Charlie Pierce calls-out Mark Penn (& Clintonism)

[Tom Rinaldo]

4. For that reason I regret that Pierce included that swipe. It serves no useful function

The positions that Hillary took in 2016, both in the primary and in the General, bear little resemblance to what Penn is calling for there. In many cases they represent a 180% difference from what Penn is advocating for. I do think it important to counter the political line that Penn took in his original OP, and Pierce does do so with this. Penn did publish in the NY Times, not an obscure publication. He should be taken to account and rebutted. But unless Hillary now defends Penn - and I am confident that she won't - using the term "Clintonism" is simply divisive. That is not what she stood for. Debunking Penn's views on their lack of merit serves a purpose. Making it about Hillary now does not.