General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Hillary's electability is largely political myth at this point [View all]
It's the oft repeated theme: Secretary Clinton is the most electable candidate and that is why she warrants our support.
But what is the evidence of this foundational argument for her nomination?
Secretary Clinton has faced three elections. The first two were against Republican nobodies in a fairly liberal state - cakewalks. The third, where she was also "inevitable" and the only Democrat who could face down Republicans, turned into a train wreck of epic proportions. Not only was her candidacy sunk by a political neophyte and relative newcomer, but her internal campaign politics were revealed to be highly disorganized and dysfunctional (read just about any election postmortem book that followed). I'm not exactly assured by the fact that her surrogates are already starting to run their mouths off in a petty, infantile manner (see the DeBlasio incident). It doesn't help that she's not an amazing campaigner. She lacks her husband's gifts to connect with people.
Many would point to current polling, but it is just that: current polling. With the primary landscape still largely unknown 18 months before the election, polls will tend to rely on name recognition. Hillary Clinton is by far the most well-known name in the race, and polling will reflect that. Once the primary begins and we have some names, some debates, some new faces and arguments in the news, we don't know what those polls will look like.
What argument is there for this electability meme other than the fact Secretary Clinton is simply well known? She faced one real national test on the electoral stage, and she failed it. If she couldn't even win a Democratic primary, what evidence do we have that she will fare well against the Republican machine?
She's not my candidate. I have no idea who I will vote for in the primary. It is far too early. But this electability thought is almost asserted to be self-evident, both in the media and on DU.
Based on what, exactly? I see no evidence offered other than very early polls that will change vastly once we're in the thick of things.