Rewarding Stupidity

I come from the world of business.  Granted not at the top of it, but from it in general.  If you are wrong 1 or 2 or 85 times in business, you get the sack.  Apparently this isn't true in politics and political punditry - where being wrong is ignored.
.
Or high finance, where being wrong, even breaking the laws, gets you bonuses.  But let's trash one profession at a time.
.

 As Glinda Said,  "You Have No Powers Here.  Be Gone"

Today's David Brooks column in the New York Times is an example of political hackery dressed up as "opinion".  I won't go through it.  Let me just hit the highlights.
.
David Brooks accused Hillary Clinton of preaching to the base, not trying to expand the base, like Jeb Bush.
.
Let us leave aside that neither has actually started campaigning, per say.  And to say Jeb is expanding the base is rather idiotic, considering he doubled down on W.'s policy, would have attacked Iraq and 19 of his 21 advisors are ex-W employees.
.
His reasoning for trashing Hillary - for something she hasn't started yet - is because it divides the country and to govern you need to cross the aisle.  He applauds President Obama for his campaign that seeked to expand the party and move to the center.  Which is rich!  (An American expression meaning are you f*cking kidding me.)  Mr. Brooks doesn't mention that the Republicans refused to work with President Obama - move to the center or not - and stated that their top priority was making sure he didn't get a second term.
.
Mr. Brooks also laments that Mrs. Clinton will seem driven by expediency, not convictions.  I would counter that there is nothing, absolutely nothing in the world, that would convince middle of the road candidates she is driven by anything but expediency.  That is the stereotype and narrative about the Clintons, and - like many stereotypes - it is based on some truth.  If she suddenly decides to stand up for her convictions now - well, who on Earth would believe her?  What are her convictions?
.
I would say, in fact, she is running from the middle already.  Mrs. Clinton, whom I will back with enthusiasm, is no big-ass liberal.  And, luckily for me and everyone else, she has endured 20+ years of being trashed, lectured to and heckled by the press and the Republicans.  She is less likely to fall for this nincompoopery than any other candidate.  There is no situation, no position, nothing she could say that will make those that won't vote for her, change their mind.  She will change no minds with a giant tack to the right now.  The press will line up, waiting for her to hang a "kick me" sign on her ass; and she is probably the one candidate that would hang a "screw you" sign back there - just because.  And that is why I will vote for her ultimately.  She knows the game and she knows the assholes.