It’s not Susan Sarandon’s fault that Hillary Clinton lost the Presidential election,but some progressive activists want to hang the Hollywood actress out to dry for giving up on the Democratic Presidential nominee.
Sarandon famously said that she wouldn’t support Clinton for president, choosing instead to work for progressive causes. Liberals were famously scandalized.
The push to turn Sarandon into a pariah has gotten so pronounced that the far left-leaning publication Salon finally had to step in to quell the “crisis of outrage.” Lefty journalists from Kurt Eichenwald to Chris Hayes had created a “narrative of blame” around the actress, and it was time for the progressive world to have a little “come to Jesus.”
Salon labeled anti-Sarandon sentiment as “privileged” and “un-woke.”
“If liberals weren’t too busy tweeting abuse at Sarandon and writing think pieces about her white privilege, they might just be able to see that she makes some salient points about the American political system, the media and the Trump presidency,” Danielle Ryan pleaded.
Shockingly, Ryan’s first argument is for Democrats to come to grips with Sarandon’s truth: that Clinton was a less-than-stellar presidential candidate who came with her own set of problems.
Not only was she a standard Washington politician, but Clinton was decidedly lacking in “revolutionary” thought. Clinton loved natural gas fracking, for example, adored the Military Industrial Complex and a “rabid” interventionist foreign policy.
And it was Sarandon, Ryan points out, who said the media failed to vet Clinton the way they vetted other candidates—even Donald Trump. “It’s not the job of members of the media to decide that a president’s policies are less deserving of harsh criticism if he seems like a nice guy,” she says.
Unfortunately for Ryan, her arguments seem to center around the fact that Clinton simply wasn’t far left enough, and that a more welcoming embrace of identity politics, lefty causes and extremely progressive policy positions would have won Clinton more fans. At least among the editorial staff of Salon.
But at least Democrats flailing around in the dark for an explanation for Clinton’s loss are getting closer to the seemingly obvious reason Hillary isn’t in office: people just didn’t want her there.