Sunday, October 02, 2016

Alicia Machado

After Hillary mentioned her in the first presidential debate, interest in Alicia Machado exploded:


What those searching on her found--and that Team Hillary apparently, including its lickspittle lapdogs in the media, failed to find--is that she is a living, breathing real-life example of the worst caricature of New America imaginable. Talk about your all time backfires.

As a commenter at Steve Sailer's put it:
Usually the Left shows us outliers, or at least somewhat respectable immigrants with redeeming qualities – hard-working Dreamers – and tries to convince us they’re representative of the broader immigrant population. Now they’ve given us somebody that embodies every negative stereotype Americans have about Hispanics – trashy sexuality, prone to erratic fits of violence, and an anchor baby by a drug lord – and make it abundantly clear that if you want this woman and her family and their car on blocks next door to you, then Hillary is your candidate.
Heartiste raised him:
In Post-America, fat-shaming is a mortal sin while cheating on your fiancĂ©, being filmed on camera having illicit sex, driving your boyfriend’s getaway car from the scene of a murder, threatening the life of a judge, bearing the bastard spawn of a drug lord, and happily lying while under the direction of a presidential candidate and a colluding media about your “20 years of humiliation” from experiencing a gentle and encouraging chiding about your weight are trivial details that should not reflect poorly on an attention whore’s character.
Humorously, most of the frantic searching has come from the Imperial City and its surrounds, where trough-feeding eunuchs are realizing in shock and horror just how terrible a poster girl Machado is:


Trump is right to hit back on this. He rightly criticized McCain and Romney for failing to go after Obama's exposed jugular and now the Cathedral is trying to portray Trump going for Hillary's here as a mistake. Just like when they offer electorally disastrous advice to their enemies on things like immigration, they're collectively hoping that the perception of this being some kind of electoral 'mistake' will become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

It won't. Machado is now off the table. There's no way Hillary will bring her up again. If she's mentioned at a subsequent debate it'll be because Trump elected to drag her carcass back out. We'll see if he has time to squeeze her fat, skanky ass in between grilling Hillary for calling one-quarter of the country she wants to lead "deplorables", using mafia-style tactics to intimidate victims of Bill's rapacity, and selling state secrets to foreign governments while secretary of state.

17 comments:

IHTG said...

Or maybe he'll be too busy sputtering when Clinton comes out with yet another accusation from his past. We don't know how many putative "October surprises" she still has left.

I think Trump can learn not to respond to things he already expects, but a new accusation might rankle him enough that he'd forget that.

Mil-Tech Bard said...


Hillary's use of "Alicia Machado" is like an old Warner Brother cartoon cigar blowing up and giving the smoker a black face.

I can't believe the Hillary campaign was that shallow.

Audacious Epigone said...

IHTG,

You could be right. It's optimism on my part. He needs a little coaching. The advice should be simple--just ignore what Hillary and the moderator say. Turn everything around on her. To the extent that he acknowledges her remarks at all, it should be "I emailed my tax returns to you, secretary Clinton."

Mil-Tech Bard,

Yeah, it's an almost incredible unforced error.

Mil-Tech Bard said...

Audacious Epigone,

GO SEE THIS POLL RIGHT NOW --

http://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1182a12016ElectionPredebate.pdf

Trump holds an amazing 59 point advantage with white men who lack a college degree.

Trump holds a 40 point advantage with all white men!

Mil-Tech Bard said...

AE,

What I cannot believe in all of this is the uniform media denial of the "Alicia Machado" Sex tape.

See:

http://gotnews.com/breaking-trump-baits-lying-media-denying-existence-11-year-old-aliciamachado-sex-tape-broadcast-tv/

That utterly blows up any possible claim to media credibility.

This does nothing but help Trump.

Audacious Epigone said...

Mil-Tech Bard,

Right, because it's going to be the most searched about aspect to this whole sordid story. It's easily accessible (assuming it's real). So it can only be hidden in plain sight, and that's not a winning tactic when everyone is looking hard for it.

Jokah Macpherson said...

My take on Machado: You are not much of a hero of women's rights when your self-worth is based on external validation from powerful men.

Looks like she's coming out as a big winner, though. Drama like this is exactly what aging B-list celebrities need to maintain their career.

Audacious Epigone said...

Jokah,

Right, she'll come out way ahead on this. Hillary, not so much. And that's another reason it's a perfect microcosm for America's current immigration policies.

Mil-Tech Bard said...

Audacious Epigone


"Young and stupid" plus "old and corrupt" pretty much covers the universe of men voting for Hillary.


And not that many young people --

Only 47% of adults 18 to 34 are certain that they will vote this year. That’s down from 74% in 2008. Only 17% of voters under 30 are enthusiastic about voting this year. And, just to make things worse, Gary Johnson is pulling in 14 percent of younger voters. In Virginia, Hillary gets only 34% of the under 34 crowd. That’s not just an entertaining coincidence. It’s also an entertaining catastrophe.

And even fewer old folks --


Hillary’s Achilles heel is an older electorate. An older electorate is least likely to be influenced by celebrity tweets and pop culture peer pressure. It is most likely to consist of adults with life experience who have actually worked for a living and understand that everything has to be paid for.

Voters over 55 years old have consistently said that they will vote by percentages in the low 80s. The only recent time that the youth vote hit similar numbers was in 2008 when 74 percent of 18 to 34 adults expressed enthusiasm about voting. But now it’s not just low. It’s the lowest this century.

The same is true of Democratic voter enthusiasm. Only 65% of Democrats say that they will definitely vote. Compare that to 76% of Republicans. All this adds up to an older and more conservative electorate.



http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/264372/hillarys-greatest-nightmare-coming-true-daniel-greenfield

Anonymous said...

""Young and stupid" plus "old and corrupt" pretty much covers the universe of men voting for Hillary." - Don't forget the vote fraud. In the inner cities blacks vote at extremely high rates, but out of them, we see areas like Ferguson where only 6% of them vote. Isn't the wordsum for both democrats and republicans basically even despite the fact that it shouldn't be?

Audacious Epigone said...

It's higher for Republicans, but when only whites are considered it's basically at parity. See here.

Anonymous said...

She ain't white, that's all that matters to Hillary supporters, and there are no significant numbers of fence-sitters for this to have a negative effect on her campaign. We're entering a period of tribal politics, nobody cares about the pseudo-nation as a whole, and as Hillary said Machado will be voting Democrat so she adds that little bit of power to them. That's the only thing that matters. After all, this is the party and movement that wants to empty the prisons, that wants to give the vote to ex-felons (and serving felons, if they could get away with it). The party that destroyed school discipline in favor of black delinquents, and openly supports cop-killing BLM terrorists who routinely commit hate-crimes during their demonstrations. You think they are bothered by Machado's character?

Cicatrizatic said...

Frustrating week for Trump. The Machado story back-fired on Hillary, but the Clinton campaign/media kept the news cycle in the gutter for the week. That's clearly their goal.

Looks like Wilileaks will release something between tomorrow and Wednesday.

Meanwhile Trump leads by 4.5 in LA Times and 2.5 in UPI (which uses a similar methodology). He's down by 3 in the RCP average.

Consider that in 2012, the RAND poll (now LA Times) was almost exactly correct, while the RCP average was off by more than the margin of error. You don't hear anyone in the media talking about that because they obviously don't want to draw the obvious conclusions from it.

Mil-Tech Bard said...

>>but the Clinton campaign/media kept the news cycle in the gutter for the week. That's clearly their goal.

Cicatrizatic,

That development is a political "tell."

The Democrats complete drop to the gutter and character assasination means their polls tell them any discussion on any issue important to 2016 voters favors Trump.

Random Dude on the Internet said...

I wouldn't worry much about Machado having a negative impact on Trump. It's more of a sign of a desperate media and campaign that is frustrated and angry that they can't get anything to stick for the past 16 months. The LA Times poll shows him steadily increasing his numbers and lead over Hillary since the debate and since September 22. Machado might be all the media talks about but it's not hurting Trump in the least.

I also highly doubt Clinton has more tricks up her sleeve, they've had this "controversy" saved up for a year. This was supposed to be their October Surprise and well, looks like they need to find something else. Hillary's campaign isn't very competent and depends on the media to play cheerleader. Fortunately it looks like people see right through it, which is the only thing that matters in the end.

Audacious Epigone said...

The search result surge shows how the dinosaur media is cratering towards irrelevance when it comes to even giving the narrative a direction, let alone controlling it. There's a huge swath of the population that waits for the next alleged gaffe with eager anticipation just so they can deliver the mortal blows to it. As soon as this shit gets thrown up it's already being refuted everywhere.

Anonymous said...

"It's higher for Republicans, but when only whites are considered it's basically at parity. See here." - 2-3 points is still quite remarkable, it would appear as if the racial gap is solved somehow via voting.