Three Lies Hillary Needs Voters to Believe

With the help of The Associated Press, the Democratic National Committee, and an army of superdelegates, Hillary Clinton made history last week by eking out a buzzer-beating victory against a 74-year-old socialist that a year ago most of the country had never heard of. Mainstream media celebrations of the first female ever to become the presidential nominee of a major party reached an apex when Joanne Bamberger, a contributor at The Hill, compared Clinton’s feat to the moon landing, claiming the two events have “similar historic significance.” That would be true if NASA had used equivocations to propel the astronauts into space instead of a rocket.

It’s always amazing to see a glass ceiling shattered, but it loses something when the shards were sent cascading by a dishonest campaign.

I could have a Ph.D in quantum mechanics, but if I mow your yard once a week for twenty bucks the Bureau of Labor Statistics calls me employed.

In the general election, Clinton — like Jonathan Gruber and Ben Rhodes before her — will be relying on the stupidity of the American voter and 27-year-old reporters who literally know nothing to ride her campaign’s false narrative to victory. Here are a few of the lies Clinton will use to propel herself as she hurtles toward a collision with the final glass ceiling:

1.) Immigration and illegal immigration are the same thing. (Don’t look directly at the nuance — it’ll burn your retinas.)
The bread and butter of liberal logic is that immigration and illegal immigration are the same thing. That’s why they shoved the term “illegal immigration” in the dumpster behind the DNC headquarters years ago.

Here’s a tweet from Hillary Clinton that contains a line she includes in stump speeches all the time: “They [Republicans] want to put immigrants who work hard and pay taxes at risk of deportation.”

She’s referring of course to illegal immigrants but refuses to distinguish between the two groups. Those immigrants who are here legally — the ones who waited in lines, paid fees, and took a citizenship test — should be offended at being lumped in a group with those who didn’t. If you steal a television from Wal-Mart, that’s not the same as buying a television from Wal-Mart. If you take a dollar from the collection plate at Mass, that’s not the same as donating. The truth is, there are two mutually exclusive ways to come to America: legally and illegally.

2.) President Obama did a bang-up job over the last eight years. (No statisticians were harmed in the making of these numbers.)
When magazines airbrush models to make them look more attractive, liberals strap on their hashtag armor and charge into social media battle, but when the government does the exact same thing with employment statistics … cricket emojis.

The employment numbers President Obama slow-jammed to on “The Tonight Show” are Disney-style fairy tales while the real economic numbers are the Grimm tales they’re pilfered from.

[lz_jwplayer video=”kfEjWZbq” ads=”true”]

I could have a Ph.D. in quantum mechanics, but if I mow your yard once a week for twenty bucks the Bureau of Labor Statistics calls me employed. If I can no longer face the indignity of mowing your yard, so I give up, go home, and start drowning my sorrows in old episodes of “The Bachelorette,” they don’t count me as unemployed, they count me as one of the roughly 90 million adults not in the labor force.

Luckily, Gallup has not given up on delivering the real information. They recommend using two metrics called “Gallop Good Jobs (GGJ)” and “Real Unemployment” to gauge the situation:

Real Unemployment “combines those who are unemployed, underemployed and marginally attached to the workforce” while GGJ defines a “good job” as “working 30 or more hours per week for an employer that provides a regular paycheck.”

Right now, Real Unemployment is at 9.7 percent, while the percent of American adults with good jobs is flirting with 46 percent. Not the sort of numbers that inspire a slow-jam.

When Hillary Clinton is touring the country for the next five months asking voters to let her continue on Obama’s progress, she’ll be counting on voters to believe the airbrushed employment numbers.

3.) Clinton’s unfavorability numbers are a result of the vast right-wing conspiracy. (That post hoc ergo propter hoc really brings out your eyes.)
Occam’s razor is a 14th-century nugget of wisdom that says when theories compete, bet on the simple one. Horses and unicorns make the exact same sound when they gallop, but if you hear that sound, summon your inner Occam and think horse. Pretty simple.

But due to the corrosive effects Occam’s razor has on liberal logic, Clinton was forced to invent her own razor — which states that all phenomena are the result of a vast right-wing conspiracy. If Hillary Clinton is to have any chance in November, she’ll have to explain away the FBI investigation that White House spokesman Josh Earnest referred to as criminal while Obama’s endorsement was still freshly echoing through the mainstream media. In other words, she needs to convince voters to apply her razor to the FBI investigation which centers around her private email server.

When asked in a “CBS Evening News” interview if she bears any responsibility for her tanking approval numbers, she said:

“Oh, I’m sure I do, but I think — When I was secretary of state and serving our country, I had an approval rating of 66 percent, and I think it’s fair to ask, ‘Well, what’s happened?’ And what’s happened is tens of millions of dollars of negative advertising and coverage that has been sent my way.”

Occam must have rolled over in his grave. Public polling doesn’t offer many guarantees, but here’s one: If a politician is under federal investigation, and her favorability rating drops, you don’t need an industrial strength shovel to dig up the cause and effect.

With the president as her sword, social media memes as her shield, and the mainstream media as her megaphone, Hillary Clinton will spend the next five months trying to slip these fictions into the collective American psyche’s reference section.

Eddie Zipperer is an assistant professor of political science at Georgia Military College.