Replies

I>she opened a long communications campaign not only to "rebrand" herself but to completely reframe who she is, what she stands for and how she intends to run.

Shouldn't a candidate for the presidency be who they are and stand for what they stood for? What's for the "re-framing" crap?

I quite agree. Hillary has more than 35 years in the public sector/life. She should have her policies, her views, her beliefs formulated within her persona. The electorate should KNOW her positions, her stance on world/country situations. This 'reframing' is just more governing by which way today's wind is blowing.

President Reagan left a paper trail from the 1950s,1960s/1970s/1080s in the form of speeches, notes, telecasts, books, governing stances. Does one really discern what Hillary stands for in any given position?

I liken President Reagan's policies similar to the Constitution as a standing document, with a long and difficult means/process to amend it. Just as our Founding Fathers intended. Wherein as Hillary's current policies derive their structure from the progressive liberals' beliefs that the Constitution is to considered a 'living document' subject to the daily/current whims, feel good agenda of the day. A democratic mob rule, of which the Founding Fathers were extremely apprehensive.