SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
In the past two weeks, the Democratic presidential nominee has faced increased scrutiny from critics to take questions at a news conference — something she hasn't done in 273 days.
[...] New York Times columnist Jim Rutenberg criticized Clinton for her aversion toward the press in a searing piece on Sunday, and CNN senior media correspondent Brian Stelter has not been shy when offering his opinion.
"She is acting in some ways as if she is already president," Stelter said in a recent CNN appearance. "By not acknowledging the importance of a press conference, the uniqueness of a press conference — it makes me wonder how accessible she'd be in the White House as president."
[...] The campaign, which did not return requests for comment for this story, frequently cites a figure that asserts Clinton has granted more than 350 interviews this year.
[...] Holly Shulman, a former spokeswoman for the Democratic National Committee, told Business Insider that technology has changed the way candidates run for office and suggested there was less of a need to lean on the press to disseminate a message.
"Campaigns have changed," she said, noting that candidates can now reach voters directly through social media. "[T]his type of direct engagement has a much bigger impact on voters' decisions."
[...] Trump has continued to spotlight Clinton's refusal to take questions from the media in an open setting.
In recent weeks, the New York businessman's campaign has sent out an email each morning reminding reporters exactly how many days it has been since "hiding Hillary" last held a press conference.
[...] Brian Fallon, the campaign's top spokesman, seemed to acknowledge the importance of one on Friday. He promised ABC News that if elected, "Hillary Clinton will hold press conferences."
Source: Business Insider
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bradley13 on Monday September 05 2016, @01:10PM
I understand your points, but they are not criticisms of his competence. You are questioning his honesty and his ethics, which is fair enough, but a completely different discussion. As for investing in the S&P instead of running businesses - who wouldn't love to have perfect foresight for their investment and business efforts? Plus, that's speculation, since (as you also point out) no one actually knows what his net worth is.
The lack of governmental experience? This is the reason that so many people plan to vote for him. People who do have governmental experience are part of the ongoing corruption. Electing someone from outside that circle would seem to be the only hope for housecleaning.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday September 05 2016, @01:50PM
The point of his ethics issues are that really great business leaders don't have to rip people off in order to be successful. If Trump is the greatest business leader of our time (and that's basically his entire campaign pitch right there), then he shouldn't have to either.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 05 2016, @10:07PM
His son is bringing up a very good point.
What exactly do the Clintons sell? They are very rich. Yet do not really seem to sell anything tangible. We have a pretty good idea how the Trumps get their money. The Clintons seem to be influence peddlers.
Both types of people would make an interesting and effective president.
(Score: 2) by arslan on Monday September 05 2016, @10:58PM
So let me see if I follow your logic. You said Clinton is known to be foul but has at least a little experience and track record and Trump is incompetent.
Someone responded and pointed out that based on Trump's business track record he is actually quite successful compared to your average businessman. You then pivoted to him being dishonest and foul.... which is exactly what Clinton is..
I'm not trying to convince you as I have no dog in the fight and you seem to have made up your mind, but your line of rationalization seems to not reconcile here...
I can definitely understand if you said you'd rather have the devil you know than the one you don't. There's really nothing wrong with that, lots of people let fear drive their decision making, but trying to rationalize that reveals the cognitive dissonance.