I figured a piece about Nancy belonged here. https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...oing-other-things-during-ryan-farewell-speech
Yes because as in most industrys, it is very difficult for paid consultants to deliver impartial points of view when their very livelihood depends on having the 'right' opinion.
In Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton’s Doomed Campaign, reporters Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes use unprecedented access inside Hillary’s team throughout the election to reveal some of the failures specific to Clinton’s campaign and strategy that brought about one of the least predicted and, for the liberal world, most calamitous election defeats in modern political history. “The map of Clintonworld looked like a traffic jam on a Venn diagram”. Hillary had a huge network of advisers, staff and confidantes whose collective contribution was cacophonous, with many “chieftains but no clear leader”. “It was unclear who was really running the campaign” write the reporters, and few factions could be fully trusted, as advice came laden with “the baggage of the adviser’s agenda”, of either pleasing Hillary or undermining a rival faction’s power. Mook began “to develop a reputation for caring as much about his own brand, and promoting his own people, as he did about getting Hillary elected”. “It was a self-signed death warrant to raise a question about Hillary’s competence in loyalty-obsessed Clintonworld” write Allen and Parnes. In addition to the muddled sources of power discussed above, this loyalty fundamentalism created a toxic atmosphere in which a “bonfire of the vanities raged” inside the campaign, while liabilities or incompetence might be given a pass. ...misinformation and silence, motivated by loyalty and power-hoarding, severely hurt the campaign’s ability to engage in crisis management. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...n-book-shattered-jonathan-allen-a7715991.html
The relevance of your input to the conversation I was having with Boandlkramer regarding the amount of money spent in the aggregate on US political campaigns appears tangential at best though... I never read the book, but I think it's pretty clear the criticisms, at least as far as what @totti fan chose to quote here, have some degree of validity. This wasn't the first time that Hilary had lost a campaign she was favoured to win because of muddled messaging and an unclear strategic meta plan.
the bloated inefficient consultant class that attaches itself to campaigns like this are extremely relevant. I'm sure those who donated to the DNC (time and/or money) would like to know how their resources are being utilised. Also the influence of consultants has significantly risen in prominence in recent years which is counter to what you were saying. Not saying I'm totally against them but despite HRC's culpability in mis-managing her overall campaign vision and strategy her advisors still are not off the hook. Clearly an overpaid and less than competent bunch.
the American people sent a message via the polls in 2016 I don't think it has been heard by the Dems.
they're still endorsing militarism, putting down progressives, shitting on Med4all, ignoring climate change, passing PayGo. They haven't changed. An anti-Trump approach will only get you so far.