From a purely pragmatic standpoint - and I hate making this shitty neoliberalistic "pragmatic standpoint" argument - let's say she wins the primary. She'll be thrust into the center stage and open to even more political attacks and misdirection than she is even now.

Given that she is already making completely unforced errors, I see no way for her to survive the general election campaign intact enough to defeat Trump. So if my "apparent dissatisfaction" is directed at the fact that she made the comment at all, it's simply coming from my attempt to see how successful the candidates can be in an objective manner.

I can respect a candidate that lies to win. After all, that's basically what our Constitution was founded on: serving self-interest. I may hate that kind of candidate and as such never vote for such a candidate, but that doesn't mean that I can't respect the method from a purely "Machiavellian" standpoint.

So if I seem like I'd be more comfortable with her lying, it's only the extent that I am simply disappointed in her absolute lack of any capability to politick.

If that makes sense.