2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Flawed: Perfect Is The Enemy Of The Good If Youre A Female Presidential Candidate [View all]karynnj
(59,990 posts)The rules themselves were stricter in 2016 as to what could be said about HRC than the rules in 2008, which were stronger than in 2004.
Nothing I said was untrue or reflected a dislike of Clinton. I assume you mean my comment that she could have avoided two of the most negative stories had she followed what she agreed to and honored Obama's call for transparency. I stated they were not illegal, but it is impossible to claim they did not hurt her. I still do not get why she did the speeches - and suspect the answer is like her husband's as to why Monica, that we learned in summer 2004 - because she could.
None of these things were principled stands she took because her conscience demanded she do them in spite of future political costs. I would argue that had none of these happened, she would have won in a landslide. Consider even with all three, she was far ahead until the first Comey letter. Note if the SD had the email to put out in 2013, there would have been no email scandal, thus no Comey.
Consider that her email impacted the Obama administration's reputation and took valuable time from the State Department to deal with.