Trump was not my first choice for Presidential candidate. I liked Gov. Walker of Wisconsin: he had a long record of accomplishments; a track record of taking on the progs and beating them; a good sense of humor, and--like me--a face made for radio. He did not do well in the primaries and faded out. After that, I remind aloof, and briefly flirted with voting for Rubio . . . but in the end Trump's brash, non-PC style won me over. He was saying the things that the elite establishment does not want said. He was a full-throated practitioner of the first amendment. Sure, his conservative credentials were far from perfect (here)--and who has such?--and, in the end, I decided I would take a chance on a nationalist populist. We got Trump warts and all, and some of the NeverTrump crowd will still not vote for him, unable to see past the warts to his message and the movement he heads. OK, fair enough.
Let's look at the other side of the battlefield: Hillary Clinton. For the life of me, I cannot think of a rational reason to vote for her UNLESS I was getting some sort of sinecure, or was able to get in on that Clinton Foundation scam to rip off poor Haitians to help a billionaire Irishman secure a mobile phone monopoly on that ravaged half island.
What has Hillary ever accomplished? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. At least nothing positive.
She has a record of corruption, lying, poor judgement, and ethical lapses that would have sent dozens of politicians to an early date on Political Boot Hill. Her vaunted feminism is a joke; why, for example, does she run as Hillary Clinton? Why not Rodham? She has latched onto her politically brilliant and morally compromised husband for a lifetime ride. Nothing is going to get her to loosen her grip on that trolley car. She and her husband have become fabulously wealthy playing the "We are here to help the poor" progressive game and have developed a loyal criminal entourage that puts those of drug cartel bosses and mafia dons to shame.
She is so corrupt that even, even Comey's FBI have decided to launch a whole new investigation of her and her friends.
Hillary Clinton is the most corrupt politician to emerge on the American political scene since, well, since Bill Clinton.
The whole thing makes no sense.
If you can't vote for Trump for whatever reason, then don't. But for crying out loud don't vote for Hillary Clinton . . .
OK, going to climb into my truck and head off to the airport. My son is flying to Chicago, and I am his personal Uber . . . in fact, I call myself Über alles . . . catchy, that.
My #1 pick was Rick Perry. Walker was in the #2 position, then Cruz. But you're right...compared to Hillary Clinton, Trump is the second coming of Ronald Reagan.
ReplyDeleteStill, saying that a politician is better than Shrillary Shroooooooo is setting a very low bar.
ReplyDeleteI have this sneaking suspicion that Anthony Wiener is going to be found dead of "self inflicted" gunshots to the pelvic area.
ReplyDeleteMaybe Hillary goes down due to Anthony's Wiener?
ReplyDeleteWrangler, Wrangler
ReplyDeleteUber Alles
(or was it Dickies?)
because Ben Davis just doesn't scan
It has always been a choice between a headache and an upset stomach ... but, in this case, the upset stomach, Hellary, is cancerous ...
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely. Shrillary Shroooooooooooo is indeed a big part of the Washingotnian swamp that has to be drained.
DeleteI'm voting for Trump for one reason: In the hopes that Congress will finally take back the power they've ceded to the Oval Office over the last quarter century.
ReplyDeleteIf both the House and Senate spend all their time bickering with each other and the president, less time for them to screw with the rest of us.
-Blake
Regardless of what you think of them otherwise, Donald Trump would never be able to do as much damage to the country as Hillary Clinton can do without even working up a sweat.
ReplyDeleteNo reason to vote for Hillary? I am ashamed to admit it, Diplomad2, but you and I have many colleagues in the FS who think a vote for Hillary is a vote for continued big government, which can only benefit their gravy train. I have gotten into arguments with former FS colleagues who have told me to shut up about my disappointment with big government: we're all drawing a nice retirement. And for our not-yet-retired colleagues, they're still on the gravy train and drawing a handsome salary for following along dumbly as the Clintons destroy what we worked so hard to preserve, protect and defend.
ReplyDeleteIf you have not seen Kimberly Strassel's column in the 10/27 WSJ, look it up. Absolutely spot on. I have written a similar column for our local newspaper, which publishes in a red-turning-purple market, but my pen did not contain anywhere near as much vitriol. Or as many accurate facts (written before WikiLeaks latest revelations of Podesta emails).
Good points, F. I had a short and undistinguished FS career myself, and know what you're talking about.
DeleteI too bailed on FS early. Between the overt D preference, how that affected one's career if outed as an R, and how that affected how policy was applied ... none of the so-called perks made up for having to live with one's real thoughts in the shadows, nor with the uncomfortable knowledge that taxpayers were unwittingly funding the hubris, the lack of gratitude, and the outright misrepresentation of what America is.
DeleteOne of my fave anecdotes: my entire A100 class was dumbfounded to learn about the Anti-Federalists, fear of factions and so on. How depressing to think that this is thought to be America's best and brightest, that these are the folks representing us abroad, that this were the folks who 10-15 years from now will be in leadership positions.
And 4 to 8 years of HRC will only make it worse.
How do they think their pension will be funded? Hillary will need money to support all those immigrants.
DeleteD--just wanted to say, ditto to everything you wrote. I also left early, after getting tenure, because it was depressing as hell. There were a few bright spots, fantastic people, mostly holdovers from the Reagan era or conservatives-in-the-shadows like me. But for the most part, it all seemed to be about climbing the ladder, never mind working for American interests or even asking what they are.
DeleteThe Banana Republic of North America. How has it come to this?
ReplyDeleteWoodrow Wilson, FDR, LBJ, Supreme Court, Bill Clinton, B. Hussein Obama, Hillary Clinton.
DeleteSeems to me you missed the Kennedys and Bushs, but the general drift of the comment is accurate-too much progressive thought too little economic analysis.
DeleteProgressives seem to represent a lingering cancer in Western culture.
DeleteNever, never overlook the contributions of the two Bushes to today's world.
DeleteI voted for both Bushes three out of four times. I voted for Clinton in 92, but mostly because it was clear to me Bush was going to lose in an electoral landslide. I was quite happy to vote for the son in 2000, and only voted for him the second time because I thought John Kerry was the biggest fool I have ever seen (still of this opinion). However, if there was one thing I could change in the past that I had enthusiastically supported, it would be the outcome of the 2000 election. Bush the son was not a conservative, had few libertarian leanings, and was catastrophically misguided in his foreign policies- the failures of which plague the world today. As much as I detested Al Gore, I don't think he would have had the reckless courage of invading Iraq, and I doubt he would have countenanced any occupation of Afghanistan that lasted beyond his first term. So much bad that has befallen the world and the Republican Party and the conservative cause flows from the non-conservative policies of the two Bushes. I wonder what the world would look like today if Reagan had selected almost anyone else as his running mate in 1980.
Whitewall, you have given the undeserved gift of forgetting to Truman, Kennedy, and Jimmy Carter.
DeleteWard is indulging absurd fantasies that the Democratic candidates would have been less damaging (or even not much more damaging) than (either) Bush. Similar views motivate Clinton votes now.
a6z...I considered them as well, but I tried to think of those who did the most long lasting structural damage to our institutions and to the Constitution all swore to "protect and defend". All caused some political/foreign policy problems...that seems to go with the job. So I omitted those three on that basis.
Delete"I'm voting for Trump for one reason: In the hopes that Congress will finally take back the power they've ceded to the Oval Office over the last quarter century."
ReplyDelete+1 for that (with the added caution that all three branches of government are out of control as far as taking power away from the people).
I have to admit that the thought of a Trump presidency is looking scarier and scarier over the past few weeks. It seems that he is completely incapable of actually listening to any advice (which is very bad for a president in general, let alone one who has never held public office before).
That said, voting against Clinton is still a no-brainer (and I didn't need my recently found copy of Peggy Noonan's 2000 book "The Case Against Hillary Clinton" to remind me of that).
Three themes from the recent Wikileaks e-mails reinforce that:
1. She is completely corrupt (we already knew that).
2. She has a disdain for ordinary people that is completely unprecedented in American politics (we already knew that, too). She reminds me of Nicolae Ceaușescu. Wouldn't mind seeing her meet the same fate as he did.
3. She can't do anything unless she is in the right "head space." This was relatively unknown before, and is potentially the most dangerous characteristic of all.
The best thing about electing Trump would probably be watching the heads of all of his detractors expode. (not necessarily good for the country, but enjoyable none the less).
"It seems that he is completely incapable of actually listening to any advice"
DeleteYeah! You hear it all the time from the Democrat talking heads and the Republican advisors for McCain and Romney. "If Trump would only do this he could get elcted." Yeah right!! Funny you don't hear all that free advice for Hillary. Gaslighting!!!
Trump is no fool. Inexperienced as a politician or in running for office but smarter than you think. His biggest problem is he tells it like it is (or like he sees it) and politicans are supposed to lie (as in "Mexican food is my favorite"). AND he is a typical New Yorker; loud, opinionated, not PC and pushy. I kinda like that.
You make an excellent point about Congress not giving a rat's a** about the people they supposedly represent.
DeleteWe really need to bring back tar, feathers and rails. And I'm not kidding. Any politician who whines about such talk should remember that it is possible to survive tar and feathers and is the least punishment they deserve.
-Blake
ps. Hi, NSA!
Your worries about Trump might diminish quite a bit if you spent some time on the DonaldJTrump.com website looking through the press releases. Click on Media, top right, then on Press Releases. Going back for six months or more, there are excellent policy proposals and analyses of issues among them. Trump does very much listen on the important things. And his closest associates are very solid, Sessions, Giuliani, Pence, and others.
DeleteWith all the hyperventilating of the progs about hackers and wikileaks (which was their darling child until wikileaks turned against them), it's rather amusing that Hillary might (just *might*) be undone by straight-forward FBI investigation into Weiner's wiener-pics.
ReplyDelete- reader #1482
Hillary supporter: "Yawn. Don't care. Gimme free stuff."
ReplyDeleteI realize that advice from the opposite party ("you need to let many more uneducated immigrants in") is given to help their interests, not yours, but I was referring more to tactics, not strategy (in particular, staying on message). I think this election was gift-wrapped for Trump if he would have just kept hammering that the main theme of the election is the continuation of a government that works only for the donor class (of the elite, by the elite, and for the elite) versus a change to a government that works for all Americans. That's it. Certainly his main concerns (trade and immigration) fit right into that (and so does a less expansive foreign policy).
ReplyDeleteOne candidate who impressed me during the primaries (not for experience, but I saw no one who could stick to the script better) was Carly Fiorina (probably still not far enough away from the establishment). Even a small fraction of her discipline would greatly benefit Trump.
Loved the story about Junior jumping out of the car to help a motorist whose car had broken down (she was black, too). You would never see a Clinton do that. Hillary just doesn't like people (a good reason in itself not to like her). Bill Clinton (for all of his faults) likes people. George W. Bush likes people. Hillary clearly can't stand anyone who is not doing something to benefit her (and even then, as with her protective detail, she is often contemptuous).
Anon: I agree entirely on Carly. She is intellectually sharp, does her homework, and tells it like it is. That's not to say she would have been a good candidate running against Hillary, but it would have been fun to watch the sparks fly!
DeleteWhether Trump will be a successful president is irrelevant.
ReplyDeleteKeep your focus on what is important. The United States Supreme Court.
The future of the country will be determined by these next few appointments.
Graham
It's a terrifically sad but true statement, isn't it?
DeleteWhy have a Constitution if the other two branches are just going to appoint 'yes men' to determine what it means?
The political leanings of court members *shouldn't* even be known, let alone influence their work. But such is not the case.
Gone are the times of Mabury vs Madison, where judges with guts would take a real stand and say: "hey, there are some things we just don't have the authority to decide."
Now? They're going to decide which restrooms children use. Because today's government isn't about micromanagement of people's lives, it's down to nanomanagement or picomanagement.
- reader #1482
Try Ubermensch. Google it.
ReplyDeleteI saw a claim this morning that the new e-mails were kept in a file labelled "life Insurance". If so, it's good to know that Ms Abedin has a sense of humour - and a sense of the fragility of life.
ReplyDeleteIt's difficult to imagine that any reader of the Diplomad is likely to be tempted to vote for Hillary.
ReplyDeleteI once thought that Shrillary Shroooooo was the one candidate no decent, patriotic, reasonably well-informed person could ever vote for. She was about one of the most unlikeable lizard--nay, snake-- people ever to slither through the Washington Swamp.:(
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAdd to this that the Shrill is probably indictable, made a hash out of our foreign policy, and thinks that partial birth abortion is just peachy keen. She is one disgusting piece of work, as one of my former FS colleagues might have put it.
ReplyDeleteJust took advantage of my state's early voting system, went down, held my nose, and voted for The Donald (plus straight GOP everything else).
DeleteI'm ready for Hillary!--to go to jail.
I did the same today as well. When I got home I washed my hands thoroughly.
Delete