With all due respect, your article completely misses the fact that Clinton has done good.
Anthony Boutros
51

You’re actually the first person I know of to make the mistake that I worried everyone would make in reading this. I mean no disrespect in saying that, you’re point is valid and I’m going to seriously address it here.

First of all, I don’t believe that the good Clinton has done outweighs the bad. Any minor foreign policy victories that she has racked up (and I don’t immediately concede that the items you listed were all that impressive) are negligible compared to the devastating body blows against the middle class that her “type” of Democrat has landed since, really Carter (he, not Reagan, was the one who got the ball rolling on free trade; see: Trade Agreements Act of 1979). Remember, I only specified her because she was the one running for president, I was really talking about an entire political class.

Second, and more importantly, this article was not about Hillary or Trump, it was about their supporters and the choices those people made with the options they were given. Democrats were given much better options than Republicans (in the long run, it may be Republicans’ own fault to a certain degree, but that’s another topic for another article). They chose to side with an establishment that had undermined their interests for decades over a genuinely viable outsider with a comprehensive platform and a real shot at winning the general election (the first one of that kind they had ever seen in an American election, providing a voting opportunity that they were remiss in passing up). I didn’t give Trump supporters a pass, I said the two were equally foolish. But at least trump supporters didn’t use their votes to double down on the group that had been abusing them for as long as they can remember.

Although, maybe I’m being too tough on all voters. In this article I essentially give the media a pass for its role in elevating Donald Trump and depressing Bernie Sanders. I’ve written entire separate articles on the evolution of the media and their role in this election, I probably should have incorporated some of that material here, the problem is, if you walk out on a tangent like that, your article can easily double in length and wander in purpose (as this response is doing right before my eyes). I chose to focus on the main subject here.

That said, allow me to mention a few points about the media’s role in all this. A report found that the media dedicated less than 1 minute to Bernie for every 81 minutes dedicated to Trump. Additionally, what coverage Bernie gets is often dismissive and condescending, treating him like a supporting character in Hillary’s story. Donald Trump has received roughly 2 billion dollars of free converge from the media this election cycle. Bernie has to spend his own money to amplify his message. However, I don’t want to give voters too much of a pass. The case can be made that being low information enough that this type of news coverage influences you is, in itself, an act of foolishness. There’s plenty of blame to go around for the problems with our electoral processes.

I stand by everything I said, but I’m not pretending that my opinion is gospel. In fact, this isn’t even an “average-length” article for me. At about 1,000 words it doesn’t come close to saying everything there is to be said on the dynamics of this year’s electorate.

Like what you read? Give Devin Reynolds a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.