I went on a bit of a ranty-pants tear the other night on Twitter whilst coming down off the high that was SDCC, and so I’ve gone ahead and Storified it here, with some additional thoughts added below for your amusement, edification, or irritation —
This election is really something special.
And it’s something special in the way that watching a dog eat a baby is special. It’s not a special you want, but it’s the special you get, and you really can’t look away despite your greatest desire to do so. It should be awesome and unparalleled because Clinton represents for all the girls and women in this country something they have not yet seen before, but it’s also unparalleled because we have Orangutan Mussolini, because we have the cult of Bernie gone rogue from Bernie the man in order to worship the ideals of Bernie the imago, and because somehow, third parties are gaining some traction here.
I feel like that’s so, so bizarre. I just — I cannot comprehend what’s happening.
Let’s just get this out of the way: I like Hillary Clinton. I do not consider her the lesser of two evils. I do not consider her evil. I do consider her a politician, which is sensible because she is one. She is a progressive politician who knows how to play the game, and I want someone like that on our side. I know some liberals have railed at her for changing her tune and getting on board with certain progressive causes — but that’s actually how it’s supposed to work. Her opinion and policy is not supposed to be fixed to the table with a nail. She’s supposed to duck and feint — when we tell her, “Hey, get on board with this shit,” and then she does it, that’s not waffling, that’s not an act of prevarication — that’s called her listening, responding, and course correcting. Now, as a politician, I also recognize that she is far from perfect. But we lionized Obama and while we got an amazing menu of accomplishments, we also got, yanno, drone strikes. I know it sounds pedantic, but I like to think I live in the real world where ennnh, this shit is going to be messier than I like, and I’m really not capable of even imagining the burden it must take to lead not only the country but to take that country out and to face the chaos of the world beyond it.
So: Clinton. I like her. She’s progressive, legitimately. She’s imperfect, but imperfect in the direction I prefer. No scandal has stuck to her because the evidence doesn’t mount. It just doesn’t work. Sure, sure, “where there’s smoke,” you say, except you’re ignoring the fact that the GOP has been at her feet since she stepped into the White House, lighting a kindling of newspaper under her shows and fanning the smoke up all around here — again and again.
And yet, I see a lot of progressives who hate her.
Like, fucking hate her.
And I see them believing all the stuff that isn’t even true. (And yes, I know there are very real and very fair criticisms of Clinton, too — again, see Obama and drone strikes, or FDR and internment camps, or or or.)
And I see them still championing Bernie, like he will somehow split his flesh and his spirit will separate from it, becoming the MANY-HANDED SOCIALIST ANGEL they believed him to be all along — taking us all to a magical promiseland where the tickets only cost $27.
And I see them championing Jill Stein or Gary Johnson — and that latter bit is especially puzzling, given how far apart Johnson and Sanders are politically. You jump from Bernie to Gary and, yeah, maybe you’re not that fucking progressive, hoss. All this in the face of the fact that voting for a third party is a literally worthless endeavor. Like I said above: you get two boxes. You have the illusion of more, but you drop your vote into one and it goes into this series of tangled pneumatic tubes and ends up in Trump or Clinton’s box. We do not have a system that rewards third parties. We just don’t. That’s unfortunate, but it’s a little late to change that now. Change it over the next four years. Stack the decks with candidates up the chain. You don’t start with the presidency.
All this is completely fucking baffling.
Even if you don’t like Clinton, what the shit? You’re really okay with a Trump presidency? Are you? Because, lemme guess — you’re white. Probably straight. Maybe a lad. A Trump presidency won’t hurt you all that much. Maybe in some off-chance it’ll even help you. But women? LGBTQIA? People of color? Who do you think is going to be likelier to believe that Black Lives Matter — Hillary, or Trump? Who do you think is going to actually work for LGBTQIA rights? Who do you think will protect Planned Parenthood, or abortion rights, or women in the workplace? Trump sees women as a series of tits all just lining up for him to ogle and squeeze. And never mind the fact that Trump has a de facto alliance with Putin — sure, that’s not terrifying at all, that the Russians are actively trying to put Trump on the throne. It’s fine. That’s all fine. Nothing weird about that. I’m sure the country will be in great hands. Tiny-fingered, tanner-smeared dictator hands. The best hands. So good, those hands. Anybody who doesn’t have those hands?
Sad!
The politician versus the plague.
One is imperfect. But the other will lead us all to ruin.
It’s like —
Imagine a garden.
This garden will be our food source for four years.
We all voted on what foods will go in that garden and we voted to plant eggplant, okra, kale.
And you’re like, “But I hate those.”
And we’re like, “No, yeah, sure, I get that, but they’re healthy, even if they’re not ideal to you personally — and we all voted and this is the garden we’re going with. It’ll keep us alive, it’ll maintain the soil for the next gardener, it’ll give us energy to continue on not just surviving but growing our community.”
And you’re like, “But I hate them. They’re gross.”
And we say, “Yes, but please understand — it’s this garden or we instead have to go into the woods to eat like, random mushrooms. They’re quite likely to poison many of us. And they won’t really sustain us. There’s no evidence at all that we can survive if we go out there.”
“But I hate eggplant.”
“Buuuuuut toxic mushrooms.”
“Okra? Ew, no.”
“Toxic. Motherfucking. Mushrooms. Not fun trippy mushrooms. Not healthy, edible mushrooms. The kind you eat and then you get stomach cramps and then you shit out your own bowels on the forest floor. And also Dave saw wolves out there. Wolves, man. Here we have a garden. It’s safe.”
“Kale, though. You hipster shit. Kale? I vote we burn the garden down and salt the ground and go into the woods because the giant question mark about how well we will fare against poisonous shrooms and starveling wolves is better to me than having to suck it up and eat my vegetables.”
“But you can’t just vote for yourself to leave. You’re voting for the tribe. If you vote we all go, we all have to go out there. And we all have a pretty good idea what’s waiting out there for us, so please, no. It’s not just about you. It’s about us.”
“Meh, it’s about me. It’s about what I want. Personal liberty trumps the needs of the community. Now excuse me as I take a scalding dump on this bag of seeds, because seriously, vegetables are really gross. YUCKY FACE. Let’s blow this pop stand, nerds!”
It’s not that I don’t understand the people who really want a kind of revolution — the problem is, if you just want revolution in any direction, you’re dangerous. You want revolution in a progressive direction, fine — but we’re not going to get that. We’re going to get pragmatism. We’re going to get compromise. And I think those can be features, not bugs. Sure, I understand that incremental progress is not as sexy as FLIPPING TABLES AND DEMANDING JUSTICE, but progress is still progress. And Trump is the antithesis of that. Trump genuinely wants to dismantle everything. He wants to wipe his ass with the Constitution. He wants to destroy social programs. He doesn’t even want the fucking job, really. He just wants the chair and the sash and the crown. Pence will be our “manager” while Trump takes the mantle of Trumpmerica, then when we’re bankrupt he’ll sell us off to Russia and fuck off to some island where he can cavort with the rest of his Greasy Marmoset People until death. Everything we are and everything that aids us — he wants it gone. Your third party vote will never elect a third party president. It really, seriously won’t. I know! That’s a huge bummer. I mean that. I get that it’s very upsetting that the political system has delivered unto you the illusion of many boxes when all you get is two. And I get that Bernie woulda been your guy, and now he’s Hillary’s guy instead, and I understand that upsets you, too. But incremental progress is better than setting fire to everything. Moving forward — even more slowly than we’d like — is better than than shoving everything we’ve gained into a cannon and then firing that cannon at a line of porta-johns.
I need you to hunker down. I need you to toughen up.
I need you to vote for the conscience of the tribe, not for you.
We all need it.
Don’t send us out into the dark forest.
Let’s grow the garden together.
Let’s keep the ground fertile.
Let us maintain what we have and build on it.
Let’s help each other instead of kicking it all into dust.
In other words: eat your damn vegetables.
conniejjasperson says:
Well, if pithily, put, sir. Said in ways I wouldn’t have thought of, but wish I had.
July 26, 2016 — 1:30 PM
Nickie Asher says:
I wouldn’t trust Clinton with feeding my pets for a week.
July 26, 2016 — 1:37 PM
terribleminds says:
Why?
July 26, 2016 — 1:46 PM
Nickie Asher says:
I’d be afraid she would let them starve to death. She isn’t exactly trustworthy, is she?
July 26, 2016 — 1:49 PM
terribleminds says:
That doesn’t really answer why, though.
What is the evidence that she is untrustworthy? What goes into that calculation for you, if you don’t mind answering?
July 26, 2016 — 1:51 PM
terribleminds says:
And the followup: do you feel Trump would do a better job feeding your pets?
Do you feel him more trustworthy, and why?
July 26, 2016 — 1:51 PM
Hamnerd says:
HAHAHAHA! I just got this visual:
Trump: “I know pets! Nobody knows pets better than me. Your cat is gonna be HUUUUUGE.”
Hamnerd: “My cat is already huge.”
I’m voting Hillary!
July 26, 2016 — 2:21 PM
BillyHigginsPeery says:
How often Hillary Clinton lies: http://www.politifact.com/personalities/hillary-clinton/
How often Donald Trump lies: http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/
July 26, 2016 — 2:17 PM
Nickie Asher says:
There’s plenty of evidence. Go look for it. And frankly, I wouldn’t trust very many people to feed anything for me, since you were wondering. Clinton is a pile of dung, unfit to run a shit house, much less the White House.
July 26, 2016 — 3:36 PM
Becky says:
Okay, but we have two choices here. Would you rather have Trump? That’s literally the only question that matters.
July 26, 2016 — 4:41 PM
Pavowski says:
Place Clinton at whatever level you like, but the question must be asked: you really think Trump is better?
July 26, 2016 — 4:58 PM
DF Voice says:
Um… you came in the comment thread and dropped an assertion. Can you back it up? If you have evidence, offer it. Don’t say ‘go look for it’, like hunting the internet to back up YOUR opinions is OUR job. If you want to convince US, then tell us WHY.
July 27, 2016 — 6:59 AM
terribleminds says:
So, you have no evidence.
July 27, 2016 — 10:29 AM
Chris Crawford says:
Read between the lines. She wasn’t exonerated by the FBI, she was excused. A key member of her 2008 election team became head of the DNC, resigned under pressure because of unsavory tactics, and then was re-hired. The Clinton Foundation may have broken federal laws as well.
If we were talking about a Republican, I’m guessing you’d have little issues with distrusting them based on what we know. I have no problem with anybody supporting Clinton, or believing she is ultimately innocent. But don’t try and pretend there’s no reason to be suspicious.
July 27, 2016 — 10:49 AM
PST (@pstaylor) says:
The one complicating factor here is that part of the Republican’s strategy has been to make her appear untrustworthy. That’s why they’ve doubled down on her emails and had 8,000 hearings on Benghazi. The goal isn’t so much to prove she’s done something wrong (and even after spending millions of taxpayer dollars, they haven’t), but to cast suspicion on her. And in that respect they’ve worked amazingly well.
July 27, 2016 — 11:43 AM
Robin Claire says:
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
July 26, 2016 — 1:40 PM
Beth Turnage says:
I had lunch with one of the founders of the Green Party, and well, all they are looking to do this election is to get enough of a slice of the voters to get government funding for the next election. So they know Jill Stein isn’t going to make a serious dent for them. But what it might do, as it has in the past, ala Ralph Nader, is chip away enough at the Democratic vote to do some damage. This is, BTW, why the GOP donors gave money to the Nader campaign during the Bush/Gore presidential race.
I with you Chuck. You said it just right. I support Hillary.
July 26, 2016 — 1:43 PM
annerallen says:
Thank you Chuck. <3 Vote for the politician or vote for the Kremlin. Are politicians always trustworthy? No. Are demented con men always trustworthy? Um, in a sense, yes. They can always be trusted to screw you.
Love this: "it’s about me. It’s about what I want. Personal liberty trumps the needs of the community."
These people are like the guy who kills the girl and maybe her family when she turns him down. "If I can't have her, nobody can. It's all about me!"
Hey, a vote for Ralph Nader brought us George W. Bush and the Gulf War and ISIS and the Patriot Act and endless war in the Middle East no action on Climate Change and all that good stuff. Think what a vote for Jill Stein can do!!
July 26, 2016 — 2:04 PM
Rev. Leslie Aguillard says:
Hey, if you had my gumbo, you’d like the okra. Fried is okay, too. Yes, I’m a Bernie long time supporter and though I don’t like Hillary, I will vote for her. She is a politician. She is progressive. Trump is totally an embarassing ugly american lunatic who believes he can buy anyone and anything and now I have to pray he is wrong about that.
July 26, 2016 — 2:17 PM
Rev. Bob says:
I eat fried okra like popcorn. Or popcorn shrimp. Or popcorn chicken. What else do they make popcorn-style? But I digress.
I voted for Bernie in the primary. I’m disappointed that he lost… but he DID lose.
One of my friends has compared this election to Hitler vs. Nixon vs. third-party candidates. Okay, sure. Let’s look at that.
Gary Johnson is on every state ballot, unless he missed one or two. He COULD win, in theory, if everything went just right. But it’s not going to happen. It would require the GOP base to jump ship in a huge way that the polls don’t even HINT at as possible.
Jill Stein is presently on 23 state ballots. That’s not enough to win. A vote for her is wasted. Sad, but true. No other third-party candidate even comes that close.
That leaves “Hitler vs. Nixon.” That’s not even a contest, even if I believed the worst even remotely credible allegations against Hillary. (As a bumper sticker said not long ago, “Vote for the crook. It’s important.”) Whatever Hillary may have done, she is competent in a way that Trump simply is not. I’m not jumping for joy about pulling the lever for her – but I’m doing it anyway, just like I’m voting for downballot Democrats so she can get shit DONE if (when, please, WHEN) elected.
I live in a deep red state. You could run a rotting tree stump with an (R) by its name and it would win. (That may have happened.) So my vote may not affect anything… but I have to try.
Because it’s important.
July 26, 2016 — 7:02 PM
Jamie says:
Yes, thank you. Yes, yes. You said what I think, only better.
July 26, 2016 — 2:21 PM
janinmi says:
Clinton/Kaine 2016. That is all.
July 26, 2016 — 2:23 PM
SamKD says:
I’m doing my part and voting Clinton/Kaine but I still wouldn’t bet more than $5 either way on the election outcome. In the past 9 months I’ve seen the Ghostbusters 2 river of slime burst forth into an amazing army of hate-babies everywhere I turn.
July 26, 2016 — 2:43 PM
otterpoet says:
Regrettably, we live in an era where people think ‘Demagogue’ is a Pokémon…
July 26, 2016 — 2:44 PM
Ken McGovern says:
Chuck I can appreciate your passion about our country and I do believe that what you want is what you believe is best for this country. I applaud you for using your voice to help other less represented groups in the “systems” we have today.
The real problem, as I see it, is that either “established party” is really just the same product packaged differently. Our foreign policy is still a mess, it has been a mess since the Reagan era and has held the same trajectory since then regardless of what party is in office. We still send our young men and women to secure assets and strengthen relationships for big business (aka corporate interests) and the military industry.
That brings me to what I feel is the issue with the eradication of the middle class – faceless corporations bent on growth that is in their interest and not the countries. Ever since Reagan started this mess with deregulation, faceless corporations (mostly bankers) have been running around creating monopolies and reducing the amount of 2nd class jobs in America. You can blame the Republicans for this and they certainly started the ball rolling but this didn’t change with Bill Clinton, nor did it change with Obama. We are still experiencing a mass decline of the middle class and an unbalance of wealth.
I think that a change is needed. We need to start choosing politicians not because they are charismatic or speak well or are from this group or that group. We need to chose our leaders by the fact that they are intelligent decision makers, they support and will IMPLEMENT THE CHANGES THE CITIZENS WANT. I no longer feel either party has representatives who aren’t in the pockets of lobbyists and won’t follow the script as it is laid out before them by the corporations or design our foreign policy to support the military industrial complex.
I think it is a mistake to not vote for a third party if you no longer trust the elephants or donkeys. I think that it will be an uphill climb and it may be the steepest climb this country will have to make. Putting this challenge off for another four years only allows the establishment to continue to eliminate our options.
I suggest voting for the representative that will make America what the people want not what the corporations want. If you feel it requires a third party then that is how you should vote. Why wait until later to do the task. It is no different than writing. You need to start so you can FINISH YOUR SHIT.
Until we stop letting the political process separate us, making us fight one another over the means while we all want the same result, we will never be unified. We will never be able to make the country as we would have it be.
July 26, 2016 — 2:50 PM
Susan Winchell says:
Ken — I agree with everything you say about how the status quo is failing its citizens in terms of income inequality and the fact that the power now seems to lie with money and business/corporations at the expense of the interests of the vast majority of us. (I think it’s a little unfair to lump all “lobbyists” together, since most progressive groups also have “lobbyists”, and “lobbyists” are a way that ALL interest groups maneuver through Washington.) And I appreciate your feeling that the line must be drawn somewhere for individuals and their citizen actions. But I’m a pragmatist. Is the best place to draw this line really the Presidential election? Especially this Presidential election, when we have a real possibility of electing a man who is completely unsuited for the job, and who would set the progressive cause back for, possibly, decades? And doesn’t this kind of change really happen in between, at the local and state level, and in Congressional elections? And in how we engage with our communities every day? It is remarkable — and a hopeful sign — that the Sanders phenomenon has pushed the Dems to create a platform that includes so many of the important issues he has talked about for the past year. At this point, the only way to advance those important issues is to elect Hillary and then hold the Dems feet to the fire.
Anyway, thanks for sharing your thoughts. This is all so vexing and troubling!
July 26, 2016 — 3:36 PM
Ken McGovern says:
Susan thanks for your reply and a couple of thoughts I have rattling in my brain over your response.
You were correct in lumping lobbyists together when I should have discussed the lobbying process, namely the change in policy where money is now considered speech and therefore is protected by free speech laws and that I feel has been taken advantage of by corporations. thank you for your clarification on that.
Second. I don’t think not voting for Hillary means a vote for Trump. I am suggesting that Americans look for other candidates that lie outside the two party establishment. I for one am tired of the candidates both parties offer. I don’t presume to have all of the answers but I feel that continuing down the same path will only create similar results.
I also would agree with you on more levels than the Presidency but that is not what the post was about so I focused on the Presidency although I should have included local, state and congressional candidates.
I believe it is time we as a peopl come together, stop letting party allegiances divide us and come up with how we America to be and how we want it to treat the rest of the world. I feel this country has lost a sense of self, of community. I think if we start there and define what it is what we want rather than looking at what the candidates present us then we can find a candidate that meets our needs.
And to quote the lyrics of Rage Against the Machine (although I don’t think “rage” is necessary) It has to start somewhere. It has to start sometime. What better place than here? What better time than now?
July 26, 2016 — 4:28 PM
terribleminds says:
“I am suggesting that Americans look for other candidates that lie outside the two party establishment. I for one am tired of the candidates both parties offer. I don’t presume to have all of the answers but I feel that continuing down the same path will only create similar results.”
Then you will need electoral reform before a third party makes a viable run at the oval office.
The third party candidates will not win.
If you want to “start somewhere,” start at smaller races and at pushing and building a base that will provide electoral reform. You don’t start at the top.
Two boxes.
We have two boxes.
Clinton, or Trump.
July 27, 2016 — 10:28 AM
Anonymous Poster says:
Here’s a fun game to play: Look up how many members the NRA has, then calculate the percentage of Americans that is a part of the NRA. Never mind, I’ll play it for you—it is around one-tenth of one percent of the total United States population. Now, how does the NRA manage to control gun policy for practically the entire US despite having a membership base of less than one percent of this country’s population?
They do the work.
No, I don’t mean they buy politicians. (I mean, yes, they do that, too. Stay with me.) What I mean is that they have a bunch of people willing to contact Congress at any time and ask for their votes in favor of laws which the NRA approves of. They have people willing to come out to rallies and show support for the NRA and do everything they can to vote NRA-friendly politicians into office. The NRA does the work to get what the NRA wants.
More than voting certain people into office, doing the work—that is, telling politicians that you’d like them to vote a certain way on a law or issue—is the most important thing you can do as a citizen. No, I can’t promise that you’ll “win” every time if you do the work. But showing up to do the work is how the NRA and its membership “wins”. Their efforts bear fruit because they didn’t sit on their asses and eat nachos all day.
You can vote anyone you want into office, even the politicians with whom you agree on major issues. But you have to hold them accountable for their votes. Regardless of whether they vote in a way you like or dislike, you have to tell them so.
They’re the tribe leaders—but you’re part of the tribe, and you still get a say.
July 26, 2016 — 10:31 PM
Anastacia says:
Fcnl.org, I’ve lobbied for them on special training citizen days around reducing military budgets and climate change
July 27, 2016 — 3:19 PM
Laurel Avery says:
Ken, I agree 100%. Voting for the lesser evil is still voting for evil. And yes, I put Clinton in that category as well. Different than Trump (who I would also never vote for), but certainly not progressive and decidedly in the pockets of the big banks. Large numbers of people need to vote third party to break the duopoly that is our government. Two parties who basically differ in name only, who have not represented the majority of the American people for decades now. Grow some balls, people, and stop voting from a base of fear. For once in your lives, vote for the leaders you really want to see in office.
July 27, 2016 — 7:34 AM
terribleminds says:
No.
This is patently false.
Two parties do not differ in name only. They are widely, predictably, easily different — and it’s not hard to actually show how they’re different, either, which suggests you’re engaging in some rhetorical flourishes to make a point.
I voted for the leader I want in office, and that person is Clinton. However, even if she wasn’t my ideal candidate, newsflash: you get two boxes. Two. Boxes. Your third party desires are impossible. They’re impossible for a number of reasons: lack of electoral reform, the fact that historically it’s never happened, the fact that any question of primacy will fall to Congress to rectify (meaning they’ll elect Trump). It will not happen. If you actually believe that Clinton and Trump are the same, you have some reading to do.
July 27, 2016 — 10:20 AM
PST (@pstaylor) says:
I used to work for a nonprofit that was advocating for policies that promoted clean energy and reduced climate change. The difference having an D in office rather than an R was ginormous. Ginormous. So much of what Obama’s EPA has done would be unthinkable under Republican leadership, and if an R is elected they will dismantle the EPA as quickly as possible. And that is one issue area. There is a huge, huge difference between the two parties. Sure, it’s the difference between center right and far right, but that is still a very important difference.
Also, who’s to say that progressivism is the answer? We’ve had six years of hardline tea party republicans in office, which are far right ideologues with little governing experience who stick to their principles and don’t compromise. That’s been shitty for the country. Why would a liberal version of that work any better? Why would a doctor with zero governing experience make a good presidential candidate? She would have no idea what the fuck she’s doing. Is that what we want? Someone with zero experience but a lot of unfounded confidence? Isn’t that what trump is?
July 27, 2016 — 12:04 PM
terribleminds says:
Third parties do not fit into our electoral process. Which is a shame. It is. But they don’t fit. They’re a puzzle piece with an odd, ill-fitting border. We need to make them a place before we can give them a presidency.
And voting for third party this time will give us Trump.
This is historically true, by the way. This isn’t like, just fear-mongering. This is how you get Bush, or Harper, or various politicians at various levels. You throw your vote at the unicorn and then it vanishes, and through the puff of smoke emerges Our Worst Enemy who is very glad we fell for the legerdemain once again. The trick that ALL PARTIES AND ALL CANDIDATES ARE EQUAL. Except they’re not. One will murder everything we’ve built. The other will curate it.
— c.
July 27, 2016 — 10:32 AM
Andrew F. Butters says:
So glad that you mentioned Harper, and voting for our Hillary (Justin Trudeau) was the only way to stop the madness. I wrote about it, even, in kind of an open letter to all Canadians (which was ultimately seen by no fewer than two dozen of them!)
http://www.potatochipmath.com/2015/09/what-are-you-voting-for.html
Careful, American friends, Donald Trump along with a Republican controlled Congress and Senate will be the worst thing that’s ever happened to your country. Four years will go by and 75% of you will be standing in the street, homeless, skin peeling and filled with puss from disease, wondering what day of the week it is and whatever happened to all the legitimately good shows on Discovery Channel.
July 27, 2016 — 3:09 PM
Carl says:
When the choice is between living with the status quo and burning down the house, I guess the only question that matters is “How much do you like the house?”
July 26, 2016 — 3:01 PM
Brittany Constable says:
Or, you know, “Who’s still inside the house that maybe won’t be able to get out?” Because you’re not the only one here, man.
July 31, 2016 — 7:49 PM
Toni says:
This.
August 7, 2016 — 5:05 PM
Susan Winchell says:
Thank you! I just love the way you put things into perspective. I am also mystified at the degree of vitriol directed at Hillary. I absolutely can not fathom how any intelligent and/or educated person is at all conflicted about what the right choice is here — which maybe is a failure of imagination on my part. I don’t know. As you point out, she is not perfect, but she hangs in there and has a perspective and a point of view that is transparent and, in broad terms, has been consistent over time. The belief that she is somehow untrustworthy is simply not borne out by actual facts. She has devoted her entire professional life to public service. I don’t know why anyone would put up with the crap she has put up with for 30 years, especially since she could have just gone home and eaten bon bons — or pursued a lucrative private sector career — if she wanted to. As Michelle said, she is a leader with a demonstrated track record of not backing down, not giving up, and fighting for what she believes is right. That is who we need to lead us into the future. THANKS again!
July 26, 2016 — 3:14 PM
Louis Shalako says:
Nice use of the Hieronymus Bosch illustration.
July 26, 2016 — 3:44 PM
Susan Jett says:
Hell yes. Thank you for writing this. It needs to be said over & over, in as many ways as it’s possible for human brains to process, until it sinks in. Tea vs. a magma enema is pretty much the best metaphor I’ve heard for the nightmare that is this election. Thank you. Going to go share this, now…
July 26, 2016 — 3:50 PM
bertie says:
I thank you for your excellent post. It boggles my mind that any sane person would vote for a racist demagogue who is bound to destroy what is left of our Constitution. I would have enjoyed seeing Bernie in the White House, but will happily vote for Hillary. I’m hoping when the voting is over in November, that we can say, “Mr. Trump, you’re fired!”
July 26, 2016 — 4:08 PM
pinklightsabre says:
That was worth every minute I spent here. Thanks for saying it your way. Bull’s eye, three of them.
July 26, 2016 — 4:18 PM
Elizabeth Marling says:
It’s Ralph Nader all over again. I am amazed that a group of people who pride themselves on things like education, science, and progress are about to repeat mistakes made in the very recent past that many argue were disastrous to our nation. Nader lost the election for Al Gore. Remember that? It just happened! It is literally about to happen again. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing again and expecting a different result.
As far as I am concerned, the democratic party is at risk of losing its collective mind. What is going on? Get it together people. Do you want another George W Bush? Because I’m starting to think that many of you do.
July 26, 2016 — 4:23 PM
J. A. Allen says:
Boom. Well played.
July 26, 2016 — 4:24 PM
Wendy Christopher says:
America my dears, you have only recently watched Britland fuggle up Brexit. Please do not emulate our mistake. You need a president who does NOT hate anyone who is the ‘wrong’ colour or gender or follows the ‘wrong’ religion. We screwed up, but you don’t have to – there’s still hope!
July 26, 2016 — 5:09 PM
Melissa Clare says:
I don’t like Hillary Clinton, nor do I hate her. I completely understand the fact that many people in the country feel she’s a pretty bitter pill to swallow – the analogy to vegetables isn’t a great one; vegetables are good for you. It’s like should we eat the shit sandwich, which will taste gross but not kill us, or should we chug gasoline and chase it with a lit zippo. By which I mean: vote for Hillary.
Why do I dislike her? Her ego and entitlement are eclipsing the sun. Every indication is that this is a woman with a wall of yes-men around her, someone not only cut off from dissenting opinions and the real world but who feels that, because she’s put up with attacks over the years, all criticism of her has no merit and she can ignore it. Why did she feel entitled to her own email server? It was a stupid move, even if it wasn’t illegal. Why is she giving Debbie W-S a position in her campaign? Why not choose a more progressive VP? Clinton doesn’t ever act conciliatory. And while that can sometimes be a strength, all these actions start to add up. It feels like she’s running only for herself, her legacy, and because she feels she deserves it. That isn’t inspiring or encouraging.
I am a feminist and a progressive. I had (have) some reservations about Bernie’s platform. I would have loved to see Elizabeth Warren run. But that was a pipe dream, because somehow the Clintons own the DNC? That may be a hyperbolic a statement, but it’s starting to feel like there’s a grain of truth there. They cleared the field for her. Why? Because they felt she “deserved” to be the president? No one “deserves” the presidency. You have to earn it.
I agree that, because she’s up against Donald Freaking Trump, everyone with half a brain should be voting for her. But don’t dump on Sanders supporters for saying “WTF? I thought I got a say in this process?” The establishment wants them to sit down and shut up, but that’s not how democracy works.
Suggestion, Bernie fans: vote for Hillary, and make sure you vote progressives into the Senate and Congress as well. Then keep making as much noise as possible to influence policy over the next 4 years. The president works for the people, after all.
July 26, 2016 — 6:03 PM
terribleminds says:
I’m not dumping on Bernie fans, I’m pondering at those super-fans who have taken it beyond the man himself.
And Hillary is, c’mon, an accomplished woman — and a mightily capable politician — who has performed a lot of roles and done them well and has a progressive record to back it up. It’s not ideal, it’s not perfect, and not all of it tastes good, but there’s nutrition in there: hence, like I said, vegetables.
July 27, 2016 — 10:27 AM
Melissa Clare says:
I’ll give you that she has accomplishments of note, but I stand my my analogy just as you stand by yours. Maybe there’s some bits of kale poking out of that sandwich? Anyway, I think that the reasonable Sanders supporters are just choking a bit now – there’s something caught in their throats. Once they fight the gag reflex, get it down and have a glass of water to clear the taste, I think most will vote Hillary. They’d be insane not to. But really, honestly, what a letdown if everyone who’s all fired up right now don’t keep pushing her to prove that both her supporters and questioners were right to trust her in the end.
Have you seen this, btw? I think you’ll like: https://medium.com/@shitHRCcantsay/let-me-remind-you-fuckers-who-i-am-e6e8b297fe47#.oi57urajv
July 28, 2016 — 12:29 AM
Rev. Bob says:
“But don’t dump on Sanders supporters for saying “WTF? I thought I got a say in this process?” The establishment wants them to sit down and shut up, but that’s not how democracy works.”
The Sanders supporters – including me – had our say. The Clinton supporters defeated us fair and square. They got more votes and more delegates, any way you slice it.
That is PRECISELY how democracy works.
July 26, 2016 — 7:11 PM
Melissa Clare says:
Sure, Sanders supporters got to vote in the primary. What I’m referring to is the fact that a lot of people are fired up specifically about members of the DNC trying to clear the field. That’s perhaps not illegal but it’s underhanded and unexpected. You don’t think that deserves a WTF? To me, it violates the spirit of democracy.
I also disagree that a democracy doesn’t fundamentally include an aspect of freedom of speech. A subset of the population doesn’t lose its ability to have its say simply because their candidate wasn’t voted in.
July 28, 2016 — 12:37 AM
Jan O'Connell says:
Watching this from thousands of miles away, all I can say is please, please don’t let Trump win. Even if all you’re voting for is competence and relative sanity. The thought of the world’s most powerful nation in the hands of an egomaniac madman is terrifying to the rest of the world (except maybe in those parts of it where seeing the US fall to pieces is an outcome devoutly to be wished.
July 26, 2016 — 7:25 PM
annwjwhite says:
I think people have forgotten you don’t have to love your candidate to vote for him/her. You vote for the one who will do the best job. There was a fair vote, I’m a Bernie fan. But, he lost. I still love the man, he’s going out gutsy. I also will vote for Hilary. I don’t like that she kept saying she’s a woman. I’d like us to be past that. But it is the first time this has been successful so HOORAY for that. Now we can get back to agendas. I’m voting for Clinton because she’s got a platform set by her party and she’ll heed that. Anything but the Republican’s candidate. I have two kids and someday they’ll have kids and I hope that our culture grows up to realize that what we do today will greatly impact tomorrow.
So, I’ll eat my veggies. I won’t like it, but I’ll eat them.
Thanks Terrible!
July 26, 2016 — 8:29 PM
Brook Miller says:
Adulting sucks sometimes. Kale can be doctored up to be palatable, and I believe the chefs in Hillary’s camp are giving some good magic to that end. Yes, I trust her. Yes, politics are a steaming cesspool, more of us should probably be involved if we want it to change. I am stunned and dismayed that such a person as Donald Trump has gotten as far as he has, but I hope that it wakes up America to our issues.If he isn’t the feverish, itchy, stomach-cramping symptom of the hatred and fear running through our country, I don’t know what is. Vote Hillary, for God’s sake. Just look at that spoon full of sugar, Mr. Tim Kaine, who looks like he oversees Santa’s Workshop during the holiday season. I hope he helps the medicine go down.
July 27, 2016 — 12:00 AM
decayingorbits says:
I absolutely reject the assertion that “not voting for one candidate is a vote for the other.” Pure, unadulterated, horseshit. This is one side trying to guilt people into checking their ethics and principles at the voting booth.
So if I decide I’m not voting for a racists demogogue, and I’m also not voting for a ethically bankrupt, power-hungry one percenter, there’s something wrong with me? That’s rich.
Voting for the lesser of two evils is voting for evil.
Part of the beauty of our democracy is we get choices at the voting booth. And while plenty of people would like to try and slut-shame you into a false choice, the truth is, I don’t have to make that choice. I can write someone in, or vote for a 3rd party ticket — which I will do.
So if I vote for neither of the main candidates, does it mean I vote for both? No. No it doesn’t.
July 27, 2016 — 5:11 AM
terribleminds says:
Every vote and non-vote is a vote. Every third party vote is a vote.
And all those votes go to two boxes.
They weight one side of the scale over the other.
I mean, you’re free to choose however you want to. You can write in Mickey Mouse or Dave Coulier or a men’s room urinal. They won’t be elected. If you choose to vote for neither candidate, which is also a viable choice, you help one side weight against the other, which is in effect, a vote.
Abstaining is a vote.
And all votes go to one of the two boxes.
July 27, 2016 — 10:23 AM
Chris Crawford says:
Integrity is important. If you want the two major parties to act with integrity, you should vote with integrity.
July 27, 2016 — 10:42 AM
SamKD says:
“If you are part of a society that votes, then do so. There may be no candidates and no measures you want to vote for … but there are certain to be ones you want to vote against. In case of doubt, vote against. By this rule you will rarely go wrong.”
― Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love
Voting third-party is always a choice but not a useful one because third-party candidates are not viable in our system: http://www.fairvote.org/problems_with_the_electoral_college
Every registered Republican who votes third-party or stays home adds to the possibility of a Clinton win. Every registered Democrat who votes third-party or stays home adds to the possibility of a Trump win. Every registered Independent who votes third-party or stays home boosts the candidate of the dominant party in that state.
If you dislike one even a tiny bit more than the other then by all means go vote against that one…but do realize that third-party is also “against” depending on your registration and location.
July 27, 2016 — 3:08 PM
Ivy says:
Yes, ‘third party votes’ don’t count in the US, which uses a ‘first past the post’ counting system. But they can in places like Australia where a ‘preference voting system’ is used. I dunno, maybe lobby to get a preferential system and see how it might affect voter turnout and/or political campaign efforts?
Also, forgive me for saying so because I’m not American and maybe there is ‘some cultural thing’ I’m missing but, TRUMP – from a distance – looks like all kinds of dysfunction and maladaptive behaviour. WTH. DSM material right there. Does nobody reporting on him see that clearly? Or are you guys just playing a really cool practical joke on the rest of the world?
July 27, 2016 — 6:23 AM
terribleminds says:
Yes, that’s what we need to do — if we want third parties to be viable, we need electoral reform.
July 27, 2016 — 10:21 AM
jeffo says:
Beyond Trump, there’s also the matter of the repugnant platform adopted by the Republicans. Have you read that thing? It’s abhorrent.
July 27, 2016 — 7:26 AM
wagnerel says:
That sort of thing is the reason I’ve never once voted for a GOP candidate. Each time I think they’ve plumbed the reactionary depths of intolerance and have to lighten up a bit next time around, they prove me wrong.
July 27, 2016 — 8:20 AM
wagnerel says:
I’m scared to death that Trump will get elected, appoint 2-3 supreme court justices (Ginsberg, Breyer, and Kennedy are getting pretty long in the tooth), and have both houses of congress. If there’s a terrorist attack or something, which is possible no matter who is president, it’s not inconceivable that the president could be granted special “emergency powers” by congress, and the now-stacked court will go along. This is how that downward spiral into fascism can start in a democracy like ours: all the checks and balances have finally been eroded away, and the country gets scared.
It’s no choice for me, even if I didn’t like her. But I do like Hillary Clinton, actually. I don’t think she’s perfect, but I think she’s been a champion for people and causes I approve of. And she’s smart, experienced, and more than competent, and she knows how to get things done. She had high approval ratings as a senator, was respected by her peers, and she was voted the most admired woman in America repeatedly during her time as Secretary of State. Yeah, so maybe she’s got a stiff demeanor and is better one-on-one than she is working a crowd. We’re electing a president, not a prom queen.
July 27, 2016 — 8:17 AM
M T McGuire says:
OK, I’m going to have to say this, and I will be slayed for it, utterly but, seriously, as a historian, watching clips of Trump picking on members of the audience at his rallies and having them slung out while the audience chants ‘usa’ and telling the heavies not to worry if they hurt them in the process … I am scratching my head slightly as to how Republican voters are able to see anything OTHER than a dictator in the making. It’s like he’s following the same game plan, using the same style, the same rhetoric as the early 20th century fascists.
OK, so I’m a Brit and we did Brexit, so I know, look who’s talking! But it makes me kind of feel that we’ve fucked the dog so you, our brothers and sisters across the water, don’t have to. But it also makes me feel, with a kind of cringing, horrific, inevitability that the world is going to get 4 years of Trump, and then because you guys are almost as averse to change as we Brits, no matter how disastrous he may be, we’re going to get another 4 years of ‘better the devil you know’.
As Chuck points out, it’s probably time to stop looking at whether or not Trump or Hilary are ‘good people’ or ‘fit’ to govern. To be honest, they’re both politicians so probably neither of them are. But surely the issue of which one gets your vote revolves around what they stand for. What are they doing to do if they get into power? Whose hand is up which ones bum working the mouth, right? So to us outsiders it’s a simple question. Read the party/presidential manifesto. Which one is most in line with your personal beliefs? Tick.
It shouldn’t be about which party you voted for last time, or which candidate you ‘like’ it should be about what they SAY. And even if you’ve voted for one party for the last 40 years, without so much as a thought, if what your current candidate says is misogynistic and racist – which would strike me as an extremely un-American standpoint – maybe you should be thinking now.
So I will definitely be scratching my head at anyone LGBT, Hispanic, Female – or a person of any colour other than white – who votes for Trump because he’s made it very clear that he hates us and worse, he seems quite happy to admit it and encourage other people to hate us too.
But we voted to leave the EU and for15 years of Mrs Thatcher, so what do I know?! 😉
Cheers
MTM
July 27, 2016 — 8:31 AM
Chris Crawford says:
// All this in the face of the fact that voting for a third party is a literally worthless endeavor
Don’t agree with this at all. An election is not only a vote for who becomes presidency, it’s the most universal indicator of the political temperature. I, for one, think it’s important to understand if people are feeling more disenfranchised by their party; significant gains by third parties are a strong sign.
While I want Clinton to win because Trump, I don’t regard him as a valid reason to shove Clinton & the DNC’s Nixon-ish actions under the rug. If you want change, you need to vote that way. And I hope that Stein/Johnson show strongly enough that the eventual winner can’t claim an overall majority.
Trump is the Republican’s fault, in part because of their lying and manipulation. It’d be a mistake to think the Democrats are exempt because we like them better. Trump should lead to at least a restructuring (and hopefully, cleansing) of the Republican party. It’d be nice for the Dems to feel motivated to fix their own mess before they get that far.
July 27, 2016 — 10:23 AM
PST (@pstaylor) says:
They won’t give a shit if they don’t get an overall majority. Obama swept the 2008 and 2012 elections. Did the Republicans try to moderate their position or become more centrist? No, they doubled down, became more conservative, and made it harder for people who wouldn’t vote for them to vote. When Trump wins because Stein splits the liberal vote, will he say, “Shit, I won but I only got 30% of the vote – better cater to the liberal majority.”? Hell no. It is a winner take all scenario.
You want to vote libertarian or green? Do it at the local level. elect green congresspeople. Elect a green city council members. Elect a green governor.
At the presidential level, if you aren’t voting for your favorite candidate, then vote for the least awful. because there are two choices. voting for a third choice won’t change that. And when you options are Literal Hitler and a possibly corrupt career politician who is probably going to continue remote control bombing foreign civilians, you vote for the possibly corrupt career politician because LITERALLY HITLER.
July 27, 2016 — 11:53 AM
Chris Crawford says:
With that attitude, one day our choices will be LITERALLY HITLER vs. LITERALLY WORSE THAN HITLER. Or maybe, no choice at all.
And, to be fair, Hitler didn’t need to be elected to become Hitler.
July 27, 2016 — 2:49 PM
M T McGuire says:
I had to come back and post this, which I found really scary!
https://www.reddit.com/r/EnoughTrumpSpam/comments/4teoxl/a_final_response_to_the_tell_me_why_trump_is_a/?st=ir3078gz&sh=59e3fd8b
Trump is a serious risk.
July 27, 2016 — 12:52 PM
salomejones says:
Obama is the first president I ever voted for. I have always taken the most liberal/progressive candidate on offer. I’m not happy about the outcome of the Democratic primary, even though I found it a difficult choice in 2008 between Clinton and Obama. I ultimately chose Obama, perhaps because I thought he had less chance of winning. This year, the choice between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton was a much easier decision for me. It was like FDR vs Hillary Clinton. Bill Clinton with his Welfare Reform, the dream of Republicans that they couldn’t get through. Many progressives, including the public interest lawyers, I worked with –literal champions of the poor — felt utterly betrayed by him. She’s not him, but their ideas seem likely to be similar. So Bernie Sanders was a huge ice cream bowl full of hope. All of this complaining and refusal you’re hearing and seeing is people going from being offered a huge bowl of ice cream to a plate of chopped liver. It will keep you from dying of starvation but it’s going to take some getting used to.
I will vote for Hillary, though it gives me a stomach ache (because as an Israeli friend said today, “Muslims are killing people in Europe, so Europe is killing Muslims in the Middle East. This makes no fucking sense.” and that’s what America is doing as well, and Clinton will feel compelled to continue this to show how tough she is.) I don’t want to be responsible for that. But Donald Trump, I fear, will do that and worse.
July 27, 2016 — 1:47 PM
terribleminds says:
Problem is, that huge bowl of ice cream is 90%+ in line with that plate of chopped liver in terms of ingredients. Further, Bill not being able to get some things passed — well, Sanders didn’t have magic powers, and would not have had any greater ability to move that needle more meaningfully. Sanders is ostensibly better on the ground, building the coalition and the grass roots stuff. Clinton in the oval office — pressured constantly by Sanders and that coalition — is almost certainly the best way to get things done. IMHO, of course.
July 27, 2016 — 2:03 PM
Susan Winchell says:
Just wanted to say “Thanks, Chuck!” Great discussion, different points of view, civil conversation. This is how it’s supposed to work!
July 27, 2016 — 3:18 PM
annelippin says:
Three cheers for Freedom of Speech.
July 27, 2016 — 11:15 PM
decayingorbits says:
Hopefully you’re not trying to be ironic, LOL.
July 30, 2016 — 2:14 PM
extrieme says:
Totally love this post Chuck. I just don’t get how seemingly intelligent people buy everything they hear about Hillary. By the way check out this anti-trump anthem and video.: http://www.polimuse.rocks
August 2, 2016 — 11:58 PM
Jessie says:
This completely reminds me of a argument i was having with my uncle the other day. Every time i would give him a reason not to vote for trump eg The man has never given a straight forward answer to any question he is presented with. The only comeback he has is oh her emails. The emails blah blah blah emails emails. I ending the conversation by telling him to look at the crowd of the DNC and the RNC one reflected america today and the other reflected the 1940s. Excuse me for not feeling comfortable in a room full of angry white guys who are convinced america is their homeland.Pick up a fucking history book prick.
Don’t even get me started on the conversation I had with my brother, who is a Bernie fan. He refuses to even vote. To anyone who doesn’t vote this year because boo hoo hoo your favorite didn’t get nominated, and allows Trump to win just know it was your fault and you have no right to complain. We can’t have chocolate cake all the time, sometimes we need to eat the cauliflower.
August 3, 2016 — 10:00 AM