Clinton in Wall Street's pocket

I ranked all the candidates standing a few months back on two criteria:

1) Less likely to start wars; and
2) Less in Wall Street's pocket.

Bernie Sanders came out on top in both rankings.

Donald Trump was second in both.

Hillary Clinton was at the bottom, along with Marco Rubio, in both rankings.

My ranking Trump ahead of Clinton on peace was confirmed by Bill Kristol trying to get a third-party candidate to throw the election to Clinton.

Now my ranking Trump ahead of Clinton on independence from Wall Street has been confirmed as well:

"Some of them also have very reasoned arguments for Trump. Hillary is a known evil. Trump is unknown. They'd rather bet on the unknown, since it will also send a big message to Team Dem that they can no longer abuse progressives. I personally know women in the demographic that is viewed as being solidly behind Hillary—older, professional women who live in major cities—who regard Trump as an acceptable cost of getting rid of the Clintons."


  1. There is a definite anti woman bias in leadership that people go to lengths to rationalize away. It will be interesting if that will still be enough to matter.

    1. And a very definite anti sleazy politician who takes bribes from Wall Street banks bias. And an anti reckless politician who wrecks foreign countries bias.

      All this ugly bias out there!

  2. Kristol being noteworthy for all the times he has supported Democrats for being stronger on defense no doubt. More farce please.

    1. Well, Lord, there is... THIS TIME. In previous elections, Republicans have always been more hawkish, and so... he would not have been supporting the Democrat, would he?!

    2. Which is more likely, a) Kristol looking forward to being welcomed into the Democratic party, or b) Kristol fearing ending up out in the cold, a man without a party? As sweet as the latter would be, I am not convinced it is worth cutting off our nose.

      If Clinton and Trump had policy transplants is there any doubt there would be talk of how her lack of knowledge and weakness would lead us into war while his strength would prevent that?

  3. I do have a question. Who would/will be the successors to Clinton and Trump, win or lose? Perhaps Warren for both on Clinton, but who for Trump, Christie or Cruz? A remade Rubio, or Ryan?