Meme by me.
Among the “intelligent left”, it is said that it is “better to elect a corrupt politician than a madman”, referring obviously to their preference of Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump. While I don’t think that Donald Trump should be president, the problem with the supposition that he is a madman, is that it ignores Hillary’s obvious mental illness(es). She is known as a pathological liar, is prone to absolute fits of rage (read anything ever by the Secret Service on her), not only excuses her husband’s boorish behaviours but attacks his victims, and likely has a narcissistic personality disorder at a minimum. (The interviews in the FBI 302s will show that behaviour when you read the source material.) While she is better at hiding it, Hillary is likely much more a “madman” than Donald Trump ever will be.
While the country debates “locker room talk” with pictures of soccer teams who have supposedly never said a bad word in their entire lives (please), she has:
- given speeches to bankers praising them while calling for their public excoriation
- she has avoided taxes in the same legal way as her opponent
- she has enriched herself and her family through pay-to-play politics
- she has enriched herself on the back of supposed disaster relief
- she has given her biggest “charitable contribution” literally to herself
- she has called for the extrajudicial killings of her opponents, and joked about the deaths of foreign dictators
- she has never successfully run any type of organisation, including the only real job she’s ever had as Secretary of State
- she is ultimately, if not directly (though there’s debate), responsible for the deaths of four Americans overseas
- she has successfully turned what should be an honour posting for the Secret Service into a job no one wants
- she has brought the fourth estate back around to being one of the three (they share the blame though)
- she has been involved in scandal after scandal after scandal for more than thirty years
- she has conspired to cover up her misdeeds
- she has said she would largely continue the policies of Obama
- she has said that she would antagonise Russia by attempting to enforce a no-fly zone over Syria, quite possibly bringing us to war with Russia
- and she, most of all, is so despicable that she is, as she said, not “fifty points ahead”.
I think this last point is the most damning piece of evidence against her; were she any reasonable politician – even a moderately disliked one – she should be handily winning against Donald Trump. Instead she is despised (a condition I attribute to myself about her, and have for more than twenty years). Say what you will about the rise of populism, but there has always been some form of it in most elections, and the reason Donald Trump is so popular is not so much because of anything germane to him or his movement, but because the alternative is so, so despicable. Think about that – she is running against Donald Trump and is only barely ahead in most polls, and that’s because most of the polls are stacked with elements favourable to Clinton or just wrong entirely.