It is very much on topic. The main defence of Hillary not being right-wing is that there are many American politicians so far to the right (e.g. most Republicans). But they are so far to the right that they are almost unmatched in the western world. Almost anyone would look centrist or center-left compared to them.
So why not use a broader context? An American left-wing person (not necessarily a communist) could reasonably say, "Yes, I call Hillary right-wing because in the US almost all politicians are right-wing." It's a legit argument because by changing the definitions it demonstrates that you can go way to the left of Hillary and it seems to work pretty well for society. I have seen some Americans use this argument, and in any case it's possible.
first of all, seeing someone (or even a group of someones) use an argument does not grant said argument legitimacy.
second of all, calling her right-wing
even in an international context fundamentally misrepresents what constitutes the "right wing", because it almost always fixates on ignoring the fact that our social services being less robust
right now is not exactly germane to what each party's end goals are
on immigration? the Dems are arguably further left than any major party in the EU. only Germany even comes close to our Overton window, and that's arguably because a grand coalition is currently in government.
on infrastructure and general spending? consistent with most center-left parties, with the caveat that many in the EU are constitutionally constrained by Union-wide treaties
on LGBT issues? far and away to the left of practically every country in Europe, with the sole exception of marriage equality
on environmental policy? consistent with most center-left parties, with the caveat that the center-right parties aren't as terminally insane on this front
on health care policy? consistent with most center-left parties as far as end goals, we're just not physically there yet
on banking policy? on gun policy? on family-related policies, from abortion to family leave? the Dems are there, broadly, with the EU's center-left. like, i've served as an assistant to left-wing officeholders in multiple countries at this point, and with regards to their respective domestic policies, we're not particularly far off from any of them anymore. might've been 20 years ago, but that was another age.
third of all, about half of the US's politicians are right-wing. this does not automatically confer right-wing status upon the other half, it just means we're polarized as hell.
It wasn't just mail ins. It was provisional ballots which should not have been handed out in the first place. It looks like they were eventually counted, however the race was a lot closer after those ballots were included though it looks like Hillary still won.
FWIW:
1) by raw vote the California margin was actually nearly identical to where it was before the provisionals were even counted - it just looked closer because that margin's less percentage-wise with more total votes, and
2) the provisionals took absolutely forever to count - they always do in California, as it turns out - because there were literally a couple million of them.
Doesn't matter if it was not rigging or just shitposting. A person of her position is supposed to be a neutral party to the primaries and she clearly was not based on the e mails. Then Hillary offers her a top position in her campaign? Sorry but that has been her biggest mistake this election season so far. A lot of moderates are upset by this (not just Bernie supporters) and are voting 3rd party because of it. Doesn't matter if what happened in the DNC chairwoman emails were legal or illegal. They show clear bias towards hillary and she was not impartial like she should have been. She should not have been offered a top stop in Hillary's campaign, political mistake and just on principle.
Also FWIW:
The "top position" that DWS was given is completely meaningless in terms of importance in the campaign - what was it, an "honorary chair"? Those are basically the "you tried" star of campaign positions (much as "honorary degrees" do not actually confer that you completed a degree), and it was probably handed to her so she'd actually quit the DNC instead of continuing to fight absolutely everyone to cling to the position for the last 6 months of her term.
