Opinion of this criticism of Hillary Clinton

[JRP1994]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFoadEm6fi0

[BaconBacon96]

An interesting critique. Even if she is running for therapeutic reasons as Hitchens would put it, she is still a candidate I can support if she is competent in office and if she introduces policies I support. I believe she will do both of those things.

[Beet]

"You musn't ever write a biography where you say, 'at this point he or she must have felt or must have thought or must have...' You're not entitled. You can't know it. And you will lose your integrity as a biographer..." Quite right indeed. So why do so many criticisms of Hillary come down to just this sort of psychoanalytic mind-reading?

[WVdemocrat]

It's not a legitimate criticism. This goes back to the dynasty question. Hillary Clinton is not running because her husband is Bill. She is running because she is eminently qualified to be president. If people should criticize her, they should criticize her on substance.

If she has good policies and shows competence in governance and leadership, then she should be president. The decision is that simple. These attacks on her character and calling her a "power-hungry b****" get us nowhere.

[King]

It's just the same criticism about inevitability, only delivered in Hitchenese.