when seen in the rear view mirror than she does when looming ahead. At least that’s what I take away from her most recent favorable/unfavorable ratings from Gallup:
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Dogged by continued scrutiny of her email practices as secretary of state, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s favorability with the American public has sunk to one of its lowest levels in Gallup’s 23-year trend. Currently, 41% of U.S. adults say they have a favorable opinion of the Democratic front-runner, while 51% hold an unfavorable view.
The graph attached to the post is interesting. She hasn’t had this low a favorable rating since 1993.
I’m noticing that the headlines for Clinton’s interview today are something like: “Clinton ‘sorry’ for E-mail Confusion.” Haven’t heard any of it yet, but I cannot tell if the writer is trying to emphasize her contrition, or prepare me for a word with a particularly defined meaning.
Secretary of State Clinton staked out an approach to the job that was bound to improve her favorabilities. Being a liberal-hawk is a sign of foreign policy maturity in many liberal elite circles and garners approval across the aisle. Also, being low-risk in her foreign policy objectives (unlike her successor), she avoided political embarrassment. I believe if Clinton were still Secretary of State, we would still be negotiating the release of Bergdahl and the Iranian nuclear deal.
I meant to write “political embarrassment or risk”