DELUSIONAL: Hillary Clinton Explains How She Lost

DELUSIONAL: Hillary Clinton Explains How She Lost

Buttocks healed, Hillary Clinton crawled from under one of her multi-million dollar rocks to face the world again.

Clinton hit the scene asking people to “just get along.” Then Clinton reverted back to normal mode, as she started attacking any Conservative in sight.

And it’s only getting worse.

Newsmax reported how Clinton has now offered explanations as to why she lost.

In a ridiculous discussion that sounded as though it belonged in a forum of a left-wing website, the panel on Sunday’s Meet the Press bemoaned how the country’s attitude towards women cost Hillary Clinton the White House. Moderator Chuck Todd read from the recent NYT column of Nicholas Kristof, who described Clinton’s idea of Trump voters as “I don’t agree with him, I’m not sure I really approve of him, but he looks like somebody who’s been president before.” Paraphrasing Clinton, Todd suggested that “she believed misogyny played a much larger role in this than it’s been analyzed by many of us.”

Helene Cooper, The New York Times’s Pentagon correspondent, agreed that sexism had a hand in Clinton’s defeat. “I think many women probably feel that way. And I don’t think I would necessarily dismiss that,” she argued, “I’ve talked to plenty of Trump voters who say they just didn’t like Hillary, including women who said, no, there’s just something — I just didn’t like her. I think there’s something to be said for that.”

“But I think we can’t pretend that this sort of misogyny doesn’t exist. I think it would be naïve,” she continued.

Democrats are interesting creatures.

Obama won because he’s black. However, when he got into office, Democrats said he couldn’t get anything done because people didn’t like that he was black.

Now we get that Hillary Clinton didn’t win because she’s a woman.

The article continues,

She wasn’t the only panelist who bought into Clinton’s assertions. David Brooks, another New York Times columnists (surprise, surprise), was in full agreement as well. “Gender politics clearly played a role in this election,” he opined before slamming Trump with a smirk:

Donald Trump is a cliché of old-fashioned masculinity and a lot of people long for that kind of masculinity which is never coming back, but they long for it. And so, to say that his hyper-macho stereotype is not part of why he got elected, I mean, it wasn’t his knowledge.

Again, another interesting point. Trump was too masculine?

Thus, had Trump been a cuck, like Obama, then Hillary Clinton could have defeated him. Allow me to “mansplain” for my lady readers: Hillary Clinton couldn’t beat a REAL man!

There appeared to be one adult among the panelists.

But Danielle Pletka from the American Enterprise Institute shot down Clinton’s whining and blame shifting. “Okay, first of all, Hillary Clinton doesn’t want to take responsibility for anything. She lost the election because she’s Hillary Clinton, not because she’s a woman,” she declared.

She agreed that the women do have a more difficult time in politics, but she chastised the former Secretary for complaining about it. “Look, if you want to be a woman who’s influential than stand up to it, ignore it and it will change over time. Screaming about misogyny doesn’t change things,” she decried.

The discussion took a really interesting turn as National Review’s Rich Lowry was asked by Chuck Todd,

“You think another woman could have beaten Donald Trump?”

Lowry responded with:

“A likable woman could have, yes.”

And here I thought Trump wasn’t a likable man?

Copy */
Back to top button