The Paradox of Hillary Clinton

Democratic U.S. President Harry Truman, criticizing the incongruity and cynicism of Republican Richard Nixon, once said that Nixon was a man who could chop down a tree one moment, and in the next, climb up the fallen trunk to give a talk about nature conservation.

Nowadays, it’s Hillary Clinton who is notorious for always saying what she thinks is best suited to please her audience. Even more than a decade ago, when she was fighting for the Senate seat in New York, and in a widely viewed televised interview with lively Katie Couric, Clinton was trying to ingratiate herself with New Yorkers when she said that she’d “always been a Yankees fan.” Couric, who had read Clinton’s biography, replied, “I thought you were a Cubs fan.” Clinton, unmoved, responded, “I am. I am a Cubs fan.” It would be as if here, a Betis fan running for office in Madrid said he had always supported Atlético or Real Madrid.

These contradictions have given her the reputation of an untrustworthy person. That old perception, however, did not stop her from winning the New York election. The voters of that state trusted her rival, former mayor Rudolph Giuliani, slightly more than Hillary, and despite everything, she won without major difficulties.

The script is repeating itself. Clinton is mired in various issues that would destroy the reputation of many politicians, and she continues to lead in the polls. The most delicate issue deals with the confidential emails sent during her time as secretary of state. She had used her private email account to send and receive these confidential messages when she should have used the encrypted, official channel. It appears that this is not an insignificant handful of emails, but rather three or four hundred. The issue is serious. This week, the renowned Washington Post featured a column by Ed Rogers entitled, “Team Clinton Can’t Get Its Story Straight.” In effect, the team is not giving clear answers to questions such as whether they quickly erased part of the messages when the scandal broke, or how many times Clinton used a route that could have been blocked or intercepted by enemies of the United States when discussing issues related to national security or the economic interests of the country.

A few days ago, in an effort to minimize the issue, Clinton said to some journalists, “Nobody talks to me about it other than you guys.”

It is an exaggeration; the topic will not disappear. Clinton, however, is not really headed in the wrong direction. Her results in the polls continue to be excellent. The gap between her and Bernie Sanders, second in the polls for Democratic presidential candidates, has narrowed but is still very wide. Clinton has the support of 49 percent of those surveyed, compared to Sanders’ 25 percent.

Fifteen months, the amount of time until the presidential election, is an eternity in politics. In this space of time, many things can happen. Mrs. Clinton, with everything, is counting on three important electoral bases in which, for the time being, she has a notable lead over her rivals: women, Hispanics and blacks.

The paradox, the great paradox, is that even though she is way ahead in terms of voting intention, the same polls show that there are many more Americans who do not trust her than who consider her trustworthy.