The conventional Democratic Convention
The Democrats are busy congratulating themselves for their groundbreaking (or is it ceiling-breaking?) nomination of a woman for the presidency of the United States. I suppose it is groundbreaking in that sense, although it doesn’t feel the least bit surprising to me. This has been coming for a long time, and the fact that it would be Hillary Clinton has been obvious for a long long time.
And yet Hillary Clinton is an extremely conventional (pun intended) choice. Even the choice of a woman is conventional at this point (or maybe especially the choice of a woman). Just check off those boxes—first the black person, now the woman. There is nothing exciting about candidate Hillary except to those women and men who are deeply into gender identity politics—which I suppose includes a lot of Democrats, particularly female Democrats. Hillary herself is a typical ho-hum Democratic politician in her rhetoric, and she has typical experience (or what used to be typical experience) for a candidate—senator and then Secretary of State.
She’s even a conventional female politician of the old-fashioned sort who got her start through a man. The Democrats (and even Bill) have tried to de-emphasize that fact, but it remains a fact. On her own, without her very public exposure as First Lady, it is doubtful that Hillary would have had the oomph to get elected to national office, although I suppose it might have happened anyway. She barely has the oomph now, even running against one of the most disliked candidates ever. That’s one of her many problems.
So in summary, the Democrats have done the expected thing, and their convention has featured the usual interest groups, as well as the suppression of a bona fide populist movement for Bernie Sanders. Say what you will about the GOP and Donald Trump (and I’ve said plenty, most of it bad), but in giving Trump the stamp of approval, the GOP has done something startling. Something wild and crazy, as opposed to the Democrats doing something staid and expected and dull. Trump is a loose cannon, which is both his strength and his weakness—“strength,” that is, in drawing media attention and the attention of the public. Some of that attention is delighted and amused, some is horrified and repelled. But attention is attention.
Not only that, but unlike the Democrats the GOP has bowed to its populist wing. The GOP isn’t usually thought of as the populist party, but that’s what has happened. Now, why they did that is a matter for speculation. I believe they felt they had no choice, once the race had boiled down to the even-more-hated-and-feared (by them, anyway) Ted Cruz vs. Trump. They had run out of options. I also believe that they felt that they can control Trump at least somewhat in that he will play the game they’re more used to, the crony capitalist and compromise game.
But for whatever reason, it’s the Republican ticket this year that’s the roller coaster ride. Some people love roller coasters. I’m not one of them.
The big news today is that GDP growth came in at 1.6%; half of expectations.
Crooked Hillary appears in Omaha tomorrow. Will submit to Power Line. I’m ready for Hillary. But is Hillary ready for Cornhead? (Apologies to fellow Nebraskan Ted Sorenson.)
Yes, a conservative pick with the most radical of agendas. But let us not kid ourselves, regardless of which candidate wins, the real roller coaster ride starts after the election. The country is perhaps even more divided than it was just before the civil war.
Correction. Sorensen.
Hillary is finished and she knows it. I’m sure I posted here that some foreign power hacked her private email server in real time. That foreign country has 33,000 of the deleted emails. I think the hacker is Israel. They just disguised themselves as Russia.
Russia knows that the Muslims own the Clintons. Look at who donated to the Clinton Foundation. And Israel could never match that oil money. The emails will expose the entire bribery scheme.
And what a pathetic speech by HRC. “I love children. I am a woman.” BFD. What have you ever done other than enrich yourself?
In other words, Democrats are the boring establishment their base rails against. They have become The Man, no one more so than The Woman, Hillary.
Correction. “Israel knows that the Muslims own the Clintons.”
I don’t know what the percentages are of liberals who are supporting Hillary largely because she is a woman. One would think that people would try to hide this fact even from themselves. But comment sections of national sources include plenty of people who come very close to saying exactly that. It often takes the form that she must be wonderful, because the deck is so stacked against women that only an exceptional person could break out of that; or that the criticism of her is unfair because the critics just can’t endure a strong woman (Possible response: Margaret Thatcher), so everything said against her can be disregarded. But these amount to the same thing.
This is how human beings think. Once started down a bad road, disconfirming information does not undermine the idea, but cycles back to strengthen it. Her core supporters are people who have learned to ignore and reinterpret enormous amounts of negative information about her. That seldom changes. A mind is a difficult thing to change, after all.
Cornhead. Correction: “The NorKs, the Chinese, the Russians, the Ukranians, the Iranians, the Israelis, MI5, and the NSA know who owns the Clintons.” There are undoubtably other private players as well, such as the gang that stole 20 million identities from the Office of Personnel Management. Should Hillary win foreign policy will be up for sale and blackmail on a grand scale.
I’ve been considering this as a distinct possibility for a while too.
…after all, what’s good for the goose, yada-yada (i.e., the Obama administration [illegally] tried to get Bibi deposed: tit for tat if they decided turn-about was, after all, fair play …and it’s not as if there’s any love lost between Israel & the Clintons anyways: hardly! lol).
So. Yeah. Makes perfect sense to me.
…so long as they don’t get caught.
“I’m sure I posted here that some foreign power hacked her private email server in real time. That foreign country has 33,000 of the deleted emails.”
I hope that someone has those emails and reveals them to the US and the world.
I have no doubt the FBI has them or at least some of them and WON’T release them!
And you know who else has all of Hillary’s emails? Her lawyer David Kendall. The ultimate blackmail. Heck, he could be the leaker. Maybe he secretly has hated her since Yale Law.
Now that hrc has made ovarian history by winning the nomination of a major party, she can wait a few weeks and then quit the campaign for health reasons. The dnc campaign slogan would be Win One For Hillary. Its been an episode from the Twilight Zone campaign season. Trump proves that.
I intentionally tuned in for Bill’s speech. That old devil. He’s still got that aw-shucks Arkansas good-old-boy charm. And he could win a prize for the fictional love story he told of his life with Hillary.
I listen to Michael Medved on the radio when I’m out and about. He went to law school with Bill ‘n Hil. He has some rich memories of those school days. None very flattering of Bill. He described him as a narcissistic jerk who was talking about being President while he was still in law school. Bill and Hill lived together in sin during law school. That sounds quaint now, doesn’t it? Back in those days it was quite a “liberated” thing to do. Of course Bill didn’t mention that in his speech.
Nor did he mention some of his extra-curricular activities while Governor of Arkansas. But Michael Medved has some first hand info about those days. Medved checked into a motel in Arkansas after Bill had spent a weekend there with “friends.” The proprietor told him that the room was a “mess” and some wild things had happened there with all the “friends” coming and going. Sounds pretty interesting doesn’t it?
What I can’t understand, after hearing Bill speak of all of Hillary’s crusades to help chilluns over the years, is why we have any such problems left. To hear him tell it she was a Superwoman fighting for children and the “oppressed.” But then the progressives have been fighting for the oppressed and working people since the days of LBJ and they have not made a dent in the problem. Of course, Bill didn’t mention that.
I don’t know who is phonier, Bill or Hil. I do know they are great grifters. Too bad so many American people don’t see that.
“And yet Hillary Clinton is an extremely conventional (pun intended) choice.”
That’s an excellent word to describe her, NEO, she really is quite unremarkable if you filter out her being married to Bill. Amazed that people in the media (even Fox’s Bret Baier who should know better) continue to refer to her as “accomplished” without ever pausing to consider what those accomplishments were outside of her job titles.
All of the “Hillary’s for the children!” hype was particularly weird considering all she’s done to support abortion. Heck, Planned Parenthood gave her their highest honor, the Margaret Sanger Award. Think receiving an award named after a eugenicist would disqualify any talk of toiling away in public service for decades “for our children’s future!” Also surprised feminists are OK with that “for the children!” convention theme for the first woman presidential nominee, but then again, they’re OK with her husband’s abuse of women, so they’re obviously flexible with their standards.
Nixon remarked to Monica Crowley that Hildabeast has “eyes like ice.” He also said this about meeting Chelsea, Bill and Hill at the White House at Bill’s invite in 1993:
“Up in the [White House] residence, I saw Chelsea, who was very shy, and Hillary. The kid ran right up to him [Bill] and never once looked at her mother. I could see that she had a warm relationship with him but was almost afraid of her. Hillary is ice-cold. You can see it in her eyes. She is a piece of work.”
from Crowley, “Nixon Off the Record,” p. 172. [Great book, by the way: fascinating.]
This you can forward to any liberal friends/relations. Lefty filmmaker uploads video, declares shock that 1,900 delegates WALKED OUT of the DNC convention:
http://www.dailywire.com/news/7844/leftist-filmmaker-uploads-video-showing-his-shock-chase-stephens
It ain’t over yet, folks. I predict Trump will do a huge, yes HUGE service to his country by exposing how rotten the Leftist edifice is. No more Marquis of Queensbury rules. We need a rumble.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=El9d0lgh3vQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE5NPrk5a8E
Dick Morris lays BARE the details WRT Bill Clinton’s version of reality.
It’s 8.30 minutes of total shock.
Morris was an insider — and is testifying from direct knowledge.
Do Leftists even have children, who aren’t adopted from heterosexuals?
Blert
Thanks. Forgot about Hillary defending the cop killers. I imagine CNN will do a special on that incident.
I liked the scene on the sitcom LAST MAN STANDING, starring the oft-politically-incorrect Tim Allen, in which the wife is going on how great it would be if Hillary got elected president, because it would be a great and good thing–in and of itself–for us to have a woman president. One of the daughters–the smart one–says, in effect: Really? Any woman? How about Mrs. Hitler?
Interesting article and comments. I have a horribly bad feeling about all this. If the democrats rigged the primary, and probably the leaked emails were only a portion of the corrupt practices, don’t people believe that a huge effort is now going into their, and other powerful special interests, rigging the general?
I recall that Romney – Ryan were on a big roll attracting giant, enthusiastic crowds. Until they lost. And that loss was a shocker, right? Only that one pollster called it correctly, Nate Silver. So if all signs and indications were there for a Romney win, but he lost, hmmm, could there have been some democrat shenanigans behind the scenes?
Sad as it is to think of Russia or Israel meddling in the US election, it maybe will take something on that scale for Trump to go up against:
big MSM
HRC’s wall St money
ClintonFoundation money
crooked democrat party
elite power brokers for globalism
Trump’s own Republican Party
and a big chunk of conservatives.
Sheesh, when one looks at the list, the question arises: who in the heck are Trump supporters??
“Only that one pollster called it correctly (that Romney would lose in 2012), Nate Silver.” – Jayne
Wow! I have a VERY different recollection. Most polls were leaning Obama. Even the betting houses were.
Yet, most conservative media were arguing about the “shy conservatives” who didn’t want to admit their true intentions to pollsters, or that pollsters were actively biased.
There were a few (e.g. Dick Morris) who even went out on a limb to predict landslide for Romney.
Yet, Obama won.
Having eaten up all that hype about the polls and about the doom and gloom that was about to beset us with Obama, it was a devastating disappointment.
It seems a large number of folks stayed home rather than vote for Romney, who was painted as a “RINO!!!!” by much of conservative media – many of the same ones now supporting trump, like the juxtaposition of their standards 2012 vs 2016 makes any sense.
And four years later, we didn’t just drop off the cliff into the abyss as was promised, by those same in the conservative media. (Not to say we are anywhere near a better position, either).
Was always somewhat skeptical, but, after the disillusionment in 2012, went from skeptical to distrustful of much of conservative media.
Must say that wisdom has proven itself out in 2016.
.
One wonders about the amount of corruption and the influence from foreign entities.
Even in 2012, the conservative media seemed to miss the boat on deserving issues. Take the campaign finance scandal where a Chinese website redirected people to an Obama website that took small dollar donations (below the threshold for identifying the donor) and allowed credit cards through without using the security code (a higher processing fee). It was a major source of funding for Obama, yet the conservative media did not give that nearly the attention it deserves. Perhaps it was the fact, as was also reported, that some GOP Senators also took some money this way (though not nearly on the same scale). Regarding Obama’s campaign, was it Chinese support, or some back channel a b/millionaire chose to funnel funds anonymously, or just sloppy management? We’ll never know, and can probably expect the same this year, given the lack of attention this had.
Corruption takes many forms and the Dems/left don’t have a monopoly on it. Will there be attempts to influence (if not fund) by other nations? Probably.
One thing is for sure, lack of transparency (e.g. clinton emails, trump tax returns) leaves us guessing as to possible sources of undue influence by foreign entities.
Realized that “distrustful” is maybe too strong a word, but want to connote something more than just being “skeptical”, as in, being more selective in sources and more aware of an echo chamber effect.
The only way to combat this, AFAIK, is to seek other sources not in the conservative camp.
Usually, as a rule of thumb, regardless of source (left or right), the more loud, boisterous, brash, broad brushed, and/or conspiracy oriented the claim, the less it is based in reality. The “truth” can be the hyped versions, but a much higher percentage of the time it is something much narrower and less extreme.
A good example of over-hype and conspiracy is the notion of the GOP “establishment”. It is an easy sell on talk radio. However, one thing the 2016 GOP nomination race has made clear, it was a fallacy how the so called “establishment” is directing everything and working in a monolithic, coordinated fashion against everyone else.
It seems a large number of folks stayed home rather than vote for Romney, who was painted as a “RINO!!!!” by much of conservative media — many of the same ones now supporting trump, like the juxtaposition of their standards 2012 vs 2016 makes any sense.
That’s the common excuse I see people use, for why they couldn’t counter the Left’s 3+ million fake votes.
They don’t even mention the real problem.
So if all signs and indications were there for a Romney win, but he lost, hmmm, could there have been some democrat shenanigans behind the scenes?
Democrats have been stealing elections since at least FDR post.
It’s nothing new. They learned that from Civil War 1, actually.
Isn’t it sort of too-bad sad that no Libertarian / Republican hackers have copies of Hillary’s email?
I don’t doubt that Russia, China, Israel, MI5, etc have copies. Maybe some will end up being fed through devious means to WikiLeaks.
Just now I can’t help but fantasize that such “leaked” copies might even be edited to be more sensationalist negative against one or more subjects — since how can Hillary deny the partial lie without showing the true original, which she says she doesn’t have …
Neo, the GOP has NOT bowed to its populist wing — see Romney’s continued attacks against Trump (had he attacked Obama as strongly, he would have done better in 2012). Many of the worst GOPe cronyists have, er, most flexible, pragmatic, crowd reading politicians.
@Jayne lists many pro-Dem anti-Rep anti-Trump folk, leaving out 90+% of gov’t bureaucrats are Dem. These anti-Trump folk are exactly why I have such little fear of a Trump presidency.
I AM very very sad that Trump populism is so strong, but have long thought that cronyism/ socialist parasites attach themselves to any stable democratic gov’t, and usually grow faster than the non-parasites “who work for a living”.
Economically, the Great Recession / less than 3% growth for 8 years, is more due to the parasites than any monetary failure, but few economists are independent enough to claim that (almost all highly paid economists get money from the gov’t, one way or another, including tax deduction conservative think tanks).
I really don’t know what President Trump will do — but I’m sure most of what he tries to do that actually gets done will be far better than what would actually be done under Crooked Clinton. (With so many of my nice relatives supporting her, that makes me even sadder than Trump.)
Many of the worst GOPe cronyists have … bowed to the populist wing. (Ready to boot lick any Rep winner.)
Big Maq:
I’m in complete agreement with you about the non-monolithic, non-controlling aspect of the “establishment.” The evil puppeteers are apparently completely incompetent at managing the puppets.
I always felt that the talk shows and blogs that said otherwise were doing a sort of “Emmanuel Goldstein” on the right, drumming up hatred for an imaginary enemy. Good for ratings. And it’s part of the reason we’re at this pretty pass right now.
“why they couldn’t counter the Left’s 3+ million fake votes.” – Ymarsakar
The problem with putting such a large number like 3M on it is that you really have to provide some links that show it to be true.
I have no doubt that there is some form of cheating that goes on, BUT on a scale like that, surely there is some evidence that is prosecutable. How does one otherwise know that the number is 3M?
No. There is too much incentive for the GOP not to let that just sit unassailed.
That claim just doesn’t make sense, given the rest.
“And it’s part of the reason we’re at this pretty pass right now.” – Neo
Thanks. And, yes, it is a BIG part.
Even some anti-trump conservative commentators still talk about “the establishment” the same old way.
They just won’t let it go. Ratings!
I have no doubt that there is some form of cheating that goes on, BUT on a scale like that, surely there is some evidence that is prosecutable.
The popular vote for Presidential elections.
How does one otherwise know that the number is 3M?
More than 3m.
How does one know that 157% of a precinct reporting 99% votes for Democrat is cheating? I don’t know, maybe someone would have to take Statistics 101.
No. There is too much incentive for the GOP not to let that just sit unassailed.
The GOP E is dumber than you think they are. Power and the status quo is what they wish for, which means power switches hands. They weren’t going to stop the Left’s shenanigans, because many of them would have to take the hit and give up power to do so.
That claim just doesn’t make sense, given the rest.
The claim makes perfect sense for people who worked in the Chicago Machine and who have seen what I’ve seen. But for you, I agree it wouldn’t make sense.