Hillary: “Least Transparent”, “Flawed Candidate”

A Challenge to Political Analysts

One can’t read an analysis of Hillary, even a positive one, or watch a panel discussion on the election without encountering the epithets “least transparent” and “flawed candidate”. They follow her everywhere. It is simply accepted wisdom in the political world that Hillary is both flawed and untransparent.

But nobody, to my knowledge, has ever either justified these epithets or put them into any context. So I am herewith challenging everybody who has ever used these phrases to answer the following questions, to prove their assertions.


  1. Please define what you mean by transparency. List every criterion you use to judge a politician’s transparency.
  2. List the 10 least transparent national politicians of the past 15 years (with, of course, Hillary at the bottom/top of the list). Note: I am being kind here. I’m not asking you to go back to Nixon or LBJ or FDR.
  3. List the 10 most transparent national politicians of the past 15 years. Justify why each is more transparent than Hillary.


  1. Please list Hillary’s 10 most important flaws (excluding transparency) in order of importance.
  2. Please list 10 national politicians of the past 15 years who have not had any flaws or have been less flawed than Hillary. Justify your choices. Note: I am again being kind here by limiting the period to 15 years.
Like what you read? Give ddouglas a round of applause.

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