October 15, 2016

Hillary Clinton is so far ahead — so seemingly almost locked in — and yet she still can't get to 50%.

Clinton's RCP average in a 4-person race is only 44.4%. You've got to imagine the missing top of this graph. Picture an empty space that's larger than what you see here, which tops out at 45%:



That's more than 55% of voters who do not support Clinton, and you've got to figure a good portion of those who do support her only support her out of rejection of Donald Trump. In fact, that's the main argument her campaign is making for her. She also lays claim to all the liberals who loathed her in the primaries and wanted Bernie Sanders. We're headed into what could be a landslide victory for someone that almost nobody likes.

I'm searching for an up side to this. Perhaps it's bad to have a beloved President. Is Obama beloved? Yes, to a great extent he is. Here's his approval rating over time. It doesn't look that great, but I think we Americans are mostly liking and trusting him and, as a consequence, not getting as outraged about things that should be bothering us. The new President will not be loved and may very well be hated. And all the things we've let slide as we indulged the well-liked Obama are going to fall heavily into the lap of the new, loathed President who we're not going to cut any slack.

I'm trying to say there's some good in that: 1. We'll have to face reality (or something close to that), 2. We'll break out of our complacent funk and get back to our old tradition of sharply criticizing the President, 3. We'll stop looking to the President for spiritual uplift and pseudo-religious hope of salvation.

127 comments:

mikee said...

Hillary's success is a symptom of the problems facing the US, and those symptoms are only going to get worse. As is she.

Unknown said...

You can be honest. People like Obama because they have to because he is black. Nobody likes his policies. His policies have a minority of adherents. A true minority. Even blacks don't like his policies. But he is black. So we have that and we have that racial kong wrong being done by media for the last 8 years too. Obama is an absolute dolt. He has no vigor. He has no innovation. He is a follower. But it worked being black.

sykes.1 said...

The news media are fanatically pro-Hillary, and none of your possibilities will occur. We will sink further into delusion; the media will create a cult of the leader; and Hillary will be held up as the ideal woman. The Precious Snowflakes at Wisky and elsewhere will swoon with adulation and idolization.

tim in vermont said...

Why would we distrust a woman who illegally burned records of her meetings a Secretary of State with donors who gave her foundation, which she used as a political slush fund and for lifestyle support, millions of dollars?

Why would we distrust the judgement of a woman who couldn't even figure out what should and should not be considered classified?

Why should we dislike a woman who said "We came! We saw! He died!" about a man who was not only murdered, but sodomized with something, possibly Obama's Nobel Peace Prize, as he was killed? Except Little Caesar was talking about Carthage, not Gaul, although the refugee flood unleashed on France was no small feat either.

Why should we dislike a woman who turned Libya into what Obama called a "shit show"?

Why oh why?

Whose close business partners in Arkansas seemed to have a propensity to die in prison, while she skated?

It's a fucking mystery?

Hagar said...

And not only that, but I think we are overdue for a financial "correction" sharper than 2009 and it is likely there will be a shooting war that may go very big indeed.

tim in vermont said...

Of course the press is right on the whole refugee thing:

What explains the huge rise in deaths at sea? Are smugglers getting more brutal?

I’m not sure I have the answer to that. The bottom line is that this is a business for the smugglers and they treat people like cattle. They have no sympathy for the refugees’ plight, for the fact that they suffered in Syria or suffered economic deprivation. There’s a huge line of refugees waiting to cross. I think it’s just brutal economics.


Couldn't be two wars, one of which Hillary started, and the other were she weighed in on one side in the name of the United States of America! Naah!

It's a fucking mystery!

Sebastian said...

"1. We'll have to face reality (or something close to that), 2. We'll break out of our complacent funk and get back to our old tradition of sharply criticizing the President, 3. We'll stop looking to the President for spiritual uplift and pseudo-religious hope of salvation." We, we, we? Actually: 1. No. Progs will postpone the reckoning as long as they can. Any people interested in facing reality would run from Bill and Hill. 'Nuff said. 2. No. Progs will treat criticism as sexist. MSM will stand guard. People expressing revulsion at Hill will be tarred as making "rape jokes." 3. No. Progs don't do "salvation." They just want power. As the most recent batch of Podesta emails confirms, progs just want to be saved from proles.

rhhardin said...

Too much rain. A mudslide for Hillary, not a landslide.

tim in vermont said...

What he meant was "I'm not sure I have an answer to that that will not cast a bad light on Democrats."

We need an anti-war party. Not an anti-war movement that is turned on an off only as Republicans are in power. There used to be protests against the wars every weekend at the end of Church Street in Burlington while W was president. Now? Well, you have to understand.. these are wars that must be fought!

Bang bang bang go the war drums against Russia, with Hillary twirling her baton at the front of the parade, the Democrats dancing the war dance in the streets, and nary a peep.

Original Mike said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Freder Frederson said...

Why would we distrust a woman who illegally burned records of her meetings a Secretary of State with donors who gave her foundation, which she used as a political slush fund and for lifestyle support

While I can accept that some of the contributions to the Clinton Foundation smell of impropriety (donations may have been used to leverage political favor), there is zero evidence of the Clintons using the fund for self-dealing (unlike the numerous instances of Trump self-dealing with Trump Foundation funds)

MayBee said...

We do need to get away from the President As Lifestyle Show Host thing we've had. The Clintons had that in office the first time, but can't recapture it.

But we also had a President the press hated- GWB, and that didn't feel great either. In fact, Obama was elected as a result of that- we wanted a president the press loved so we could get some peace and quiet. We (not me) wanted a president the world leaders would love (they tried that with Kerry, too, but it only stuck with Obama). We wanted a president the Muslim World would love (that face!). And none of that really worked. We have riots at home, and world leaders don't really even like Obama, and the Muslim world is falling apart. But we don't hear about it because the press still loves him.

So....I don't know. We just need the press and the entertainment industry to be more neutral. To stop putting politics in everything, and to stop either loving or hating a president.
I don't want the new president to be interviewed before the Super Bowl or the NCAA. I want him or her to sit quietly in the White House and work.

David Begley said...

I don't believe the polls. This will be like Brexit; unfavorable polls but ultimate victory.

tim in vermont said...

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/clinton-foundation-sidney-blumenthal-salary-libya-118359

Clinton Foundation pays Hillary advisor 10K a month.

This is the guy who wrote this email:

“First, brava! This is a historic moment and you will be credited for realizing it,” he wrote in the August 22, 2011 memo to Clinton. “When Qaddafi himself is finally removed, you should of course make a public statement before the cameras wherever you are, even in the driveway of your vacation house. You must go on camera. You must establish yourself in the historical record at this moment.

Which she did! When he was "finally removed" she said "We came! We saw! He died! [ chortle guffaw!]"

MayBee said...

there is zero evidence of the Clintons using the fund for self-dealing

What do you mean? The Clintons left office with very little money and are now gobzillionaires. They and their foundation are their only source of income. They made speeches for money, the place where they make a speech makes a big donation to their foundation, and then that entity got favorable treatment from the government.

Chuck said...

From your post here, Professor Althouse, most readers would never know that you voted for Obama. (Twice? Is that correct? Did you vote for Obama twice?)

MayBee said...

NO, she didn't vote for Obama twice

Original Mike said...

"there is zero evidence of the Clintons using the fund for self-dealing"

The whole thing's a huge freaking slush fund, for Christ's sake. You'd see that if it were done by the other side.

320Busdriver said...

Obama's presidency is an unmitigated disaster.

It exemplifies the "soft bigotry of low expectations."

He might be popular, but not respected.

It's proven out by the right/wrong track polls.

Bob Ellison said...

"We're headed into what could be a landslide victory for someone that almost nobody likes."

What will happen when she wins? We have not had this situation in my lifetime. Lots of people like Obama, liked Bush, Clinton, going on down the list of history.

Rightists will not react violently, evensomuch as some people would like them to. Mostly they will hunker down and think about 2020.

Leftists will not celebrate, because Hillary is awful and not even-- even!-- a consistent leftist.

America will be demoralized. Maybe that's the best we can hope for: a lame-duck POTUS with female parts and a failed Congress. Together, they can achieve nothing.

tim in vermont said...

there is zero evidence of the Clintons using the fund for self-dealing

What a fucking joke

Maybe you shouldn't use Clinton campaign talking points as a substitute for thinking for yourself. I know that's what PB&J does, be we both know he is not very bright.

AJ Lynch said...

America is like a person who is very obese, smokes too much and gets no exercise. Trump will put a stop to some of those negatives and America will slowly get in much better shape. Hilary won't address any of those negatives - she will make it much worse. If she is elected, America will eventually find itself in organ shutdown and the shit will really hit the fan bigtime.

Bob Boyd said...

Most voters are trying to pick who they think will do the least harm.
To me that means who will do the least period. Trump won't be able to do much. It'll be ugly, but will end soon.
Hillary doesn't want to be like Obama, just a "first". She wants to be an FDR. Major turmoil, long lasting consequences.
Most of the media will not stop being her priest cast. They love the superior feeling it gives them. In their hearts they know the progressive cause is the only thing that allows them to believe they are any different than the somebody spray painting "fuck you" on an overpass.

AJ Lynch said...

Foundation self-dealing?

Are you kidding me- most of the Clintonistas worked for the State Dept, shifted to the Foundation payroll [or to John Podesta's partisan non-profit group] after she stepped down from State, and now they work for her campaign.

Bay Area Guy said...

AA: "Perhaps it's bad to have a beloved President. Is Obama beloved? Yes, to a great extent he is. Here's his approval rating over time. It doesn't look that great, but I think we Americans are mostly liking and trusting him and, as a consequence, not getting as outraged about things that should be bothering us."

His tone and temperament is beloved. He never gets rattled. He never throws a tantrum. He has a lovely family and a winning smile. Liberals can feel good about themselves by supporting him, because it means, in their minds,they can't be racist (while his opponents are).

The problem is that Obama's policies suck. He's a leftist. Obamacare is crippling small business. He's far too lenient with radical Islam terrorists in our country. He has no private sector business sense whatsoever. He coddles illegal immigrants. In sum, he governs just love like an ordinary Chicago Democratic hack, keeping lock step with the party machine. But in contrast to Hillary, Bernie and Trump he comes off as the adult in the room.

robother said...

Yes, comrades, the upside to Hillary is that we can no longer romanticize the boot crushing our face forever.

tim maguire said...

As MayBee suggests at 8:25, possibly the biggest and most intractible problem with our system today is the tendency of the media to either love or hate a politician and it's willingness to do nearly anything to get us to love who they love and hate who they hate. That woud be bad enough under any circumstances, but here, where they are so ignorant and irresponsible about how they decide who they love or hate, it is disasterous.

Original Mike said...

"Here's [Obama's] approval rating over time. It doesn't look that great, but I think we Americans are mostly liking and trusting him"

Who are you going to believe, me, or your own eyes?

You've never gotten over your infatuation, but don't think its shared by the nation.

Levi Starks said...

I cannot for the life of me understand why anyone would want to preside over a country in which over half the populate are certain they are a criminal.
While I may be a self described Republican, There are Democrats whom I can respect as having integrity even though I may disagree with them politically.
If Hillary really wanted to insure a Trump loss, she would step aside and let an honest person take her place.

Barry Dauphin said...

WJC got 43% in 1992.

tim in vermont said...

BTW, I love how Politico reports on Clinton travel:

“At the Clinton Foundation, it’s unclear the line between ‘charity’ and multi-million dollar political organization funneling money to subsidize the Clintons’ private political air travel and courting of prospective presidential campaign donors,” group official Tim Miller said. “Given the extravagant luxury travel and fundraising expenditures that could help a potential presidential campaign, the Clinton Foundation must be transparent about how these funds were spent, detailing flight costs, itineraries, manifests and other relevant information.”

Clinton’s only political travel in 2013 was related to Terry McAuliffe, the Clintons’ longtime friend who won the Virginia governorship that year. The rest of her travel public travel appeared to be for paid speeches, which were covered by the entity she was speaking to, according to contract terms.


Do you believe this? That Hillary did no political travel in 2013? That suddenly her massive presidential campaign appeared fully born after that? Are you that gullible, Freder?


Based on her public schedules from last year, her foundation-related travel appears to have been minimal.

So basically, as per her usual Nixonian behavior, she is keeping this stuff secret and Politico covers for the fact and takes the lying harpy at her word! When did Hillary earn the right to be believed?

MayBee said...

There is the possibility that either of them could be a good president. Clinton was actually a good president aside from all the shenanigans. Trump could get good advisors in.

I fear the Democrats overplaying a Hillary win and trying to re-create the Obama in Grant Park moment. I fear the press overplaying a Trump win as Doom for America, and protests at the inauguration like we had for GWB.

It would be nice to just calm things down. Have a detente among ourselves. No riots, no gloating.

tim in vermont said...

The Clinton Foundation’s finances are so messy that the nation’s most influential charity watchdog put it on its “watch list” of problematic nonprofits last month.

The Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid.

The group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel, and salaries and bonuses, with the fattest payouts going to family friends.

On its 2013 tax forms, the most recent available, the foundation claimed it spent $30 million on payroll and employee benefits; $8.7 million in rent and office expenses; $9.2 million on “conferences, conventions and meetings”; $8 million on fundraising; and nearly $8.5 million on travel. None of the Clintons is on the payroll, but they do enjoy first-class flights paid for by the foundation.
- New York Post

tim in vermont said...

Clinton was actually a good president aside from all the shenanigans.

The "no-fly zones" and policy of overthrowing Saddam in Iraq and the missile attack on a sovereign Afghanistan, which was not at war with the US at the time played out great!

MayBee said...

Yes, Tim Maguire. You worded that so well.

Bob Ellison said...

Maybe, MayBee.

My sense is that Hillary does not have it in her to listen to advisors and do the right thing. When she has had power (as FLOTUS, as Senator, as SoS), she has used it badly, and word on the street is she is not interested in criticism, even from trusted advisors. Look at the toadies around her.

Trump seems to have it in him to listen to advisors. He even boasts about it in his me-me-me way, saying things like I will hire the best people. He expresses doubt about his own thoughts.

I'd like to have Gerald Ford back.

Freder Frederson said...

Trump seems to have it in him to listen to advisors.

Of all the ridiculous statements praising Trump on this blog, this has to be the absolute most ridiculous.

Lucien said...

@Barry Dauphin beat me to it. Bill Clinton won with 43% because Ross Perot hated GHW Bush so much that he came back into the campaign and made sure Bush lost.

Hilary seems likely to get at least 44% if she wins, so she'll hold the family record (for first time candidacies).

Bob Ellison said...

Freder Frederson, of all the dumb things ever said in the history of dumb things said, yours has to be the dumbest of all, even dumber than was considered possible by modern science.

MayBee said...

The "no-fly zones" and policy of overthrowing Saddam in Iraq and the missile attack on a sovereign Afghanistan, which was not at war with the US at the time played out great!

No he wasn't perfect and he made a lot of mistakes. But he was better than Obama and better than I'm imagining Hillary will be. If she can be more like he was and less like the left *wants* now, and less like her own foreign policy history would indicate......

AprilApple said...

The fact that she cannot get to 50+ tells us that Trump sucks.

A toothbrush could beat her.

tim in vermont said...

Of all the ridiculous statements praising Trump on this blog, this has to be the absolute most ridiculous - Freder

And here I thought you were going to come back and show us that in fact there actually was "zero evidence" of self dealing by the Clintons!

That really was a ridiculous statement. I don't blame you for declining to defend it. Surely you can dredge through the Hillary talking points you use as a substitute for thinking for yourself and find something to explain why it seems like Clinton's political machine is kept intact by the foundation, but that is simply not true!

William said...

I agree with rhhardin. Mudslide, not landslide. Her election will not signify any tectonic shift of the plates, nor any great love for her. The propaganda class have had considerable success in discrediting Trump, but zero success in portraying her as likable, honest or competent. I don't think they even like her very much. If she gets elected, she will not have much of a honeymoon. The media is holding fire now because of Trump, but they'll start dumping on her immediately after the election. The attacks will come from the left, but they will come and they will be harsh and vitriolic. They will want another Obama in 2020. Elect Michelle. She'll help America see straight again.

tim in vermont said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
tim in vermont said...

I wonder if SNL will sell out their credibility with their desired demographic, who are now Bernie supporters and continue to serve as Hillary's palace guard? Or will they jump on board with the future of the Democrats and mine that rich vein of comedy gold that is Hillary?

No need to answer that. They will not shirk their duty to their empress!

Diogenes of Sinope said...

It is not possible to eat me without insisting that I sing praises of my devourer?
Fyodor Dostoevsky

tim in vermont said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
tim in vermont said...

Bouncing the Freder rubble:

In April 2009, former Bill Clinton aide Doug Band, who helped establish the Clinton Found, sent an email to Hillary aides Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills with the subject line “A favor…”

Band, who currently heads the global consulting firm Teneo Holdings, wrote that it was “important to take care of” an unnamed male associate who wanted a job.

“We have all had him on our radar,” Abedin wrote back. “Personnel has been sending him options.” - HeatStreet

Abedin, through a special arrangement, was allowed to do paid part-time work for both the Clinton Foundation and Teneo Holdings while employed by the State Department.

AprilApple said...

2. We'll break out of our complacent funk and get back to our old tradition of sharply criticizing the President...


Media, late Night Comedy, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSN, MSNBC, SNL, Ellen, Joy Baher show, all the morning shows are all pro-Hillary. It's a vortex of crime cover for her.

We might complain, but the propaganda megaphone won't hear our voices.

Diogenes of Sinope said...

It's very difficult for an obviously bad person to poll well. The evil poll much better once they take power.

tim in vermont said...

By the way, both Clinton political aides mentioned above had jobs with the Clinton Foundation. So I am wondering how Freder defines "self dealing."

Rhythm and Balls said...

She also lays claim to all the liberals who loathed her in the primaries and wanted Bernie Sanders.

Any other lies she's told that you're willing to believe?

We'll stop looking to the President for spiritual uplift and pseudo-religious hope of salvation.

Yes! No more Lincolns! No more Washingtons! No more Roosevelts! Screw character! What does character matter in a president anyway!? We need more cold, conniving, calculating Nixons! And Andrew Johnsons! We need more not-so-great, morally weak, flimsy and even evil presidents. Criminal, perhaps. Leadership is sooooooo overrated, saith the Althouse. Screw leadership!

AprilApple said...

Her election will mean the end of an already compromised and collapsing voting system.

People do not seem to understand the seriousness of it all as they bash and blame the GOP. After Hillary gets in, electorally the GOP is henceforth, dead. She's packing the courts. Those courts will END ALL Voter ID laws across the nation. The fix is in.

The GOP burn-it-downers should be happy. It's happening!

Say hello to Schumer and Pelosi and - forever.

MayBee said...

Abedin, through a special arrangement, was allowed to do paid part-time work for both the Clinton Foundation and Teneo Holdings while employed by the State Department.

Suddenly occurs to me Obama wants Clinton to win so he can set up his own little favor-currying shop. He's staying in Washington. He needs to make the money to keep up the lifestyle he so obviously enjoys.

MayBee said...

Screw character!

A president of good character wouldn't use the office as a way to gain personal popularity for himself or his family.

mccullough said...

A combination of Hillary getting a few points below 50% of the popular vote and the GOP holding the House and Senate would be a realistic best case scenario at this point. A managed decline

Rhythm and Balls said...

Oh, you think?

Not using an office as a way to gain things? You're starting to sound like one of those wayward, non-narcissists we here call "commenters."

Rhythm and Balls said...

Screw bravery!

It's all about going ahead to get ahead.

The wimmin know.

Gotta boost, boost, boost that Hillary over the finish line!

chrisnavin.com said...

In my condo complex, after getting a potentially bad deal on a major piece of work, and lots of drama, there was just a legal, orderly replacement of the board driven by the dissenters (to whom I contributed).

During the transfer, one member of the ousted board floated the little gem of there being 'no women.' I truly hadn't noticed.

I'll bite:

Ousted board:

-Woman (child-care specialist)
-Woman (landlady)
-Gay guy who never says anything (nice enough...doesn't appear to work)
-Filipino guy who says what he thinks (finance)
-White guy (don't know what he does)

Replacement board (supported by a majority...they all introduced themselves)

-Russian/American guy whose parents live in complex (lawyer)
-White guy (IT)
-White guy (finance/consulting)
-White guy (construction/bookkeeping)
-White guy (Tech/game design)

I'm looking for competence, some experience, and accountability. I participate and go to every meeting (25K on the line). These were the people who stepped up.

William said...

As human beings, I like the Obamas better than the Clintons. Their personal and domestic life is considerably less rancid. Even so, in 2008 I would have preferred Hillary over Obama. I think there's a good possibility that she will be a better president than Obama-- all the while generating far more criticism.

Mike Sylwester said...

Scientific Progressives denounce all criticism of Barack Obama as racist.

Likewise, they will denounce all criticism of Hillary Clinton as sexist.

That's what they do.

Unknown said...

"I don't believe the polls. This will be like Brexit; unfavorable polls but ultimate victory"

Karl Rove comes to mind, the shocked look of disbelief, priceless.

Rhythm and Balls said...

Scientific Progressives denounce all criticism of Barack Obama as racist.

Anti-scientific regressives know better.

chrisnavin.com said...

Living in Seattle, I have come to expect the constant grouping of people into categories of hierarchical
status. Such people imbue this ranking/ideological system with a kind of pseudo-religious and mystical significance.

Of course, their moral compass and moral lights are better than yours. They must educate, convince, share and scare you. You may even be heartless and...evil? They spend all try trying to show you how much they care within this little system.

Some deal with actual people and reality better than others.

It's usually best not to play.

It helps to understand the rules.


damikesc said...

People like Obama because they have to because he is black.

Basically. It's also why his Chewbacca-stand in for a wife is constantly called beautiful and elegant. I mean, when compared to the wookies in Star Wars, she ain't bad...

It would be nice to just calm things down. Have a detente among ourselves. No riots, no gloating.

It'd be nice...but I ain't interested. I've turned the cheek enough.

MadisonMan said...

That Hillary will win makes it easier for me to vote for Trump. Time to start marketing "Don't blame me, I voted for Trump" bumper stickers.

My expectations for a Clinton Presidency are exceedingly low. Lowest ever.

If you set your expectations low enough, it's hard to be disappointed, yet somehow I think I will be.

chrisnavin.com said...

***Hierarchy is fine on its own, and status within the hierarchy is variable, subject to mob rule, current trends and whatever comes up on the way to the prophesied future. Roberts Rules should cover it.

Usually, it's Conan The Barbarian with epaulets who steps up to lead, because that's such folks rolled all along.

buwaya puti said...

The problem here is the "we will do this" idea.
You will not. You no longer have political influence. Thus is not a democracy. There is no funk to break out of. You, the US population, simply no longer have control.

Unknown said...

MOST of Bernie Samders voters have come over to support Clinton, because we know what the alternative is. If you're still so entrenched in your irrational hatred of Clinton as a Bernie Sanders supporter that you haven't listened to him when he says to vote for Clinton, you're an idiot, because a Trump presidency would be far far far worse. When you vote third party you've essentially thrown away your vote.

Sebastian said...

@MayBee: "Suddenly occurs to me Obama wants Clinton to win so he can set up his own little favor-currying shop. He's staying in Washington. He needs to make the money to keep up the lifestyle he so obviously enjoys." Now, wait a minute. Don't you read comments? Don't you do your blog-commenting homework? I was there weeks ago, explaining how O will set up his own foundation and raise a cool $1B for racial justice and climate change scams, made possible by peddling the possibility of a Michelle run for office. O is a competitive guy and will try to outdo the Clintons in graft and money-grubbing. The O's will never go away. You read it here first (and second and . . .).

gbarto said...

This sounds to me like voting for Obama so the Democrats will be responsible.

It's nice in theory, but the reality is accountability actually only comes and but briefly with the midterms.

Rhythm and Balls said...

MOST = 51%, dildo. That's not much of a win. Again, if winning requires running against Trump, that's an indictment, not a strength. If winning requires more blatant bias than ever before by the media, that's a weakness, not a strength. If it requires owning the DNC - INCLUDING the objective (in name only) chair, CFO etc., blatant efforts to wreck her Democratic opponent's campaign, and blatant bigotry attempts against him in KY and WV, then that's not a strength. She exhibits all the hallmarks of a tyrant - which is political weakness in a nutshell. Brittle. Incapable of accepting criticism. Musing about the "droning" of journalists. And shaming, shaming, SHAMING everyone who's not with you. She has turned the Democratic Party into something FDR wouldn't recognize and not different at all from the RNC in either fiscal or military policy.

It didn't take Bernie Sanders to have no interest in an anti-progressive, Barry Goldwater-fundraising, Wall Street-owned, black youth mass incarcerating, welfare reforming, war addict. She was NEVER impressive to anyone (and still isn't) who isn't just reacting to their bad memories as women in a 1960s Mad Men workplace and all the fantasies they have of exacting vengeance on nasty male bosses at the time. None of the other matters matter to her boosters. Not war, not peace, not prosperity, not poverty. NONE OF IT. You think Jill Stein has an "IRRATIONAL HATRED" of your below mediocre candidate? Nonsense. It's you who has an "irrational hatred" of all people who aren't Hillary. It's repugnant. There are far better people - at least for those of us with scruples. You OTOH just care about power. All the power you CAN'T have and that Hilldog WOULDN'T have if she had any actual political skill and valued the people of this country and playing by the rules. I feel sorry for other women who have to put up with and make excuses for people who think like you and have no capacity to even understand what your own motives are. HRC supporters are more transparent than you know, and usually vie for Trump in terms of low information status. They're actually even more poorly informed, as far as I can tell.

Rhythm and Balls said...

Hillary will do exactly what Bill did. Grease the economy, weaken us internationally, project an even less credible image of prosperity and peace, and then let all the consequences of her non-leadership smack us back in the ass about a year to eight down the road. Graft, graft, graft and bloat their fortunes. The ONLY thing the Hillary boosters have to run on is cultural nonsense. Hillary doesn't lead on policy; she makes one that she feels is a smorgasbord crafted to appeal to every right-winger and moderate. And they ALL go down in flames. All the time. As senator she sponsored three bills. Two to re-name post offices in New York (Let's commemorate people!) and one to rename a road in Buffalo after the monstrous mainstream media mediocrity Tim Russert. Wow. Some leadership. But hey, we live in a sexist world so let's pretend that voting for Hillary will make all sex crimes disappear. No one will ever say anything unkind toward any woman again! Oh how nice that will be. In the meantime, let's assassinate journalists, over-leverage the financial industry, continue to gut manufacturing and the working class, throw the working poor under the bus. It will suck. But we will all know how awesome it was to have a woman doing it! Go Hillary!

cyrus83 said...

It sounds hopeful, but there are 3 observations here:

1. Americans, like most people, will do anything to avoid facing reality. It's not an encouraging sign that the generation coming up requires trigger warnings to protect them from ideas that mess with their inner sense of well-being. They're supposed to handle reality how?

2. This is only happening if somebody not named Hillary Clinton wins. If she wins, all criticism will be off limits as sexist, and any crimes, corruption, or government misdeeds will be covered up by the media and government.

3. The left has largely made ideology a pseudo-religion, I don't see this changing regardless of who wins this time.

tim in vermont said...

Karl Rove comes to mind, the shocked look of disbelief, priceless

Yeah, he didn't account for Pennsylvania voter fraud, which is a tradition there, when he looked at the polls. Yet still he won... But you got that "priceless look."

tim in vermont said...

How is Hillary going to "grease the economy" when interest rates are basically zero or negative in real terms? How long can it go on that savers are mercilessly punished, waiting, of course, for the coup de grace of means testing Social Security so that those hardy few who did save despite all, are going to have their savings taken, well, used in lieu of Social Security payments to them, which is the same thing.

Where is it going to come from? Higher taxes on the rich? The US already has the most progressive taxation in the Western world. That single-payer health care in Canada? That's paid for with what US liberals would call "taxes on the poor"! You know, sales and VAT taxes. That's where the big money is. Not that I don't think that Zuckerberg, Gates, Larry Elison, and Bezos should pay taxes 'til their scrotums shrink. The thing is they will never pay, they buy protection from the party of high taxes which has become the party of the super rich and the war mongers. No, they will come after people who work for their money at jobs and call them rich.

EDH said...

What's the prevailing theory on the other 7% of voters not accounted for in the four-way polls?

buwaya puti said...

It doesn't matter which Democrat is President.
The polls dont matter.
Voting doesnt matter (in the usual case).
Public opinion doesnt matter.
No one who is elected has any actual control of anything important on the Federal level; in some states like CA they dont even have local control.

Most of you are still living in a world of obsolete assumptions, the way things were.

Its going to take somewhat more to shift all your world-views, but it will come.

Rhythm and Balls said...

Not voting third party is a waste of one's vote. There is NO need to keep supporting the establishment, and the duopoly. They have enough support; don't need We the People to rubber stamp them. HRC supporters suffer from a poverty of imagination. They think a Trump presidency would be the world's worst disaster? I think it would be America's best wake-up call. People with a vendetta against him are stuck on this tangent of how he's a creation of the Republicans - with their bigotry/xenophobia/sexism whatever. Yeah, he's that. But he's also a reaction to a Democrat party that completely SOLD out the working class. They think Trump's the worst we can do, as a country? Oh, we can do far, far worse. Trust me. It just shows you how poorly informed these mainstream Democrats are. So now Trump is Hitler and we have to vote against political bigotry? You can't vote against bigotry. You can ONLY buy it off. Very specific and predictable conditions led to Hitler, and the DNC and RNC are re-creating them with a vengeance and will amp up their re-creation of them on STEROIDS under Clinton. Maybe not immediately during her reign, but she will do her best to entrench the same political inertia her husband and his Republican owners did, with all the same predictable results. A crash worse than 2008. A war worse than Iraq. An attack worse than 9/11. It will happen, the DNC under a Hillary Clinton presidency virtually guarantees it.

But hey - let's all be single-issue voters this year and raise our voice to say a loud NO to sexism. More important than life or death, a nation that leads, wallows, rises or falls and crumbles with the ROW it brings down with it - is that we vote for the candidate that the most resentful, misandrist 2nd wave femunists see as their hero. That will solve EVERYTHING.

I think it won't even solve their gripe against sexism. But as with the pro-lifers, they're all about the struggle and the drama of it. Actually winning what they say they want is beside the point.

mockturtle said...

Any male who votes for Hillary is a soft, pink pussy.

Leora said...

I think the obituary for Trump's campaign is premature. About 70% of the country thinks we are going the wrong way and Hillary can't break out of the mid-40's even in the states she supposedly is winning by large percentages. I don't know what's going to happen, but it's going to be a lot closer than people are supposing.

MayBee said...

MadisonMan said...
That Hillary will win makes it easier for me to vote for Trump.


Yeah, just came to this conclusion last night.

MayBee said...

Sebastian, yes. Yes, you did.

Original Mike said...

"How is Hillary going to "grease the economy" when interest rates are basically zero or negative in real terms?"

Yeah, they've already blown their wad. They're stubbornly opposed to reforming taxes and regulations so I really don't see a way out.

Original Mike said...

"How long can it go on that savers are mercilessly punished, waiting, of course, for the coup de grace of means testing Social Security so that those hardy few who did save despite all, are going to have their savings taken, well, used in lieu of Social Security payments to them, which is the same thing."

I saw the writing on the wall decades ago, so I saved even more. Call me a chump, but I didn't really see any other option.

buwaya puti said...

They cant reform regulations. Its a Gordian knot they have tied, and they cant untie. It is beyond human abilities, even if there was the will and unity to attempt it. The mass of stuff in there, including the millions of administrative law decisions, civil law precedents, settlements, commissions, and etc. are beyond mortal conception. And its increasing rapidly, daily.

This place is run by a collective you know, not of course a democratic one, but a sort of fuzzy-logic oligarchy. There are too many interests tied up in the mess to even get together the will for reform.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Undecideds break for the challenger. Trump is the challenger. What are his numbers if you add 7%? Still, I don't know what to do about the D city machines.

R&B, another upside of boring and election g Trump is that it can hardly be taken as an endorsement of the GOP. It's rather a kick in their teeth, actually.

All you doubters and mourners, chin up! Stay the course! Keep hope alive! If you vote for Trump, he can win. Can anyone tell me with a straight face that the news and the polls are honest, and devoid of incentive to be dishonest? Vote. Get out the vote. Bring friends. Somebody with Ted Cruz's phone number find out what the hell he is doing.

This is it, people, this is our last chance.

FullMoon said...

Read it and weep. The rest of it
"See, rural jobs used to be based around one big local business -- a factory, a coal mine, etc. When it dies, the town dies. Where I grew up, it was an oil refinery closing that did us in. I was raised in the hollowed-out shell of what the town had once been. The roof of our high school leaked when it rained. Cities can make up for the loss of manufacturing jobs with service jobs -- small towns cannot. That model doesn't work below a certain population density.

If you don't live in one of these small towns, you can't understand the hopelessness. The vast majority of possible careers involve moving to the city, and around every city is now a hundred-foot wall called "Cost of Living." Let's say you're a smart kid making $8 an hour at Walgreen's and aspire to greater things. Fine, get ready to move yourself and your new baby into a 700-square-foot apartment for $1,200 a month, and to then pay double what you're paying now for utilities, groceries, and babysitters. Unless, of course, you're planning to move to one of "those" neighborhoods (hope you like being set on fire!)."

mockturtle said...

This is it, people, this is our last chance.

You've got that right, BL!

hombre said...

Blogger Freder Frederson said...

"Of all the ridiculous statements praising Trump on this blog, this has to be the absolute most ridiculous."

Praise for Trump on this blog is extremely rare. Democrats like Freder, who lack the decency to be embarrassed by Crooked Hillary's candidacy have a pathological need to believe that the #NeverHillary crowd likes and/or approves of Trump.

Sorry, Fredor, there is no mitigation for the sin of HillLove in that. Trump is the "Anti Candidate." He will have his idolaters, although far fewer than Hillary, but most of us just see him as an alternative to the Clinton Crime Family and the corruption that accompanies them.

hombre said...

Dead people will put Hillary over the top.

Big Mike said...

@Althouse, a 52% approval rating does not make Obama "beloved," and note that -- according to the same chart you link to -- Obama's approval rating has been underwater for most of his presidency.

The only "upside," if you can call it that, is that Hillary's unique combination of gender, corruption, and ineptitude will make it very difficult for another woman to be elected president for at least 24 and perhaps 48 years. And that's too bad, because I liked Carly Fiorina and very much like Kelly Ayotte.

hombre said...

Blogger tim in vermont said...

"What explains the huge rise in deaths at sea? Are smugglers getting more brutal?"

Islamic extremists on refugee boats/ships are throwing Christians overboard.

damikesc said...

Hillary will do exactly what Bill did. Grease the economy, weaken us internationally, project an even less credible image of prosperity and peace, and then let all the consequences of her non-leadership smack us back in the ass about a year to eight down the road.

I bet we will miss having some corporate accounting standards. God knows we had none under Bill.

They think Trump's the worst we can do, as a country? Oh, we can do far, far worse. Trust me.

They always decry poverty as a cause of crime. When they are fucking over the working poor badly, why do they seem to never assume that something violent may occur? If I had to kill a politician to feed my children, I pity any politician within miles of me.

So now Trump is Hitler and we have to vote against political bigotry? You can't vote against bigotry. You can ONLY buy it off.

It's even funnier when Hillary has a longer history of bigotry than Trump.

I don't love Trump...but there is no way that he isn't the better candidate for US, the people. Sure, Hillary can work the gears of government better...but is that in anybody's best interests but hers?

ALP said...

FullMoon: damn good article at your link; surprised to be reading something so right on in......Cracked!

I am so over cities, Seattle in particular. The only reason I go there is to work; that city is like an annoying ex-husband that won't leave me alone. All efforts to get it out of my life (as long as I've got bills to pay) are useless.


Cacimbo Cacimbo said...

Absurd fantasy. If HRC wins media continue to function as lapdogs. If you want to "break out of our complacent funk and get back to our old tradition of sharply criticizing the President," then vote Trump.

tim in vermont said...

No "self dealing" here!!!

Leading the review was Victoria Bjorklund, one of the nation’s top-ranked legal experts on good-governance practices for foundations and charities. She came out of retirement to lead the review.

She created and previously headed Simpson’s tax-exempt group which advises public charities, private foundations, boards, and donors. Bjorklund was named “2014 Nonprofit Lawyer of the Year” by Best Lawyers Magazine.

Simpson Thacher found numerous weaknesses in the Clinton Foundation’s management structure, including a board consisting entirely of insiders loyal solely to Bill and Hillary Clinton, the board’s failure to oversee finances properly, inherent conflict of interests and the use of audits based on cash accounting rather than the federally mandated accrual basis.


Laws are for the little people!

She[Chelsea] also personally recruited McKinsey & Company friend and colleague Eric Braverman to become the new CEO. And Chelsea widened the board from a handful of Clinton insiders to a dozen while serving as its vice-chairman.

Only months after Braverman arrived after signing a lucrative $395,000 employment contract, he abruptly quit. Bruce Lindsey, a long-time Clinton hand who Braverman had replaced, is now back running the foundation.

It’s unclear if Braverman resigned or if he was pushed out by old Clinton loyalists.

Band and other long time Bill Clinton pals had a lot to lose with a Chelsea-led investigation.

Historically, the foundation was run by a small group of old Clinton loyalists, including long-time aide Bruce Lindsey, Terence McAuliffe, now the Democratic governor of Virginia, and Cheryl Mills, who was Hillary’s chief of staff at the State Department.


Bruce Lindsey, long time Clinton political operative running the place.

I used to think the Clinton Foundation just smelled. But you know what? The more you look into it, the more you realize that it is a cesspit of rotten corruption! [Redundancy required to express the degree of disgust. -ed]

I am waiting for Freder to explain all of this away... I am holding my breath, honest to Hillary!

walter said...

Obama began his reign with a pre-emptive Nobel while promising to skyrocket energy prices.

Unknown said...
You can be honest. People like Obama because they have to because he is black.
--
It also helped to be essentially an academic who sealed his academic records.

Hil's problem is her woman card is dog-eared with her treatment of women..and long list of known corruption and fail.
But still...many will think
It's high time. She wants it.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Ann Althouse said... The new President will not be loved and may very well be hated. And all the things we've let slide as we indulged the well-liked Obama are going to fall heavily into the lap of the new, loathed President who we're not going to cut any slack.

Bullshit. You're smarter than that, Professor; I don't believe you really think this. You've already identified the kind of "sexist claptrap" we're in for at least 4 years of--the Media will disallow any criticism of Hillary Herself as sexist, just as they disallowed most criticism of The One as racist.
She'll be hated but she'll be entirely unaccountable. She wasn't held to account for her unethical, illegal actions as Sec. State, her husband is a serial sexual harasser & rapist but is widely loved...these people will never pay for their misdeeds. It's the Clinton way! Even I have to admit that it works--they're probably the most well known and successful public grifters of the last hundred years. Using nothing more than above-average intelligence, the power of Bill's massive charisma, and a complete lack of moral or ethical restraint they've occupied the highest positions of power within our nation and used those positions to make themselves fabulously wealthy. It's impressive, although in a very depressing way.

tim in vermont said...

Turns out there was a witness on that airplane, and the answer is!

He says she is lying. That he was incensed to hear her story, and that she was flirting with him.

No matter, The damage is done. Althouse and all the women she represents are lost to this corrupt machine that is the Clintons.

walter said...

They're good at what they do, those Clintons. Perhaps "The best". Maybe that's why Trump felt it an achievement to force them to attend the wedding.

Original Mike said...

"I am waiting for Freder to explain all of this away... I am holding my breath, honest to Hillary!"

I think even Freder knows he embarrassed himself.

Yeah, maybe not.

khematite said...

The polls being cited here are job approval polls. They measure support for a president's policies. To get at whether a president is liked (let alone beloved), one would need to look at polls measuring "favorability" (i.e., "Do you have a favorable opinion of the President?").
53% of Americans seem to have a favorable opinion of President Obama at the moment, so it might be fair to say that he's liked. To say that he's beloved seems somewhat hyperbolic.

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/obama-favorable-rating

cubanbob said...

Ann Althouse said... The new President will not be loved and may very well be hated. And all the things we've let slide as we indulged the well-liked Obama are going to fall heavily into the lap of the new, loathed President who we're not going to cut any slack."

If the next is likely to be so thoroughly hated why would you want that president to be the first woman president? Let Trumpy take the mantle of The Most Hated President Ever so that way in 2020 a fine, decent, non-criminal well regarded and respected woman can become the first woman president.

khesanh0802 said...

I referenced this piece in the WSJ called "Trump and the emasculated voter" on another thread. Written by a Yale computer science prof, it gives perfectly lucid reasons for voting for Trump over Clinton even if you dislike both. Here's the meat, but I recommend reading the whole thing:

"Mrs. Clinton has nothing on Mr. Trump when it comes to character. She lies (“Wipe? Like with a cloth?”—cute and charming Mrs. C.) the way basketball stars shoot baskets—constantly, nonstop, because it’s the one thing she is best at and (naturally) it gives her pleasure to hear herself lie—swish!—right onto the evening news. And her specialist talent of all is the verbal kick in the groin of a Secret Service man or state trooper who has the nerve to talk to her as if she were merely human. She is no mere rock star; she is Hillary the Queen. She is so big, and you are so small, she can barely even see you from up there. What are you? A macromolecule?

I’ll vote for Mr. Trump—grimly. But there is no alternative, no shadow of a responsible alternative.

Mr. Trump’s candidacy is a message from the voters. He is the empty gin bottle they have chosen to toss through the window. The message begins with the fact that voters hear what the leaders and pundits don’t: the profound contempt for America and Americans that Mrs. Clinton and President Obama share and their frightening lack of emotional connection to this nation and its people.

Mr. Obama is arch, patronizing, so magnificently weary of having to explain it all, again and again, to the dummies surrounding him. Mrs. Clinton has told us proudly how thoroughly she prepared for the first debate and has prepared to be president. For her, it is all a matter of learning your lines. Her whole life has been memorized in advance. Mr. Obama is at least sincere. Mrs. Clinton is as phony as a three-dollar bill, as a Clinton Global Initiative."


The polls are a bit depressing, but Trump will never quit. I admire him for that. Listen to some of his rally speeches - Mick has given some good links. He is very impressive. Note that Clinton is taking the weekend off while Trump campaigns in NH and ME and is headed for Green Bay on Monday. Hubris or illness? You decide!

rehajm said...

Yeah, they've already blown their wad. They're stubbornly opposed to reforming taxes and regulations so I really don't see a way out.

One of Hill's chief economic advisors and a likely Fed Chairman is Larry Summers, who still seems to believe in Keynesian multipliers, so Hillary will grease the skids through deficit spending on transfer payments to spendthrift states and municipalities so they can make payroll, to favored political groups like unions and tenured professors. Stimulus they call it.

Big Mike said...

Just as a point of information, one of the states that is strongest for Trump is Arkansas, which is the state that knows the Clintons best. The rest of us might want to pay attention.

Original Mike said...

"One of Hill's chief economic advisors and a likely Fed Chairman is Larry Summers, who still seems to believe in Keynesian multipliers"

Hey, Hill can bring back Laura "A dollar in tax cuts is a dollar taken out of the economy" D'Andrea Tyson. Good times.

Oso Negro said...

Fucking Obama is NOT fucking beloved. Quit goddamn projecting.

The Cracker Emcee said...

"Likewise, they will denounce all criticism of Hillary Clinton as sexist."

They will try manfully but I don't think that's going to work. With Trump out the picture, words like "rapist" and "corrupt" become much more difficult to deflect. I do know some conservatives, mostly of a Libertarian bent, who welcome a Clinton Presidency in the belief that it will discredit government further and foster change.

buwaya puti said...

Hi Khesanh,

Thats Gelernter. He is a big deal, or was, rather. Computer science is a young mans world.

I like his simile - Donald Trump is an empty gin bottle the public has thrown through the window as a response to the piwers that be.

Clyde said...

Those who are "mostly liking and trusting" Obama have not been paying attention. Nobody who HAS been paying attention likes or trusts the man, unless they are of his ilk.

Unknown said...

Yes Obama is beloved. 57% approval rating. He will be missed.

Unknown said...

"All you doubters and mourners, chin up! Stay the course! Keep hope alive! If you vote for Trump, he can win. Can anyone tell me with a straight face that the news and the polls are honest, and devoid of incentive to be dishonest? Vote. Get out the vote. Bring friends. Somebody with Ted Cruz's phone number find out what the hell he is doing."

Pathetic, I can't even laugh at this.

Rhythm and Balls said...

Sure, Hillary can work the gears of government better...but is that in anybody's best interests but hers?

Unknown sure seems to think it's a great, benign skill to have.

mockturtle said...

Is Trump not a logical product of our Hollywood-inspired culture of decadence and depravity? Why, oh, why are people 'shocked' by what is typical speech and behavior in our current society? With all of his shortcomings [no innuendo intended here!], he is still a far better candidate than Clinton.

Rhythm and Balls said...

57% approval rating. He will be missed.

Is this sarcasm? Compared to other contemporary politicians its through the roof.

BTW, your 8:07 was a real beaut. Missed that one. But then, it was kind of easily missed.

Nobody likes his policies? Even the ACA? Are you saying that Queen Hillary, that Health Care Reform Vandal, doesn't like the policy she's championing?

I guess that would be a pretty unaware admission that she's a liar.

Hopefully the people will like her Libya policy and her Syria policy and her Honduras policy and her regime change policy and her Wall Street policy a lot more than the current approach. But I doubt it.

But what do I know? The sisterhood has spoken. And they are apparently for war all the time everywhere and being easily bought.

Rhythm and Balls said...

Is Trump not a logical product of our Hollywood-inspired culture of decadence and depravity? Why, oh, why are people 'shocked' by what is typical speech and behavior in our current society?

LOL. IKR. Only corporate mainstream Demo-crats believe that the government should be less depraved and decadent than the cultural ideals that they themselves champion! It shows you how ignorant they are.

walter said...

It was high time. He wanted it.
So much to love.

Doug said...

zerobama is despised by millions of Americans - just not the Americans the media cater to.

SukieTawdry said...

I think you're overstating the extent to which Obama is "beloved" and the number of us who have tried very hard NOT to "let things slide."

Obama has not been a particularly successful president. The Middle East is a mess and his signature domestic policy achievement is imploding. He has been relegated to unilateral action taken without the consent of the governed or their representatives. Accordingly, his executive orders can be reversed and the various international agreements he's not seen fit to submit to Congress do not carry the weight of law that ratified treaties do. Other world leaders neither like nor respect him. Race relations are at a low not seen in decades. The federal government is taking in record revenues and still spending at a deficit. Our debt is horrendous and our growth minimal. And all this, you say, is the result of our "indulging" the man by letting things slide because, doggone it, he's just so darn likeable?

I've long thought that Democrats would have a hard time winning national elections were it not for media bias (which will continue regardless of who the Democrat is and how little she's liked) and this:

A 2012 report by the Pew Center on the States found that 24 million voter registrations — one-eighth of all registrations nationwide — were either invalid or inaccurate, including more than 1.8 million dead people who were still registered.112

A 2014 study found that two years earlier, some 155,692 registered voters in North Carolina alone had first and last names, birth dates, and final-four Social Security Number digits that matched those of voters who were registered in other states.113

The same study also found that 35,570 people who had actually voted in North Carolina, had first names, last names, and birth dates that matched those of voters who had cast ballots in other states.114

In 2008, Democrat Al Franken won a highly controversial U.S. Senate race in Minnesota by just 312 votes. It was later discovered that 1,099 felons — all legally ineligible to vote — had cast ballots in the election, almost exclusively for Franken.115

A 2006 study found that 77,000 dead people were listed on New York's statewide database of registered voters, and that as many as 2,600 of them had somehow managed to cast ballots from the grave.116

In Milwaukee in 2004, approximately 5,300 more ballots were cast, than voters who were recorded as having shown up at the polls.117

In 2008, election officials nationwide had to discard at least 400,000 bogus voter registrations submitted by ACORN,118 the now-defunct criminal operation masquerading as a “community organization.” (Speaking at ACORN’s 2006 national convention, Mrs. Clinton said: “I thank you for being part of that great movement, that progressive tradition that has rolled across our country.”)119

In 2011, a Colorado study found that of the nearly 12,000 non-citizens who were illegally registered to vote in that state, about 5,000 had taken part in the 2010 general election.120

In ten Colorado counties in 2012, voter registrations outnumbered the total voting-age population by between 4% and 40%.121


(The Clinton Record)

Bad Lieutenant said...

No matter, The damage is done. Althouse and all the women she represents are lost to this corrupt machine that is the Clintons.

10/15/16, 1:08 PM

Tim, your only recourse is to fight back by voting for Trump. You have to neutralize their votes.

Inga, I mean Unknown #55, if I cared about providing you fuel for laughter, I would put a mirror up to your face.

Any of you not voting for Trump, who voted for Bush after the DUI revelation, are hypocrites of the first water. Endangering lives is far more objectionable than sexual friction. Hre are 20 more GWB scandals: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2009/01/06/forgotten-bush-scandals.html

Who remembers Bob Dole? http://www.perkel.com/politics/dole/dump.htm

John McCain? http://wonkette.com/358941/john-mccains-long-career-of-sleazy-lies-semi-affairs-total-corruption

Mitt Romney, Mr. Clean? http://www.nationalmemo.com/10-forgotten-scandals-surrounding-mitt-romney/

Don't tell me that Trump crosses some sound barrier. He is a flawed human being who nonetheless for many reasons is incomparably superior to the alternative, which is, of course,

Madam President Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Say it with me!

Madam President Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Madam President Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Madam President Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Madam President Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Madam President Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Madam President Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Madam President Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Are you sick yet?
Ready to crawl across broken glass in a snowstorm to defeat her?
Who's with me? Yeeaaaaaaaaaarrrgh!

And if there were no scandals, they would have made some up. They're doing it now.

Vote. For. Trump.
Vote. For. Trump.
Vote. For. Trump.
Vote. For. Trump.
Vote. For. Trump.
Vote. For. Trump.
Vote. For. Trump.
Vote. For. Trump.
Vote. For. Trump.
Vote. For. Trump!

In every state! Even if it's hard red or hard blue. We can look forward to disputes and popular vote counts will be a factor for public opinion. And you never know about recounts and all that rot.

And even if our last hope fails and Trump is defeated, in 10 or 20 years if we survive and you have children, are you really going to want to tell them that you had an opportunity to stop her and you didn't even try?

Because he might or might not have gotten thrown out trying to steal second base? Your children will laugh, I think, except that the times that will be coming won't offer much in the way of laughter.

mockturtle said...

I'm with you, BL, as are both of my daughters.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Lord love you, mt.

Every German who voted against Hitler in 1932 deserves credit. Of course despite losing he got in anyway, but they tried, ultimately to be betrayed by elite dealmakers.

We can only do everything we can do.

Jonathan Graehl said...

not looking good for almost all of these 'trump grabbed my pussy' accusations after a little digging.
nonetheless i concede the premise that trump gets real green lights so often (and takes them) that he must have overstepped unwittingly.
only a few of these will be intentional/paid lies. the first few. the rest will be genuine decades-old memories, with the usual reliability (and quantity, when it comes to famous people). while the chance of all of these being untrue is low, it's higher than you'd think - probably 1 in 3. still, that's not what matters. people feel it's true looking at him.
so, no more hetero male presidents from now on, if this very effective tactic is rewarded. ok, women - you break it, you bought it. you're responsible now.

Jonathan Graehl said...

by the way, we all know women (or are women) who have experienced borderline-terrified feelings at drunk or otherwise over-bold males. even if nothing happens, it's natural to feel physically afraid.
unfortunately, hillary has campaigned on bill and her being a team. i'm not sure a rapist and an enabler are anything for americans to be proud of. additionally, it *feels* as if hillary cares more for women than she does about all americans. her 'irredeemable' 'dark' 'basket of deplorables' rhetoric feels like it might lead to an acrimonious presidency.
i submit that we can do better for our first female president. certainly there's a chance it will work out more like maggie thatcher than angela merkel. but i don't think hillary's the one. there are better examples.
i could be mistaken; maybe powerful men (who have women flirt with them *all* the time, but perhaps sometimes misread mere interest - like the interest a man has running into javier bardem at a bar - for sexual flirtation) won't have any accusations like these leveled at them in future elections. maybe this is only against trump.
i'm afraid i don't believe it.

veni vidi vici said...

You're dreaming. The populace's dislike of the presumptive next president, if it's Hillary, will be used as an excuse to ever tighter circle the wagons around her and more vociferously condemn those who dislike and/or disagree with her as "UnAmerican". Get your Watergate goggles off; don't you remember the 1990s?