ELECTION NARRATIVE COLLAPSE: Hillary is McCain (and why Rand had to be destroyed)…

Here’s one thing you’ll NEVER hear in the MEDIA — someone call HILLARY CLINTON OLD, and her Republican Challenger, the candidate of youth and change. Why do I mention this?


In the 2008 election, John McCain, at 72, was painted as a creaking relic likely to push the dreaded RED BUTTON and nuke the world, while intending to dial for an outside line. Whereas Barack Obama, 47, was so young and nubile, he awoke each morning coated in a sheen of fresh morning dew.

Well in the 2016 election, HILLARY will be 68, and her bevy of Republican Challengers (except Jeb Bush and Huckabee if he decides to jump in), are on average, a good twenty years younger than her. Yet the majority of Republican candidates are painted as a bunch of revanchist atavists who will drag the country in a direction beyond human comprehension. There’s a noted absence of HOPE AND CHANGE in the media portrayal of this youthful rabble.

But the inverted parallels with the 2008 election keep going:

An unpopular president, especially foreign policy wise (Obama isn’t punching up Bush numbers of unpopularity, but he’s FAR from healthy, and his term’s not over yet); A country thirsting for change; And a party hoping to retain power is going to put up it’s sacrificial WAR HORSE in an attempt to hold on for DEAR LIFE. Oh, and McCAIN happened to have a RICH SPOUSE, which made him part of the moneyed elite (bad news after bank collapses), whereas the CLINTON CASH is seemingly stainless, because it was made THROUGH GOVERNMENT.

But it gets even better:

The media is going to call this WAR HORSE the EXPERIENCED CANDIDATE, and the only logical choice to head off the motley crew of youthful Republicans who are going to make this country look like a cross between Shenzen (for the poor), Thunderdome (for minorities), and a land where you can’t get PIZZA’S or WEDDING CAKES (the LGBT community). Whereas in 2008, OBAMA’s relative inexperience (and staged on-camera EVOLUTION on GAY RIGHTS) was lauded as the exact REASON we should all vote for him. Too much of this Washington as usual is what brought us to two wars and economic armageddon.

Do you want to tell me that JOHN McCAIN in 2008 was more WASHINGTON than HILLARY CLINTON? No one is more Washington than the Clinton’s, regardless of what “up-and-coming” New York neighborhood they build offices in.

So basically when a REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE has experience, they’re DANGEROUS, and will enforce the STATUS QUO. Whereas, when a DEMOCRAT has experience, only they CAN SAVE US.

Oh and if a REPUBLICAN doesn’t have decades of EXPERIENCE, they’re DANGEROUS as well. But when a DEMOCRAT has little experience, they’re UNTAINTED.

So regardless, according to the Media, all REPUBLICANS are DANGEROUS if they have NO EXPERIENCE or TONS OF EXPERIENCE.

Got it. Good. Moving on…

But this election has a wild card that 2008 lacked and could make things interesting:

RAND PAUL. Why? Because he is at WAR with both parties. He’s unafraid of the Clinton Machine, seems to know it’s old politics, and capable only of wheezing and spitting out hundred dollar bills. And he seems to have contempt for the wastefulness and stodginess of his own party. But there’s a PARTY that declared WAR ON HIM:

THE MEDIA. Because he terrifies them. They already knew how to douse CRUZ and WALKER. Tea-Party Wing Nut and Union buster. But RAND confounded them. Hell, he sounded to the LEFT of HILLARY on some issues (foreign policy, drug legalization) and could inflict some real damage on her. So they had to tar him with something worse than Tea-Party Wing Nut and Union buster combined.

He’s a MISOGYNIST. And in 2015, there’s no more DREADED unenlightened term to be labeled with.

Is it really an accident the day after PAUL announced his nomination that he suddenly became a WOMAN HATER with a track record of reducing female reports to tears?

Here’s my greatest fear for RAND PAUL: That the Republican machine keeps him alive long enough to destroy Hillary in order to save the inevitable nominee from having to do it himself. Let RAND tear her down, let the media brand him a raging misogynist, BUT THE IMPLANTED NARRATIVE HE CREATES ON HILLARY WILL STICK, and she will be fatally weakened. Then RUBIO (or whomever) can receive the party’s nomination utterly untainted with allegations of MISOGYNY.

Let’s hope that’s not what happens, because RAND is the only one in the presidential race WITH IDEAS…

P.S.: I’d like it noted I’m not a DEMOCRAT, and I’m not a REPUBLICAN. I just think RAND PAUL makes a ton of SENSE.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s