History, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Social Commentary

Bush For Clinton

34 Comments

Yes, this is indeed exactly why so many Republicans are supporting Trump, even though he’s a Democrat. More thoughts from Ed Driscoll. Someone should ask Papa Bush what he thinks about Bill Clinton’s history of raping women, and Hillary covering for it and attacking the victims.

[Update a few minutes later]

Hillary is a one-woman war on honesty. But despite her corruption, incompetence and lies, she’s part of the Washington “elite,” so she’s A-OK as far as the Bushes are concerned.

34 thoughts on “Bush For Clinton”

  2. Jeb Bush being in the race, one was one of reasons people wanted an Outsider. Or if voters wanted an insider, Jeb Bush would been the Republican nominee. Trump rocks the boat, Jeb is boat ballast.

    1. Both sides wanted an outsider. That’s why Trump showed up on the Republican side and Bernie showed up in the Democrat side. The difference is the Republicans didn’t rig their primaries so their business as usual candidate would win this time.

  3. See also:

    http://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2016/09/19/hillary-hates-you-n2220280

    You can almost here the chronic Hillary bootlickers (you know, the kind who remind me of Baghdad Bob) saying, “It’s not hate! It’s just tough love!”

    I think it was Schichter who compared Hillary to Bea Arthur’s Maude, calling Queen Cacklepants a sexless shrew who, as president, will always be browbeating the electorate for not measuring up to her standards.

  5. For an alternate perspective consider my father, who like Bush 41 is a WW2 vet and a lifelong Republican. He disagrees with much that Mr. Tump says, but it is his belief that the man is temperamentally unfit to be Commander in Chief which pushed him into the NeverTrump ranks, even if the alternative is Ms. Clinton.

    I’ve been surprised at how strongly he’s gotten behind Messrs. Johnson and Weld — not just indicating his intent to vote for them (if he lives that long — last month I’d have given him poor odds, now he is rallying and growing stronger again, and it is just possible that he’ll be good for a couple of more years), but he’s donated to their campaign and has a lawn sign ordered for his house. He has always done research in advance of elections (particularly for local offices which don’t receive much news coverage) in order to cast an informed vote, but I’ve never before known him to be more politically active than that.

    This morning, concerned about the near Clinton/Trump tie in the polls here in Florida, he talked to me about various vote pairing schemes. From BalancedRebellion where he would pair with a NeverClinton voter and both pledge to vote for Mr. Johnson, to out of state schemes where he would pair with a Clinton support from a non-swing state who would vote for Mr. Johnson and he would actually vote for Ms. Clinton here in Florida to stop Trump, but in the knowledge that the pairing has contributed to Johnson’s overall national results.

    You may disagree with my father’s conclusion, but please don’t question his motives or his patriotism. Many loyal Americans truly believe that Mr. Trump is such a horrible choice that a strategic vote for Ms. Clinton is their patriotic duty.

    1. I am grateful for your father’s service, Kirk, and wish him the best of health.

      I am also impressed by and grateful for his interest in oft-overlooked local races.

      Regarding his choice in November – if he actually declares that he’ll vote for Clinton, my issue would be, is he a former Republican President of the United States? Because if he’s not, it’s a rather different thing than if he is. If he’s not a former president, he’s IMHO fine. But being a former president carries with it a very different responsibility to the party.

      I’ll probably be voting for Trump, though I have great qualms – including his temperament. The reason is I have much greater qualms regarding Clinton in every area where I have qualms about Trump. I don’t agree with the neverTrump crowd, but I don’t condemn them, either. I can’t, because I’m very strongly NeverMcCain. I held my nose and voted for that SOB in 2008 because, and only because, the alternative was Obama, but I swore “never again!”. McCain will be on my ballot again this year, and I will not be voting for him.

    2. but it is his belief that the man is temperamentally unfit to be Commander in Chief

      Saying he would ask the military for a plan of action and then letting them do what it takes is, in my view, the thing a President should do. Hillary and her media keep knocking Trump on not having a plan for ISIS but Trump is proposing the most responsible and effective course of action. Let the military do what they do best.

      But we don’t really know how Trump would act as none of us have time machines. We don’t need a time machine to know about Hillary. She has a record. When it comes to acting as CiC or being in charge of foreign policy, we have only to look at the Russian Reset, collapse of relations with Iraq, the disaster of Libya, the destabilization of Europe, and many other examples of unprecedented geopolitical disasters that Hillary helped happen.

      Our enemies are emboldened and have the run of the roost while our allies have been marginalized and stabbed in the back.

      I am not sure how Trump will perform but Hillary already tried out for the team. She made it into the game and scored half a dozen own goals and set the bleachers on fire.

    3. How can they be ‘patriotic, loyal Americans’, if they’d prefer an America-hating globalist like Clinton to someone who at least claims to love America?

      ‘Good Americans’, maybe.

      Perhaps you should ask him if he thinks it’s a good idea for US military men to be forced to wear high heels and fake pregnant bellies? Because the Obamoid military is heading toward complete SJW convergence, and if he’s successful in getting Clinton elected, it will vanish into the black hole of Social Justice.

      I guess you could also ask whether he really wants his grandkids to grow up with a choice between civil war or becoming a minority in their own country, because that’s what they’ll be facing once Clinton opens the border to flood America with new Democrat voters.

  6. Frankly, while I agree that Trump isn’t much of a Republican in some ways (My big qualm with him is he seems okay with big government), where were all these accusations during the Bush administrations? Or have we conveniently forgotten all the big government things George W. Bush did and said? And that applies to Bush Sr. as well, though in fairness he was nowhere near as bad as W. If Trump isn’t a real Republican, the Bushs sure as hell never were, yet oddly enough I don’t recall #NeverBush being a thing.

    As for Bush Sr. endorsing Hillary Clinton; that’s downright reprehensible if true, but I’m inclined to cut him some slack, mainly because we don’t know for sure if it’s true, and secondly because he’s 92.

    2. Bush Sr. very specifically has not endorsed Ms. Clinton. From his spokesman: “The vote President Bush will cast as a private citizen in some 50 days will be just that: a private vote cast in some 50 days. He is not commenting on the presidential race in the interim.”

    3. I’ve said it a million times but Trump comes off as a moderate establishment candidate from either party. Democrats will say they would never vote for a candidate who talks like that but they already did with Obama. Difference being Trump is pro-American. NeverTrumpers say they don’t like his policies but they are very similar to past Republican Presidents’.

      Trump is running as outside the current power structure. That means that the industry built up around supporting the GOPe and big government in general wont have the access they would under Hillary or a mainstream Republican. This scares them because their gravy train is at risk.

  7. Never cared for GHWB. Still don’t. That he is capable of this is why.

    If someone says he or she can’t vote for Trump on principle, then that is somewhat defensible, if rather blinkered, as principles won’t matter anymore if Hillary gets in.

    But, actually registering a pro-vote for Hillary is something entirely other. I don’t question such voters’ patriotism. I question their sanity.

  8. I disagree that the anti Trump sentiments have anything to do with Trump not being of the established political families, there are plenty of other politicians in America without family connections and without being toadies that I think H. W. would have happily supported. The problem many have with Trump is his personality and inconsistency. I doubt he has any principles at all, he’ll preach whatever he thinks has the most appeal to his audience at any given time, that for a lot of people, those who do stick to one set of principles, is cringe worthy.

    1. I doubt he has any principles at all

      Which says a lot more about you than Trump, Andrew. Like every other person on the planet, Trump has things he believes and things he doesn’t care about. But if you look at his history he has always been a right leaning populist. Being a populist in our culture is left leaning… so he’s a bit of both.

      The important thing is not so much his lack of ideological purity. It’s also not how much detail he can spew. The important thing is what are his goals and executive abilities. He isn’t going to accomplish anything by himself. But if he represents his deplorables he’s doing the right job. He’s already acted in ways that show he will (although nothing is ever certain.)

        1. Andrew, he doesn’t have your principles. To equate that with none shows your deficiency, not his. Everybody has principles. They also happen to be a different set for each and every person. To believe only those principles you share with others are valid is idiotic.

          The fact however, is that he does share principles with people that for whatever reason, some are not willing to acknowledge. That’s pointed out in the article that says he’s objectionable because he’s not a blue blood regardless of his positions. It’s the same problem others have with his language choices which resonate with people that are willing to look beyond poor language precision and those that are not.

          BTW, the lack of precision isn’t just on Trump’s part. It’s actually more so on the part of people that accuse Trump of meaning what he obviously didn’t.

          He says he wants a traditional wife at home, so those with an agenda insist he hates woman. He says sexist things that other wimpy men just think but would never say.

          We’ve become such a neurotic stressed society that real people (the deplorables) can only shake their head at how out of touch with reality ‘our betters’ are.

        1. At least he’s not as crooked as the criminal Hillary. Or as inept and corrupt as the current occupant of the White House. In 2008, I didn’t vote for the first time since 1972. That was due to my mistaken impression that McCain and Obama were co-equal evils. I couldn’t have been more wrong. This year, there’s even less equality among the evils. The Donald may be awful, but he’s not criminally awful.

        2. Look again Rand, he is a mixed bag that includes many conservative ideas for decades. That you don’t see it just proves that observational bias even affects the most brilliant of people.

          1. you won’t watch it and he never said this stuff

            Well Vlad, you failed your prediction. What part of that video is supposed to be news? Do you understand what the expression ‘mixed bag’ means?

            Trump has not hidden who he is which has been all over the map, so it’s easy to put together a string of statements to portray him as anything you like. But even in that video you can see he’s more than the one dimensional person you’d like to believe.

          1. Not delusional. Lazy. If you don’t have the bias that makes his conservative positions invisible you would see them constantly going back decades.

            But there is absolutely no point in providing the links since you already have a ready made answer… he’s lying.

            The only proof will come after his term when you will then say, it wasn’t Trump, just all those people he accidentally appointed.

            You’ve got the perfect argument position Rand. You can’t lose.

          3. Time will do what it always does. My delusions usually become facts. It’s already started with his VP pick. How do you explain that?

  9. It is kind of hard being a leftist which is skeptical of AGW and against gay marriage these days. But I do have some principles and I am sticky on them when they matter.
    I couldn’t join the right even if I wanted to. I just can’t see it eye to eye with them either. The whole question of how to regulate natural monopolies is just too big of an issue to dismiss.

    1. You’ve only got a bang-bang control input. To keep the output centered, sometimes you have to bang it the other way. You don’t have to join, just temporarily assimilate.

    2. One element of controlling a natural monopoly is not letting them expand the monopoly into other fields. For example, don’t let the telephone company prohibit 3rd party devices on the consumer end of the lines. Separating operators of natural monopoly physical cable from media providers would be productive. And don’t let government (the ultimate monopolist) expand into fields sufficiently handled by private parties or more local government.

    1. “Why are Hillary’s circles so full of sexual predators?”
      Probably should be expected with a movement that systematically normalizes deviance and condemns any traditional measure of right vs. wrong.

Comments are closed.