About rightOctober 10, 2016 Tim WorstallPolitics28 CommentsTrump is a crazy candidate, yes. But Clinton is a really poor one. previousAustralian Mines Ltd – Can’t See This Working MyselfnextThat diverted profit tax in full 28 thoughts on “About right” JuliaM October 10, 2016 at 7:54 am But the ‘debate songs’ meme on Twitter is what’s really winning! Henry Crun October 10, 2016 at 9:05 am The entire election campaign is just an insult to any reasonable person’s intelligence. I feel for the merkins, I really do. BobRocket October 10, 2016 at 9:21 am Trump, Trump, Trump, everybody is talking about Trump. Hilary is talking about Trump. The MSM is talking about Trump. Trump is talking about Trump. A quick google search shows Trump references massively outweighs Clinton. site: http://bbc.co.uk trump 38,100,000 site: http://bbc.co.uk clinton 27,400,000 site: http://bbc.co.uk donald 37,600,000 site: http://bbc.co.uk hilary 16,500,000 same search results for telegraph.co.uk trump 5,770,000 clinton 767,000 donald 5.940,000 hilary 781,000 I imagine these results are replicated across the entire web. This election is not between Clinton and Trump, it is between those who will vote for Trump and those who will vote against Trump. The Pedant-General October 10, 2016 at 9:29 am “But Clinton is a really poor one.” She’s not – she’s rich as Croesus. Baboom, tsh! I’ll get my coat. The Inimitable Steve October 10, 2016 at 9:56 am Ah. “Dr.” Tim Stanley, formerly of Damian Thompson’s DT Blogs Catholic mafia of floppy-haired posh boys who’ve never had a girlfriend. The guy with a PhD in America who seems to hate America. Nowt as queer as folk, I suppose. Sadly, he’s one of the better writers still at the paper formerly known as Torygraph. But what to make of this: Trump looked like he was in the dock. Occasionally he shot a glance at the audience – maybe at the women he’d invited who accused the Clintons of abusing them in one way or another. He probably didn’t intend to bring up their allegations; their presence was enough. Dunno if Dr. Tim calls himself a journalist or just a Doctor of Sneerology, but this is painfully ignorant stuff. Trump held a press conference with Clinton’s rape victims right before the debate. Of course he intended to bring it up, you drongo! But it’s something conservatives have waited two decades to see: someone telling the nation’s most prominent feminist to her face that she’s a hypocrite for standing by her man. No, you fool. She’s a hypocrite for attacking Trump over him joking about pussy 11 years ago while she herself went out of her way to ruin the lives of the women her husband sexually abused. She’s a doubly incontinent Lady Macbeth, not Tammy Wynette. Trump is a crazy candidate, yes. What’s crazy about Trump? Has he built skyscrapers out of marshmallow? How about cackling with glee about Gadaffi being raped to death with a knife? Or calling Putin “Hitler” and threatening WW3 over Syria? Until about 5 minutes ago our Prime Minister was a guy who jammed his penis in a pig and repeatedly declared Islam to be a “religion of peace”. Our Leader of the Opposition is Wurzel Gummidge’s communist older brother. Who are we calling crazy? As for the not-very-good doctor’s political prognosis, nah. I really don’t think Americans are going to put the horrible old woman in charge of their government. Mr Ecks October 10, 2016 at 10:01 am In the first “debate” Trump held his own and his composure against an evil machine containing almost everybody except himself and those who rightly see him as the only hope left of America remaining America. This time he had learned and he handed the bitch –and Billyboy–their fucking worthless heads on a plate. I wish to Christ I was crazy Trump-style. If the Americans don’t put him in the White House they will truly deserve the horrors that the Clinton Crime family will impose on them. So Much For Subtlety October 10, 2016 at 11:56 am BobRocket – “This election is not between Clinton and Trump, it is between those who will vote for Trump and those who will vote against Trump.” No it isn’t. That is what the Mainstream media wants to make it. They know no one likes the witch. So they will studiously avoid talking about her – and her criminal activity. These are my final words on advocacy. If you have the facts on your side, hammer the facts. If you have the law on your side, hammer the law. If you have neither the facts nor the law, hammer the table. They have neither a likeable candidate or a convincing policy agenda. So they will hammer Trump. BobRocket October 10, 2016 at 12:32 pm SMFS, no body is talking about Jill Stein either (or that other bloke). Theophrastus October 10, 2016 at 12:35 pm “This election is not between Clinton and Trump, it is between those who will vote for Trump and those who will vote against Trump.” The percentage of the US electorate that would vote enthusiastically for ‘Illary is probably quite small. However, she will undoubtedly garner votes from those who are desperate to stop the Trumpster. Meanwhile, whatever he says or does, the Trumpster’s vote remains pretty solid – his reputation goes before him and has been discounted by many voters. All of which suggests to me that the result will be decided by turnout: if it’s low, the Trumpster could just win. That said, with my poor track record of predicting election results, I’ve probably just given the Trumpster the kiss of death. John Square October 10, 2016 at 1:43 pm If trump wins (and what a choice, as others above have said), it’ll be because the shy voters once again swept in to the rescue of a right wing candidate. On this occasion, though, I think we’ll see the limitations of the shy Tory vote. I think trump will do better than the left fear, but not sufficiently well to win. I further predict Hilary will not make a second term due to ill health, likely resigning to avoid impeachment. Philip Scott Thomas October 10, 2016 at 1:59 pm Those “lewd”, “offensive”, “obscene” (and whatever else the BBC called them) comments were made eleven years ago. Wasn’t Trump a Democrat back then? Dennis the Peasant October 10, 2016 at 2:06 pm Mitt Romney made the fatal mistake of banking on conservative hatred of Barack Obama. Go back and look at how Romney did by demographic and you will see that the only group he truly underperformed with was the conservative base. Romney and his advisors made the assumption that conservative hatred of Obama was so high that they could ignore conservatives and concentrate on winning moderates. How’d that work out? Irrespective of the convention wisdom – mythology if you will – voters don’t turn out to vote against. They may say they will, but they don’t. If you hand out two shit sandwiches – theirs and yours – and think you’re going to get rich because your shit sandwich is on a brioche bun with gourmet mustard and theirs isn’t, you should probably think again. Lots of folks will pass on a shit sandwich no matter what you do to it. Despite all of the pearl clutching last week by the political and media classes over Trump’s potty mouth, what is becoming apparent is that both Hillary’s camp and establishment Republicans are starting to panic. It’s dawning on them that Trump may very well win, and the standard Washington playbook isn’t stopping him. You don’t go out in the first week of October and corral Al Gore to campaign for you if you think things are going well. My take on it is this: If Hillary Clinton was ever going to be president, she’d be finishing her second term right now. Nine years ago Barack Obama was an obscure first term senator of absolutely no distinction. Democrats chose him over Clinton, and they couldn’t do it fast enough. She was toast after Iowa’s primary, for God’s Sake. That should tell you a lot about what sort of turnout you can expect for Hillary this November. Jorge C. October 10, 2016 at 2:35 pm Poor America!!! Poor the world…. Mr Ecks October 10, 2016 at 2:59 pm Boo Fucking Hoo. Ironman October 10, 2016 at 4:06 pm It’s dangerous to generalise. For example, Tim Stanley and Damian Thompson might both have never had a girlfriend. But probably not for the same reason so it’s a pointless thing to note. dearieme October 10, 2016 at 4:09 pm “Romney … the only group he truly underperformed with was the conservative base.” Religious prejudice, I expect. dearieme October 10, 2016 at 4:11 pm What I really want to see is Trump win, Hillary found guilty in court, and her plead against a prison sentence on the grounds that her health is so bad that she’s near to death. By God I’d laugh. Dennis the Peasant October 10, 2016 at 4:42 pm Religious prejudice, I expect. Doubtful. His positions on everything from immigration reform to Obamacare were more moderate Democrat than Republican. And moderate Democrat is what he was… The fact that he was a successful governor in Massachusetts proves it. Real Republicans don’t get elected in Massachusetts. And the only folks that were making Romney’s Mormonism an issue during the campaign were Democratic operatives and ‘progressives’. Evangelicals didn’t give a shit. Southerner October 10, 2016 at 5:01 pm They’re both as rotten as a black banana but Syria happened on Hillary’s watch, if not on her instigation. It would be stretching it to call her a mass murderer but she set off the greatest humanitarian tragedy of recent times. I’m beginning to think that Trump may be the better candidate. Diogenes October 10, 2016 at 5:02 pm Which candidate are the snake-handling Baptists of Texas more likely to support? Dennis the Peasant October 10, 2016 at 6:14 pm Which candidate are the snake-handling Baptists of Texas more likely to support? None of the snake handling churches are Baptist: They’re Pentecostal. And none are located in Texas. Snake handling originated in Appalachia and is concentrated in West Virginia, the Carolinas and Tennessee, although there are also churches in Kentucky and several Deep South states. So the answer to your question is “neither”. PJF October 10, 2016 at 8:40 pm “That should tell you a lot about what sort of turnout you can expect for Hillary this November.” Dennis the Peasant, what do you make of the polls giving Clinton the clear lead (now big)? I called the last UK general election and the EU referendum, but I can’t read US politics well. If the reality on the ground is as you say, the polls would have to be more than wrong; they’d have to be profoundly corrupt. “Nine years ago Barack Obama was an obscure first term senator of absolutely no distinction.” He had the exceptional distinction of being black. A large number of Americans, especially anyone vaguely left leaning, wanted to see themselves voting for a black president. And they ended up with another pinko. Liberal Yank October 10, 2016 at 9:01 pm BobRocket, I see it all the time. Go to MotherJones(not recommended for the intellectually challenged) and virtually ever lead is about Trump. Based on the average American’s tendency to not make it passed the keywords in the headline I assume they actually want a Trump victory despite what the article actually says. Liberal Yank October 10, 2016 at 9:04 pm I disagree with charictarizing Cliton as a poor candidate. Based on her tax returns I don’t see how anyone could call her poor. Virtually any other adjective would be more descriptive. I prefer terrifying as the prospect of a Cliton victory induces terror. Dennis the Peasant October 10, 2016 at 9:47 pm PJF – Political polling is always fraught with difficulties; the most important of which is actually making sure your are sampling the correct population… the folks that vote. Want to skew a political poll? Fool with the sample. Is the WSJ above screwing with their own polls in furtherance of their own prejudices? Of course they would… they’re mainstream media! They are, by definition, corrupt. This election is, in my opinion, unlike any in living memory simply because there is not now, nor has there ever been, a sizeable contingent of “undecided” voters. These candidates are too well known and too polarizing for anyone to actually considering voting for one of the other. The only two questions of this election are as follows: (1) Will Trump get those predisposed to vote for him out? (2) Will Clinton get those predisposed to vote for her out? What we learned in the primaries was that Republican turnout was historically high, and that Democratic turnout was the lowest in decades. If you use that yardstick as a guide, Clinton is in trouble irrespective of what the polls tell you. Last month Bernie Sanders stumped Ohio for Hillary Clinton and couldn’t draw flies… He got a turnout of 150 people at a rally at the University of Akron. That tells me this: Democrats aren’t energized. In contrast, Trump routinely draws between 10,000 and 30,000 to his rallies. The other part of the equation is this: Nothing that was disclosed last week is going to sway anyone who has decided to vote for Donald Trump. Even his most fervent fans understand that he a crude, foul-mouthed boor. I see last week as simply pearl clutching by Washington in furtherance of Hillary… I didn’t see anyone voicing much concern about it here in Ohio. The other part of the equation is this: The Republican Establish was going to abandon Donald Trump at some point in October anyway… everyone knew that. And again, most Trump supporters see Republican Establishment figures denouncing The Donald as a feature, not a bug. They’re voting for Trump because they hate the likes of Bush family, Ryan, Romney, McConnell, Kasich and McCain. Every Republican who denounces Trump simply validates their decision to vote for Trump in the first place. I’m thinking that Trump will win this, and that his margin will surprise most people. The beauty of it all for me is this: If he loses, he will almost certainly claim the Republican Party stabbed him the back. If that comes to pass, the Republican Party as we know it could go as the Whigs went… Which I am all for. As a conservative, my feeling is I win no matter who ends up in the White House. My interest is in burning down Establishment Republicanism and then building a Republican Party true to the conservative principles of democracy, capitalism, limited government and national interest. This election is viewed by ol’ Dennis as part of what economists call “creative destruction” in the business world. Donald Trump has never been a conservative, but he is most assuredly is an agent of creative destruction in the furtherance of conservatism. That’s why I’m going to vote for him. The Inimitable Steve October 10, 2016 at 10:43 pm Ironman – It’s dangerous to generalise. It’s OK for the purposes of mildly poking fun at people though. Now, personally, Steve doesn’t care if you’re a heterosexual or a homosexual or one of them Pan’s Sexual People. As long as you’re not fat. So Much For Subtlety October 10, 2016 at 11:15 pm Dennis the Peasant – “Mitt Romney made the fatal mistake of banking on conservative hatred of Barack Obama.” Actually I think his problem was that he just did not want to win it enough. As with McCain. And Bush Senior. Every time the media starts calling the Republicans sexists and racists and whatever. The decent men fold under the pressure. They get defensive. They lose. The base likes Trump, low life that he is, because he doesn’t. Or until this clip he didn’t. He fights. If Romney had fought back, he may have won. He didn’t. Trump won me over when he slammed the media in one of the debates. As with his 3-1 comment. We all know it is true. But no one else has been crass enough to point it out. Ironman – “It’s dangerous to generalise.” Unless, of course, someone makes you a little uncomfortable and then all bets are off. Diogenes – “Which candidate are the snake-handling Baptists of Texas more likely to support?” They would do a better job of it than anyone CNN or any random Ivy League Political Science Department would. Edward M. Grant October 11, 2016 at 8:27 pm “Mitt Romney made the fatal mistake of banking on conservative hatred of Barack Obama.” Romney lost because he stole the nomination from Ron Paul, and the Paul supporters stayed home in droves rather than vote for a candidate who was, at best, no better than Obama. And, at worst, was far more likely to start WWIII. The Republican establishment crapped on the Tea Party, and forced Ron Paul out of the last election. So the Tea Party went home, smoked some crack, and decided that nominating Donald Trump would be a jolly wheeze. And here we are. Leave a Reply Cancel replyYour email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Name * Email * Website Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.