Priceonomics

Bias against Hillary

Free online version of this book

Now that it's clear that Hillary will be our next president, we should start dealing with the media bias against her. I hear it said over and over on TV---even on PBS---that Hillary still hasn't provided voters with a compelling reason to support her---or a "vision" of what she would do as president.

Good to see this commentary today after last night's debate:

Clinton articulated her position on SCOTUS nominees, defended the 2nd amendment and common sense gun safety, defended Roe v Wade, offered a clear plan for how to grow our economy, reiterated her commitment to comprehensive immigration reform, discussed the importance of retaking Mosul from ISIS and then move on to retake Raqqa in Syria, defended her support for a no-fly zone in Syria, articulated the importance of working to stop home-grown terrorism, reiterated that her investments in economic growth will be paid for by having the wealthy and corporations pay their fair share, alluded to her plan to raise revenue for the Social Security Trust Fund and committed to no reduction in Social Security or Medicare benefits. Whether you agree or disagree with her, she gave us pertinent information about her proposals.

People can't complain that she hasn't given them a reason to vote for her if they can't even look at her website---she gave the audience the address in the first two debates---which lays out in some detail her dramatically liberal agenda.

Even the non-Breitbart right has some grudging praise for her debate performances:

National Review editor Rich Lowry just tweeted that Clinton “never made a major mistake” in the three debates. I think this is correct — she managed not to have any moments along the lines of “you didn’t build that” or “basket of deplorables.” She’s not noted as a particularly brilliant or moving communicator, but it seems like people on both sides agree that she’s been competent and clear. This is a change after the charisma of her husband, the soaring rhetoric of candidate Obama, and the folksy charm of George W. Bush. Whether that matters, I guess, remains to be seen.

Historically, this is like Harry Truman, who was widely derided in the media as an unworthy successor to FDR. Over time Truman's reputation grew, especially after his stunning 1948 election victory. Politically Hillary will be Harry Truman in drag. 

A prediction: Once she's been president for a while, her favorability ratings will go up significantly. Recall that only two years ago she was the most admired woman in the country.