The Clinton campaign had a great week, but don't call the election for her yet.

Last week, I made the case for the increasingly-pointed Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-Vt.) presidential candidacy, based on the qualities of his character and his integrity as (or in spite of being) a politician. This week, I will be covering the other Democratic candidate worth mentioning, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Despite a genuinely excellent week, Clinton is overall a dangerous prospective nominee for the Democratic Party if they hope to maintain control of the White House in 2016.

First, her campaign must still weather the ongoing investigation by the FBI into Clinton’s personal email account, a major talking point of Republican attacks and a source of discontent among many Democrats as well. Many people — including President Barack Obama — have forgotten that the issue is not fully concluded yet, no matter what the public opinion is. It wouldn’t be prudent at this juncture to write the issue off until it’s dead and buried permanently in the ground. After the FBI has determined everything is clear, the Clinton campaign can rest easy. Until the next inevitable “scandal” arises, anyway.

In that regard, the Clinton name itself has fair potential of being a liability instead of a buttress after thirty years of public scrutiny. However, the frequency of scandals involving the surname “Clinton” should be alarming to voters regardless of political affiliation, because even though a number of her and Bill’s numerous political faux pas have been exaggerated by the media and other outlets, many are serious encroachments that rightly deserve probing for a potential Chief Executive (and her potential first, first gentleman).

Since her brand can’t stay controversy-free, it begs the question of whether Clinton can survive the unassailable assault that the Republicans have in store for her as the Democratic nominee. This email controversy has been dragged out well beyond its expiration date because Clinton has a real problem handling crises regarding her image. Why not apologize outright for the emails, or better yet, hold steadfast to the first narrative about no wrongdoing if it was true? Republicans simply have to sow one seed of credible doubt before next November and Clinton’s entire campaign could unravel before the general election.

On her own side of the aisle, Clinton has faced charges of inauthenticity, political shrewdness and having a serious corporate bent. Actions speak louder than words, but they hold a more equal weight in the political realm where the relationship between the two is more reciprocal. There is more for liberals to be concerned about than the past actions of Clinton; her record on the issues merits significant critique. This includes more than erroneous votes (e.g.; Iraq) but also her stance on the issues of the day, both yesterday and today.

Consistency is a quality we should appreciate and promote in our presidents, and Clinton lacks it on many of the U.S.’s most critical issues. Examples abound, across fields from economics, to the environment, to social liberalism. Take The Trans-Pacific-Partnership, the Keystone XL pipeline or even qual rights for LGBT Americans. She sounds Machiavellian through-and-through with her insistence on shifting her views repeatedly for political gain. This lack of integrity should be a red flag for anybody who views Hillary as something more than a vanilla establishment politician.

That, essentially, is the crux of the issue for Clinton in 2016; are Americans of all stripes indignant enough this election cycle to elect a true outsider like Donald Trump in the general election or to vote for Bernie Sanders in the primary? Or are they complacent enough and confident enough in Clinton’s ability to run the country without drama that they will accept the very first, in all of American history, female president without deep reservation? That is the looming disquiet under which the Clinton campaign will have to work for the next 12 months.

In short, Clinton’s election is anything but a slam dunk at this point. Let’s just hold off until 2016 to start declaring the 45th POTUS, lest your favorite candidate’s campaign shirts end up like failed NFL teams’ do.

Related Links:

Hillary Clinton: Purveyor of muddy-water transparency

Hillary Clinton scrunchies make mockery of former Secretary of State, presidential candidate


Reach the columnist at hfinzel@asu.edu or follow @OnlyH_man on Twitter.

Editor’s note: The opinions presented in this column are the author’s and do not imply any endorsement from The State Press or its editors.

Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.

Like The State Press on Facebook and follow @statepress on Twitter.


Get the best of State Press delivered straight to your inbox.

×

Notice

This website uses cookies to make your expierence better and easier. By using this website you consent to our use of cookies. For more information, please see our Cookie Policy.