Hillary Clinton has now positioned herself as the “Solutions” candidate. And what solutions has she to offer as examples that she can solve problems and find solutions? If you look at the string of losses she has accumulated in her campaign, you have to ask yourself why didn’t she solve the problem of losing votes?
You could also look at the problem of discovering infidelity on her husband’s part and the solution she chose, which was to simply overlook his indiscretion. Or, you could look at the request to reveal her tax information and her choice to not disclose it; you have to wonder what, as President, she would hide from the American people.
You could wonder at the method of campaigning that inspires no one and attacks her opponent because he makes better speeches? You could wonder about the pragmatic approach to modifying her image and her campaign tactics on a weekly basis trying to find out what will work. This is not problem solving but crisis management of the typical sort you see in mangers who operate by trial and error. Finding one’s voice after 35 years “experience” seems to be rather slow on the uptake.
To be a person of solutions you need a set of problem solving skills. These skills require that you first of all put a big priority on preventing problems. Hillary has not shown any evidence that she has developed this skill. The campaign she is running is the greatest testament to this . This approach translates into a President reacting and not preventing problems from occurring. For example, let’s look at a typical situation a President may face, for instance – if spending is getting out of hand and the money is deteriorating in value due to excessive printing to cover bigger debt brought on by such huge spending programs as universal health care. Only by ignoring the long term effects of inflation could such a sanction for a huge increase in spending happen. This is pretending that universal health care is a solution when in fact it creates a far more dangerous “illness” that will affect all citizens.
Hillary’s problem solving was evident from the start by the emergence of scandal to the failed health care fiasco early in Bill Clinton’s presidency. There was no evidence that she was interested in being transparent or inclusive in her efforts to accomplish anything. She has demonstrated she is a micro-manager that must oversee every detail – which shows a reluctance to delegate and a lack of trust of her subordinates. Her inability to recognize these failings is another indication that as much as she wants to change into a viable vote getter she will not change her basic mode of operation. To posit yourself as a solutions candidate without trying to understand what is required to be an effective problem solver and ignoring a past of poor performance shows that she believes a simple declaration of her ability is sufficient. Facts don’t lie but politicians do.
The most reprehensible part of Hillary’s campaign is her attack on Donald Trump for his virtue. To denounce his ability to inspire via the spoken word should be applauded by any honest observer. Hillary doesn’t think such recognition is warranted. She voices a disdain for his speeches because she cannot match his eloquence and enthusiasm. This is the spoiled brat approach to not getting her own way. After being coddled and “protected” she has come to believe she has been” ordained” to occupy the White House where she lived as First Lady or what may be more accurately designated as to function as “First Guest”. Her assessment of her experience is long on years but short on substance. What experience can you claim by a mere presence in locations? It is a far different experience to conduct tours of the White House than to do the work of the President which is primarily making decisions. And how does Hillary make decisions?
She talks of making changes and cozies up to old cohorts who have questionable pasts and are simply “yes” people who want to ride her coattails. A person who cultivates animosity to the tune of a 50% negative doesn’t sound like someone who is focused on their own problems or solutions for them.
Consider the necessity of a Commander-in-Chief to possess a knowledge of strategy and victory. Translate a political campaign performance with a battle campaign that places lives at stake and an absolute need for victory. Do we want a military leader who tries and fails and then explains that she is learning while she reinvents her tactics and her position? Hillary has the ambition, but that is about all she is offering the voter. She wants the power and thinks that by having power she will then be above criticism much like Reptevia in “The Fiddler on the Roof”.
Wielding power cannot be done effectively with a flawed method of mental operation. If you refuse to listen to subordinates or your boss (the voters), you fog your vision with the emotions of keeping the power. It becomes a dictatorial process where all issues are addressed because you are the boss. This in spite of facts, advice, or consequences. Benghazi proved this. This is not a solutions mentality but a way to achieve disaster. Excessive spending leads to inflation. Poor military decisions lead to losses on the battle field. Animosity leads to gridlock. Ignoring the obvious leads to national embarrassment or worse. Hillary does not take criticism well. She doesn’t mind dishing it out, but she is oblivious to the fact that as President she would receive day after day of disagreement. Like her husband, she would undoubtedly receive an impeachment movement. Her secretive ways would be an invitation for investigations and the promises she is spouting in her speeches would simmer and stew on back burners as her personal animosity takes front stage.
To offer solutions is one thing, to achieve them is another. There are a lot of solutions that would make the government an instrument of protector of individual rights. There are solutions like the gold standard that would protect the value of our currency. The limitation of the government to its nature as an instrument of force enacted to protect individual rights is a solution to a government growing daily out of control. These are real solutions that will not materialize under a Hillary regime.
No, Hillary is not a solutions candidate, but a problem candidate that will require a solutions president to resolve, if she gets elected, after she leaves office. Her proposals of solutions to date have all been utterances of what she perceives are things a majority of voters want to hear. And her perceptions have been off base as her election results proclaim. There is one solution she could offer and implement that would resolve the Democrat’s wavering on who to support. She could stand aside and do what is best for the country, the Democratic party, and the long term acrimony America would experience under her thumb.. But like so many of the solutions Hillary is offering they have little to do with the future of America unless she can dictate, revel in the glory, claim credit for, and, ultimately, wield power over the munchkins.Tags: Hillary Clinton