Mediaboss Marketing

Democrats say theyd like Hillary ClintonHillary Rodham ClintonFive things lawmakers want to know from Comey Dems want Hillary Clinton to leave spotlight Huckabee: 'Hillary needs to get over herself' MORE to take a cue from former President Obama and step out of the spotlight.

They say her string of remarks explaining her stunning loss in November coupled with the public remarks blaming the Democratic National Committee for the defeat which many took as also critical of Obama are hurting the party and making the 2016 candidate look bitter.

The Hill interviewed more a dozen Democrats about Clintons remarks, including many staunch Clinton supporters and former aides.

They said they understood the need for Clinton to explain what happened in the election, and many also empathized with Clintons anger over former FBI Director James Comeys handling of a probe into her private email server.

Good God, what is she doing? one longtime aide wondered after watching Clinton at the Recode conference in Californiaon Wednesday. She's apparently still really, really angry. I mean, we all are. The election was stolen from her, and that's how she feels.

But to go out there publicly again and again and talk about it? And then blame the DNC? the aide wondered. "It's not helpful to Democrats. It's not helpful to the country, and I don't think it's helpful to her.

Former Obama aides are among those scratching their heads over Clintons strategy.

At the Recode conference, she said she had inherited nothing from a bankrupt Democratic Party led by Obama for eight years.

If she is trying to come across as the leader of the angry movement of what happened in 2016, then she's achieving it, said one former senior aide to Obama. But part of the problem she had was she didn't have a vision for the Democratic Party, and she needs to now take a break and let others come to the forefront.

Clintons remarks come at a point in time where the Democratic Party feels somewhat leaderless after the eight years of Obama and the surprise Clinton defeat.

Obama has largely gone out of public view, though he reappeared with a statement this week blasting President Trump for pulling the United States from the Paris climate deal.

Advisers to Obama have said he wants to give a new generation of leaders room to grow.

Sen. Bernie SandersBernie SandersDems want Hillary Clinton to leave spotlight High-stakes Georgia race puts pressure on Dems Globe heaps scorn on Trump for Paris exit MORE (I-Vt.) is perhaps the leading figure on the left after he gave Clinton a run for her money in the 2016 primary. Yet he is not even a member of the Democratic Party.

Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez is still adjusting to his leadership position after winning his post in a contest with Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.). The two have worked hard to forge a united front since the election.

The former Obama aide said Clintons criticisms of the DNC can make it tougher for new leaders to come forward.

It's hard to do that when you have the former nominee out there in a newsy, aggressive manner, the former Obama aide said.

While Obama has made public appearances since leaving office, he has generally refrained from talking about Trump. Instead, he has held events focused on getting young adults active in civic engagement, as he did in April.

That puts Obama in the tradition of other past presidents who have generally sought to avoid public criticisms of their immediate successors.

Whether Obama sticks to that role consistently going forward is unclear.

Clinton, of course, is not a former president.

Longtime aides and advisers say she will not run for public office again, and that she feels liberated to finally speak her mind. They anticipate that Clinton will keep discussing the election, particularly to promote her upcoming book, which is expected to be published this fall.

She's saying the same stuff she would say on a phone call with me, said one former aide, who worked on the 2016 campaign. And I think she'll continue to have a national dialogue on what needs to be fixed.

Some Democrats say Clinton is better off laying low.

I'm not sure there is a political strategy here, said Democratic strategist Brad Bannon. It sounds to me like more of a personal strategy.

Complaining about an outcome and blaming everyone else is not a good political strategy, Bannon added.

Jamal Simmons, a Democratic strategist, acknowledged some frustration among Democrats over Clintons remarks.

Some people I know are just frustrated that it's happening, he said. She is a national hero and a great public servant and has the right to be upset."

But Simmons added that if she's going to discuss the loss, it would be nice to hear a little more about the things she did wrong, which I believe mattered more than what she has discussed.

Simmons, who worked for Al GoreAl GoreGore: Recreating 19th century not 'visionary strategy' for 21st century Dems want Hillary Clinton to leave spotlight Gore: Paris accord sent 'powerful signal' to businesses, nations MORE's presidential campaign, said he is intimately familiar with the mourning that takes place after a narrow loss particularly one that was decided on so-called hanging chads.

When Al Gore lost the election, he went to Europe, gained weight and grew a beard, Simmons said. He walked away. And there's something to that.

Excerpt from:
Dems want Hillary Clinton to leave spotlight - The Hill

Hillary Clinton may be the most tone-deaf politician in modern history.

Repeatedly over the course of a 41-year career as a political wife, candidate and appointee, shes said and done things that alienated voters. Who can forget her acerbic comments during the 1992 presidential race? I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas, she told one reporter on the campaign trail in describing her decision to continue her legal career while first lady of Arkansas.

And then there was her response in defending her husband from allegations of extramarital affairs: You know, Im not sitting here, some little woman standing by my man like Tammy Wynette.

More recently, there was her testimony in front of the committee investigating the attacks on a US post in Libya that resulted in the deaths of four Americans, including the US ambassador: Was it because of a protest, or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided theyd go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?

And of course, there was this infamous claim during the presidential campaign: You could put half of Trumps supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. She described these people as irredeemable, racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic you name it.

But Clintons tin ear hasnt improved with age or experience. Last week, she told a California audience, I take responsibility for every decision I made but thats not why I lost [the presidential election].

She went on to blame the Democratic National Committee, saying that after she became the partys nominee, she inherited nothing from the Democratic Party: It was bankrupt. It was on the verge of insolvency. Its data was mediocre to poor, nonexistent, wrong. I had to inject money into it to keep it going.

She didnt bother to mention that DNC operatives were alleged to have helped her secure the nomination in the first place. She portrayed herself as a victim, even using the word to describe why the assumption she was going to win hurt her. And of course, she blamed the Russians not without some justification, given their alleged role in hacking her e-mails and using WikiLeaks to dump them at the height of the election and former FBI Director James Comeys investigation of her private e-mail servers.

Clintons lament, however, helps neither her nor the investigation into Russias meddling in the election. The best thing she could do right now is to stay silent.

Like it or not, Donald Trump won the election according to our constitutional rules, securing enough electoral votes to win the presidency. There has been no evidence that Russia hacked voting machines and altered the vote count.

And even if Trumps operatives helped weaponize information gleaned from the meddling as Clinton claimed without citing evidence other than hearsay saying so publicly without proof may undermine the case against the Russians among those who will simply chalk up the charges to partisan whining.

The more Clinton blames others for her election loss, the less sympathetic a figure she becomes. She has never been her own best advocate. Whether its the vast right-wing conspiracy, the Russians or Comey, someone else is always to blame when things dont go her way.

She wants to be perceived as a powerful woman in her own right one capable and deserving of leading the most powerful nation in the world on the one hand and a hapless victim of forces beyond her control on the other. Shed be better off separating her defeat from the very real threat that one of Americas strongest adversaries tried to interfere in our election.

Hillary Clinton and many Democrats seem to miss the forest for the trees in the Russia story. Russia may well have wanted to see Clinton defeated and Trump elected, but its ultimate purpose was to undermine confidence in American institutions and our electoral process. It wanted to sow seeds of distrust among American voters and to undercut American influence in the world, regardless of who won.

Turning the story of Russias involvement in the 2016 election into a partisan issue helps further Russian aims, and the real loser is American democracy.

Linda Chavez is the author of An Unlikely Conservative: The Transformation of an Ex-Liberal.

Read more:
How Hillary's sore-loserism helps Vladimir Putin - New York Post

Standing in her parents pastel-hued living room, the low hum of a neighbors hedge trimmer buzzing behind her, Hannah Risheq launched her campaign for the Virginia state legislature with a slightly rambling speech that was peppered with like, um and other youthful tics.

Despite her lack of polish, there was something compelling about the baby-faced 25-year-old Democratic candidate. A big part of it was her personal story: Her Palestinian immigrant father and Jewish mother were pushed out of Greensboro, North Carolina, when customers stopped patronizing their restaurant after the September 11 attacks. The family of five headed north and started over in the salad bowl of Virginias Fairfax County.

But theres another aspect of Risheqs allure: her intensity. She captivated the roughly two dozen people who attended her launch party in Aprilfrom gray-haired neighbors to 20-something friends and volunteers. Im standing up, Risheq promised, and Im going to take down [Republican incumbent] Jim LeMunyon.

Subscribe to Newsweek from $1 per week

The odds are against her. Shes not even the favorite in her Democratic primary: That would be 38-year-old community activist Karrie Delaney. But even if Risheq losesin the June 13 primary or come NovemberDemocrats win, because with their ranks decimated after nearly a decade of state and local losses, Risheq and thousands of other young first-time politicians like her represent the partys best hope of resurrecting itself in the age of Donald Trump. Over the past decade, only Barack Obamas name on the ballot has attracted the broad mix of supporters Democrats need to win elections. When Obama wasnt running (in 2010, 2014 and 2016), the party got crushed. Since 2008, Democrats have lost both houses of Congress and nearly 1,000 state legislative seats. The GOP now controls 67 of 98 partisan legislative chambers around the country. With their 2016 election losses, Democrats were shut out of power at the federal level and left with few rising local stars.

The dearth of emerging leaders helps explain the remarkable disconnect last year between the party establishment, which backed Hillary Clintons presidential campaign, and a younger, more diverse, progressive base, which embraced Vermont independent Bernie Sanders. The result was a surprisingly fierce primary that splintered the party and aroused deep suspicions about the Democratic National Committee and other party leaders in Washington. Even as Democrats rally to oppose President Trump, the wounds from the 2016 contest havent healed. And none of the party eldersfrom its septuagenarian leaders in Congress to its dwindling number of governorsseem to have a plausible plan to regain power.

Since Trumps election, what Democrats do have, however, is a young bloc of angry voters. The challenge for the party is to turn that angerthat energyinto electoral gains. And fielding strong candidates at a local level is a critical first step.

Over the last decade, Democrats have seen Republicans methodically take over state governments, shifting the country to the right on key issues such as taxes, labor rights and abortion. Those local gains have also helped the GOP consolidate their power in D.C. In most states, the party that controls the legislature gets to draw the voting district lines, which can help both state and national lawmakers insulate themselves from competition. Thats exactly what happened in 2010, when Republicans took control of state legislatures in Colorado, New Hampshire, North Carolina and more than a dozen other states. The next year, those legislatures redrew the state maps in their favor, as both parties have done in the past.

Opponents complain that redistricting has warped voter representation. Take Virginia, for example, where the GOP redrew district lines to pack Democrats into certain areas and insulate their own candidates in others. Republicans there control the state House by a wide margin and the Senate by a narrower one, even though Democrats now dominate statewide. Clinton, for instance, won Virginia in November by nearly 200,000 votes.

Gerrymandering, however, isnt the only state-level problem for the Dems. Theyve also been handicapped by a lack of compelling candidates. The Northern Virginia district where Risheq is running favors Democratsthe partys gubernatorial and presidential candidates have won comfortably here in recent years. Yet LeMunyon, the Republican incumbent, did not have a Democratic challenger when he was re-elected in 2015. Kelly Ward, executive director of the partys new National Democratic Redistricting Committee, says the Republican wave of victories early in the decade, combined with redistricting, created a sense among Democrats that, Oh, we cant winso why bother running?

Now, thanks to Trump, the lid is blown off of that problem, Ward claims, as a bevy of Democratic candidates are vying for officeat least in Virginia, with its off-year 2017 election. Usually, finding credible people to run is a time-consuming process. But since November, its been raining candidates, says David Toscano, the Democratic leader in the states House of Delegates. He notes that in 2015, the party fielded about 20 challengers to Republican delegates; this year, theyre up to 66 challengers running for 53 GOP seats.

This influx is a reflection of the ferment within the #Resistance movement rather than the strength of the Democratic Party, says Quentin Kidd, a political science professor at Christopher Newport University in Newport News, Virginia. Risheq is a prime example of how the president is mobilizing new recruits for his opposition. Fresh out of a graduate program at Columbia Universitys School of Social Work, she always thought she would run for office someday, but Trumps win accelerated that plan. Its time for a woman of color to be in this spot and a young person, she reasoned.

Even with the surge of Democrats running in Virginia, Republicans are likely to hold on to their majorityalbeit a smaller onein the state House this fall. But the swell of Democratic candidates is good news for the party as it looks to rebuild. The more people who run, the more contact there is with the local community, as these new candidates interact with potential voters and volunteers, explains Amanda Litman, the founder of Run for Something, a new progressive group that is supporting Risheq and other millennial candidates. These newcomers, Litman says, will also provide the party with future leaderspeople more in touch with grassroots efforts and the increasingly influential under-40 voters.

Run for Something is one of a growing number of progressive groups that emerged out of Clintonsand the partysdevastating losses in 2016. The organizations rallying of protesters outside Republican town halls and Trump properties around the country have attracted headlines, but it and other fledgling organizations are trying to channel that protest energy into gains at the ballot box at the state and local level. Former Democratic campaign operatives who have opted to work outside the formal party structure have created many of these groups.

In Litmans case, thats because she thinks the traditional party approach doesnt work. Democratic committees and donors measure a candidates viability by political experience and fundraising networks. Theyre likely to shun young first-timers. As Risheq says, A lot of people told me no. But Litman believes that supporting newcomers like Risheq is how you build the bench Democrats lack. Politics, she says, is like everything else: You need to get experience. Few newcomers win. But even if Risheq loses, Litman says, she can run again in two years or apply the skills shes acquired to boost other Democratic candidates and causes.

So while this 25-year-old Jewish-Palestinian may not look or sound like a traditional politician, Risheq and others like her may be exactly what Democrats need to reinvent themselves as they look toward 2018 and beyond.

Excerpt from:
Hillary Clinton They Aren't: The Millennials Working to Save the Democratic Party - Newsweek

Photo Credit: Hillary Clintons Instagram (@hillaryclinton)

Hillary Clinton often leaned on first lady Michelle Obama during her unsuccessful run for U.S. president in 2016. Mrs. Obama stumped for Clinton in several cities and even delivered the most memorable speech of Clintons entire campaign during the DNC convention.

Hillary understands that the president is about one thing and one thing only, its about leaving something better for our kids. Thats how weve always moved this country forward, by all of us coming together on behalf of our children, folks who volunteer to coach that team, to teach that Sunday school class, because they know it takes a village, Obama said.

Although Obama did everything in her power to help get Hillary Clinton elected, Clinton had not always given that same form of generosity. In fact, Clinton once refused to share the same plane with Obama.

According to an email obtained by Judicial Watch through the Freedom of Information Act, Clinton did not want to share a plane with Mrs. Obama for Betty Fords funeral in 2011. In the email exchange with her top aide, Huma Abedin, Clinton discussed the trip to Palm Dessert, California. Clinton agreed to speak at the funeral but insisted that she and Obama take different planes. After asking twice, Abedin agreed to request two planes for the trip.

Clintons desire to take separate planes from Mrs. Obama reveals a lot about why Clinton was not an endearing presidential candidate. Sure, she could have done a better job than Trump in the White House, but her personality never galvanized the masses. Clintons untrustworthy background has always come back to haunt her. The same woman who once called young Black males super predators and pushed for the 1994 Crime Bill, has never been able to overcome those remarks. It was her husbands bill that eventually led to mass incarceration of Blacks over the past two decades. Moreover, Hillary Clinton also championed welfare reform that eventually doubled extreme poverty for Blacks.

Beyond policy, it shows a consistent character flaw. A flaw that led to the election of the most incompetent U.S. president in history.

So it comes as no surprise that Clinton would refuse to share a plane with Mrs. Obama. Her record of being a warm and trustworthy person has always been sketchy.

Original post:
Hillary Clinton once refused to take same plane with Michelle Obama - Rolling Out

From jokes about the election outcome and the inaugural crowd size to warnings about the Trump administration's growing Russia scandal, Hillary Clinton has turned her ire on President Trump. (Jenny Starrs/The Washington Post)

With Democrats still trying to figure out whos going to lead them, Hillary Clintons reemergence on the political scene is attracting a lot of attention. But while her recent appearances indicate that she can still lend a high-profile voice to Democratic causes, Clinton risksigniting a controversy that distracts from her partys message.

On Wednesday, during an eventat the Code Conference, Clinton told interviewers Kara Swisher and Walt Mossberg that she believed theDemocratic National Committees failures contributed to her loss. This rankled some political operatives and caused a small Twitter furor. Over on the right, Fox Newsfired up a Clinton chyron andbrought pundits on to condemn her words.

The moment underscored for Clinton that if shes going to return to public life and help to Democrats shes going to need to choose her words and actionswisely.

Democratic operatives sayits not surprising that Clinton would reenter the fray. She has immense resources and influence after a historic election and a long career in politics. And Trump is working to enact the kind of future she ran against.

However, she remains a deeply polarizing figure and an unpopular one. A Suffolk University poll from March found that Trump had a higher favorability rating than Clinton and that her favorability has dropped since the election.

Clinton is alsoreturning at a time when political watchers wish to move on from 2016 yet continue to pore over the results, trying to figure out how to move the party forward in 2018 and 2020. Though her prominence in the Democratic Party means shes unlikely to ever fully disappear from the spotlight, she is human kindling for the combustible debates happening among Democrats right now.

One of the benefits of Clinton reentering the political conversation is that her clout could provide direction and inspiration for a riled-up liberal base.

I think that she has people that were more than distraught that she lost. Those people are trying to figure out what to do, said Scott Mulhauser, who served in the Obama administration.I think her emerging and steering some of her supporters toward causes, toward issues, toward moments where they can weigh in, helps at a moment where a lot of her supporters are looking for outlets and looking to change things in Washington.

Mark Longabaugh, who served as a media adviser on Sen. Bernie Sanderss presidential campaign, said,Pointing out the flaws in Trumps foreign policy, Trumps health-care polices, I think that's a very appropriate place for her to be.

But operatives agreed that any remarks she makes about the 2016 election why she lost, for example may do more harm than good.

I think the concern right now is theres a lot of talk of unity and theres a lot of finger-pointing from progressives who want to point out institutional issues that exist within the party, said Nomiki Konst, who served as a Sanders campaign surrogate. Its like theres this external campaign of: Were all fine. Were all coming together. Were part of the resistance together. But the reality is there are real infrastructure issues within the party that need to be addressed.

Longabaugh had similar sentiments. I would be less inclined to do an autopsy of the election in terms of Comey, the Russians, the this ones, the that ones, he said.I dont think thats very productive for the Democratic Party moving forward.

As one longtime Democratic operative noted, Clinton is often at her best and perceived the best when she isnt running for officeand when she's lending her gravitas to causes that she believes in.

But some believe she should be wary of giving the impression that any public immersion is arelaunch for the Clinton brand, which could come across as self-interested.

They say sticking to supporting the progressive resistance and lending her voice to the chorus that's mostly being led by Sanders (I-Vt.), Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) might be a better way for Clinton to use her natural platform to guide the party.

Clinton certainly seems aware of her platform. Im not going anywhere, shepromised at the Code Conference.

Continued here:
Hillary Clinton is returning to public life. But if she wants to help Democrats, she should tread carefully. - Washington Post