Lion of the Blogosphere

Hillary Clinton’s scary prediction could be true

An article at RealClearPolitics:

Clinton, who said she planned to host unnamed Latino leaders at her home in Washington Friday night to seek their support, said she is “optimistic” that comprehensive immigration reform legislation that includes a pathway to citizenship could be enacted if she is president. She said Trump’s defeat in November could send a wake-up call to Republicans that the policies they championed with voters in 2012 and 2016 failed to make the GOP a national party that could capture the White House.

Advisers inside Clinton’s campaign believe Trump’s policy prescriptions and rhetoric could prove toxic enough to compel Republican lawmakers and party leaders to once and for all abandon their enthusiasm or tolerance for anti-immigrant policies, if the GOP loses decisively in the fall.

Now of course, one shouldn’t believe everything that politicians say, or even most things. Normally an utterance of someone running for office, especially the office of President, is designed to further her chances of getting elected and does not represent her true thoughts.

But here we have an utterance that seems to me will scare Republicans into voting for Trump more than it will rally Hispanics who have already been rallied and are in her corner.

This also seems like the sort of thing that cuckservatives like Paul Ryan and Jeb Bush and even Karl Rove will believe 100%. This is one of the reasons why I think it’s likely game over if Hillary wins. Obama’s win over Romney didn’t change much. The Supreme Court remained controlled by conservatives, Republicans in Congress did not cooperate with Obama on immigration, nothing much changed. I think it will be very different if Hillary beats Trump.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

August 9, 2016 at 11:35 am

Posted in Politics

28 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. If the media can destroy trump with lies they will be feeling a surge of FU power and they will go for broke on amnesty and everything else. it’s like with Erdogan in Turkey – a failed overthrow attempt of the establishment will embolden them. look for a concerted attempt to destroy the second amendment and to federalize control of the police – amongst other things.

    JimBonobo

    August 9, 2016 at 11:51 am

    • The first amendment would also be in jeopardy via “hate speech” laws.

      Lewis Medlock

      August 9, 2016 at 12:26 pm

  2. If Hillary wins and gets to put in place (1) a liberal Supreme Court that will overthrow the 1st and 2nd amendments, and (2) amnesty the millions of illegals and open the floodgates for more, I’m not sure why I should even vote Republican any more.

    The establishment Republicans clearly hate me and would rather have a left wing Supreme Court than accept economic, immigration and foreign affairs policies that I favor. Under that scenario, I might as well go join the Bernie Sanders wing of the Democratic Party and work to overthrow the Clinton/neocon establishment on that side. Much of what I value would have been irretrievably lost, but if the 2016 election shapes up as it currently appears it will, then the Sanders path looks like the most viable path towards salvaging what would still be salvageable. (These are preliminary thoughts that I might change on further reflection.)

    Richard

    August 9, 2016 at 11:55 am

    • I don’t know if the Sanders option would really get you where you think it might. Sanders himself folded like a cheap suit, so it seems to me you would get all of the Clinton corruption with three times the deficit.

      Mike Street Station

      August 9, 2016 at 2:52 pm

      • I’m just thinking about the future, under Lion’s scenario where corporate Democrats and their Republican quislings win a total victory on immigration and the courts. With those issues taken away, I think I have far more in common with Sanders Democrats like Glenn Greenwald and Mike Tracey than I do with the jokers currently on my side like Ben Sasse and Erick Erickson. Most of what they’re passionate about I consider nonsense, while a lot of the causes Greenwald and Tracey have resonate with me, although not as much as what Trump has campaigned on. Sanders is too old to be a player in the years to come, so his personal failings aren’t very important.

        Richard

        August 9, 2016 at 3:54 pm

      • But at least you get to help break the bank, Overspend the country into oblivion. If it isn’t yours, why care?

        chris

        August 12, 2016 at 8:12 am

    • What on earth would the Sanders path get you? This is another case of “other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?” Sanders is a leftist and would be a bigger advocate of a liberal Supreme Court and amnesty for illegals than Clinton is.

      Hermes

      August 9, 2016 at 7:11 pm

      • Crackdown on corporate excesses, a wet blanket on TPP type free trade deals, an embargo on incessant wars in the Middle East and whatever else the neocons dream up, a reining in of the surveillance state. This assumes that a left-wing Supreme Court and immigration amnesty were already put in place and removed as standing issues. Like I said already, it’d be a disaster but once the disaster’s happened the question then becomes what can be salvaged.

        Richard

        August 9, 2016 at 7:37 pm

      • actually you’re wrong about the last point. clinton favors open borders. sanders has described it, correctly, as a conservative policy…in the sense of economic conservative. the wsj favors open borders.

        sanders attended brooklyn college and chicago. obama would never select him for his cabinet, half of whom have harvard degrees. clinton attended wellesley and yale law school, and he husband was a rhodes scholar.

        to the extent that the american elite is selected via elite education and this selection is via extra-curriculars, grades, recommendations, race and gender, who your parents are, etc. rather than exclusively by test scores (as almost the entire rest of the world does it) its elite will be:

        1. ideologically homogeneous and ideologically orthodox aka politically correct twelve year old girls
        2. dumb
        3. amoral
        4. pushy
        5. greedy
        6. striver-ish
        7. un-imaginative organic robots
        etc.

        hillary fits all these. bernie fits none.

        while at the same time such people will believe themselves to be the best and the brightest.

        Trumpocalypse Now

        August 9, 2016 at 9:11 pm

      • “This assumes that a left-wing Supreme Court and immigration amnesty were already put in place and removed as standing issues. Like I said already, it’d be a disaster but once the disaster’s happened the question then becomes what can be salvaged.”

        I guess I just don’t see anything worth salvaging once that happens. What good is economic protectionism or a reduction in the surveillance state once America has been permanently condemned to be a 3rd world country?

        Also, maybe I’m in the minority among Lion readers, maybe Lion would lump me in with the “TruCons,” but I don’t get all the Bernie-love/economic leftism around here. Traditional America was a free country. I don’t want a Scandinavian-style “social democracy” with socialized medicine, generous welfare programs, and all the rest.

        “actually you’re wrong about the last point. clinton favors open borders. sanders has described it, correctly, as a conservative policy…in the sense of economic conservative. the wsj favors open borders.”

        No, I’m not wrong; I knew Sanders had blamed open borders on the Koch brothers (the left’s bogeyman for everything.) But the Koch brothers, and the WSJ, are libertarian, and as the late Lawrence Auster pointed out, libertarianism is not a variation of conservatism, it’s a variation of liberalism. What liberals favor any immigration restrictions? They’re constantly telling us that any opposition to immigration is “racist.” Bernie is a total SJW. With a push for more immigration coming not from the Koch brothers, but from the left, he’d reflexively endorse it.

        Hermes

        August 10, 2016 at 9:42 am

  3. “Advisers inside Clinton’s campaign believe Trump’s policy prescriptions and rhetoric could prove toxic enough to compel Republican lawmakers and party leaders to once and for all abandon their enthusiasm or tolerance for anti-immigrant policies, if the GOP loses decisively in the fall. ”

    Thanks. This is what I have been saying all along.

    Trump is the one candidate you can assure what you guys are trying to avoid.

    Lion of the Turambar

    August 9, 2016 at 11:58 am

    • The problem is that treading water on the subject, which was the preference among those establishment Republicans who didn’t already favor amnesty, wasn’t avoiding the ultimate outcome either: just delaying it a few years longer than the Democrats and their fellow travelers like Jeff Flake preferred.

      Learning that the Republican establishment would never accept an immigration policy that went against social elite preferences is important information that the public should have had a long time ago.

      Richard

      August 9, 2016 at 12:27 pm

    • Trump is the one candidate you can assure what you guys are trying to avoid.

      Trump is the ONLY candidate who could prevent it.

      In fact without Trump the battle would be between Jeb and Hillary, which means phony controlled opposition either way.

      Dems and Republicans are basically one party – pro immigration, pro rip off trade deals, pro massive debt, pro war, pro wall street.

      Trump is hated by both sides for the same reasons.

      Which is why the Hilbots and the TruCons and GOPe might as well be the same people.

      Rifleman

      August 9, 2016 at 1:32 pm

      • Trump is ‘hated’ because he rude and arrogant. And appears to have several personality disorders. His analysis of any given situation begins with who “likes him”.

        Beyond that he does stupid things, is lazy and poorly informed. There are many reasons to dislike candidate Trump.

        Lion of the Turambar

        August 9, 2016 at 5:40 pm

      • There are many reasons to dislike candidate Trump.

        Including personal envy. But the primary issues get around to immigration, war/demonization of Russia, trade policy and who is benefiting from the status quo and who fears real change.

        The problem for the Trump haters is they can’t really deny the fact that anti-Trump means Hillary for President and while Hilbots like that the envy driven Republican Trump haters have no excuse for that mentality.

        Trump’s personality you hate but Hillary’s is not a problem?

        I’m not buying that.

        Rifleman

        August 9, 2016 at 6:06 pm

      • Being rude and arrogant toward leftist scum is perfectly reasonable. It’s about time we had a candidate like that.

        map

        August 10, 2016 at 1:34 pm

  4. If Ryan loses his primary, forget about immigration reform. It’s done forever. A McCain primary loss would also probably end immigration reform.

    If Trump loses and it’s close immigration reform is off the table for the next 2 years.

    A Trump blowout loss would lead to momentum for amnesty, but I don’t think that will happen.

    Otis the Sweaty

    August 9, 2016 at 11:59 am

    • Didnt you already admit that you thought Ryan would win by 30 points?

      A McCain loss would make everyone happy.

      Lion of the Turambar

      August 9, 2016 at 1:13 pm

      • I think he’ll win by 25 but we really don’t know because we don’t have any real polls. The only recent poll was obviously fake. The most recent public poll had Ryan at 69% with 11% undecided. I think Ryan will get around 62% of the vote.

        We’ll get him next time or in 2020.

        Otis the Sweaty

        August 9, 2016 at 2:11 pm

      • So Ryan won by 70 points and got the most primary votes of the history of WI-01.

        Trumpism is dead.

        Lion of the Turambar

        August 10, 2016 at 4:11 pm

      • Trump has always been dead in MN and WI. MN was the only state cucked enough to go for Rubio. WI was the last state Trump lost to Cruz, iirc.

        DB

        August 10, 2016 at 8:43 pm

  5. Running on a platform mainly opposed to illegal immigration isn’t big enough. Being opposed to legal immigration, so long as you explain why, polls much better.

    Dave

    August 9, 2016 at 12:44 pm

  6. …to compel Republican lawmakers and party leaders to once and for all abandon their enthusiasm or tolerance for anti-immigrant policies

    Republicans have been PRO immigration. In fact after the Romney loss that was their interpretation – go full pro immigration.

    That’s one of the reasons they hate Trump – he’s ruining their plans to bring in as many cheap workers and low end consumers as possible.

    That’s the GOPe plan – make America Mexico, Again!

    With an establishment elite on top and 100+ million dumb docile mestizos doing what they are told.

    Rifleman

    August 9, 2016 at 1:27 pm

  7. dsgntd_plyr

    August 9, 2016 at 2:43 pm

  8. Omar Mateen’s dad turned up at a Hillary rally, by the way.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-09/why-father-orlando-mass-shooter-was-sitting-behind-hillary

    Mateen’s wife is still missing though. Oh well, what can you do?

    Glengarry

    August 9, 2016 at 2:46 pm

  9. Watch what happens in Germany.

    Hillary’s agenda for 2017 is remarkably similar to Merkel’s 2015 agenda. This is not likely to work out well for Merkel’s team.

    A Trump win would probably be better, of course, but there is little reason to panic now. Andrew Jackson did not become president on his first try. Mutual annihilation of Trump and the NYT/WP/Team Jeb/etc. is a good outcome; just make sure in the 2020s that Team Jeb stays dead, and the rest should take care of itself.

    DB

    August 9, 2016 at 5:24 pm

    • trump is 70. he wouldn’t run again.

      kris kobach, the kansas attorney general, who has many of trump’s positions (he wrote the template for state level anti-illegal laws), is someone who could lead “trumpism without trump.”

      scott brown is to trump’s right on immigration. maybe scott walker (wants legal immigration restrictions) if he got media training. dave brat is even more boring than walker so he’s not in the mix as a candidate.

      there’s probably some 28 year old county councilman in nowheresville michigan that’s watching what’s going on who will rise up.

      if ted cruz had told the trucons to support trump, and moderated some of his positions, then he would by far be the future leader of the new gop.

      dsgntd_plyr

      August 10, 2016 at 9:24 am

      • Putting aside the demographic issue that there won’t be enough votes for anyone to succeed Trump in the future, the real problem is there is no money in it. Trump could be Trump because he was a billionaire. But what donors are going to support a campaign of a Kobach or Kobach like character?

        Jeb! in 2020

        Mike Street Station

        August 12, 2016 at 9:04 am


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: