When Hillary Clinton said “they were never going to let me be president,” who was the “we”? The list is long, and Wednesday, the former Democratic nominee added another item: Socialists.
That is, the former secretary of state believes that it was her own love for capitalism that kept many hard-left Democrats from voting for her.
The moment occurred Wednesday at the Shared Values Leadership Summit, when the moderator, Allan Murray, noted Clinton is vocal about being a capitalist.
“You may be the only presidential candidate since World War II that actually had to stand up and say, ‘I am a capitalist.’ And you did. Did it hurt you?” he asked.
Clinton responded, “Probably. It’s hard to know, but if you’re in the Iowa caucuses and 41 percent of Democrats are socialists, or self-described socialists, and I’m asked, ‘Are you a capitalist?’ And I say, ‘Yes, but with appropriate regulation and appropriate accountability,’ you know, that probably gets lost in the ‘Oh my gosh, she’s a capitalist.'”
I normally take a dimmer view of Clinton’s many, many, many theories for why she thinks she lost the 2016 election, but there’s probably an element of truth in this capitalism business. No one expected that avowed socialist, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., would make her work hard in the Democratic primaries. But that’s exactly what happened.
The Vermont senator won primary and caucus contests in 22 states, and he lost to Clinton by less than a single point in Iowa. Sanders made a point to go after Clinton’s paid appearances at Wall Street firms, arguing she is beholden to deep-pocketed interests. It certainly doesn’t seem to have helped her campaign. Clinton claimed later in her book, What Happened, that Sanders’ Wall Street attacks did “lasting damage.”
This is up for debate. What’s undebatable is that a septuagenarian socialist gave Clinton a run for her money in the primaries. This could have something to do with what Clinton alleged this week, that many modern Democrats are on the socialism side of the political spectrum. But it probably has more to do with the fact that there are plenty of non-capitalism-related reasons for Democrats not to be thrilled about a Clinton candidacy.
There’s her spotty record on race, her preference for long-term armed conflict with no clear plan for peace, and, of course, the fact that she has actively participated in the sliming of the women who’ve accused former President Bill Clinton of sexual misconduct. There’s also the multiple personal and political flip-flops, and the fact that her pandering is always a bit too obvious. Sanders, on the other hand, is a what-you-see-is-what-you-get situation. There’s nothing particularly calculating or duplicitous about him. He’s a socialist, and he’s proud of it.
The fact that the senator presented himself as the realest, most authentic version of himself likely did more to help in the primaries than his preference for socialism. Authenticity, more than economic and political ideology, appears to go a long, long way with voters. It certainly seemed to work for Donald Trump.
