34 Reasons This Bernie Voter Will Vote Trump
by Eric Zuesse
Here are the 34 reasons I will vote for Trump:
- “Hillary Clinton’s Six Foreign-Policy Catastrophes”
- “Hillary Clinton the hawk, and the Honduran coup”
- “I’m a Bernie Sanders Voter: Here’s Why I’ll Vote Trump”
- “Hillary Clinton: A Threat to All Humanity.”
- “Red-Light Warning On Now About Hillary Clinton”
- “Here’s Why Hillary Won’t Allow Her Corporate Speeches to Be Published”
- “Hillary Clinton’s Global-Burning Record”
- “We’re out of time on climate change. And Hillary Clinton helped get us here”
- “Hillary Clinton Is Backed by Major Republican Donors”
- “Wall Street gives Hillary Clinton $27M”
- “Tim Kaine Calls To Deregulate Banks As He Campaigns To Be Clinton’s VP”
- “Hillary Clinton Exposed Part 1 – How She Aggressively Lobbied for Mega Corporations”
- “Hillary v. Bernie: Their Two Opposite Views of the Presidency”
- “Hillary Clinton Backs Fast-Track on Obama’s Trade Deals”
- “Hillary’s Record: Pretending to Oppose Trade Agreements”
- “Hillary Clinton Oversaw US Arms Deals to Clinton Foundation Donors”
- “Neocon Kagan Endorses Hillary Clinton”
- “Neoconservatives Declare War on Trump”
- “U.S. Foreign Policy ‘Elites’ Eagerly Await Expansion Of Overseas Wars Under Hillary Clinton”
- “Hillary the Hawk: A History”
- “Jonathan Turley on the Laureate International Universities Scam”
- “Hillary Clinton’s Connections to the Oil and Gas Industry”
- “Clinton Supported and Enabled Tax Evasion”
- “To Protect Hillary Clinton, Democrats Wage War on Their Own Core Citizens United Argument”
- “Why Hillary Clinton’s Email Case Is Still Not Closed”
- “Hillary Clinton’s Email Operation Violated At Least Six Criminal Laws”
- “Hillary, Trump, and War with Russia”
- “Hillary Clinton Lying for 13 Minutes Straight”
- “CNN Stunned When Fact Checkers Confirm”
- “Undercover Footage Shows Clinton Operatives Admit To Inciting ‘Anarchy’ At Trump Rallies”
- “2006 Audio Emerges of Hillary Clinton Proposing Rigging Palestine Election”
- “Hillary Clinton’s security detail laughed when she broke her elbow”
- “Hillary Clinton Is Evil!”
- “Why I Won’t Vote for Hillary Clinton | Evan Edinger” (but then he changes his mind on that)
TO CLOSE: Evan Edlinger will vote for Hillary against Trump because he thinks that whereas Hillary’s actual track-record of policies (not mere statements) in public office have been horrific, Trump’s bad statements and lack of any track-record in public office at all, make Trump even worse. That’s what he thinks. I think it makes Trump better — the better choice — as opposed to the proven evil and catastrophically harmful public official, Hillary Clinton. Edlinger is preferring an evil record as a public official, to no record as a public official. Edlinger fails to make two crucial distinctions: One is that he fails to distinguish between mere political statements, versus actual political policies carried out as a public official (which show Hillary to be a proven neocon and tool of Wall Street); and the other is his failing to distinguish between a bad record in a person’s private or business affairs, versus a bad record as an actual public official. Only the bad record as a public official should be absolutely disqualifying — and that’s Clinton, not Trump, who has a horrific record as a public official.
Trump has no record at all as a public official. Edlinger at 1:30 in his video says that when he contemplates voting for Hillary,”There’s always one thing that comes in the way, and that’s trust.” He says he doesn’t trust her — but what he doesn’t actually “trust” is her words; when he says he’ll vote for her, he’s simply ignoring her actions, he’s ignoring the real person-as-a-public-official, the person who is shown and displayed beyond any reasonable doubt whatsoever. Proven selfishness in one’s private life is bad, but proven selfishness and evil in one’s public-office policies (such as “We came, we saw, he died. Ha, ha!”) is utterly disqualifying. I argued in my “I’m a Bernie Sanders Voter: Here’s Why I’ll Vote Trump”, that Trump could possibly turn out to be a progressive President; but, even if he turns out to be a bad President, he won’t, on balance, be as horrific as will a President Hillary Clinton. With Trump, there is reason to have some hope for the future of the world; with Clinton, there is reason to expect unprecedented horrors.
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
The liberal media spin on this election has been pushing my surrealism monitor to its limit.
Then I watched the clip from Owen Jones, and…..PING !…..
(…..I need a new, bigger model.)
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/video/2016/nov/02/us-election-complacency-trump-owen-jones-video
Just look into his eyes.
Donald Trump is winding up the rhetoric…..the US will be ‘ungovernable’ if Hillary is elected because she will be dealing with criminal prosecutions against her over her emails.
He is also repeatedly referencing Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner causing some bloggers to smell a rat.
When Hillary gave evidence about emails to the House Select Committee in Oct 2015 the Republicans insisted that Hillary had perjured herself. One of her defenders to that charge — by way of evidence provided to the Committee — was no less than FBI Director James Comey.
Blogger Joseph Cannon is now asking “Why should an otherwise cautious and prudent FBI Director who had previously shown no malice towards Hillary now politically throw her under a bus with the new email claims?”
According to Cannon the FBI likely have found criminally incriminating emails against Hillary on the Weiner computer — but that they were planted there not by some non-existent Russian hackers but by Trump operatives. Weiner received Abedin’s laptop when she had finished with it and likely accessed her emails using passwords still on it. And it was this computer that was hacked some time ago by Trump dirty tricks operatives — Brietbart, Stephen Bannon, Roger Stone.
Rather than trying to take down Hillary Clinton, FBI Director James Comey may have been indirectly trying to protect her. But the FBI team in New York — the ones examining Weiner’s computer — are not playing for Comey, and they’ve been chafing under his attempts to restrict them.
That’s why there might well be new, totally damning email revelations against Hillary emerging from FBI sources in the next few days. And if so, those emails have almost certainly been planted there.
Both Rudolph Giuliani and Trump’s daughter-in-law, Lara Yunaska Trump, have been tweeting that “We’ve got some stuff up our sleeve” and that “surprises” are in store. And Trump is campaigning in blue states he can’t win without an apparent care in the world. Perhaps he knows something. Perhaps the fix is in.
The other issue that people aren’t facing is what happens if Hillary Clinton wins by a small margin. Trump has repeatedly said that the Clinton team is backed by Obama and the government and has rigged the election. If he insists that he actually won but that he was ‘robbed’ what then?
Trump rallies have been marked by cries against Hillary of “lock her up” and he has followers who have said that guns may be needed and that they intend taking to the streets.
If some new, more inflammatory email claims emerge against Hillary in the next week then Trump may insist that she is a ‘criminal’ (despite those claims not being tested) and that she has no moral legitimacy and cannot take office.
I’ve said it before — Trump is very dangerous.
Meanwhile, Jason Chaffetz, Republican chairman of the House’s government oversight committee, has pulled enough BS and conspiracy links about Hillary Clinton from right-wing websites to keep them busy investigating her administration for at least two years.
The mindless Hillary hate speech just keeps on rolling.
On the email server issue you stack up a few ifs and maybes. Here’s a simpler reading, given by William Barr in today’s Washington Post:
In July Comey told the world the Clinton emails had been “thoroughly investigated” and he did not recommend prosecution. That boosted Clinton, who touted it as vindication of her using private servers as Secretary of State, placing official correspondence beyond the reach of democratic accountability.
Her ratings went up but the FBI now finds the investigation was not thorough, nor could it have been. Thousands of emails reside on the laptop of disgraced former Congressman Anthony Weiner and his estranged wife, Clinton aide and confidante, Huma Abedin. Their failure, with or without Clinton’s knowledge, to provide all relevant evidence invalidated the July statement. This is the ‘impossible situation’ Comey was in on Friday as he announced that new emails have been found. Had the FBI kept quiet about these it would have left uncorrected a misleading statement already used by Team Clinton – but now with the collusion of the Feds – for political gain.
Thus spake Barr. Now it’s true this man is a Trump supporter but the argument can be assessed on merit or lack of. Applying Occam’s Razor, isn’t it the more persuasive? Barr’s biased but where’s the flaw in his argument?
In 2007 the Bush White House tried to sack eight US attorneys who refused its overtures to bring fabricated corruption charges against Democrats running for political office.
Recall that this was a Karl Rove sponsored exercise, the same Karl Rove who laughingly tore up Congressional subpoenas and refused to front up for its questioning. The same Karl Rove who brought fake criminal charges against Alabama Governor Don Siegelman.)
Congress subpoenaed White House emails only to be told that most of them had been sent via a non-government domain host and an email server not controlled by the federal government but by the Republican Party. This was a violation of several US laws and had clearly been set up by the Bush administration to defeat any Congressional oversight. Over 5 million emails were lost or deleted in this way. It was a concerted effort by the Bush government to conceal its activities; government by stealth from a bunch of criminals and none of the media called them out on it.
But hey, this is about the evil Hillary, right. She’s a Democrat, a Clinton and — damningly — a woman, unbowed before the criminal Right. So a different standard must apply and every falsehood promoted.
No argument from me re Bush & Co. But how does this address my simple point?
I agree 100% with this author!
Reblogged this on TheFlippinTruth.
Excellent list. However, # 27 is all you need. And Jill Stein is the only candidate who’s not batshit insane.
#27 is so worth reading and the comments on that article are interesting too.
Pure garbage! No matter what Clinton is guilty of voting Fascist is not possible for any responsible American and especially Jewish people like myself who witnessed Hitler’s Europe.
I’d vote Jill Stein if I were American. I’d also shout from the rooftops that America’s political system is so broken and corrupt we might ask whether “democracy” is any use at all as a description.
For the rest I understand you feel strongly. It would help if you (a) define fascism as opposed to right wing conservatism, (b) say why millions of ordinary men and women in the Middle East, Honduras, Ukraine and Russia – and progressives everywhere – should care whether or not HRC fits that definition, and (c) say why Trump is a fascist according to that definition.
Otherwise it’s hard to distinguish what you say from the claims of those who see HRC as ‘lesser evil’, purely on the basis of her seeming more liberal on social and domestic matters, without engaging with her actual record in office, in particular that as Secretary of State, or her proximity to a big capital that has repeatedly shown itself to support real fascism (Ukraine, say) and extreme intolerance (Saudi Arabia, say).
Agree, except you’re failing to distinguish the two chief types of fascism. There’s corporate-fascism, the type favored by Mussolini, Stalin, and the American Oligarchy (of which HRC is a fully paid-up member). And there’s racist-fascism, exemplified by Hitler, Maidan-Ukraine, and Israel.
Calling Stalin a fascist is silly.
I think so too.
The problem is that Gary Johnson and Jill Stein are not going to take an equivalent amount of votes away from Trump and Clinton. Hillary Clinton will lose 5 times the support that Trump will to those two candidates, so if Stein and Johnson reach 8% of the vote, Hillary will lose about 6% to Trump’s 2%. As long as Trump stays 2 to 4 points back in the head to head polls, he may actually be tied or slightly ahead of Hillary Clinton. A vote for Stein is in reality a vote for Trump. It’s the same problem Gore faced with Nader in 2000. Ideological purity won’t save you here.
No, it’s not a case of ‘ideological purity’. The commonly aired statement “it’s immoral not to vote Clinton as that is a vote for Trump” can be stood on its head with equal moral force. But to see that you have to engage with the actuality of HRC’s record; something most – I don’t say all – of those who pronounce her the lesser evil have rarely done.
The fact is, the next POTUS is going to be terrible. I’m resigned to that. I’d vote Stein as part of a wider commitment to challenging the phony democracy that is the USA.
Her foreign policy stance is abysmal, I agree. But Hillary Clinton is not the corporate lackey her critics insist she is. See also here.
A protest vote is fine but it’s not going anywhere.
“A protest vote, blah, blah, blah” – same old LOTE bs.
a) a vote for Clinton is a vote for Clinton
b) a vote for Trump is a vote for Trump
c) a vote for Johnson is a vote for Johnson
d) a vote for Stein is a vote for Stein
e) etc.
Get it? That’s how democracy works. Try it some time.
Ronald Reagan was facing stiff opposition from Carter in 1980 and and a savy GOP political operator (call him “Fixit”) saw a way to help. He decided to run a slightly Left wing Republican John Anderson as a third party candidate against Carter and Reagan. Conventional wisdom at the time held that Anderson would draw votes from Reagan, but private polling, and Fixit’s experience in running “third party fake” candidates told him the real story: that Anderson would drain votes not from Reagan but from Carter (which is what actually happened). The problem was that Anderson had left it too late to register as an independent. So Fixit worked with a former aide to Sen. Joe McCarthy named Roy Cohn and a mobster named Fat Tony Salerno to bribe an established party — the Liberal party — to enroll Anderson as their candidate. They paid $125,000 in cash and the jig was successful. Anderson bled votes from Carter and Reagan won.
After the statute of limitations on these criminal actions had expired Fixit admitted to all of the above details in an article in the US Weekly Standard in 2007.
And the name of Mr Fixit? — Roger Stone. Until August last year he was the head of the Trump electoral campaign and, by all the signs, still effectively running it. On April 5, 2016, Roger Stone encouraged Trump supporters to descend on the GOP Convention should other candidates try to “steal” the nomination from Donald Trump. You have to laugh. Nothing changes.
So just keep believing the democratic process is a level playing field. Roger Stone has been relying on that fiction to divide and conquer the Democrats and liberals for forty years and ensure Republican wins. Have your little vote and feel warm and fuzzy. And then lose.
Politics is not about high-minded principle. Trump’s former campaign manager (and likely still so covertly) is Roger Stone. Here’s his philosophy from his unpublished biography:
“I practice the politics of polarization — a politics that is brutal, psychological and effective. It is the politics of division, galvanizing those who bear a grudge against the establishment, rallying the resentful, the jealous, and the angry against the elites. In an America as large and diverse as we are, the politics of unification is a non-starter. It is unrealistic to think that one could voice one or the other of the political philosophies of the two major parties to unify the country around any course of action. The politics of unification is, at heart, about only so much as you need to unify your 51%.
My goal is to ensure that the reader approaches politics with an educated, skeptical and more jaundiced view after reading this book. In the world of politics, not everything is as it seems.”
Ahem … from Wikileaks:
CLINTON: You just have to sort of figure out how to — getting back to that word, “balance” — how to balance the public and the private efforts that are necessary to be successful, politically, and that’s not just a comment about today. That, I think, has probably been true for all of our history, and if you saw the Spielberg movie, Lincoln, and how he was maneuvering and working to get the 13th Amendment passed, and he called one of my favorite predecessors, Secretary Seward, who had been the governor and senator from New York, ran against Lincoln for president, and he told Seward, I need your help to get this done. And Seward called some of his lobbyist friends who knew how to make a deal, and they just kept going at it. I mean, politics is like sausage being made. It is unsavory, and it always has been that way, but we usually end up where we need to be. But if everybody’s watching, you know, all of the back room discussions and the deals, you know, then people get a little nervous, to say the least. So, you need both a public and a private position. And finally, I think — I believe in evidence-based decision making. I want to know what the facts are. I mean, it’s like when you guys go into some kind of a deal, you know, are you going to do that development or not, are you going to do that renovation or not, you know, you look at the numbers. You try to figure out what’s going to work and what’s not going to work. [Clinton Speech For National Multi-Housing Council, 4/24/13]
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/927
Come back and tell us again that Hillary Clinton is not a corporate lackey and has “liberal” views.
I fall back in abject defeat. You mean she actually has dealings with —corporations! Is there no end to this woman’s perfidy?
I long for that great day when Bernie Sanders is carried by the people into the White House and his policies (unsaleable at least to 70% of middle America which rejects them as ‘socialist’) are hurried through Congress.
Where is the political ‘middle’ in America? Answer — it doesn’t exist. Like the last western plains bison it’s been hunted out of existence by a far Right Republican business class, a corrupt media and a majority of the ill-informed general populace who have come to believe it’s death is essential to their well-being.
As I understand it you are criticizing Hillary for failing to defeat the entire Republican and business class, is that right?
Burn her at the stake, I say. We can toast marshmallows and feel good about ourselves while mafia Trump sicks the Justice Department on anyone who’s ever challenged him.
So she’s so evil, isn’t she?…..You can see it in her face….
What is worse is that she cites Spielberg’s movie as a source on Seward, about whom I suspect she knows less than Ivanka Trump.
At this point – with both candidates so equally disastrous as to make no difference – voting Stein is the only honorable thing to do. It has the virtue of being truthful and sincere – and in the longer term it sends a message and shifts the entire polity in a much better direction.
What planet are you on? HRC IS a fascist and so is the Jewish State.
See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCabT_O0YSM
At this point, invoking the Holocaust is simply the flip-side of Godwin’s Law – once you shout ‘Nazi!” sensible people stop listening to you.