So, it seems Queen Hillary I finally laid out some of her proposed economic policies, and the reaction was “so what?” Excerpt:

Hillary Clinton gave a big economics speech here on Monday and the snap reaction among Wall Street investors, economists and ardent financial reformers who thrill to the soak-the-rich rhetoric of Bernie Sanders was a collective: “Meh. What’s next?”

Clinton laid out the soft contours of a “growth and fairness economy” in a speech designed to appeal to struggling middle-class workers with promises of higher pay and more generous federal policies.

But she left out many hard specifics on tougher tax policy toward the rich and corporate America. And she offered limited pledges to crack down on big Wall Street banks while hitting her strongest notes promising to toss rogue bankers in prison while ripping recent worker productivity comments from Jeb Bush.

There is a long, long list of reasons that Her Highness is the worst possible candidate the Democrats could choose for 2016.  In addition to her having all the charm and charisma of a painful anal obstruction, in addition to her having alienated most of the legacy media (who should have been her strongest allies) and in addition to her Brobdingnagian sense of entitlement, now she is finally releasing some policy positions – positions calculated to double down on seven years of Obama economic failure – and the collective response is “meh.”

Seriously, Democrats, is this the best you’ve got?  This is a  candidate whose entire campaign strategy is apparently “it’s my turn, peasants.”

The very thought of a Hillary Clinton Administration is downright unsettling.