And here is my response.
Dear Ms. Tucker,
I would like to address your column placing the blame for Donald Trump and his pending Supreme Court choice on those progressives who refused to support Hillary Clinton in 2016.
To begin with, you base a great deal of your anger on what you see as the obvious character short comings of Donald Trump. I do not necessarily disagree with the notion that Mr. Trump is short in the character department. In fact, that is why I voted for Gary Johnson. I am a conservative #NeverTrumper who could not bring myself to pull the lever for him. You indignantly point to Susan Sarandon as a prominent NeverHillary saboteur. Can you name another? Because to be honest, I don't really see her as that big of an influence on the national political scene.
On the other hand, I am proud to stand with people such as Senators Mike Lee, Jeff Flake, John McCain, Governors Arnold Schwarzenegger and John Kasich, former Presidents G.W. Bush and his father, influential pundits Charles Kruathammer, George Will, Bill Kristol, Jonah Goldberg, Glen Beck and David Brooks who openly opposed, and did not vote for Trump. Can I just say, my list is a lot more impressive than yours. Now I'm sure you attribute this to the vastly inferior character of The Donald. But does that mean you had NO problems with Hillary? None? Nor the Clinton Foundation Influence Retail Store? From "flat broke" to a net worth of $215 million in 15 years; Wow! As the old saying goes, profits don't happen until something gets sold. What were they selling?
But what you are really saying is that Democrats were better able to hold their noses with one hand while voting for crooked Hillary with the other. In other words, progressives were far less principled. Congratulations. Why not blame Hillary and the sycophants on the DNC? They rigged the system for one of the most unlikable candidates in the history of presidential politics. Also, she was a terrible politician, who gave wooden speeches to small crowds of sycophants. Unlike her husband, when she lied, it was obvious. Remember when Obama said that Hillary was "likable enough?" He was not being entirely truthful. Misogyny? I don't think so. How condescending was it to hear that women didn't vote for the Hildebeast because their husbands and boyfriends told them not to?
Then there is your contention that Trump's pick will be some radical right winger. Using your words, this is somebody who will be ultra-right, hostile, hard core conservative, starving unions, eviscerating rights, coddling violent police officers, abusing defendants, kowtowing to corporations, hateful, abbets homophobes, ultraconservative, and being far-right hypocrites. Gosh, hyperbole much? You don't even know who is being selected. Your column could be reduced to "The Supreme Court will now pick the wrong winners and losers." (Judicial tip: That's not their job.)
And surely you realized the perilous path of declaring that votes for Jill Stein rightfully "belonged" to Hillary. Gary Johnson got more than 3 times the votes that Jill Stein got, while Evan McMullin got half as many. If Stein's votes rightfully belonged to the Democrats, Republicans should just as easily claim Johnson's and McMullin's as their own. (And let's not even revisit the votes that Ross Perot drained off in 1992 (18%) and 1996 (8%). I hope Bill Clinton sends him a Christmas card every year.) Like I said, it's a perilous path.
No, you should just blame Hillary, rather than the principled Democrats who refused to support her.
