ith her white pantsuit and those horrifying evil toothy grins, Hillary Clinton only
lacked one thing: a white Persian cat that she could pet throughout the debate.
She matches the stereotype of an obsessed evil dictator perfectly.
(I can even imagine Trump saying, “She's a man, baby!”)
And those crazy eyes. If she drove a car, it'd be one of those clunkers where the right headlight points into the bushes and the left points right into the path of oncoming traffic. At least her new CPU fan is working: she didn't overheat and crash this time.
Welcome to my underground lair
I don't even want to think about Trump's debate performance. He was making great progress at not looking narcissistic, but time and again he let Hillary get away with lying because he didn't know enough about the issues.
Most voters know that this flock of strange women who, as if on cue, suddenly ‘remembered’ being sexually harassed by Trump some 20 or 30 years ago is a typical Democrat trick. Why do women do this? The Democrats try this tactic in every election, knowing that many voters will fall for it. The problem is not Trump's womanizing; it is that he should have taken a crash course on current events. Being a president is more than being a good leader; you have to know stuff.
Jonah Goldberg says the country can survive a Clinton administration, but not a Trump one. I think he's wrong.
It's the dishonesty that annoys me the most. Where I live, there's a commercial from a pro-Clinton group being broadcast every day that accuses Trump of being likely to launch nuclear ICBMs, presumably against Russia. It starts out with a military officer in a nuclear silo talking about how it all depends on self-control, then cuts to some Trump statements, then missiles being launched.
But it's Hillary who's been trying to get the neocons on board with anti-Russia rhetoric. She accuses Trump of being an ally of Putin, then accuses him of wanting to nuke them? That doesn't even make sense.
Few people seem to care: logic is not the left's strong point. But to my mind, it triggers the unspoken corollary to Godwin's law: call somebody a racist, as Hillary did in the debates, or accuse somebody of wanting to start WWIII, and you automatically lose the argument.
Now I admit I rarely watch TV commercials; usually they consist of close-ups of people jamming large greasy hunks of food into their mouths, or they're a series of annoying, blinking images flashed in rapid succession. I only saw the anti-Trump ad by chance.
It convinced me that Trump is by far the more decent candidate. There's a great leader in Trump trying to get out. If he can't do it, the nation will suffer. But if the Never-Trumpers tip the balance against him, they will be excoriated for everything Hillary does, and they will have nobody to blame.
Last edited oct 25, 2016, 6:57am
