"In a special report, POLITICO offers a behind-the-scenes account of the extensive shadow campaign that has sprouted up around Hillary Clinton in recent months to lay the groundwork for a 2016 presidential run. Some of the activity has the former first lady's (emphasis mine) tacit approval. Some involves outside groups that are operating independently, and, at times, in competition with one
another, to prepare a final career act for the former senator and secretary of state, whose legacy as the most powerful woman in the history of American politics is already secure.
More than two dozen people in her orbit described a virtual campaign-
in-waiting - a term that itself makes some of Clinton' s supporters bristle - consisting of longtime Clinton loyalists, as well as people who worked doggedly to elect her onetime rival Barack Obama." - Politico
The fall semester kept me pretty busy (*cough* 4.0 *cough*) and I've been trying to take a break, but I just wanted to take a moment to call bullshit on this update. There's nothing wrong with being a former first lady or a current first lady. I do not look lightly upon what a total bundle of insanity that job...and let's be real, it's a job...must be like. All that said, what the hell, Politico? I'm not sure if you remember this, but before Hillary Clinton was the First Lady she was a very capable and well-compensated lawyer. After being the First Lady she was elected a United States Senator from the state of New York, following which she was herself a Presidential candidate and then the Secretary of State of the United States of America. Perhaps former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton?
What I'm saying is, given all the things that Hillary Clinton has done with her life, need we identify her by the powerful person to whom she was married? I don't think we do.
And "shadow campaign"? Really? I'm not entirely sure that the "shadow campaign" surrounding Hillary Clinton could be any less shadowy if it tried. Is it extensive? Yeah, it is. I can think of nothing more to say to this than, duh. The article is a rehash of everything you've heard about Clinton's prospective run including this tidbit:
"Why put herself through the campaign pulverizer again and risk ending her groundbreaking career on a low note? She could still wield plenty of influence from the outside — and enjoy a normal, fulfilling family life for the first time in who knows how long."
Let's say she runs and loses, why does that mean it's the end of her career?
Look, I'm trying not to pay too much attention to the Clinton campaign until the Former Secretary of State announces herself, but I'm also gearing up for sexist onslaught. Unlike Hillary Clinton, sexism has already announced itself.