When all else fails, Democrats will play the race/victim card. And Hillary Clinton is no exception.

During her “Bloody Sunday” speech in Selma, Alabama this past weekend, Clinton told the crowd that the Supreme Court’s “gutting” of the Voting Rights Act prevented her from winning Wisconsin:

[Racist Republicans] are motivated every single day to try to pull back rights, to try to suppress rights, to try to prevent people from fulfilling their own God-given potential. They did go to work and they found a receptive Supreme Court who came up with the most absurd decision. There are a lot of absurd decisions but this is, in many ways, the most absurd.

The Congress is supposed to legislate based on evidence and facts, which we did. And then it gets up to the Supreme Court and they say, ‘No, you don’t need that anymore. We don’t need that voting rights stuff. You don’t need to hold states and municipalities accountable. We are beyond all that now.’ What nonsense. Absolute, absurd nonsense. And what was the result? They gutted the Voting Rights Act.

I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act and I will tell you it made it makes a really big difference and it doesn’t make a difference in Alabama and Georgia, it made a difference in Wisconsin where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40,000 and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.

Watch this portion of her speech below:

It sure would be nice if she could make up her mind on why she lost Wisconsin – and voters in other states in 2016. She’s come up with all kinds of excuses, none of which pass the smell test.

What arguably kept her from winning Wisconsin was just one simple but crucial thing: She did not visit the state, not even once, after the primary (which she lost to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT).

She lost Wisconsin in the general election by less than 30,000 votes. And it wasn’t because Republican turnout in comparison to 2012. It was because other voters decided to stay home – or vote for the Libertarian and Green Party candidates instead.

We saw this play out in several other states. Democratic voters were not as enthusiastic about Clinton’s candidacy as they were about Barack Obama’s, and that played out at the polls.

But her reaction to losing is pretty typical of what we see from Democrats when they lose closely contested elections. They blame racism. They blame voter suppression. They fraud at the ballot box. They simply cannot accept that there might be legitimate reasons for why they lose, like voters not being receptive to their ideas and/or not being impressed or motivated enough to vote.

Oh well. At least she hasn’t played the woman card on losing Wisconsin. Yet.

——————————
Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter.–