The odd thing is this is the Washington Post publishing this unflattering article.
That *is* odd, but I think this is a sort of proof-test. At the risk of sounding paranoid, from what I have seen, “non-real time” faux-pas [plural] by Hillary apparently have no effect on her support. By that I mean, anything that happened in the past; the more past the better, is just.....gone. This is getting to be core Dem-theory. For some snafu to affect her support among her fan base, it would have to happen in real time, live, on TV, and be fairly serious. It would have to be unspinnable. We would need footage of her beheading a puppy. Because any delay between the event and the reportage leaves a pantsuit-wide wide gap to foam up with blather. I think any voter who tends Dem who hasn’t soured on Hillary by now is a certain lock for Hillary. It’s just a matter of turnout and *that*, as far as I am concerned, is attackable. The electoral math is seriously depressing. Hillary as presumed nominee starts out basically 93% (making up that number but it is not far off) elected.