Noam Chomsky would “absolutely” choose Hillary Clinton over the Republican nominee if he lived in a swing state, but her primary challenger, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, “doesn’t have much of a chance,” the MIT professor and intellectual said in a recent interview.
Chomsky, who lives in the blue state of Massachusetts, said he would vote for Clinton if he lived in a swing state such as Ohio.
“Oh absolutely…my vote would be against the Republican candidate,” Chomsky told Al Jazeera English’s Mehdi Hasan in a two-part interview — part of which will air Friday on “UpFront.”
Chomsky cited “enormous differences” between the two major political parties. “Every Republican candidate is either a climate change denier or a skeptic who says we can’t do it,” Chomsky said. “What they are saying is, ‘Let’s destroy the world.’ Is that worth voting against? Yeah.”
A good chunk of the electorate who is mad at either party’s establishment would probably vehemently disagree with the “enormous differences” line. I know for a fact that disgruntled conservatives could be assuaged quite a bit if Mitch McConnell would just once be as mad at the Democrats as he is at Ted Cruz.
There is, however, a lot of difference between many of the candidates. John Kasich has, though, shared policy positions with every candidate on both sides.
Whatever gets him through the night.
An endorsement from Chomsky, even as qualified as this, means Hillary is safe with the academics, despite their incessant longing for the resurrection of Joseph Stalin.
That he gave it to the Arab-owned network that bought Al Gore’s folly and is now closing up shop weaves so much Democrat into this story that it probably smells like FDR.
When he was alive.