WHY NOT CLINTON?

WAR HAWK, GLOBALIST, CORPORATIST, BOUGHT BY MEGADONORS, SCANDAL RIDDEN ELITIST, WILL NOT CHANGE DIRECTION OF NATION

I watched the debate last night (September 26, 2016) between candidates Madam Secretary Clinton and Mr. Trump, (or "Donald" as Mrs Clinton so dismissively referred to him). As a former college debater, I scored Clinton, "the debater" a winner, but she lost as candidate Clinton for not advancing her political situation.

Clinton wobbled and was on the ropes during the first quarter hour, but with the "third debater" Lester Holt, on her side, she recovered and, in the end, won on scored points. But she may have not advanced her position in the polls. Secretary Clinton showed herself to be very well rehearsed and practiced as a political debater...she was smooth, scripted, and smug. Perhaps she was too smooth...too scripted and and to my thinking, way too smug.

Mrs. Clinton has so far spent some $100 million dollars on TV ads generated to falsely brand Mr. Trump as a racist, liar, and woman hater. Yet, most recent polls show her losing ground to Mr. Trump, both nationally and in the battleground states, indicating that her massively costly campaign of vilification has not been successful. But she doggedly continued in this same vein of attack last night. I found the ad hominem thrusts unpleasant to watch...as many others may have. It did not change my negative opinion of her as a female (not so humble) Uriah Heep of politics: sinister, plotting and insincere.

But Mrs. Clinton's main problem is not Mr. Trump. It is that a vast number of American voters who know her all too well--- do not like or trust her. Added to that is a deep American distaste for and resentment against the establishment of an American political dynasty, a cadre of elite families who trade the top positions in government back and fourth between them as in some tin pot South American nations of the 1930s. Voters aware of her long history of misdeeds, peddling access to public office and personal and political scandals, real and self inflicted all while public officials fear the turmoil and conflict of another bout with Clintonism. They are repelled by her and her husband's ethics and moral challenges and her facilitation of his misbehaviors and her sliming of his female accusers. They question the challenge and the obvious conflicts of interest posed by the Clinton Foundation. Of concern also is former president Bill Clinton's possible position in the White House and his penchant for selling access to power to the highest bidder, foreign and domestic.

The necessary goal of altering these issues of trust and character and conflict of interest where not altered by the debate, and I contend that her "win" on debating points did not change any voter's minds. I conclude she may have won a tactical battle last night, but has made a strategic blunder. Instead her performance in the debate only seemed to have underscored her "unlikability quotient". She has, after all, a long history of Strategic blunders from incidents way back during the Travelgate era, to her Senate, Iraq War vote, to her Bengazi attack and Libya war mongering, and her email scandal decisions. These when taken together seem to be characteristic of Mrs. Clinton's mental processes...and one must ask do we want her in the White House?

Which brings me to the reason why I cannot cast a vote for Mrs. Clinton.

I. DO NOTHING COAT TAIL RIDER. Mr. Trump Has actually produced something. He took a loan from his father to create a huge international and immensely successful international business. He has actually created jobs and met a payroll. He was chosen by the GOP primary voters. Republican voters had a clear choice of 17 candidates...they chose Mr. Trump fair and square. Mrs. Clinton's ascendency was more of a monarchial coronation. She has plotted and schemed her way on a cursus honorum, not on her own but on the coattails of her husband and others to establish a nominally creditable curriculum vitae for president....but her accomplishments in each post were minimal or often missing altogether. Each position being only a way-stop for her presidential event. The first attempt was a failure. Then as a booby prize she was handed the position of Secretary of State. In each post she proved only her limitations. Now having been a nominal carpet bag Senator, and a failed and careless Secretary of State she seems to think she deserves to be usshered into the White House because it is owed to her and she deserves it.

2.BOUGHT BY MEGADONORS. During the primaries, Mr. Trump shunned the megadonors. He did not follow the path of the other candidates to the doors of the Koch brother and the Adelsons of this nation who think they can buy our candidates and control them with cash. Mr. Trump's campaign was self funded, and as a consequence he was able to freely address the needs and concerns of the average American as he saw them, not having to comply with the directives from the elite, super wealthy one-tenth-of-one-percenters to whom the other candidates went hat in hand for an imprimatur. Not so Mrs. Clinton, who is in bed with the monied class and mega donors. She owes these elites and wealthy and will no doubt repay them amply on the taxpayer's dime while in office.

3. WAR HAWK. Mrs Clinton's foreign policy is one of continued USA interventionism abroad. She has staked out a foreign policy position even further right of the disastrous presidency of George W Bush. I and the American people are well aware we can not afford to continue to spend trillions of dollars abroad in such adventurism when the needs here at home are so great. Mr. Trump has called for a retreat from these costly adventures and an emphasis on making America great again by attention to the home front. He will not waste our children's blood and our wealth in senseless wars around the world.

4. CORPORATIST AND GLOBALIST. Mrs. Clinton's policies favor international corporations and unrestricted free trade, and a form of globalism and trade polices which have had drastic effects on our nation's trade balance, the working class jobs, and the cities here at home which were once bustling with industry are now idle and in decay. Her policies would not address this issue or alter the course of our decline. She is not for America first.

5. FOCUS ON FRINGE, IGNORES NEEDS OF WORKERS AND BUSINESSMEN Mrs. Clinton has focused her attention on the urban minorities that may make her election possible in populated cities on the east and west coast as well as the needs of her megadonor supporters, government elites, denizens of Hollywood and academics who rabidly support her. She has ignored the desperate plight of the vast majority of average, hard-working Americans, of all creeds and races, and of small businessmen, and the underemployed across this broad land who are suffering economically as a result of the drag of the Great Recession much of which was an economic consequence of her and her husband's policies of deregulation and global trade deals..

No Ms. Clinton your day has come and gone. We reject you.