First, allow me to apologize, as I am probably giving amoebas a bad rap —I don’t know of a single one-celled creatures that engages in hyperbole and hate mongering.
I just read a hate piece on Hillary Clinton, based on her interview with that political savant Howard Stern.
The writer, a self-described “writer and leftist with analysis on topics related to politics and policy,” made some of the most incendiary statements about a Democrat this side of Putin’s boy toy in the White House and guess what happened?
She got thousands of claps from over 500 readers, with 83 of them writing fiery comments on both sides of the issue, with half of them attacking Hillary Clinton and the other half attacking Bernie Sanders.
I’m not going to link to this monument to absolutist thinking and complete disregard of American history. It deserves the same respect I would reserve for any right-wing conspiracy nut job like Alex Jones.
But I will make some comments, if only to get people to learn something about politics and history and stop the circular firing squad mentality that has ruined the progressive movement.
Quote #1: “Hillary Clinton is without a doubt the most destructive democrat in modern American history.”
First of all, congratulations on writing without a doubt the most destructive article to Democratic hopes in 2020.
I know a little something about history and this comment is without a doubt the most uninformed and simplistic article this side of a Russian troll.
Was Hillary flawed? Of course. She ran a bad campaign and carried around the baggage of 20+ years as a target of GOP smear tactics.
It’s sad that so many hundreds of people read and applaud an article that has so little factual basis.
In spite of supporting Sanders in 2016, I voted for Hillary because that is what rational adults do to avoid allowing the biggest con artist in American history to occupy a position of power.
Anyone who was semi-rational in 2016 knew that the voting records and campaign platforms of the candidates were not that far apart.
The Senate Votes That Divided Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders
Hillary Rodham Clinton is a liberal Democrat on domestic matters, and Bernie Sanders is a socialist. They voted the…
I’m sorry, but when two candidates are in agreement 93% of the time in their Senate votes, you lose all credibility as a political observer if you state that Hillary would have made a terrible, corrupt president.
You lose all credibility as a rational voter if you claimed your vote for Agent Orange was really a vote against Clinton.
Let’s break down this quote a little bit further.
Anyone who writes “without a doubt” is simply trying to put lipstick on a pig — a pig that wallows in shit and relishes the thought of rubbing its shit-covered body against anyone dumb enough to come in contact with it.
Why is it that people who offer no facts supporting their position engage in this kind of rhetoric?
In addition, from a grammatical standpoint, this wonderful quote doesn’t capitalize the word “Democrat” when referring to a member of the Democratic Party.
Come on, people, it takes 30 seconds to verify the capitalization rules for a political party or one of its members.
Either this is the work of some idiot Russian troll unaware of English grammar, or some idiot blogger who is more upset about Bernie not winning the 2016 nomination than seeing Genghis Tang being installed as the Pussy-Grabber-in-Chief.
It certainly isn’t the work of a real political journalist.
Finally we need to examine the definition of “modern American history.”
From a historical standpoint, this statement is false, unless we define “modern American history” as starting with the Howard Stern interview.
Let’s look at the destructive effects of Democratic leaders since 1964:
- Lyndon Baines Johnson took over after the assassination of JFK and used all his skills to honor Kennedy’s agenda to ensure equal rights for minorities. After he won the 1964 election, LBJ made good on his promises and helped push through the Civil Right Act of 1964 and tried to create a new set of programs to fight poverty. While these were the right policies to pursue, he knew that his actions would split the Democratic Party in half, as the Southern segregationist would eventually all switch parties, and become the foundation of the Southern Strategy that allowed Republicans to hold the presidency from 1968 until 1992 (with the exception of Carter’s one term). If we apply the definition of “most destructive Democrat in modern American history,” to the effects on his party, one could argue that LBJ falls into this group, as well.
- George McGovern, the 1972 Democratic nominee, was awarded medals for valor as a bomber pilot in WWII. He refused to run on his war record, which would have completely discredited Republican attacks against his patriotism because of his position as a peace candidate. Nixon won and the war continued for another three years. The real damage to the Democratic Party was that it was permanently branded as soft on defense, a go-to tactic for Republican chicken hawk candidates even to this day. Aside from Carter’s post-Watergate win, the Democrats didn’t win another presidential election until Ross Perot split the Republican vote in 1992. In those four losses (1972, 1980, 1984, 1988) the combined electoral votes for the Democratic nominees did not equal the 270 necessary to win the presidency.
- According to Michael Moore, Bill “Clinton was a pretty good president for a Republican.” Clinton supported a number of policies that were disastrous for the Democratic Party and the American people: NAFTA, repealing Glass-Steagall and the deregulation of the derivatives markets, and the crime bill that increased prison populations by 60% and helped fuel the massive growth of the private prison industry. Perhaps the most damaging action was how Clinton allowed his FCC appointees to relax the regulations that prevented large media companies from becoming news monopolies, leading to the rise fo right-wing talk radio and all its brainwashing effects. Top it off with a White House sex scandal that poisoned the well for Al Gore, and he opened the door for George W. Bush, huge deficits, increased income inequality, the lies and incompetence in Iraq, and incredible amounts of corruption. I’d say Clinton should garner more than his fair share of votes for being the most destructive Democrat in modern American history.
How Democrats would be better off if Bill Clinton had never been president — The Boston Globe
Clinton smoothly tapped a tambourine as he sang “don’t stop thinking about tomorrow,” the hopeful refrain that the Man…
- Barack Obama managed to lead the party to unprecedented losses in the 2010 midterm elections. His naive attempts at governing in a bipartisan manner in the face of the worst obstructionism in the history of this country only served to dishearten his supporters and feed his political enemies. His decision to withhold information about Russian intervention and possible collusion with the Trump’s staff helped the candidate emerge unscathed from the political primaries. It’s impossible to imagine losing a national election while the economy was still recovering from the GOP-created worst recession in 80 years, but hatred for Obama was one of the main catalysts. We are now in year four of those destructive effects; let’s hope people wise up and work together to unseat Cheeto Jesus.
Quote #2: “At this point, I don’t think it’s a stretch by any means to suggest that Hillary Clinton would rather see Donald Trump re-elected than have Bernie Sanders as President.”
How poorly can someone write a statement and not come off as political crackpot or Russian troll?
We expect this nonsense from Fox News, except that they shield themselves from libel lawsuits by adding a question mark at the end of their false statements:
“Is Obama a Muslim terrorist? Tune in after this commercial break.”
“Is Bernie Sanders a communist who can’t count to ten while claiming he can provide free college to all Americans? Tune in after this commercial break.”
“Is Elizabeth Warren really an opportunistic phony posing as a Native American while secretly establishing ties with socialist PACs funded by international child prostitution rings? Tune in after your frontal lobotomy.”
What does “I don’t think it’s a stretch by any means to suggest” mean, exactly?
Those double negatives turn the statement into “I think…” or “I suggest…” followed by the incredible claim that Hillary would prefer Agent Orange over Bernie Sanders.
But what the writer is really saying is “if you are nuanced and reasonable, you have to admit this condition is within the realm of possibility.”
Just like Corgis mashing computer buttons to determine which articles will be curated. Except that Corgis are cute and the premise is a humor piece, not a serious attempt at political analysis.
I can only frame this response in the most academic way possible “what utter and complete bullshit.”
Here’s the thing about human beings playing armchair psychologist and suggesting something so stupid that you have to wonder if Alex Jones isn’t writing under a pen name: it’s called projection.
Here’s a little quiz for you.
Guess which small disenchanted group of progressive actually voted for Orange Julius?
I’m ashamed to say that 12% of my Sanders brethren felt the Bern so much they got heat stroke and suffered massive brain damage.
Here's How Many Bernie Sanders Supporters Ultimately Voted For Trump
subscribe to The NPR Politics Podcast podcast Fully 12 percent of people who voted for Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., in…
Now here’s a little history quiz for all you disenchanted millennials who weren’t old enough to vote in 2000.
Guess whose 97,000 votes in Florida in 2000 made the election close enough that George W. Bush was elected president with the help of a Republican controlled Supreme Court? Answer: Ralph Nader, the Green Party nominee.
Guess who hoped to attract disgruntled Sanders voters to act as a spoiler in 2016? Answer: Jill Stein, the Green Party nominee.
The far left’s disgust with the status quo makes them suckers for the false equivalence presented by Republicans and Corporate fascists that there is no difference between the parties.
Again, I will respond with the purely academic terminology “that is some fucked-up bullshit.”
Equally ridiculous is the idea that if things get bad enough there will be some major change in the system.
That’s about as rational as Charles Manson thinking he could start a race war by murdering white celebrities.
The basic problem with the “if things get bad enough” argument is that things have to get and stay really bad.
Like the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution, or the 11 years the Nazis ruled Germany.
Things have been terrible in Russia since the Russian Revolution, and we’re on year 102.
Quote #3: “Hillary Clinton will bring down the party, and hand Trump another four years before she sees the left come to victory under the leadership of a man like Bernie Sanders.”
Here’s a little reality check.
Hillary Clinton is pushing a new book, so obviously she’s going to try to make herself look good, but how much of an effect will she have on the Sanders campaign?
Here are the polling results from 538.com, going back to the week of November 5–6, 2018.
National 2020 Democratic Presidential Primary Polls
We're tracking polls and endorsements, with more to come. The 2020 Democratic nominating contests are scheduled to…
In polls which include Joe Biden, Sanders has never reached 30%, and only hit 27% once. His support, which varies from poll to poll ranges between the high teens to the low 20s.
How exactly is Hillary going to bring down Bernie Sanders?
In the polls since Hillary’s interview, Sanders has reduced Biden’s double digit leads to about 7%.
The latest Ipsos poll which has tracked Sanders support over the last year at 13–17%, has Sanders at 15%, with Biden’s lead cut to 3%.
If anything, it seems like Hillary’s negative remarks about Sanders are helping his campaign.
I hope all people will unite to cleanse the White House of Herr Drumpf next November.
Until then, educate yourself and stop being pawns being pushed around by whatever power is employing these hysterical political windbags.