It’s been over a year since Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 election, but the scapegoats continue to be named:
— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) November 25, 2017
“It is true that when you run to succeed a two-term president of your own party, you have a historical headwind blowing against you,” Clinton told radio host Hugh Hewitt. “It’s not just this campaign can be set apart from everything that’s ever happened in our politics. It is a challenge.”
“If you are both the candidate defending a lot of the areas of agreement, but also putting forth an agenda for change, which is what I tried to do, it is often difficult to get the second part of that message through,” she added. “So I do think it was a problem.”
In other words, campaigning as a “change” candidate seeking to succeed a “change” candidate she endorsed and worked for might have been an ill-advised approach? But of course it’s somebody else’s fault. Re-confirmed:
There is no one she will not blame. https://t.co/a6wMyNyK5l
— Bob ن (@BobHicks_) November 25, 2017
She can literally find an angle to blame anything https://t.co/WekgtpYNXT
— Melyssa Hubbard ? (@SpankCityHall) November 25, 2017
With the possible exception of somebody named “Hillary Clinton.”
Hard to be an agent of change if you agreed with his failed policies.
— Skip Russo (@BocaSkip) November 25, 2017
Her campaign really didn’t think that one through.