ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Hillary Clinton, who lost the presidential election, just can’t quite seem to get it through her head — that she lost the presidential election.

In a recent interview with New York Magazine, she told the writer she should’ve won — she would’ve won — had it not been for those dang, pesky Russians.

Her words: “I would have won had I not been subjected to the unprecedented attacks by [former FBI chief James] Comey and the Russians, aided and abetted by the suppression of the vote, particularly in Wisconsin,” where I didn’t bother to campaign.

Oops — that last was a bit of editorializing. But then again: it’s factual, so how much editorializing can it really be?

Let’s just say Clinton’s trying to wave a magic wand here and forget the fact it was her campaign — not the Russians, not Comey’s investigation, not the crappy voters in Wisconsin — that caused the big shocker loss.

Fact is: If Clinton actually ran on something, rather than against something, she may have given voters something to hold on to and support at the ballot boxes. Running a campaign on two platforms rather than policy only works if the two platforms resonate. And her choices — 1) I am Hillary, hear me roar and 2) Trump stinks — clearly nosedived with voters.

Comey coming in with some much-needed looks at her long-running email server scandal was simply the icing on a cake that had been cooling for a long time. Let’s just say Democrats, to the last, were furiously seeking another candidate to run. Joe Biden could’ve died, mid-campaign, and there would have still been some Dems who would’ve wanted his name on the ballot, instead of Clinton‘s.

The magazine article was titled, “Hillary Clinton is Furious. And Resigned. And Funny. And Worried.”

And it’s the press she turns a lot of her anger at — the pro-Democrat, left-leaning, loving-all-the-Dems-hating-all-the-Republicans press.

Unbelievably enough, she pines: “Look, we have an advocacy press on the right that has done a really good job for the last 25 years. They have a mission. They use the rights given to them under the First Amendment to advocate a set of policies that are in their interests, their commercial, corporate, religious interests.”

Well, there’s where you’re wrong, Hillary.

First off, everybody this side of Oz knows the press leans left — the press, the mainstream media, leans left. Too many Pew polls have revealed that the vast majority of journalists either identify as Democratic or independent, but that even the ones who identify as independent caucus, shall we say, with the Democrats on most domestic and foreign policy issues.

And second off? The press doesn’t have rights given to them under the First Amendment.

Press people have rights given to them by God. The First Amendment only makes clear that government can’t take those rights — because, after all, they’re not rights that came from the government in the first place.

And with that comes some light: Clinton’s loss, much as she would like it blamed on the media, the FBI, the Russians, the deplorables, the vast right wing majority, or so forth and so on, is due squarely to her own doing.

Clinton’s elitism and inability to grasp the spirit of America is what did her in — what prevented her then and what prevents her now from connecting with voters. The simple fact that she thinks government, not God, is the granter of Americans’ rights is a clear-cut reason why her campaign went down in flames.

Sign up for Daily Opinion Newsletter Manage Newsletters

Copyright © 2020 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.