Hillary Clinton Thinks You Are Very Dumb
By: Ian Donovan
Tags: Politics, Hillary Clinton, Debate

Last night, Bernie Sanders asked why Hillary Clinton’s foremost campaign donors have been Wall Street banks. I’ve linked a video of the exchange below, but here’s a transcript of what he said:

I have never heard a candidate — never — who has received yuuuge amounts of money from oil, from coal, from Wall Street, from the military-industrial complex, not one candidate says, “Oh, this campaign contribution will not influence me. I’m gonna be independent.” Well, why do they make millions of dollars in campaign contributions? They expect to get something, everybody knows that. Once again, I am running a campaign differently than any other candidate. We are relying on small campaign donors, 750,000 of them, thirty bucks apiece. That’s who I’m indebted to.

This is a good question! Generally speaking, people will contribute to political campaigns they support. Banks enjoy being profitable. By extension, they will thus support policies (and, necessarily, politicians) that will bolster their bottom lines. So, it poses the question: When four of Hillary’s top five campaign donors are Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, and Morgan Stanley, who’s being played a fool? Presumably, it’s not the very wealthy people whose entire careers revolve around buying things to advance their own self interest, so, Sanders is saying, perhaps it’s the populace at large for believing Hillary when she suddenly professes a new love for regulating banks.

Here is Mrs. Clinton’s response:

He has basically used his answer to impugn my integrity, let’s be frank here. You know, not only do I have hundreds of thousands of donors, most of them small, and I’m very proud that, for the first time, a majority of my donors are women — 60 percent of them. [Applause.] I represented New York, and I represented New York on 9/11, when we were attacked. Where were we attacked? We were attacked in downtown Manhattan, where Wall Street is. I did spend a whole lot of time and effort helping them rebuild, that was good for New York, it was good for the economy, and it was a way to rebuke the terrorists who had attacked our country. [Applause]

Let’s be totally clear, here: Hillary Clinton only felt comfortable offering that bucket of word-turds as an answer because she thinks you are very stupid. She thinks you are an easily-distracted child, and she does not respect you.

I think it’s fine that women are donating to Hillary’s campaign! I’d rather introduce publicly-funded elections, but if we’re going to have a broken system, we might as well have gender parity. (We do it with overpolicing and CEOs, as well. This is liberalism in 2015, refusing to tackle the roots of problems like your favorite sportsmen refuse to tackle their rivals’ quarterback.)

But what in the world does any of that have to do with Wall Street? If I ran for President and took money from Satan, aka The Actual Devil, could I say, “Well, a majority of my contributions are from people who are not the Dark Lord, Harbinger of the Absolute Nothing, Prince Of All That Is Ghoulish, so, never mind?” Of course not. Why is everyone clapping?

Emboldened, Hillary seized the opportunity to make a cartoon a reality in a way that even Rudi “9/11” Giuliani would balk at. I get that it’s a Presidential debate, so we’ll have to be reminded of how you were in charge during what is possibly the worst day in our nation’s history — why is this a thing politicians keep doing, by the way? I don’t remind everyone of the time I managed a McDonald’s that burst into flames — but my god, you were asked about campaign contributions. What does this have to do with 9/11? What is the causal relationship here?

WHY IS EVERYONE CLAPPING?

It’s because she’s right. We are easily-distracted children, and we will get the President we deserve.

(Quotes via YouTube.)