Democrats will be voting for businessman Donald Trump this November, and it seems most likely from comments scattered across social media and elsewhere that many are of the opinion that “big league change” in America is now more important to their lives, and the lives of their loved ones, and they will not be automatically giving up their vote to a scandal-ridden candidate such as Hillary Clinton and her DNC pals.
As some posts on Twitter show, emotions run high regarding the news that Bernie Sanders supporters were so badly treated by a “demonic” Hillary Clinton.
And here is a recent meme with boxer Mike Tyson, retweeted by YoungDems4Trump:
Broken lives and broken promises seem to have pushed voters to select candidates with newer voices outside the established political classes during the primaries this year, and thanks to social media, in a year where mainstream media’s political news seemed quite lopsided, and thanks to journalists like Peter Schweizer and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, and his crew of Truth Hunters, some democrats are seeing the bigger picture with ears and eyes wide open.
As the Twitter-verse tells of it, the mainstream media is a really useful bunch when “the Clinton Camp” needs a lie disseminated.
The Clinton Camp. thinks if they tell a lie & have a press hack publish it, it becomes true! Not how it works, sorry #PodestaEmails15 pic.twitter.com/VKitHZaHeY — Democrats for Trump (@YoungDems4Trump) October 22, 2016
Another recent tweet about the special interest issue and money in politics, post-John Podesta emails, may give a better sense of why democrats are going to come out and vote for Donald Trump in 2016.
A WikiLeaks dump caught the Hillary Clinton camp weighing in on the Clinton Cash author Peter Schweizer being interviewed by ABC News host George Stephanopoulos, a former aide, Clinton Foundation donor, and Bill Clinton campaign pal. But in presenting the author, the host of the show This Week tells Schweizer that “your reporting raises serious and alarming questions about judgment of possible indebtedness to an array of foreign interests and ultimately, a fitness for high public office.”
Then Stephanopoulos asks his big question. “How does your reporting show that Hillary Clinton may be unfit for the presidency?” Schweizer re-frames it.
“Well, I think the real question here, George, is when you ever have an issue of the flow of funds to political candidates, whether that’s to their campaigns, whether that’s to private foundations, whether that’s to their spouse, is there evidence of a pattern of — of favorable decisions being made for those individuals? And I think the — the point that we make in the book is that there is a troubling pattern. There are dozens of examples of that occurring.”
Jenn Palmieri’s statement about the interview was short and succinct.
“This is amazing. A pleasure to read.”
Voters may wonder if the interview was even really understood through those biased eyeballs and mindset. But of course, it was Clinton-favorite George Stephanopoulos doing the interview.
Soliciting $12 million from Morocco might be a big enough mess, according to the New York Post story by Bob Fredericks.
“Hillary Clinton solicited a $12 million donation from a government that her State Department considered corrupt, then realized the ‘mess’ it would cause in her presidential run, a newly leaked email reveals. King Mohammed VI of Morocco agreed to give the money to the Clinton Foundation, provided that it held a convention in his country in May 2015 with Clinton as the keynote speaker.”
The conference, however, would be held one month “after she announced her run for president,” writes Fredericks, and this might “hurt her candidacy.”
That money in politics issue is the worst sort of candidate-contamination for some voters this year, it seems, and voters are looking to shake things up in a collective sort of way. Per Richard Potter’s remarks on the matter, Trump and Sanders seem similar as populists wanting to rattle the establishment.
“Trump and Sanders have some things in common,” believes one Quora writer. “They are both populists who want to shake up the establishment.”
Adam Mac writes a Quora response regarding republicans, democrats voting out of spite, Clinton, Trump, and the weirdness of this 2016 election season.
“There is a large ‘Never Hillary’ movement out there, just as there is a large ‘Never Trump’ movement. The question is, which side is more determined? The issue here is that Republicans tend to be less willing to vote blue than Democrats are to vote red. Most republican voters will vote red no matter who the nominee is, while democrats have been known to just not bother voting at all if they don’t like their candidate, or vote red out of spite.”
So, come November, try not to pretend there was no warning of voter discontent anywhere in 2016, after democrats wanting change for their lives have voted for Trump.
[Featured Image by Andrew Harnik/AP Images]