27th April 2016
Hillary Clinton became yet another foreign politician wading into the EU referendum debate. After Barack Obama’s intervention (which it seems did more harm than good for the Remain campaign), Hillary weighed in herself; arguing that the United States backs a “strong British voice in the EU”. What gives Hillary Clinton, whose own record brings into question any claim to foreign policy expertise she might otherwise have, the right to comment on a British-EU affair? What gives her the right to tell Britain to agree to something which she herself would never advocate for the United States?
Mrs Clinton is forgetting, it seems, just how strong the British voice is both in and out of Europe. She is also forgetting how little her opinion matters, since she won’t be winning any elections this November.
Hillary is a divisive topic in the USA. She has devoted followers, as any politician does, but she also has huge swathes of people – even Democrats – who refuse to vote for her. She is seen as an establishment symbol; someone on the inside; another member of the Wall Street ‘crew’. One factor that could work in her favour – her gender – now isn’t a particularly powerful asset. Even some of the US sisterhood won’t put their vote behind her.
Susan Sarandon called Hillary “the best Republican that’s out there”. The actress went so far as to say that Donald Trump would make a more revolutionary candidate. A lifelong Democrat voter, saying she could support Trump over a Democrat nominee. Never thought I’d see the day. But Sarandon isn’t the only one; there are countless Democrats who would support Trump, Cruz or Kasich over Mrs Clinton.
The reason that Hillary turns off so many Democrats, so many people who should be supporting her (and yet are supporting someone like Trump), is because she is unfit for the office of president. We need only look to her disastrous foreign policy as Secretary of State to see that; she not only presided over the abhorrent events at Benghazi, she even practically caused it, she advocated the recent nuclear deal with Iran which has awarded them some $100bn with which they are likely to fund terrorists, she contributed to the wholesale destabilisation of Libya and she allowed the situation in Iraq & Syria to become what it is today. Without the likes of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, ISIS’ job would be substantially harder than it is now.
The most recent primary results suggest my prediction is right. Last night, when Donald Trump took all five states up for grabs in the Republican race; Hillary took an additional four states for the Democrats. But crucially, Bernie still took one. Anyone can see that Bernie Sanders isn’t going to be the Democrat nominee – but that doesn’t mean he won’t run as an independent. Why else would he stay in to the end of the Democrat race even though he’s already lost? If he does run, he will do nothing but take votes from Hillary. The effect will be to deliver them right to the Republican candidate – right now, it seems likely that it’ll be Trump.
So, it looks like President Trump. Trump will be marching along with the other patriot parties of Europe who are sweeping the polls because the voters feel they are being listened to. In the near future we could have President Trump calling President Le Pen and President Wilders in the continent. At least Trump will know who to call when he needs to speak to Europe.