Onward Together launched to promote progressive values.

On Monday (5/15/2017) Hillary Clinton officially launched a new political group called Onward Together. According to the group’s web site, its primary mission is to “promote progressive values” and give a voice to the 66 million voters who supported Hillary’s presidential campaign in 2016.

Organized as a 501(c)(4) group with the IRS, a designation for social welfare nonprofits, the group has begun its fundraising campaign in earnest. Already tens of thousands of voters on Hillary’s email list have been contacted to contribute to the group.

Hillary Clinton

Energized by the antics of President Trump, Onward Together speaks to many of the same ideals promoted during Hillary’s campaign:

In recent months we’ve seen what’s possible when people come together to resist bullying, hate, falsehoods, and divisiveness, and stand up for a fairer, more inclusive America.

The challenges we face as a country are real. But there’s no telling what we can achieve if we approach the fights ahead with the passion and determination we feel today, and bring that energy into 2017, 2018, 2020, and beyond.


It remains to be seen if Democrats who personally blame Hillary (and not the Russians) for losing the election will support her new group. At the very least, Onward Together can serve as a focal point for the numerous anti-Trump interest groups and political viewpoints currently shouting for attention.

How Obama killed Hillary’s campaign.

Obama and his failures became Hillary’s failures.

When Bill Clinton’s Administration got hammered during the 1994 midterm elections, many pundits blamed Hillary: it was health care reform, she was too liberal, the was too powerful as first lady, etc. etc.

One of the few who called it correctly was our own hyperventilating Chris Matthews. I personally called Matthews the day after the election. In fairness, he didn’t really know who I was, though the Hillary Clinton Quarterly was certainly well known among most political reporters at the time.

I taped the telephone interview with Matthews: This is what he said, verbatim:

Hillary’s Caboose

If Zuckerman was wetting his pants with joy over Hillary’s comeuppance, Chris Matthews, a new-Democrat type who writes for the San Francisco Examiner and appears regularly on Good Morning America, was doubled over in pain. It’s true: Matthews often looks like he’s about to pass a kidney stone, but the day after the election his anguish was unusually intense.

Matthews regularly faces off against former Secretary of Education Bill Bennett on Good Morning America. On this particular good morning, we thought we heard Matthews proclaiming Hillary the Guilty One during his post-election tete-a-tete with Bennett, so we got Matthews on the phone.

“Are you blaming Hillary?” we wondered, eager not to misquote him.

There was silence on the other end. Then he sighed. “I’m not saying it. I’m trying to be careful. I’m not giving you new material to exploit. The Clintons hate me enough as it is. You gotta give me a break here. I erupt some times and I say certain things. If you catch me, you catch me. But I’m not saying it.”

“We’re not trying to ‘catch’ you, Mr. Matthews. We’re just trying to check out the story. Were you saying that Hillary Clinton was at fault for getting Bill Clinton to drift away from his more centrist positions?”

“That’s not what I said.”

“Fine. OK. You didn’t say it. But what is your opinion? Did she play a role?”

Long pause. Then Matthews erupted, angrily squeezing out every word.

“Bill Clinton is a grown up. He’s the President, and if he wants a left-wing, socialized-sounding health care plan, he did that. If he wants to let his wife do that, he did that. It’s still him. How are we to interpret this? Is Bill Clinton just a caboose on her train? The whole health care thing was too far to the left. In substance and in selling. Both. The old Eleanor Roosevelt approach, the paternalistic ‘we know better, we’re gonna do this for the little people’ stuff is gone. It’s gone!”

Matthews took a breath.

“I am absolutely convinced that the reason the Administration lost every close race, the reason the Democrats were lambasted, the reason every Republican was reelected is because if the election had been held last year, this would not have happened. I know that, you know that. The economy’s gotten better this year, so what’s changed? The year-long push for a socialistic health care program, which was the showcase of this Administration, which gave it its definition as a left-wing Administration.”

While Matthews didn’t have the stomach to say it outright, he clearly believes that Hillary Clinton — directly or indirectly — was responsible for the gang bang of the Democratic Party. The equation, if we follow his logic, is this: Hillary = Health Care Reform = Left Wing Big Government = Crushing Defeat for the Democrats.

So Matthews placed most of the blame on the president, where it belonged, with Hillary playing a supporting role as the purveyor of left-wing health care reform

Now we have left-wing health care reform — Obamacare — and President Obama has to take responsibility and credit for getting his signature legislation shoved through Congress. Did that play a role in the 2016 debacle? You bet it did! (Whether it should have or not is another question — me? Health care reform was the right, ethical and moral thing to do. But I don’t decide elections.)

Then there is everything else. Obama has the most muddled, confused foreign policy of any president since Herbert Hoover. No one knows what he stands for, what his strategy is, what he sees as America’s role in the world and how he would fulfill that role. The economy bounced back but he deserves little of the credit for that — it’s just the economic cycle we have always seen after a recession. His appointments have been lackluster and uninspired and uninspiring ((where’s Janet Reno or Robert Reisch when we need a little excitement in DC?).

Let’s go on about the failed gun control policy, the flatulent nonsense that came from the Vice President every few weeks, and a first lady who has some partisans but who is basically considered as exciting as drying paint. He’s a photo-op president whose jutting chin in some photos makes him look more like Mussolini than our Democratic standard-bearer.

So it’s Tuesday, November 8, 2016. The heathens arrived at the gate and re-took control of the Senate AND the Congress. To take Chris Matthews’ 1994 indictment and update it for 2016, “He did it!” The “he” in this case is not Bill Clinton, it’s Barack Obama. It’s as if all the nightmares we pro-Hillary types had about an Obama presidency have come true. . over. . . and over. . . and over!

Yes, let the historians be kind to Barack. Perhaps they will. But in this moment, the day after he lost Hillary’s presidency and control of the agenda, Barack Obama has given us only one thing to be grateful for: He’s proven that Hillary was right in 2008. Everything we were warned about has come true and she can point fingers directly at the man who stole her presidency.

Obama’s failure is now Hillary’s failure.

I was not always sure that I wanted her to run again. There’s too much pain, negativity, money, and media for anyone to run for president. And what they dish out to male candidates, they double-down when it’s a tough woman like Hillary.

But I was convinced that she had to run. Obama made her case for her. It’s not liberalism or basic Democratic principles that lost the 2012 midterm elections. Incompetency lost the elections.

Hillary had to run because she was the only potential candidate with the forward thinking vision, historical perspective, and “get it done right competency” that America needed. But thanks to Obama, it will be generations before we get another chance to control our destiny. Given the resentment about Hillary that’s lingered in Obamaland, I’m sure that no one currently in the White House really feels sorry that she lost.

Women who hate Hillary.

Women Who Hate Hillary: the Secret Sin Many Women Share —

(Editor’s Note: I wrote “Women Who Hate Hillary” more than 20 years ago. I never re-published it on this web site mostly because I thought the article’s premise — that women hate Hillary — no longer had any validity. I was wrong. Many people are blaming women for Hillary’s loss. Not everyone agrees with that assessment. While a majority of women did support her, I do wonder why the percentage wasn’t much higher. After all, her opponent was arguably one of the most misogynist presidential candidates in our lifetimes.)

To the casual observer, Susan could be Hillary Rodham Clinton’s philosophical twin. She’s 46, a professional woman who earns twice as much as the average man, well-educated with an advanced degree, liberal on most social issues and, in her own words, a “highly ambitious” over-achiever. She’s also intelligent, attractive, confident, assertive.

As we sit down to dinner one night, the conversation inevitably drifts from idle chatter to a discussion of a certain First Lady, who has just returned to the White House after wowing the proverbial pants off a few hundred congressmen with her dazzling display of health care lingo.

“Hillary,” I say to Susan, “was simply brilliant.”

“Hillary,” responds Susan, “is a cold bitch.”

“What?” I mumble through my food.

“You heard me,” asserts Susan. “She’s a cold bitch.”

I look up and the glare in Susan’s eye tells me she really means it.

Next topic.

A day later, my telephone rings. It’s a woman from Washington. She’s an attorney, she tells me. She was in the Peace Corps. She’s a child of the Sixties, a feminist, a world-traveler, a woman who’s done battle on the front lines of justice.

Who the hell does Hillary Clinton think she is, she wants to know, leaving so many dedicated professional women like herself stranded on the beach of life unnoticed, unrecognized, unappreciated? Who the hell does she think she is, she asks a second time, that privileged Park Ridge–Wellesley College–Yale Law School–over-achiever?

“I know it sounds like I’m whining,” says the woman.

“Yes, it does, a little,” I admit.
“But she’s not the only woman who’s done anything worthwhile.”

“No, she isn’t.” It’s hard to disagree.

The next day I have lunch with Becky. Becky is a psychotherapist. She manages her own group practice. She’s as liberated a woman as you’ll find in these parts. She’s earned her way. She’s struggled and continues to struggle. She’s well-known for her group seminars for women.

While not as vicious as Susan in her condemnation of Hillary, Becky nevertheless makes it clear that in her professional opinion, anyone who spends more than five minutes thinking or speaking about Hillary is “obsessed.”

“She doesn’t walk on water,” I am reminded. “And, besides,” Becky says, “Bill’s a much warmer person than she is.”

I’m sure Bill is. I’m also sure Hillary would agree with Becky.

Later on, I’m about to say something about Hillary, and catch Becky’s eye. It’s a warning: say the “H” word again, buster, and you’re dead meat.

The reaction of these women to Hillary Clinton is certainly fascinating. But what is really fascinating is how they respond when I play back what they’ve said about Hillary.

“I never said that.”

“Yes, you did.”

“No, I didn’t. And, really, I don’t hate Hillary.”

Hate? Did I say hate?

Clearly, these women are in a profound state of denial.

It was just a matter of time. Given Hillary’s roller-coaster ride in the hearts and minds of Americans over the last 18 months, the appearance of a new Hillary backlash is not surprising. What is surprising is that the backlash appears to be coming from women. Which raises the question: what kind of women hate Hillary, and why?

Why professional women hate Hillary.
If you’re a professional woman, it doesn’t matter how smart you are, how much money you make, how many men you turned into sawdust to get to the top, Hillary is smarter, earned more, and mashed more men than you have. Professional women have started to hate Hillary because their roar of accomplishment sounds like a pathetic “tweet, tweet” when compared to the First Lady.

Of course, these are the same women who were supposed to be Hillary’s natural constituency. But Hillary blew it: she turned out to be much too competent, too attractive, too savvy. I mean, how can a woman feel proud that she’s the first female CEO of a Fortune 500 company when Hillary’s out there managing 14% of the Gross National Product and being compared not to Eleanor, but to Franklin Roosevelt?

How can Hillary win them back? It’s easy. She needs to make a mistake, a big one, preferably on national television. If she can look temporarily flustered or at a loss for words, all the better. She needs to stop appearing so damned competent and in control all the time. Bill Clinton can then schedule a prime-time news conference to say Hillary’s still got his trust and confidence, despite her “errors of judgment.” America will love Hillary again. Professional women will welcome her back as one of their own.

Why feminists hate Hillary.
I’m not talking about part-time suburban feminists — you know, the kind that wear flannel shirts on weekends and pick up their groceries in four-wheel drive Broncos. I’m talking about women who know how to spell misogyny and have Anita Hill posters in their bedrooms. For them, Hillary is living proof that the only way for women to succeed in this country is to subrogate yourself to the white male power structure. They hate Hillary precisely because — like most men — she is willing to do whatever it takes to succeed, whether it means changing her name, her hair, her clothes, her values, or her disdain for certain members of the Republican party.

Why poor women hate Hillary.
Hillary who?

Why black women hate Hillary.
Remember Lani Guinier? She was the “radical” black woman that the media said wanted to relocate parts of the Bronx to South Carolina so there’d be more minority congresspersons. Lani Guinier, given her activist agenda and legal background, is really a black Hillary Rodham Clinton — Hillary without the conservatism of Park Ridge, without the compromise of whiteness. She was also the black woman that Bill Clinton forgot to fight for. So while Lani got the rope, Hillary got the pedestal. Don’t expect black women to sing Hillary’s praises in the foreseeable future.

Why country-club Republican women hate Hillary.
These are the women with expensive degrees from Smith, Vassar, Mount Holyoke, and Wellesley who for years coasted along, living off their inheritances or their husbands, who joined a few community groups, dabbled in the arts, and thought they were making the most of their talent and education. Thanks most recently to Barbara Bush, it was fashionable to be a highly-educated female under-achiever.

Hillary’s changed all that, and these women are pissed. A large number of them are doctors’ wives, which explains the venomous hissing whenever Hillary’s name is mentioned.

So who really likes Hillary?
The people who were supposed to hate her the most, as it turns out, have become her most consistent fans. Of course, we’re talking about white, middle-aged, middle class men. Certainly not a majority of men fit into this category, but Hillary has gotten more support from them than anyone expected.

It took a few months, but Hillary’s proven herself and they like what they see. Cooped up all day in corporate offices, surrounded by incompetent young MBAs (male and female), these men love the ever-competent Hillary. She’s the woman they thought they were marrying twenty years ago. As the joke goes, if they had married her, they would be President. And she’s far less threatening than their wives, who not only insist that they help out in the kitchen, but are statistically likely to take off with their children, their homes, their bank accounts.

There’s a bonus, too: Hillary is sexually appealing. (Decency precludes too much detail about this. Let’s just say that for these men, Hillary is a combination of Sharon Stone and Rebecca DeMornay, with brains.)

As I sit at my desk trying to come up with a clever way to end this article, Susan comes over and puts a hand on my shoulder.

“What are you writing about?” she asks, peering down at the computer screen.

“It’s a story about women who hate Hillary Clinton.”

“Her again?”

“Get used to it.”

“Can I see what you’ve written?”


“You told them what I said about her, didn’t you?”


Susan abruptly pulls her hand off my shoulder and is about to leave the room when she turns around. “I never said that I hated Hillary.”

“No, you didn’t. Not exactly.”

“Well, I don’t hate her.” Susan is on her way into the next room when I hear her mumbling “. . . what a bitch.”

As I said, women who hate Hillary are in a profound state of denial.