas taint. But the same wasn’t applied to Bill, and he’s way more Arkansas than Hillary.

So I guess it comes down solely to personality. She is personally unlikable. I guess for Democrats, if you are personally likable, there’s almost no sin they can’t forgive. If they don’t like you, there’s a limit to how much they’ll lie for you or even “The Cause.”

Hillary is a well known, long visible politician whose only executive branch activity, the 1994 health plan, resulted in a GOP Congress, the first in 40 years.

The Dems are in full panic mode now. I just hope Trump’s security is tight.

And I know lots of Moms that are way tougher than the Dads when the kids are out of control.

My other Most Favorite Blogger also had a good post up on Beinert and (bonus!) one about complaining feminists.

https://stuartschneiderman.blogspot.com/2016/09/playing-sexism-card.html
What is it about Hillary that turns people off? Could it be her dishonesty and her willingness to compromise state secrets–and then to lie about it repeatedly? Could it be the fact that her candidacy is based on an empty resume–a bunch of sinecure jobs and no accomplishments?

Speaking of big lies, why is this monumentally unqualified candidate is being touted as the most qualified candidate in history? If you do not believe that Hillary is qualified you are a bigot.

But, it might be that if she had not been named Clinton, no one would ever have considered her for the presidency? If she had not been female, no one would have considered her a viable candidate for much of anything.

And besides, Hillary Clinton is not only an incompetent fraud, but she clearly does not like people. Most politicians, beginning with her husband and with W, like people. Everyone who has ever listened to Hillary knows that she does not. She cackles like a witch and sounds like a shrill harpy.

In any event Beinart does not think that there is any good reason why people don’t like Hillary. Like a eunuch at the court of the Mother Goddess he is off on his own private guilt trip and wants to share it with the rest of us. He sees the hand of sexism at work, just as he sees racism in all criticism of Obama:

In the following paragraph he says that decades of research “would predict” the sexist backlash against Hillary. And I ask, “Did it predict or didn’t it? It’s like the Beinarts of the world have an editor in their brains that wants to point out that when they talk, they are manufacturing bs.

And this guy is considered an intellectual.

Social work? It’s practically the only SJW-esque besides public policy I know of at Columbia, unless there’s some Gender Studies terminal program.

That said, it is bigoted (e.g. “=”) and chauvinistic (e.g. feminism) to construct a diversity class (i.e. denigration of individual dignity) that encompasses individuals, even with majority participation, when membership is not a matter of principle or uniform.