Jim Murray

6 years ago · 4 min. reading time · 0 ·

Blogging
>
Jim blog
>
The Successful Albeit Pretty Slimy Repositioning of Hillary Clinton

The Successful Albeit Pretty Slimy Repositioning of Hillary Clinton

~ Jim Murray ~
Communication Strategist ® Writer ® Editor © Op-Ed Blogger
Art Director ® Project Manager * beBee Brand Ambassador
Partner with Charlene Norman @ Bullet Proof Consulting

With an experience base that bridges
the Digital Divide by a good two decodes,

| work with direct clients large & small,
designers, art/crective directors & consultants
fo create results-driven, strategically-focused
communication in all on & offline media.

Phone: 289 687A couple days ago I wrote a post on Facebook. Guess you could call it a mini-rant. But there was a point to doing it.

I have a few ‘friends’ on FB who are very conservative. One of them, in fact is actually in the game, not sure at exactly what level. But he’s there and pushing the conservative peanut up the hill in a country that’s primarily Liberal.

The point of the was to see if I could get anybody to disagree with me and give me some good reasons why they did.

Did it work? You be the judge.

My original post:

I watched the Anderson Cooper interview with Hillary Clinton, and all I could think was if that Hillary had shown up during the election, instead of the one fighting Puff the Magic Dragon, she would have been able to convince a lot more people that she was the better candidate.

But she got successfully repositioned by Russian hackers and Wikileaks. She wasn't willing to play at the guttersnipe level that Trump played at and she found out the hard way that civility now means fuck all in America. Bernie Sanders would have been miles ahead if he had thrown in with Clinton early on and they had been the ticket.

Then he would have been able to be highly influential in getting all the stuff he wanted and would not have to resort to writing a dumb ass book about it. Hillary Clinton got fucked over by her own party. By Sanders. By Trump. By the Russians. By Wikileaks. By the right wing media assholes and even the FBI. It was a total gang bang.

But the real victims here were the American people who have to suffer through all the bullshit Trump is creating and American democracy, which is just some ideology that everybody used to know. It's way beyond sad. The most important country in the world being run by the world's biggest asshole. Ironic.

This was my conservative friend’s response.

Of course, Hillary losing had nothing to do with her - or the fact she was the least popular Presidential candidate of all time. I read this today in "National Review”

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/451289/ta-nehisi-coates-wrong-hillary-clinton-not-racism-why-donald-trump-president

You can read this article if you like. It’s really nothing more than an elaboration of the conservative viewpoint, which reinforces my friend’s argument that Hillary Clinton is amazingly unpopular, which you have to actually question when you look at the popular vote numbers.

I don’t really factor in the electoral college tally, which actually won the election for Trump. Mainly because I think this is not only an anachronism, but something that the Jared Kushner and his propellerhead team and the GOP could have very easily rigged, and have been accused of doing so.

But my original point was really about what should have happened,

and I actually thought would happen, which was a coalition between Clinton & Sanders. This would have forced the GOP to play fair and, I believe would have changed the outcome of this election for the better.

So my response back to my friend was:

As I thought I clearly pointed out, she was repositioned by all of these forces. Do you really think that people came to the conclusions about her without all this influence?

Sorry, but people have been manipulated into all kinds of shit because they are easy to manipulate. BTW: She did win the popular vote by 3 million.

So not everybody got sucked in, only the really addle-brained. After the fact analysis is wonderful, but it's mostly bullshit. You're a communications guy. You know perfectly well what happened here.

And he shot back.

Jim, please don't tell me what I know perfectly well. I believe Hillary was an awful candidate - yes, more awful than Trump. The Democrats and their supporters should be reflecting on what they did wrong, and stop whining and blaming everyone else.

But I got the last word.

We can agree to disagree on that one. On the downside, life would be a lot less interesting if she had gotten elected by the majority that voted for her. I totally agree with Trump that the election was rigged.

I don’t know what it is about conservatives these days. But they tend to make all these accusations, and their only rationale comes in the form of things like. “A lot of people have said”… or “Everybody knows” or “I really believe”.

This is all rhetoric that they have picked up from Trump, who is probably the most clueless president in the history of America. He is very fond of telling anyone who will listen that everybody thinks the same way he does. He has never actually quoted a specific source

nor has he ever really bothered to think about the ramifications of telling outright lies and contouring reality to fit his point of view.

And so what happens is that a culture springs up where innuendo, lies, bullshit, fabrication, and slander become OK, as long as it bolsters your argument.

So you can see that, in a climate like this, it’s very hard for people to actually listen and appreciate opposing points of view.

This Whole Thing Revolves Around Marketing

2f44c2ae.jpgDonald Trump and the GOP won this election because they did a better job creating a negative persona of Hillary Clinton than the Democrats did of creating a negative persona of Trump.

This effort was aided to a great degree by Russian hackers, Wikileaks, gerrymandering to manipulate the electoral college in swing states and the fact that the GOP has been working on creating a negative persona of Mrs. Clinton since she was the First Lady back in the 1990s.

All these tactics have been reported on and proven to be true. But nobody seems to give a shit, except for the recipient of all this corruption.

It is extremely difficult to know what’s true and not true about anyone. And the more public they are the more difficult a task this is.

I’m neither Democrat nor Republican. In fact, I’m not even a damn American. But what I have witnessed over the last two years in that country only says to me that their political system needs to be blown up and replaced with something that isn’t more than 200 years old.

That probably won’t happen, because anything powered by greed and corruption has a very large commitment to self-preservation.

Let’s just hope it doesn’t cause the US to be left behind as the world moves forward into a global entity.

d71c7a5a.pngAll content Copyright 2017, Onwords & Upwords Inc. All rights reserved.

"""
Comments

Harvey Lloyd

6 years ago #13

#15
I really liked the add that popped up, Show your support for Democrat Women who are pro choice for governor, sign up. I guess through evolution we are no longer human but rather a group of words defined by media. What if called the add Human, American, willing to serve the people? Probably isn't a good brand, i guess. https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/downloads/highlights.pdf When Bernie was questioned on paying for national healthcare coverage he stated that if took 10-20% of the defense spending we could get healthcare for all America. Given expenditures for all healthcare being 3.2 trillion i would say that this is more spin than reality. But spin sells, Chas \u270c\ufe0f Wyatt and the article proves that like many other national issues that stay in the air for profit by a few the Trump debacle will prove to be a profitable wave to surf. Meanwhile in the rest of the world we are trying to manage mundane issues like taxes, health care costs and raising a family. But forgive me for highlighting these uneducated, deplorable positions.

Harvey Lloyd

6 years ago #12

If i could i would like to add some targets for your POV. I will set it up easy. I am a deplorable. A person who didn't vote for Hillary or Bernie. So i have set the outer ring of the target, i believe it is white. The next most inner rings are black and represented by the fact we all get our information from media with an agenda. I neither defend or attack either candidate but realize that the millions of dollars spent on each campaign were not spent in facts but rather spin. The blue rings of the target is the fact that it is difficult for me to perceive that within such an enlightened, well educated society that we can actaully reframe 50% of the population under a single slur of deplorable. Is this the best we got. The red rings, getting closer to the bullseye now, the history of both candidates is deplorable. From Hilary's foundation shenanigans, Bernies pie in the sky lets everyone have everything and let the government pay for it to Trumps social ineptness and inability to communicate an idea without offending 80% of the people, how do you make a choice. There were two choices on the table, fiscal responsibility by Attila the Hun or expanding government's role in our daily lives through tax and spend. The bullseye, The candidates represent the endgame of a liberal education system that systematically has drilled in the population larger government is needed because the population is to stupid to take care of itself. Activist government. You now have an official FITA target.

Phil Friedman

6 years ago #11

#12
, you know full well that I have the utmost respect for you. So please understand that I believe these were special, nay unique circumstances. Trump posed, indeed continues to pose, a grave threat to the survival of this Nation. And I personally believed that we could not afford the luxury of voting our respective consciences -- or personal likes, dislikes, or beliefs. In the most recent presidential election, there was only winning -- which meant keeping Trump out of office. I voted against Trump, which meant I had to vote for Clinton. Because, as I said earlier, any vote not for Clinton, even not voting, was a vote for Trump -- given what I could make of his "spoiler" strategy. And believe me, I take absolutely no pleasure in knowing I was right. Hopefully, the Nation will survive long enough to make a correction. Cheers!

David B. Grinberg

6 years ago #10

#5
Phil Friedman one more thing. Hillary didn't want Bernie on "her" ticket and likely colluded with the DNC to rig the primary for herself. This also backfired by turning some Bernie voters away for her in the general election because she F---ed Bernie. Lastly, I live in Maryland which is about as far from a "swing state" as one can get. However, I would have voted for one of the two main candidates if I did live in a swing state where my vote would have mattered. Just saying.

David B. Grinberg

6 years ago #9

Phil Friedman, I'm not sure if you were referring to me on your prior comments? Regardless, please consider: 1) I don't use the "negative button" -- in fact, I just gave you a plus to offset the minus. 2) Just because someone did not vote for Trump or Hillary does NOT mean that person did not vote. There were other candidates on the ballot. Moreover, a voter can always choose a "write in" candidate who could be any US citizen over 35. Thus, for all you know I could have voted for YOU as president!

Phil Friedman

6 years ago #8

#6
Jim, I see that there is someone among your readers who chose not to vote in the election but is content to click the negative button from the shadows. Fits and figures, I guess. Cheers!

Phil Friedman

6 years ago #7

With all due respect to all those who "voted for neither Trump nor Clinton", I reiterate what I repeatedly argued before the election -- a vote for neither IS (was) a vote for Trump. Trump ran a "spoiler" campaign. That is, drain the vote away from Clinton by whatever means. And target the key states in the Electoral College. With Clinton losing the election while winning the popular vote by 3 million plus, shows how well the Trump camp succeeded -- aided by vote abstainers. So, I ask today, "How's dat workin' fer ya, now?"

David B. Grinberg

6 years ago #6

Jim, a few points: 1) I'm a longtime registered independent who voted for neither candidate. 2) Hopefully, HRC can rest a bit easier with the tens of millions of dollars from her new book and tens of millions more for likely speaking fees in the near future , most of which will be from foreign governments to curry favor with the Clinton Foundation. 3) It's been reported by legitimate media outlets that the DNC proactively rigged the primary for HRC by sabotaging Bernie time and again. 4) I don't recall Al Gore throwing a "hissy fit" when he won the popular vote in the 2000 election but still lost to George W. Bush. Rather, Gore took the high road. He didn't write a well published book blaming everyone else for the loss (like the Florida GOP with brother Jeb Bush as governor controlling the recount, or a conservative Supreme Court which ratified the results). Just saying.

Jim Murray

6 years ago #5

#4
Phil Friedman. What do you know. A He Said He Said right here for everybody to read. Thanks for the commentary. I know as much about US politics as any Canadian who is paying attention. But the cons here are like the reps in the US. They do have a deep seeded emotional bias.

Phil Friedman

6 years ago #4

I agree, Jim, with some of your observations. For example, that "Bernie Sanders would have been miles ahead if he had thrown in with Clinton early on and they had been the ticket." Or, I would add, if Sanders' supporters had the slightest clue about how once Clinton had the nomination, there was no serious choice but to support the ticket -- or end up with Trump, the least qualified, least capable, least honest, most megalomaniacal POTUS we've in the history of the Nation. But you are wrong in accepting, or if not accepting, failing to make fun of the postulate that Hillalry was "... the least popular Presidential candidate of all time." For this is simply not supported by any of the statistics and is simply the gutteral expression of a deep-seated emotional bias on the part of your "conservative" friend. The fact is that, as you point out, Hillary carried the popular vote by a margin far greater than any presidential candidate who, at the same time as winning the popular vote, lost the election. What does this tell us? continued... Pt. II

Phil Friedman

6 years ago #3

Pt. II -- Very clearly that the Clinton camp badly strategized, perhaps even ignored the need to win in the Electoral College -- which, by the way, was not rigged, but which, in this case, simply went the way the established rules provide. In other words, your friend's misconceptions notwithstanding, the Electoral College did not nullify Clinton's popular win -- something it had the power to do, but didn't -- but simply voted the way it was mandated to vote. The Clinton camp screwed up royally in the Rust Belt -- where Sanders would have done much better, as would have Joe Biden. Indeed, with each debate, they continued increasingly to congratulate themselves in what appeared to be an ongoing Ganja party with the CNN talking heads -- forgetting that the CNN constituency consisted of maybe a hundred talking heads. The key components of Clinton's loss were arrogance, stupidity, and self-delusion -- not to mention a complete failure to appreciate the result of allowing a Trump win -- on the part of many closet Republicans and many of the supporters of Bernie Sanders and various splinter-party candidates. IMHO, buddy. Cheers!

Phil Friedman

6 years ago #2

I agree, Jim, with some of your observations. For example, that "Bernie Sanders would have been miles ahead if he had thrown in with Clinton early on and they had been the ticket." Or, I would add, if Sanders' supporters had the slightest clue about how, once Clinton had the nomination, there was no serious choice but to support the ticket -- or end up with Trump, the least qualified, least capable, least honest, most megalomaniacal POTUS we've in the history of the Nation. But you are wrong in accepting, or if not accepting, failing to make fun of the postulate that Hillalry was "... the least popular Presidential candidate of all time." For this is simply not supported by any of the statistics and is simply the gutteral expression of a deep-seated emotional bias on the part of your "conservative" friend. The fact is that, as you point out, Hillary carried the popular vote by a margin far greater than any presidential candidate who, at the same time as winning the popular vote, lost the election. What does this tell us? Very clearly that the Clinton camp badly strategized, perhaps even ignored the need to win in the Electoral College -- which, by the way, was not rigged, but which, in this case, simply went the way the established rules provide. In other words, your friend's misconceptions notwithstanding, the Electoral College did not nullify Clinton's popular win -- something it had the power to do, but didn't -- but simply voted the way it was madated to vote. The Clinton camp screwed up royally in the Rust Belt -- where Sanders would have done much better, as would have Joe Biden. Indeed, with each debate, they continued increasingly to congratulate themselves in what appeared to be an ongoing Ganja party with the CNN talking heads -- forgetting that the CNN constituency consisted of maybe a hundred talking heads. The key components of Clinton's loss were arrogance, stupidity, and self-delusion -- not to mention a complete failre to
"Jim, please don't tell me what I know perfectly well. I believe Hillary was an awful candidate - yes, more awful than Trump. The Democrats and their supporters should be reflecting on what they did wrong, and stop whining and blaming everyone else." I didn't think Clinton was worse than Rump, but I thought she was just as slimy if not more so. I voted for her to promote a status quo I don't believe in, but believed it was the safer course. Bernie proved to be slimy, too, when he chose his own hide over the hides of his followers. Survival at any cost is not survival at all. "I’m neither Democrat nor Republican. In fact, I’m not even a damn American. But what I have witnessed over the last two years in that country only says to me that their political system needs to be blown up and replaced with something that isn’t more than 200 years old." Here, here--I so agree.

Articles from Jim Murray

View blog
1 year ago · 3 min. reading time

This is the second in a series on branding strategy for authors. But in actuality, it applies to vir ...

7 months ago · 6 min. reading time

Over the past few weeks, in anticipation of submitting these stories to film and TV production compa ...

1 month ago · 1 min. reading time

1. The quality of your life is only what you make it. We all have the ability to live like good huma ...

Related professionals

You may be interested in these jobs

  • 1000064487 ONTARIO INC.

    Web manager

    Found in: Talent CA 2 C2 - 5 days ago


    1000064487 ONTARIO INC. Mississauga, Canada

    Education: College/CEGEP · Experience: 7 months to less than 1 year · Tasks · Consult with clients to develop and document Website requirements · Write, modify, integrate and test software code · Maintain existing computer programs by making modifications as required · Develop We ...

  • Fraser Health

    Business Analyst

    Found in: Talent CA C2 - 5 days ago


    Fraser Health Surrey, Canada TEMPORARY

    Detailed Overview · Supporting the Vision, Values, Purpose and Commitments of Fraser Health including service delivery that is centered around patients/clients/residents and families: Provides leadership and support by applying expert knowledge in health economics and skills in d ...

  • Veolia Water Technologies (VWT)

    Business Development Representative

    Found in: Talent CA C2 - 6 days ago


    Veolia Water Technologies (VWT) Oakville, Canada Full time

    Job Description · Under the responsibility of the VP Business Development – municipal Canada, the incumbent is directly involved in the sales activities in the municipal sector for drinking water, wastewater and process technology solutions in Ontario. The person will work closel ...