(Before I even started responding to this pro-Trump blog post with my own obscure blog post, I knew this would almost certainly be pointless. What can I say? I find this cathartic.)
Yesterday, I saw multiple Facebook friends – including multiple college-educated women – either share or like this blog post that’s titled “Why I’m Voting For Donald Trump.” The timing of the post, with Trump nose-diving in the polls and Republicans in Congress fleeing from the carnage, coupled with the sudden surge of pro-Trump comments appearing in my Newsfeed, made me curious, so I took the plunge.
What struck me about this pro-Trump post, and what continues to strike me about nearly every right-wing critique of Hillary Clinton, is the sheer number of lies the Right feels they need to tell about a candidate who can effectively be criticized with the truth. But before I get to why I think the Right continues to create this alternate reality where Hillary is, in fact, the Devil, let’s dive into this woman’s blog post.
Before listing her four reasons she’s voting for Trump, this blogger announces she’s a survivor of sexual assault (and also a white-Republican-Christian), and she’s appalled by the Access Hollywood video. Assuming that’s true, why would she tell us this information? The purpose is to give you permission to vote for the misogynist Trump in the video: if a victim of sexual assault is voting for Trump, then you can vote for Trump without a guilty conscience, too!
The next part of her preamble is just shameful. You see, Trump isn’t just a misogynist – he’s also overtly racist, and the author needs to address that before telling us why we can vote for Trump. But she’s not a minority, so she can’t say “I’m Black and voting for Trump, so you can, too!” Instead, she pulls this stunt:
Are racism and sexism HUGE issues in our country? YES. But how are those things resolved? Movements of people coming together. Different races and religions taking time to understand each other. Men learning how to stand up for their sisters and daughters and wives.
Don’t worry, everybody – we can elect a racist for President because the President can’t solve racism on his or her own – only we can! And Donald J. Trump – he’s definitely the leader that will help different races and religions take the time to understand each other. He’s the greatest understander in history. The best.
Jesus, we’re not even past the introduction. Just douse me in gasoline and light me on fire already. Let’s get to her reasoning.
My heart breaks for the refugee crisis in Syria . . . But I don’t think it’s unfair to screen who we allow into our country . . . Donald Trump wants to protect AMERICANS – no matter what race you are. No matter what gender. On the other hand, Hillary, wants to allow anyone and everyone into our country, regardless of the danger she could be putting her own people in.
This is so fucking rich. First, let’s tackle the insulting claim that Trump wants to “protect AMERICANS – no matter what race you are.” Are we talking about the same Donald Trump? This is the same guy who is single-handedly reviving the White Nationalist movement. The same guy who just last week continued to insist the young Black men who were called the “Central Park 5” are guilty despite the fact that someone else confessed to the crime and DNA evidence exonerated them. This is after he took out full-page ads in the New York papers advocating for their execution. This is the same racist piece of shit who refused to rent to Black people in the 70s and was sued by the Justice Department. The same guy at the forefront of the racist Birther movement against Obama. Maybe that’s why he’s polling at 2% – behind Jill Stein! – with Black voters. But don’t listen to Black voters – listen to the White woman tell us Trump cares about Black Americans.
I haven’t even mentioned those Mexican immigrants he labels rapists, or those Muslims he wants to profile – I’m sure they’re feeling the love from Donald, too.
Alright, to the Syria part of the quote. The basic gist of this entire paragraph, labeled “National Security,” is that Hillary (and Obama) have no vetting process for refugees. Except there is one, it’s very effective, it’s been in place for decades, and it was retooled after 9/11: “The process typically takes one to two years or longer and happens before a refugee ever steps onto American soil. Ultimately, says the State Department, about half are approved, and there’s no real precedent of a terrorist slipping in through the vetting system.”
Yes, I’m sure your “heart breaks” for the victims in Syria, so much so that you’re willing to lie about the refugee screening process because you don’t want them to live in the same country as you do. Putting your irrational fears of terrorism (you’re more likely to be killed by your own furniture) ahead of children in a war zone is the definition of heartbreak.
My favorite part about this “fear” is that “[t]he main terrorist threat in the United States is not from violent Muslim extremists, but from right-wing extremists.”
[I]f we are talking about rape culture – Hillary Clinton has done MUCH more to contribute to that than Donald Trump. As an attorney, she has reduced the jail time of rapists. She has helped cover up the abuses done by her husband while he was President.
As with any distortion of truth worth its salt, there’s some kernel of reality here that allows the person perpetuating the bullshit to feel like they’re not lying. The short truth: in 1975, a judge appointed Hillary as a criminal defense attorney to defend a man accused of raping a 12-year old girl. Hillary . . . did her job and defended the man!?! The gall of that woman. The man pled guilty to a lesser offense and spent a year in jail. Long story can be found here.
What’s particularly tasty about this lie is that later in the post, this person praises Trump for “not paying taxes under legal provisions,” and “not pay[ing] people who did not do good work.” So Trump is great for “doing his job” and using the law to his advantage to not pay taxes and to bully contractors he wanted to stiff, but Hillary is a monster for doing her job as a criminal defense attorney? Love the hypocrisy here.
As for “covering up” Bill’s alleged abuses, once again, there’s no evidence for this claim: “What we found is that Hillary Clinton has been accused of threatening or shaming accusers of Bill Clinton. But all the accusations remain unproven, as do the specific allegations against Bill Clinton. In most cases, evidence Hillary Clinton intervened in any significant way doesn’t exist.”
I do think that the screening process should be more intense when you go to buy a gun. But taking guns out of the hands of Americans leaves us completely helpless.
My favorite distortion – still under the “National Security” heading – is an endorsement of Hillary Clinton cloaked in a criticism of Hillary Clinton! If you want a more intense screening process for gun buyers but still want people to be able to buy guns after that process . . . you should vote for Hillary Clinton because that’s the policy she’s advocating for?
(The gun lie is really just the same “DEMS ARE GONNA TAKE AWAY ALL YOUR GUNS” paranoia that continues to plague the Right that prevents the exact common-sense screening process this blogger is advocating for from becoming reality).
Hillary has made lots of promises that sound great, but they all require MORE TAXES. And yes, a lot of them are on the wealthy, which sounds fair . . . .
This isn’t a lie, it’s just hilarious. Maybe it sounds fair because it is fair? (she goes on to say taxing the wealthy is actually bad). Let’s place it side-by-side with this, from the New York Times three days ago:
Mr. Trump’s tax cuts would be the deepest ever, reducing revenue $6.2 trillion in the first decade and mostly benefiting corporations and the highest-income Americans, the center said. Some middle-income families, however, would receive a tax increase.
Trump: cut taxes for the wealthy and corporations. Raise taxes on middle-income families.
Mrs. Clinton would substantially raise taxes on high-income taxpayers, mostly on the top 1 percent; slightly reduce taxes on average for middle- and low-income households; and overhaul corporate taxes.
I don’t even know what to say. Despite the fact that “[i]n the United States, income inequality, or the gap between the rich and everyone else, has been growing markedly, by every major statistical measure, for some 30 years,” this self-described Republican goes on to make the same bullshit “trickle-down economics” argument that rich people have been using to dodge taxes for decades while forcing the rest of America to subsidize their tax breaks. But this is good because when you inevitably join the ranks of the millionaires, you want those tax breaks, too? That’s the argument here. Where’s that gasoline can?
Whoever the next President is will likely nominate FIVE Supreme Court judges . . . It’s possible that America would NEVER recover from a 7-2 Democratic majority. We NEED to keep Republicans in the Supreme Court who will uphold the Constitution.
Here’s the truth: this blogger cares about the Constitution even less than she cares about Syrian kids. Trump and Mike Pence have proposed or passed a truly impressive amount of laws that have already been ruled unconstitutional: religious and racial profiling, stop-and-frisk, Pence’s abortion law and ban on Syrian refugees. In the Syrian refugee case, the Court said “Pence’s security concerns regarding Syrian refugees are ‘nightmare speculation’ based on no evidence.” Sound familiar?
Also, perhaps the next President appoints multiple judges (I find no evidence it’ll likely be five), but regardless, would a 7-2 Democrat-appointed majority on the Supreme Court open up the gates of hell and swallow America whole? According to this blogger . . . yes. Really, though, this is the same sad argument right-wingers have always made: that judges appointed by Democratic presidents ignore the Constitution while Republican-appointed judges uphold the Constitution.
Justice Scalia, the conservative jurist who was the darling of Republicans, was supposedly a staunch “originalist” who only read the plain text of the Constitution, and nothing more. This belies the facts, of course:
“In affirmative action cases, Scalia insisted over and over again that the 14th Amendment required the government to follow color-blind policies. There is no basis for this claim in either the text or history of the amendment.”
“Similarly, the men who drafted and ratified the First Amendment would, it’s safe to say, been shocked out of their wits if someone had told them they were granting the same free speech rights to corporations they were giving to persons.”
Stay with me. Almost done.
Hillary believes that even minutes before delivery, a baby does not have constitutional rights. That is absolutely absurd. Babies are born as early as 22 weeks and survive.
Of course we would finish with abortion. I honestly don’t even know what this person is claiming here. Regardless, abortion is legal and Hillary’s stance on abortion is standard pro-choice. If you’re against abortion, then just have the balls to say so instead of portraying Hillary as some kind of specially-horrific pro-choice fetus-eater. It’s reminiscent of Carly Fiorina staring into the camera and dramatically lying to us about Planned Parenthood.
In sum, what continues to strike me about almost every right-wing attack on Hillary is the sheer number of lies they find necessary to attack someone who can so easily be attacked with truth. But the most effective truth-based attacks on Hillary come from her left, and of course they can’t use those (one reason Bernie was so effective against her was because his criticisms of her were all true – she’s too close to Wall Street, too eager for war, compromised by large donors to her campaign, etc.). To the dismay of many on the Left, the Clintons have effectively moved right on many issues in order to take the Republican’s moves away from them: welfare reform, harsher criminal sentencing, no longer for single-payer healthcare, embracing big money in politics, etc. Since the Right can’t effectively criticize her on those policies from a Right perspective, they continue to fabricate and exaggerate to portray Hillary as some extreme threat, when in reality she’s a moderate Democrat who’s even more centrist than Obama turned out to be. (h/t to the Chapotraphouse podcast on this point).
P.S. Another reason I am voting for Trump is because of who is running with. Mike Pence is a man of character, faith and integrity. And if this is the first person Trump has “hired,” I have a lot of hope for who else might surround him as he serves his term in the White House.
LOL. Mike Pence, the guy who advocates using public money to send gay kids into “conversion therapy,” signed a law mandating that women bury or cremate their miscarried fetuses as part of a larger anti-abortion law that was found unconstitutional before it took effect, and, as previously covered, the same guy who’s own attempted statewide ban on Syrian refugees was found unconstitutional by a panel of three judges appointed by Republicans because it was racist: “A federal appellate court rebuked Indiana Governor Mike Pence’s attempt to block Syrian refugees from resettling in his state on Monday, at one point comparing those efforts to racial discrimination against African Americans.”
Finally, I wonder – does this person even know she is lying? Why do so many educated people like or believe these obvious falsehoods? Maybe she just lives in the right-wing “reality” that exists on Fox News and Rush and Hannity, so she actually believes all of these things to be true. If so, I’ll finish with a simply sublime quote from Rush Limbaugh he graced us with this week:
You know what the magic word, the only thing that matters in American sexual mores today is? One thing. You can do anything — the left will promote and understand and tolerate anything — as long as there is one element. Do you know what it is? Consent.
If there is consent on both or all three or all four, however many are involved in the sex act, it’s perfectly fine. Whatever it is. But if the left ever senses and smells that there’s no consent in part of the equation, then here come the rape police. But consent is the magic key to the left.
You’re right, Rush. I do think consent is the magic key. You got me.