[Ohioan]

Your suggestion assumes that it is a good issue to attack a woman for standing by her husband, when he behaves badly. In my opinion that is a dangerous gambit, and that a misunderstanding of the psychological dynamics in 2000, is one reason that the 2000 election was a cliff-hanger.

A better iteration--which fits perfectly into the major theme of the campaign--would be to demand why Mrs. Clinton will not agree to put America & the Americans first; defy her to point out anything in the Constitution, which is not about doing just that. Then iterate over & over again, aspects of the betrayal of American war veterans; her pledge to flood the country with immigrants who clearly do not share our values--our pride in what made America great-- even while they take the jobs that would otherwise go to out-of-work Americans; and kindred issues.

[Mr. K]

what are you, nuts?

Her husband WAS A SERIAL RAPIST and SHE HELPED SILENCE HIS VICTIMS!

And you think we will by asking her why she won’t put America first? Holy kee-ripes that is the most ignorant thing I’ve read here in years.