I won’t detail the
second mountain Hillary had to scale because I’ve already analyzed Comey’s hatchet-job
of a press conference in my October 30 posting. Meanwhile, new information has
come to light in the last few days, which I’ll get to later. I want to discuss
the polling first. On July 7, when Comey gave his press conference, and on
October 28th, when Comey dispatched that letter to Congress announcing
a new investigation into Anthony Weiner’s emails, Hillary Clinton enjoyed a
significant lead in the polls. I’ve used the Reuters/Ipsos Tracking Poll here,
but most of the other polls produce the same general trend. On July 5th,
the Reuters Poll reveals an 8% lead for Hillary Clinton. That lead shrank to a
virtual tie after Comey’s press conference, but soon expanded once again as
voters got to know the real Donald Trump. Then, on October 28, eleven days before
the election, Comey struck again. New emails had been discovered in the
computer of Anthony Weiner which might incriminate Hillary Clinton and lead to
an indictment. With a little luck, she’d be in jail before her inauguration. At
that point, Hillary enjoyed a six percent lead, which again began to shrink.
Only now, she didn’t have enough time to recover.
And all the
while, from Trump’s lying mouth, it’s “Crooked Hillary”, the most corrupt
candidate ever to run for the highest office. Lock her up.
On December 9, the
Washington Post ran a story that
included a letter from outgoing Senator Harry Reid. Early on, according to
Reid, the CIA concluded that the Russians were behind the hacking of the DNC’s
and John Podesta’s emails because they wanted Trump to win. Further, the CIA
revealed their findings to James Comey who somehow decided that the emails in
Anthony Weiner’s computer were more important than an attack upon the American
electoral process by a foreign country.
It seems more and more likely that Comey
was motivated by purely partisan politics and not a prickly conscience. He
wished to elect a Republican, any Republican. But I’m not here to convict a man
already convicted by the facts. I only want to demonstrate that like Bernie
Saunders’s attack on Hillary’s character, Comey, as an obstacle, was unique. No
former FBI Director, not even Hoover, had dared to insert him-or-herself into
an election. Comey did it twice. And Vladimir Putin? Hacking into the DNC’s
computer, then selectively releasing emails in an attempt to defeat a candidate
in an American election? Again, an unprecedented obstacle, one too many to be
overcome. In my opinion, against anyone but Don the Con, Hillary would have
lost by a wider margin.
What’s the point? Why the rant? Given the
composition of most State governments, and the Republican majorities in the
House and Senate, I don’t think that Democratic success depends on shifting to
the left, as Bernie and the Progressive Caucus demand. Just as Southerners
voted Democratic for a hundred years because a Republican ended slavery, just
as Southerners now vote Republican because a Democrat ended segregation, a
significant percentage of the white working-class in the north have been, and
will continue, to vote against their economic interests. Perhaps when they hit
bottom, when they see their children and grandchildren going hungry at the end
of the month, the worms will turn. Until that day, which may be very far off,
the Dems are better off with the coalition they now have.
No comments:
Post a Comment