Posted on 08/17/2015 7:48:17 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
This primary season has the Mainstream media establishment off balance, with their certitudes (Hillary’s a lock; Trump will quickly crumble) in ruins. So discombobulated are they that occasionally a bit of frank truth slips past the internal censor. That appears to be the case with Chuck Todd yesterday, who uttered something very revealing about Hillary Clinton. Pam Key of Breitbart picked up on it:
Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” host Chuck Todd played an interview with Democrats at the Iowa State Fair who had many doubts about presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
Todd said, “some Democrats I talked to are worried how the campaign has handled this controversy [over Clinton’s email and server].”
One woman stated, “It does make it seem to me, a little bit like she’s hiding something,” while another said Clinton owes voters a better explanation, declaring, “we’re smarter than that.”
Todd also said, “I was stunned at how many — how easily it was to find these Democrats willing to say these things. That was on camera.”
Whoa! Wait a minute! Todd seems to be saying that it is surprising that ordinary Americans would be willing to go on camera with a criticism of Herself, the meanest, most vindictive, power mad politician since LBJ. Apparently we are already close to the old USSR, where people are supposed to guard their criticism of the political powers that be. Why else would it be “stunning” for people to say these things “on camera”?
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
A better analogy would be “After 3 decades on the political scene there are so many bodies under Hillary’s bus that the wheels no longer touch the ground”.
That’s nonsense. Hillary herself has decreed that voters are not interested in the email server issue. Case closed.
Bookmark
Let me know when Hillary and Huma get married and buy a pistol and cyanide.
Trustworthiness and integrity have never been important qualities for democrat politicians. Fournier hasn’t had a new insight into Hillary. He has not “come to Jesus”. It is simply that her lack of integrity is so out in the open now that it can’t be denied. However, if it were latter in the race and Hillary was the rat nominee, we would be hearing no such negativity from Fournier about Hillary. Her lack of trustworthiness wouldn’t be an issue.
A little bit?, a little bit? So sayeth one dead from the neck up, low information voter!!
Look on the bright side, Pantsuit. If you're not the nominee again this time, you can finally divorce Pants and marry the one you love. Surely it will give your reputation a bump amongst your base. Think how poignant she will look on the cover of the Rolling Stone with her right hand on the telephone and the left one pressed up, mirroring yours, separated only by the two-inch plexiglass between you.
” Apparently we are already close to the old USSR, where people are supposed to guard their criticism of the political powers that be. Why else would it be “stunning” for people to say these things “on camera”?”
Apparently, this is projection, because Chuck Todd knows how bad it would be for his career and perhaps him personally to say those things.
After 2008 and 2012, I wouldn't be so sure.
I think one reason the Left was so willing to accept a clearly-flawed Hillary as the nominee is their conviction that the electoral college is weighted so heavily in favor of the Dems that it’s very difficult for the GOP to gain the advantage, especially with the “demographics” supposedly going against the GOP.
What we need is another 49 state wipeout to disabuse them of their preconceptions, and at the rate Hillary is going we might just get it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.