” … a candidate with seriously complicated woman issues”


"THE FIX: How potent do you think the "enabler" claim might be as a political tool?

BROWN: This is a particularly potent claim against Hillary. According to a recent CNN/ORC International Poll, less than 20 percent of Americans sampled said that they did not think that America was ready for a woman president. Indeed, Gallup polling data has shown that Americans are increasing likely to support a woman candidate, particularly if a voter’s political party nominated a qualified woman.

These numbers indicate that Americans may not be opposed to electing a woman president; it is the candidate herself that matters most. Therefore, Trump does not necessarily have to play the gender card against Hillary but rather showcase why she, in particular, is the wrong woman for the job. This nuanced argument is an individual attack against Hillary — not women candidates. As such, Trump may be able to sidestep overt claims of misogyny and sexism." The Fix


The media in its willingness to help Obama get HC elected is launched upon a full throated campaign to denigrate and mock Trump.  His seeming inability to control what he says is a big help to them in this.  The imprecision of his speech gives them many openings, and they use them.  A typical example is his claim that HC abused and sought to humiliate and destroy those women who had the gumption to say that Bill had used and abandoned them or something like that.  "A wealthy rogue seduced and abandoned me" as the Irish terrorist gal says in "Ronin."  Her male colleague then replies, 'Funny, that's what happened to me as well." 

The press have twisted Trump's claim into a pretzel by insisting that Trump is criticizing her for tolerating his affairs when in fact he accuses her of attacking Bill's gals in order to protect their joint political career.  That is a big difference in focus.

Nevertheless, she has a lot of problems with women and her score card in the primary season with them is not all that good.  Her real strength is with Blacks.  Without them she would be in bad shape.

IMO she is very vulnerable to circumstances in which she is relentlessly pounded by Trump surrogates with accusations of a lack of virtue, civic and otherwise.  Trump himself should keep his mouth shut about this kind of thing and should concentrate on seeming the friend of miners, unemployed victims of Clintonian trade agreements, etc. 

I am increasingly attracted by the idea that he might ask Jim Webb to run with him.  Yes, I know that Webb is, at the moment, a Democrat, but… the GOP leaders are not going to like Trump, so, to hell with them.  Webb is a seriously "bad" dude.  Navy Cross, Silver Star, Secretary of the Navy, US senator from Virginia,  writer.  He is quite fluent and has that hard edged Scotch-Irish thing going.  Let him do the talking about military and foreign policy.

If Trump plays his cards right, he can beat Hillary.  pl  


This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

114 Responses to ” … a candidate with seriously complicated woman issues”

  1. escot says:

    wow, until a year ago, I’d have been much enthused at the thought of Jim Webb as a solid running mate…. perhaps especially so for DT. Alas, Webb disappointed much when he mysteriously came down hard against the deal with Iran, just as his own campaign was running on empty. So out keeping with the independent minded Webb I’d come to respect, who had long made stand after stand against the neocons….

  2. DC says:

    Obama’s mistake was wading into the email controversy in the first place. By telegraphing that the FBI investigation is about “intent” — which it is not — he is seriously misleading the american public, as of course her surrogates are all too happy to follow. Trump will pile on her poor judgement, Obama’s complicity, and the DNC’s corruption, as soon as DoJ lets her off. HRC is toast, imo.
    The President should have read the tea leaves long ago and sent the opposite message to his flunkies at DOJ. Biden would have had an easy swim to the nomination. Now they are stuck with anti-establishment Sanders if they hope to have a shred of a chance against the charismatic, aggressive, Trump.

  3. Erika says:

    I agree. I too was disappointed with Webb.
    If Trump were to pick any democrat it should be Tulsi Gabbard. That should solve the woman problem, and it would be someone the Republican base (i.e. voters) would actually respect, considering that Gabbard is after all a veteran.

  4. turcopolier says:

    I, too, would prefer Gabbard, but Webb, although as prickly a character as I, has a wealth of experience that must be considered. the Iran opinion? Yes, most unfortunate. pl

  5. hans says:

    When Bill got caught out over Monica the first, gut reaction among women I knew was that Hill should’ve borrowed a pistol from one of the Secret Service detail. Ask women you know, today, how noble they think Hill is for standing by her man.

  6. kao_hsien_chih says:

    I think it is extremely likely that Trump will run with a Democrat, and not improbable that HRC will run with a Republican–possibly someone like Brian Sandoval, if she can find one who is willing. Trump is looking to appeal to voters who might otherwise be inclined to vote Democratic, had it not been for the latter’s sociocultural, economic, and foreign policy leanings (cosmopolitan in both directions) but have fallen out of the electorate since then. HRC represents, as a multiculturalist, interventionist, free trader all her life, the ultimate anathema to their interests. By the same token, HRC is looking to court Republicans who are cosmopolitan in all these respects as well. It would make sense, then, that the Democratic ticket will feature a pair who are essentially “moderate” (in the peculiar sense that term has acquired recently) Republicans while the Republican ticket will be headlined by a pair of old fashioned Democrats.

  7. Will Reks says:

    The election’s going to come down to the same old swing states, like Ohio and Virginia, that Democrats won by relatively small margins in the last couple of elections. It’s probably not going to be the landslide that some on both sides seem to think could happen. If the missing white vote actually exists in these particular states then Trump’s focus on ending free trade agreements and bringing jobs back could bring those voters out to the polls. Country club conservatism doesn’t appeal to those folks but Trumpism might.
    Nativism, nationalism, and white backlash will help him as well. I’m surprised he came out against the bathroom bills but he could easily flip the other way on that.
    Clinton is probably the worst candidate the Democrats could have nominated this cycle.

  8. Joe100 says:

    I still have a Webb 2016 bumper sticker on my truck – I thought this was long obsolete, but had been wondering about a Trump VP play.
    My suspicion is that Webb’s animosity to Iran may well go back to the 1983 Marine barracks bombing. He had been awarded an Emmy for his pre-bombing coverage of the Lebanon situation for the MacNeil/Lehrer hour and then went back to cover the aftermath. He would have made solid personal connections during his pre-bombing coverage with many Marines who were killed and there may have been a few he knew from his time in uniform.

  9. HankP says:

    Of course Trump can win, but I still think it’s very unlikely. As mentioned, he simply can not and will not keep his mouth shut, and contradicts himself within days if not hours. How anyone can accept anything he says as his “position” is beyond me. Also, winning 30 – 60% of Republican primary voters is very different than winning >50% of all voters.

  10. SmoothieX12 says:

    Tulsi Gabbard is an amazing women. Smart, courageous, with real integrity and gorgeous–no man can resist her powers;-) Realistically and without a joke, such choice could be a stroke of genius for DT’s campaign and a very clear message globally. The contrast between Hillary and Tulsi Gabbard can not be more startling than this, with Tulsi being absolutely in the league of her own when compared to this war-mongering she-devil and neocon shill Hillary.

  11. different clue says:

    I wonder if Senator Webb’s opinion on Iran was in part based on Senator Webb’s own perception of unfinished bussiness with Iran about the Embassy hostage taking. I don’t know enough to theorize . . . I can only wonder.
    Could Webb stand to be anybody’s Vice President? Trump’s own inner security would make Trump uniquely UNthreatened at a psychological level by a powerfully independent Vice President. Perhaps a Vice President Webb could use the Vice Presidency as kind of a semi “Fourth Branch Lite” of government, sort of like Cheney but in a GOOD way.
    Perhaps a Prez Trump and VP Webb would both be okay with that and make it work.
    And if a Trump-Webb Administration had good luck and good results for four or eight years, it would open the way to a Webb run for President in four or eight years from now if Webb wanted to do that.
    Webb could perhaps be a stabilizer to the irrepressible and unpredictable Trump, and could be presented in part that way . . . if both were okay with that.

  12. different clue says:

    Tulsi Gabbard announced her support just a little after Madeleine Albright invoked “a special place in hell” for women who don’t “help eachother”. I wonder how many “career-thwarted” professional women agree with that view? Such women would regard Gabbard as an Evil Traitor for supporting the Dark Pretender Sanders to the Throne which is rightly Clinton’s.
    If Clinton is elected President, Gabbard will have to prepare for all kinds of behind-the-scenes political-personal persecution and sabotage from the Clintonite Forces. Clinton considers such “failure-to-support” a personal matter, and she will take it that way and make it that way.
    Hopefully Gabbard will be able to visibly wear Clinton’s barely-passive aggression against her as a public badge of honor.

  13. scott s. says:

    I don’t think too many Republicans would be enamored of a socialist like Gabbard near the White House. Her main claim seems to be publicity seeking, as compared to our other Congress critter Mark Takai who also is a vet BTW (LCOL HIARNG).

  14. different clue says:

    I don’t think I could have voted for Biden under any circumstances. Among other things, he was very gung-ho responsible for the so-called “Bankruptcy Reform Act” which made student debt non-dischargeable in bankruptcy, among other things.
    Also, I gather his surviving son has investments in a company which hopes to do all kinds of fracking for oil and gas all over East Ukraine. This would tend to bias Biden in favor of the illegal Nazi-Nazi Banderazi coup regime currently occupying the seat of government in Kiev. I feel confident others can offer other reasons to say ” no Biden, no thank you.”

  15. Matthew says:

    Col: When I read Webb’s “Born Fighting,” he left me seriously confused. You would have thought all the Irish Catholics fought for King and Country and all the Low Land Scots settled in Ulster were the Andrew Jacksons.
    However, British military history since 1690 is almost an encyclopedia of Ulstermen. Many brave Catholic Irish fought in the ranks; but the fighting generals were Scots Irish.

  16. crf says:

    It would be very bad for the moderate constituency Webb represents within his party: that would be a loss for the Democrats. This loss for the Democrats would occur whether or not Trump/Webb wins. Webb would not be a gain for the Republicans. Too many Republican congress-people do not have a good track record of working with leaders in their own party, so what chance would Webb have to influence Republicans in congress?
    And I think Trump can win, of course, but it is more likely he’ll lose. He’s deliberately and stupidly made himself unattractive to large portions of the swing electorate.
    So Webb would be taking a loss up front, with little chance of a payoff.

  17. David Lentini says:

    From what I’ve heard from some dependable sources, depending on who comes forward, Hillary may have a whole different set of “women” problems. Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.

  18. Tyler says:

    Hah, glad to see my Webb theory has feet.
    “Crooked” Hillary is his line of attack for her, and damn if it don’t stick like black to tar. He’ll let Manafort and Stone handle the gouges, but Trump’s “mouth” is a feature more than a bug, IMHO. People like him cause he says what he thinks. People don’t trust the media to tell the truth in general, and especially the truth about DJT.
    If anything, it makes people investigate what exactly Trump is talking about. Its why you see the full court press whenever Trump talks about Muslim immigrants or illegal immigrants in general, either trying to obfuscate or outright lie to protect their sacred cows.

  19. Tyler says:

    IIRC, Webb was suckered in as part of the Democrats 50 state strategy to run as a blue dog, and then was whipped into line to support the globalist agenda of the Democrats.

  20. Tyler says:

    Personally I like the rumors of:
    Ron Paul as SoS
    Sessions as SoS or SDHS
    Giuliani as Attorney General or SDHS

  21. bth says:

    Webb did poorly in the debates and trusted out in public regardless of his many attributes. Webb might make an interesting Sec of Def. China will remain a wildcard this summer which could change the calculation.
    Concentrating on the swing states will be key for Trump, Ohio, Florida to name two. A popular moderate governor might be a good VP choice.
    Pain in the O&G producing states is going to be acute this summer so someone that could bring cred to a national energy policy might be popular.
    An infrastructure building emphasis might also work, investing in our infrastructure, putting people to work, etc would also resonate well.
    Look for congress to stuff a lot of pork projects into the budget at the last minute in July. Whether Congress passes a budget or not will be important going into the convention weeks and might affect VP selection.

  22. rakesh says:

    actually she never ever publicly attacked anyone cited. Her private conversation reflect her misplaced trust in her husband. If someone disagrees please post the actual quote.

  23. WILL says:

    Trump has made it pretty clear that first, it will be a republican vp, and second he wants an experienced politician to help push his legislative agenda. The House of Reps has lately been the problem, w/ the Hastert rule. Kasich as a former representative would be ideal, except that Donald has insulted his eating habits, don’t know if the governor would be able to get past that.
    The dems got screwed w/ wasserman-scultz (?sp) rigging the debate schedule so O’Malley and Webb couldn’t get exposure or oxygen.
    After being a lifelong dem, i changed my registration to unaffiliated so i can vote in the repub primary for my congressman Walter Jones. He’s way to the right of me on fiscal and social policy but he is pro veteran and anti-war. To me, that supersedes (i avoided saying trumps) everything else. There’s always some neanderthal neocon challenging him in the primary.
    I think Trump would strongly, strongly, benefit from ritalin, mephyphenidate. This would help him stay focused and control his tongue. They have an Arabic proverb, lsaanuk hassanuk, trkubudu wa byrkabek. Your tongue is your steed, ride it or it will ride you.
    لسانك هو الحصان، ركوب أو أنها سوف تركب لك

  24. Kooshy says:

    Colonel, IMO, and as I wrote here previously, I think in general election this fall, there would be a lot of democrat voters who will cross party lines, and would cast a protest vote for Trump,this is just to to make sure Clinton would get less chance of wining in fall. Apparently this was asked and was evedent in yesterday’ primery exit polls. 1/2 of Bernie’ voters said they would vote for trump if Bernie is not nominated. Count me in.

  25. Fred says:

    different clue,
    That’s the coke snorting son who got a wrist slap discharge from that navy rather than a trip to the naval prison in Portsmouth.

  26. Walrus says:

    There is a suggestion out there that what Hillary is afraid of is “personal” emails on her server that would shed unfavourable light on her private life.

  27. Tyler says:

    Relevant to many of the people in denial on here.

  28. rakesh,
    You’re getting in the way of building the narrative. You clearly know nothing of how politics works.

  29. Max H says:

    I would love for Jim Webb or Tulsi Gabbard to be the VP pick, but I think it would problematic for a VP pick to be from another party. I’m not sure how that would work. And I don’t believe there could be an expedited party registration process just to do this. Its slim pickings among GOP members. A few paleos I guess, e.g., Walter Jones, John Duncan, et al. But we know it won’t be Carly “General Buck Turgidson” Fiorina, she’s been tapped for VP slot by another candidate.
    Btw, all the people who are making a lot of money in neocon political consulting are getting apoplectic about a Trump Administration. Neocon Russophobe Ian Bremmer’s most recent tweet (this evening):
    ianbremmer @ianbremmer
    Teddy Roosevelt: Speak softly and carry a big stick.
    Donald Trump: Speak loudly about your small stick.

  30. jdledell says:

    I’ve been a member of this group for many years. Yet I don’t recall a person being more reviled on these pages than Hillary Clinton. During the Bush/Cheney years a lot of criticism was leveled against their administration but never were words equivalent to “she-devil” used.
    I am not a fan of Clinton, but she strikes me as a typical politician – slippery and inconsistent. While she probably won’t be a great President, I feel like she will be cautious and stay away from major policy errors.
    Trump on the other hand is egotistical enough to ignore policy advice from experts. He really believes he is the smartest person in any room. I honestly believe soon after taking office that he announces something like the “U.S will pay 80 cents on the dollar for treasury debt, first come first served. He will pay for it by ordering the Feds to print 10 trillion in new dollars. Imagine what that would do to interest rates, inflation, corporate bonds and the upheaval in world and American economies.
    As I said, Clinton will probably not do anything impulsive but I do not trust Trump when he assumes to power of the American Presidency not to do crazy things because of his ego.

  31. Mark Logan says:

    I don’t think the path is by beating on Hillary. He can win if he can successfully portray himself as the champion of the working stiff though, and embrace his inner Krugman for policy with which to do that. Undermining the Dems would be better than attempting to trump them with a VP. It’s difficult to imagine any who would accept the offer, and impossible to imagine anyone who after doing so would drag significant numbers of Dems with him or her. The VP pickings are, for him, exceedingly slim. He’s probably going to have to settle for Perry or Christie.

  32. Bobo says:

    It took me awhile to warm to Trump but I’m there now. The value of Trump is that he is an outsider, he understands that our elected government is not functioning properly, life is not what it was here in the good old USA and he has a fire in his belly. The verbosity and character assassination is his tool of trade and his mechanism to push another’s weaknesses. Just look at poor Marco completely out of character babbling about appendages. This is what he is attempting with Hillary. While it’s uncooth and over the top it works. To me Trump wins the vote and ekes by in the Electoral College but what he will do is bring out a level of voters we have not seen in a long while.
    Eventually you will hear in words with similar meaning from Trump but not Hillary. “First, we are Americans. We may be Male, Brown, Red, Yellow, Female, Black, Homosexual, Musliim, Straight, Catholic, etc. etc but we are all Americans first and we need to remember where came from, where our country was and where this country is going. Now join me in Making America the Greatest Nation on Earth Again”. Corny or odd yes, but this is who Trump is and anyways what could happen in four years.

  33. J says:

    Has there been a ‘damage assessment’ made regarding Hillary’s National Security Compromise?

  34. JohnH says:

    I think Trump has an excellent chance of destroying Hillary by asking:
    “Who is she really? Do we have any idea who you’re really voting for?” It’s
    a good question. She is notorious for bobbing and weaving and posturing.
    Does anybody know what she stand FOR? Does she stand for anything besides
    her becoming the first female President?
    The whole issue of her of attacking Bill’s gals in order to protect their joint political career plays directly into this–does she have any principles, or is she just and opportunist?
    Her speaking style reinforces this. Her positions are often so lawerly and laden with clauses and conditions that you really can’t tell where she stands. It comes across as constantly posturing, searching for the perfect, politically correct nuance. For example, she can’t make simple statements like, “I support a higher minimum wage.” Bernie, by contrast, has no trouble speaking in simple sentences and makes his preferences unmistakable.
    The irony, of course, is that nobody knows what Trump stands for, either.
    Yet after so many years on television, he knows how to feed media audiences. People feel like they know him. And Hillary, with her convoluted, serpentine sentences, will have trouble countering Trump’s strength and directness.

  35. mbrenner says:

    I suspect that the Clinton’s have a contingency plan, an October surprise, in the event that Hillary falters in the polls. An anonymous video clip will appear showing Bill and Jennifer Flowers’ daughter Marigold checking into a downtown Little Rock motel at 2 A.M. Then, the NSA will leak a surveillance recording of their ordering an extra large pizza with all the toppings from Domino’s at 4:30 A.M. They’d expect the sympathy vote to be overwhelming – especially if this time Hillary announces that a divorce petition will be filed immediately.

  36. kooshy says:

    In case you haven’t seen this video yet
    Jeff Daniels Goes ‘Will McAvoy’ on Trump

  37. Emad says:

    There’s a part of me that’s filled with visceral disgust for what HRC stands for. For me she stands “somewhere between a cockroach and that white stuff that accumulates at the corner of your mouth when you’re really thirsty,” to quote the venerable Cyrus the Virus.
    On the other hand, as a principled non-voter, I can’t help but ask so what?
    BHO wants her to succeed him; the press treats her every misdeed as if it were a virtue, and most any democrat will be whipped into voting for her come November. But why agonize over the prospect her winning this race?
    HRC is a known commodity. We know what we’ll get with her at the helm: The country will go off the Borgist deep end. Trump on the other hand can only disappoint. Without a plan to deal with a post-disappointment Trump, rooting for him is going to sting as bad for his supporters as it did for people who bought hope and change from a community organizer from Chicago.

  38. Interesting post and thread. Wondering what exactly the American voter expects to get from the fall elections? Does possession of wealth by an individual indicate worthiness to lead others or competence in governance in 2016 America?

  39. LondonBob says:

    I admire Webb but he comes across poorly on television and is too old. Trump needs to shore up his right anyway, both in regards to evangelicals and soccer moms in the suburbs. I would make it a choice between Scott Brown, Kris Kobach and Duncan Hunter (Jr.). All strong on immigration and all early endorsers of Trump. My money would be on Scott Brown, although I prefer Kobach as he is smarter and has a Midwest background. Soccer Moms prefer a good looking guy with a central casting family over a tokenistic female pick.
    Shame Rand Paul is still in a strop about Trump’s attacks, he could actually play a foreign policy role in a Trump administration.
    Trump will get 10% plus of black voters with a lower turnout of black voters in general, they like him and he is addressing issues that concern them. The national polls and state polls indicate Trump is doing slightly better than where Romney finished, well positioned for the 5 point win I expect he will achieve.

  40. Peter Reichard says:

    When Tyler first floated the idea of Trump-Webb I wrote in to SST that it was politically brilliant but somehow it didn’t post. Trump, however, has since stated that he will only choose a Republican and having already alienated the Party leadership so much he is unlikely to reverse course on this. Webb is the perfect guy to shake up the DOD but is temperamentally a poor choice for VP and I doubt he would want it.

  41. Peter Reichard says:

    I think Hillary has an excellent chance of destroying Trump by asking:”Who is he really? Do we have any idea of who you’re really voting for?” It’s a good question. He is notorious for bobbing and weaving and posturing. It works both ways and thus we face the worst choice in American political history. Either way may God help us.

  42. Jack says:

    I’m one of those that does not want Hillary as President. Although the current odds are she gets it as she is the Borgist candidate. The Borg is pulling out all the stops so she can be coronated.
    My reasoning is 3 fold:
    1. Hillary has backed every meddling war since the Balkans. She is the candidate from ziocon central when it comes to overseas military interventions that bring only costs and no benefits to the country.
    2. The Clintons have always deeply aspired to be accepted by the financial and social elites. This deep seated desire has IMO led them to be duplicitous, corrupt and unprincipled. They’ll sell their parents to be accepted by those circles they want to move in.
    3. She reeks of smarmyness. Will say or do anything that is expedient to achieve her lust for power. She IMO holds ordinary people in contempt while playing to the gallery of how she is for the working man.
    With Hillary we have certainty. More wars, maybe even one with Russia. More transfer of wealth to the elites using the power of the state. And a vindictive management style.
    I disagree with your prognosis that she’ll be cautious. IMO, it will be the opposite as she will want to prove that a woman Commander-in-Chief can be more of a warrior than a man. If she gets elected I’ll be buying Wall St and Defense contractors and using the best of my abilities to dissuade my son from serving in the military.

  43. ex-PFC Chuck says:

    Just as SST is my go-to read each day for goings on in US foreign affairs, especially in the Middle East, when it comes to any aspect of the presidential campaign that has to do with Trump I go to a blog published by Scott Adams, the author of the “Dilbert” cartoon that appears in hundreds of daily newspapers. Back in August of last year, when almost all the MSM pundits were looking at their watches so as to document the exact time The Donald finally jumped the shark and crashed and burned, Adams put up a post asserting that not only would he not crash, but that he would sew up the nomination before the convention and would ultimately be elected by a landslide. Adams’ basis for this claim is that he himself has been a serious student of persuasion techniques since early in his varied career and that he has never seen anyone in any walk of life more skilled in that art than Donald Trump. Most of Adams’ posts since then have been either analyses of recent campaign action or predictions of how he might respond to attacks on him and proactive initiatives he might take. As events have unfolded Adams has been right in these posts much more often than he has been wrong.
    Below are links to a post late last month regarding the woman issue as well as one to the blog’s home page.

  44. ex-PFC Chuck says:

    And Trumps response will be: “We already know what Hilary stands for: Business as usual with her owners the banks, the 0.01%, and their coat-holders running the economy and gutting everyone else. How’s that been working out for ya?”

  45. Joe100 says:

    Yves Smith had a thoughtful post on HRC vulnerabilities yesterday that suggests to me that HRC has serious challenges ahead. And Smith confesses that she had underestimated Trump.
    She also cites a recent Quinnipac poll that shows Trump in a dead-heat with HRC in the key swing states of FL, OH & PA

  46. rjj says:

    What would be so bad about four years of doing nothing more complicated than gilding the Washington Monument??

  47. Fred says:

    “Possession”, creation or destruction:
    Well the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree, does it?

  48. rjj says:

    Clintons and their marriage continue to be the Great National Inkblot Test.

  49. Babak Makkinejad says:

    The perception among some in Iran is that HRC will bring War and DT will bring Economic War to Iran and indeed the entire world.
    Neither candidate are sensible.

  50. Nancy K says:

    I agree with you completely. From many of the posts regarding Hillary, you would think she was the devil incarnate. Donald seems to be given a free ride. Michelle Obama was criticized for wearing sleeveless dresses, however Donald’s wife can pose nude and no one seems to be shocked. I will admit she does look good in the buff however Michele Obama has very nice arms also. I think the main objection to Hillary is her gender.
    I don’t trust Trump either, he is not consistent on anything, changing your mind frequently is not a trait I think is desirable in someone running for President. He is also volatile and egotistical. A lot of posters in the past have commented on Obama being a narcissist and an empty suit, these descriptions seem to fit Trump perfectly.

  51. turcopolier says:

    “I think the main objection to Hillary is her gender” That is a remarkable statement. pl

  52. Erika says:

    I actually would prefer Trey Gowdy as Attorney General.

  53. rakesh wahi says:

    It is beyond my comprhension that someone would prefer a buffon with fascist mindset and a know nothing over a slightly flawed but intelligent person. trump is a sociopath and a patholoogic liar. You really want to turn over the country to him?

  54. Swampy says:

    I can’t believe that I’m still hearing people moan about how it’s inevitable that HRC is going to win. You guys sound like Eeyore, fer christ sake.
    Hell, I wouldn’t be surprised if Bernie wins California.
    The only people I’ve talked to who have actively supported her are gay men, blacks, and straight-ticket zombies. There are a lot of liberals that are not happy with the Dem choices.
    It’s all for Trump to pick up these disaffected voters with his VP pick.

  55. Jack says:

    Maybe The Donald is smarter than he let’s on.
    It’s quite possible that many voters don’t care that much about policy details since their experience is that candidates say one thing during the campaign and do the opposite when in office. Dubya campaigned against nation building and then plotted regime change in Iraq as soon as he got to the Oval Office. Barack said rule of law applies to the elites and promptly ran out the clock on the Wall St criminals. Bill ran on being a black man and then shivved them with his Sister Souljah moment.

  56. turcopolier says:

    rakesh wahi
    What you have written here about Trump is mere name calling. You have to do better than that on SST. pl

  57. Tyler says:

    Nah. Gowdy is a grandstander who is open borders and puts on a good show for conservative media with Benghazi.

  58. Tyler says:

    As far as I know Hillary identifies as a woman still, but I’m sure shed describe herself as genderfluid for the all critical tranny vote.

  59. Tyler says:

    Nancy K yet again with strong arguments for why the 19th Amendment should be repealed.

  60. jld says:

    a slightly flawed but intelligent person

    Thank you very much for the good laugh.

  61. steveg says:

    “DT will bring economic war to Iran
    and indeed the entire world” I don’t
    know about Iran but economic war
    has been brought to the American
    worker for approximately 35 years
    some might say more. Off shoring of
    good paying manufacturing jobs under
    the guise of neoliberal “free trade” being
    one aspect of this. The mantra of “they
    are doing the jobs Americans won’t do”
    another. What is it, his thatched look?
    His cock sure swagger? The American
    voters’ choices have been which benign
    dictator best represents us.

  62. rakesh wahi,
    You illustrate perfectly the mentality which is largely responsible for the emergence of Trump.
    If the anxieties, and resentments, of those who support Trump had not been ‘beyond the ‘comprhension’ of ‘élites’ alike in the United States and Europe, there wouldn’t be a Trump.
    Those ‘élites’ – if only out of a concern for self-preservation – would have taken some note of those anxieties and resentments.
    This used to happen. After all, both Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt came from the ‘élites’.
    (Indeed, when the Liberal government broke the power of the British aristocracy in the years leading up to the First World War, quite a few of those involved were themselves very much ‘upper class’, and they were in no way resisted by the King, Edward VII.)
    It is a peculiar characteristic of the ‘meritocracy’, whose replacement of traditional ‘élites’ was supposed to be an unqualified good, that their lack of concern with what many of their fellow-citizens think and feel makes the pre-1789 French aristocracy look positively ‘in touch’.

  63. Babak Makkinejad says:

    “Genderfluid” – very good!

  64. Babak Makkinejad says:

    Ah, that reminds me of the drug-dealing son of Geraldine Ferraro; while in college.
    I guess he lacked for money, having to work 4 jobs to pay for his tuition at Brown University – Not.
    I witnessed analogous things in rich suburbs of New York City in Connecticut – I knew then and there that US was on a path of decline since the addled brain dope-head progeny of the elite were going to assume the leadership of ruling class in US in the ripeness of time.

  65. rjj says:

    what do you think of his chances against Clinton-Sanders?

  66. Nancy K says:

    I probably should have stated a main objection instead of the main objection to Hillary is her gender. I’m not even saying that the objection is from men. My mother is 91 and lives in an independent living community. She said many of the women there feel uncomfortable with a women being president. It is something they are not use to. There will be women who vote for Hillary only because she is a woman. I think gender and race influence us in ways we may not even be aware of. I’m sure identification with a political party is similar. My father use to call himself a yellow dog democrat. He said he would vote for a yellow dog if it ran as a democrat. I’m not quite that bad but there have been very few times in my 48 years of voting that I did not vote Democratic.

  67. Nancy K says:

    Tyler, your replay indicates why it took so long for the US to give women the vote.

  68. different clue says:

    Nancy K,
    There are two leftish blogs I read regularly . . . Ian Welsh and Naked Capitalism. They both find Clinton objectionable on what they claim to be policy grounds. If you or someone else can link to a pattern of articles or posts on either of those 2 blogs that are motivated by gender bias, it might be useful and helpful to link to them here and explain why they are based on gender bias.

  69. MRW says:

    a buffon [sic] with fascist mindset
    You appear to have the classic uneducated understanding of what fascism means and its history and methodology that prevails these days.
    Fascism was a reaction to communism. It protected the rights of the presumptive 1% at that time, and used business and government to assure its interests would prevail. It didn’t give a shit about creating jobs for ordinary people so that their kids and families could eat, earn a living wage without going into debt to provide necessities (as Greenspan told people to do in 1998 when private sector debt soared under Hillary’s husband), and live with dignity in a society that acknowledges their right to the live with the protection of the social contract we call a republic. It was powerful industrial and financial interests that created the genesis and propagation of fascism. American industrialists applauded; it protected their turf. Elites like Republican Teddy Roosevelt and Democratic FDR stuck up for the little guy, incurring the wrath of the ruling class.
    Hillary’s husband and his ridiculous VP unmoored the tenets of Eisenhower’s form of government that created the middle class and the greatest period of prosperity in America’s history. He welcomed the rebirth of fascism by handing the government over to the bankers, undoing the safety nets of the previous 60 years with no thought to the consequences. (His deregulations created the Great Recession, but I won’t get into that now.)
    Bush and Cheney were the fascists, institutionalized it, and Trump correctly raked Jeb Bush over the coals last fall publicly for what his brother did as President. The only thing our Congress knows how to do is pass unanimous laws for Israel within four days, not use this immense constitutional power to fix the lives and futures they destroyed in 2008: fuck The People. But then Congress wants those donor bucks, doesn’t it. Cheap suits.
    Who the hell do you think a president Hillary is going to talk to at 3 AM when she doesn’t know what to do? When she’s dancing on Monica Lewinsky’s rug in the Oval Office shadowboxing the stale air “fighting for us?”

  70. IMO and could be wrong as always this fall’s Presidential election all about who turns out and how they vote. While I still think neither HRC or Donald can get 270 electoral votes or more [thus going to the House for decision] IMO the selection of running mate will determine both turnout and outcome.
    Given the importance of Virginia [should it flip Republican] would not be surprised to see on of the running mates for either party a Virginian by birth or more recent roots.

  71. Matthew says:

    Jack: For me, it’s about sharpening the contradictions. We won’t have a non-Davos, non-Goldman Sachs-supplicant Democratic Party until the Clinton DLC’ers are defeated.
    One term of Trump is a small price to pay for that larger victory.

  72. Matthew says:

    mbrenner: Billmon has a pretty extensive Twitter string showing that Democrats and Republicans are pretty fixed in their loyalties–and the actual significance of any candidate is overrated. IMHO, this election will be close because the nation is–and has been–closely divided for 20 years.

  73. Matthew says:

    Col: Yes, Colonel, Nancy’s statement is remarkable….remarkably untrue. As a voting Democrat, I think Hillary’s gender is a plus. Her character, in contrast, is a huge minus.

  74. VietnamVet says:

    The 2016 election will test the comity of SST.
    There are huge problems for the incumbent Democrats; the collapsing Middle Class, the proxy mini world war in the Middle East plus the restart of the Cold War 2.0 with Russia and China. Hillary Clinton can only be elected if the majority of the voters ignore these issues. It is Trump’s election to loose; for example, by selecting Newt Gingrich, an architect of the new America, as his Vice President.

  75. Matthew says:

    DH: This was a major theme of Chris Hayes’s book, “Twilight of the Elites.”

  76. turcopolier says:

    I guess my task would be to prevent people from attacking each other personally while still being able to disagree forcefully. pl

  77. VietnamVet says:


  78. Valissa says:

    Ka*ching! Stop the spending! I keep trying to tell people that gridlock is good, else they tend to pass primarily kleptocratic legislation. But it seems the “productivity” meme gets stuck in people’s heads and they think if congress “does stuff” life in the US will magically get better somehow. IIRC the Founding Fathers set things up to make it difficult to “get stuff done” because they wisely did not trust congress to “do the right thing.”
    Why so many still believe what politicians say is beyond me. Lucy (politician) – Football(promised stuff) – Charlie Brown (gullible voter).

  79. MRW says:

    I heard some guy on the John Batchelor Show last night from the American Enterprise Institute. He was railing against Trump, claiming he’s not a real Republican, that no one knows the real Donald.
    Paraphrasing, but most is verbatim: ‘He’s been a pro-choice, single-payer health care guy for 69 years. […] He’s against the whole pro-market turn in US policies since 1980. He was against the 1986 tax reform. He wanted wealth taxes. He’s against trade. And I thinking it’s shocking that he’s being held up as a pro-growth supply-sider because that’s what he been for the past day and a half.’

  80. Castellio says:

    This is the conclusion of the article: “Unless Democrats or the New York City Board of Election can provide compelling evidence contrary to Election Justice USA’s findings, New York’s delegation also should not be seated at the Democratic Convention in July.”
    In other words, serious voting corruption.

  81. MRW says:

    Ah, I see you mentioned the Roosevelts as well. I didn’t read your comment before I wrote mine.
    And I agree with the rest of your comment. I would add that our brand of meritocrats do concern themselves with their fellow-citizens, but those fellow-citizens live in Israel, which has sucked up far too much congressional oxygen over the past eight–hell, 15–years.

  82. mbrenner says:

    Trump’s unbridled temper will continue to be a liability. Witness his violent attack this week on Elizabeth Warren with a heavy, blunt instrument – his wit.

  83. Fred says:

    Yes. Sadly our civilization is being destroyed, not with a bang but with a whimper by the likes of these. Had my son done what Biden’s did he would be in prison.

  84. steveg says:


  85. charly says:

    True but Trump is not a Republican and Sanders is not a Democrat. They just run on those parties tickets.

  86. Peter Reichard says:

    Election fraud is a serious concern with Clinton. Exit polls, which using the same methodology, got the more complex Republican primaries essentially correct gave, with the exceptions of Vermont and Wisconsin,statistically significant higher results for Sanders than the official tally in almost all cases. Ironically it may end up that the Democratic convention is the one being contested.

  87. Tyler says:

    Because they knew many women are irrational, immune to logic, and easily swayed by emotion. Often they want all the power and none of the responsibility that authority brings, and when something goes wrong it’s always another’s fault.

  88. rjj says:

    this description also applies to XY serfs, slaves, spoiled children, some courtiers, and many underperformers. Have only read about the courtiers (unless academics count), serfs and slaves.
    you did not mention calculation and guile.

  89. rjj says:

    the shared crookedness of the timber is easier to spot in those with a more obvious difference.

  90. Tyler says:

    I think that ticket would tear itself apart on the contradictions. So many cracks for a wrecker like Trump to drive a wedge.

  91. Laura says:

    LondonBob, I’m not sure Trump will go anyway near “smarter.” He is obviously the “smartest guy in the room” in his own mind and is of such fragile ego that there is no way he is going to want to read pundits talking about how smart his running mate is and how that smart running mate is going to educate and inform the candidate. Actually, I’d be more hopeful if he does pick someone like that…but I’m not holding my breath.

  92. Laura says:

    Rakesh, you state it well. I totally agree that because of Trump himself, we are not voting on a party but on a person. Trump is not to be trusted on anything. Hillary is to be trusted to understand American government and its flaws and possibilities. Having said that, I’m SURE she will make decisions we all regret but she will waste our time and hers trying to remake our government Imperial…but Trump will.

  93. Linda Lau says:

    I remember when she ran in 2008 a random man in the Midwest who was said to have little use for blacks, said that he would vote for a black person rather than a woman. I have never been a fan of HRC, but Ishe is what we have (or what I have anyway) or Trump. I would surely hope that Jim Webb would never ally himself with Trump and dirty his good reputation.

  94. Nancy K says:

    Tyler, I understand that some men dislike or fear women however to imply that many women are irrational, immune to logic and etc, is just crazy talk. Most of the world’s leaders have been men and we can see how well that has gone. This fear and hatred of women has led to horrific lives for young girls and women in many parts of the world. The sexes are different but neither is better than the other.

  95. Tyler says:

    “This fear and hatred of women..”
    You mean the areas with lots of Muslims…
    Which liberal women don’t want to talk about. Let’s be serious here.
    I know as a typical progressive you think that disagreement is “fear”, but all I have to do is look at politicians like Hillary or Merkel and realize that stereotypes exist for a reason.

  96. Nancy K says:

    No I can’t show or do I feel there is any gender bias in those two blogs. I think the left prefer Bernie to Hillary. To be honest I prefer Bernie to Hillary but he can not win. Most Americans are not going to vote for an older Jewish Socialist who went to Moscow on his honeymoon. I am a realist.

  97. Nancy K says:

    He is backing Trump, how is that rescuing Clinton?

  98. Nancy K says:

    I don’t think I am a typical progressive anymore than I think you are a typical conservative. I also did not mean just areas with “lots of Muslims”. Many religions are patriarchal and treat women as 2nd class citizens. I have found it is usually cultures or men who are unsure of their own masculinity who treat women poorly. I understand it but I don’t identify with it. My husband is a nonreligious Jew, who lived many years in Israel. He is very secure of himself as a man and treats me as an equal. I can only hope that our 4 daughters and 1 son have relationships such as ours.
    I will vote for Hillary not because she is a woman but because I feel she is the only candidate that can bean Trump.

  99. optimax says:

    “… with a heavy, blunt instrument – his wit.” I heard it land with a dull thud.
    Those that believe Trump will save America will not be dissuaded by his compulsive lying. His ego is big enough to ignore the self-made verbal traps that ensnare him.
    I voted for Pat Buchanan in 200 because he was against free trade, American jobs being shifted overseas,illegal immigration and for isolationism and a military strategically designed for defense and not offensive or preemptive wars. He was called a racist for bewailing the fact that that due to hispanic immigration American whites would become a minority, resulting in the depreciation of Western Culture. Clinton was praised by the same media stars for saying it was good that whites would someday be a minority in the country he led.
    Too many Americans have lost the survival instinct and I have no one to vote for.

  100. rjj says:

    By putting people off Trump.

  101. Tyler says:

    I’m a nationalist. “Conservatism” has conserved nothing.
    You’re engaging in more pop psycho analyzing BS. Women have it great under the Christian West compared to the rest of the world. You’re trying to compare the how the majority of women are treated under Islam and other religions with outliers, which shows your fundamental dishonesty.
    Yes, you are a typical progressive.

  102. different clue says:

    William R. Cumming,
    What if the brilliant analysts at Clintocrat Central decided that means Governor McCauliffe as Hillary VP?

  103. rjj says:

    the Dems became so iron fisted they managed to alienate both Clinton and Sanders supporters in Nevada.
    Thought at first it was political theater but it seems to be more than that. No idea how it is being reported on Official State Media. There is another report of the results being posted by a local station three hours before the vote was taken.
    not suggesting there is any sort of conspiracy.

  104. optimax says:

    The DNC is going to nominate Hillary no matter what the voters want. The MSM ignores the questionable tactics of the Democrats while concentrating on Trumps past girlfriends, real and imagined.

  105. Brent Wiggans says:

    Colonel, if you were contracted by a client to analyze the possible effects on policy – and their probabilities of realization – of Jim Webb being Donald Trump’s vice president what would your executive summary be?

  106. turcopolier says:

    Brent Wiggins
    Are you a client? pl

  107. Tyler says:

    Warren’s flustered “triggered” response to his tweet spoke more volumes about Warren than it did Trump.
    Trump is the guy who says what everyone is thinking. He’s right to point out that Warren’s claim of Native American ancestry as a lever to achievement is nonsense.
    This is only going to “hurt” him with people who would never vote for him anyway.

  108. Brent Wiggans says:

    No. I was just trying to elicit your most steely-eyed assessment of what Jim Webb is likely to be able to do and what influence on policy he is likely to have in the roll of Vice President in a Donald Trump administration?

  109. turcopolier says:

    Brent Wiggans
    OK I dub you honorary client. IMO Webb should be SECDEF, Rand Paul should be SECSTATE and Tulsi Gabbard, like Webb, should be lured to a VP run even though she is a Democrat. pl

  110. Brent Wiggans says:

    Thank you. Honored. What I am really trying to get at is an eminent intelligence professional’s assessment of the likely effectiveness of a Jim Webb (and now a Rand Paul and a Tulsi Gabbard) in a Trump administration given Mr. Trump’s personality, his career leading an organization with his own name on it and his absence of experience in working within the constraints of American government. Conventional politicians have public records that can be at least suggestive of how they will work with members of their administrations. We can imagine how a Hillary Clinton or a Ted Cruz might get along with and utilize their own people and others to shape policy. Mr. Trump is anything but a conventional politician. His public record is of a very different kind. What are the predictors of how he will work with his own appointees to deal with others who hold power and are beyond his direct control?

  111. turcopolier says:

    Brent Wiggans
    Flattered. IMO the kind of administration that I outlined would have no problems on most issues with a Republican Congress. There would be some grumbling but the general outcome would be cooperative. In foreign affairs his non-interventionist views coupled with an aggressive re-negotiation of trade deals are, in my view, doable and desirable. pl

  112. Brent Wiggans says:

    So, the answer to my question is that this group of appointees would have a high probability of having great influence over policy in a Trump administration. I can imagine that this might happen in one of two ways: Donald Trump would largely be quiescent to the views of his cabinet members or he is simpatico with the positions of these people on their signature issues. As to the first, it is difficult if not impossible to conceive of Mr. Trump being content to ride shotgun in the vehicle of his own administration. With regard to the second proposition, I do not think that what is in the public domain justifies much confidence that we know his real positions on much of anything. When challenged he invites us to not take too seriously a seemingly categorical pronouncement because it was merely a “suggestion” or a trial balloon or he may deny having said it at all or he may make a new and contradictory statement. Perhaps there are members of this committee who have a reliable fix on what Donald Trump truly believes.
    It appears to me that people who were not initially persuaded to support Mr. Trump based upon his temperament and are – now that he is assured of being the Republican nominee and the alternative to Hillary Clinton – looking for other reasons to support him are underestimating him as a disruptive force and discounting his willfulness and unpredictability. On the other hand, those who oppose him based upon his temperament may be over-estimating its likely effects. I would have to believe that the greater strategic downside is in underestimating him.

Comments are closed.