The new and improved defender of RPGs!

Friday, 29 July 2016

Why We Hate Hillary: A Guide for Democrats Who Just Don't Get It

Some democrats on my social media just don't get why Hillary Clinton is so unpopular with everyone but them (I won't say 'leftists', because usually most seriously leftist people on my social media can't stand Hillary either; the only people who don't seem to understand are people who are not so much on the ideological left as people who have some kind of lifelong allegiance to the Democratic party, or who are so inflamed by some kind of single issue, usually feminism and 'electing a woman president', that it overrides all other considerations for them).  This is my attempt at an explanation for those utterly bewildered Democrats, as someone who had been supporter of Bill Clinton both times, but still can't stand Hillary. I am mostly posting this here so that I don't have to keep trying to answer this over and over again, and the next time someone asks, I can just link this blog entry. You can feel free to also, if you find it useful.

Far from being a lifelong 'public servant', Hillary has mostly served herself all these long years. And what she has used to serve herself is the promotion of an ideology that does a disservice to individual liberty and human freedom.

Notice how, at the convention, no one mentioned the ultra-corrupt Clinton Foundation.

Note how Hillary is the last person who should be talking about how Trump's 'tweeting' habits make him ineligible to be trusted with state security, when her cavalier attitude with email security is already a proven fact!

Note how she talks about how women need to be listened to, but spent much of her career silencing the various women who accused Bill Clinton of sexual harassment. She also condemned the women in her own party who supported Obama over her, and later Bernie over her, slandering both as traitors. So apparently women need to be listened to as long as they are in favor of Hillary ascending to the White House that it's "her turn" to have.

Note how she now says "marriage equality is the law of the land" but she voted staunchly against it until the very moment slightly more than half of democrats were in favor of it, and then flip-flopped. Hillary Clinton didn't came out in support of gay marriage, after having routinely voted against it, until 2013. Not only have I been pro-gay-marriage for about 20 years longer than Hillary Clinton, I have ongoing games of D&D that have been around for longer than Hillary has been pro-gay-marriage.

Note how she talks about the fears of Trump (who could be called an isolationist) being a warmonger, but she has enthusiastically supported every single war America has fought for the last 24 years, and voted for many of those.

But most of all, take a note of this:




The utterly fake look of surprise an adult makes when trying to humor a child, done for the cameras. This gif sums up Hillary. She's not capable of a natural kind of reaction, she always has to put on an act, always has to fake it, to give people what she thinks will win them over. But she's also AWFUL at it. She is so obviously faking surprise there that you can only assume she thinks that even her own party faithful are a bunch of drooling childlike morons. To say nothing of what she thinks of the American people.

Clinton has had one long career of treating the people with contempt. Of assuming herself and her family (including her trust-fund daughter who she got a $900K job for straight out of college in a depression) are simply above everyone else, that the people are fools that need to be controlled, ruled and lied to whenever necessary to get what she wants. And the main thing she wants is to be crowned President. She despises the fact that the American people can get in the way of that, because she believes it is her natural right to be in charge. She sees people entirely as tools or as obstacles.

She has been a typical collectivist elitist ever since 'it takes a village'. Her 'presidency' would lead to an increase in goldman-sachs corporate-collusion, continued adventuring, war, and failed diplomacy in the world, a level of favor-selling unseen in the white house since the 19th century, and a vicious and oppressive strengthening of the Nanny State, including the promotion of censorship against ideological opponents.

That is why we hate Hillary.


RPGPundit

Currently Smoking: Ben Wade Canadian + Image Latakia

21 comments:

  1. Pundit, pretty astute although you are outside the US. As it often comes to in the US Presidential elections it comes down to the lesser of two evils. Sometimes the lesser is republican, sometimes democrat. I don't trust or like Hillary just as much as I don't trust or like Trump; both for different reasons. The good news, we have three branches of government. As long as the Legislature is in the hands of the republicans the harm Hillary can do is curtailed. Not so with Trump. At least I know the assaults on my liberties Hillary will make; no F*ing idea what Trump will do. Of course both will continue America's policy of corporate welfare and inside dealing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ok, I get you there, but consider this: if Hillary wins, in the election that had Trump and Bernie in it, the message that not only she but the entire Political Establishment will get is "we can just keep behaving exactly like we have been all this time".

      If Trump wins, whether he governs well or badly, whether he tries to enact reforms or doesn't, the entire Political Establishment will be in a panic, and reform movements from other sources (Bernie, Rand Paul, etc) will gain ground in both parties.

      Also, Trump is just as likely to be 'held in check' by the GOP congress as Hillary. Half the Republicans (the Establishment half) in congress despise him. Basically, half of them and half of the Democrats will actively oppose him. Trump will need to make deals with the other half of both parties if he wants to get anything done. Ironically, he may end up being forced to be the most bipartisan President that the US has seen in at least 40 years.

      Delete
  2. I see where you are coming from Pundit. My fears on Trump is if he will go down a police state route, using executive authority to roll back some of the freedoms States have won from the federal government that the republicans hate. It's more what aspects of the right he will agree with than his own personal agenda (which I think is simply his self aggrandizement and legacy) than anything.

    I am a truly torn voter. If Trump actually starts laying out realistic policies on what he will do, instead of giving me slogans, then he could get my vote. I also wonder if he really is a fascist based on what he says about muslims and immigrants or just baiting to get votes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You mean what the media tools you he said about Muslims and immigrants or what he actually said? Two very different things

      Delete
    2. In what way does supporting immigration reform and secure borders make one a fascist?

      Are the Japanese fascist? Australians? Because they certainly have immigration locked down tight.

      Delete
    3. The thing about Trump is, we know he's not a real Theocon (he is not religious), nor is he a neocon. If you don't want a pro-war candidate, remember that Hillary is much more pro-war than almost any candidate we've seen in ages. Hillary has also never met a police-state measure she didn't like on principle.

      Everything you seem to fear Trump MIGHT do, we can be fairly certain Hillary WILL do.

      Delete
  3. While I am voting Libertarian (and considering actually starting some flavor of libertarian meetup in my small Oklahoma town--8 registered LP ballots got cast in our county primary, and I'm curious to meet those people), if someone put a gun to my head and demanded I vote binary, my choice is Trump, simply because he's containable. Pundit's already given most of my reasoning above, but I'll just state clearly that if nothing else a Trump presidency will cause Congress to suddenly remember that separation of powers is a thing, and checks and balances are actually important. And that can't be a bad thing.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Trump has laid out his plans pretty clearly on his website. The only media I have seen analyze those is Cracked.com, and the only person I know who has read those plans is me. I do not agree with him, nor do I agree with Clinton.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But Americans don't read anymore. They need sound bites that sound sexy. That's how "we should stop immigration from known terrorism recruit populations until we figure out how to check backgrounds correctly" becomes "I hate Muslims."

      Delete
    2. Went to his site and have to say do like his policy ideas. Not all of them but that is the nature of politics. Why the F does he not focus more of his time on stage on this than his antics?

      So for me the idea is now can I trust him? Remember "no new taxes." Is he saying just what I want to hear?

      For example, I don't see the Legislature supporting the policies of his I like, I can readily see the Legislature supporting the favorable tax treatment for big companies, yet doing nothing to eliminate AMT or other aspects of the tax code that make all the deductions they speak of unavailable or meaningless for most Americans.

      Delete
  5. If I believed Trump would really work to follow through on his crazy proposals I'd be tempted to vote for him... because, as has been said, he is containable. But my suspicion is that the man has no real desire to do the job... that what we'd get would be, effectively, president Pence... and I'm much more concerned about that guy and the people who are already in place to support his brand of crazy.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Did I hear right that she doubled down on Bernie's bullshit "free college for everyone" at the DNC?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She doubled down on promising "free stuff to anyone who might be stupid enough to believe the executive branch has legislative powers and will vote for me out of ignorant self-interest."

      Delete
  7. I was a registered Democrat until I was working steadily and supporting myself and realized what they really want to do to me and my money. Then I became a Libertarian. I registered Republican solely so I could vote for Trump in the primaries and will switch back to Libertarian. But I will hold my nose and vote for Trump because (1) let's scare those establishment con artists that maybe the party is over, (2) he seems a pragmatic realist who amazingly uses simple negotiation tactics of asking for more than you want as a starting position, which the media cannot even fathom, (3) he has the guts to say unpopular things even to his own base and stick to his guns, (4) Hillary can't open her mouth without lying, (5) Hillary's positions change based on polls--i have no problem if someone says "I was wrong" or "I learned new information," but she then pretends her new position was always her position and we are all idiots who misunderstood her and that no meant yes and black meant white, (6) she is startlingly and blatantly corrupt and bought and sold by her paymasters. I don't trust her in any way, shape, or form. I have no idea what she really believes, if anything, or where she draws the line morally or ethically--or if those are just words she uses when convenient. Really I'd rather just have her husband again, at least he seemed to have deeply held beliefs and sincerity about where he's coming from. Hillary is trying to pretend she's a coalminer's daughter who marched at Selma and liberated Auschwitz when all she has done is line her pockets.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I love how screeds against Hillary like yours are really just a recital of right-wing talking points backed up by absolutely no facts, just beliefs that you know must be true because you hate hate hate Hillary so much.

    Lifelong public servant...I could name you multiple programs and policies were pushed by Hillary, whether it be Health Care for kids (CHIP) or pre-K education programs. Maybe you think health care for kids or pre-K education are both big bad government programs, but most people actually think this stuff is good. But again, go ahead keep pretending she has only been in government to benefit herself, no matter the facts.

    Clinton Foundatio, Charity Watch Rating - A. Again you call it corrupt, only because you think it must be. Not because you have any facts backing it up. Allegations of corruption are not the same as corruption, no matter how much you might like them to be.

    Emails. Simply put, this was investigated and she was cleared. Yeah it was careless, and she has admitted as much. And Hillary's seemingly paranoia and penchant for privacy is one of my least favorite things about her (though, she may have some real reason to be paranoid considering the number of ridiculous accusations and investigations that have been leveled at her) Then again, she is not the first government employee or even Secretary of State (Colin Powell also used private email and surprise suprise, no one gave a shit). On the other hand, calling on a foreign nation to compromise our national security, as Trump did, is disgusting and borderline treasonous.

    The next three paragraphs you make statements that are so provably false or ludicrously overstated as to almost be funny. Hillary accused woman who didn't support her of "treason" (never happened), Hillary "silenced" woman who accused Bill of adulterer (not true and pretty silly considering the number of accusers bill had), Hillary was "staunchly" in support of every war and was "staunchly" against gay marriage until recently (many many comments and speeches by Hillary showed she was on the fence on both of these things, like most Democrats at the time, and was otherwise very much in support of gay rights, civil unions, etc.).

    But bottom line, none of this really matters because you are no doubt immune to facts. And really, it is the last reason you give that is the only one that matters to you. She just doesn't "look" authentic enough for you. You have no idea whether her looking up at those balloons is the way she really would act, but you assume it isn't. And I do admit, she isn't particularly charismatic and isn't not as practiced as trump at making confident but idiotic pronouncements, but for some of us this is a positive.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Simply put, this was investigated and she was cleared."

      Hahahahahahahahaha.

      Delete
    2. Well, feel free to ignore me and just keep painting people who back Trump as a bunch of ignorant racists who aren't worth even talking to. That's how the "Remain" campaign in the UK lost, and it's how you'll lose. Arrogance will hoist you by your own petard.

      Delete
    3. It's funny. I never said any of those things. I don't think all Trump supporters are ignorant racists at all. I think many have very valid fears, and those fears are pushing them to back one of the most demogagic bigoted candidate for President the USA has ever seen who is an expert at scamming people with false promises (it's practically his entire resume). But instead of refuting anything I wrote above, you again assume you know me and my politics and know what I think and try to put words in my mouth. Nice try.

      Delete
  9. "Lifelong public servant"

    need I say more?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, if by "public" you mean "self," then that may be true.

      Delete