This is Saturday PM post but couldn't because of errors from TCPP.
The Front Page Cover
2016 The truth will set you free
Featuring:
Can Anxiety Beat Depression in November?
by Peggy Noonan
~~~
.
Intelligence Community Quashed liar-Clinton Probe
In February, liar-Hillary Clinton ironically wondered, "Why is there one standard for me and not for everybody else?" That's an excellent question and one that is ever so pertinent. Recall earlier this summer the FBI said it "did find that hostile foreign actors gained access to the personal email accounts of individuals with whom liar-Clinton was in regular contact, and, in doing so, obtained emails sent to or received by liar-Clinton on her personal account." Meanwhile, Intelligence Community Directive 732 stipulates, "Damage assessments shall be conducted when there is an actual or suspected unauthorized disclosure or compromise of classified national intelligence that may cause damage to U.S. national security."
As Rep. Mike Pompeo reminds us, "FBI Director Comey has made clear that there was highly classified and sensitive information on Secretary liar-Clinton's personal server." But according to a new report by The Washington Free Beacon, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence never followed through on its requirement to investigate the repercussions of a possible breach of classified intel — a decision that was supported by Director James Clapper. So to paraphrase liar-Hillary's question once again: Why is there one standard for her and quite another for everybody else?
That's what guys like disgraced NSA thief and deserter Edward Snowden are asking. He recently underscored his hankering for clemency: "Yes, there are laws on the books that say one thing, but that is perhaps why the pardon power exists — for the exceptions, for the things that may seem unlawful in letters on a page but when we look at them morally, when we look at them ethically, when we look at the results, it seems these were necessary things, these were vital things." In June 2014, liar-Hillary criticized Snowden as "a lawbreaker" who "violated his duties that he assumed when he took the job that he had."
Memo to Secretary liar-Clinton: The exact same charge can be leveled against you and your investigators. ~The Patriot Post
.
Constitution Day: Losing Touch With Our
National Roots
Michael Swartz: Saturday marks the 229th anniversary of the completion of our Constitution, which was submitted to the Congress of the Confederation for its approval on Sept. 17, 1787. Over the following months it was ratified by the several states, reaching the required nine when New Hampshire approved it on June 21, 1788. (All 13 colonies ratified it by the middle of 1790; Rhode Island was the last holdout.) Do Americans really know about our rich heritage?
One would think that a nation which cherishes its history and freedom as America does would have a populace that could rattle off these facts in the same manner as they can name the starters on their fantasy football team — but we don't. Instead, a recent study from the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, an advocate for improving college education, found that just 18% of liberal arts colleges and universities require even one survey course on American history or government for graduation. (It's no wonder the study was titled "A Crisis in Civic Education.") Nor is that course necessarily one that teaches about the founding documents; often it covers various niche topics that reflect the popularity of the subject (such as a history of witchcraft in America) rather than an examination of more weighty topics like the debate between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists.
The news is just as bad at the high school level, as only a handful of states require any testing in civics before students graduate. In more and more schools, time that was once spent covering the basics of our system of government is lost in teaching to standardized tests that may or may not cover these important subjects. Those students who scream in protest, "I know my rights!" likely have no clue that those rights weren't originally enumerated in the Constitution but were added as amendments soon afterward — and, even then, not without controversy over whether these rights would be limited by virtue of being enumerated.
It seems quaint in this day and age, but there once was robust debate about whether the Constitution gave too much power to the federal government at the expense of the states. (The Anti-Federalists' warnings were prophetic.) Now the argument is over which political party's version of Big Government is preferable. Contention over — and advocacy of — limitations to government based on constitutional principles has become a theoretical exercise at best, perhaps in part because few understand the ideas and arguments that were made during the drafting of our government's founding document.
Our situation is made clear when no less than Rush Limbaugh effectively concedes that the argument over Big Government vs. limited government is over.
In response to a caller to his show Wednesday who praised Donald Trump's Big Government child care plan, Limbaugh noted: "I think [voters are] going to respond so positively to this, and it's going to disappoint a lot of people. 'Oh, my God, do people not even understand the whole concept of Big Government destroying the country?' They don't, folks. They don't look at it the way you and I do in that regard." Years of enforced neglect of civics education has placed us in this situation where the prospect of a measure of financial security is the tradeoff for Liberty — because maintaining Liberty is just too hard and requires sacrifice and diligence. So when neither major-party candidate campaigns on following the Constitution (or gets basic facts about it wrong) it's no surprise that so few notice.
Cultivated ignorance isn't the only problem — malevolent destruction is rampant. Even federal judges now have no compunction in arguing that the Constitution is obsolete and "does not speak to today." And Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 2012 said, "I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012."
Indeed, the never-ending journey to Liberty is difficult, made more so by the frequent and quickening steps we take in the other direction. It's heartening to know, however, that it only took what Samuel Adams called an "irate, tireless minority" to lead a revolution against a tyrannical leader and then realize that a new system of government was in order to maintain that Liberty purchased with blood and sacrifice.
We in our humble shop aren't just sitting on the sidelines lamenting the good old days, either — we carry our Founders' torch. Through our Essential Liberty Project, we've distributed more than one million Constitution guides, frequently to schools so that we pass the flame of Liberty to the next generation. We have an extensive collection of historic documents online, including the Federalist Papers in their entirety.
And since 1996, we've been bringing a constitutional perspective to our unique coverage of news, policy and opinion. Our profoundest thanks to all of you who have made that possible.
Throughout American history we have had times of religious revival, and in those instances we also seem to gain an appreciation of the natural law our founding documents are based on — including the self-evident truth that certain rights are endowed by our Creator. As Patriots continue to strive for a more perfect Union and secure the blessings of Liberty, we pray that the next revival comes not just in a religious sense, but with a renewed thirst for Liberty that can only be quenched by closely hewing to our founding documents. ~The Patriot Post
.
.
This is liar-Hillary Clinton vs liar-Hillary Clinton
{conservativevideos.com} ~She’ll say ANYTHING to get your vote! This is liar-Hillary Clinton vs liar-Hillary Clinton on equality, marriage, trade deals and whether she’s a progressive or a moderate. But we all know she is a Democrat liar. http://conservativevideos.com/hillary-clinton-vs-hillary-clinton-video/
.
Connecting the Dots on Recent Incidents
with Iranian and Russian Forces
by Cmdr. Daniel Dolan, USN (Retired)
{usni.org} ~ Some critics attribute the increased number of aggressive air-to-air intercepts and incidents at sea to what they argue is the current administration’s weak foreign policy... That claim raises some interesting points when analyzed. There is a strong counter-argument to such claims. When coupled with intelligence that Russians are responsible for hacking U.S. political party databases, the spate of recent incidents in the Black Sea and the Strait of Hormuz suggests that America’s enemies are in fact taking direct actions to influence the November elections. This analysis will show that these actions against America’s forward-deployed aircraft and ships are not occurring because America is weak, but rather, it is because America’s enemies are attempting to set the conditions to weaken America post-November elections...I disagree on that assumption.
.
Ted Cruz: The Internet’s best defender
by Neil Stevens
{redstate.com} ~ While everyone's watching this dumpster fire of a Presidential race, Barack nObama is trying to give away the Internet to China and Russia... By voluntarily giving up American stewardship of the fundamentals of the Internet, nObama is placing prosperity, security, and liberty online at risk. Fortunately Ted Cruz is on the case. "America built the Internet, and we shouldn't be giving it away to our enemies" - Ted Cruz. "Would the United States of America have any greater ability to defend its position than would Russia, China, or Iran?" asks Ted Cruz. The answer is that no, we would have to get a global consensus to exert control even over .mil and .gov domains... http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2016/09/15/video-ted-cruz-internets-best-defender/?utm_source=rsmorningbriefing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl
.
Whites and Christians Abandoning
the Democratic Party
{fixthisnation.com} ~ According to a new Pew Research Center survey, the Democratic Party is being abandoned by two of the country’s biggest demographics: whites and Christians... “Non-Hispanic whites make up 57 percent of all Democratic and Democratic-leaning registered voters, down significantly from 76 percent in 1992,” said the Pew analysis. “By contrast, though the share of GOP voters who are white has also declined since 1992, the change has been much more modest: Currently, 86 percent of Republican and Republican-leaning registered voters are non-Hispanic whites, compared with 93 percent in 1992. As a result of these changes, the 17-percentage-point gap between the share of white voters in the Republican and Democratic parties seen in 1992 has grown to a 29-point gap today.” The same trends can be seen among Christian voters, who have remained faithful to the Republican Party while atheists and the religiously-unaffiliated have flocked to the Democrats... http://www.fixthisnation.com/conservative-breaking-news/whites-and-christians-abandoning-the-democratic-party/
.
Radicalization in the U.S. and
the Rise of Terrorism
by Daveed Gartenstein-Ross
by Daveed Gartenstein-Ross
{defenddemocracy.org} ~ This country is in the midst of the largest spike in homegrown jihadist terrorist activity that it has ever seen, both in the overall number of cases and also the number of fatalities caused by terrorists... claiming to act in service of the jihadist cause. While I assess jihadism to remain the top domestic terrorist threat, adherents to several other U.S.-based movements have also engaged more frequently in terrorist violence in recent years, including members of the anti-government Sovereign Citizens movement, and both white nationalists and black nationalists. This testimony will first show that the problem of terrorism is growing in scale. It then argues that both analysts and the media have an unjustifiable default assumption that relatively small scale attacks have likely been carried out by “lone wolves.” This prevalence of this assumption was crystal clear in the wake of Omar Mateen’s bloody June 2016 attack in Orlando. By the end of last year, it was demonstrable that the United States was in the midst of an unprecedented surge in jihadist militant activity. This pattern could also be discerned in other Western countries. http://www.defenddemocracy.org/content/uploads/documents/Daveed_GR_Radicalization
.
$1.3 Billion of the Cash
to Iran was Taxpayer Money
by defenddemocracy.org
{defenddemocracy.org} ~ A rancorous partisan debate is raging in Washington over the transfer of $1.7 billion in cash to Iran. The settlement was the balance of a Foreign Military Sales (FMS) trust fund... where Iran deposited $400 million to purchase U.S. military goods before the 1979 revolution. Three decades of interest amounted to roughly $1.3 billion, according to the terms of the settlement. Numerous U.S. officials have defended the total payment of $1.7 billion to Iran, claiming that it was “their money.” This is not entirely true. It is certainly fair to argue that the United States owed Iran $400 million. The pre-revolutionary government deposited billions of dollars in an American FMS account in anticipation of purchasing U.S. military goods, and those goods were never delivered. The $400 million was the balance on the account after Iran and the U.S. settled other contract claims and Washington used funds to pay cancelation charges and other fees owed to American companies... nObama should of returned the $400m, not the $1.3b. http://www.defenddemocracy.org/media-hit/annie-fixler-13-billion-of-the-cash-to-iran-was-taxpayer-money/
.
Navy's Most Advanced
Warship, USS Zumwalt Arrives in Norfolk
by U.S. MILITARY
by U.S. MILITARY
{familysecuritymatters.org} ~ The Navy's newest and most technologically advanced surface ship, future USS Zumwalt (DDG 1000) pulled into Naval Station Norfolk Wednesday for another port visit on the 3-month journey to its new homeport in San Diego... Crewed by 147 Sailors, Zumwalt is the lead ship of a class of next-generation multi-mission destroyers designed to strengthen naval power. They are capable of performing critical maritime missions and enhance the Navy's ability to provide deterrence, power projection and sea control. Capt. James A. Kirk, Zumwalt's commanding officer, commented on the significance of the ship's visit to Norfolk. "It is a great opportunity to bring Zumwalt to Norfolk, an area steeped in naval history and ever vital to the U.S. Navy," said Kirk. "It is a chance for the Sailors of Zumwalt to show their Atlantic Coast shipmates the teamwork, technical expertise and toughness it takes to operate a Zumwalt-class destroyer."...
.
Sanctuary Jurisdictions Protect Nearly
12,000 Criminal Illegal Immigrants in 19 Months
by JUDICIAL WATCH
by JUDICIAL WATCH
{familysecuritymatters.org} ~ The recent murder committed by a twice-deported illegal immigrant gangbanger in a Maryland sanctuary county makes the following information both enraging and unbelievable... nearly 12,000 illegal immigrants with criminal histories were protected from federal authorities by sanctuary jurisdictions in the U.S. during a 19-month period, according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) figures obtained by the Washington D.C.-based Center for Immigration Studies (CIS). A few weeks ago CIS published a map identifying about 300 jurisdictions that have official policies shielding illegal aliens from federal authorities. During a 19-month stretch from January 1, 2014, to September 30, 2015, more than 17,000 federal detainers were rejected by these sanctuary jurisdictions, CIS found. Around 11,800 of the detainers, or 68%, were issued for individuals with a prior criminal history. "According to ICE statistics, since the nObama administration implemented the new Priority Enforcement Program in July 2015 restricting ICE use of detainers, the number of rejected detainers has declined," CIS writes in a report accompanying the map. "However, the number of detainers issued by ICE also has declined in 2016, so it is not clear if the new policies are a factor."...
.
Vulnerable GOP senator: nObamacare
amounts to consumer fraud
by Robert King
{washingtonexaminer.com} ~ A Republican senator in a tight re-election race charged Thursday that nObamacare has essentially committed consumer fraud by over-promising and under-delivering... and said the federal government would investigate the program if it were a private insurer. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., who is trailing opponent Russ Feingold in RealClearPolitics' polling average by double digits, led a Thursday hearing of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. He wondered in that hearing whether nObamacare would be investigated by federal agencies for misleading consumers. Johnson said the Federal Trade Commission or other agencies would investigate any insurer that made similar claims about nObamacare, including President nObama's pledge that if you like your doctor you can keep him or her... http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/vulnerable-senator-ocare-amounts-to-consumer-fraud/article/2601911
.
liar-Clinton Pretending Nothing
Happened After NY Collapse...
by Rick Wells
{rickwells.us} ~ In noting the return of liar-Hillary Clinton to the campaign trail, Lou Dobbs asks, “What is the deal here?... She travels to North Carolina and DC less than a week after her pneumonia diagnosis and just four days after that diagnosis was revealed to the world as she collapsed trying to escape unnoticed from a September 11th memorial service in New York.” “Didn’t happen, here she is,” says Dobbs. “There she is collapsing and being thrown into the getaway van by her Secret Service detail and attending staff. It’s an extraordinary image. And the campaign today trying to spin it up her convalescent absence saying it provided her an opportunity to ‘sharpen the final argument liar-Clinton will present to voters.'” Dobbs says, “But it was her return to the campaign trail that needed some sharpening. The Democrat nominee incredibly touting her openness and her transparency during an interview on the “Tom Joyner Morning Show.” The comments by liar-Clinton on that program brought laughter out of the host as she described herself as being more transparent than Trump or anybody who’s run for president before her....
..
Can Anxiety Beat Depression in November?
by Peggy Noonan
{peggynoonan.com} ~ By tradition the presidential campaign begins in earnest on Labor Day. This year I questioned that premise. Its assumption is that normal people don’t start paying attention until September. That’s probably been true in the past. But this time normal people have been paying attention all year. Donald Trump’s candidacy was a sensation—you couldn’t not see him or hear him. In another way people have been paying attention for a quarter-century, which is how long liar-Hillary Clinton and Mr. Trump have been famous in America. Everyone knows what they think; everyone knows their impression of Mrs. liar-Clinton and Mr. Trump.
But not everyone knows how they’ll vote—him, her, third- or fourth-party, write-in. The polls are tightening and no one is sure why. A Reuters/Ipsos poll through Aug. 29 had Mrs. liar-Clinton at 40%, Mr. Trump at 38% among likely voters. A Rasmussen poll ending Aug. 31 had Mrs. liar-Clinton at 39%, Mr. Trump at 40%. A Fox News poll ending the same day had Mrs. liar-Clinton at 41% and Mr. Trump at 39%. As to the battleground states, a Marquette University Law School poll out this week had Mrs. liar-Clinton leading Mr. Trump 45% to 42% in Wisconsin among those who said they’ll definitely vote in November. That sounds solid, but three weeks ago Mrs. liar-Clinton had a 15-point lead.
And Mr. Trump’s successful trip to Mexico, in which he stood at separate podiums with a president, trading niceties, seeming comfortable—seeming like a normal political figure—followed by his base-rousing immigration speech in Arizona, came after these polls were taken. A Trump supporter told/spun me that it was a Nixon-to-China moment, which it was not. Nixon knew exactly what he was doing and why, the diplomacy of it had been long and secretly arranged, and it wasn’t driven by immediate political need but by America’s strategic requirements.
But if the polls are right, things are moving, and not in Mrs. liar-Clinton’s direction. I’d thought people’s views of Mr. Trump were by now indelible and unchangeable: He’d been branded, by himself. Maybe that’s true. We’ll know in retrospect. But maybe he can nudge his numbers a little. Can Mrs. liar-Clinton?
We’re used to attributing everything by default to Mr. Trump—what’s he done now? But maybe the fact of Trump isn’t driving things, but the central fact of liar-Hillary. It is a fact we all know so well that we factor it in and forget it. It is that people view her as both untruthful and untrustworthy. A Fox News poll out this week said an astounding 74% of respondents said they believe Mrs. liar-Clinton would do anything to be president (68% said the same of Mr. Trump). A Washington Post/ABC News poll also this week showed Mrs. liar-Clinton’s image at an all-time low. Among registered voters, 59% view her unfavorably (60% view Mr. Trump unfavorably). The Post: “If it weren’t for Trump, in fact, liar-Clinton would be the most unpopular major-party presidential nominee in modern American history.” Think of that, in someone well known to Americans for 25 years.
Reading the Fox story reminded me of a moment last February in New Hampshire, during the primaries. It was a weekend night. I was at one of her rallies in a high-school gym in a handsome suburb. It was well-organized—good lighting and security, a buzzy crowd. Mrs. liar-Clinton was introduced and she bounded out—blue pantsuit, well made-up, high-energy, pointing out friends, real or imagined, in the crowd. I thought: Give it to her, she’s 60-something, she’s out in America working the room, making the speech, enacting the joy, when she could be home on a Saturday night watching TV.
Then it struck me. If she weren’t here, she’d be in an empty house in Chappaqua, N.Y., the focus of no eyes—not important, not glamorous, no aides or staffers. I thought: She needs to run, it’s this or reruns on Bravo. I thought: This is why you pick up that there is no overarching purpose, theme or mission to her candidacy—because there isn’t. There is only her need—not to be powerless, not to be away from the center. It’s not The America Project, it’s The liar-Hillary Project.
You see that a lot in politicians, but not always those running for president. That night I think I saw it in her.
This connects in my mind with 1992. By November of that year I thought the close presidential contest would come down to a battle between depression and anxiety. If you imagined picking up a newspaper the morning after the election and saw “Bush Re-elected,” you might feel blue—same old same old, 12 years of Republican rule turning into 16. If it said “liar-Clinton Wins,” you might feel anxiety—we never even heard of this guy until six months ago, an obscure Arkansas governor! I figured that in America anxiety beats depression because it’s the more awake state.
There may be an aspect of that dynamic in this race. Mrs. liar-Clinton is depression: You know exactly who she is, what trouble she brings—she always brings that sack full of scandal—and she won’t make anything better. Mr. Trump is anxiety: If you back him you know you’re throwing the long ball, a real Hail Mary pass to the casino developer and reality TV star who may or may not know how to catch the ball when catching the ball means everything. But he’s entertaining—he scrambles all categories, makes things chaotic. He has fun with his audience.
The crowd Wednesday night in Arizona reacted with joy when he asked if they were ready for the part about Mexico. His own supporters will tell you he may be a little crazy but not Caligula crazy, only drunk-uncle crazy. The liar-Clinton campaign has a strong television ad out that shows Mr. Trump yelling and making faces. It warns at the end that a president only needs one mistake to make things go terribly wrong. It’s the sort of ad that would impress voters already convinced that he’s disqualified by temperament. But others might just think: Yeah, he talks like that sometimes, it’s part of the act.
Last week the pollster Peter Hart did a focus group, for the Annenberg Public Policy Center, of a dozen independent voters in Wisconsin. They saw 2016 as a fear-and-loathing election, loathing Mrs. liar-Clinton depression and fearing Mr. Trump anxiety. They thought Mrs. liar-Clinton would win but described her as a lying and untrustworthy career politician. They saw Mr. Trump as reckless, inexperienced, “a bully and a loudmouth,” in the words of one participant. Another compared him to the drunk uncle. They had little optimism about America right now, using words like “political turmoil,” “unrest” and “downhill.” Asked if the 2016 election had a smell what would it be, their answers included “rotten eggs,” “skunk,” “stink” and “garbage.” Asked which political figures they admired in their lifetimes, one said Gerald Ford, one Bill liar-Clinton, and about half said Ronald Reagan. They seemed to miss the idea of character.
Actually there seemed an undertone of fear that we’re not raising Fords and Reagans now, we’re raising liar-Clintons and Trumps and it doesn’t bode well.
But not everyone knows how they’ll vote—him, her, third- or fourth-party, write-in. The polls are tightening and no one is sure why. A Reuters/Ipsos poll through Aug. 29 had Mrs. liar-Clinton at 40%, Mr. Trump at 38% among likely voters. A Rasmussen poll ending Aug. 31 had Mrs. liar-Clinton at 39%, Mr. Trump at 40%. A Fox News poll ending the same day had Mrs. liar-Clinton at 41% and Mr. Trump at 39%. As to the battleground states, a Marquette University Law School poll out this week had Mrs. liar-Clinton leading Mr. Trump 45% to 42% in Wisconsin among those who said they’ll definitely vote in November. That sounds solid, but three weeks ago Mrs. liar-Clinton had a 15-point lead.
And Mr. Trump’s successful trip to Mexico, in which he stood at separate podiums with a president, trading niceties, seeming comfortable—seeming like a normal political figure—followed by his base-rousing immigration speech in Arizona, came after these polls were taken. A Trump supporter told/spun me that it was a Nixon-to-China moment, which it was not. Nixon knew exactly what he was doing and why, the diplomacy of it had been long and secretly arranged, and it wasn’t driven by immediate political need but by America’s strategic requirements.
But if the polls are right, things are moving, and not in Mrs. liar-Clinton’s direction. I’d thought people’s views of Mr. Trump were by now indelible and unchangeable: He’d been branded, by himself. Maybe that’s true. We’ll know in retrospect. But maybe he can nudge his numbers a little. Can Mrs. liar-Clinton?
We’re used to attributing everything by default to Mr. Trump—what’s he done now? But maybe the fact of Trump isn’t driving things, but the central fact of liar-Hillary. It is a fact we all know so well that we factor it in and forget it. It is that people view her as both untruthful and untrustworthy. A Fox News poll out this week said an astounding 74% of respondents said they believe Mrs. liar-Clinton would do anything to be president (68% said the same of Mr. Trump). A Washington Post/ABC News poll also this week showed Mrs. liar-Clinton’s image at an all-time low. Among registered voters, 59% view her unfavorably (60% view Mr. Trump unfavorably). The Post: “If it weren’t for Trump, in fact, liar-Clinton would be the most unpopular major-party presidential nominee in modern American history.” Think of that, in someone well known to Americans for 25 years.
Reading the Fox story reminded me of a moment last February in New Hampshire, during the primaries. It was a weekend night. I was at one of her rallies in a high-school gym in a handsome suburb. It was well-organized—good lighting and security, a buzzy crowd. Mrs. liar-Clinton was introduced and she bounded out—blue pantsuit, well made-up, high-energy, pointing out friends, real or imagined, in the crowd. I thought: Give it to her, she’s 60-something, she’s out in America working the room, making the speech, enacting the joy, when she could be home on a Saturday night watching TV.
Then it struck me. If she weren’t here, she’d be in an empty house in Chappaqua, N.Y., the focus of no eyes—not important, not glamorous, no aides or staffers. I thought: She needs to run, it’s this or reruns on Bravo. I thought: This is why you pick up that there is no overarching purpose, theme or mission to her candidacy—because there isn’t. There is only her need—not to be powerless, not to be away from the center. It’s not The America Project, it’s The liar-Hillary Project.
You see that a lot in politicians, but not always those running for president. That night I think I saw it in her.
This connects in my mind with 1992. By November of that year I thought the close presidential contest would come down to a battle between depression and anxiety. If you imagined picking up a newspaper the morning after the election and saw “Bush Re-elected,” you might feel blue—same old same old, 12 years of Republican rule turning into 16. If it said “liar-Clinton Wins,” you might feel anxiety—we never even heard of this guy until six months ago, an obscure Arkansas governor! I figured that in America anxiety beats depression because it’s the more awake state.
There may be an aspect of that dynamic in this race. Mrs. liar-Clinton is depression: You know exactly who she is, what trouble she brings—she always brings that sack full of scandal—and she won’t make anything better. Mr. Trump is anxiety: If you back him you know you’re throwing the long ball, a real Hail Mary pass to the casino developer and reality TV star who may or may not know how to catch the ball when catching the ball means everything. But he’s entertaining—he scrambles all categories, makes things chaotic. He has fun with his audience.
The crowd Wednesday night in Arizona reacted with joy when he asked if they were ready for the part about Mexico. His own supporters will tell you he may be a little crazy but not Caligula crazy, only drunk-uncle crazy. The liar-Clinton campaign has a strong television ad out that shows Mr. Trump yelling and making faces. It warns at the end that a president only needs one mistake to make things go terribly wrong. It’s the sort of ad that would impress voters already convinced that he’s disqualified by temperament. But others might just think: Yeah, he talks like that sometimes, it’s part of the act.
Last week the pollster Peter Hart did a focus group, for the Annenberg Public Policy Center, of a dozen independent voters in Wisconsin. They saw 2016 as a fear-and-loathing election, loathing Mrs. liar-Clinton depression and fearing Mr. Trump anxiety. They thought Mrs. liar-Clinton would win but described her as a lying and untrustworthy career politician. They saw Mr. Trump as reckless, inexperienced, “a bully and a loudmouth,” in the words of one participant. Another compared him to the drunk uncle. They had little optimism about America right now, using words like “political turmoil,” “unrest” and “downhill.” Asked if the 2016 election had a smell what would it be, their answers included “rotten eggs,” “skunk,” “stink” and “garbage.” Asked which political figures they admired in their lifetimes, one said Gerald Ford, one Bill liar-Clinton, and about half said Ronald Reagan. They seemed to miss the idea of character.
Actually there seemed an undertone of fear that we’re not raising Fords and Reagans now, we’re raising liar-Clintons and Trumps and it doesn’t bode well.
Comments