In another, he said younger Republican lawmakers “despised” Mr. Boehner. “They are repelled by his personal behavior,” he wrote. “He is louche, alcoholic, lazy, and without any commitment to any principle.”
In several messages, Mr. Blumenthal argued that Democrats should present Mr. Boehner as the face of the Republican Party during the 2010 midterm elections. “Making Boehner the GOP poster child should be systematic and relentless,” he wrote.
Mrs. Clinton — who, as the nation’s chief diplomat, publicly stayed out of the campaign — never responded to such suggestions in the emails that were released. But she clearly followed the elections carefully as Democrats were headed to a blowout defeat.
Mr. Boehner is a Republican, and he can definitely present the Republican Party. But in my opinion, the fact has nothing to do with the Democrats, as they have no right to choose anyone to present the Republican Party. Maybe they can choose some Democrat to present the Democratic Party, but not the Republican Party.
How should the sentence be interpreted? I am confused. Could someone please give some explanations about it? Thank you.
The paragraphs above are extracted from the New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/02/us/politics/emails-show-how-hillary-clinton-valued-input-from-sidney-blumenthal.html?_r=0