The fallout from Hillary Clinton's poor debate showing is much worse than a "bad night".  What we are witnessing is the classic disconnect between professional politicians, and the people.
Camille Paglia rightly notes that this isn't here first stumble down the campaign steps.

"The liberal Northeastern media were criminally complicit in enabling her queenlike, content-free "listening tour," where she took no hard questions and where her staff and security people (including her government-supplied Secret Service detail) staged events stocked with vetted sympathizers, and where they ensured that no protesters would ever come within camera range."

There is more to the story here.  If it were just avoiding the tough questions, that game would ultimately end, as it did in the Democratic party debates.  Eventually, you're going to be exposed to a difficult question, or line of questioning that you must respond too.  The real issue is in her fumbling response.  At first glance it appears to be a conundrum. The ignorant masses (I include myself here) have been told for years how incredibly intelligent his woman really is. The message was pounded in to us not just by the lazy media (I don't call them liberal, it's just laziness) but by her fellow Democrats and even a handful of Republicans.  So what's the story?  How could someone so smart have been so unprepared? The logical conclusion now is, she's not that smart. 

The truth is, it really doesn't matter.  This is politics, not particle physics.  Complex ideas that may be floating around in her head like ping-pong balls, must be articulated, and the voters must be persuaded to agree with the idea.  When Hillary attempts to formulate her rhetoric, she fails miserably.  Is this because she is an idiot?  I really don't know, and I don't care.  She fails in her rhetoric because she doesn't have the life experience, or general knowledge to build her case. 

There is no perfect legislation.  A new government law or program designed to solve one problem is going to create another. It is simply a balancing act.   If you can't understand the pros and cons, you can't make your case.  The plan to give a driver's license to an illegal immigrant is the perfect case study. 

On the surface, it looks like a good fix to a problem.  There are millions of illegal immigrants driving around, and we don't know if they can operate a vehicle or not.  If we give them a driver's license, we know they have a basic understanding of the rules of the road.

Great. But if you're going to back this plan, you should take a good five minutes and think it through.  Won't this just look like pandering to get votes?  Why would someone in the country illegally, risk discovery by going to a government office and  filling out a lot of paperwork?  How will Joe Sixpack, who just lost his job as a drywall finisher to an illegal immigrant feel about this plan? Isn't a driver's license used as a form of identification when you vote?  If you're not going to ask a lot of questions when you pass out a driver's license, couldn't anyone get one and use it for identity theft?

Hillary Clinton never bothered to look at this proposed legislation through the eyes of the very people she wishes to represent.  Because she's stupid? No, because it doesn't effect her life at all.  She is completely disconnected from the average American who stands in line to get a driver's license, who loses his job to an illegal immigrant,  or to the citizen who believes our laws should be followed.  The problem compounds itself with issues like national health care, immigration reform, and global warming related legislation.  A candidate must connect with the voters, and articulate their positions.  Simply stating the facts isn't enough.  If Senator Clinton can't grasp the full impact of her ideas on the voters, she cannot persuade them to vote for her.  Because she is so disconnected from the average voter, there is no easy way for her to accomplish this. 

And it will only get worse. In the one on one debates against a Republican challenger, the focus will be on her, and her positions for half of the entire debate. A challenger who "goes for the kill" will spot the weakness in her rhetoric and simply hammer away at her.  The disconnect with "real people" dictates that she will never be able to prepare for such a verbal assault.

Like to way in with your own opinion?  Go to <a href=http://www.u4prez.com>U4prez</a> and start your own campaign for president.  You can create your own editorials and see what the masses think.

Technorati Profile