Could we turn our clocks ahead to a time when we don’t care about Chelsea Clinton’s spinach pancakes? That would be preferable.

November 8th spelled doom for Chelsea’s mother and left that glass ceiling unbroken. Since then it’s been heartbreak, walking through the woods near Chappaqua, and the occasional pep talk via Snapchat from Hillary. On the other hand, her only offspring has been busy making a “name” for herself.

Chelsea Clinton is the boring child of a charming and likable (to some) father, and cold, standoffish mother. She lands somewhere between those two residing in an odd, not quite unlikable, but nowhere near charming place. Sorry, Chelsea.

Now she is in front of us, in our face, promoting breakfast food and expressing her excitement about planetary discoveries.

Where can one become relevant based on a colossal failure of someone closely associated with them? The answer is politics. Chelsea is stretching far to reach for that relevance. The mainstream media is right alongside her, politely laughing at her jokes, promoting her political opinions, and pushing her persona.

Here is every 2017 tweet from @thehill that includes the words “Chelsea Clinton.” pic.twitter.com/PuLQlSmPjf

— neontaster (@neontaster) March 7, 2017

The media is doing one (or both) of the following:

• Trying to keep the Clinton name on our tongues to help cement a legacy
• Doing their part to groom Chelsea for political office someday

Whichever one it is, it’s happening. As The Washington Times reports, everyone else is noticing, too.

You can rarely go a day anymore without reading or hearing about some Chelsea Clinton news.

Every single one of her tweets seems to garner a story.

“Ben Carson’s comments on slavery draw a swift rebuke from ex-president’s daughter,” the Washington Examiner wrote of one of Ms. Clinton’s online missives.

“Chelsea Clinton lets loose on Twitter,” a Politico headline blared, remarking Ms. Clinton had picked up a “spicy, sarcastic online personality” since her mom lost on Election Day.

“Chelsea Clinton’s Twitter account has lately been getting saltier,” The Washington Post reported, and the Mercury News poised the question: “Is Chelsea Clinton Donald Trump’s most formidable Twitter foe?”

The New York Times did a story on the books Ms. Clinton reads and recommends, and she penned an op-ed earlier this month in BBC on America’s opioid epidemic, even though she’s not a doctor, an addict, or a health care expert.

The New York Post has speculated, after her mom’s loss, Ms. Clinton is being groomed to run for Congress. The New York Daily News has suggested if Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand runs for president in 2020, Ms. Clinton may look to fill her seat.

Perhaps the media attention is a way to keep Ms. Clinton relevant — a token to the Clinton family that the mainstream press so lovingly adores.

No thanks.

Hillary’s defeat at the polls (aided by underwhelming support from females) should have been a sign to the Clinton clan. If America didn’t choose to “be with her” when it should have been her year, then force-feeding Chelsea via social media won’t go over very well.

It’s clear that the Clintons, and their cheerleaders in the media, want a third act. Mercifully, Bill Clinton won’t be in office again and most likely neither will Hillary Clinton, who is one of the biggest losers in modern American political history. All that’s left is Chelsea Clinton. Right now, promoting her brand is a top priority. What the end goal actually is has yet to be determined.