Of the multitude of messages delivered through Tuesday’s presidential election which will propel Donald Trump to the White House, exit polling shows a percentage of voters who cast their ballot in favor of the Republican candidate did so with reservations, but determined the New York businessman carried equal if not less grievous liabilities in comparison to former First Lady Hillary Clinton.
As reported by CNN, an astounding percentage of Trump voters, some 63 percent, described the candidate as dishonest and untrustworthy; in contrast, 61 percent found Hillary Clinton dishonest and untrustworthy.
Similarly, 60 percent of those surveyed revealed their candidate of choice, Mr. Trump, believed the real estate mogul was not qualified to be president, unlike his rival who 47 percent found unqualified to be chief executive.
In relation to experience, only eight percent of self-described Trump voters valued this quality in their candidate, as opposed to 90 percent of Clinton supporters that did so.
Of the more telling revelations, a quarter of voters disclosed an antipathy for the opposing candidate. Of this sample of voters, 51 percent admitted they support Mr. Trump and 39 percent cast their ballot for Clinton out of disdain for her opponent.
Despite trumpeting the reliability of its exit poll, it is likely CNN’s canvassing is no more credible than the now-discredited, pre-Election Day polls which blurted out Clinton would win the White House in a landslide.
One half of the most-selfish pair ever to cast a shadow over the American political system, Mrs. Clinton will never accept blame for this unexpected loss and neither will her husband.
A woman of uncontrollable ambition but lacking vital experience, preferring only to rely on a resume penetrated with titles, Clinton undid herself.
Going back over two decades, Clinton’s “impressive” curriculum vitae included the ceremonial role of First Lady, a seat in the U.S. Senate and eventually a stint as America’s top diplomat. Unfortunately for Mrs. Clinton, those positions never earned her the prestige to carry her into the White House.
As First Lady, Clinton orchestrated a Rube-Goldberg healthcare mess which drew the ire of Congress and required a court order to open the doors to her secret meetings. Similarly, Clinton was also known for her exorbitant travel: Laying the groundwork for her strong sense of entitlement, between 1993 and 2001, Clinton, often accompanied by daughter Chelsea, took 74 foreign trips at taxpayers’ expense to the tune of $111 million.
Later, trading off her husband’s two terms in the White House, Clinton skated to a Senate victory in New York and was known to have only one piece of legislation enacted in eight years, the naming of a federal building after late-Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall.
After joining President Obama’s State Department, her diplomatic skills amounted to little more than increasing her foreign travel, shrugging her shoulders when held to account for the attack on the Benghazi diplomatic compound in 2012 and, in the wild attempt to establish a hawkish reputation, set aside the better judgment of Pentagon officials to demand the U.S. military conduct a devastating but careless bombing campaign to oust Libyan strongman Colonel Muammar Gaddafi while neglecting to formulate a post-Gaddafi Libya.
Unfortunately for Mrs. Clinton, her two-decade-old ethical baggage and unremarkable government service overtook the image her assistants and adoring media sought to produce for public consumption.
Failing to brand Trump as an out-of-control, misogynistic, modern Robber Baron, voters were sensible enough to see Clinton was more determined to win the White House to earn immortality as the first female president than a candidate who had voters’ best interest and the future of the United States in mind.
More than her duplicitous behavior, ethical baggage, serial mendacity or shady e-mail habit, it was the former Secretary’s impatience which sabotaged her election prospects.
A lifelong dream, Clinton could have easily claimed the Oval Office had she been endowed with the virtue of patience. A native Illinoisan, Clinton preferred the trappings of liberal mecca, New York City, to launch her presidential ambitions.
While Clinton was busy establishing herself in the Senate, a little-known, naive community organizer on Chicago’s south side was holding a clipboard and knocking on doors. Four years later, after assuming a seat in the Illinois State Assembly, Barack Obama contemplated a run for the upper chamber of Congress to fill a seat for Illinois’ retiring Republican, Peter Fitzgerald. Obama became president four years later and along the way promised to halt the rise of the oceans.
Had Clinton recognized Illinois’ 2004 U.S. Senate race presented her with stronger election prospects for a White House bid, she could have easily swept aside the unworldly Obama in the Illinois Senate primary.
For all her advantages in money, national exposure, a diplomatic post, a Senate term, and a husband who doubled as ex-president, Clinton never quite achieved the conception her adulators erected for her. She fell short in every way.
Never expecting to lose on Nov. 8, Clinton delayed a public concession speech because she never anticipated delivering one. As she approached the podium, a tangible air of despondency overtook the room and for the first time, one brief moment in her public life, she finally, and mercifully, demonstrated a strength she and her followers gloated of her whole life, the strength to fight back tears of rage and self-pity to admit defeat.
Beyond defeat in 2016, Clinton will admit to nothing. For the rest of her life, she will blame others and leave her gullible followers presuming her loss was never her doing; was unrelated to decades of her slippery evasions of the law; was distinct from her decision to invite an FBI probe over her dubious private server; was independent from court orders for her to release documents; was completely unconnected to her managerial incompetence at State; and was all the consequence of a still unidentified “vast right-wing conspiracy.”
A stinging defeat likely to injure for a lifetime, Mrs. Clinton will long be remembered as more than the loser in 2016, and more than undeserving of the White House, but the candidate who won a nationwide least-popular contest by losing the presidential election.
CNN’s exit poll is meaningless and a poor excuse to excuse Clinton’s loss.
[CNN] [Photo courtesy The Federalist]