Re: Hillary Clinton’s Incredible Weakness

by Charles C. W. Cooke

Response To...

Hillary Clinton’s Incredible Weakness

Rich notes an NBC poll showing that 59 percent of Americans “regard Hillary Clinton unfavorably.”

Usually, that would be enough to finish off a candidate. And then you read this

Only 12 percent of Democrats call her honest and trustworthy. And yet she leads by 9.

12 percent of Democrats.

“And yet she leads by 9.”

I must confess to being surprised at how weak a candidate Hillary has proven to be. Last year, before the Republican primary had begun in earnest, I was not of the view that 2016 would be an automatic win for the Right. I thought that the Republicans had a good shot, certainly. But I thought that Hillary would start as the slight favorite nevertheless.

In my view at the time, only a handful of GOP candidates had a chance. Cruz, I thought, would be defined early on as an extremist and edged out. Bush, I predicted, would invite a 1990s vs. 2000s fight that the Republicans could not win. Perry was too much like W. Jindal was too wonky, and spoke too fast. If the GOP wanted to prevail, I imagined, their options were limited to Walker, Rubio, or Kasich.

I’ve changed my mind. Even up against Trump, Hillary Clinton has proven herself to be weaker than I could ever have imagined. We can never know how a different race would have played out, of course. But I now think that pretty much anybody else would have beaten her. Bush, I think, would have beaten her. Perry would have. Jindal would have. Cruz would. Maybe even Carly Fiorina would have. How lucky Hillary Clinton was. How lucky the Clintons so often are

The Corner

The one and only.