Yes, Hillary, the DNC is why you lost the election

In an interview at Recode’s Code Conference in California this past Wednesday, Hillary Clinton once again took responsibility for losing to President Donald Trump in 2016’s presidential race while simultaneously dodging blame. Clinton, who lost a not-as-close-as-we-are-pretending election to Trump, has long been searching for a compelling and convincing scapegoat for the most cringe-worthy defeat in any modern presidential election. James Comey, the former FBI Director fired by President Trump—for, apparently, asking too many questions about his connections to Russia—has been Ms Clinton’s favourite target.

Wikileaks and Russian interference are also frequently mentioned as factors contributing to Clinton’s November loss, and Wednesday she added the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz to the long list of non-Clintons at guilt.

To keep it brief, Clinton blamed the DNC’s insufficient or inferior data and lack of funds for her defeat.

I set up my campaign and we have our own data operation. I get the nomination. So I’m now the nominee from the Democratic Party. I inherit nothing from the Democratic Party. I mean, it was bankrupt.

For an organisation responsible for seeing Democrats elected to political offices all across the country, this is a harsh critique, including of the organisation’s management. And, if you follow the link above, you’ll find that current DNC staff are calling bullshit on this.

During most of the 2016 presidential election cycle, a close Clinton ally was the woman in charge of the entire Democratic Party’s infrastructure and strategy, one Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. Before Wasserman-Schultz, the person running the DNC was Hillary Clinton’s pick for vice president, Tim Kaine. After helping secure Clinton the nomination to be the Democratic candidate for president over Independent Senator Bernie Sanders—a firebrand progressive who ran as a Democrat as a means to move the party left, away from Third Way neoliberalism made tolerable by former-President Bill Clinton’s charm and Obama’s sophistication—Wasserman-Schultz decided to step down and join Clinton’s campaign. Even after a less-than-enthusiastic reception at the Democratic Convention, Clinton supported her ally.

*Not to get lost on the Third Way or neoliberalism movement, but it is not a progressive ideology economically, and only moderately so socially. It is a bridge ideology meant to close the gap between the political right and political left, all for the sake of corporate profits. It is a globalist, corporatist political movement hellbent on exploiting every last resource the planet has to offer for the sole purpose of wealth accumulation at society’s top. Neoliberals are somewhat willing to throw oil and coal under the bus to combat climate change and generally support more welfare programs than conservatives, so they get credit where credit is due.*

In 2008, when Ms Clinton ran for president before ultimately losing the primary to former-President Barack Obama, Wasserman-Schultz was her campaign chair and obvious confidante. As head of the DNC, the unpopular Wasserman-Schultz and the DNC aided Ms Clinton in her primary contest against Senator Sanders, an action Tom Perez, current Chair of the Democratic National Committee, and lawyers for the DNC have argued they possess the right to do. You should read more about the fraud lawsuit filed against the DNC, which marks an important milestone in challenging the established oligarchy of the United States.

In essence, Wasserman-Schultz and the DNC helped secure Hillary Clinton the Democratic nomination for president in 2016 and were so bad at it that Clinton hired Wasserman-Schultz to be a special advisor on her campaign as soon as she legally could and then leveraged all of the DNC’s resources in her battle against Trump. Lest we forget, she also chose the previous chair as her running mate.

Clinton is full of shit. Of all the bullshit she’s spewed since being rejected by average Americans, Clinton’s blame of the DNC, and effect Wasserman-Schultz, rings hollow. That doesn’t mean she isn’t also right.

To be honest, I agree with Hillary Clinton, because had the DNC not climbed on top of her giant strap-on dildo, she never would have been the nominee and wouldn’t have lost to Donald Trump. Who knew she would turn out to be right after all this time? Not to imply that Bernie couldn’t have lost, only that Clinton was never going to win.

*Updated June 2, 6:50 pm CST

To further stress how full of shit Hillary Clinton was in making this claim, allow me to add the following.

In July 2016, prior to Wasserman-Schultz stepping down and Clinton officially receiving her party’s nomination, the DNC outraised the Republican National Convention $32.4 million to $27.2 million. On July 16, 2016, Politico reported that “Hillary Clinton’s joint fundraising committee with the Democratic National Committee raised $81.6 million over the last three months,” adding that “Hillary Victory Fund’s FEC report reveals a smoothly functioning Democratic Party fundraising apparatus behind their presumptive nominee [emphasis added].”

This was before she accepted the nomination and far outpaced Trump and the Republicans.

On 9/1/2016, CNN said Clinton “[smashed] fundraising record” for August by gobbling up $143 million. Exactly one month later, the LA Times reported that “Hillary Clinton raised $154 million in September” and that at the end of August the DNC had “$68.4 million in the bank to Trump’s $50.2 million.”

Money wasn’t the problem.

Additionally, some DNC staffers had the following to say on Twitter regarding the DNC’s data.