Three great takes today on the nightmare choice we face

Heather Wilhelm at Real Clear Politics says that if Squirrel-Hair keeps up his momentum and wins in November, it will be because Hillionaire so plainly a misanthrope:

Hillary Clinton also seems to quietly dislike (a) people, and (b) America, and you don’t need an advanced degree in election analytics to know this is not good. Sure, Donald Trump has talked about how stupid the people in Iowa are and how he wants to punch protesters in the face, and maybe sue a few journalists here and there, and how he won’t leave nuking Europe off the table, but overall—and again, here are those magic 2016 Goggles™ working—he manages, like Barack Obama, to serve as a blank screen upon which his followers can project their hopes.

No one cares about policy when it comes to Trump, apparently not even Trump himself. Just as Obama fans ignored his wacky pastor, his blatant insults to Christians, and his promise to control global sea levels, Trump fans ignore a multitude of sins. To his supporters, Trump projects “Team America,” even though we have no idea what Trump’s America might do. (Note: This should be mildly terrifying.)

Hillary Clinton, meanwhile, bless her cynical heart, desperately tries to project a team of some sort, but fails miserably every time. This is because, as noted before, she doesn’t seem to like you all that much, and for many Americans, the feeling is mutual.

Noah Rothman at Commentary asks readers to consider how post-Americans two generations out will look back on this year:

 Amid all this, the temptation to succumb to cynicism is strong. For those not steeped in the political process, the desire to drop out of it must be intense. It serves us, however, to put aside our revulsion for a few minutes to ponder the moment and ask how posterity will look upon it and us. We might be able to fool ourselves into believing that all of this is normal and within the bounds of normal American political behavior, but will our children or their children? What kind of politics will they be left with? And will they ask if any of this could have been averted? Some might be tempted to wash our hands of it all, sit back, and enjoy the “reality show.” But none of this is a game.

And Larry Elder at Townhall echoes a lot of the point Matthew Continetti was making last summer in a Washington Free Beacon piece called "Revenge of the Radical Middle" which I've discussed here many times. They both rightly point out that the non-ideological critical mass of post-American society does not make the connection between the pervasive role of government in their lives and two bad results of that: an erosion of freedom, and an accumulation of insurmountable debt. Elder couches it this way: Face it, this is presently a center-left country:

As with socialist Bernie Sanders, economic anxiety fuels Trump's candidacy. After eight years of Obamanomics -- raising taxes, increasing regulations, "stimulus" and "investing" taxes on failed "green initiatives," most of the country says that economically we are on the wrong track. Their near stagnant paychecks, unemployment and under-employment tell many Americans that this recovery is the worst in their lifetime. Given the shared grievances of Sanders supporters and Trump supporters, Sanders voters may, in some number, turn to Trump over Clinton.
Unfortunately, the correct prescription to deal with this -- lowering taxes, reducing the size of government and reducing regulations -- is not what voters want. They want the social safety net preserved, not reformed. This is what Trump is offering.

In a nutshell, conservatives are right, but there are not as many of us as we've been assuming.

It is very late in the day.