Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
I’m with #WomenWhoVoteTrump, Otherwise I’m Stuck with Clinton
Elections are choices, and next month, the American people will effectively choose one of two people to become America’s next president, either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump.
The most recent polls suggest that many Americans are rethinking whether they should support Trump over Clinton because of his crude 2005 interview with Billy Bush, mitigated by his debate performance, but then tested again with allegations of unwanted groping and kissing by assorted women.
We don’t know if the allegations are true — Trump has denied them. But the video is real. And I certainly found Trump’s remarks reprehensible. It’s repulsive to hear a grown man treat women as objects and so cavalierly discuss pursuing women as if they were just points on an ego scoreboard. But it’s also not a surprise.
I grew up with New York tabloids talking about Trump, and paid attention during the primaries — seriously, who can be shocked that in a private setting he talked this way?
But this election, to an even greater degree than most, is not about electing a candidate I like, but one that I dislike less, who will do a less-bad job as president.
There certainly are things Trump could do to lose my support. If the media, for instance, unearthed a recent speech in which Trump said that the public positions on key policy issues are different than his real private views, I’d be rethinking my support.
But that’s not what Trump did, it’s Clinton who proudly admitted to being two-faced on some policy issues.
If the media found an interview with him cheerleading wide open borders, gutting gun rights, or creating a single-payer health care system, I’d have a problem.
If he thought that the president should be able to rewrite major laws through executive orders and the labyrinth of agencies ceaselessly generating regulations that would have me worried.
If he was promising to continue the failed economic policies that have enriched the politically-connected in Washington while destroying opportunity for those in inner cities and Middle America, and making everyday life ever more expensive, that would give me pause.
But those aren’t Trump’s positions — they are Clinton’s.
If Trump said that he would only select judges who thought their job was to advance a liberal political agenda rather than defending the Constitution and leave legislating to the people and their elected representatives, I would hesitate. But that’s not what he has promised; it’s what Clinton promises.
I might decide that Trump wasn’t fit for office if the media uncovered documents that showed that Trump hadn’t actually made his money building his businesses, but rather had amassed millions by using a government position to wring hefty payments for speeches and for his foundation from bankers and foreign governments.
But it wasn’t Trump who built a fortune exploiting government power — that was Clinton and her family.
I might be concerned if we knew that once Trump was in office, the deep institutional self-serving corruption which has corroded the integrity of the IRS, the VA, apparently the State Department, and now the FBI, would continue. Because countries survive bad leaders, but once their institutions become deeply corrupt, restoring integrity and trust is incredibly difficult.
But Trump is the broom to clean out the Augean stables that is Washington — it’s Clinton who is the embodiment of this cozy, unscrupulous dishonesty.
I’d be worried if I thought that in a Trump presidency the media would downplay all scandals and evidence of corruption and abuse of power.
But we know that the media will be the most attentive watch dog if Trump is president, followed by many in the GOP themselves, ready to pounce on anything that would be remotely out of bounds, while Clinton will enjoy the same sycophantic treatment that she always enjoyed: Excuses of misplaced evidence are accepted, repeated claims of not remembering when deposed are not a matter of concern, and complaints of corruption and wrongdoing poo-pooed as mindless conspiracy theories or dismissed as old news.
New Clinton email describes @maggieNYT as a “friendly journalist” who has “teed up” stories and “never disappointed” https://t.co/HL67S6vjKW
— The Intercept (@theintercept) October 9, 2016
I’d be appalled if Trump truly disrespected women: If I learned he was complacent about practices that would put the nation’s — and women’s — security at risk, or if I saw him asking women on his staff to do illegal things, like destroying evidence, to protect his sorry self.
Or if I saw him lying to women across the country that they could keep their healthcare and their doctors and their costs would go down, or hear him call large numbers of women “deplorable” and “irredeemable,” or touting that he had hired women because they were women, not because they were individuals who were good at what they do.
But Trump doesn’t disrespect the women in his life, his business, on the campaign trail, or in this nation; it is Hillary who jeopardizes us, lies to us, and disrespects us, and who is the worse role model for my children.
Yes, just about everyone has said that this is an election of imperfect choices. That’s true. Yet for me, it’s still an easy choice to make.
Voting for Trump does not mean condoning his lewd comments or behavior, it simply means faced with two choices, one is clearly better than the other.
When it comes to rebuilding the economy so that it works for American families, having a court that adheres to the Constitution and respects the will of the people, and creating a government that is accountable to the people and not corrupted by its service of the politically-connected, Trump is far superior to Hillary on just about every measure.
Cross-posted at The Hill.
Published in General
Thank you, @heatherhiggins, I agree.
Exactly my sentiments. At one point a few weeks ago I thought I could even vote for Trump without holding my nose. Then came The Video and my gut reaction was to abandon him and write in Mike Pence since my state Oregon is already deep in the tank for Hillary and my vote does not matter. But reason has returned, and once again I’ll hold my nose…
You are assuming he had a belief system.
The subject was a grain of truth in a parcel of lies, and one’s tendency to confirmation bias… and that this is true on both sides of the aisle. The linked post, which contains a few true statements, illustrated this.
Actually, what is ludicrous (and unhelpful in a discussion) is your unsupported, unreasoned claim about the statement. Clearly the election is binary, even if the individual choice about which lever to pull is not. Not voting or voting for an third party candidate simple allows all the other voters ()at least those who vote either Hillary or Donald) to make the choice for you.
Sorry, after several months of this I’m just depressed about this 4th grade social studies understanding of politics.
Yet another comment devoid of any shared reasoning. Exactly what do you accuse of being “4th grade social studies understanding” and how do you justify that position?
It shouldn’t need reasoning. It didn’t used to need reasoning. Quite a lot has been written about politics over the last many centuries. I can’t recall any volumes about the centrality of the binary nature of voting in human political behavior.
But, put simply, if picking who one likes best is at the core of one’s political thinking then one isn’t doing much political thinking at all.
If you’d like an example of someone who thinks politically, then pick up a stone and toss it blindfolded at the half of the country that’s winning.
Vague comments without supporting reasoning come across as arrogant. It that is your desire, OK.
Simple. In a two party system, elections are binary, even if the voter has more choices.
All choices are emotional. I am saying that we should choose to vote against the corrupt candidate, even if the other is crude.Huh?
Huh? It is not at all clear what you are intending to say here.
I think Jonah Goldberg has both talked at length about his objections to Trump. I don’t think his views could be characterized as a simple disdain.
I don’t think too many people are NeverTrump because he’s crude. His untrustworthiness, lack of knowledge, and lack of conservatism are much bigger issues.
You think Trump is sincere in his Pro-life stances and his position that Planned Parenthood does great work?
His praise for single prayer plans for Europe and recent support for Obamacare don’t give you pause then?
So his plans to restrict trade, price people out of jobs and raise consumer prices don’t give you any pause for thought and need to rethink you support?
So Trump’s promise to order war crimes and ignore treaty obligations don’t make you hesitate to support Trump?
A broom that is all handle and no bristles.
Oh if any of that were true… I understand finding Clinton unacceptable, I certainly do, but by the very measures you find Clinton unacceptable Trump is also unacceptable. He is not going to clean anything out, Trump likes muck as long as it works for him.
My desire is to get in a comment before cleaning up after the dog. I don’t live on the Internet.
And the reason I don’t spend time to go deeper later is that I find myself getting into this kind of thing. Conservatives just want to show up on game day and win. And they think that win means something.
Non-liberals don’t know what they want, they don’t know what victory looks like, they don’t engage in politics, and then they reduce everything to an election day choice and get upset about losing.
If you want to win, do politics. If you don’t want to do politics then don’t bother joining in on game day.
Heather Higgins (swoon) … doing the job other Ricochet Contributors won’t do.
I guess you need a dog that does not poop in the house!
He’s learning.
I
But slowly, I guess.
Actually,after only 6 weeks, he’s learning and adapting quickly.
He must be a Democrat.
@columbo So Heather applying standards to Clinton that she refuses to apply to Trump since that would mean that she could supporter neither candidate is doing a job the other commentators wouldn’t do? That is good who would want that job?
I like to call it …. Comprehensive Contribution Reform.
Jobs other Contributors won’t do.
Thank you @heatherhiggins !!!
Is this a trick question? ‘Cuz, ahh . . . I hate shooting fish in a barrel but you’ve left me no choice.
How well did that work out for Arnold? From Governor of a State with more citizens than Canada to . . . uhh . . . yeah, doing ads for game software.
That’s why: It. Doesn’t. Work.
Trump’s smart enough and un-PC enough to have figured that out. And he’s burnt his bridges during this campaign. Arnold was a Hollywood-Kennedy-Clan-Appendage. I’m not seeing the same pedigree in The Donald.
But, the bottom line is probabilities: Trump may disappoint every bit as much as Arnold did. You can’t predict that future any better than I can. What we can say is there’s ZERO probability Clinton will do anything to get this country back on track from a center-right perspective.
Any probability that Trump will do the right things for America that’s higher than ZERO makes him the only smart choice.
The only condition for which this logic fails is if you really aren’t center-right.
But go ahead . . . prove me wrong. Create the word salad that makes Hillary more likely to do what’s best for America from a center-right perspective. I’ll pop corn while I wait for your reply.
I did not argue that Goldberg’s objections are “simple” or lack substance. For arguments sake, let’s stipulate that they are pure distilled reason, the essence of 5000 years of human evolution, culminating in Western Civilization.
It’s as though you didn’t read the rest of what you clipped from my comment. NONE. OF. THAT. MATTERS. COMPARED. TO. CLINTON. WITH. PRESIDENTIAL. POWERS.
That will be more nearly the essence of evil, 5000 years of Beelzebub’s evolution distilled into one cretin.
BTW – “disdain” is a perfectly serviceable one-word summation of Goldberg’s and Hayes’s view of Trump. Of course one can’t do justice to their (tens of?) thousands of written words on the topic in one word, but do you doubt they disdain him?
So let me get this straight: trustworthiness, knowledge, and conservatism are points in Hillary’s favor?
You’re a center-right Ricochetian, voting for Hillary on the basis of her relative trustworthiness, knowledge, and conservatism?
That is certainly the trolliest trolling I’ve ever had the pleasure of laughing at! [:-)))
Attention Pins; time to meet your Bowling Ball.
Clinton . . . trustworthy . . . BAAAAAAAA!!!!!
Sure. That’ll show’em. Of course, one will be your President either way. But you will have made a stand for . . . what exactly? Your bi-partisan opposition to moral flaws?
That’s not the best argument for Jeb! or McConnell . . . it’s the only argument.
The “best” argument for Trump is he’ll build that damn wall and spark a counterinsurgency against the Left’s hostile takeover of Freedom’s indispensable homeland.
Jeb Bush would surrender on every important issue while tenaciously defending everything of secondary importance, and puffing his chest out all the while.
McConnell hopes no one notices he’ll have been on Capitol Hill 36 years when his current term ends, since obviously he’ll need a sixth term to achieve his life-long goal of becoming an octogenarian senator with 40+ years on Capitol Hill. . . what higher calling can there possibly be?
You normally don’t see such obvious hypocrisy so fulsomely praised. But in the age of Trump all things are possible…
If you way over estimate Clinton’s power, political skills and savvy. Trump destroying the Republican party, incompetently handling foreign affairs and ushering in an age of unchecked Democrat power could easily be far worse than a likely one term Hillary adminstration.
No of course not. Is what you are saying is that since the Democrats have untrustworthy, ill informed, an unconservative nominees that the Republicans should have the same kind of Candidates? Why?
Why would he be voting for Hillary? Why would any anyone really vote for Hillary or Trump?
You think his comment was a troll because you misread it so completely.
Trump wouldn’t even know what a counterinsurgency or why we need one. Since his instincts or lefty he will be very unlikely to lead any kind of movement against leftism but instead will make it bi-partisan and try to mix up who the winners and losers are a bit.
Not at all what he did in Florida. He crushed the left her so completely they still have not recovered. His record of actual accomplishment puts him far, far to the right of Donald Trump.