Hillary Clinton’s “backwards” Americans voted for Trump explains why she lost in 2016. | The Weekly Standard

Hillary Clinton's "backwards" Americans voted for Trump explains why she lost in 2016. | The Weekly Standard.

By The Editors The Weekly Standard · March 13, 2018
In case we’d forgotten.
We’re aware that some elected officials—perhaps more than a few—regard the average voter with contempt. Such politicians may succeed for a time, but contempt is hard to hide, and they soon find themselves giving talks at ritzy confabs about their regrettably brief time in public life.

That’s the case with Hillary Clinton. On the strength of the notoriety she’d received as First Lady in the 1990s, she won a seat in the U.S. Senate in 2000 and held it for nine years. But that is about as much of Hillary Clinton as voters could take.

Sorry, you’ve reached the limit on the articles you can view.

All shall love me and despair. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
We’re aware that some elected officials—perhaps more than a few—regard the average voter with contempt. Such politicians may succeed for a time, but contempt is hard to hide, and they soon find themselves giving talks at ritzy confabs about their regrettably brief time in public life.

That’s the case with Hillary Clinton. On the strength of the notoriety she’d received as First Lady in the 1990s, she won a seat in the U.S. Senate in 2000 and held it for nine years. But that is about as much of Hillary Clinton as voters could take. She was appointed secretary of State by Barack Obama for no other reason than that she’d come in second in the 2008 primary election; she then went on to lose a general election and now enjoys a successful career as a former presidential candidate and writer of unreadable memoirs.

Mrs. Clinton was never a talented politician. Like many another former officeholder, she thought most voters were idiots and often didn’t have sense enough to pretend otherwise. She proudly heaped scorn on voters who weren’t inclined to back her—her infamous “basket of deplorables” remark is still shocking to read—and thereby managed to lose an election to a man who did everything in his power to make himself unelectable.

Her supporters like to pretend that that’s not what she did, and that she is in reality a charitable and interesting person. People might begin to believe them, too—if only she would keep quiet.

But, alas for us all, she cannot. Already since her 2016 defeat, she has written another lengthy memoir and given innumerable talks and speeches about the reasons for her defeat; and the reasons always seem to involve the stupidity and backwardness of the people who couldn’t be persuaded to embrace her. At a confab in Mumbai last weekend, for instance, Clinton explained her loss in this way:

If you look at the map of the United States, there is all that red in the middle where Trump won. I won in the coasts, I win, you know, Illinois, Minnesota, places like that. But what the map doesn’t show you is that I won the places that represent two thirds of America’s gross domestic product. So I won the places that are optimistic, diverse, dynamic, moving forward, and his whole campaign, “make America great again,” was looking backwards. You know you didn’t like black people getting rights, you don’t like women getting jobs, you don’t want to see that Indian American succeeding more than you are. Whatever your problem is, I’m going to solve it.

One feels Mrs. Clinton could profit from the advice Sen. Everett Dirksen once gave his son-in-law Howard Baker after the latter’s overlong maiden speech: “Perhaps you should occasionally allow yourself the luxury of an unexpressed thought.”

A fair translation of her remarks: Productive and open-minded people voted for me; ignoramuses and bigots didn’t. In the proud mind of Hillary Clinton, there just weren’t enough intelligent non-racists in America for her to win the Electoral College. If only those vast swathes of the country hadn’t been so upset about “black people getting rights” and “women getting jobs”!

Of course, Clinton lost the 2016 election because she is a corrupt and unaccomplished fraud. But this is already well known by most people not named Hillary Clinton. What’s far more disturbing is that a great number of her fellow Democrats—perhaps a majority—will find nothing to disagree with in her latest remarks. In their minds, she spoke the simple truth.

It’s a real mystery why they don’t win more elections.

Categories: right

Tagged in: