Mark Halperin has written a most peculiar article claiming that Republicans have a bad case of Clinton Derangement Syndrome and are underestimating her when it comes to the 2016 election:
A virulent strain of Clinton Derangement Syndrome, which scientists and Republicans thought had been wiped out at the end of the last century, is now inflicting millions of conservative Americans. Some Republicans so detest Hillary Clinton they are badly underestimating how likely she is, at this point in the campaign, to be America’s 45th president. Their denial is just as strong now as it was a month ago, before Clinton began a run of political victories that have enhanced her prospects, all while the roller derby/demolition derby that is the Republican nomination contest has continued to harm the GOP’s chances of winning back the White House.
I’m not sure which Republicans to whom Halperin refers. Certainly not Ramesh Ponnuru of NRO. While most Republicans and conservative activists might very well despise Hillary, I don’t think we are blind to the fact that Hillary’s fortunes have improved vastly since the Democratic debate in Las Vegas nearly three weeks ago. But even before her recent uptick in the polls, I don’t think Republicans were under any illusions that Bernie Sanders was going to win the Democratic Party nomination even he did somehow manage to win Iowa and/or New Hampshire. E-mail scandal or not, Republicans have long operated under the assumption that Hillary will be the Democratic Party nominee.
Later in the article, Halperin claims, “Republicans are erroneously convinced they can beat Clinton solely with talk of Benghazi, e-mails, and other controversies that have nothing to do with the economy and the real lives of real people.” Again, Halperin doesn’t tell us who these Republicans are. It is inconceivable that the Republican nominee, whomever he or she might be, wouldn’t make policy proposals where it concerns the pocketbooks of people and their families.
But this doesn’t mean that Benghazi isn’t a legitimate issue. Even if the Benghazi compound is remote to most Americans what isn’t remote is that Hillary told the Woods family an internet video was responsible for their son’s death while telling her own family that an al Qaeda like group was the culprit. Well, both can’t be true and somehow I think Hillary is more likely to tell the truth to her daughter than she is to a family with whome will she never cross paths with again. Character still matters to some people in this country and I don’t think calling Hillary Clinton’s character into question where it concerns her account of the events at Benghazi is a symptom of Clinton Derangement Syndrome.