No, she's definitely as much or as little corrupt as any other politician.
And yes, your second point is spot on. which is the problem. The electorate focused on emails and assumed content of those emails for months, and ignored 400 problems with Trump.
It wasn't a painless choice, but the correct choice sure as hell was obvious to anyone trying.
>No, she's definitely as much or as little corrupt as any other politician.
Not according to the bought meetings via donations to the Clinton foundation. You need some significant evidence to show this is standard practice for all secretaries of state.
Look, you clearly don't think there is anything to this corruption angle. Therein stems the disconnect between you and the typical Trump supporter.
>The electorate focused on emails and assumed content of those emails for months, and ignored 400 problems with Trump.
The media focus on Trump was about him being offensive or using a tax loss carryover. The email scandal is about violations of the law with regard to the handling of state secrets. Then pretending she didn't understand classification, etc.
>It wasn't a painless choice, but the correct choice sure as hell was obvious to anyone trying.
Right, anyone trying to justify their preconceived notions.
You ignore the corruption and two-tiered legal treatment, Trump supporters ignored the pussy grabbing talk and other non-PC shit he spews.
And yes, your second point is spot on. which is the problem. The electorate focused on emails and assumed content of those emails for months, and ignored 400 problems with Trump.
It wasn't a painless choice, but the correct choice sure as hell was obvious to anyone trying.