Even a stopped clock is right twice a day, which makes it at least twice as accurate as Chuck Todd. But when he’s got a good point, he’s got a good point.

And he’s got a very good point today:

Journalists complaining about getting more access to political candidates is nothing new, but the escalating tensions between the press and the Clinton campaign expose what we think could end up looking like a big strategic blunder for the Democratic candidate. Clinton, staffed by plenty of White House alums, is essentially running as a presidential incumbent, except without a day job. By trying to play by the same set of rules that govern the White House press corps (background briefings, tightly regulated pool coverage, and very limited questions to the principal), Team Clinton is playing into the exact narrative they’ve pledged to avoid – appearing to hold a coronation, not a contest.

Which might be one reason she’s relaunching her campaign for the first time. The previous launch has just been a warmup. Hillary is stretching her muscles and preparing for the real launch.

It’s a bit like this:

Let’s all pause to shudder at reflect on what we’ve just learned.

Anyway, back to Chuck Todd making sense about a Democrat. It’s really something to savor. Hey, here’s an idea, Chuck & Company: Maybe if the press started treating Democratic politicians as adversaries, the way you do with Republicans, then maybe Democrats would quit walking all over you.

Of course, that would mean putting your personal feelings aside and relying on facts and evidence. It would mean being skeptical of a politician’s assertions, even if he or she belongs to the same political party as you. It would mean being as unbiased and impartial as you keep insisting you are, in the face of all evidence to the contrary.

In short, it would mean behaving like professionals.

Can you do that? C’mon, give it a try. Prove us all wrong about you.

(Hat tip: Trey Sanchez)