October 31, 2016

"If ruling Democrats hold themselves to the high moral standards they impose on the people they govern, they would follow a simple process..."

"They would demand that Mrs. Clinton step down, immediately, and let her vice presidential nominee, Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, stand in her place."

Wrote John Kass in a much-linked column in the Chicago Tribune. That was published a couple days ago. I feel I said the same thing a while back. Oh, here it is, from August 8th, responding to a NYT piece called "Mike Pence Should Get Donald Trump to Withdraw." My post heading was: "And Tim Kaine should get Hillary to withdraw."

I took a poll. Here's how you voted:



BUT: At this point, 22 million people have already voted. I hate this new system of early voting, but it's the game as it is being played this time around. It's too late for a drastic change. And yet, Clinton could make a statement that if she is elected and X occurs, she will have the courage and integrity to resign, and her worthy running mate, Tim Kaine, will become President. But what is X? And would you trust Clinton to follow through? Given that X would have something to do with her being an immense liar, I would expect a lawyerly explanation of why X is not X.

57 comments:

AllenS said...

The only way that Hillary quits is if someone drives a wooden stake through her heart, and then covers her with garlic.

Brando said...

I'd rather four years of Kaine than four years of Hillary. Not sure I like the "step aside at the last minute to switch to a candidate who hasn't been under as much focus" thing though. It's one thing if a candidate is incapacitated, but to carry a scandal and then drop out seems like a devious tactic.

AprilApple said...

Democrats should hang their heads in shame that Hillary is their nominee. Her corruption is staggering.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Assuming either candidate wanted to ( they don't ) is there any mechanism for doing this? The candidates are already qualified for the ballot. If they drop out, does the party have the right to put their running mate in their place?

Unknown said...

Could Kaine or Pence be elected legally?

Big Mike said...

@AprilApple, they should but they won't. I their universe "everybody does it."

EDH said...

"Step down, step down, step down!"

Bay Area Guy said...

Hah - Ruling Democrats holding themselves to high moral standards? Puhleeze.

There are many fine average citizens who are Democrats. I don't have a beef with them, heck, I was one for decades.

The Dem party apparatus, however, is corrupt to the core. Kaine is a meek nobody compared to Clinton and the power brokers. These Dem rulers have a playbook - to turn Chicago into a one-party murder Capitol of the world, to turn California into a weird foreign playground for the filthy rich San Francisco elites to govern the illegal masses.

Don't let them do the same thing to our country.

chickelit said...

False equivalency. Plus there is no McMuffin on that menu choice.

MadisonMan said...

What did Kaine know and when did he know it?

If he's complicit in the scandal (If -- make me laugh) then how is he any better?

Sebastian said...

"If ruling Democrats hold themselves to the high moral standards they impose on the people they govern . . ." Funny stuff. Had me at if.

Michael K said...

The Clintons were crooks in 1992. Only Ross Perot enabled Bill to get in. That year, Bush was considered unbeatable after Gulf War I and I think Mario Cuomo declined to run which opened the door for The Clinton Crime Family.

Lawrence Walsh provided the October surprise and Bush, himself, alienated the GOP base with his collapse on taxes.

I still think it was a deal with Dan Rostenkowski to get Democrats to support the war and maybe someday we will learn about it.

George Mitchell then killed a capital gains tax cut and the Clintons squeaked in.

Getting them out is much more difficult because they have paid off so many.

Wilbur said...

And who does Mr. Kass think is going to deliver this news to Ms. Clinton? "Democrats"? Who and under what or whose authority? The President? HRC undoubtedly has too much dirt on him for him to tell her to do anything.

No, this is another fine mess she's gotten them into. Except they chose her as their standard-bearer, so they have to live with the consequences.

rhhardin said...

The poll needs sharp stick in the eye.

Matthew Sablan said...

"... and Bush, himself, alienated the GOP base with his collapse on taxes."

-- Eh, Bush made a call expecting the other side to be willing to compromise as well. As usual, though, the other side never gave.

I like compromise, and I like to work across the aisle. But, Republicans need to learn that Democrats are not working in good faith. See: Reagan's amnesty, Bush's tax hike compromise, Congress's pulling Clinton to the middle, pretty much everything W. Bush did, Reid stabbing McCain in the back after asking him to come back to the Senate during the financial crisis, etc., etc. If the left had held up their end of each of these bargains, the country'd be less divided and better over all, instead of where we are now.

I can understand why a lot of other Republicans are ready for political war and no compromise.

SayAahh said...

The country will be a victim of merciless gridlock as POTUS Clinton is meticulously examined.
Some might consider that a positive.

Big Mike said...

BTW, Trump may be rude & crude, but where is there evidence that he acted illegally that would force him to step aside? Women are scurrying out of the woodwork to claim he groped them but when you shine a light on each case you find (1) no corroborating evidence (indeed, in the case of the woman who alleged that she was groped on a flight to London, and other cases, such evidence as exists points in the other direction) and (2) quite often a tie to the Clinton campaign, the DNC, or a pro-Clinton media outlet.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

"If Democrats hold themselves to the high moral standard..." I think I made it that far. The party of Harry Reid? The party of Nancy Pelosi? The party of Loretta Lynch & Eric Holder--the party of Lois Lerner and all her friends? The party of Bill F'in Clinton?!
Yeah, that's an "if" too far.

sinz52 said...

The early voting issue is another reason why I wish we had a Constitutional Amendment that mandated Instant Runoff Voting (IRV).

In IRV, you get to vote for your first choice AND your second choice.

I assume that most Trump voters would vote for Pence as their second choice, and most Hillary voters would vote for Kaine as their second choice.

That would eliminate the early voting problem: Those early votes would simply go to Pence and Kaine respectively.

sinz52 said...

Big Mike said: "no corroborating evidence"

The corroborating evidence is Trump's own words on tape in the Access Hollywood tape.

If a woman accuses John Smith of having raped her, and they find a recording of John Smith actually boasting that he raped her, the combination of eyewitness testimony and his recorded confession will be enough to send John Smith to jail.

320Busdriver said...

She blew it when she made the "intent"ional decision to shield all her government communications from the light of day. That alone disqualifies her from holding office ever again.

Period. End of story.

Meade said...

"False equivalency. Plus there is no McMuffin on that menu choice."

If you had known of Evan McMullin before August 8, you are 1 of 3. Maybe 4.

320Busdriver said...

And would you trust Clinton to follow through?

I would not trust any Clinton to take out my garbage.

JRoberts said...

I've told my friends I'm voting for Harding, but hoping for Coolidge.

viator said...

On a panel made up of Fox Political Insiders former Republican Congressman John LeBoutillier, and Democrat public opinion pollster Pat Caddell, Schoen, the diehard Hillary supporter shocked everyone with a public confession.

A sheepish Doug Schoen spoke directly to Faulkner, saying:

"As you know I have been a supporter of Secretary Clinton… but… and the but is a big deal, at least to me, given that this investigation is going to go on for many months after the election, no matter who wins. But, if the Secretary of State wins we will have a president under criminal investigation with Huma Abedin under investigation -- the Secretary of State -- the president-elect, if she should win, under investigation."

Dumbfounded, Faulkner cut in asking, “Whoa, whoa, whoa… wait a minute you’re not going to vote for Hillary Clinton?”

More concerned for country than party, a patriotic Schoen replied back:

"Harris, under these circumstances I am actively reassessing my support…I’m deeply concerned that we will have a Constitutional crisis if she’s elected. I want to learn more this week see what we see, but as of today, I am not a supporter of the Secretary of State for the nation’s highest office."

Static Ping said...

It is a very good article. The problem is if Hillary had any honor, she would never have run for President in the first place. If the Democratic Party had any honor, they would have derailed her before Iowa. Pundits refer to the Democratic Party as a criminal organization for a reason.

The Republican Party has a different problem: its leadership hates its voters.

CStanley said...

An excellent proposal by sinz52- tying early voting to the need for IRV.

Nonapod said...

Given that X would have something to do with her being an immense liar, I would expect a lawyerly explanation of why X is not X.

The Clinton's are the absolute grand masters of equivocation. See Bill's now infamous parsing of "is" and Hillary's "What difference, at this point, does it make?". They've proven over and over again that they can reframe and restructure things they've said in the past with the willing defense of their MSM sycophants. I can only assume that at this point most voters would take anything Hillary would say with regards to any possible "X" with a zettagram of salt.

People aren't going to be voting for Hillary because she tells the truth, they'll be voting against Trump because they believe (incorrectly, imo) that he'd be worse. And Hillary will never, ever step down.

traditionalguy said...

Don't go all Wisconsin civilized on Hillary, now. The analogy of what we can expect from her is how Hitler and the SS treated the German people after the Battle of the Bulge ended in 1945. He ordered them to blow up Germany and all die for letting him down.

And any proponent of negotiated peace was taken out and shot.

Big Mike said...

@sinz52, that's a lie and you're a liar. Trump was not talking about groping a woman on a flight to London on that tape, was he?

bwebster said...

Ann:

I registered as a Democrat at age 18 in 1971 and remained a registered Democrat (at least, in those states where you declare a party) for most of my adult life. But I began to become a DINO (Democrat In Name Only) when the Democratic leaders in DC did not go to Bill Clinton and demand that he resign as President when it became clear that he did, in fact, have sex with Monica Lewinsky in the Oval Office (ignoring for now all the prior charges of sexual assault and harassment). That was, in my opinion, the Dem Party's 'haggling' moment, from an exchange variously attributed to GB Shaw, Winston Churchill, and others (though I don't believe authenticated for any of them):

Churchill: "Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?"
Socialite: "My goodness, Mr. Churchill... Well, I suppose... we would have to discuss terms, of course... "
Churchill: "Would you sleep with me for five pounds?"
Socialite: "Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!"
Churchill: "Madam, we've already established that. Now we are haggling about the price”

The irony is that had Bill Clinton in fact resigned, I think that Al Gore would have easily cruised to re-election in 2000 (not necessarily a good thing from my POV, but I still think it would have happened). I finally resigned from the Democratic Party for good in 2008 after the savage misogynist attacks on Sarah Palin that poured out upon McCain naming her as his VP. ..bruce..

MikeR said...

"they find a recording of John Smith actually boasting that he raped her". Huh? What did he say that fits that description?

320Busdriver said...

How about the news that broke where Russ Foolsgold was accepting boatloads of cash from a big Boston law firm where the attorneys were writing checks to dems and then the firm reimbursed the money as bonuses.

Mr campaign finance reform is not exactly following high moral standards either now. I am pretty sure he told us all he would only accept money from the good folks in WI.

If WI voters are dumb enough to put him back in the senate I might just have to move out of state.

Freeman Hunt said...

I agree on early voting. I think it should be eliminated.

CWJ said...

A President Kaine would be a figurehead, like Obama has always been, and those running the show would continue to do so. If you want 4 more years of the Obamna administration, he's your man. There are reasons to prefer Kaine over Clinton, but not for public policy purposes.

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

That would be a true Republican solution - not in the Party sense, but in the technical meaning of the People electing Representatives and those Representatives making decisions for the People.

Who, amongst the People, voted for Tim Kaine in the 2016 Primaries?

buwaya puti said...

You elect systems, not people.
Yes, this POV is unpopular because its too natural to personalize collectives, but they really are collectives.
When you focus on persons, you are arguing about shadows, about illusions, myths, facades.

It matters very little to have Clinton vs Kaine. It may not matter all that much to have Trump/Paine vs Clinton for that matter, the leadership class is that far gone and the structures are so rotten.

MadisonMan said...

Re: early voting: Did anyone who was not all-in for a Candidate vote?

I have doubts. I won't vote 'til election day. I'm still not sure which candidate will get my anti-Hillary vote.

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

Ah, yes. I well recall that bit of doggerel scrawled on the side of a stall in basement of the Texas Tech Engineering building:

Don't change dicks in the middle of a screw;
Vote for Nixon in '72.

jr565 said...

the fact is, democrats simply don't hold themselves to that high moral standard. They only hold Republicans to that standard. So, they are not going to do what is suggested.

Michael K said...

"There are reasons to prefer Kaine over Clinton, but not for public policy purposes."

Kaine deep down is probably a communist. He was a big Sandanista supporter.

Hillary is a total opportunist and crook. The rich Hillary supporters are counting on that,

Gusty Winds said...

There has never been any reason for Trump or Hillary to withdraw. Trump was nominated by winning Primary votes (13 Million), and Hillary by Democrat Superdelegates. That's the system.

There are two choices this election. Make one. Corruption vs. Change.

The holier than thou hyperventilation over Trump is all bullshit. He has been proven right again and again, even in regards to Huma and Carlos Danger having access to gov't information. The corruption being exposed is real. Voter fraud is real. Media Bias is real. Shitheads like Paul Ryan know its real, but never had the balls to say or do anything about it.

Wikileaks is the new investigative media. The rest are just paid extensions of the Central City trying to hold on to power. Can't let a gov't by the people actually run things.

Whether he wins or loses Trump has done this nation a yuuuge service.

Larry J said...

"If ruling Democrats hold themselves to the high moral standards they impose on the people they govern

They don't, which is why I don't believe it's possible for me to ever vote for a Democrat again. I don't necessarily demand that politicians get held to a higher legal standard than the rest of us, but I damned well resent them not getting held to any legal standard at all.

tcrosse said...

We're in this mess because the Democrats rigged their nomination and the Republicans didn't rig theirs.

Matthew Sablan said...

"If a woman accuses John Smith of having raped her, and they find a recording of John Smith actually boasting that he raped her, the combination of eyewitness testimony and his recorded confession will be enough to send John Smith to jail."

-- I was unaware we had a recorded confession of Trump admitting to the specific acts alleged to him, as opposed to him making general comments. I still think Trump's scumbag level is high, but to treat his tape as admission of guilt in specific cases is just poor thinking.

Gahrie said...

Voting should be restricted to one day, and absentee voting should be restricted to the military and government workers serving overseas.

Ann Althouse said...

There are no allegations that Trump raped anybody.

It's kissing, hugging, breast touching, and ass grabbing.

If you'd put everyone in prison who's ever kissed or hugged you or touched your breast or ass without asking you first -- in every situation, like at parties, when you're hanging around with friends -- and if you've never done it yourself (or you believe you belong in prison), please let me know.

Gahrie said...

This year's election is precisely the reason the Electoral College was created for. The electors need to go to Washington, reject the will of the voters, and elect a responsible ticket instead.

Most people would probably be willing to accept a Pence/Kaine ticket.

Jeb/Sanders?

Romney/Warren?

Ann Althouse said...

My point is: I'm against selective prosecution.

Bill Clinton, by the way, has been accused of rape.

Matthew Sablan said...

"There are no allegations that Trump raped anybody."

-- There's actually at least one person who claims Trump raped her when she was a minor, Snopes has an article laying it out.

tim in vermont said...

If a woman accuses John Smith of having raped her, and they find five contemporaneous witnesses, all testifying under penalty of prison if they lie, including one who found the accuser bleeding with torn clothes in the hotel room where she claims it happened, it will be enough to send John Smith to jail.

John Smith, but not Bill Clinton.

tim in vermont said...

You know, I looked for the Snopes page on Juanita Broaddrick's rape accusation, and oddly enough, can you imagine this? It wasn't there.

But Snopes is entirely impartial!

Kirk Parker said...

sinz52,

There's the slight problem that the tapes aren't talking about rape, but I'm sure you will gloss over that with the greatest of skill.

Michael K said...

" touched your breast or ass without asking you first "

The tape alleged that he had consent because he was a star.

The women coming out of the Gloria Allred woodwork were making allegations of stuff 25 years ago.

Bay Area Guy said...

There are no allegations that Trump raped anybody.

It's kissing, hugging, breast touching, and ass grabbing.

If you'd put everyone in prison who's ever kissed or hugged you or touched your breast or ass without asking you first -- in every situation, like at parties, when you're hanging around with friends -- and if you've never done it yourself (or you believe you belong in prison), please let me know.


God Bless you, Althouse, for having some common sense decency, here.

Before the advent of Iphones and Uber, we, as young males in the 70s, did many stupid things:

1.On weekends, we played tackle football in the park, no parents involved, no helmets.
2. We rode in the back of pick-up trucks without seat belts, yes, sometimes on the highway.
3. We threw rocks at moving cars (very stupid, yes).
4. We got into fistfights after school on asphalt pavements
5. We stole candy from Safeway, and ran down the street laughing.
6. We hung around outside 7-11, and asked older kids to buy us beer.
7. And, yes, on occasion, at a dance, or after school, or on the playground, we got a bit grabby with the girls, some were cool with it, some were not.

This was all before age 14 -- by high school, kids got bigger, and confrontations got a little more worrisome.

Under today's puritanical standards, we would have all been expelled and put in jail, and our parents too, for letting us do all these things.

Some guys never grew out of this, perhaps Trump is one of those men/

On the whole, though, it was a good childhood - I've stayed in touch with many of the kids, even the girls too!

rcocean said...

" There's actually at least one person who claims Trump raped her when she was a minor, Snopes has an article laying it out."

She claims that in 1992 - 24 years ago - Trump had sex with her when she was under-age. NOT RAPE.

She filed a suit in 2013 alleging this and it was thrown out for lack of evidence. She refiled in 2016 after Trump got the nomination.

If this had any substance the WaPo and NYT would have had screaming headlines about it for the last 3 months.

Michael K said...

If this had any substance the WaPo and NYT would have had screaming headlines about it for the last 3 months.

The previous lawsuit was by Clinton lawyers and there was no valid address or phone number or even ID for the "plaintiff." I'm not sure she exists.

Even Gloria Allred does better,