Just because he "lost" (by 5 points!) to Hillary in Nevada, it's insane to assume that Bernie Sanders has lost the nomination. I doubt the Clinton gang believe that. P Diddie at Brains and Eggs has a masterly wrap-up of the Clinton win in Nevada after a surge of support for Bernie Sanders. Excerpt:
Two links: The Hill, with Hillary asking herself a question -- and not answering it directly -- about trust ...
“I understand that voters have questions,” Clinton said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “I’m going to do my very best to answer those questions."
"I think there’s an underlying question that is really in the back of people’s minds, and that is, you know, ‘Is she in it for us or is she in it for herself?’” she added.
“I think that’s, you know, a question that people are trying to sort through."... and Ron Fournier at The Atlantic, clarifying it.
Voters learned not to trust Bill Clinton to tell the truth about his private life. But they believed him when he said he got up every morning determined to work for them. “Is he in it for us or is he in it for himself?” Even when Bill Clinton disgraced himself and faced impeachment for lying about sex with an intern, most voters believed he was still in it for them.
Most voters don’t feel that way about Hillary Clinton, and it’s a dangerous matter of trust. She can’t convince voters that she’s always been honest—not in an era that equips people to be their own electronic fact-checkers. She can’t give today’s voters the authenticity they crave.
Her challenge is to convince them that even if she’s mendacious, she’s their liar—she’s on their side—and the other side lies almost as much.
Hillary and her people need to be certain that the definition of 'the other side' they're using is the Republicans ... and not Bernie Sanders.
Plus, the last thing Democrats need is to behave like Republicans: confused, mendacious, and mean.
