Signs

We’re hours away from the first presidential debate. Anything could happen during the debate. Trump might come up with a new nickname for Hillary. Hillary might have an uncontrollable coughing fit. Anything could happen.

And that’s why so many people will watch. There is an excitement in the air, similar to a prize fight. There could be a knockout punch at any moment.

A knockout in the debate will be metaphorical but just as devastating. The prize is the presidency. Many people believe that Trump is not only fighting for the presidency. He’s fighting for us. He’s fighting for our future. There are yard signs here that say “Vote Trump – Save America”.

I went for a ride today in Boardman, Ohio. Boardman is a suburb of Youngstown, Ohio. Usually, the republican candidate has widespread support in the small towns and farming areas. This time, it’s different. Trump has widespread support in the cities.

There are Hillary signs here too, but there are more Trump signs. I saw a Hillary sign and noticed that the houses on either side of that Hillary supporter had Trump signs. Both next door neighbors were supporting Trump. It seemed to be a pattern. I would see a Hillary sign and the next two houses would have Trump signs.

I went for a ride in the countryside the other day and only noticed Trump signs. There were a lot of them. Someone constructed a giant Trump sign on route 43 heading into Hartville, Ohio.

Trump is gaining momentum. I can feel it. Hillary has her core group of liberal supporters, but no momentum. In 1980, Ronald Reagan proved that democrats will cross over and vote republican. That’s exactly what will happen in 2016. Many democrats don’t agree with the democrat platform anymore. Many democrats aren’t satisfied with the direction the country is headed in.

There are three main concerns.

Refugees from Muslim countries: Hillary wants to increase the numbers. ISIS has said they will infiltrate the refugees. There is a real fear that America will become a hotbed for terrorism just like Syria, Iraq and Israel. Many people don’t want to accept a future that includes a constant threat from bombings and shootings. The best way to avoid such a future is to vote for Trump.

Deportation of illegal immigrants: Hillary has said that no illegal immigrants will be deported. That policy will mean open borders. Anyone from any country can cross the border and live here and work here without a visa or paperwork. No one would let unknown strangers walk into their home, but Hillary wants us to let unknown strangers drive on the roads next to us and walk the streets next to us. If any of them are former rapists or murderers or criminals, who would know? According to Hillary, as long as they’re not caught committing a crime here, they can stay.

Jobs moving to China and Mexico: My job was moved to China. Everyone who I have ever worked with has lost their job. Trump is the only candidate who has expressed any concern over this trend. Ford is moving all small car production to Mexico. Can you imagine a world where the classic Thunderbirds and Mustangs were built in Mexico? This is the world Hillary is driving us to.

I predict that Trump will explain these concerns to the voters. These concerns matter. I predict that Hillary will bash Trump over trivial things that don’t matter.

I predict that the yard signs will increase after the debate, all for Trump. He will be headed for a landslide.

I predict that you will notice a lot of your neighbors quietly placing their Hillary signs in the trash, headed for a landfill.

Hillary's History

At the February 3, 2016 Democratic town hall, Anderson Cooper asked Hillary about the $675,000 she received from Goldman Sachs for three speeches.

She shrugged her shoulders and said “That’s what they offered.” She then went on to say “Anybody who knows me, who thinks that they can influence me, name anything that they’ve influenced me on. Just name one thing.”

Elizabeth Warren did name one thing back in 2003, before the Goldman Sachs speeches. She wrote about it in her book, “The Two Income Trap” and she talked about it in a 2004 interview with Bill Moyers.

Warren said that Hillary was influenced by campaign contributions from banking interests. When Hillary was the first lady, she was opposed to a bankruptcy bill that favored credit card companies and hurt single mothers. She called it an “awful bill”. According to Warren, Hillary successfully influenced President Clinton to veto the bill.

After Hillary began her run for the U.S. Senate, she received $140,000 in campaign contributions from the banking industry.

According to Elizabeth Warren, those contributions influenced Hillary. After she was elected to the Senate, the bankruptcy bill was re-introduced and she voted in favor of it.

Warren wrote about it in her 2003 book, The Two Income Trap:

Warren: “In the spring of 2001, the bankruptcy bill was reintroduced in the Senate, essentially unchanged from the version President Clinton had vetoed the previous year. This time freshman Senator Hillary Clinton voted in favor of the bill. Had the bill been transformed to get rid of all those awful provisions that had so concerned First Lady Hillary Clinton? The bill was essentially the same, but Hillary Rodham Clinton was not. As First Lady, Mrs. Clinton had been persuaded that the bill was bad for families, and she was willing to fight for her beliefs. Her husband was a lame duck at the time he vetoed the bill; he could afford to forgo future campaign contributions. As New York’s newest senator, however, it seems that Hillary Clinton could not afford such a principled position. Campaigns cost money, and that money wasn’t coming from families in financial trouble. Senator Clinton received $140,000 in campaign contributions from banking industry executives in a single year, making her one of the top two recipients in the Senate. Big banks were now part of Senator Clinton’s constituency. She wanted their support, and they wanted hers—including a vote in favor of ‘that awful bill.’”

In the 2004 interview with Bill Moyers, Warren said that Hillary had taken money from the credit card companies. Warren said “more to the point, she worries about them as a constituency.”

The definition of constituency is “a body of voters in a specified area who elect a representative to a legislative body.”

Elizabeth Warren said that Hillary worries about the credit card companies as a constituency.

There was one question and answer in the interview that stood out.

Moyers: “But what does this mean though to these people, these millions of people out there whom the politicians cavort in front of as favoring the middle class, and then are beholden to the powerful interests that undermine the middle class? What does this say about politics today?”

Warren: “You know this is the scary part about democracy today. It’s… We’re talking again about the impact of money. The credit industry on this bankruptcy bill has spent tens of millions of dollars lobbying, and as their profits grow, they just throw more into lobbying for how they can get laws that will make it easier and easier and easier to drain money out of the pockets of middle class families.”

Here is a video of the Bill Moyers interview with Elizabeth Warren.

Hillary responded to the Elizabeth Warren story on February 7, 2016 when she appeared on ABCs “This Week with George Stephanopoulos”. She blamed the story on Bernie Sanders, even though Warren’s allegations were made back in 2003, years before Bernie Sanders even considered running for president. She called the charges “innuendos and insinuations that the Sanders campaign is engaging in”.

Hillary gave a long explanation for her flip on the bankruptcy bill. Stephanopoulos tried to interrupt her a couple of times, saying “but that’s not what...” and “but Senator Warren...”. Toward the end of her explanation, she again blamed the Sanders campaign for the allegation.

Here is the video.

Whether you believe Hillary’s explanation or not, it is significant that Elizabeth Warren had her own very different explanation in 2003. Warren was voted into the Senate in 2012 and is considered very liberal. She is certainly not part of a “right wing conspiracy”.

Hillary has blamed a right wing conspiracy for being behind many other allegations. It didn’t fit as an explanation for this allegation, so she blamed the Bernie Sanders campaign, even though they couldn’t have had anything to do with it.

A Sanders supporter may have reminded everyone of Warren’s critique of Hillary, but Warren certainly had no connection to Bernie Sanders or his supporters back in 2003 and 2004.

In Elizabeth Warren’s 2014 book, A Fighting Chance, she told only half of the story. She left out all of her previous criticism of Hillary. Warren wrote: “The industry-supported bankruptcy bill passed the House and Senate by sizable margins. Fortunately, one last warrior held out against the banks and the credit card companies: President Clinton. In 1998, I had met with First Lady Hillary Clinton to discuss the proposed bankruptcy legislation, and after our meeting she had declared that she would fight on behalf of working families, against “that awful bill.” Now the president was under enormous pressure from the banks to sign the bill, but in the last days of his presidency, urged on by his wife, President Clinton stood strong with struggling families. With no public fanfare, he vetoed the industry’s bill.”

The New Republic published an article in 2014 titled: “Warren's New Book Whitewashes Some Awkward Hillary History”. The New Republic is a liberal American magazine of commentary on politics and the arts published since 1914.

https://newrepublic.com/article/117409/warrens-new-book-whitewashes-hillary-history

In her 2014 book, Elizabeth Warren didn’t denounce her earlier criticism of Hillary. She just didn’t mention it.

Another article that discusses this issue is the Washington Post’s “Elizabeth Warren’s up-and-down relationship with Hillary Clinton began with a 1998 op-ed.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/06/10/elizabeth-warrens-up-and-down-relationship-with-hillary-clinton-began-with-a-1998-op-ed/

Elizabeth Warren knows all about the events of the past. She knows Hillary’s history. She knows that Hillary’s decisions are influenced by big money donors.

History is constant. It never changes. It might be whitewashed, though.

Comments, please.