Senator Cruz has gone and got himself a Veep and the little men inside my TeeVee are nearly wetting themselves in their eagerness to be wicked about it. One reporter called it an "arranged marriage" between Ms. Fiorina and the Senator.
I've made no secret that I don't like any of the front-runners, or the next rank, or-- you get the picture. But for pity's sake, it's a pretty reasonable political move; I'm not a big fan of Ms. Fiorina (I liked Hewlett-Packard; I have my doubts about Agilent) but she made a creditable run for the big prize and is no less-qualified for second place than Senator Cruz is for the Presidency. (Neither one is especially qualified, if you ask me, a trait they share with Mr. Trump, Secretary Clinton and Senator Sanders -- but why ask me? Ain't you got an Internet and a mind of your own?)
Can't they just report the facts?
...No. They can't. Especially when it's the GOP.
I feel sorry for the Republican candidates, who never get a break from the lamestream media. If pity were votes, they'd be shoo-in; but I don't think that's a viable way to pick a Chief Executive, no more than the, "Vote for me even if you don't like my platform, because I can win," strategy three of the four front-runners are presently employing. (Or do Senators Sanders and Cruz no longer qualify as "front-runners?" Depends on who you ask.) What exactly do you win when you vote for a candidate whose positions you find repugnant?
Update
3 days ago
11 comments:
Being turned off by all of the candidates does allow a perspective of the process that is untainted by personal hopes about who wins.
One item of note - my friends on facebook who tend to repost stuff from Media Matters et al., tend to go apoplectic whenever "Carly" gets her face on the evening news or newspaper front-page. I've not yet worked out just what it is that they hate and fear so much, but the SigInt tells me that the fear is indeed great.
Which seems strange, because she never inspired those who get handed "R" ballots on primary days, and seemed easy enough to defeat in her senate race.
Oh, part of that is easy: women, especially well-educated women, aren't *supposed* to be even the least bit conservative. Ms. Fiorina is clearly a traitor in their eyes.
Sheeesh.
Ted was just after all of Carly's delegate...
"I feel sorry for the Republican candidates, who never get a break from the lamestream media."
You have to hand it to the LameStream media, they've given the Billionaire well over a billion dollars in free commercial time.
The amusing result of that is that The Donald is running neck-and-neck in some polls against the HildaBeast.
Trump seriously concerns me as a potential President, but Clinton scares the hell out of me worse. As bad as Trump's negative numbers are, Clinton's are similarly bad.
I don't love the Trumpster, but I will vote for him over Hillary.
Does Trump have an actual platform? Or just slogans?
He is a salesman, and the product he is selling is himself. He is good at selling, as is proven by the current state of the race. Even the NoTrump folks are falling into line, because he may turn out to be okay and at least he is not Hillary...
The real thing to be fearful of is Trump being elected...because whatever will happen when the Trump voters discover he can't deliver on all those promises, it won't be pretty.
Do they ever deliver on their promises? ACA is as close as I have seen and it's not very -- contrast the pie-in-the-sky from his campaign from the actual mess Congress was barely able to deliver.
Voters are some kind of dim and easy date; the mass fall for the slick talk every four years and get left in the lurch not long after surrendering their precious virtue to one loathsome Lothario or another, and yet four years later it all happens again.
Roberta, that is quite the apt comparison. Four years is long enough for the average voter to forget the outrage and promises to themselves to never put themselves in that situation again.
(And you can call me "Belabors The Obvious"
Trump is that worst possible thing for America: A populist.
He has no ideology other than pragmatism and whatever is going through his mind at the moment.
He disgusts me now no less than he has always disgusted me.
"I liked Hewlett-Packard"
BTAIM, I suggest, based on blessedly limited contact, avoiding HP printers. They seem to have been programmed by persons whose thought processes are decidedly odd.
Ritchie: I liked h/p test equipment. Their early-early printers were okay, their plotters especially so, but IMO, the cheesy-plastic-peripherals-and-computers venture was the death of that company as many of us had come to know it. Maybe Ms. Fiorina was only guilty of a mercy killing.
The electronics test equipment products of the old H-P are not Agilent, but now are produced by "Keysight Technologies."
Post a Comment