Reply #20: Heh. I'm not a Hillary supporter.

[Kelly Rupert]

You may have noticed the Bill Richardson tag next to my post. I'm just not a fan of bad arguments. (I haven't backed up my statements with links, because I haven't claimed that anyone has said anything outrageous.) I haven't said you don't have a right to reply. I said that if replies are claims of fact void of information, they are completely unhelpful. You have the right to post just about anything you like.

You know what the problem with candidates is? Issues are complex, and they have to take multilayered views. When talking about situation A, you say X. When talking about situation B, you say, you know what, X isn't appropriate here. It's good fun to pull the last bits out of both those speeches, and show "X!" "Not-X!" next to one another, but you can do that with absolutely any campaign. Hillary is especially prone to that, because she tends to play up the A-X paradigm in crowds of X supporters and the B-not-X paradigm in crowds of X opponents. However, while that may lead to unflattering TDS segments, it also leads to greater bases of support.

Her seemingly-twin-stanced postures may look embarrassing. But they aren't gaffes--because they're completely premeditated. She has calculated that the benefits from doing that are greater than the costs. And given the polls, she's right.