First, the quote:
If you look at the map of the United States, there is all that red in the middle where Trump won. I won in the coasts, I win, you know, Illinois, Minnesota, places like that. But what the map doesn’t show you is that I won the places that represent two thirds of America’s gross domestic product. So I won the places that are optimistic, diverse, dynamic, moving forward, and his whole campaign, “make America great again,” was looking backwards. You know you didn’t like black people getting rights, you don’t like women getting jobs, you don’t want to see that Indian American succeeding more than you are. Whatever your problem is, I’m going to solve it.I don't think she is in any way deluded about why red-state Americans rejected her. They sensed her contempt and lack of concern for their predicament. It wasn't hard. She had contempt during the campaign even when she was under pressure to act like she cared, and it's no surprise that she has it when she's free of that pressure. To express her contempt and lack of empathy now is simply to revel in the freedom of not having to appeal to the people for their votes.
And isn't it refreshing to hear her straightforward pride in having the support of the economically successful people? She "won the places that represent two thirds of America’s gross domestic product." And she equates having the money with being "optimistic, diverse, dynamic, moving forward." The rich are not just different because they have more money.* They are also better people all the way down.
Are they rich because they're better, or are they better because they're rich? I don't know, but hooray for the well-off, and maybe those poor people are poor for good reason — that's what I hear from Hillary, exulting in India, where I don't know how well that sort of attitude plays.
In a really terribly stratified society, it may help to indulge in a philosophy that says you have what you rightfully deserve, and we don't have to worry too much about the dispossessed, because their own failings have got them where they belong.**
And isn't it lovely to have Hillary Clinton swan over from the United States to bestow such convenient wisdom — convenient for the best people, of course. For the losers, you are even bigger losers if you listen to someone who tells you he's going to solve your problems. That's beneath Hillary Clinton. And she's free to say so even more clearly now.
And here's the video, which conveys a truly queenly imperiousness:
_________________________
* I'm reminded of the mythical exchange between F. Scott Fitzgerald and Ernest Hemingway: "The rich are different from you and me"/"Yes, they have more money." Hillary seems to be on the F. Scott side of that debate.
** I'm thinking of Social Darwinism and karma.
पोस्ट्स
२४४ टिप्पण्या:
244 पैकी 1 – 200 नवीन› नवीनतम»She also won the areas with the worst urban poverty and violence. I don't see her touting that accomplishment.
Confirming once again that America dodged a bullet with her defeat.
*whew*
She's just as much of an asshole as Trump has ever been. She just targets different people.
exulting in India, where I don't know how well that sort of attitude plays
Basket of untouchables.
She is in India. Democrats always loved caste systems. They make a rich/poor caste system wherever they go.
And boy do they love to put their thumb down on poor people.
Blogger Jeff Roth said...
She also won the areas with the worst urban poverty and violence. I don't see her touting that accomplishment.
Democrats want very rich/very poor people. They try to destroy the middle class at every opportunity.
What it may mean is indeed that HRC is out of messaging control, that is not buffered by campaign consultants. It may also mean she is getting old and like a retired general now occupied by defending her reputation, at least among people where she thinks her reputation matters.
Indians are extremely status-obsessed, like most Asians. Disparaging "backward" subcultures plays well to Indian elites, and may still fly over the heads of the Indian masses.
This may sell well if she is fundraising there. After all one of the big issues is outsourcing and H1b, on which India makes a lot of income, and moreover is an aspirational route for the Indian middle class.
I wonder who paid her for that speech?
A friend of mine, a cardiac surgeon who was the best pediatric cardiac surgeon in the world at the time, gave a talk in India.
After his talk about a new operation for fatal heart disease in infants, several Indian physicians came up to him and said "We would never do that operation since we cannot treat the fatal diarrhea in our infants. That is too expensive for a small number of such children. We spend the money we have on the poor."
I don't think India is that far along yet but there may be enough rich to pay her speaking fee.
"A chicken in every pot that deserves to have a chicken in it"
And the rest of you lazy progeny of bitches? We have hungry Mexicans who are more than happy to take your jobs and work harder for less! And if you want Christmas Eve off be sure to show up for work on Christmas morning all the earlier, and forget about that extra lump of coal for the heat!
Oh yeah, and don't vote on your way out of the country!
This is what happens when billionaires take over your party, and Democrats, the Clintons and Obama sold your party to the billionaires.
She also won the areas with the worst urban poverty and violence.
Poor black people are victims. Poor white people are losers.
After all one of the big issues is outsourcing and H1b, on which India makes a lot of income, and moreover is an aspirational route for the Indian middle class.
Excellent point and probably one of importance to her fund raisers in California.
"Nevertheless, Clinton’s paean to Trickle-Down America is a sign of the times. Just as the rising industrialists of the 1900s produced the Social Darwinist intellectuals, we now have a new class of thinkers keen to explain why the rich and the good are one and the same, though they’re now more likely—shrewdly—to categorize themselves as a species of progressive. History doesn’t exactly repeat itself, but it rhymes."
Indian governments have traditionally played the top-bottom game, where upper-caste politicians pandered to, well, untouchables, through set-asides of university places (affirmative action), etc. The Congress party was big on this high-low split.
She should be sentenced to navigating stairs once a day.
I think this is the single worst thing I have ever seen come out of a politician's mouth; and that's saying something.
BTW, I was so worked up about this the other night that I found the Wikipedia page where they lay out U.S. GDP by state, since it seemed implausible that you could lose Texas, Florida, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin and still have two-thirds of the nation's GDP. In fact the states that went for Trump (not counting one-third of Maine) account for just over 48.5 percent of GDP (2016).
So unless by "places" she means something other than "states," what she said was not only thoroughly obnoxious, but thoroughly false as well. Well played, Madame.
On the bright side, after something like this, I feel pretty confident she's not going to give the presidency another go.
So I won the places that are optimistic, diverse, dynamic, moving forward,
In other words, the states that undergoing the greatest out-migrations.
The more time Hillary spends explaining why she lost a gimme Presidential election, the worse and more embarrassing it is for her, the better and more joyful it is for us.
So, you go Girl!
These same elite wannabees that were raised in darkest Scranton, Pa. and discovered their worth among Yale's snobbery are finding out that all the stolen money (looted from charity under cover of being a Socialist and taken in secretly as bribes from crony capitalists) doesn't give them good health. For that they must prey on stolen children to steal from them their youthful good health. Hilary stinks in every way. So what if she has loot. She is still lower class than anyone who ever lived.
If Democrats take back the majority in Congress, it won't happen by differentiating themselves from Trump, but from Hillary, Obama, Pelosi, Cantor, Boehner...
In the video of Hillary walking down the stairs her outfit reminded me of Marlon Brando in “Isle of Doctor Moreau”.
I'm thinking of Social Darwinism and karma.
It's a very insightful comment. Here in the Bay Area, staggering wealth and squalid homeless poverty are found side-by-side, often on the same block. It requires a powerful ideology to ignore this inequality day after day, and Social Darwinism/karma pretty much nails it.
"The more time Hillary spends explaining why she lost a gimme Presidential election, the worse and more embarrassing it is for her, the better and more joyful it is for us."
-- I just want someone to ask her: "You got to fight the opponent you wanted and STILL LOST, how were you so wrong in your analysis?"
The rich are not just different because they have more money.* They are also better people all the way down.
The Progressives have always believed this ...going back to their original incarnation in the early 20th century.
That's the whole reason Sanger created Planned parenthood.
That clip did not include the part about white married women voting for Trump.
The impression I got watching the video of her saying that about white women was she wrote it on the plane there and then she slowly realized how bad it sounded as it passed her lips in real time.
http://www.kusi.com/hillary-clinton-blames-married-white-women-election-loss/
Michael Brendan Dougherty, writing at NRO, did his own version of this post:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/hillarys-bitter-clinging/
He's right, and Althouse is right. This sort of stupid and incompetent messaging on the part of Clinton is laughable.
But really, I felt the same way about Donald Trump's saying, “They say I have the most loyal people — did you ever see that? Where I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters...It’s like incredible.”
It's the same message. Hillary Clinton is saying that Trump voters were credulous and loyal to Trump beyond all reasoning. And Trump was saying the same thing.
From some considerable experience - the US high tech industries were created and staffed by "deplorables" when they grew to their leading positions. Joe Engineer, Silicon Valley Guy, etc. voted Republican during the ferment of the great growth days.
To a large degree the consolidated industries have been replacing these with foreigners as their creativity has declined.
The coastal enclaves, to the extent that they are still leading in growth (and they aren't) depend on a high-quality minority of skilled technology workers, which are not on the whole "liberal", plus an extremely liberal corporate-government bureaucracy ruling over a vast population of low productivity that votes reliably as the bureaucracy desires.
A lot of the misunderstanding here is also due to the headquarters effect - the HQs of most large enterprises are in these places, but the actual functional/creative parts usually aren't, which leads to a misapprehension of where things are getting done. No doubt much of this rhetoric is deliberate.
Hillary, who has never produced anything of value in her life, revels in being rich. Isn't life great? America - where a dishonest, contemptuous grifter, an unaccomplished third-rate back-bench political hack, can look down her nose at people who have to get up and go to work every day.
I would fucking vote for Satan before I would vote for that sneering, condescending low-life.
Althouse posts something bad about a Democrat. Lifelong Republican Establishment member insists that current Republican president is much worse.
Keep searching for those strawberries..they're out there somewhere.
(World Famous Lurker says....)
Another example of using statistics to mislead instead of inform. While 2/3s of the U.S.'s GDP may be reported from the blue areas of the political map, that doesn't mean that the GDP was necessarily created there. Quite a few large national and international companies are headquartered in the blue areas, so their gross sales are reported as coming from those blue areas. But the reality is far different. Let's just take one large company as an example: Aetna. Aetna is headquartered in very blue Hartford, CT, but their sales come from every county and state in the country.
The concentration of corporate headquarters in and near the large financial centers provides those blue areas with additional political clout, but through Democrat mismanagement, this is changing to some extent. Corporations, like the population, are migrating out of blue areas with corrupt politicians, high taxes, crime, poor schools, etc. and are moving to more livable areas in the red and purple zones. Will it be enough to even out the political influence of corporate America between red and blue areas? That remains to be seen.
I have a half dozen or so friends on Facebook that post several times a day about how much they hate Donald Trump.
It's always the same theme. They consider themselves not only correct on political issues but smarter and better than other people. Their posts positively drip with creamy self satisfaction and preening smugness.
At the same time they are eager to believe anything about people who disagree with them about anything at all.
They remind me of TV preachers. I think correctly, their driven by the same suite of human emotions.
As to the question of why is Hillary doing this?
It's what she believes and who she is.
There is a hidden error in Her-Self's whole thesis: She is laying claim to the whole GDP of the states she won, but she didn't win every single vote in the states she won, nor lost every vote in the states she lost.
Take the deep blue state of Connecticut: Hillary won 55% of the vote to Trump's 41%. Her votes come mostly from public employees, minorities and a good slice of the very wealthy. Trump wins with everyone else. Not sure where to find the data, but I would bet that the taxes paid by Trump's 41% exceed what was paid by Hillary's 55%. Taxes paid, being a proxy here for contribution to GDP.
In Hillary's defense--I am ashamed to rise to the defense of that deplorable woman--she was counting counties--not states. I think I saw a figure that she won 479 counties to Trump's 2,350 counties or so. In California if you count just the Bay Area and the coastal Southern California counties, you probably have 85% of the GDP in the state. And of course the wealthy in those same counties probably sent 98% of their political contributions to Hillary in 2016--just as they had done for Obama in the past.
But using that metric simply shows that Hillary is a clueless twit when it comes to playing the Electoral College game. She thought that if she got--and spent--most of the money, the Oval Office would fall in her lap. By Gum! She was entitled, doncha know?
Not much noblesse oblige in that sorry critter. One can only hope that she spends a lot more time on a lot of very steep stairs.
It's hard to believe this woman was once First Lady of Arkansas. She must have been holding her nose throughout her tenure. I wonder what Bill "Bubba" Clinton thinks of this.
It is interesting that in 2 generations we went from Thomas Henry’s Social Darwinism to Aldous’s “Brave New World”. Perhaps evolution and natural selection is not fast enough.
These remarks probably played will with the Economic Royalists Hillary needs to bankroll another run. There's no shortage of people with more money than sense.
I wonder what Bill "Bubba" Clinton thinks of this.
He thinks she's stupid for saying aloud what they both think.
Why? As the scorpion said, "It's my nature."
Hillary! unbound.
A useful reminder of how nasty she really is.
Oh my God. She is such a clueless, queening harridan in that video. Can you imagine what a horrible place this country would be if she were President.
What a completely clueless politician. Yikes.
I wonder whay she was paid to appear there. It wasn't enough given the damage this video will do to her battered reputation.
"Confirming once again that America dodged a bullet with her defeat.
*whew*"
You forgot...there were two bullets, and we only dodged one.
Or, to put it another way, there was a tiger behind both doors!
Hillary is spreading division and hatred because that is what the Democrats need to win elections. They rely on identity groups who all see themselves as victims needing Dem protection. If this collection of identity groups fall apart, the Dems won't win elections.
The Dems always get 90% of the black vote. If they only got 40 to 60% of that group, like they do with other racial groups, they'd be screwed. They'd never win anywhere. So they have to push the idea that America is racist. They have to promote fear and suspicion among blacks. They have to keep black voters convinced that without the Dems the white majority would put them back in chains. Biden even said that in so many words.
So Hillary isn't suddenly being honest about what she believes. She's pushing the party line like she always has.
@Chuck, you need to learn when to stop. In your case above, it was after three lines.
When you add a 'But' to a post, you'll lose your audience.
I have been on this Democrats as the new social Darwinists for years, and it is good to see you guys catching up. In fact I have needed a certain beloved commenter on this point repeatedly. He doesn't even deny it.
Ask a liberal where these deplorables are supposed to go sometime, and are they supposed to lose their voting rights, on account of they are just "angry" and frustrated at their economic lot.
Tweaking liberals is best done by presenting them with a conundrum where they either have to reject a purported core value, such as standing up for the powerless, or accept that you have a point.
Of course the trolls here can just wander away and pretend they weren't asked such a question.
Meade said:
"If Democrats take back the majority in Congress, it won't happen by differentiating themselves from Trump, but from Hillary, Obama, Pelosi, Cantor, Boehner..."
That won't be so bad for Repubs if Trump will be able to cut some deals with the help of these conservative Dems. I suspect though the liberal base of Dems [minority blacks & hispanics and big city far lefties] will still call the shots and control the votes in the House.
@Mattman26, thanks for doing that analysis. Her claim about 2/3 of the gdp seemed way off to me, as well.
Other trolls, when defending an open border to the south and uncontrolled immigration, just pretend that "supply and demand" are fictions of the political imagination.
minority blacks & hispanics
What has Trump done to harm the interests of black and Hispanic citizens, BTW?
Gahrie said...
Althouse posts something bad about a Democrat. Lifelong Republican Establishment member insists that current Republican president is much worse.
That's an interesting take. I mean, I'm not surprised by it. I think yours would be a common reaction among many in the Althouse commentariat.
But I'd bet -- in complete fairness to Ann Althouse above all -- that she didn't intend her post to be "something bad about a Democrat." Or correspondingly, something good about a Republican.
I feel safe in saying that Althouse is not a Republican. (She can correct me.)
I think Althouse was trying to make a genuinely interesting point about Hillary Clinton's personal attitude; Clinton's messaging incompetence; and the overall place of such messaging in our current national political conversation.
Your point, Gahrie, was purely partisan and a basic, base level. My point was more in keeping with Atlhouse's "messaging" commentary.
But this is where the Althouse blog is these days, isn't it? There is pro-Trump (which either is or isn't pro-Republican, depending on how "Trump" it is), and then there is everything else, which is Democrat, left, establishment, blah, blah, blah.
I'm not trying to defend any Democrats. Certainly not Clinton. But any slippage into criticism of Trump now earns the "pro-Democrat" label here.
I just wanted to call this out for what it is, since I think this is something that Althouse gives considerable thought to, in her daily blogging.
Political contributions as usually reported are a very poor indicator of actual political funding, and certainly nothing near a measure of available political resources.
Among other things the Democrats have a huge infrastructure of NGOs/Quangoes, plus whole industries that are entirely on-side, among them education and media/entertainment, and essentially the government payroll at all levels.
They have the means and structures to reward and punish individuals in every sort of career.
TTR is another big social Darwinist.
Donald Trump needs Hillary to run against him in 2020. She is the one candidate he can't possibly lose to.
Meade said:
"If Democrats take back the majority in Congress, it won't happen by differentiating themselves from Trump, but from Hillary, Obama, Pelosi, Cantor, Boehner..."
That won't be so bad for Repubs if Trump will be able to cut some deals with the help of these conservative Dems. I suspect though the liberal base of Dems [minority blacks & hispanics and big city far lefties] will still call the shots and control the votes in the House.
I like the part in her speech where she says that white women who voted for Trump are just a bunch of idiots who cannot think for themselves.
Keep talking, Nancy.
I've hated Hillary for 30 years. No man need convince me to hate her. She's a liar, a money grubber, a sociopath, an oligarch. She operates above the law and in secrecy and is protected by the corrupt DC swamp. She should be in prison. She won't go away. I hate her even more with each passing day.
Why look at GDP contributions at the electoral college level rather than at the individual/householder level? If you accept the seemingly self-evident hypothesis that those who make more $ contribute more to GDP, well then:
<$50,000 income - voted for HC
>$50,000 income - voted for DT
>$100,000 income - voted for DT
>$250,000 income - voted for DT
White males, clearly the greatest contributors to GDP, voted for DT over HC two to one.
What a croc.
Going off-topic here to note that the PowerLineBlog guys did suss out a decent photo of CIA nominee Gina Haspel, although the link (unlike the headline and blog post here) refers to her as "Lisa" inexplicably. I might modify this for reposting below.
https://i2.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2018/03/lisa-haspel.jpg?zoom=1.5625&resize=110%2C85
"Part of that [decline] is an identification with the Republican party, and a sort of ongoing pressure to vote the way that your husband, your boss, your son — whoever — believes you should. What happened in my election is I was on the way to winning white women until [James Comey] dropped that very ill-advised letter on October the 28th, and my numbers just went down…
All of a sudden, white women who were going to vote for me and frankly standing up to the men in their lives and the men in their workplaces, were being told 'She’s going to jail, you don’t want to vote for her. That’d be terrible, you can’t vote for that.'"
And who would know better than Hillary what it's like to be a white woman who votes the way her husband believes she should? Who would know better than Hillary what it's like to be a white woman who fails, on principle, to stand up to her husband?
Althouse isn’t going to blog Hillary’s rant about white married women voting Republican, because it hits too close to home. It’s true, but I think the obvious second level analysis is asking how the Democratic Party could be more appealing to men and the women they are married to.
Wow, Ann, you are missing the point of her diatribe.
Clinton is positioning herself for the nomination fight in 2020. Sure, such attitudes cost her in the general election in 2016, but to get to the general election of 2020, she will have a much harder fight for the nomination, and will likely be running against several more moderate sounding male Democratic politicians.
In a way, Clinton is planning to run a campaign much like Trump did against the establishment Republicans- by staking out ground claiming the most "rabid" faction of the Republican Party, Trump got a bloc that regularly finished first in the early primaries thus clearing the field of everyone else. Clinton is planning to do the exact same thing in the Democratic Party in 2020.
She's a broken record with a scratch voice. Bad karma.
Mitt Romney is very polite.
Who would know better than Hillary what it's like to be a white woman who fails, on principle, to stand up to her husband?
Zactly.
@Chuck sez:
I'm not trying to defend any Democrats. Certainly not Clinton. But any slippage into criticism of Trump now earns the "pro-Democrat" label here.
Not quite. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that you mostly criticize Trump's words, tone, speeches, manner of speaking.
But you ignore what Trump has actually done (except for maybe Gorsuch).
The Heritage Foundation says that Trump has already achieved 64% of its conservative wish list.
So, if you are a Conservative, one would think you'd focus more on the policies you are getting from Trump, not his unorthodox tone and speaking mannerisms.
This is only my 2 cents. Could be off.
Hillary stumbled twice on her way down the stairs in India. Fortunately, she had someone to catch her.
tim in vermont said...
In fact I have needed a certain beloved commenter
I agree that you need me, even when I am not here. This is how I know I am beloved.
I'm not trying to defend any Democrats. Certainly not Clinton. But any slippage into criticism of Trump now earns the "pro-Democrat" label here.
"slippage into criticism of Trump" is something that happens once or twice...not constantly and consistently. Your constant attacks are an obsession.
A real life long Republican would take the position that while the Democrats are digging holes for themselves you either shut up, or hand them a shovel. Instead you seek to constantly distract by pontificating that Trump is worse. Whether or not you intend to defend the Democrats (and I have my doubts about that), your anti-Trump hysteria does help defend the Democrats.
I just wanted to call this out for what it is, since I think this is something that Althouse gives considerable thought to, in her daily blogging.
Bullshit. You saw another chance to harpoon your white whale and leapt at the chance.
Tax payers pay for the large men who keep her from falling down the stairs.
Confirming once again that America dodged a bullet with her defeat.
So her ideas are so far out of mainstream of the Democratic Party, but they did all they could to put her in power anyway?
Or they make up the thinking of the Democratic Party, and her stating them in inconvenient for those who wish the rubes to vote for her anyway?
Meade said...
If Democrats take back the majority in Congress, it won't happen by differentiating themselves from Trump, but from Hillary, Obama, Pelosi, Cantor, Boehner...
That's an interesting notion! You might be right. What we saw in PA-18 was some of that. Lamb didn't go off on hatred of Trump. And he did make a significant point of saying that he'd vote against Pelosi for Leader/Speaker.
I'd have thought that a Democrat who moved to the center on issues (i.e., serious and committable promises to protect the rights of gun owners, and abortion opponents, and religious organizations that oppose homosexuality; the ending of government waste; moderation and centrist views on immigration instead of 'sanctuary city nonsense, etc.) but who, at the same time condemned the reckless lying and laughable misstatements of Trump, would be the Democrat who might have the serious cross-appeal. Trying to reach out to Republicans who really hate Trump personally.
But honestly, Laurence; your categorization is better than mine, for what happened with Conor Lamb in Pennsylvania. I hardly ever heard him trashing Trump in a personal way. He talked about working with Trump to bridge differences.
I dunno; maybe the polling proves out that there are more voters like me; so used to voting Republican, and so devoted to opposing Democrats, that it is almost impossible to imagine voting for a Democrat, even a moderate Democrat. And so why bother to try to reach out to anti-Trump Republicans. Better, and safer, and more productive, to pull back old-line Democrats who crossed over to vote for Trump, and who can be pulled back even when Trump comes to town and says that he will be foiled in his mission without a Republican Congress.
What a nasty woman.
Far left libruls have black hearts and hate-filled souls.
Hillary Clinton is the gift that keeps on giving. Just when you're sort of forgetting about her, she pops up again and reminds you of what an awful human being she still is and how we collectively dodged a bullet. She reminds us all of the worst qualities of the Democrats, their prevarication, mendacity, sophistry, equivocation, and their false narrative building. And she never goes away! She's like herpes, occasional flaring up. If Hillary Clinton is ever assassinated, the first people I would suspect would be the heads of the DNC.
I suspect Hillary's eyesight is failing and that may be one reason she has trouble with stairs.
Bay Area Guy said...
The Heritage Foundation says that Trump has already achieved 64% of its conservative wish list.
So, if you are a Conservative, one would think you'd focus more on the policies you are getting from Trump, not his unorthodox tone and speaking mannerisms.
That's the rub. Chuck and the neverTrumpers are more ideologically aligned with democrats. They want to define "conservatism" as open borders, 20,000 page "free" trade agreements benefiting cronies, lots of wars, a few rich people and lots of poor people.
Basically democrats with anti-gay marriage thrown in.
Republican voters care a lot more about the other stuff, like having a middle class. That is why we kicked the Bush wing out and voted for Trump.
I just think it's her way of saying "I won't be running for anything ever again."
"Except from the authorities if DJT installs in the DOJ a leader with some guts. But as long as Jeff is in there, I'm okay."
We hear suggestions - here and elsewhere - that Hill the Thrill is intending to run in 2020. I would believe it, except there's no way she can do it and pretend these serious physical problems don't exist. There's too much video already and bound to be a lot more by 2020. The other Democrat contenders are not going to give her a complete pass on it, even if the MSM would if they could.
I predict one of that crew, probably Sanders, will eventually run third party if an establishment Democrat appears set to get the nomination. Gonna' be fun to watch.
Nonapod said..
She's like herpes.
Hillary is just showing and telling us what she thinks and what sort of character she possesses. She is smarter than us, she has thought long and hard about what is best for us, and she insists on giving it to us completely. Unfortunately, for us and her, we failed to put her in the position of power that would have allowed her to bestow her wise plan for our betterment. We were fooled by that charlatan Trump. She is angered by this and not inclined to forgive our transgressions. She will not rest until she succeeds in making us do what is best for us. We might as well give up our resistance because it is futile.
-sw
Hillary stumbled twice on her way down the stairs in India.
Remember how the media busted the chops of anyone who asked if HRC was hiding health issues after she fainted on 9/11/2016?
Nah, the Clintonistas weren't hiding anything. Nope, not a thing.
She won CA and Illinois - two states with suspicious strangle hold on power with one party rule.
Universal health care! Universal this universal that.
Hillary was going to give us the universe. Long and hard.
Dickin'Bimbos@home@11:45am/
Beaucoup DITTOs, here, April..
Achilles said...
Bay Area Guy said...
The Heritage Foundation says that Trump has already achieved 64% of its conservative wish list.
So, if you are a Conservative, one would think you'd focus more on the policies you are getting from Trump, not his unorthodox tone and speaking mannerisms.
That's the rub. Chuck and the neverTrumpers are more ideologically aligned with democrats. They want to define "conservatism" as open borders, 20,000 page "free" trade agreements benefiting cronies, lots of wars, a few rich people and lots of poor people.
Basically democrats with anti-gay marriage thrown in.
Republican voters care a lot more about the other stuff, like having a middle class. That is why we kicked the Bush wing out and voted for Trump.
I'm just not a team player, am I? Not "Team Trump."
Of course, if you looked real hard -- and I encourage you to look really, really hard; spend a couple of days doing it -- you'd never find so much as a word of anti-Republican sentiment from me. Not anti-Republican. Not even anti-Trump, in the end (my vote, that is). Just critical of Trump.
So the lesson: don't criticize the God Emperor.
What happened in my election is I was on the way to winning white women until [James Comey] dropped that very ill-advised letter on October the 28th, and my numbers just went down…
Let's see. How could the "ill-advised" letter incident have been avoided? Oh, I have it! Hillary could have followed federal laws and procedures for handing government emails and classified data.
*** poof ***
Problem solved.
A simple solution. If only she had persisted long enough to think of it.
Isn't Mumbai the it capital of the world, so she is unwittingly punctuating trumps point
re mcmafia and rushdies latest it has other reputations.
So the lesson: don't criticize the God Emperor.
When it distracts (purposefully?) from the self destruction of our enemies.....yes.
It is also a rather silly thing to focus on personal issues.
So and so said this - or that.
The big picture is what matters and its rarely about one man.
HRC certainly isn't an independent actor in any way that matters.
She is, or was, a figurehead of a clique, a subculture, and a caste.
Most politicians are.
Trump is that also, to a lesser extent, as he is one of those accidents of history, a man who found his moment, a would-be drum major who found a whole parade, ready to go, lying about by the side of the road. But even in his case it is much less about Trump than about his parade.
Why are you doubling down on Hillary, who is such old news?
Isn't the interesting question now, 18 months after the election, whether Trump is actually doing anything positive for the economically depressed white working class areas that propelled him to his narrow victory in the electoral college?
You seem to have nearly no interest in that question. A couple of drive by posts on the tax bill that hardly showed any engagement or understanding and no interest in the predicted effects on income inequality or economic growth, almost nothing on Obamacare repeal or the undermining of the exchanges, nothing on the net effects of steel tariffs on jobs, nothing on the failure to move forward on promised infrastructure improvements, nothing on whether coal policy is actually having any meaningful impact on jobs, etc.
I'd describe this as basically the Fox news approach. Trash Hillary, because she's a reliable punch and judy figure for the base. Ignore the substance of what Trump is up to.
What am I missing?
You guys are paying too much attention to the Democratic Party mouthpieces who have to criticize Clinton's comments- they hope to be working for another candidate in 2020. Clinton isn't speaking to that audience- she is speaking to the animated people who loathe Trump and really do think his election was a crime. She is speaking to the people on the Left who comment here on Ms. Althouse's blog. Clinton didn't need these people in 2016's primaries because she cleared the field of everyone other than Bernie Sanders and Martin O'Malley before the election season even started. That won't be the case in 2020, however, and she has made the calculation that to get the nomination in 2020, she will have to stake out the ground further to the Left and with the most animated part of the primary electorate. That is why she is doubling down on the "Deplorables" rhetoric- it will play very, very, very well with the people voting in the Democratic primaries. Do any of you really doubt this?
She is planning to win the early primaries and caucuses with 25-35% of the vote, then get the field narrowed down to just herself and and one other candidate by the end of March 2020- preferably someone well to her right.
"he will be foiled in his mission without a Republican Congress.'
He will, or rather the subculture/caste/classes he leads will be foiled indeed.
The US is in a truly manichaean struggle - well, not black against white, but one definite shade of grey against another, fundamentally incompatible and irreconcilable. There really is no in-between or quibble-space, without implicitly choosing a winner and an outcome existentially fatal (well, in terms of culture/identity, economic state and social status of ones descendants) to one side.
You have the political equivalent of the WWII Eastern Front.
Deserters and temporizers need to be shot, for the sake of collective survival. Both sides have the Gestapo and the NKVD in action - the NKVD in this case is enormously more effective btw.
This is not a good, moral, honorable, desirable situation, but so it is.
I am glad I am a foreigner and don't have to choose.
What am I missing?
Well Steve, on the assumption that you're a lawyer, you never ask a question to which you don't know the answer.
So, what are you missing? Or pretending to miss?
Or what point were you going to make? Were you going to comment on whether Trump is serving his base? Or not serving his base?
Or do you just want to criticize the way other people talk? Which would be so great, because nobody on the internet ever does that.
Take the deep blue state of Connecticut: Hillary won 55% of the vote to Trump's 41%. Her votes come mostly from public employees, minorities and a good slice of the very wealthy. Trump wins with everyone else. Not sure where to find the data, but I would bet that the taxes paid by Trump's 41% exceed what was paid by Hillary's 55%. Taxes paid, being a proxy here for contribution to GDP.
There is some interesting voting information regarding the wealthiest towns in CT. Hillary won about 5% less of the CT vote than Obama did in 2012. Of CT's 169 towns, 30 bucked the trend with Hillary winning a higher percentage of their vote than Obama did in 2012. These were wealthier towns. The two biggest outliers were Darien and New Canaan, where Hillary's vote percentage was 18.5% and 17.9% higher than Obama's in 2012. Not coincidentally, Darien and New Canaan have the two highest per capita incomes in the state.
Hillary should run for Queen of New England.
Wealthy and white.
"You seem to have nearly no interest in that question. "
Althouse says that she has a strong aversion to economy/business subjects.
That's much like my wife, who will not even look at her brokers statements and breaks out in a rash if I comment on the FTSE.
However, if you want to discuss this, many are available to comment.
Yancey Ward said...
She is planning to win the early primaries and caucuses with 25-35% of the vote, then get the field narrowed down to just herself and and one other candidate by the end of March 2020- preferably someone well to her right.
That may be what she's planning, but I doubt it'll happen (unless I'm really far off on my current assessment of the mindset of the typical Dem voter). She may be delusional.
"unless I'm really far off on my current assessment of the mindset of the typical Dem voter"
This is more a question of the mindset of the typical Dem funder, and they are a bunch of billionaires. And the problem for HRC is that even with excellent contacts and favors and backscratching arrangements with that lot, the big question will be whether her backers think she could win.
"I would bet that the taxes paid by Trump's 41% exceed what was paid by Hillary's 55%"
Beside the point. Hillary wasn't referring to taxpayers, separately or as a group, getting what they pay for in taxes, but about the tax base needed to keep her nanny state humming, and taxes that keep the Deplorables from spending their own money as she sees unfit.
For those who wish to abolish the Electoral College that kept Hillary from her rightful place at the top, I agree. Think of the millions of conservatives whose votes NEVER count for president in New York, Massachusetts, and California, and the dozen or so Hillary voters in states like Iowa, Nebraska, and Utah.
“You forgot...there were two bullets, and we only dodged one.”
“Or, to put it another way, there was a tiger behind both doors!”
Personally, and I think that I speak for a lot of American voters here, Trump has been amazing good. Good for the country, and good for us. We are finally over the longest recession since the Democratic mismanagement caused Great Depression. 8 years of economic malaise, instead of the year or two that we should have expected, absent similar mismanagement by the Dem Party. A 40% corporate tax rate cut is YUGE, in terms of causing growth in the economy. Pushing, instead of hindering, the fracking boom, is also a big economic boom for us. Plus, it moves us to a more powerful position politically in the world, moving us from from being a big net petroleum importer to one of the biggest suppliers. And we would have had none of that if Crooked Hillary had won.
LLR and #Strong Durbin Defender Chuck: "I'm not trying to defend any Democrats."
Some things simply come quite naturally and require no effort at all.
This is more a question of the mindset of the typical Dem funder...the big question will be whether her backers think she could win.
Yeah, which of course of course depends on their own assessment of the mindsets of the typical Dem voter I guess. In general the Clinton's have had a stranglehold on the Dem money stream for decades. But, as we say in 2008 when they defected to Obama, the backers could easily divert the stream if they lose confidence in them. That suggests to me that when there's a viable alternative, the big money people are happy to divert money to the more charismatic candidate.
@BP,
the big question will be whether her backers think she could win.
These backers are seeing the same health issues we are. To run for president at age 74 & take office at 75 would be a first in American history.
I swear, our ruling classes are starting to move into being a Soviet style gerontocracy.
ARM: "I agree that you need me, even when I am not here."
People
people who need people
Are the luckiest people in the world,
We're children, needing other children
And yet letting our grown-up pride
Hide all the need inside,
Acting more like children
Than children.
Vichy Chuck: "I'm just not a team player, am I?"
Nonsense.
ALL the lefties here know precisely what team you are on. And they defend you consistently.
"You know you didn’t like black people getting rights, you don’t like women getting jobs, you don’t want to see that Indian American succeeding more than you are. Whatever your problem is, I’m going to solve it."
She is making a straightforwardly anti-white speech to what one assumes is an audience receptive to that message.
buwaya: This may sell well if she is fundraising there. After all one of the big issues is outsourcing and H1b...
They didn't put "D-Punjab" after her name for nothing.
Has Hils ever done anything in her life not motivated by greed and a pathological hostility toward white men?
“Isn't the interesting question now, 18 months after the election, whether Trump is actually doing anything positive for the economically depressed white working class areas that propelled him to his narrow victory in the ele”
See my comments above. You pretty much have to be either willfully blind, or ignorant, not to realize that the working class, white, black, brown, and, I suppose, yellow (though that last is probably politically incorrect) has visibly benefited from the Trump Economic Boom, and are likely to continue to do so as the tax cuts work their way through the economy over time.
Why did Hillary say that? Because she is an out-of-touch rich liberal.
I saw her many times in Iowa and Nebraska. She hates flyover people and campaigning. She wanted to be crowned.
"The more time Hillary spends explaining why she lost a gimme Presidential election, the worse and more embarrassing it is for her, the better and more joyful it is for us."
Yes, 2020 isn't happening for Hillary. Unless she's planning some kind of quixotic, tone-deaf, Jeb! run. Which would also be joyful.
Why are you doubling down on Hillary, who is such old news?
1. Because she can
2. Because it's of interest to other people.
I agree that you need me, even when I am not here. This is how I know I am beloved.
God damned fucking auto-correct! However, I must award the points for the touché.
Can you imagine what she used to say in private about the rednecks, white trash and assorted shitkickers in Arkansas?
Earlier lefty: Did you see Hillary on (insert name of every single talk show here)?
Did you see Hillary on her book tour?
Did you hear Hillary's latest hot take on how Putin and Trump stole the election?
Did you hear Hillary's latest hot take on how Comey and white chicks cost her the election? Did you see Hillary's latest hot take on the male deplorables turn their wives into female deplorables?
Did you see the announcement that Hillary was going to get involved in dem campaigns across the country?
Later lefty: "Why are you doubling down on Hillary, who is such old news?"
You seem to have nearly no interest in that question. A couple of drive by posts on the tax bill that hardly showed any engagement or understanding and no interest in the predicted effects...
Predicted... What about the actual current economic growth and growth in employment, the increase in manufacturing jobs that Obama "predicted" were gone forever?
Oh, and the "old news" thing? That's a sweet touch right out of the Clinton playbook, right up there with "put some ice on it."
Can you imagine what she used to say in private about the rednecks, white trash and assorted shitkickers in Arkansas?
I bet if you drag a $100 bill through a trailer court, you might get an idea!
“These backers are seeing the same health issues we are. To run for president at age 74 & take office at 75 would be a first in American history.”
The next year and a half are going to be fascinating, watching Crooked Hillary and the Democrats. I personally don’t think that she is healthy enough to run for, or even be President. Yet, I also agree that she seems to be preparing to run again. And, if she gets the nomination again, I expect that her health would be front and center this time. The difference this time is that the MSM (Dem operatives with bylines) aren’t going to be able to ignore the difference in energy levels, with Trump non-stop campaigning, from AF-1, mixed in with plenty of White House action, while she does maybe an event or two a week. They could ignore Trump’s 2-3 packed venues a day, often in multiple states, last time. But AF-1 and Presidential motorcades changes that. Even if the MSM, in their bicoastal enclaves, tries to ignore that, for the rest of the country, a visit by the President is a Big Thing.
She's doubling down because she and her backers, PB&J being a loud one, deeply believe it. She's like Gypsy Rose Lee's mother in the movie, the control freak who turned her own daughter into a stripper and asks plaintively at the end of the movie "Why does everybody keep leaving me???" It would be fun to splice in there "Why am I not 50 points ahead?"
Bruce: "The difference this time is that the MSM (Dem operatives with bylines) aren’t going to be able to ignore the difference in energy levels,....""
They most certainly will.
And they'll have tremendous support and cover from their LLR allies.
She just gave a speech, Stephen. You stand by her words?
She is right in a way. This married woman did vote the way her husband asked her to, in the end (For Trump). But he asked, didn't demand. And the choice for me was never Hillary vs Trump. It was Libertarian/other 3rd party vs Trump and while I liked Austin Peterson, I didn't like the guy the Libertarian party chose and I had not been convinced by any of the other choices so when, at the end, I asked my husband who he wished I would vote for, I chose to vote for him (my husband) even though I had personal reservations about Trump. I still don't like the way Trump acts, but I have been happily surprised about how he has governed. It has been much better than I expected so far!
Why are you doubling down on Hillary, who is such old news?
When Hillary stops doubling down on how the evil whatevers deprived her of her inalienable right to the Presidency, people will stop paying attention her.
Since you don't like Ann covering what Hillary says, perhaps you are embarrassed by what Hillary says.
HiYa Virgil!
If the Clintons will exit stage left, we will be happy to leave her alone. OK - Not really, she belongs in jail. In any case - SHE refuses to Go the fuck away.
She just gave a speech, Stephen. You stand by her words?
Stephen is doing his best to airbrush her out of the news. Just like he has airbrushed all of the positive news for working people in the past year out of his own head.
Hillary will try again in 2020. her mega donors demand it. They want pay-back. If not Hillary, it will be Terry McClinton or George Clooney-Clinton.
"Whether you're rich or poor, it's nice to have money." -- Mad Magazine(?)
"In a really terribly stratified society, it may help to indulge in a philosophy that says you have what you rightfully deserve, and we don't have to worry too much about the dispossessed, because their own failings have got them where they belong."
Used to be, Dems cared about the dispossessed, and blamed GOPers for blaming the poor.
But Hill is positioning herself, moving left, or at least trying to appear to be running: as long as she does, her enemies can't count her out, and her compromised allies can't dish on her and Bill, hence keeping the Clinton mafia intact for now, as long as there is a chance of Hill payback. Not sure that's gonna work, though.
Sebastian: "But Hill is positioning herself, moving left, or at least trying to appear to be running: as long as she does, her enemies can't count her out, and her compromised allies can't dish on her and Bill, hence keeping the Clinton mafia intact for now, as long as there is a chance of Hill payback"
Exactly.
The Don has been shot, but he didn't die and they've got a baker with a fake gun out front protecting the door...but you can't be completely sure its just a baker.....
“You seem to have nearly no interest in that question. A couple of drive by posts on the tax bill that hardly showed any engagement or understanding and no interest in the predicted effects...”
The predicted effect of the tax cuts, by most anyone who isn’t a partisan hack, is that they will stimulate the economy. This happens pretty much any time we see tax cuts. JFK knew this - I am just surprised that his descendants running the Democratic Party don’t get it yet. Instead, they bought in, big time, to completely discredited Keynesian Economics (due, I believe to the level of graft it provides). And, hence, the 8 year Obama Recession.
The reason that I am so bullish on the tax cuts is that we have been calculating federal tax quarterly withholding for the new fiscal year, having just filed our yearly 1120. We have been trying to keep cash from accumulating, by pushing up dividends the last couple of years. But all of a sudden, we realized that that 40% reduction in federal income taxes translates into almost a 200% increase in after tax income for the coming year, assuming constant sales (which are, in fact increasing). What are we going to do with those profits? That is the issue that is facing us, and hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of small and medium sized businesses around the country. Even big companies. We need to expand, but so do these other companies, these other beneficiaries of the tax cuts. That means major purchases of plant and equipment, and driving up wages, as unemployment reaches frictional levels. Shouldn’t be surprised that we are seeing better employment throughout the economy, including some (like Blacks), who don’t typically benefit as much from economic booms.
Isn't the opposite true? We know lefties were never going to support Trump, but you still showed up for Hillary. Kind of deplorable, in refusing to see her corruption.
"D-Punjab"
More like D-Karnataka (the Indian State which contains Bangalore) or D-Tamil Nadu (contains Chennai)
Punjab is not one of the major tech originators.
I know it's been said before, but thank God Trump won.
Every time Hillary talks about Epic Presidential Election Loss 2016, a newborn angel gets her wings.
Every. single. time.
As an aside, Hillary doesn't talk much about her 1st crushing Presidential loss in 2008. But I digress.
p.s. Where is Michael Dukakis talking about his 1988 loss? That was traumatic (for him) too.
p.p.s. It is fun to just say, "Dukakis"
p.p.p.s. It is fun to associate Hillary with Dukakis
As an aside, Hillary doesn't talk much about her 1st crushing Presidential loss in 2008. But I digress.
That was a primary loss, of course, to Obama, not a general election loss.
"“They say I have the most loyal people — did you ever see that? Where I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters...It’s like incredible.” (Chuck quoting DJT)
Chuck,
I think you have completely lost your sense of humor and absurdity.
Does she really think people didn't vote for her because they were upset about women entering the workforce?
buwaya: Punjab is not one of the major tech originators.
Nonetheless, "Punjab" is what the wags went with.
Jim Gust said...
"Hillary stumbled twice on her way down the stairs in India. Fortunately, she had someone to catch her."
What's so fucking fortunate about it? She'd look better in a box. She wouldn't look good, but she'd look better.
Ambrose: Does she really think people didn't vote for her because they were upset about women entering the workforce?
That's an interesting question. Usually, if a politician does not seem to be a complete idiot, one assumes he doesn't really believe the bullshit he spouts. With Hillary, the college radical political views seem to exist in eerie harmony with beady-eyed ambition and corruption. As finely-honed as her reptile cunning may have become over the years (as far as remunerative self-interest was concerned), her higher intellectual faculties do not seem to have advanced beyond college sophomore level.
"hence keeping the Clinton mafia intact for now, as long as there is a chance of Hill payback"
Some of those "donors" may want their money back. That, too, is a matter of concern. Some of them just shoot instead of asking for a refund.
Let Hillary be Hillary--condescending, entitled, cloth eared, caste conscious, unsteady on her feet, lacking self knowledge, fact challenged, callous.
I have a friend who lived in Park Ridge as a child, and who was in Hillary's kindergarten class. He doesn't remember her directly, but he says he got in trouble for pushing a bossy, obnoxious classmate off the merry-go-round. He thinks it was her.
"After the election," she thought, "I'll have more flexibility."
“I wonder what Bill "Bubba" Clinton thinks of this.”
I wouldn’t be amazed to learn that his thoughts were “Thank god she lost”.
There is no reason to over think this. Hillary is not very bright and has had a praetorian guard of media sycophants to hide or excuse her many flaws. These unscripted moments are just like a "Face in a crowd" when people find out what Lonesome Rhodes really thinks of them. The feeling is very mutual, sweetie.
If an important Indian politician came to America, and gave a speech to the local Chamber of Commerce, claiming that he was tired of the poor, backward Indians back home who did not welcome American immigrants to India because they were jealous that the Americans were successful in India when they were not, what would you think of that Indian politician?
That's what you should think of Hillary Clinton.
One day, men are going to tire of propping up that hag and they’re going to just let her face plant.
Since Trump won't let her blow him, this speech is the next best thing.
"You seem to have nearly no interest in that question. "
Here is the newest DNC talking point.
The tax bill benefits only the rich !
Do you really think that will hold until after November ?
Hil' continuing her bridge building..
Hillary ignites the Straw Electorate.
The Republican National Committee (RNC) also pounced on Clinton’s remarks. . - The Hill
They are beyond parody.
A Clinton spokesman did not comment on the former secretary of State’s remarks. . - The Hill
That sentence is almost like a koan. Not only did the spokesman "not comment" he wouldn't even "not comment" for attribution. In the next county, BTW, The Hill, a dog didn't bark, even though other dogs did.
Hillary/Behar 2020
Pounced!
She's holding back. She should include some regional accents to add some hot sauce to her current schtick.
Diverse, chauvinistic, congruent, and Pro-Choice. The tell-tale hearts beat ever louder, Hillary.
deep inside the hill
“She put herself in a position where [Democrats] from states that Trump won will have to distance themselves from her even more,” said one former senior Clinton aide. “That’s a lot of states.”
Hillary is a bad machine who doesn't know she's a bad machine. (Hat-tip to "Midnight Express.") It's hard for me to imagine that she doesn't believe her own bullshit. I am very much a theologically loyal Catholic in that I acknowledge the "mystery" of evil. I don't understand people like her. They are mysteries to me. I don't understand how they get that way and how they can live with themselves. Mind, I don't think she's evil. But she is very bad. Toxic bad. Yet also profoundly self-unaware. There's something tragic about that.
I am reminded of Manwe and Melkor in Tolkien's Silmarillion, the mightiest of the Valar, brothers and coeval in power. Except that Manwe was good and Melkor was, or became, evil. Manwe repeatedly pardoned Melkor for his cosmic transgression because he was all good, and being so could not comprehend evil. But Melkor was laboring under a handicap, and was ultimately doomed by it. Namely: he was evil; and, as Tolkien was a pains to point out, "evil is stupid" and ultimately self-defeating.
You forgot...there were two bullets, and we only dodged one.
I assume you mean that Tim Kaine was the second bullet.
Matthew said:
"-- I just want someone to ask her: "You got to fight the opponent you wanted and STILL LOST, how were you so wrong in your analysis?""
We already know her answer....
Because of all the damn RACISTS !!
If she decides to run in 2020 the opposition ads have just written themselves. She dislikes you. She really really dislikes you. She thinks you are deplorable and stupid.
And what is it about India that causes Western politicians to beclown themselves? First Trudeau and now Hillary.
Because India, like Brazil, is "the country of the future -- and always will be."
Francisco D: "I think you have completely lost your sense of humor and absurdity."
That is one theory.
An interesting question to ask yourself is how would LLR and #StrongCNNDefender Chuck's postings would be any different if he were an actual paid moby?
Very interesting indeed.
I'm sure there are other theories and I am certainly not asserting any one particular theory is more correct than any other. Heavens no.
Of course, if you looked real hard -- and I encourage you to look really, really hard; spend a couple of days doing it -- you'd never find so much as a smidgen of difference between what known moby's do and what LLR Chuck posts.
Of course, and this goes without saying, naturally, I am in no way saying one way or the other whether or not "Bowe Bergdahl Republican" Chuck is misrepresenting himself here.
All I know is that LLR Chuck becomes very very defensive on behalf of every democrat, lefty MSM'er and cultural lefty who comes under scrutiny.
Whatever you do, do not criticize democrats or lefty God Emperors when LLR Chuck is in the vicinity unless you are prepared to brace yourself for incoming flak.
All the butt hurts who complain about racism at every turn fail to notice Hillary is white.
dbp said...There is a hidden error in Her-Self's whole thesis: She is laying claim to the whole GDP of the states she won
--
Calling that an error is way too charitable.
What few people look at, but matters tremendously -
Pension fund status.
The best reporting is on corporate pension funds. Public ones tend to report late as to funding status.
If we go by Corporate funds, there has been considerable improvement in 2017 and even YTD 2018
Corporate Pensions
Dickin'Bimbos@Home: "All the butt hurts who complain about racism at every turn fail to notice Hillary is white"
An excellent point.
I couldn't help but notice that when LLR Chuck was boosting the lefty narrative about all Trump voters being racist and subject to dog whistles during and after the campaign that LLR Chuck himself failed to make note of that.
Interesting.
chickelit said...
"One day, men are going to tire of propping up that hag and they’re going to just let her face plant."
I hope it gets on you tube.
Blogger Drago said...
"Francisco D: "I think you have completely lost your sense of humor and absurdity."
That is one theory."
I've come to the conclusion that "Chuck" is someone's attempt to parody a condescending, milquetoast, perpetually butt-hurt NeverTrumper. On the other hand, if he is really who and what he claims to be...
Well, anyone that lacking in self-awareness should never attempt to cross the street without assistance.
I also believe that "Inga" is a poorly written ELIZA script.
I don't ask for much, but I will ask for this:
I hope and pray I live long enough to see this vile bitch draw her last breath.
To think they howled for weeks about Mitt's 47% comment.
And "binders full of women".
Poor Mittens. "I thought we were supposed to pander"
What am I missing? - Stephen
Your own blog?
Jim,
It was so long ago that armchair docs here predicted her death any day now.
As a Queen, she gets to pick who gets the rub
The poor "Indian American" (Hi India! You are with Her)
The the job, the opportunity
While the deplorables, those not in Her light
receive disdain for not producing enough
This illustrates the basis of intersectionality
and why college students favor free speech as long as it is their own speech
We all need to be the best victim we can be
Clinton's latest probably plays really well in India--among the Brahmins. After all, that is how she and her core supporters see themselves in opposition to the rest of America, as Brahmins over all us Untouchables (to use the old terms). Surely the REAL Brahmins in India will understand.
Hillary es mi abuela !!! Racist bastards.
It was so long ago that armchair docs here predicted her death any day now.
I don't remember that, but the armchair docs here did say that here health was not great, and the two falls and the sprained wrist seem to bear that out. But sure, move the goal post to death.
Chuck said...
I'm just not a team player, am I? Not "Team Trump."
No. You are here in bad faith. You pretend to be something you are not. Of course you are not on the team of people who generally vote for republicans. You are on the same team as the democrats and neocons.
Of course, if you looked real hard -- and I encourage you to look really, really hard; spend a couple of days doing it -- you'd never find so much as a word of anti-Republican sentiment from me. Not anti-Republican. Not even anti-Trump, in the end (my vote, that is). Just critical of Trump.
I read what you say. You make my point. You are trying to define "republican" as someone that does not serve republican voters nor does what republican voters want. You are trying to define republican as democrat + anti-gay marriage.
So the lesson: don't criticize the God Emperor.
The lesson is stop getting in the way of what republican voters want. Right now trashing Trump is getting in the way. Helping democrats at every step is getting in the way. We don't want you around anymore.
We know you didn't vote for Trump. We know you don't want the same things we want. We know you are operationally aligned with democrats. You always support them.
You are completely disingenuous and a fraud.
Part of the amusement of this site for me is to see at what lengths people of good will will engage a known troll. Watching the hapless Garage Mahal continually faceplant during the Walker recall provided many hours of entertainment. Engaging LLR's on Trump, not so much. So I just scroll through to more worthy commenters.
What you just heard from Crooked Hillary, was one of her campaign speeches. Get used to them, because she won't stop until after Nov 2020. If she ever stops.
Jim Gust
"fortunately she had men to catch her."
FIFY
What was Huma doing? You didn't see her rushing to help, did you? She stood well back watching helplessly.
You know the joke about someone who can't walk and chew gum at the same time.
Hillary can't even walk at the same time. Being so crooked likely affects her balance.
John Henry
As long as we're piling on, those stupid high-water pants look ridiculous on a dumpy woman of a certain age. Hide those pasty, thick ankles, please.
Watching the hapless Garage Mahal continually faceplant during the Walker recall provided many hours of entertainment.
Shhh. Secret. Routers.
Any day now.
I am reading that many brahmins in India these days have to work for the untouchables who own the companies and businesses.
"Isn't the interesting question now, 18 months after the election" that some people can't handle basic arithmetic? It's 16 months plus 6 days since the election, and 14 months minus 6 days since the inauguration, which is what counts for actually getting things done.
chickelit said...
"One day, men are going to tire of propping up that hag and they’re going to just let her face plant."
Faster, please.
Hillary says of those who voted for someone other than her: " you don’t want to see that Indian American succeeding more than you are." Apparently she's never heard of Nikki Haley? Had she said "American Indian" the interpretation may have been different.
I think she's got to be the dumbest politician in history. She and Trump were made for each other. She cannot leave the scene soon enough.
TTR: "She cannot leave the scene soon enough."
Its very clear she isnt going away anytime soon. She is clearly positioning for 2020.
Sometimes I wonder if she's a Republican plant to disrupt the Ds. After all, she did grow up as a Republican.
Steve Bannon was right. She really is stupid.
TTR: "She and Trump were made for each other."
If those 2 crazy mixed up kids cant make it, what hope do any of us have?!
TTR: "After all, she did grow up as a Republican."
Yeah. In Illinois. Where Illinois nazis come from.
She is clearly positioning for 2020.
She's about as helpful to them as George Wallace. If she continues her disruptive pro-elitist scream of consciousness bullshit, then the Ds had better either find their RFK to trounce her out once and for all or they will surely deserve to lose. I can't believe how deplorably incompetent a politician she is. She went up there and essentially declared that she's the candidate of the rich. What a fucking moron. Even pols who are explicitly in it just for the rich aren't dumb enough to say that. And then she essentially said that women are "brainwashed" into voting for the economic interests of their heads of household. Well fucking duh. Why would/should that change? She really does subsume the entirety of her identity into her gender, into her crotch, when economics always trumps everything. She is literally the first candidate in history of whom I know to say that improving the economy for those left behind is not her concerned. And to write off her opponent's voters - even when they won! Talk about a non-people person. She declared that she's just a gender symbol who prioritizes chasing dollars over votes. If there's anything truly holding women back, I'd say it's morons like her. How useless can a politician be? How incompetent are the DNC to not throw her and everyone with her out of there? Jesus.
Brilliant of Trump to not direct the FBI to go after Hillary again. Keep her around. Keep her talking.
I hope she runs in 2020.
She's an asshole. Like most liberals.
Not only was Hillary dumb enough to write off Trump voters due to the fact that they/he won, she seems to have lost the point that they were union/laborer/traditional Democrats in the first place.
She is just dangerously stupid.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा