Donald Trump is the Cracker King, lord of the worthless knuckleheads who cover their insecurities with bigotry, and crave the respect they thought would be their due in a blissful white supremacy state. He is now also the Usurper King of the Regressive Plutocrats: the maverick leader of the Republican Party. Donald issues a great deal of bilious bombast and bluster, but within that expansive superheated vacuity there are some sparks of creativity and independence. The establishment may never fully domesticate him. We’ll see. If the Democrats insist on imposing Hillary Clinton on us then Trump is likely to become our next President.

Hillary Clinton is the Queen of the Desperate Housewives and their charmless princes, the Maleficent disguised as Glinda, the paragon of the sell-outs and careerists, the me-people who live in the comfort bubble of the establishment and don’t want anything or anybody spoiling the perfect arrangements of their self-satisfaction. Hillary Clinton is the cash injected-molded made-to-order service provider for the establishment owners.

Bernie Sanders is the American Spartacus leading the most popular revolt against economic tyranny in over half a century. His are the we-people of America: the youth who want real futures, the overworked underpaid who want real lives, and the old who retain the ideals of the New Deal. Bernie has assembled the most diverse array of supporters of any candidate ever, and holds the popular majority. He is the emblem of America’s future, and the man most fearfully hated by the careerists and flunkies of what is now obviously an outmoded and failed past.

Q:
“Alright, just remember to always explain your opinions logically and give the facts and reasons openly. It doesn’t help the explanation much to rely on emotional explanations without facts.”

A:
It is a fact that I dislike supporters of Hillary Clinton. It is a fact that I dislike supporters of Donald Trump. It is also a fact that some of the people who are in my normal circle of family and friends support Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. Because I value maintaining good family relations, and also prefer not to annoy friends (and, you know, “friends”), I make a point of not talking politics with these non-Bernie personal insiders and acquaintances.

Even so, I have taken a nastier anti-Hillary tone lately to try to shake off Hillary type people from my pool of acquaintances (which is the purpose of my new Facebook page). I can afford to have this attitude since I am retired and have no need to ingratiate myself with a wide variety of people in order to carry on a career or become “accepted” in society. But you, as a young person, should not be so unfriendly to the wide variety of idiots that fill the ranks of humanity in these United States. You have yet to launch a professional career, and will need to be tolerant of the many imperfections of your potential audiences. Once you are mature, and have money in the bank, you can prune off the deadwood from your life.

It is true that I see Hillary voters as being one of, or a combination of, the following: ignorant and easily led, obdurate and stupid, selfish, a vagina vanity voter, self-satisfied, spoiled and entitled, suburban, physically older and mentally immature, superficial, vacuous, unaware, gullible, a timorous mediocrity and wannabe careerist dependent on wages, unprincipled: a true careerist in establishment politics, malevolent: an oligarch corrupting democracy with money so as to steal on a grander scale.

Donald Trump’s voters fall into these same categories, except for “vagina vanity voter,” for which they substitute: “bigotry as cover for insecurity by white males.” So, Hillary gets the benefit of XX bigotry, Donald gets the benefit of good-old-boy XY bigotry, and poor Bernie misses out entirely on the bigotry vote because of all his talk of “inclusion” “diversity” and “compassion.” He’s really out of touch with heartland America (and the Confederacy) on this one.

A Hillary or Trump partisan could charge me — beyond being “wrong” about my candidate choice, and beyond the standard charges of being disrespectful of their preferred forms of bigotry and thus a necessary target of them (which I am, proudly and inevitably, respectively) — with taking an insulting attitude toward these partisans and acting superior to them. I don’t see how I can escape such a charge, so I plead guilty. The only mitigating factors I could point out are that:

1, Clinton and Trump partisans don’t care in the slightest what I think, and they pay no attention to what I say or write. So my “insults” of them evaporate in the unseen aridity of their unknowing.

2, The momentarily uncomfortable twinges of mental stress that the proletarian (wage-earning) partisans of Clinton and Trump may feel as a result of my comments and “superior” attitude tickling their cognitive dissonances are quickly dispelled by resort to their favorite palliative: delusion. People believe what they want to believe, and facts don’t matter. By maintaining vacuous and vaporous minds they prevent logical substantive arguments by Bernie Sanders from gaining conceptual traction, and altering their programming. Once again, self-protection by willful ignorance: outta sight, outta mind.

For my part, my sense of superiority comes from knowing that the vision for America that Bernie Sanders presents, and Hillary and Donald oppose, is easily possible and inevitable, in the sense that the 13th Amendment was inevitable, if America is to have any possibility of a worthwhile future. It really comes down to that, folks, are Americans to become servants and slaves? — albeit with gas-guzzling SUVs and big-screen TVs vomiting infotainment garbage on a 24-hour cycle to maintain their conditioning to obedience by the masses — or will the public regain control of their government, their economy, and thus of their lives and the destinies of their children?

So, yes, I think the people who oppose that very realistic vision, by “proudly,” stubbornly and myopically working to advance the ambitions of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, are all the terrible things I have enjoyed saying about them. And, it makes me feel very good to share Bernie Sanders’ vision, and to know that there are millions of people who are my brothers and sisters in the sharing of that vision. QED.

The American news media is diligently fulfilling its obligations to its corporate sponsors by restricting the public discussion of the presidential campaign of 2016 to the two candidates, out of the three contenders, favored by the establishment: Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.

Hillary Clinton is, of course, the absolute favorite of the establishment, she is a fully bought-off influence peddler yoked to the service of the Big Money, and presents the most popularly appealing package enclosing the the most thoroughly toxic content: unhindered oligarchy.

Donald Trump is tolerated by the establishment because they have no choice, he has commandeered their Republican Party, which fell before the ferocious assault of Trump’s army of populist white supremacist anti-socialist (they think) proletarians.

Bernie Sanders is detested by the establishment because he is a man of impeccable character, morally untarnished history, great wit, humor and experience, and he is fighting tenaciously for the public good. All this bodes ill for corporate-funded political corruption and the many who depend on it for their daily bread (cake).

One of the angles being pushed at the moment by the media, on the wished-for contest between Clinton and Trump, is that of the relative advantage or disadvantage posed by each of their preferred candidate’s massive (and net) un-favorability rating among the public. Bernie Sanders has a high (and net) favorability rating among the public, so establishment media minimizes mention of him.

While the un-favorability ratings of Clinton (57%, of which 46% is strongly unfavorable) and Trump (57%, of which 45% is strongly unfavorable) are comparable, I think the sentiments behind the disfavor of each are different. Against Clinton is disgust, while against Trump is embarrassment.

People who disfavor Hillary Clinton know about her long history of unprincipled ambition, careerism, influence peddling and shameless cupidity. This disgusts people who disfavor her, and such disgust gives them a personal sense of moral superiority, which comfortably distances them from her.

People who disfavor Donald Trump are repulsed by his crude and boorish bigotry and loutish buffoonery, despite his talent for entertaining bombast, and his truthfulness regarding the pain of the white (and black) American proletariate, and the draining bloody waste caused by America’s foreign military adventures and its imperial pretensions. This embarrasses people who disfavor him, because they agree with much of what he says, but they don’t want to be publicly connected with the bigotry, boorishness and bombast even if they secretly agree with it. Embarrassment springs from the shame of sensing that one is not really morally superior to Trump, which uncomfortably shortens the distance to him.

Despite these two flavors of disfavor, people who see their personal interests and illusions advanced (and aversions forestalled) by either Hillary or Donald will vote for whichever applies.

Superficially, it would appear that Trump’s public image carries more liabilities than Hillary Clinton’s, and he is thus less likely to win in November. But, Hillary Clinton has no margin left for improving her public image or erasing her many failings from the public record. In fact, Hillary’s image may suffer serious further abrasion as more of the public takes in the critical report by the State Department’s Inspector General, on Hillary’s illegal (and hacked) private e-mail server while Secretary of State. And, there is always the very well-known possibility for a very-justified criminal indictment, though I would guess the Obama Administration would try to prevent that. So it seems more likely that Hillary’s favorability will decrease rather then increase with time.

Donald Trump, on the other hand, would have an easier time improving his public image than sinking it further. He only has to moderate (he can’t eliminate) his intemperate boorish bigoted bombastic buffoonery to improve the public’s view of him, as “presidential.” Whether he has the discipline, foresight and cleverness to carry off a public image rehabilitation is not clear at this time. But, now that the Republican Party machinery is behind him, I am sure that the best public image rehab doctors will be retained to operate for that purpose. So, I think Trump’s favorability is likely to increase with time.

Today, it was announced that Bernie Sanders will debate Donald Trump (“for charity”) in California before the June 7 Democratic primary. As a Bernie supporter I naturally assume that Bernie will trounce Trump. However, regardless of how that debate unfolds, it is a certainty that the biggest loser will be Hillary Clinton.

A Sanders-Trump debate will highlight:

1, the fact that Hillary Clinton reneged on her commitment to debate Bernie in California before the primary (dismissiveness of millions of voters),

2, the “presidential” images of both Sanders and Trump, since they would be engaged in an inter-party debate,

3, the failure of past and proposed Hillary Clinton politics (without her present to rebut this) by the mere presentation of Sanders’ and Trumps’ alternatives,

4, the actual debate of principles that the public wants between their two major “anti-establishment” champions.

This debate could be the imaginary snowball that initiates an avalanche of anxiety in the minds of Democratic Party super-delegates terrified of being buried by a “dump Hillary” movement.

It is two months before the party conventions, and five months before the general election.

[Dispatch #3]

<><><><><>

Poll: Election 2016 shapes up as a contest of negatives [22 May 2016]
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/poll-election-2016-shapes-up-as-a-contest-of-negatives/2016/05/21/8d4ccfd6-1ed3-11e6-b6e0-c53b7ef63b45_story.html

This entirely subjective matrix of characterizations of the candidates, their voters and their campaigns, is 100% accurate in my opinion. The candidates (and the categories associated with them, below) are listed in the preference ranking of the corporate establishment, which is exactly the inverse preference ranking of the public.

Candidate Qualities:

Hillary Clinton: corruption, incompetence, mendacity, careerism.

Donald Trump: bombast, braggadocio, bigotry, bluster.

Bernie Sanders: integrity, vision, judgment, compassion.

Voter Qualities:

Hillary Clinton’s:
old, comfortable, boring, fearful, unthinking, manipulative, selfish, want Democratic labels on Republican outcomes.

Donald Trump’s: white male, non-thinking, envious, resentful, want attention/respect.

Bernie Sanders’:
young, young-at-heart, idealistic, sociable, intelligent, hard-working, underpaid, determined, honest, want justice.

Candidate Ownership:
CI = corruption index (0 to 1)
BI = bigotry index (0 to 1)
BI = (BvI + BaI)/2
BvI = verbal bigotry index (0 to 1)
BaI = action bigotry index (0 to 1)

Hillary Clinton’s:
100% corporate establishment;
CI = 1.0, BvI = 0.2, BaI = 0.8, BI = 0.5

Donald Trump’s:
60% corporate, 30% private, 10% public;
CI = 0.6, BvI = 0.7, BaI = 0.3, BI = 0.5

Bernie Sanders’:
100% public;
CI = 0, BI = 0 = BvI = BaI.

Primary Campaigns:

Hillary Clinton’s primary campaign is a public relations spectacle to mask the attempted continuation of corporate establishment ownership of the Democratic Party.

Donald Trump’s primary campaign was a successful hostile take-over of the Republican Party by a combine of maverick corporate raiders and disaffected populist white supremacists. The corporate establishment ownership (same one) has accommodated itself to this change in Republican Party leadership.

Bernie Sander’s primary campaign is a hostile take-over attempt of the Democratic Party by the public. The corporate establishment ownership (same one) continues to fight this take-over attempt, and its intended expropriation of the Democratic Party by the public.

<><><><><>

[Hillary Clinton reneges on a commitment to debate Bernie Sanders in CA by June 7]:

Logically, it does her no good to debate Bernie, especially now. So, tactically, she’s right to avoid fulfilling her earlier commitment. And, this shows (as if we need to see it again) what a hollow careerist she is. She’s not interested in voters as actual human beings, or “the national good,” or “democracy,” for Hillary “it’s all about me.”

Substantively, she has nothing to debate, her “policies” boil down to influence peddling to establishment high finance. Her campaign now has devolved to simple fear-mongering (“be afraid of Trump, and vote for me to avoid that fear”), which will be most effective with her blissfully delusional “first female president” cultists. Hillary Clinton supporters in the general public (outside Cult Central apparatchiks) have learned how to remain happy and avoid cognitive dissonance, by being delusional.

Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party want voters to serve them. Bernie Sanders’ campaign is the exact opposite, he wants to serve the voters. The debate is done, now it’s time for people to just do the right thing.

[Ray says “vote Hillary” because she’d make better Supreme Court choices than Trump]:

Ray, look at the polls, Hillary is a loser. Neither Trump people, nor more Bernie people than you can imagine, will ever vote for her. Everybody knows she’s just an influence peddler, and that’s not real popular with voters right now, especially anyone who has suffered in some way from the 2007-2008 crash (which is most working/not-working people).

The Supreme Court – does – not – matter. Judges are appointed primarily to safeguard property/capital from populism and democracy; this is true regardless of whether it’s a “Democrat” or “Republican” president. “Social issues” can be resolved (pushed past the SC) by legislation. If the issue doesn’t have enough support to get legislated into law, the SC can diddle with it, but like Obamacare, if the SC sniffs the dominant mood, it goes along (and if the public doesn’t care or seem to notice, they nudge things along in favor of “property”). Also, the “be afraid of the SC appointments” red herring is a typical Clinton campaign fear tactic (like “fear Trump”) to manipulate the non-thinking fearful into acquiescing to Hillary. It’s Hillary-troll type stuff, Ray; it won’t wash with Bernie people.

Revolutions live because revolutionaries are fearless. Revolutionaries think, instead of just reacting fearfully, because thinking is the greatest antidote to fear. Trump-fear is a Clinton Campaign psychological manipulation. To succumb to it is to remain a slave. “I rebel there we exist” (Camus)

Finally, the election is actually about two issues, one national and one partisan:

#1, will the US government remain under the control of property/finance/corporations to the detriment of the public, or return to public control (democracy versus oligarchy)?, and

#2, will the Democratic Party remain under the control of property/finance/corporations to the detriment of the public, or return to public control (“open” democracy versus corruption & influence peddling)?

The Bernie-Hillary contest will determine the partisan issue (who gains control of the DP). A Bernie-Trump national contest would determine the issue of national control (people versus corporations/corruption). A Hillary-Trump contest would mean both the partisan and national issues were settled (for a while) in favor of the Big Money (people would have lost, again), and the result in November would only tell us what style that corporate control would exhibit to perception-manage and string along the enslaved population.

<><><><><><><><><>

May 19, 2016: The media is in a code-blue panic. The establishment, of which the media is a lushly funded appendage, is witnessing the steady deflation of public support and approval for the establishment’s presumptive figurehead and aspiring presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton. A national poll of registered voters, conducted by Fox News, for the first time places Donald Trump ahead of Hillary Clinton, at 45% versus 42%, with a margin of error of 3%.

This is just one poll, so confirmation of this shift in public opinion awaits polling by other organizations. But, Fox News polling has usually been comparable to that of other organizations. All polls show Bernie Sanders decisively ahead of Donald Trump, nationally and in “battleground” states. Hillary Clinton is decisively behind Donald Trump in those battleground states.

Hillary Clinton has NEVER had an increase of popularity during the course of any of her campaigns. She has entered her races with a high percentage of voter support/interest, and steadily lost it till the election, whether the final result was a victory or a defeat for her. In April, the Fox News poll showed Trump at 41% and Hillary Clinton at 48%. So in one month, Hillary went from a 7% lead over Trump to a 3% lag behind him; her support (by poll) dropped 6% while Trump’s increased by 4%. This represents a shift in voter opinion by 10% of the electorate (as determined by polling).

The party conventions are in 2 months, and the general election is in 5 months. The escalation of bad behavior by the Clinton campaign (as in Nevada) and the careerists in the Democratic Party (which is, after all, a Clinton machine fronting corporate money and control) only ensures that a larger and significant portion of Bernie Sanders people will abandon the Democrats after July if Bernie is not the presidential nominee (and not the VP nominee, and regardless of hollow promises to include the Sanders agenda in a party platform that a President H. Clinton would completely ignore).

The reason for Bernie’s superior popularity is that a wide spectrum of people resonate with his agenda, that is what they are voting for, not merely a personality (though certainly an appealing one), or a party label. In contrast, Hillary Clinton’s campaign is entirely a cult of personality without any intellectual, policy, and emotional substance beyond Democratic Party brand loyalty. Bernie Sanders supporters are following an agenda, a revolutionary movement, and they will stay with that movement without being restrained and corralled by party labels. Hillary Clinton’s campaign is only about Hillary Clinton, and that drastically narrows its appeal.

As the electorate looks more closely at Hillary Clinton, they like what they see less and less. So, if Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee, she will absolutely need Sanders’ people’s votes in order to defeat Donald Trump. And, she is doing the most effective job possible of alienating those voters. I think the rift is irreparable at this point. (I know I’m done with Hillary people for good and all.) It’s almost as if the Democratic Party has a death wish by sticking with her; or perhaps their massive cognitive dissonance arises from simple hubris; or maybe they’re just all blackmailed. It is probably as Upton Sinclair observed:

“It is difficult to get a person to understand something, when their salary depends on their not understanding it.”

(The Sinclair quotation was edited for gender neutrality. Sinclair’s original: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”)

Trump has many flaws and liabilities, and the combination of his acting stupidly and also suffering political attacks from his opposition might cause him to lose support in coming months, and perhaps ultimately lose the presidential race. But, if Hillary’s characteristic fading of support continues without reversal, and Trump’s support does not fade, then Hillary might be unelectable even with the votes of all the Bernie people. And in reality that Hillary dream, of hijacking the Bernie Sanders revolution, will never happen.

Because Hillary is running a personality-based campaign (“It’s all about me”) her opposition to other candidates is personal, she prefers to attack their personalities directly or by innuendo instead of getting bogged down in debates about policy differences (Sanders thwarts her the most in this regard). Her policy arguments have been erratic and vague because in reality she has no policy beyond influence peddling to establishment high finance. She is asking voters to choose her personality as superior (“more popular”) than that of Sanders and especially Trump, who is painted as the ultimate bogey man she must be elected to save America from: “Be afraid (don’t think!), elect Hillary.”

However, Bernie people actually do think, and thinking is the most effective antidote to fear. They are voting for national reform (rooting out political corruption) and national renewal (public investment in the American people for universally inclusive social and economic benefit to the American people). Stated negatively, they are voting against corporations and their corruption of the political system by money. The face of that corporate-funded political corruption is Hillary Clinton. More Bernie people than the establishment can imagine are now immune to Trump-fear, they are not going to be diverted from their revolution to save Hillary. It’s code-blue time for establishment politics.

<><><><><>

The poll that might scare Clinton supporters (18 May 2016)
Donald Trump leads Hillary Clinton 45% to 42% in a new national poll…a statistical tie. Historically, that has not boded well for Clinton. Can she turn her numbers around? Lawrence discusses with Michael Steele, Peter Wehner, and Geoff Garin.
http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/the-poll-that-might-scare-clinton-supporters-688508995933