In a very smart article that appeared in The Washington Post, Harvard professor Danielle Allen argued that likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton Hillary Diane Rodham ClintonJeff Flake: Republicans 'should hold the same position' on SCOTUS vacancy as 2016 Momentum growing among Republicans for Supreme Court vote before Election Day Warning signs flash for Lindsey Graham in South Carolina MORE would be advised to avoid failure by not falling into the trap that her opponent set for her, namely, the "woman card," proudly defending women's issues while offending men. But there are so many more ways for Clinton to fail. To name but a few: leaning to the middle and assuming that the left wing of the party and Sen. Bernie Sander's (Vt.) supporters will simply follow suit; failing to define what her political platform is, as opposed to what it is not; failing to handle her establishment credentials and make voters believe she is not simply more of the same; becoming characterized or defined by legacy issues, or erring in tying her coattails too closely to President Obama and becoming tarred with the business-friendly transactional approach that has offended many of his constituents; and finally, yielding to the temptation to get down in the mud with presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump Donald John TrumpUS reimposes UN sanctions on Iran amid increasing tensions Jeff Flake: Republicans 'should hold the same position' on SCOTUS vacancy as 2016 Trump supporters chant 'Fill that seat' at North Carolina rally MORE and losing the name-calling battle.

ADVERTISEMENT

Allen goes on to make sound recommendations as a strategy: Let your surrogates carry the name-calling message and remain above the fray and on message; quickly define Trump as the divisive force that he is and target his strength, his appeal to white wage-earning men who are disaffected by making America "fair" as opposed to "great."

There are far too many Clinton supporters who are resting easy in the thought that the American electorate is too sensible to ever elect a flawed candidate like Trump. Pundits are trotting out the electoral maps that give Clinton an overwhelming advantage in the Electoral College based on historical voting patterns. They are too confident and seemingly oblivious to the glaring realities of the American electorate.

Americans are furious. While Clinton's supporters point proudly to the 12.5 million votes cast for her in the primaries versus the 10.7 million for Trump, they are oblivious to the fact that 86 percent of Americans disapprove of Congress and an estimated 125 million people will be voting in November. The urge to "throw the bums out" after eight years of a Democrat in the office will be strong. Clinton's message of the practical progressive is flat and uninspiring. Her establishment credentials make it far too easy to label her as more of the same. Her interventionist foreign policy stance compounds that impression in the face of a public that wants endless wars to stop.

The world of professional politicians disparages Trump and the simple appeal he has as a name-calling demagogue. However, we would point out that the Republican Party could offer up a rhesus monkey and it would get 45 million votes in support. There are now voter suppression laws in place in some form in 36 states; before the 2012 elections, FiveThirtyEight estimated that between 0.8 and 2.4 percent of voters may be turned away. In July 2012, the Philadelphia Daily News placed the number as high at 9.2 percent in Pennsylvania. According to Jim DeMint, president of the Heritage Foundation, "[I]t's something we're working on all over the country, because in the states where they do have voter ID laws you've seen; actually, elections begin to change towards more conservative candidates." There are estimates that millions of Americans will be prevented from voting. Keep in mind that Obama won by 5 million votes in 2012.

The executive summary here is that Clinton is no shoo-in and her campaign strategy for the next six months will have to be smart. Being "smart" in this election cycle is much akin to shifting military strategies from conventional to asymmetrical approaches. Trump may be unpredictable, but he can be counted on to be craven. In addition to the smart advice from Allen to stay on message and shift to a fair-deal approach, she needs to do the following: embrace the Sanders campaign and make a vice presidential choice that will incorporate the progressive agenda into the White House policy circle; focus on the specifics of her economics message, not just generalizing about closing corporate loopholes. She will need to shore up her claims to being tough on Wall Street by promising to get rid of the carried interest deduction, increasing the capital gains tax. Her message to the middle class should be access to training and job relocation, funded by the $134 billion that could be gained from higher taxes on capital gains or the $108 billion that could be repatriated by ending the deferral of offshore corporate earnings. She can promise a reduction or elimination of student-debt interest charges by ending the depletion allowance that oil companies have enjoyed for over 100 years. Drawing contrasts and being specific will go a very long way toward distancing her from the ugly prospect Democrats have of the self-aggrandizing Clintons back in office to feather their nest and favor the few. When a candidate starts with a 47 percent disapproval rating and is widely branded as "untrustworthy," it matters not whom the opponent might be; there is much to overcome.

Russell is managing director of Cove Hill Advisory Services.