What We Want
Dec 13, 2016 9:41:31 GMT -5
Post by Michael Downing on Dec 13, 2016 9:41:31 GMT -5
bastionofliberty.blogspot.com/2016/12/what-we-want.html
What We Want
The sole thrust of every complaint about the election that’s originated on the Left since November 9 is this: We wuz robbed. The Democrats want Americans to believe that the election was somehow stolen from their candidate. If they can’t contrive to reverse the result, they’ll settle for delegitimizing the candidate who won. Accordingly, we’ve been treated to all the following:
• “Comey threw the election to Trump.”
• “It was the white racist vote that did it.”
• “Voting machines were tampered with.”
• “The Constitution is wrong; the president should be chosen by national popular vote.”
• “It was Russian hacking.”
• “It was fake news from right-wing sources.”
Were any of the above, or any combination, to take hold in enough minds, the incoming Administration would be badly hobbled by adverse public opinion. That, of course, would suit the Democrats and their ideological affiliates just fine. But note that the losing candidate:
•Can claim no accomplishments of her own;
•Is personally unlikeable and verifiably corrupt;
•Is probably too seriously ill to function as president;
•Referred to the victor’s supporters as “a basket of deplorables;”
•Bragged about herself and asked “Why am I not fifty points ahead;”
•Ran a badly targeted campaign that utterly ignored the heartland states;
•Ran on her gender and demonized her opponent rather than address policy.
All of that was a matter of public record. No exertion of the Media That Once Were could have suppressed it. Moreover, The aggregate seems more than enough to defeat her, even were this not an “anti-Establishment” campaign season. And down to defeat she went.
But Hillary Clinton’s worst inadequacies were well known to the electorate well before she threw her hat in the presidential ring. Her promoters and supporters were aware of all of them. Given that she had so many negatives as a presidential candidate – and let’s not forget that she behaved throughout as if the honor of becoming the first woman to serve as president was hers by right – why did the Democrats select her to be their standard-bearer?
Could it be that a serious political disease afflicts the entire Democrat Party? Is that something else we’re not supposed to learn?
What We Want
The sole thrust of every complaint about the election that’s originated on the Left since November 9 is this: We wuz robbed. The Democrats want Americans to believe that the election was somehow stolen from their candidate. If they can’t contrive to reverse the result, they’ll settle for delegitimizing the candidate who won. Accordingly, we’ve been treated to all the following:
• “Comey threw the election to Trump.”
• “It was the white racist vote that did it.”
• “Voting machines were tampered with.”
• “The Constitution is wrong; the president should be chosen by national popular vote.”
• “It was Russian hacking.”
• “It was fake news from right-wing sources.”
Were any of the above, or any combination, to take hold in enough minds, the incoming Administration would be badly hobbled by adverse public opinion. That, of course, would suit the Democrats and their ideological affiliates just fine. But note that the losing candidate:
•Can claim no accomplishments of her own;
•Is personally unlikeable and verifiably corrupt;
•Is probably too seriously ill to function as president;
•Referred to the victor’s supporters as “a basket of deplorables;”
•Bragged about herself and asked “Why am I not fifty points ahead;”
•Ran a badly targeted campaign that utterly ignored the heartland states;
•Ran on her gender and demonized her opponent rather than address policy.
All of that was a matter of public record. No exertion of the Media That Once Were could have suppressed it. Moreover, The aggregate seems more than enough to defeat her, even were this not an “anti-Establishment” campaign season. And down to defeat she went.
But Hillary Clinton’s worst inadequacies were well known to the electorate well before she threw her hat in the presidential ring. Her promoters and supporters were aware of all of them. Given that she had so many negatives as a presidential candidate – and let’s not forget that she behaved throughout as if the honor of becoming the first woman to serve as president was hers by right – why did the Democrats select her to be their standard-bearer?
Could it be that a serious political disease afflicts the entire Democrat Party? Is that something else we’re not supposed to learn?