Well, if Clinton wins (which I think will happen but I'm very superstitious about making predictions like that -- and I can't believe Trump is polling as high as he is), unless we flip the Senate and make inroads in the House, it's going to be more of the Republicans trying to make Obama a one-term president From Charles P. Pierce:
I sort of disagree with Pierce about one thing: they do represent somebody, but it ain't us. If you want to find out who, just look up the financial disclosures from their election campaigns to find out who their big donors are.
This is, I think, one of the real indications of what the Republican party has become -- aside from the isolationism, jingoism, racism, etc., etc., it's the absolute refusal to govern the country unless they get their way. I'm convinced that it's one of the effects of incorporating the "Christian" right into their base: these are people who have a hammerlock on what's right (in their own minds) and they are diametrically opposed to everything this country is about. It wouldn't matter who was president, if he or she were a Democrat we'd get the same reaction from the GOP.
Not that anybody will remember this little thing from Tiger Beat On The Potomac in March of 2017, when everybody will be writing about how Hillary Rodham Clinton's strident rhetoric during the campaign has crippled her ability to govern effectively, or to "reach across the aisle," or to "create bipartisan solutions." But I thought it ought to be noted for the record that the Republican commitment to institutional vandalism will not be going anywhere any time soon, and that there are Republicans—and a few Democrats and faux independents—who see an inert executive to be a political opportunity.
That means the bipartisan show of support she has now—thanks to Donald Trump and the "alt-right," conspiracy-driven campaign Clinton attacked Thursday in Reno—is likely to evaporate as soon as the race is called. If she wins the presidency, Clinton would likely enjoy the shortest honeymoon period of any incoming commander-in-chief in recent history, according to Washington strategists, confronting major roadblocks to enacting her ambitious agenda, as well as Republican attacks that have been muted courtesy of the GOP nominee. "It will be the defining fact of her presidency," Jonathan Cowan, president of the moderate think tank Third Way, said of Clinton's problem of entering office with a divided Congress. "It's unprecedented."
Good Lord, not these people again. They represent nobody. There is no viable constituency for anything they represent. The Republicans are going to be bad enough, but all HRC is going to need is to be heckled from the Joe Lieberman Memorial Peanut Gallery, especially with Zombie Evan Bayh on the verge of reappearing in the Senate, after his sabbatical during which he helped save representative democracy by being a lobbyist.
I sort of disagree with Pierce about one thing: they do represent somebody, but it ain't us. If you want to find out who, just look up the financial disclosures from their election campaigns to find out who their big donors are.
This is, I think, one of the real indications of what the Republican party has become -- aside from the isolationism, jingoism, racism, etc., etc., it's the absolute refusal to govern the country unless they get their way. I'm convinced that it's one of the effects of incorporating the "Christian" right into their base: these are people who have a hammerlock on what's right (in their own minds) and they are diametrically opposed to everything this country is about. It wouldn't matter who was president, if he or she were a Democrat we'd get the same reaction from the GOP.
No comments:
Post a Comment