I've been around the sun 50 times.
For 20 of those trips, the person occupying the Oval Office has had one of two last names: Bush or Clinton.
That accounts for nearly half my life, and the bulk of my adult life.
Four years ago the MSM suggested the 2016 Presidential race would likely be between a Bush and a Clinton -- with a result that would up the total years of B-or-C occupancy to at least 24. A quarter century, in other words.
Neither party seemed to think anything was amiss about this possibility.
It surprises me not at all that Trump, bloviating his way into this scene, felt to many like a breath of fresh air.
It astounds me that Dems think Clinton is their best match against this guy. The wise (or desperate) among us urge voters to consider the "Three Cs" -- competence, character, conviction -- when backing a candidate. Democrats seem to think meagre "competence" will sway voters away from the candidate who possesses none of the above.
Alright, other, better commentary: Matt Taibi explains why young voters distrust Clinton. To that I would only add that if younger voters personally identify with anyone from the Clinton years in office, it's probably Monica Lewinsky.
Trump took a crack at making Scotland great again -- with controversial results.
|Nuffadat -- happy thoughts, happy thoughts...|