The latest on Clinton’s email troubles is from the NYT, and it features a couple of big names — who also happen to be Hillary supporters:
Many Democrats worry that this newly contrite tone is too little and too late to quell questions, and that it may not last — given that her responses up to now have been so varied, and her irritation with the issue so thinly veiled.
“They’ve handled the email issue poorly, maybe atrociously, certainly horribly,” said Edward G. Rendell, a former governor of Pennsylvania and a supporter of Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy. “The campaign has been incredibly tone-deaf, not seeing this as a more serious issue. She should have turned over the email server at the start, because they should have known they’d be forced to give it up. But at this point, there’s nothing they can do to kill the issue — they’re left just playing defense.”
Rosalind Wyman, a veteran Democratic national committeewoman from California who is also a Clinton supporter, said Mrs. Clinton had not shown enough urgency in battling questions about her judgment, and complained that the campaign’s responses to the controversy — and the federal inquiries that have followed — were becoming only more muddled.
“The only thing Hillary can do, I think, is get out there in front of reporters and take five hours of questions — if that’s what it takes — until people understand her, at least, and hopefully believe her,” Ms. Wyman said.
Hopefully believe her? That may very well be wishful thinking at this point, even if Queen Hillary did deign to submit herself to the tender mercies of public scrutiny.
More interesting is that Rendell was willing to go on the record with such a blasting critique of his longtime ally. The story’s undercurrent is that if even Rendell is willing to say that Clinton has handled the crisis “poorly, maybe atrociously, certainly horribly,” then maybe she isn’t fit to be president — opening the door for Rendell and other major supporters to shift their allegiance.