Reply #50: Once again, reading comprehension bites you in the ass

[jgraz]

I know I'm repeating myself but if you're going to respond to a substantive post, please make sure you ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND IT. I don't know how much clearer I can make it, but I'll try. Here's the relevant quote from the OP:

So there you have it: four questions, four dissembling, triangulating answers. Never committing, never tying herself down, never demonstrating core principles -- in short, playing right into the biggest criticisms against her and her husband.

Now imagine Hillary giving answers like this in the final debate of the General Election. The entire nation is watching and Hillary clearly demonstrates that in this area she is exactly as bad as the right has been portraying her. How does a candidate recover from that?

It's a basic fact of politics. If we nominate a candidate who has something to hide, or at least acts as if she has things to hide, then we run the risk at every non-scripted appearance that she will be exposed -- that she will make some slip that reveals the depths of her dishonesty. And then it's game over, hello President Giuliani.

Is that a risk you're willing to take?

OK. I'll type slowly so you can keep up.

The premise of my post is that Hillary's stumbling and dishonesty can cause the Democrats problems in the General Election. In case you missed it, I said the General Election. Is the General Election happening yet? Has Hillary made a debate gaffe in the General Election? I'll say no, since the General Election is not underway yet.

Your posting of current polls is a non-sequitor because the risk I was raising was in the (say it with me) General Election.