Voters Remember '98 Sexcapades The biggest irony of the 2016 Presidential election is we are seeing a leading political party possibly being hoisted on its own petard. Sex may no longer matter to America.

Voters Remember '98 Sexcapades

The biggest irony of the 2016 Presidential election is we are seeing a leading political party possibly being hoisted on its own petard. Sex may no longer matter to America.

Travel back in memory just 18 years ago. Bill Clinton was in trouble because of his sexcapades while Commander-in-Chief. On Sunday, September 13, 1998, the New York Daily News published an informal poll conducted on the streets of New York. The message came in loud and clear, "New Yorkers did not like the scandal the President got himself into but 'an overwhelming majority (76%) were ready to forgive and forget." In short, Clinton was seen as human and therefore, as it was just sex, he should be allowed to finish his term.

So if extra-marital sex was not a disqualifying position in 1998, why does the Hillary Clinton Campaign news outlets seem to think sex is going to change anything in this election cycle? Yet they seem dumbfounded the daily news reports over sex allegations are not having the desired impact in 2016. 

What was of real import was the New Yorkers, mostly Democrat voters, thought the prosecutor, Ken Starr, was 'far too explicit' in his descriptions of the sexual acts conducted by the President. The cigar put them over the top.

So the conclusion by the Times IN 1998 was, "Many supported Clinton's claim that his relationship with (Monica) Lewinsky is his business and that his sex life and whether he lied about it has NOTHING TO DO WITH HIS ABILITY TO PERFORM HIS JOB." One interviewee even went so far as to support the President no matter what he did because the economy did very good and "if he steps down I do not know what will happen to the economy."

Now it is 2016, the shoe seems to be on the other foot and the mass media and Democrats seemed obsessed over whether or not Donald Trump is 'pulling a Clinton' and what that means to his fitness to be Commander-in-Chief. Are they serious? As a crutch.

The reason is this is the only end game left to them. Over the weekend several commentators urged their followers to forget the polls, "Trump will win." Why could they assert this--because the regular political pollsters cannot see beyond their own safety nets.

In my county, a union-leading Democrat hotbed, early voting began on Oct. 13. By the end of the day on Friday, 4100 early ballots had been cast--a rather large number. But 2700 of those early ballots came from first-time voters or voters who had failed to vote often enough to have their names retained on the rolls. A very interesting fact was over 1900 of the registering voters, just under 72%, took an independent position rather than aligning with one of the two major parties. 

Is this visible backlash against 'the establishment system?' 

I believe it is. Back in February I claimed voter anger at the establishment was a factor the pollsters had not accounted for. I clung to that position before each and every primary vote. I've held fast to it over the past weeks as the debates rolled by.

Every person I know is holding his or her nose over the choice at the top of the ballot. But what I am getting from these people is the disgust with the "Establishment" (which means the leadership of both political parties in Washington) is paramount. The average Josephine and Joe on Main Street loathes both parties equally. Therefore the announced defections by Washington-insider Republicans from their party's candidate is not hurting him nearly as much as it would have 20 years ago. In a perverse way it may be helping him with the unnoticed anti-Establishment voter as both Democrats and insider-Republicans are against him.

The Daily News' story about Bill Clinton those 18 years ago had all the supporting data possible of why removal impeachment was the only possible course for America to remain on the high ground. The Democrats fought like mad to keep their man and settled on a rebuke impeachment instead of removal. They salved their conscience with the idea a rebuke would suffice. Thousands of Americans turned their back on this political decision in disgust. That number has been growing ever since.

This action provides the point the anti-Establishment voter has fixated his anger upon. The pollsters claim they are "putting all Americans in their surveys." How? If these people are not on the rolls, on what basis are they contacting them. Most carry cell phones so using land-line phonebooks (as was the past practice) also doesn't get you in contact with them. 

If Hillary's campaign staff was really as concerned as she claims over Trump's sex allegations--then why is she still with Bill? If it such a disqualifying trait, why is she still with Bill? How can Billy stump for his wife morally when she demoralized his accusers 18 years ago?

The campaign, thankfully, is on its last legs. Since all the independent candidates seem to be running a distant third at best, America's choice seems to be Hil-Liar or the Trumpster at the top of the ticket.

Not much of a choice, but then again the stage was set 18 years ago when the moral high ground was abandoned to maintain the status quo. For decades voters have comprised a shrinking factor in America. Those who willingly dropped rather than opt for a immoral Left versus a high-brow Right may be resurfacing. 

The pollsters do not want what the New Voters want because the pollsters want to maintain Establishment politics. Whoever takes the Oval Office won't be able to govern as they would like however, the aroma of molding cigar still pervades the place and some Americans can't forget.

"I have sworn on the altar of God eternal hostility to every form of tyranny over the mind of man."--Thomas Jefferson