This election year reminds me of something a friend of mine told me a few years ago. When she went to see a new play with some friends, no one in her party knew much about it so she wrote down her prediction as to what the play would be about, and hid it away for revealing afterward. After the play she showed them her prediction: “Everyone hates women, including women.” She was right, of course.
I wish that she could be wrong, at least once. Here’s my prediction, three months before election day. I’m publishing it here so you can remind yourselves of my wisdom (or stupidity!) months and years later. Here goes:
Hillary Clinton will win the presidential election this year, and be given precisely zero credit for having flattened Donald Trump. She’ll still be called “historically unpopular” after winning a Johnson ’64 or Reagan ’84-style victory. Forget the sixteen opponents Trump crushed in the primaries–they couldn’t do it. But somehow when Clinton beats him, we’ll just roll our eyes and say, “well, DUH! Obvs. he couldn’t get elected.”
She and her campaign staff and volunteers will have saved the United States from a President Donald Trump, and she and anyone who worked for her will get precisely zero credit for having done this. The entire country will be all “Ugh, MOM, where’s my sandwich?” for the next four years. Because we all depend on a high degree of women’s effectiveness and accountability but we resent it and so never give them the credit they deserve.
You will be very correct.
LikeLike
OK, now you’re on the record too, Theresa!
LikeLike
Or, the very worst yet, Trump will win the election (wow, it was painfully difficult to type those words!) and Clinton will be blamed for “letting” it happen.
LikeLiked by 1 person
IF Trump wins you’re undoubtedly correct. Sad! As some might Tweet.
I was jumping ahead to the HAPPY ENDING, by comparison at least.
LikeLike
I’m almost afraid that the “October Surprise” will be that Trump is under in-patient psychiatric observation during the last weeks of the campaign, and she’ll be asked to explain whether or not she feels badly about having run the table on an “obviously sick man” who couldn’t even finish his campaign. Can’t win, even by winning. His latest rant is that if he wasn’t getting dishonest coverage by the media, he would win Pennsylvania by 20%. I think he means Transylvania.
LikeLike
Memo to all political parties: don’t nominate rich d-bags who have surrounded themselves with yes-men and women for the past forty years. And if you do, don’t expect him to “pivot” or give a $hit about any bad news or criticism you offer him. He’s not having it.
Like right-wing conservativism, Trump cannot fail; he can only be failed. The fault is never with the Republicans, but in our stars. . .
LikeLike
Pace Historiann, I find this political cartoon to be spot on:
http://api.theweek.com/sites/default/files/Hands_Tribune.jpg?resize=1000×1000
LikeLike
WOW–that’s aggressively awful, Profane!
I mean, they could have showed her working out or flexing or something, instead of *filing her nails.* You know: like girls do.
LikeLike
Given Trump in a female costume having fallen off a balance beam (not a male event in the Olympics – there is another whole issue) I am inclined to give the cartoonist a pass on that. Granted, a flexing Hillary would have given it a better effect!
LikeLike
SIGH
LikeLike
You will indeed be correct. And about we all depend on a high degree of women’s effectiveness and accountability but we resent it and so never give them the credit they deserve I could write a book. Alas.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, you are correct. And this will be the best possible outcome. Better than we deserve as a country/polity. I am going to start drinking heavily. Just as soon as I can get my syllabi done.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’ll join you when I get mine done, too–
LikeLike
I’ve been saying the same thing about how they’ll say her victory was unimpressive and unimportant, but I missed the insight about how everyone will blame her for not giving them a pony. So right.
Also too: HRC may have won, but she doesn’t have a mandate. Because she betrayed the left to win, or because she didn’t reach Reagan’s landslide level, or because Real ‘Murkin voters are against her, on and on. Don’t go thinking you have any power to do anything, missy!
LikeLiked by 1 person
WORD. Sad!
LikeLike
Can’t resist a dissenting note. When Clinton wins I predict her favorability rating will approach Obama’s on Jan. 20, 2017.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You might be right, bharshaw, for 1/20/17, but she’s got to get to work on January 21, 2017, and for the next 21 months or so. That’s when high (or low) approval numbers will count for something.
LikeLike
I agree with you, the 2018 midterms will be very important but I’m too chicken to predict past Jan 20–a president, any president, has too little control over events–judging by the past we’re overdue for a recession during her time in office, foreign events, etc.
LikeLiked by 1 person
But we could also each get ponies!!!
Beautiful, sparkly ponies! And if we don’t, we’ll be really, really pissed and of course IT’S MOM’S FAULT.
LikeLike
During the primaries, seeing the incredible hostility of many Bernie supporters (not a healthy place, online media and YouTube comments), this scenario came to mind:
Bernie Sanders was the grandpa who promised the kids ponies. Grandma Hillary knew they couldn’t have even one pony in their apartment, so she went out and got the best quality stick ponies, with hats and bandanas and even chaps.
When the grandkids came over, despite Grandma’s efforts, the kids were disappointed. When they complained, “But, Grandpa, you promised us ponies!” he shrugged and said, “Hey, well, Grandma.”
I’m not sure how to update this for the general. Maybe Trump as the pervy drug dealer hanging out on the corner?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Perhaps Trump as a door to door snake oil salesman. . .who then proceeds to criticize the stick ponies since they were made in Mexico.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Like most of his merch, which was made in China or Mexico!
LikeLike
I also am guessing the word “despite” will appear in the lede of many, many of the stories the Wednesday after Election Day. And very few of them will be referring to sexism — rather they will refer to a range of sins, mostly imagined, that have allowed too much of the media to engage in both-sides-do-it-tooism. “Despite her unpopularity …” “despite her many flaws …” “despite allegations of impropriety …” “despite decades of criticism …” — in other words, everything but “despite years of FALSE allegations and the sort of scrutiny that her male colleagues have never had to face …”
Seriously — if I see one more Facebook post or internet comment about how we are faced with two terrible choices I am going to explode in paroxysms of false equivalence. (That’s a real thing.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
“I am going to explode in paroxysms of false equivalence. (That’s a real thing.)”
Yup. I can confirm that. (The walls and ceiling took a lot of scrubbing the last time it happened. Yesterday.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, and also: the best description I’ve seen of the degree of equivalence between the Orange Mess and Hillary is by prolixious at Widdershins:
“[It] is like comparing directions for a potty seat and the Large Hadron Collider. There is no comparison beyond both being concepts occurring on the planet Earth.”
LikeLike
That is good.
LikeLike
Pingback: The prince’s body and the body politic, 2016 | Historiann