Journalists Notice Problem For Hillary Clinton In Her Shouting

Video Transcript:

After observing Monday’s Iowa primary and her previous speeches, journalists noticed a weakness in Hillary Clinton’s loud delivery style.

HILLARY CLINTON: What a night! An unbelievable night. What a great campaign … For the democratic party and the United States of America … I know that we can finish the job of universal healthcare coverage for every single man woman and child.

MSNBC’s Morning Joe sees deficiencies in her bluster.   

BOB WOODWARD: I think a lot of it with Hillary Clinton has to do with style and delivery, oddly enough. She shouts. There’s something unrelaxed about the way she is communicating and I think that just jumps off.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: Last night I was watching her and I said to myself, “Has nobody told her that the microphone works?”

WOODWARD: There is something here, where Hillary Clinton suggests that she’s almost not comfortable with herself. And you know, self-acceptance is something that you communicate on television.

SCARBOROUGH: But you were right though. Hillary’s always up here and again, it’s just not natural to her.

WOODWARD: She could make a case for herself if she would just kind of lower the temperature and say, “Look, this is what I’ve done, this is what I can do, this is what I believe in,” and kind of get off this screaming stuff.

Howard Dean was then shut down trying to claim people only criticize Hillary because she’s a woman.

HOWARD DEAN: If she were a male and she were making these kinds of speeches, would people be criticizing her for…

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: No, oh my God, that’s desperate.

DEAN: I’m sorry to say it, I didn’t want to but…

SCARBOROUGH: I promise you if there was a man who always talked like this on stage, I would make fun of that man a lot faster than I would have to a woman.

Do you think Hillary Clinton struggles in communication? Do you think it’s off-putting to voters? Share and comment below.

Watch: MSNBC Host’s Appalled Reaction When He Learns WHERE Hillary Just Held A Fundraiser

Hillary Clinton may have given Bernie Sanders enough ammunition to sabotage her hopes to win next week’s Iowa caucus with a decision to attend a fundraiser Wednesday night.

She certainly drew the consternation of the hosts of MSNBC’s Morning Joe.

Clinton left Iowa, days before the caucus, to attend a fundraiser in Philadelphia. Sanders pounced on Clinton’s actions by stating to a crowd of his supporters, “I am delighted to be here with you tonight in Mason City,” he said. “My opponent is not in Iowa tonight, she is raising money from a Philadelphia investment firm.”

That announcement was immediately booed loudly. “Frankly, I would rather be here with you,” Sanders stated and received a roaring applause.

Apparently miffed, MSNBC commentator Joe Scarborough said, “So let me get this straight, Hillary Clinton had a fundraiser at a bank in Philadelphia yesterday?”

Franklin Square Capital hosted the fundraiser. The firm runs a $17 billion investment fund. Bon Jovi was invited to play for the event.

Scarborough continued, “Did she give a speech? I’m just curious, because I mean if you can pick up a quarter million dollars in an afternoon, that must be nice.”

“She certainly handed Bernie that line on a silver platter,” co-host Willie Geist noted.

Another co-host, Mika Brzezinski, sounded stunned to hear Clinton was originally scheduled for another fundraiser tonight in New York City, even though the event was cancelled at the last minute. “She was going to be in New York tonight raising money?,” Brzezinski asked. “Three days before Iowa? Four days – what?”

Scarborough concluded, “Wow. She must be very confident that the people of Iowa don’t care whether she’s there, or with bankers raising money on the east coast. That’s a big fundraiser. Must be a really, really wealthy investment bank to be able to afford Bon Jovi. Wow.”

Clinton has been heavily criticized for her ties to big money. The strongest of arguments against electing Clinton come from her acceptance of large sums of money from Wall Street firms for speaking at such meetings, giving her political opponents like Sanders ample evidence to distinguish themselves from Clinton.

WATCH: What Trump Just Said He’d Do On His First Day As President Got Even This MSNBC Host On Board

On Thursday night, as President Obama scoffed at the notion of gun rights for Americans and advocated the power of legislation to protect America, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump promised a far different action.

“I will get rid of gun-free zones on schools, and — you have to — and on military bases,” Trump said during a Vermont rally. “My first day, it gets signed, okay? My first day. There’s no more gun-free zones.”

“You know what a gun free zone is to sickos? That’s bait!” Trump told the crowd. At a Republican debate in October, Trump had said, “I think gun free zones are a catastrophe, they’re a feeding frenzy for sick people.”

Trump’s Thursday comments on guns represented the polar opposite of the restraints Obama urges on the right to bear arms.

Referencing the recent attacks in San Bernardino, California, and Paris, Trump said both incidents might have been averted by an armed citizenry.

“They walk into a number of places in France, and they say, ‘Get over.’ Boom. ‘Get over.’ Boom. ‘Get over.’ Boom. Nobody had a gun on the other side,” Trump said. If the victims there were armed, he said, “It’s a whole different outcome. It’s a whole different deal.”

He added: “You’ll have bad stuff happening, but at least we’re shooting back. And we’re going down shooting.”

Trump has spoken out before about the need to ensure all personnel at military facilities — not just military police — are armed.

“They will be able to defend themselves against terrorists. Our brave soldiers should not be at risk because of policy created by civilian leadership. Political correctness has no place in this debate,” he said.

Trump has repeatedly said that in addition to gun rights being protected by the Second Amendment, gun control is a failed policy.

“Gun control does not reduce crime. It has consistently failed to stop violence. Americans are entitled to protect their families, their property and themselves. In fact, in right-to-carry states the violent crime rate is 24 percent lower than the rest of the United States and the murder rate is 28 percent lower. This should not be up for debate,” he said.

The speech in Burlington, Vermont, also stirred opinions in both sides of the issue — as Trump usually does. On MSNBC’s Morning Joe Friday, Trump was clearly being taken skeptically by the liberals, but host Joe Scarborough took his side.

“I think gun-free zones are the stupidest idea,” Scarborough said, to the evident disgust of co-host Mika Brzezinski.

Check it out here.

h/t: The Right Scoop

Watch: Leon Panetta Reveals Who He Supports For President – MSNBC Host Points Out 1 HUGE Problem

Former Obama Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has just made an official endorsement for the 2016 race for president, and few are surprised by his choice.

Panetta appeared on MSNBC on Thursday and was asked by host Andrea Mitchell, arguably herself a longtime Democrat advocate, who he supports to become commander in chief in a world that is “in crisis everywhere we look.”

He immediately endorsed Hillary Clinton, saying she was “best qualified” to be president.

“My view,” Panetta said earnestly, “is that Hillary Clinton probably has the best credentials in terms of those two areas that I discussed.”

The former defense secretary went on to claim that Hillary “understands” all the troubles the world faces and would be the best choice to “lead” the country, especially in matters of foreign policy.

But the MSNBC host had a very tough question for Panetta, one that made his claims of Hillary’s qualifications seem risible.

“And you support her,” Michell said pointedly, “but all of these problems we’ve just talked about got worse on her watch as well as on your watch. The growth of ISIS, the Syrian civil war, the withdraw from Iraq… so why is she qualified to become commander in chief?”

In the end, Panetta didn’t seem to have an answer for that charge and simply restated his claim that Hillary was best qualified.

Here is the transcript of that conversation:

Andrea Mitchell: We have described, you have described, a world in crisis everywhere we look. Who is best qualified to be commander in chief as we elect a new president?

Leon Panetta: Well, you know, I’ve said the next president of the United States has two principal responsibilities. One is to break the gridlock in this town because I think one of the greatest threats to national security is the dysfunction in Washington. So, the ability to govern, the ability to bring both parties together in order to govern, that is a huge responsibility for the next president.

Secondly, they have to be a world leader–he or she has to be a world leader–uh, that can deal with all these threats that we just discussed. So, it is extremely important that whoever is elected president of the Untied States have the ability to govern, but also have the ability to provide world leadership.

My view is that Hillary Clinton probably has the best credentials in terms of those two areas that I discussed. But clearly, other candidates on the Republican side have to show that they are willing to address those two issues as well.

Mitchell: And you were a Republican when you started out in public life, uh, you even served in the Nixon administration; so, although you have been part of Clinton world and part of the Democratic Party for many, many years. Are you officially endorsing her?

Panetta: I’ve endorsed Hillary Clinton, and I’ve also helped provide advice on defense and foreign policy issues. I know her, I work with her, uh, I think, uh, that what this country needs at a very dangerous time is responsible leadership in the real world, not a fantasy world, but in the real world. And she is somebody who has that experience, uh, and for that reason that’s why I support her.

Mitchell: And you support her, but all of these problems we’ve just talked about got worse on her watch as well as on your watch. The growth of ISIS, the Syrian civil war, the withdraw from Iraq… so why is she qualified to become commander in chief?

Panetta: I think she’s qualified to be commander in chief because she understands the challenges that are there, she understands the world we live in, she understands the complications of it. Of course, you know, uh, look, going back to Republican administrations as well as Democratic administrations, there is a responsibility for both the good things that happen as well as the bad things that happen. But in the end the real question is, does someone have the ability to be able to deal with other world leaders, to be able to represent our national security interests in dealing with those countries and has the credibility to be able to engage in that kind of world. And that is critical at a time when we’re facing the kind of threats we are facing now.

h/t: IJReview

Watch: Hillary Gets Hit With The 1 Question No Dem Can Answer And Gives PAINFUL Response

Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton got stumped on Tuesday by the very same question her party’s chairman would not answer this past summer: “What is the difference between a socialist and a Democrat?”

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews was the questioner in both instances. On Hardball Tuesday night, the host said we wanted to help Clinton “locate herself politically” for his audience. “Now Bernie [Sanders] calls himself a Socialist,” Matthews said. “Nobody uses a derogatory term any more. It’s his — he loves to have that label. He’s never run as a Democrat, he runs against Democrats up there in Vermont. You’re a Democrat … What’s the difference between a Socialist and a Democrat?” the host asked. 

The candidate cautiously answered, “Well, you know, I — you’d have to ask…”

Matthews interjected, “I wouldn’t like someone calling me a socialist.”

“But I’m not one,” Clinton responded.

The host followed up wanting to know what the difference is, if that is the case.

Clinton would not answer the question. “Well, I can tell you what I am. I am a progressive Democrat.” 

“How’s that different than a Socialist?” Matthews wondered.

The former secretary of state continued by answering that she’s a “progressive Democrat who likes to get things done and who believes that we are better off in this country when we’re trying to solve problems together.” 

Matthews did not let her off the hook, noting that DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz would not answer the question either when he asked her in July.

Schultz sought to change the query to explaining the difference between Democrats and Republicans, demagoguing the latter as “strangled by their right-wing extremists.”

Matthews conceded in his interview with Clinton that he understands that she is trying to keep the left and center left together.

Both Clinton and Schultz likely do not want to alienate Sanders’ supporters by saying anything to which they could take offense. The Vermont socialist senator currently leads in polling in New Hampshire’s Democratic primary, and last month reported having over 2 million individual donations, more than any other candidate on the Democrat or GOP side.

h/t: Independent Journal