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.
Worst Case Scenario
Ted Rall
Ted Rall is a syndicated political cartoonist for Andrews McMeel Syndication and WhoWhatWhy.org and Counterpoint. He is a contributor to Centerclip and co-host of "The Final Countdown" talk show on Radio Sputnik. He is a graphic novelist and author of many books of art and prose, and an occasional war correspondent. He is, recently, the author of the graphic novel "2024: Revisited."
5 Comments. Leave new
“NATO last week launched the largest war games exercise in eastern Europe since the end of the Cold War. Named Anaconda-2016, the 10-day military exercise began in Poland and involved 31,000 troops and thousands of vehicles from 24 countries. The exercise was designed to reassure NATO allies in the region and as a show of strength to Russia.”
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2016/06/13/Four-NATO-battalions-heading-to-Baltic-States-Poland/3861465819817/
Now to the point: who do you trust? Those who brought us to this international brink?
How will a nation that doesn’t recognize the danger select one who will answer to the danger?
“Eeny, meeny, miny, moe”, atomic warheads about to blow.
> a lunatic racist Republican versus a wild-eyed interventionist-warmonger who loves big corporations.
Business as usual. :: Yawn ::
I’m starting to think Trump might be the better choice. If elected, he will be massively restrained by the military and the bureaucracy, where he has no political sway. He will be like Arnold Schwarzenegger as Governor of California. On the other hand, Clinton is fully able to steer the ship of state and can take us places Trump never could. It is exactly her ability to ‘get things done’ that makes her more frightening.
Hillary tried to win all on her own in ’08. That didn’t work. This time, she’s doing a Ma Ferguson. Ma became governor of Texas because the Texas legislature passed a law that Pa Ferguson could not run,, and she is in the history books as winning because Pa was very popular with the voters who saw Ma as a way for Pa to circumvent term limits. So with the people who like her, plus the people who voted for Bill and think they’re voting for his third term, Hillary has most of the African-American, Hispanic, and women’s vote. Trump has white men, and fewer of them than Romney, who won more than 60% of all white votes but still lost the election.
McCain might have won had he not picked a bozo as his VP candidate.
I think Trump has only been running to ensure that Billary wins, but I’ll know if I”m wrong if Trump picks the only VP would gives him a remote chance of winning. As of now, he’s doubling down on alienating African-Americans and Hispanics, and he can’t win without some of their votes, more than Romney had. The right vP candidate would scratch back at least some African-Americans, Hispanics, and women, and she’d give Trump a real chance at victory.
But I do NOT think Trump will pick her, and I’ll be very surprised if he does.
Best bet: Hillary by a landslide. Followed by overthrowing the evil dictators of Syria, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and China and bringing them the same peace and prosperity and democracy that she brought Iraq and Libya.
Plus blowback.