How Clinton lost

[Bob]

http://www.slate.com/id/2192827/ somewhat positive and mildly informative

[scooterbug44]

Very interesting and (IMO true) take on it!

[goodwitch58]

Too bad for her that she did not run as the woman she is; rather than as the candidate others have convinced her he had to be...

[Bob]

read carefully it's a slam on growing older and not being good on TV, do you hear that McCain?

[Margarita]

read carefully it's a slam on growing older and not being good on TV, do you hear that McCain?

Read carefully and you will see that it's a slam on being an historic candidate with no substance, do you hear that Obama?

But the substance of her presidential run seems far more dismal than I would ever have imagined

You can't be a historic first unless you act like one,

[Minnie]

Thanks for sharing, that was an interesting read.

[rapunzel]

Too bad she showed the poor judgment to first hire Mark Penn, and then keep him around despite the fact every bit of advise he gave her was so very wrong.

Mark Penn was shocked to learn -- after Super Tuesday -- that delegates were awarded on a proportional basis. He thought that by winning California and New York, they'd capture the nomination. That, in my opinion, is the reason she lost the nomination.

Mark Penn is a relic. Hiring him was a huge mistake, and for me showed early on that she lacked the vision to become president in times with so much at stake.

With that said, I think we as Democrats should let this thread die. To keep this argument going instead of aggressively looking forward to the general is completely unproductive for anyone interested in seeing a progressive Democrat win the White House come November.

A lot of good people ran but didn't get the nomination, bygones...

[Chickpea]

Apparently even Clinton is known to say could have ....should have..... would have....

And yes, let's concentrate on getting him nominated - it is going to be a tough tough battle.