Why Kirsten Gillibrand should have been sent to the kiddie table

The press has been very solicitous of Kirsten Gillibrand, one of the lower-tier Democratic presidential candidates polling at 0.5%, who, if they had a little table, would star there.

They intone about her stance on abortion or on women's rights, or, very delicately, her efforts to be heard.

After all, as the talking heads say: each candidate is striving to stand out in a field of ten, the better to break out.

Here's the one and only thing Gillibrand did to stand out: she interrupted others.  She failed to respect time limits, making life hell for the moderators in a difficult and unwieldy format of 10, with an audience to control, too.  And she couldn't stop talking.  I believe she was the one yap-yap-yapping on camera in the background as the moderators tried to close out the segment and go to the commercial.

In my own Twitter feed, which I filed comments on in real time, I counted four instances where Gillibrand failed to respect time limits, and five if she was that yapping voice in the background on fade.

It signaled a kind of indiscipline, not to mention inconsiderateness, buttressed by a lot of ego.  No respect for the collective picture from this woman, no respect for the party rules.

Not exactly a leadership quality, actually.  More the act of a self-regarding jerk.

It stood out because most of the other candidates did try to keep within limits and show respect the format.  It certainly wasn't a perfect one, but if everyone did what Gillibrand did, the whole thing would have been a disgusting mess.  It was at certain points, but very few candidates disregarded time limits and interrupted others the way she did.

File under "jerk."  File under "immature."  This is what we know about Gillibrand now.  Does not play well with others.  No wonder she's her own kiddie table.

Image credit: NBC via shareable YouTube video, screen shot.

If you experience technical problems, please write to helpdesk@americanthinker.com