Saturday, 5 November 2016

A tight race between two awful people, one of whom is a skilled politician

SHARE
What happened to the decent Democratic party of Carter and Bill Clinton? Economics happened to it and demographics, I suppose. They gave up on working class men and the South.
The big developments in America since 1989, apart from September 11th, are the decline of religious belief and Third World immigrants. You see this with both parties.
The Republican party of Reagan is dead forever and George W Bush killed traditional American conservatism, which was never conservatism anyway but 19th century liberalism plus pork-barrelling.
Hillary would intervene in Syria which is bad - very bad. She is the war candidate and a globalist who'd fit nicely into any Western European country. She is secretive, dishonest and has no political skills beyond craftiness. Everything she touches goes wrong, most of all Libya.

I am undecided about who should win. Trump might be good. Or terrible. If the latter he would be the best thing that could happen to the Democrats and left-of-centrists around the world. He is a bad man - a twice divorced womaniser - with a controversial business record - who boasts of groping pussies. Vain, very easily distracted, a short fuse.

Still he might - already is - changing thinking worldwide about many things, most of all PC.

He addressed a woman journalist at a press conference as 'Beautiful'. This is appalling or magnificent depending on taste.

One term for Hillary, stymied by a Republican Congress, and then an impressive Republican POTUS who is not a globalist might be the best outcome.

But the progressive young are the big danger in the USA as in England. Brexit came just in time. Perhaps Trump is a last chance.
Trump is dangerous which is why he excites his supporters. He is not of course a Republican.  Trump is a sort of Democrat, as Katty Kay of the BBC said

Think of William Jennings Bryan. Or Andrew Jackson, the very rough diamond and populist who was the founder of the party. Happily Trump is without Wilson's internationalism or racism. Wilson introduced segregation in federal offices. His Fourteen Points did to Europe what George W. Bush (his spiritual heir) did to Iraq.


Hillary is dangerous too and does not excite even her fan club but she is less dangerous, unless you live in the Middle East or intend to make your home there.

12 comments:

  1. Clinton is pure evil.
    Trump a self serving salesman , untried in politics but certainly not amoral like Clinton.
    I would not vote for either were I american.
    Instead I would take the anarchists no vote stand.
    The good people of Wikileaks, Anonymous & the true patriots of the FBI,NYPD & Intelligence will deliver the truth to the people via the 650,000 emails found on Huma Abedin/Anthony Weiner's laptop.
    America has beome befouled by corruption & hidden , hideous agendas - kept from the people by an immensely powerful coterie of BAD people.
    let this transitional period be peaceful as society faces awful truths about itself & it's real leaders.
    I'm anti war as I'm certain most ordinary ppl are.
    We will know more very soon as more revelations come.
    Humanity at the crossroads.
    I pray that good changes now occur or we're done for.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rosie you are a good person.

      Delete
    2. Tried to respond, but your facebook account is unavailable

      Delete
  2. ...you know, the conflation of "nonwhite" with "third world" is exactly the sort of thing that turns nonwhite voters into Democrats.
    Per capita income in Mexico is almost exactly the same as per capita income in Romania. is Romania a third world country?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Why is someone who divorces twice necessarily bad? That's silly.

    I think the truth is that they are both deeply _unprofessional_ politicians. She in the sense of having been incompetent and (it increasingly seems clear) highly corrupt, he in the sense of being an amateur fresh into politics who is still learning, nonetheless learning fast.

    The Democratic party of Bill Clinton was a very different one to the party that elected Carter a decade and a half earlier.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Clinton was more centrist? Carter was long ago now but I recall most people in the UK thought him much better than Reagan who seemed like Mrs T an extremist. I remember Heath telling me that Reagan didn't have the intellectual capacity to be president. I was an impressionable 18 year-old. One has to rethink one's 18 year-old politics. Though a lot of my critique of Mrs T which I didn't hear others make was repeated by Richard Vinen in his very good book about her. E.g. relative decline vis a vis Germany didn't matter. In fact it did because people felt it did as I accepted then and as Vinen says.

      Delete
  4. my eyes won't tolerate some of this trashing of Clinton because you read it somewhere? really, misogynistic folks, 30+ years of harassment and NO findings against her. you might find bogus sites that name call and use bullying tactics, and a few so called journalists with dollar signs in their eyes - trying to save their jobs and then there are the trolls who invade everywhere and who cannot be traced because they are trolls. I tried to find two of them, but will not waste time on others. then there are the plain old people with their heads in the sand
    speaking as if that list of things t has done did not exist. There is NO equilvalency; she is not evil, but a really good person who has done so many things for so many in the world. so stop with this false equivalency -- it shows sheeplike non thinking.. no opinions just parroting of another who wants to get you on their side or turn you into a person cowering in the corner in fear.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/conrad-black-clinton-and-trump-are-imperfect-candidates-not-evil-or-deranged

      Delete
  5. Hilary Clinton is also going to restart the so called 'Silk Route' project for her corporate masters. Which means trouble for Russia, Pakistan and China. The frightening prospect of a Clinton victory has in recent months pushed former enemies like Russia and Pakistan and Russia and China together.
    Asian economies are growing and developing at much faster rates than European ones. This is the reason Obama has lost all interest in the UK and Europe and focuses on Asia-Pacific. Even Canada is now trying to promote itself as a 'Pacific nation'.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I don't think left and right mean much anymore. I mean the term comes from the time of the French revolution. it's time to up to update. I mean, in the US, supposedly the party of the weak and the working class, has become the party of the military industry, imperialism (disguised as 'human rights'), wall street. Trump, as you rightly ssay, i ssomething of a democrats, which is where his true instincts lie. Until trump, both parties were globalist. In the uk, both parties have been globalist since blair and until corbyn. The post brexist conservatives have both a globalist and a nationalist wing. all very confusing. I am conservative, elitist, very antiglobalist. Hate all this culture flattening consumerism which, pace brexiters, i believe comes from us post cold war hegemony, not the EU. The EU is just a conduit for America.#

    Pelle

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think left and right mean much anymore.

      If you try to look at the US election in traditional terms of left and right then Trump is the candidate of the moderate centre-left and Clinton is the candidate of the extremist far right.

      The media has muddied the waters so that any nationalist (no matter how moderate) is seen as far right which is patently ridiculous. And globalists are depicted as leftists when the only constituency they represent is Wall Street.

      Delete