Hillary Clinton’s main campaign argument is that Donald Trump is dangerous, and that she’s not Trump. Election after election, Democrats have been urged to choose the lesser of two evils rather than a candidate whom they can vote for enthusiastically. Will this tired old sales pitch work again?
Republican leaders who are uncomfortable with Donald Trump as their presidential nominee keep urging Trump to act more mature and respectable on the campaign trail. It probably won’t happen. But even if it does, how can they forget the outrageous things he already said and proposed? How can we voters? Not that Hillary Clinton is any better.
When the media and political establishment gang up against Donald Trump by calling him out for racism, idiocy and promoting violence, they’re absolutely right. Given how unpopular and discredited they are, however, they may be pushing some voters into Trump’s column.
Democrats occupied the floor of the House of Representatives to demand that people on the federal “no fly” list be denied the right to buy firearms. But the no fly list is maintained by the incredibly incompetent TSA. Why should they get to decide whether you have your Second Amendment rights?
Supporters of Hillary Clinton tell the progressive supporters of Bernie Sanders that they have to change their politics, or compromise them, or ignore them, in order to join them in their fight to defeat the dangerous Donald Trump. But no one seems to ask: if Hillary Clinton wants our votes, why doesn’t she change her politics to suit us? Isn’t that what politicians do? Instead of pandering to the people, she panders to corporations.
President Obama says Donald Trump is a dangerous man. But what about him? He murders people by remote control. He plots assassinations. He tortures. He kidnaps. He spies on everyone. How much worse could Trump be than him?
Donald Trump dodged the draft during the Vietnam War by claiming to have “bone spurs.” But now he’s pretending to be a ferocious militarist. Hillary Clinton has never met a war she didn’t like – Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya – but she has to pretend to be a liberal in order to get Democrats to vote for her. What a choice!
After a self-radicalized American shooter massacred 49 patrons at an Orlando gay nightclub called Pulse and retroactively associated himself with ISIS, the Islamic State claimed responsibility for his actions. That’s how ISIS works: you do what you want in their name, then they claim you. Now Donald Trump is threatening sanctions against Muslim immigrants, and Hillary Clinton claims to have a plan to racially profile potentially self-radicalized lone wolves. Both favor bombing Muslim countries. Trump and Clinton are serving ISIS’ interests. Will they claim them?
Here we are, faced with two terrible choices for president this fall (unless there’s a miracle and Bernie Sanders somehow manages to become the Democratic nominee): a lunatic racist Republican versus a wild-eyed interventionist-warmonger who loves big corporations.
Hillary Clinton’s probable victory in the Democratic presidential nomination is said to mark an important historical achievement for women. Certainly, she would become the first woman in the United States to be the nominee of a major party. From a broader historical vantage point, however, there’s nothing novel about a woman marrying a powerful political leader and achieving power as a result, which is what happened in Clinton’s case. It’s time for the system to reward women who achieve power of their own accord.
