It's a mad, mad, mad, mad world

Oh Lord, as a small 'c' conservative I do hate change.  Yes, yes, I know it's not always all bad but then again the present isn't all totally bad either, so leave well alone, is my maxim!  But, dammit, restless humanity will not have it so and I am forced, against my will and my laziness, to think about new problems.  Take the USA for an example.

America is a hugely important entity in the world scheme of things and whether it keeps 'doing things', as it has since WWII, or whether it more or less stops 'doing things' as it has in the past eight years, the effects on all of us are enormous.  We had a brief interregnum when the Soviet (dis)Union evaporated but now we have the looming threat of a new, hugely rich and over-confident China arising with a long list of old scores to settle and a steely determination to be the new boss-kid on the global block.

It is at this highly critical point that 'the cousins' appear to have gone mad!  It now seems certain that Trump will win the Republican party nomination and the race for the presidency will be between him and 'HillBilly'.  Of course, it is possible, as I indicated in a post a few days ago, that before the competition begins 'Hillbilly' will have 'her collar felt' by the American equivalent of 'the Old Bill' but in that event the Democrat candidate would be Jeremy Corbyn's political 'twin Brother'!  A mad situation will be instantly transformed into a lunatic one so, with gulping reluctance, one begins to hope that 'HillBilly' will deploy her usual, ingrained dishonesty to good effect and keep herself one step ahead of the law.

I can hardly believe I am writing these words but, whilst firmly pinching my nose, I am reluctantly forced to admit that in a choice between her and Trump, I would hope that she wins.  I am (possibly, because the story has not been confirmed) supported in this eccentric view by the editorial board of The National Review who are, apparently, ready to throw their deeply conservative support behind 'HillBilly' in preference to Trump whom they have already excoriated in the most severe terms.  For my British readers, let me explain that that would be the equivalent of The Daily Telegraph supporting a Labour party leader over a Conservative party leader in a general election - yeeeeeees, quite!

So, my American friends and readers, 'if you must hold your noses, prepare to hold them now!'

Comments

[Antisthenes]

I believe that which ever one wins we are totally fucked. Both are conniving, corrupt, incompetent and clueless megalomaniacs. They do not understand basic economics, are authoritarian statists and on foreign relationships they may even prove worse than Obama and that is some indictment. HillBilly is no more to be approved over Trump than is the reverse. They will both destroy the US and the rest of us just employ different methods in which to do so. Every leader/ruler past and present is flawed and make innumerable mistakes but none apart from the likes of Mao and Stalin measure up to how flawed these pair are.

[Cuffleyburgers]

Well let's agree to disagree on this. Vs the loathsome witch I would unhesitatingly vote Trump. To vote Hillary is a vote tomcontinue the same crap rotten politics that are bringing down the western world. trump? I've no idea but he's not business as usual, so all good.

[Andrew Duffin]

I'm with Cuffers.

Trump's great appeal is the he's NOT a professional politician

He's not of "them".
He won't be business as usual.
He's not in anyone's pocket, since his own is quite deep enough thank you.
He speaks how he finds and does not cringe before political correctness; in fact he despises it, and doesn't care who knows.

He may be a bit bonkers, but oh how refreshing.

The Clinton woman? She's just more of the same that's done all the damage, and hideously entitled to boot. She wouldn't know an ordinary voter if one came up and bit her on the behind, as I fervently hope they will.

[Whitewall]

The voter that bites her behind would keel over dead from the poison.

[Whitewall]

Speaking of mad...what is this uproar over a ship called Boaty McBoatface? Can she float or will she just keel over? Or is she symbolic of something much larger?

[David Duff]

I'm not too fussed about her dodgy political morality, some of the very greatest statesmen have been absolute A1 shits of the first order - Talleyrand, Bismarck, etc. - but it is her stupidity and laziness that worries me. It is only exceeded, as far as I can judge from this distance, by Trump. Hence, by and large, I incline to preferring her to him.

Whiters, the organisation responsible for arctic exploration asked the GBP (Great British Public - yeeeeees, quite!) for suggestions to name their latest ship. 'Boaty McBoatface' was supported by a huge majority. Other suggestions were "Usain Boat" and "It's Bloody Cold Here". It's that bloody English humour thing again!

[Whitewall]

I see. If the same thing was repeated here, I'm guessing the ship would be called "Ship of Fools"---the movie, not the song.

Re Trump or the Harridan, all I can recommend is a large supply of Haz Mat suits.

[David Duff]

Good advice, Whiters!

[Dom]

"Both are conniving, corrupt, incompetent and clueless megalomaniacs.". True. But the witch is less bad. Sorry cuffly, sorry jimmy, but I'm going to hold my nose and take David's advice.

[Cuffleyburgers]

I'm thinking that once his nomination is confirmed he will lay into her like nothing she's ever seen or dealt with. Should be quite a show. And could hopefully end up in her being indicted for national security violations, and jailed for 230 years.

[JK]

Well, I for one Will NEVER Vote FOR Hillary!

But I also realize "others" just might look fondly back at such things as, for instance, Libya.

(That turned out so well now, hasn't it?)

https://www.judicialwatch.org/bulletins/hillary-clintons-rogue-agenda-why-sid-blumenthal-matters/

I will be voting for Whoever Ain't Hillary.

Whoever that person is.

[JK]

Something them National Reviewers might want to put in their pipes before they puts alight and then smokes it:

"With his five blowout wins Tuesday night, Donald Trump has passed Mitt Romney’s popular vote total from four years ago and is on a trajectory that could land him more Republican votes than any presidential candidate in modern history – by a lot."

"Trump is positioned to easily pass the modern record-holder, George W. Bush, who collected 10.8 million votes in 2000."

"That presents an uncomfortable reality for anti-Trump forces: they’re attempting to thwart the candidate who is likely to win more Republican primary votes than any GOP contender in at least the last 36 years, and maybe ever."

http://www.politico.com/blogs/twelve-thirty-seven/2016/04/donald-trump-popular-vote-record-222510

What's that you sometimes steal-quote David?

"There will be blood"?

[JK]

Sorry for returning (last time .. today's posts anyway) so soon but, it occurred to me something else them National Reviewers might wish to consider afore they keep on opinionating ...

I'd suggest a spelling change whenever the NR goes to thinking about mentioning where the big Republican Nominating Shindig is to occur.

Spell it Cleave-Land.

***

("There will be blood" ... Cleave-Land, get it David?)

[Dom]

Ladies and Gentlemen, the next president of the United States ...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ChAT72eWUAASYyY.jpg

[Andra]

Dom, I looked at that and it's only 6 a.m. here.
Not fair!!!

[Ken Hoop]

I note a bunch of the left or what passes for it is all aghast at people like Sanders supporter Sarandon who have suggested that Trump might be better than Hilary if for no other reason that to spark rebellion, Hillary being a warmongering Elitist herself.

We can't afford the unrest, say the imperialists-lite.
(Even Bernie is an imperialist-lite having approved drone bombing and the
barbaric attack on Serbia by Hill's hubbie.)

What standards! Good for Syria, well maybe bad for Syria, but...good for Libya, well she meant well anyway....but the US? Why that's different!
(She was tricked by Bush for the Iraq vote so her complicity in that "social unrest" isn't even on the table....)

[backofanenvelope]

Hold your nose and vote for Hilary. Someone round here advised us to hold our noses and vote for his man Dave. How is that working out?

[David Duff]

Not awfully well, BOE, but a damn sight better than if we had voted for the 'Milipede' or the clowns who, er, 'run' UKIP!

[backofanenvelope]

One can only speculate about how Miliband or UKIP might have worked out. But we know how the current lot are doing, don't we?

[missred]

I am with Cuffy and Andrew. There is absolutely no way I can vote for Hillary - we know what to expect, and to vote for her would be outright folly. And while we don't know about Trump, I truly believe he cannot be as bad as what we have been living with for the last 7 years.
I don't know where she is getting her votes - every damn communist-oops liberal I know (let us just say I am a minority of one in my circles)is voting for Bernie.

[David Duff]

Well, dear Miss Red, perhaps better the devil you know than an unpredictable nut-job like Trump?

[missred]

In this case my dear Duffers, I would rather take the risk.

[David Duff]

Fair enough!