The point is that most people are unable to remember good things that even very famous career people have done, despite this information being in the public record. It's just not covered, repeated, and as memorable as bad things that people have done.
You're focused on "Hillary bad!", not realising that that's the point I'm making. You can only remember bad things.
The exercise is to see if you can name good things. You can't, not because she's unadulterated pure evil, but because good things are not as memorable in general.
Try for a moment to rise above your primitive animal tribal instincts and think like an anthropologist.
Sorry to disappoint you but you're thinking like a Hillary fanboy, not an anthropologist. Democrats had better options available that'd have beaten Trump but people like you decided that Hillary was supposed to be the next president. Not many opponents would be so good at electing Trump.
I picked an example at random that I knew everyone would be familiar with. I have no skin in this game and who won or didn't win isn't the point. The point is the rules of the game.
You got me absolutely confused here. There are 5 good things she had done? I think this proves that a bad alternative can get anybody elected.
reply