consultants are sandburs

Monday, May 16, 2016

As a political independent, I don't care much for either of the Republicans seeking the Presidency.

Not caring for either puts me in the majority decisive responding pluralities; per this Reuters link:

Former Secretary of State Clinton's appeal to voters seeking continuity with President Barack Obama's policies, has won her a decisive lead in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, but finds strong opponents among those disillusioned by what they see as lack of progress during Obama's tenure.

The poll asked likely voters about the primary motivation driving their support of either Trump or Clinton heading into the general election on Nov. 8.

About 47 percent of Trump supporters said they backed him primarily because they don't want Clinton to win. Another 43 percent said their primary motivation was a liking for Trump's political positions, while 6 percent said they liked him personally.

Similar responses prevailed among Clinton supporters.

About 46 percent said they would vote for her mostly because they don’t want to see a Trump presidency, while 40 percent said they agreed with her political positions, and 11 percent said they liked her personally.

A career politician who built a fortune from being that, vs a blowhard. And, in a sense with a description pairing such as that, labels are substantially interchangeable.

Two Republicans? Certainly, with even HuffPo noticing. Vomit time, looking at the both of them.

And out of curiosity, who besides the medical industrial complex including Big Pharma, together with Wall Street, likes what's come of the Obama presidency? What change? No hope. Lied to again. Feel the Bern.

If alive, Eisenhower would not vote for either of them; each being further to the right than he was. Each shorter of character than likeable Ike. Yeah. Another difference. He was likeable. Who likes either of the Clintons, and then, which one? Who likes Trump? Liking a good joke is okay. Having two bad jokes winnowed for us by our two party system as offered chaff winnowed from any wheat, what times we live in and what ongoing awfulness can we expect. To the extent Dayton's assessment of DC as a cesspool is spot on, both candidates fit.

UPDATE: Through your looking glass and with Alice in Wonderland as only a spectator, (think Elizabeth Warren); and then unless Bernie gains unanticipated traction, is it to be a contest of the two Tweedles; or is it the Mad Hatter vs the Red Queen?

FURTHER UPDATE: Remember you saw it here first. If Bernie does end up run over and pushed aside to a gutter to rot, then as a perfect match ticket possibility you read of here first, a Hillary Clinton - Lloyd Blankfein ticket. Expect it. If it does not happen, with Clinton the candidate it should. Hand in glove slam dunk similarity. Equals in trustworthiness for ordinary citizens looking at elitist self images held among "in it for the money" players.

Can you name one fundamental difference aside from gender between the two? Payor - payee, okay, that, but otherwise . . .

FURTHER UPDATE: In contemplation of Dayton's DC - cesspool analogy, there is an arguably more apt ecosystem analogy. While that seems a digression from the main theme of the post, it is and it isn't; depending on your perspective. It, as well, is an alternate vision of the Blankfein - Clinton relationship as well as a model of existing variations in lobbying.

No comments: