Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for October, 2016

Damon Linker’s article in “The Week” on the chances of Hillary Clinton winning a mandate is the triumph of hope over experience. Mr. Linker writes Mrs. Clinton is likely to have a mandate based purely on the percentage of people voting for her. I respectfully disagree. Clinton won’t have a mandate – “Not Trump” will have a mandate. Clinton hasn’t run on her policies; she has largely disappeared from the campaign trail and let Trump slit his own throat.

Think about Clinton’s TV ads. How many are positive visions based on her policies? Compare that with how many are about Trump. Mr. Linker says that “Not Trump” people could have voted for Johnson or Stein or McMullin. He neglects the idea that many have (incorrectly in my opinion, but they have it), that this is a binary choice – that a vote for one of the minor candidates is effectively a “half-vote”, and that only a vote for Trump or Clinton is a full vote against the other major candidate.

Virginia already has some experience on this. Terry McAuliffe won the governorship over Ken Cuccinelli in 2013 in a remarkably nasty and expensive campaign. But McAuliffe didn’t win a mandate; “Not Cuccinelli” did. McAuliffe can’t get his priorities through the legislature, because the Republicans hold it and everyone knows McAuliffe has no mandate.

“Not Trump” is a strong candidate this year. Hillary Clinton is not. “Not Trump” will have a strong mandate. Hillary Clinton will not.

-1TF

 

 

Advertisements

Read Full Post »