A reminder of the unsavoriness of both Clintons

First, Hillary:



This is clearly anti-Hillary agitprop, but in the same way that this was anti-McCain agitprop in 2008:

Note the camera angle selected to cast unflattering shadows.  The video does this too; in my mind that detracts from the video's argument.  However, notice that the video has clear sourcing on just about everything.  As Mythbusters would say, "Plausible".

And some of the weaker points brought up here are discussed by the late, great Christopher Hitchens (whose journalistic credentials are disputed by nobody).  In particular, he goes over Dick Morris and Sid Blumenthal at some length.



I'm sure that my readers will recognize the Blumenthal name as the same one that the Trump campaign says (via a former McClatchy bureau chief) started the whole Obama "Birther" business back in 2008.  Sidney was seemingly useful to the Clintons over the course of two decades.

I can understand how someone would want to vote for her because they self-identify as a Democrat.  Tribal instincts run deep in the human psyche.  I may not agree with their choice, but we are not rational beings - rather, we are rationalizing beings.

But this is who the Clintons are.  This is who Hillary is.  The only excuse to vote for her is because of a tribal instinct.  Remember that.

So would Donald Trump be a good President?  I certainly can't say.  What I can say is that the single biggest political problem facing this Republic today is a crisis in governmental legitimacy.  Hillary is astonishingly unequipped to deal with this.  Trump, as an outsider in the political arena at least has the possibility.