FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Hillary Clinton’s Great Failure

As Hillary Clinton rolls around within the smooth hollowness of the echo chamber of corporately programmed media promoting her disdain for the fibers of the woodlands which are being wasted as paper pulp for her twisted version of “what happened” in the election of 2016, it dawned on me what was the real cause of her (and the DNC’s) self-inflicted electoral failure. It was not Bernie Sanders (even though I suspect he is probably more than willing to believe he and his supporters might owe her an apology).

It was not Donald Trump or any promoted, unsubstantiated Russians. It was not the paltry number of Jill Stein’s supporters. It was not anyone else’s doing.

There is only Hillary Clinton’s history of blatantly devious manipulations and predatory militarism, as Glen Greenwald has pointed out, which is the most likely reason why Clinton’s campaign was met with so much dissatisfaction by the electoral system. This answer, however, is still not getting to the truth of what was the greatest failure of Clinton’s campaign.

Perhaps Clinton, the DNC, and the vast majority of voters are incapable of recognizing the truth. This is understandable because, when you have an electorate who overwhelmingly refuses to see that Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, their running mates, and their parties in general are, in fact, heavily right wing in their actions, there could only be a brief, tiny pool of rapidly evaporating water in Hell when you are sure there was a snowball.

What might have prevented Hillary Clinton’s failure was a recognition. It is the same recognition which is what stimulates the opposition of the Green Party to both the democrats and to the republicans. If Clinton had only listened to the Greens, she would have recognized that she was and is really a republican. Not only that, but she is as far to the right as the majority of republicans would proudly boast of being.

If Clinton had been honest (pausing for laughter and tears), she could have sought the republican nomination. Donald Trump would not have stood a chance. Even as a democrat, Clinton had significant support from many republican operatives. Her inability to be honest and open, coupled with her record of vicious militarism, while surely a hallmark of a democrat, would have also been characteristically appealing to huge (or “Yuge”) numbers of republicans.

Clinton would have enjoyed a great deal of what is delusionally referred to as crossover votes. The numbers of so-called democrat women who would have voted for her if she ran as a republican would have alone been enough to put her in power. I have little doubt that their support (and that of other democrats) for her as an open republican would have been defended with the rational that Clinton ran as a republican because “she had to” in order to ascend to her destiny as the great savior/inspiration.

This argument of “she/he had to” is so central to the democrat voter identity because without the illusion, democrats might have to face the facts of their record of electing republicans in all but name candidates for decades upon decades.

So, the one little move toward honesty which would probably have put Hillary Clinton into the presidency would have meant that she abandon the pretense which is so central to the democrats. The pretense that she and they are not republicans who deliberately pretend to be something else.

The old expression about “honesty is the best policy” is so alien to how the hollow echo chamber works, that Clinton’s lack of credibility is beyond merely typical and her failure resulted because she had no way to be open and honest about who and what she is – even when her history of bloodied debauchery would have been embraced as proof of her devotion by so many republican and democrat partisans if she would have run as a republican. A minor partisan name change was too much to ask for from someone as devious as Clinton.

Trump, for his part within the life-sucking hollowness, is still trying so hard to make Clinton look like she is, by contrast, composed and presidential.

I’m tempted to go into speculating about how the democrats might have manipulated their organization if Clinton had openly embraced her republican self, but I just can’t find any value in kicking a dead Trojan Horse.

More articles by:
September 24, 2018
Jonathan Cook
Hiding in Plain Sight: Why We Cannot See the System Destroying Us
Gary Leupp
All the Good News (Ignored by the Trump-Obsessed Media)
Robert Fisk
I Don’t See How a Palestinian State Can Ever Happen
Barry Brown
Pot as Political Speech
Lara Merling
Puerto Rico’s Colonial Legacy and Its Continuing Economic Troubles
Patrick Cockburn
Iraq’s Prime Ministers Come and Go, But the Stalemate Remains
William Blum
The New Iraq WMD: Russian Interference in US Elections
Julian Vigo
The UK’s Snoopers’ Charter Has Been Dealt a Serious Blow
Joseph Matten
Why Did Global Economic Performance Deteriorate in the 1970s?
Zhivko Illeieff
The Millennial Label: Distinguishing Facts from Fiction
Thomas Hon Wing Polin – Gerry Brown
Xinjiang : The New Great Game
Binoy Kampmark
Casting Kavanaugh: The Trump Supreme Court Drama
Max Wilbert
Blue Angels: the Naked Face of Empire
Weekend Edition
September 21, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Alexandra Isfahani-Hammond
Hurricane Florence and 9.7 Million Pigs
Andrew Levine
Israel’s Anti-Semitism Smear Campaign
Paul Street
Laquan McDonald is Being Tried for His Own Racist Murder
Brad Evans
What Does It Mean to Celebrate International Peace Day?
Nick Pemberton
With or Without Kavanaugh, The United States Is Anti-Choice
Jim Kavanagh
“Taxpayer Money” Threatens Medicare-for-All (And Every Other Social Program)
Jonathan Cook
Palestine: The Testbed for Trump’s Plan to Tear up the Rules-Based International Order
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: the Chickenhawks Have Finally Come Back Home to Roost!
David Rosen
As the Capitalist World Turns: From Empire to Imperialism to Globalization?
Jonah Raskin
Green Capitalism Rears Its Head at Global Climate Action Summit
James Munson
On Climate, the Centrists are the Deplorables
Robert Hunziker
Is Paris 2015 Already Underwater?
Arshad Khan
Will Their Ever be Justice for Rohingya Muslims?
Jill Richardson
Why Women Don’t Report Sexual Assault
Dave Clennon
A Victory for Historical Accuracy and the Peace Movement: Not One Emmy for Ken Burns and “The Vietnam War”
W. T. Whitney
US Harasses Cuba Amid Mysterious Circumstances
Nathan Kalman-Lamb
Things That Make Sports Fans Uncomfortable
George Capaccio
Iran: “Snapping Back” Sanctions and the Threat of War
Kenneth Surin
Brexit is Coming, But Which Will It Be?
Louis Proyect
Moore’s “Fahrenheit 11/9”: Entertaining Film, Crappy Politics
Ramzy Baroud
Why Israel Demolishes: Khan Al-Ahmar as Representation of Greater Genocide
Ben Dangl
The Zapatistas’ Dignified Rage: Revolutionary Theories and Anticapitalist Dreams of Subcommandante Marcos
Ron Jacobs
Faith, Madness, or Death
Bill Glahn
Crime Comes Knocking
Terry Heaton
Pat Robertson’s Hurricane “Miracle”
Dave Lindorff
In Montgomery County PA, It’s Often a Jury of White People
Louis Yako
From Citizens to Customers: the Corporate Customer Service Culture in America 
William Boardman
The Shame of Dianne Feinstein, the Courage of Christine Blasey Ford 
Ernie Niemi
Logging and Climate Change: Oregon is Appalachia and Timber is Our Coal
Jessicah Pierre
Nike Says “Believe in Something,” But Can It Sacrifice Something, Too?
Paul Fitzgerald - Elizabeth Gould
Weaponized Dreams? The Curious Case of Robert Moss
Olivia Alperstein
An Environmental 9/11: the EPA’s Gutting of Methane Regulations
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail