Millennials favor GOP, want Clinton imprisoned

Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

There is hope: Despite oversampling Democrats, a new poll shows that millennials now favor the Republican Party, with a plurality calling for Hillary Clinton’s imprisonment.

Among ages 18 to 29, only 36 percent have a favorable view of the Democrat Party, and 47 have an unfavorable view. The low favorability number can likely be tied to young voters who were upset by how the DNC attempted to favor Hillary Clinton over millennial-favorite Bernie Sanders. And, some of these millennials are even saying they view the Republican Party more favorably. The GOP is leading the Democrats by 5 percent, scoring 41 percent favorability. Millennials have the most favorable view of the GOP versus other age demographics.

Later in the poll, we might have found out why: a plurality of millennials believe Clinton should be in prison. In fact, millennials are the only age demographic where more voters believe she should be in prison than those opposed to arresting her. 40 percent of millennials want her jailed, while just 39 percent oppose it (21 percent not sure).

For the past century the Democratic Party has had a lock on young voters. No matter the issue or candidate, voters under 30 routinely voted for Democrats in large majorities. For this poll to show such a trend away from the Democratic Party suggests that maybe the youngest voters are finally waking up to the reality facing them, due largely because of that Democratic Party.


  • wayne

    This is good to hear!

    On a purely anecdotal basis, I know a few 30-something young professionals, and none of them like Hillary, or Trump for that matter.
    –Almost all of them did vote for Obama in 2008, but considerably less did in 2012. Again, purely anecdotal, — the ones who have gotten married and/or purchased houses, are just as economically Conservative as myself & “socially” on the libertarian end.

  • Kirk

    This is the poll in which 5% of the respondents chose Harambe the gorilla for President over Ms. Clinton or Mr. Trump.

    See Q10 of the poll:

  • Kirk

    Harambe’s biggest disqualification for office is that he is dead, but ignoring that minor impediment, he was born in Brownsville (a fact sufficiently documented that there shouldn’t any birther issues), though I don’t know how 17 gorilla years translates into human years. Of course if they measured emotional years, I doubt that Mr. Trump would make it more than a third of the way toward the required 35.

  • Gene

    I was born in 81′. I guess that means that i’m a ‘millenial’, whatever that means.

    I have no illusions about who and what the clinton family is. Criminals, and grifters plain and simple. From arkansas to DC and word wide there is nothing they can say that I will believe at face value.

    And the same continues today. I heard on the radio a guy named obama was running for Democratic nomination. And as soon as I heard him talk I knew he was a lying sack of shiite muslim.

    My family is very informed about politics. Not being informed was not an option in the house of my parents. Very proud of the work my father does pushing back against the land grabbers and out of control pushers of statism at regulatory agencies everywhere in the alphabet soup of state and federal agencies including the Forest Service, the Center for Biodiversity in Tuscon or Tucson whichever, the epa, Texas commission on environmental quality, the list goes on.

  • Gene

    Voting for Trump if I was unclear.

  • wayne

    [HAR. ]
    According to the “internet,” gorilla’s can live into their 50’s, so it’s practically a 1:1 ratio. (in the wild, it’s even less)
    So, overlooking the whole “he’s-dead, Jim” thing, alas… we can’t elect him.

  • Cotour

    There really is hope, some similar real world feed back.

    This morning I receive an email from a lady friend (50ish, professional, former liberal feminist) related to an email I sent her about choosing Hillary or Trump. She does not personally like Trump so she assumed that she would support Hillary.

    She sent this article to me about Carl Rove erasing 22 million emails in response to and to counter Hillary’s email debacle.

    Then I more clearly explained what went on with Hillary and her email server and the fact that the old Rove story is designed to counter act and distract from the current Hillary story.

    “Carl Rove is not the sitting Secretary Of State, part of the presidents cabinet, who is legally required to save and store and surrender her work product after her service. It by law belongs to the American people. She set up her own server in order to control every communication that she had in order to later run for president.
    She did not want to have to be required to disclose her information / communications / Clinton Foundation conflict of interest as per any FOIA requests (Freedom Of Information Act).

    Doing so she revealed our governments business and secrets to our enemy’s, who the FBI director testified about was probably hacked (read: It was hacked). If the DNC was hacked then you can bet that the Secretary of States server was absolutely hacked. If it were anyone else other than Hillary, who exists in the political world they would 100 percent be in jail. 100 percent. Hillary Clinton must not be rewarded with the presidency for that FACT alone, never mind the multiple other reasons.”

    Then she wrote: “The degree of that crime JUST hit me by your 2nd paragraph. I think I didn’t want to know it. And quite frankly, Trump’s Bassoon like charades are so damn distracting from it and everything else that’s serious. They’ve gotten everyone focused on rallying to stop him more than anything else. Do you ever believe, as I’ve fantasied but not read anywhere, that they are in kahootz? I will not be voting for Either of them. ”

    There really is hope, somehow educating yourself in between the chaos of raising a family, going to work, paying your bills can result in some kind of positive decision and action. Not voting for either of them is a reasonable choice IMO and in this case it goes against Hillary.

  • wayne

    (I’m twice your age & my daughter is slightly older than you.)

    –My younger friends are in your exact age-cohort, and none them (to a person) knows what the heck a “millennial” is, nor do they appreciate the tag.

    -again, anecdotally among my associates– I personally find your generation to be very intelligent, patriotic, and fairly “traditional,” generally unencumbered by “race & sex issues,” & generally small “l” libertarians. They are interested in American History & generally aware of the period before they were born.

    Personally, I can’t support Trump myself, but I appreciate your interest in politics & will do everything in my power to give you a solid Reagan Conservative to vote for, next cycle.

  • Edward


    One liberal Democrat or the other liberal Democrat. Your friend did not have to move very far to change her mind about either or both of them.

    The real trick is to get her to vote conservative, as better fits her values, although she has been taught otherwise.

  • Joe

    Any one who observed the Clinton administration should know what kind of person Hillary is, nothing about her has changed, anyone but Hillary!

  • Cotour

    No, Think about it.

    One candidate she found personally distasteful and would not have voted for. But the other candidate who she was going to vote for because she is a Democrat she now confidently sees as a criminal and can not vote for.

    She took the time to educate herself and came to IMO an appropriate, reasonable decision. I am working on getting her to vote for the more conservative candidates. One step at a time, at least she is thinking.

  • Edward

    As I said. She only made a small step. The big step is getting her to vote conservative.

    By the way, you can’t do that, because you do not vote conservative yourself, Cotour. You voted for Trump, rather than any of the actual conservatives.

    But I am interested in which conservative you are thinking of getting her to vote for.

  • wayne

    “I am working on getting her to vote for the more conservative candidates.”

    Just exactly who are these “more conservative candidates” of which you speak & in what election’s?
    Just yesterday, you painted Cruz as a rigid, right-wing, extremist, robot, religious obsessed, petty little man, who could never get elected to anything.

  • wayne

    Edward– our posts crossed each other in the Ether. I as well am interested in which “conservative” candidates Cotour actually supports. (not just the Presidential election– I consider all House/Senate races to be “National” in nature.)

  • Cotour

    She lives in NYC, there are not many Conservatives to choose from. That’s why this represents real progress of some sort and why from my perspective, even though as you so doggedly keep pointing out, that they are each tyrants, that voting for Trump is also some kind of progress because he, IMO, will be the less tyrannical.

    And like you pointed out here: “Once again, just because a candidate is less than perfect does not mean that the right vote is for the liberal Democrat, who will bring more tyranny to us, rather than vote for the less-than-perfect conservative. Cruz is and always was better than Trump in almost every way.”

    The more palatable Liberal Democrat is certainly better then the less palatable Liberal Democrat, and that, believe it or not, is a starting point and some measure of progress. Trump IMO is the acceptable lees-than-perfect candidate (although not conservative to your thinking).

  • Edward

    wayne wrote: “our posts crossed each other in the Ether.”

    I’ve had that happen, too. I’m figuring out ways to hit the refresh button before posting a reply.

    wayne wrote: “I consider all House/Senate races to be ‘National’ in nature.”

    Good way to look at it. I can’t remember the last time I considered myself represented by my Senator or Congresscritter.

    I must be feeling pretty young, right now, because I agree with those millennials who think Clinton should be in prison.

  • wayne

    -I would remind you, plenty of Conservatives, not in NYC, running throughout the Country.

    -“Trump IMO is the acceptable less-than-perfect candidate.”

    Now you are just back-pedaling on months of your pronouncements as to Trumps genius, evolution, master-negotiator, brilliant, chess-playing, shrewd-intellect, & generally wonderfulness-ness, etc.,etc.
    It finally dawned on me– if Trump were to win, you’ll be patting yourself on the back and “told-you-so-ing” people like me.
    If Trump loses, you’ll be blaming people like for not voting for him.

  • Edward

    Cotour wrote: “The more palatable Liberal Democrat is certainly better then the less palatable Liberal Democrat.”

    Not really. …

    Cotour wrote: “that, believe it or not, is a starting point and some measure of progress.”

    … because it still takes us in the wrong direction, the direction of tyranny. That is *not* progress in any way, shape, or form. It is regression in the wrong direction. There is no other way of looking at it. Unless you favor going in that direction.

    Do you, Cotour, favor going in that direction?

  • Cotour

    “Now you are just back-pedaling on months of your pronouncements as to Trumps genius, evolution, master-negotiator, brilliant, chess-playing, shrewd-intellect, & generally wonderfulness-ness, etc.,etc.”

    I was pandering to Edward, I thought that I saw some room for a molecule of agreement. I will take what I can get.

    “Do you, Cotour, favor going in that direction?”

    If you had to be shot in the ass, would you rather be shot in the ass with a 22 or a 50 cal. ?
    What might you answer? I know what I would answer.

    I will take the 22.

  • Gene


    Not all millenials fit the stupid twitter pound sign stereotype. I’m living proof of that.

    Only God knows what the future holds. I thought that we had a reagan-bible-believing-christian candidate in Ted Cruz. Good or bad more of Ted will unfold as time goes by. Definitely a stupid move by him to claim that his conscience is that squeaky clean and we should feel the same as he does. And his conscience is more important to him than beating Hitlery. The world is bigger than you ted and you too wayne. AS if the future of the republic revolves around how you FEEL about your vote. I didn’t want trump to win the nomination but I am not a small man. I will not stay home on election day because my idea of utopia has not been met by who got the nomination. The U.S.A. and Israel are the only governments whose rights are restricted to those granted it by its citizens. That rare reality doesn’t give Wayne pause to think that it’s better to vote for Trump than stay home and cast a vote for Hitlery. We are facing the biggest advancement of unadulterated progressivism in the existence of the United States of America!! And wayne has admitted to staying home instead of standing up and voting for who got the nomination. In the words of the late jim traficant: “Unbelievable beam me up scotty!”

    I am not libertarian because they are so conservative that they elect democrats. I have begun calling myself a bible-believing Christian, and my political beliefs flow out of that on the advice of my Rabbi, Daniel Lapin, . I will refrain from calling myself a conservative because I think it has become ill-defined. To many ‘conservative’ is what you call someone who hates government, and who cannot briefly express solid reasons why.

    If you have such a hard time voting for Trump how do you think not voting for him will keep Hitlery from winning?

    Look, the ship of the United States of America is sinking and Hitlery and Trump are the only two lifeboats. Hitlery has holes, it can’t help you. Trump is a lifeboat with a cover over it. We don’t know what will happen if we get in the Trump lifeboat. But at least we have a chance. At least by going with Trump we are not going with Hitlery.

    There is no third choice like a protest vote or some such nonsense. That would be an incredibly selfish move on your part. But your mind is already made up.

    You cannot provide a candidate to me or anyone else unless you decide to run. Even still you are not a solid Reagan conservative. I understand what you’re trying to convey but it is worthless. All the more worthless if you attempt to reach that end by not voting. There are no perfect candidates. Jesus Christ will never run for office.

    Gene Shipp

  • Edward

    I’ll avoid getting shot. I don’t know what you’re thinking, but I’m not much of a masochist, thank you very much. You also failed to answer the question.

    Here’s a better analogy, since this concept of “direction” in politics seems to confound you:

    Imagine that you are in St. Louis and want to get home to New York. There are two airplanes going to San Francisco, one will fly at 550 miles per hour and the other at 500 miles per hour. Which airplane will you take?

    The analogy is that New York is liberty (that’s where the statue is, after all), St. Louis is where we are now (the government telling us how to spend our money and (ab)using its power to harass any patriots), and San Francisco is tyranny (that’s where Pelosi is from, after all). Hillary Clinton is the 550 mph plane, and Donald Trump is the 500 mph plane. He isn’t going to get to tyranny (SF) as fast as Clinton, but that is the destination.

    I already know that your choice, Cotour, is the 500 mph plane (Trump), but he isn’t getting you where you want to go. In fact, he is taking you farther from your destination, but maybe you hope that he will change his mind and fly to New York, instead. Does this make any sense to you? Me neither, which is why I wonder what you think you are doing going with Trump in the first place. (Or is tyranny the place you want to be, not New York?)

    Instead, you should consider the other options.

    A plane to Philidelphia is not perfect, but it is just a two hour train ride away from home. That would be a better choice. A train into New York would take longer, but it is also a better choice. Renting a car or taking a bus would also be better choices, though they are slow and/or expensive.

    But somehow, when it comes to politics, you insist that everyone board the plane that goes the other way.

    Trump is not an acceptable choice in any way, shape, or form.

  • Edward

    Comparing voting for Trump to getting shot in the ass with a .22 is not as good of a sales technique as you may imagine. It may have opposite effects to what you may have hoped for.

  • Joe

    Edward, love your train/plane speed and direction analogy, we are headed in the wrong direction, both parties seem to be united in that, it seems as though conservatives are once again faced with voting for the candidate that stinks less. The Republicans have said multiple times that they are against Obama care, give us more control and we will get rid of this bill, not a single republican voted for the bill, but for the most part only one Republican has tried to do something about the ACA bill almost no one stood with Ted Cruz, it is as though the chamber of commerce said to Republican leaders, we need more illegal immigrants and we (our corporate members) don’t want to pay for health care benefits any longer, don’t do anything to dismantle the ACA, and so it goes that Trump has flip flopped on a number of things that he said he would fix, folks, the fix is in, no matter who is elected,we are going to Los Angela’s.

  • wayne

    Yes– the ‘getting-shot’ analogy is not one of Cotour’s better arguments. (There’s an error of logical construction in that, but I can’t recall what it is. Or maybe simply an unstated assumption that a .22 won’t kill you, no matter where you happen to get shot.)

    You guys might like “The Abilene Paradox,” aka “The road to Abilene.”

    “The Abilene Paradox was coined by Jerry B. Harvey, Professor Emeritus of Management at The George Washington University and author of “The Abilene Paradox and Other Meditations on Management.” The Paradox is explained using a parable of a family who ends up making an uncomfortable trip that none of them wanted to make.”

  • Phill O

    Just finishing a family reunion. The folk from Utah and I agree on this: If Hillary gets in, there will never be another chance to elect a conservative! To hold out now for a better candidate is lunacy. It is great that Cotour has at least stoppped a liberal for voting for Hillary but—– When one ruminates on the postings by Bob on this site, this fact becomes clear. Think of the postings where fascist is in the title. You know of many examples. The whole push by the left is to eliminate the voice of the right.

    Do you think that the targeting of conservative groups by the IRS has stopped even after it was exposed? Do you think that the executive actions by the president will be reversed?

    My cousins from Utah agree that Cruz shot his political career in the foot. What I was not aware of was how Romney shot himself in the foot with them. They are staunch Tea Party folk. Freedom is their goal.

  • Cotour

    The 22 in the ass analogy is a simple and direct choice problem, you do not have to be a high IQ nerd genius to figure it out. Especially when you get a look at the difference between a 22 and a 50 cal. You have all nerded things up to serve your own narrow and self defeating purposes.

    In the end you are all willing to have Hillary as the president and that is in no way, shape or form acceptable to me. My primary argument through out this ordeal is that Hillary not be rewarded with the presidency. How ever you get to that reality, please get there.

    “Yes– the ‘getting-shot’ analogy is not one of Cotour’s better arguments. (There’s an error of logical construction in that, but I can’t recall what it is. Or maybe simply an unstated assumption that a .22 won’t kill you, no matter where you happen to get shot.)”

    Wayne: Which do you think would be more survivable, a 22 or a 50 cal. ? If you can not make sense of this choice then that explains quite a lot to me. Your confusing yourself with irrelevant details to your own detriment.

  • Cotour: Your analogy using a 22 vs a 50 is quite weak, especially since I know for a fact that a 22 can easily kill you. I myself would do something similar to what Indiana Jones did, and quickly pull out my concealed 45 and kill the guy attacking me.

    Edward: Your analogy of the two planes is also flawed, as it does not correctly describe the situation. A more accurate version would give us a choice between a plane flying to San Francisco and a plane flying in circles, the pilot unsure of which way to go. He has never flown to New York before, isn’t sure how to get there, and has always loved the San Francisco bay area for its women and entertainment. However, his co-pilot has been to both places, and prefers New York and knows the route. Also, while there is incredible disagreement in air traffic control about what route to send him, the majority of controllers strongly favor New York.

    Thus, while there is a good chance the pilot of the second plane will fly you to San Francisco eventually, there is also a good chance he might not, and might actually end up landing somewhere in Chicago, or even better somewhere in Indiana.

    What choice does one make in this situation? One plane guarantees that you to end up in San Francisco, hanging out with Nancy Pelosi. The other might not. The choice is not a good one, but it still is a real choice.

  • wayne


    It’s not the correct analogy that you want, to illustrate the point, you wished to make.
    (I understand completely, the point you intended to make, but that’s not, what you did.)
    Maybe if you said “air-rifle,” vs. anything else…
    (and in your analogy– I would refuse to state a choice. I don’t acquiesce to being shot by anything, under any circumstances.)

    “The devil is in the damn details.” Pulling the “hi-IQ nerd” card, won’t get you anywhere.
    (You do realize? the hated AR-15, uses .223 rounds?)

  • Cotour

    Quality of analogy aside, can we all just get to the point where Hillary does not become the next president?

    IMO a 22 in the ass is simply more survivable than a 50cal., and that is my essential point and analogy to Hillary becoming president. Must we get into the irrelevant minutia about physiology and ballistics?

    You can not take the nerd out of the nerd, can you?

  • wayne

    Mr. Z–
    good clarification.

    “Road to nowhere”

  • wayne

    My 30-something friends tell me “being a Nerd” is a term of endearment now, so I’ll take it.

    Your Guy Trump, is doing his best, to ensure Hillary is elected.

  • Cotour

    In this context “nerd” means overly anal about details that are not relevant, they are only relevant to overly anal nerds. So take pride in your newly embraced handle, you have earned it.

    The coin toss that is this presidential election carry’s on and will probably be determined by Wikileaks releases and potentially murderous events much closer to November 8th.

  • wayne

    –you’ve spent months telling us all how Trump was the ONLY one who could beat Hillary. Now, its a “coin toss” & depends on what the radical left WikiLeaks releases?

    It should be a LANDSLIDE against Hillary, but you & people who think like you, gave us Trump.

    You are correct on one point, about “ much closer to November 8.” (deciding the election.)
    The vast majority of the Electorate, does not really firmly decide, until August/September.
    (When you are right, I have no problem giving you the credit.)

    I would implore you to abandon the Freud references. Not only are they largely bunk, but most people instinctually cringe at them. (but I’m not here to shut-you-up.)

  • Cotour


    I still think that the only person that can beat Hillary is Trump. No one else would have the stones and the base instincts to actually tear her down. No one else would be able to do that and have the ability to prevail, not even T.C.

    And at this point in time the polls, which we have previously established were “facts”, of the moment anyway, currently indicate that its a 50/50 race.

    Feel free to cringe when you feel the need.

  • Cotour

    The ultimate indicator that Trump must prevail:

    Logic would indicate that if you stand unequivocally opposed to Obama then you must ensure that what he is against must be what you are for. Its really that simple.

  • Garry

    I think Mr. Z nailed the correct analogy.

    Cotour, now you’re getting on the very slippery slope of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” which I think is symptomatic of a problem we have in American politics (and elsewhere) of “us vs. them” thinking.

    The real world is more complex than that; often, the enemy of my enemy is also my enemy. The binary “us vs. them” thinking leads to things like arming ISIS in Libya, because we think that ISIS will help us against Assad.

    Having said that, today Obama continued to prove that’s he’s very unpresidential, and when I hear things like that my gut reaction is to do the opposite of what the speaker is advocating.

    In a similar vein, Google doesn’t work on my cellphone, so I use Yahoo, and their headlines are so biased pro-Hillary/anti-Trump that their cumulative effect is making we want to vote for Trump. To me that’s silly; I do my best to ignore what the idiots at Yahoo write in their headlines.

    Personally, I always try to make up my own mind, regardless of what “my enemies” want. You often say that election results are based on emotion, but that doesn’t mean that we should cast our votes from emotion.

  • Cotour

    I’m so sorry that this is so hard for you, sometimes things that must be done are hard.

    Suggestion: Load the Drudge Report app on your phone, you will be a happier person.

  • wayne

    (It’s no secret, you & I just fundamentally disagree on some key points.)

    You did hit upon something–
    “No one else would have the stones and the base instincts to actually tear her down.”

    I would submit–
    – It’s necessary, but not sufficient, to exclusively attack one’s opponent.
    –Trump needs to clearly explain with what exactly, he intends to fill the void, after his opponent is defeated, in a manner sufficient for large numbers of people to accept.

    Trump needs 100% of “our side,” and a certain minimum percentage of defectors from “their side,” or he does not win.

    Saying, “You have to vote for Trump because Hillary is worse.” Doesn’t say a whole helluva lot about Trump, does it? (And for all the reasons I’ve said in the past, I can’t buy into Trump.)

    “Fear” is definitely motivating, but it won’t earn you the magical Electoral College votes required.

  • Gene


    You’re about seventy years old. And listen to, if not lean on, 30 somethings for advice.

    You’ll get there but you’ve got to straighten out your thinking. A. LOT.

  • Wayne

    Not sure what that’s about. (Not in that part of the Baby-Boom generation–I should have said “about twice your age.”) But it’s nice of you to patronize me, ostensibly because I won’t vote for Trump.
    My daughter (PhD in Pharmaceutical Research) is 36 & I have a 12 yr old g-daughter. I work with people 24-60.
    Been a Movement Conservative with a libertarian-bent, all my life–I was battling Ford’s, Carter’s,, Bush’s, and Clintons, before you were alive or could vote.

    In case I just mangled my original post–I was paying compliments to your generation, but I’m entirely open to re-evaluating my generalization.

  • wodun

    Maybe a better analogy is a zombie attack took out your town and you have no choice but to board a plane to escape. There are two pilots available. One pilot wants to take you to Detroit and you don’t know where the other one will take you but they claim it will be someplace better than Detroit. Neither of the pilots will take you where you want to go but no matter what, one of them will be the pilot and you have to be a passenger on the plane. Which pilot do you choose?

  • Cotour

    Who wants to definitely go to Detroit? No one who has already been there.

    And we have been there. At least with the other pilot potential exists other than what you definitely know you do not want.

  • Cotour

    That 22 is sounding pretty good right about now now, ha Wayne :)

  • Edward

    Phill O wrote: “If Hillary gets in, there will never be another chance to elect a conservative! To hold out now for a better candidate is lunacy.”

    You make is sound as though Trump or the Republican Party may someday in the far, far distant future run a conservative. We have been trying that method for the past 28 years, now, expecting different results, but the GOP continues to *not* run a conservative for president, and now they have a liberal Democrat for a candidate. They keep choosing more and more liberal candidates each election time. The trend is disturbing and is why I abandoned the Republican Party.

    Cotour wrote: “In the end you are all willing to have Hillary as the president and that is in no way, shape or form acceptable to me.”

    No, we are not willing to have Hillary Clinton as president, but we are also unwilling to encourage Trump in his bid to tyrannize America.

    Cotour wrote: “In this context “nerd” means overly anal about details that are not relevant,”

    I think that we need to stick to commonly accepted definitions, otherwise we will get bogged down in the irrelevant minutia about the meaning of words and what we meant by them. It’s bad enough that they seem to go from insult to terms of endearment without notice.

    Cotour wrote: “Logic would indicate that if you stand unequivocally opposed to Obama then you must ensure that what he is against must be what you are for.”

    Actually, not only is that not logical, but I stand unequivocally opposed to tyranny. Obama (and Clinton and Trump) is just one possible conduit for tyranny to conquer America. What I am *for* is liberty. It does not matter what Obama is against; he does not determine my desires and favors, or my dislikes and oppositions. Thus, to be against Obama and Clinton does not mean that I must favor the third tyrant, who runs against them. I can be against him, too.

    Cotour wrote: “sometimes things that must be done are hard.”

    You mean like voting for the conservative rather than being able to say “I voted for the winner”? This is, as Biden might say, malarkey. The easy vote is for one of the tyrants. The harder thing to do is go against the current and vote for the conservative, rather than the two popular liberal Democrats on the two major party tickets.

    Cotour, you yourself noted that it was easy to convince someone to not vote for Clinton, but it is hard to get them to vote for the conservative. That is the thing that must be done, if we are to have liberty in this country. It is hard, but it must be done.

    You wrote: “Quality of analogy aside, can we all just get to the point where Hillary does not become the next president?”

    Face it, Cotour, the reason Clinton becomes president, if she does, is not our fault for not voting for her, but your fault for voting for the liberal Democrat, Trump. Trump in not worth voting for. Had you voted for a Republican nominee who is worth voting for, then we all would be voting for that candidate in November (it is your logic, that a vote for the incorrect candidate is in reality a vote for Clinton, where in the primaries Trump was the incorrect candidate – the one who could not beat Clinton).

    But, no, you had to rebel against the Republican establishment and vote for the person they hated most. Now we are stuck with *two* Democratic Parties, two liberal Democrat candidates, and – as you say – only evil choices from which to choose (I say that there is a third, alternative choice, but you refuse to acknowledge or vote that way).

    I refuse to choose to get shot, either by the .22 or the 50 caliber. Do *NOT* try to put the blame for the mess you made onto me, for I do not accept it. You did this to yourself and to the rest of us. Stand up and accept the responsibility. I’m not going to save your butt at the expense of my own. You may have abandoned your own principles, resulting in tyranny raining down upon us, but I will not abandon mine, like the Republican Party did – with *your* help. If we all get shot in the ass, that is on you. (2 seconds)

    I *did* say that it was a better analogy, but the bar was very low, so that does not mean much.

    I used the two different speeds, because it is certain that Trump is taking us to tyranny, but we seem to have disagreements on how long it will take him to get us there.

    Your logic is a bit flawed, because the pilot (Trump) has been flying strongly in the San Francisco direction his entire life, funding those who would take him there and not funding those who would not. I don’t know about the co-pilot (I never heard of him before he was announced as co-pilot), but the rest of the flight crew strongly favors San Francisco over New York. At best, the pilot might stop off in Laredo to build a wall, but I’m not much counting on that, anymore.

    All of his instinctive answers to questions always show that his intention is San Francisco, and any other answer is coaxed out of him reluctantly as he avoids an outright passenger revolt. His ego tells him that he is right and the passengers are wrong, and he gets upset when anyone questions his correctness. So, what do you think he will do when he locks the cockpit door? I don’t think that he is headed to Chicago or Indiana any time soon (or ever), not with those women and other entertainments in San Francisco.

    I hope you like cable cars, but the lines to get on them are pretty long. I hope you like Alcatraz, but you have to get tickets days in advance.

    Huh. Long lines and great inconvenience. San Francisco sounds more and more like the Soviet Union all the time.

    That is why I am taking the third choice. I do not want to encourage anyone who is going to San Francisco.

    In my family, if someone did not want to go to Abilene, he spoke up. I guess this is why I don’t do the road to Abilene story much. It does not bring back such memories. When I did something I didn’t like, I had thought it was a good idea at the time.

    Garry wrote: “the enemy of my enemy is also my enemy. The binary “us vs. them” thinking leads to things like arming ISIS in Libya, because we think that ISIS will help us against Assad.”

    Excellent point. The enemy of my enemy may be an ally today, but tomorrow he may use the assistance I gave him against me. That is how I see Trump. Whichever one of them wins election, the rest of us get screwed. I refuse to be the one who sells Lenin the rope, as in: “The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.”

    Not so good analogy. The history of the second pilot is well known, and he has favored and admired Detroit his entire life, funding those who go there but not those who don’t, and continues to indicate that he wants to go there.

    In the instance of a zombie attack, it is most likely that this would be his last chance to go there, so I think we know that it is better for us to take the third alternative choice – even if that is walking.

    What we actually have is a case of tyrant attack, and our supposed saviors are the tyrants.

  • Cotour

    ” so I think we know that it is better for us to take the third alternative choice – even if that is walking.”

    We are all still waiting for that “third” choice to show up.

  • Edward

    No, Cotour, you are just not paying any attention. I keep telling you that there is a third alternative choice, and I keep saying that you refuse to accept that fact — and here you are confirming just that.

    Sometimes the hard thing that must be done is sitting down and doing some research, such as on alternatives. Instead of doing the hard thing, you wait around for Mark Levin to tell you what to do and who to vote for. Apparently he still has not given you permission to consider those alternatives, which explains why you refuse to acknowledge their existence.

  • wayne

    ref 3:30pm comment, in case this crosses with others in transit

    Don’t want to speak for Edward, but for me- this is all a matter of my principle’s.
    There is a “third choice,” and that includes walking. (This “binary-choice” stuff is overblown and Garry/Edward/others have touched upon it.)

    Some of us just aren’t going to vote for Trump, some will vote 3,4,5-th party, some won’t vote for that office but remain highly invested in the down ballot, some will decide on Trump as they walk into the booth. I don’t think anyone in those positions, making that choice, are expecting a result other than Trump or Hillary.

    slight tangent– you DID hit upon something in a previous post (which I can’t readily locate) about Trump ‘having the guts to trash Hillary.’–I totally agree; Trump is relatively good at trash-talking Hillary & he definitely touches upon themes people have wished other “politicians’ would actually say aloud.

    I would put forth, along that line;
    It’s a necessary (and refreshing) thing, -trashing Clinton-, but it’s not a sufficient act, for Trump to win.
    He needs 100% of “our side,” + a certain percentage of “their side.”
    Trump needs to hammer Hillary 24/7 AND present his “Vision thing,” for lack of a neutral-phrase, to make it a complete “necessary & sufficient” package. (Making America Great, is a Theme, not a plan.)

    What he appears to be saying– what I hear him saying (and what you have said on occasion)– “You have to vote for Trump.”
    That just won’t garner the necessary Electoral Votes.

    (and I know we differ on all this.)

  • Garry

    I just realized that Obama’s comments today, although infuriating, have their own aspect of genius.

    I don’t like any president, regardless of party or whether not I voted for him, talking trash, which is what Obama did today. However, anyone criticizing Obama for talking trash has to recognize that talking trash is a big part of Trump’s identity.

    This doesn’t leave a whole lot of room for criticizing Obama’s actions as unpresidential while defending Trump, unless one has no problems being seen as a hypocrite.

    I didn’t like Obama’s comments, but I grudgingly give him his due for choosing his target wisely.

    I hate politics.

  • Cotour

    Its becoming clearer and clearer, now government is too big to fail!

    The narrative being put forth by the French government, the Obama administration and the media is that the world is now so fragile that to disturb it too much by changing the American government (especially to Trump) to something other than the next Leftist installment of the Democrat party the world will implode!

    If its good enough for the banks, its good enough for government. At the point where this story is bought specifically by the American people, because the Europeans and most of the rest of the world is already there, that is the point where the globalists / One World Order mentality is manifested and there will be no other direction to go.

    Think that was all just a “conspiracy theory”? Guess again.

  • Phill O

    ” Edward
    August 2, 2016 at 3:10 pm

    Phill O wrote: “If Hillary gets in, there will never be another chance to elect a conservative! To hold out now for a better candidate is lunacy.”

    What I a was trying to express is the thought of many in Utah as well as my own conclusions. One cousin was mayor of Provo some years back so is definitely Mormon, while I would be classified as evangelical. The posts by Bob show that the current democrat party is heading to shut down any opposition using legislation. Other sources indicate those who do not support man made climate change should be illegal or criminal. This is fascism. The control that the dems have of the media (shown by Bob’s listing of the Wikileaks) and the control they have on the education system is just how the fascists operated. We believe there will never be anything but democrats in power if the Clintons (Hillary) regains the White House.

    Is there any one other than Trump that could keep the Clintons winning and from reforming so only democrats can run for office? Obama sure has moved that way. The left sure wants it. We believe there will never be another chance (without civil war). All conservatives will have to be re-educated in special class rooms. We are seeing the growth of fascism in a free country.

  • ken anthony

    It should be a LANDSLIDE against Hillary, but you & people who think like you, gave us Trump.

    It will be a landslide against Hillary. Look at the past republican candidates. They could all have been selected by the democrats. Trump breaks that mold. Every time Trump is lambasted by the media it turns out Trump was right. The latest is this gold star fiasco. It turns out this Muslim lawyer has a financial interest in bringing Muslims into America even if a large percentage of them are terrorists. He waves the constitution without realizing that again Trump is right. As president it would be his legal right and moral duty to vet immigrants. Trump hates Muslims is just the latest version of the BIG LIE. Get past how Trump says things to the actual facts and you find Trump holding very conservative principles. Where he does not his principles are very libertarian American.

    It is unfortunate that he speaks in terms of what ‘he will do’ for America, but if you pay close attention he acknowledges that he needs the American people to get things done. It doesn’t matter that he speaks like a boss (which is what he is after all.) What matters is he will try to do the un-pc things that have been a long time coming. Comparing Trump to a fascist is comical. It’s also dangerous because the real dem fascists are gaining and consolidating power every day. ‘Conservatives’ can moan about the abuses of power but then support those abuses by inaction. Ted Cruz wasn’t a conservative savior. The more he parroted Trumps popular ideas the more he revealed himself to be more like Hillary than Trump.

    Trump may not know how to fly the plane or where to go, but he’s not trying to do it alone. He will accept your help. Hillary doesn’t need or want your help. She’s got the whole country tied in knots and that works for her.

  • Alex

    This video summarizes Hillary Clinton’s evil personality and why she is a threat to all of mankind.

  • Edward

    Phill O asked: “Is there any one other than Trump that could keep the Clintons winning and from reforming so only democrats can run for office?”

    Trump won’t do this. He advocates that freedom of speech can be limited so that no one says anything that he doesn’t want them to say, such as anything negative about him. That is a Democrat proposal — almost exactly. The Democrats actually proposed an amendment to the First Amendment.

    It is amazing how little recognition that the advocates for Trump give to how similar he is to Clinton and the rest of the liberal Democrats. They seem to think that Trump will miraculously change into a conservative, some day, despite the fact that he can’t even describe conservativism. Just because this RINO is on the Republican ticket does not make him any less of a liberal Democrat.

  • Edward.

    As much as I do agree with you about the foolishness of choosing a liberal Democrat as the Republican presidential candidate, I think you weaken your case when you act like there is almost no difference between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. The two are very very different in many ways, mostly related to her dishonesty and corruption as well as his many links to the Republican Party.

    In fact, maybe the biggest difference between these two candidates is the company they keep. This fact is as important a consideration in choosing who to vote for as anything.

  • Edward

    Robert wrote: “mostly related to her dishonesty and corruption as well as his many links to the Republican Party.”

    This is why I say that they take different paths, but the goal is the same. Trump is less corrupt, but that does not make him any less liberal Democrat.

    Robert wrote: “maybe the biggest difference between these two candidates is the company they keep.”

    Trump’s links to the Republican Party, some of the company he keeps, are not to the conservatives in the party. He trashes those regularly. His links are more with the other RINOs in the party, but that is just a birds of a feather thing. The company that he keeps has not helped him to understand conservativism any better than other liberal Democrats, such as Clinton. Thus, the difference in the company they keep does not make them much different than each other.

    Just because they are not exactly the same does not mean that their many similarities should be dismissed. Neither one puts much store in the US Constitution.

  • Phill O

    August 3, 2016 at 3:08 pm (your last post)

    In summary, do you think the USA has already gone past the point of no return to any form of conservatism?

    If only liberal democrats have been chosen by the GOP, this might be true.

  • Edward

    Phill O asked: “do you think the USA has already gone past the point of no return to any form of conservatism?”

    It depends upon whether the GOP can be taken back from the Democratic Party or a new party can become dominant, as the Republican party did over the slavery issue a century and a half ago.

    Alternatively, an Article Five Convention could result in amendments that reaffirm the liberties that have been lost through various Supreme Court (mis)interpretations of the Constitution (e.g. Wickard vs. Filburn) (come to think of it, the Whiskey Rebellion may have gone the wrong way, too, but that was the president and his Executive Branch). Obviously, the Supreme Court, Congress, and many presidents have not read the US Constitution, whose preamble clearly states: “… and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” We the Posterity await the return of these Blessings of Liberty.

    If all else fails, the Final Solution (yes, I intend that to sound ominous) is stated in the Declaration of Independence, whose list of grievances of tyranny is eerily similar to the tyrannies expressed by today’s federal government and many local governments.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *