On the historic significance of presumptuous nominee Billary

Supporters for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton hold up letters to spell the word, history, during a presidential primary election night rally, Tuesday, June 7, 2016, in New York. (AP Photo/Julie Jacobson)

Associated Press photo

Billarybots celebrate “history” today at a rally in New York City. Indeed, Billary Clinton would be the first female DINO presidential candidate who never would have made it this far if her husband hadn’t been president first. Because that’s what feminism is all about: women coasting on the previous success of their husbands!

Polls of the American electorate still have Bernie Sanders beating Donald Trump by low double digits and Billary Clinton beating Trump by only low single digits.*

Nonetheless, Queen Billary is the “presumptive” — or, as I think of it, the presumptuous — 2016 Democratic Party presidential nominee — even before the super-delegates have had the opportunity to actually cast their votes at the party convention in late July. (Neither Billary nor Bernie can actually get the 2,383 delegates needed to win the nomination until the super-delegates actually vote at the convention.)

No matter that it’s way too close for comfort putting Billary against Trump; we are on course to have our first female presidential nominee from the Coke Party or the Pepsi Party — who only got this far because her husband was president! Yaaaaay!!!

Of course, it would be nice if the first female Democratic Party presidential nominee were an actual Democrat instead of a self-serving, center-right sellout, but heyhistory! (Oops! I mean herstory!)

It also would be too bad for the first female presidential nominee of one of the duopolistic, corporate parties to lose the presidential election — the optics of that wouldn’t be great for feminism (or for what passes for feminism these days, anyway) — but oh, well.

Bernie Sanders recently was asked by a “journalist” at a press conference whether it’s “sexist” of him to remain in the race.

Just: Wow.

So much for equality. Again, this is what “feminism” has come to.

“Is that a serious question?” Bernie incredulously asked the “journalist.” “Your question implies that any woman who is running for president is by definition the best candidate,” he said (I agree; and that implication or assertion is sexist itself). He added, “If Hillary Clinton runs for president, your point is that it’s sexist for any man to oppose her? I don’t think it’s sexist.”

You can’t have it both ways, women; you can’t argue that women can do anything that men can do (and perhaps or probably even better) when it behooves you to do so but then argue, when it so suits you, to assert that a man competing against you for elected office (or for some other contested prize) is “sexist” because, as a man, he shouldn’t compete against you.

As I’ve written here many times before, I go for the most progressive political candidate, and Billary Clinton is not a progressive; it wasn’t even a full year ago that she publicly proudly proclaimed, “I plead guilty” to “being kind of moderate and center.”

Race, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, age, looks — none of that matters to me. I go for the most progressive candidate. I don’t play identity politics. I’m a gay man and it would be great to see our first openly non-heterosexual president, but I’d vote for the (apparently) heterosexual presidential candidate if he or she were more progressive than a non-heterosexual presidential opponent every time. That’s because I have my priorities in fucking order.

One good thing can come from Billary losing the White House to Donald Trump, though: It should, at long, long last, drive that stake through the hearts of the cold-blooded vampires who have taken over the once-progressive Democratic Party and turned it into Repugnican Lite.

Even if Billary actually wins the White House in November, I see that still happening, though, and that’s because if Billary actually ekes out a victory over Trump in November, I see her, given her persistently double-digit unfavorable ratings, as a one-term president, like Jimmy Carter or George H. W. Bush.

Ironically, while DINO Billary can and probably will (quite unintentionally) finally put an end to the center-right brand of Democratic Party that she and her DINO husband helped to create, that’s something that even Bernie Sanders perhaps (or maybe even probably) couldn’t have accomplished even had he won the White House.

It’s ironic, but I’d take it; more important than Bernie Sanders winning the White House in November is that the Democratic Party, after having gone seriously off track for many, many years now, finally is set back on a progressive path.

That seriously, sorely needs to happen — perhaps even if it takes a President Trump to make it happen.

*Real Clear Politics’ current polling average:

Bernie vs. Trump: Bernie up by 10.4 percent

Billary vs. Trump: Billary up by 2 percent

Huffington Post’s current polling average:

Bernie vs. Trump: Bernie up by 11 percent

Billary vs. Trump: Billary up by 4.6 percent

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s