I purposely used the “H” word as I did recently in connection with a comment about Lucy Ricardo because the word seems to be all the rage these days — it or one of its synonyms. But I actually hate neither woman. I don’t know either of them so how could I hate them? And yet, there are thousands of people waiting to vote who claim to hate Hillary — or at least to not be able to stand her — even though they do not know her either. What they “know” is a political caricature that has been created over the years by her political opponents and the air-heads on Fox News.
I suspect she is a very private person, perhaps secretive. But that is OK with me because I’m a bit private myself and I realize that on the international stage when one is privy to information dealing with national security one has to be secretive. But, as I say, I don’t know the woman and I cannot say, therefore, that I hate her or that I love her. I simply don’t know her. Neither does anyone else, for that matter — except for her immediate family and a few close friends.
I have made the point a number of times that how we feel about the two candidates should not enter into our calculations of which one we will vote for. This is not to say that character and personality do not count. They do. My blogging buddy, Sue Ranscht, politely pointed this out to me after I insisted that they do not. Even though we do not know either of these two people, we know enough to allow character flaws and personality glitches to enter into the equation. But this does not reduce our decision of whom to vote for to the level of gut feeling. One would hope.
In the end it is the person’s record of public service, their C.V., that is most important. Which candidate has the better qualifications for the office? And while personality does enter in — just imagine Donald Trump in that office dealing with professional politicians and international dignitaries who have walked the world stage for years while he was firing people on reality TV — it shouldn’t weigh enough to allow us to accept or reject that person.
I recently quoted a woman who is determined to vote for Donald Trump (can you imagine?) who said she cannot stand Hillary and that, apparently is her main reason for voting for Trump. I noted that this involves a leap of immense proportions, one that I cannot even follow. How does one get from “I hate Hillary” to “I am determined to vote for Trump”? This leap ignores several alternatives: (1) one could decide not to vote any all; (2) one could vote for the libertarian candidate; (3) one could vote for the Green Party candidate; (4) one could write in someone like, say, Monica Lewinsky — or anyone else. The leap itself cannot be made logically and can only be accounted for in this woman’s case as a leap based on blind faith. At this point it is up to the psychologists out there to determine why someone would take such a leap of ignorance in a matter of this importance.
In the end, however, what matters is the candidate’s record and there is only one candidate who is fully qualified for this job and that is Hillary Clinton. It doesn’t matter if you can’t stand the woman, what matters is that she is almost certainly the best qualified person for the presidency since the birth of this nation. If we were to like her that would be icing on the cake. But if we don’t it really doesn’t matter in the end.
hughcurtler 
Hugh, that is why it is important for us to focus on Trump’s business record as that is what he is setting forth as his primary advantage. Yet, when we look at his history, and it is not hard to find, we find a man who exploits people for money throughout his career.
Through bullying, litigation, stiffing, misrepresentation, and bad business decisions, many employees, contractors, customers and co-investors have been harmed. The mismanagement of his campaign where he has many unpaid staffers and pays his companies for services rendered is one microcosm of how he operates. The mismanagement and self-dealing with his Foundation is yet another. The three class action lawsuits for Trump University which will occur after the election are yet another. Then, there are 3,500 lawsuits he has participated in over his 45 year career.
This man should be credited with a tremendous PR acumen, but his management is highly questionable and at times exploitive and even unethical.
That is the man running against imperfect Hillary Clinton. Keith
One of the best articles I have read on the subject includes this passage: This election is not just about placing the nuclear codes in Trump’s hands. It’s also about handing him the instruments of civilian coercion, such as the IRS, the FBI, the Federal Communications Commission, and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Think of what he could do to enforce the “fairness” he demands. Imagine giving over the vast power of the modern state to a man who says in advance that he will punish his critics and jail his opponent.
To your point, John Oliver had a piece on Guantanimo this past Sunday. Trump said he wants to keep it and fill it up. With whom we might ask?
His critics and political enemies, of course!
Should Clinton win, she needs to follow through with her commitment for bipartisan dialogue. It may not hurt for her to nominate a Republican or two to her cabinet, as did Obama. Truth be told, that is her history as a Senator where she gets her highest marks. I would hope GOP leaders will tell people the truth that the election is not rigged against Trump. He is losing because he is a poor candidate and has been from the get-go. This kind of reporting should have been done last year, so a more reasonable GOP candidate would have won the nomination.
I hope she has the good sense to do just that!
All those practices and amoral decisions further speak to so flawed a character that the idea of such a person being in charge of a country is horrifying, even if he had the same political experience and knowledge as Ms. Clinton.
Indeed.
I honestly don’t know how much facts and evidence will alter the outcome of this election. The more I think about it the more it appears to be largely a visceral issue for most people. I am working on a post along these lines. Thanks for the tireless effort and good comment.
It will be fitting that his sexual predatory behavior may be what brings him down. These witnesses coming forward are only corroborating what he said to Billy Bush and Howard Stern. There will be more. The big lies were his “locker room talk” did not equate with action and that it was not indicative of who he is. Wrong on both counts from what I read.
Facts and evidence are like water off ducks’ back to the Trump’s faithful followers – we saw it (sorry, here she goes again) in the referendum campaign here. The more facts were marshalled the more the Brexit folk did their – ‘well what would s/he know’ thing – when of course the s/he was a major expert with gazillions of years of experience. Psychology is the key – Trump hit the right nerve with his crowd and knew so well how to play it – but I wonder if he’s finally blown it. Lets hope so. What I simply cannot understand is how all the Republican bigshots who are deserting came to leave it this long? And the women – why???? Any woman can suss him out in a blink of an eye – even from thousands of miles away!
I couldn’t agree more! It boggles the mind.
Yours is the calm and rational voice in a sea of large-mouth creatures! If only more thought, spoke, and acted as you, my friend! Just a few more weeks … whew … and we can begin to pick up the detritus and try to put the pieces back together again. As Erik said in his recent post (which I just re-blogged), that is when our work begins. 🙂
And tons of it, I fear. I wonder iff there’s enough super glue!