Chimamanda Adichie, author of We Should All Be Feminists, published a piece Thursday in The Atlantic which is apparently not satire, called "Why Is Hillary Clinton So Widely Loved?" Adicheie answers herself in a line immediately below the article's title: Hillary's "fans are drawn to her intelligence, her industriousness, and her grit."
Hillary doesn't have "fans," apart from Hollywood celebrities. She is the least likeable Democratic presidential candidate in American history, or at least since candidate likeability has been measured. Adichie's glowing profile of Hillary is at odds with virtually everyone else's perception of her, even in the mainstream media. "David Brooks on why Hillary Clinton is so disliked: She isn’t 'a person' so much as 'a role'” was one Slate headline earlier this year. "Why do they hate Hillary Clinton so much?" asked CNN in March. "Why Is Clinton Disliked?" the New York Times queried in May, when Hillary's unfavorability rating reached nearly 60 percent.
What Hillary has in her corner isn't fans but a segment of the populace that is hyped about the idea of voting in the first woman president in America, much as Barack Obama benefited from voters who were excited about the historic first of a black American president. She also has the support of voters who would rather die, or at least leave the country, than vote for Donald Trump; in that sense they are not voting for Hillary but against Trump. So, the notion that Hillary is "widely loved" is a complete fantasy on Adichie's part.
As for Hillary's intelligence, industriousness, and grit... Her intelligence isn't in question so much as her judgment; witness her unfathomable carelessness regarding national security communications, for example. Her industriousness? Well, she's very industrious about aggrandizing power and wealth. And grit? If by grit, Adichie means profane, hair-trigger rage and ruthlessness, then we're in complete agreement.
In response to all the criticism of Hillary, Adichie predictably dismisses much of it as misogyny and concludes her gushing, sycophantic ode to Hillary this way: "There are millions of Americans who do not have the self-indulgent expectation that a politician be perfect. They are frustrated that Hillary Clinton is allowed no complexity."
Complexity? Is that the going euphemism now for a Machiavellian character of corruption, mendacity, and lust for power, not to mention her ideological radicalism? Nobody expects a presidential candidate to be perfect, but we have the right to expect one who will give her all for America rather than take all she wants from America.