NixGuy Dave, writing at AOL, puts forth a list of the "non-partisan" uber-liberals that CNN put forth as legitimate questioners and then says:If Hillary is a weak candidate, Democrats would be best served if they found out about it now, before it's too late, and CNN's actions here help Hillary, they don't help the Democratic party.This is not how Democrats play this game... Remember John Kerry? He was a pretty weak candidate too. Did the Democrats work to expose his weaknesses and find ways to turn them in to strengths? Nope. They did the rope-a-dope dance around every flaw that he had.
Same thing here with Hillary!.
As Republicans, we are used to hearing all about our candidates weaknesses and are able to evaluate how said candidate weathers those storms and handles the criticisms as a gauge for how well the candidate would handle real problems in office. Democrats do not find this sort of exercise useful. They call it "unity"...
Rudy Guiliani has had trouble convincing social conservatives that a vote for him won't bring down the Republic. The criticism was quite loud (much louder than it is today, anyway) and Team Rudy decided that the best way to handle that issue was to state the the kind of judges he would appoint are judges that are similar to judges that they already know. He put together a team of advisers and announced plans and policies that take the issues seriously even if they don't convince 100% of that constituency.
Have we ever seen a Democrat do anything like this? Let alone Hillary!?
