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.