Do Let's Shut Up

October 9th, 2016

I'm sick of the manufactured outrage this election.  The American public was fully aware what kind of people both Presidential candidates were when we nominated them.  We have only ourselves to blame.

Let's be honest and stop with the fist-waving and name-calling.  We relinquished that right with an enthusiasm and abandon that should trigger nothing but shame in retrospect.

Donald Trump is, for lack of a more articulate adjective, an asshole.  He's the spoiled rich kid, the bully, the fraternity jock who hopes a comely cheerleader will get drunk enough not to remember who took advantage of her in the morning.  The evidence of his disdain for nonwhite elites is apparent to anyone who knows how to use Google, and it always has been.

Those who voted for him in the primaries should have known this.  The only explanation is that we're truly desperate or that we chose to disregard that in favor of bumper-sticker slogans.

The Left doesn't get a pass.  To them, Trump is a blessing.  Hillary Clinton should get on her knees every morning and thank whatever higher power she believes in that she has him for an opponent and not a competent politician.  Let's be honest: in their backrooms and meetings, her campaign staff celebrates every time some woeful piece of his past comes to light.

So does the press.  When a new bombshell drops, they high-five each other.  When the cameras roll, they smooth their jackets, put on an air of righteous indignation, and pretend to be appalled.  If they had a shred of integrity, they'd admit they are absolutely loving this.

The fireworks have an ancillary effect of distracting the public from what an awful politician and human being Hillary Clinton has been.  Is it really coincidence that Trump's soap opera comments fell into the hands of CNN the same day transcripts of Clinton's Wall Street speeches were leaked?  Really.  Come on.

I remember the 1990's.  I remember when Ms. Clinton did her best to discredit and slander the women her husband abused.

I remember when she urged him not to intervene in the Bosnian genocide because it was potentially "a Vietnam that would compromise health care reform," which was Ms. Clinton's pet project at the time.

I remember her full-throated support for the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, which increased our minority prison population by 60%.  If there's a candidate who should be pilloried by criminal-justice reformers, it's not Trump.

Then there's the whole issue with the personal email server.  Petty Officer First Class Kristian Saucier could face up to thirty years in prison for mishandling classified information, even though there is no evidence he planned to share it with anyone outside the chain of command. Clinton did the exact same thing, but on a larger scale, and for a longer span of time.  She got a pass from the FBI because there was no evidence she meant any harm.

The double standard, and the obvious fact that the FBI investigation was managed by the administration, doesn't seem to bother anyone, least of all her supporters.

Why?  Because they believe her personal reinvention as a "progressive," or because they simply "want to see a woman President."   To this end, they voted for her despite the fact she's pretty much the monster Trump is.  His crime may be that he's an incompetent and awful person, but hers is naked corruption.

So, here we are.  Both choices are wretched, but let's at least show some sliver of honesty.  There were other candidates, but this is what we chose.  Voting has its consequences.  Not voting has its consequences.  We get the government we deserve, and in 2016, this is apparently it.

4 Comments »
  1. The BeerHunter wrote, running Mozilla Firefox 49.0 on Ubuntu Linux

    From an outside perspective, what is baffling is that it seems to be impossible to dislike both. With a very few exceptions, disliking one seems to mean supporting the other.

    This points to a failure of the electoral college system, and a wider failure of two party politics. (A universal problem, not uniquely American)

    Every election cycle, in every country, there are discussions about the lesser of two evils. America is genuinely living that now. The question is who will be the least worst President?

    It's a shame that third party is not a realistic option.

    Comment on October 10, 2016 @ 4:10 am

  2. advcyclist wrote, running Google Chrome 53.0.2785.143 on Windows NT

    Repeatedly voting for the lesser of two evils for the past, eh, twenty years is what got us in this mess. We drove the bus, knowing full well a cliff was fastly approaching… knowing the brakes were cut; yet we pressed that gas pedal at every election.

    My hope would be an Evan McMullin insurgency to the '16 POTUS elections but that's a fading one. He's the most articulate and capable candidate I've seen to date, yet the mass media pundits and talking heads are giving him no air time, no mentions… they are too busy lapping at the heels of Trumpism and HillaryGate.

    Comment on October 12, 2016 @ 10:07 am

  3. Andy wrote, running Google Chrome 54.0.2840.59 on Windows NT

    Honestly, Gary Johnson is looking GREAT.

    He's within striking distance of THREE states, Utah, New Mexico, and Alaska. That COULD get him the Electoral Votes needed to shut out anyone from getting 270, assuming Hillary takes a dip in the polls with the next email dump, which is apparently coming on the 1st. If the votes are EVEN and Gary can get TWO states, it goes to the House, and with Paul Ryan as Speaker, and all the Threats and alienation Trump has directed towards the GOP that doesnt support him, they are DAMN likely to elect two former GOP Governors who never really clashed with leadership, they just wanted a bit more freedom.

    Evan McMullin could only POSSIBLY win Utah, and he actually shows well there, but he's a part of the CURRENT system, he'd be four more of the same. He also only have ballot access in like 11 states.

    Another point for Gary is that the recent Ohio Mock Election shows him winning at 30.11%, vs Trumps 13.93% and Hillary's 10.85%. That's more than DOUBLE the second place candidate, and that's from a sample size of like 250,000.

    Fox News Utah did a FACEBOOK poll (harder to fake than a non-confirmed or email-confirmed poll) shows Gary winning it all at 55%, followed by Trump at 16%, Evan McMullin at 12% and Hillary at 10%. That's out of 52,000 votes.

    The fivethirtyeight polls that show Gary at a 6% chance and Trump at a 14% chance are out of pools of about 600 votes, so i am actually inclined to think the larger sample sizes matter for something.

    And mind you, Gary is leading the Independent, Millennial, and Military demographics.

    Trump and Hillary both historically support AWBs, banning private party sales, mandatory waiting periods, no-fly-no-buy. Trump also wants Stop-and-Frisk and Hillary wants Manufacturers protections repealed. Gary wants NONE of those things, and wants to move to have the Hughes Amendment repealed.

    Gary Johnson is our guy. Both in decent chances, and in principles.

    Comment on October 15, 2016 @ 4:03 am

  4. Erik wrote, running Google Chrome 53.0.2785.124 on Android 6.0.1

    Andy,

    If Johnson appears to have that kind of momentum, I wonder if Ryan could convince him and Weld to run as Republicans. It's never happened before, but then again, we've had a lot of surprises already in this cycle.

    Comment on October 15, 2016 @ 10:46 am

Leave a comment

This is a written medium. If you think something is worth expressing, it's worth using proper spelling and grammar.