Thanks for the response. What about the Justices she'll appoint, and the legalization/voting rights for illegals? Those really weren't issues in 1980.
The immigration issue wasn't a 1980 issue, but there was always a concern about Supreme Court justices even
then, though you couldn't predict when a replacement would need to be nominated. That said, I trust
neitherHilarious Rodent Clinton
nor Donaldus Minimus to appoint justices who will construe the Constitution
reasonably. And I'm not convinced that Donaldus Minimus has the capacity to navigate the illegal immigration
issue sensibly and/or constitutionally, either.
And demographically, we're not in 1980 any more.
I did say the next prospective truly rightward candidate wouldn't be another Mr. Reagan. I had that demographic and other
factors in mind.
In Reagan's day, there was a split between the parties, but also a large swath of undecided voters -- the potential "Reagan Democrats". Now, those people are all part of the GOP, but the electorate otherwise has shifted. You have far more single females, who lean heavily left, and far more minorities. Those are core Democrat constituencies that lean overwhelming left, and they also get a majority of government employees, academics, people in the arts, etc..
I suspect there will come a different breed of undecided voter, now and in the years to come. We have two candidates who are
distinctly unpalatable to a fair majority of voters this time around; you have surely noticed the overwhelming collective disapproval
toward both major party candidates. We may very well see a near hybrid of rightward and leftward voters among the undecideds.
If so, the right will have serious work to do, now and after the election. Especially if---let us hypothesise---I prove right and,
should she be elected, a President Hilarious Rodent Clinton alienates even her own party (it's very possible) and leaves the
Democratic factions you noted in the lurch.
I just don't see a path if the illegals get the vote, and that does seem to be one issue on which Hillary and the Dems seem united. And why not? It basically locks them up long term.
Again assuming we're facing a President Hilarious Rodent Clinton (it could happen, never mind that one wishes for neither
a Hilarious or Donaldus Minimus presidency), watch the downtickets and then watch Crapola Hill. She may not have quite
so simple a Congressional ride as one suspects. The particular issues are different now than then, of course, but it wasn't
very long before the presumably unstoppable Jimmy Carter alienated even his own party. Who's to say a President Hilarious
wouldn't, either? (Remember, there are many who think a President Donaldus would alienate the Republican Party in due
course . . . and there'd be nothing to stop Hilarious from training her guns on even those in her own party who might
deviate even a single degree from Her Ladyship's writ . . . )
