As elections near, voters face the choices before them with something like dread: Donald Trump: loud, bombastic, bellicose, rich as Croesus, and xenophobic; or the presumptive Democratic nominee (unless Vermont’s Bernie Sanders manages to upend her): Hillary Rodham Clinton: slick as oil, flexible as a Slinky, bottled-blonde ambition, and wife of the penultimate political animal: ‘Slick Willie’ Clinton.
Both options elicit eyebrow-raising negative ratings. In a word, it’s a battle between Nasty vs. Crafty.
Indeed, this election may turn on who is hated least.
Ultimately, the race may reveal voters choosing a victor by voting not so much for one, but voting against the other.
Trump seems to [ahem] ‘trumpet’ his meanness, almost as if posting a sign: ‘ No Mexicans, no Blacks, no broads and no Chinks need to vote here!’
Hillary, as co-architect of the prison-industrial-complex, has shown up in more Black churches than the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. She has eaten pork chops, quoted Sojourner Truth and tried to sing Negro spirituals to lure Black voters.
Sadly, millions of Black voters will opt for Clinton, who helped cause more Black pain on a vast scale than any antebellum slave-owner.
Thank goodness for Black youth, who, as Black Lives Matter, bucked their parents to raise a. burning issue: mass incarceration.
Unlike virtually any constituency in America, we vote for who we feel comfortable with—and demand nothing. Other constituencies demand discrete, clear policies—and get them.
We vote like children in a grocery store—for bright, shiny, glittery things; y’know, Sugar cereal!
If Hillary Rodham Clinton gets elected, it’ll be because of Black voters–rewarding a politician for her policy of repression.
