Today she's mostly being slammed for running an incompetent campaign managed by a Republican ass, committing one PR gaffe after another, alienating her base, being financially inept, threatening to throw the entire party under a bus if she doesn't win, and not bothering to show up for important votes in the Senate.
A lot of campaign politics happens under the radar of rationality. With the flip-flopping narrative Bush was able to paint Kerry as a weak loser, even though the reality was that Bush was weak, a loser, and someone with serious mental health issues.
Because Hillary has a tin ear for narratives, she's managed to portray herself as someone who cares only about herself and will do anything - anything - to win the nod.
Obama meanwhile has run a superb campaign, based on plenty of 'we' power. The chances are good it's mostly rhetoric, but he's successfully painted himself as a winner. Leaving Hillary as the loser.
The key point that you're missing is that Obama has done nothing that Hillary couldn't have done. She started with all of the advantages, and if she'd had the people skills to build on them she'd have cruised to an easy win.
But - no evidence of people skills at all. And that's what's destroyed her campaign, more than any other factor.
What do you mean by people skills?
Are you talking about one-to-on e situations or speaking in front of an auditorium?
I simply disagree with what you're saying. But it's an attack and I can't respond to anything in specific. In point of fact, I even like her health care plan more than Obama's, so to say she only cares about herself is not quite right. Someone could easily say the same thing about Obama based on his health plan alone.
And it's only 'just an attack' if you miss the overwhelming evidence of her inability to connect with ordinary voters, to act graciously, and to create a feeling of inclusiveness - and also to pick good people to run her campaign.
These are all clear evidence that managing people - i.e. managing relationships, managing expectations, and building effective teams of supporters - is not her strong suit.
We simply disagree. If she wasn't a good "manager" she wouldn't have gotten so much done in the Senate.
The 'Republican attacks' idea is nonsense, because there really haven't been any serious attacks on her.
In fact she's attacked Obama far more aggressively than the Rs have attacked her.
She's been attacked more than any candidate in history.
This has been going on for years.
I'm really surprised you said that.
She's losing to Obama. That doesn't make her a bad manager. Under that logic, there is only one good manager every year. Last two times around, Geroge Bush was the best manager in the US.
