Memo to Salon: The only turkeys around are those writing for you. Why journalists can never admit they're wrong. Ever. Even if it kills you.

Journalists can be an annoying breed of stalker, and arrogant monomaniacs are not the kind of people you want dictating what you ought to think. They cannot admit their narratives have nothing to do with reality because that would be tantamount to admitting their worldview was somehow flawed. They have an idea that the future will vindicate their beliefs, and then try to rig things to prove themselves right. Case in point is Salon: Matthew Rozsa's peculiar rant Here's your leftover turkey: The case for Hillary in 2020 is as childish and out of touch as an article can possibly get, giving Donna Brazile's claim that the Clinton's took over the DNC complete credence. He may be trying to prime an audience to go with his ideas, but that is the last thing anyone ought to be doing.

American journalists have been in denial ever since that fateful November day in 2016 when all their manipulations and decrees proved to be wrong. Psychics and psychological profilers they were not. They have been underestimating the shrewdness of Donald J. Trump for decades. He is a man who thrives in chaos and antagonistic battles. He is a magician on a stage, and his misdirecting tweets should be a case study in how to make an audience assume they are intellectually superior and then stare at those tweets, instead of seeing what you are truly capable of doing. That he knocked out both the Bushes and the Clintons should be a huge sign that he is not a simple man with dumb luck. He provokes and understands strategy. He played Spy magazine for years, writing letters of complaint that they pinned up on their wall, assuming they had their prey hand deliver yet another trophy to them.

They have been gone for twenty years. Trump is in the White House.

Underestimate the man at your own peril.

The press keeps making the same two mistakes: (a) thinking Trump is some sort of an actual turnip who is less intelligent than they are, and (b) obsessing over genuine turnip Hillary Clinton.

There is no case for Hillary in 2020. The extent of her incompetence is one for the books. No presidential candidate in the history of the US came in with more resources and boosts than she did:

  1. Name recognition. She was First Lady for eight years. She was the senator for the key state of New York. She ran for president before. She was secretary of State. Her name was synonymous with politics. Trump's was...not.
  2. She had the media's full backing. They slobbered all over her, despite her numerous missteps, petty machinations, and questionable political practices. Trump was seen as a joke when he first announced his intentions to be ruler of the world.
  3. She had political and celebrity endorsements, and had a very popular sitting president and First Lady go stumping for her repeatedly. Trump did not even have the support of the Republican Party that did its best to distance itself from him.
  4. She had experience her rival did not.
  5. She had a husband who won two presidencies, even under the worst of circumstances and scandals.
  6. She had an enviable war chest, an experienced campaign team, and even had made certain the DNC was at her disposal.
  7. She could actually play the gender card to its fullest extent, while her rival was getting bad press for a leaked tape of him shooting off some very sexist prattle.

Clinton should have won this in her sleep. She cannot claim that Russia or the FBI thwarted her, and be taken seriously by people with critical thinking skills. She knows foreign threats as she was Secretary of State and would have had to have known the lowdown on the capabilities and intentions of foreign countries -- and would have been able to prepare years in advance. She would have also had had experience with various government arms, such as the aforementioned FBI, and been able to better anticipate what could happen.

If she were capable, she would have shown the electorate that she could handle both internal and external problems because that is what a president has to do every single day. As in, none of these problems magically vanish once you get yourself into the Oval Office.

What happened?

She lost.

She had numerous chances that no one ever had -- or any women will ever have again. The next woman to run for president is not going to have all those advantages -- so she had better be capable of being an army of one woman who has to fight a thousand battles a day during the campaign -- and after she is elected.

That is the reality of the situation.

But American journalists have proven to be a bunch of turkeys who have no idea what reality is.

They are still pining for Clinton -- not because they like her, but because it was so embarrassing that they declared Hillary to be the, like obvious winner, and she, like, totally blew it, and they never even saw it coming.

The shame of being wrong in a public forum!

Well, not really.

We humans are a flawed lot, and we are wrong more often than right. If we want to increase the rights over the wrongs, we have to acknowledge we were wrong, revise our hypothesis, and be more vigilant and sensitive to our environment.

That is what journalists are mandated to do: be vigilant and sensitive as they observe their surroundings...and yet they are still determined to prove they were right in their idiotic cheerleading of a woman who could not find her way out of a paper bag.

Reporters assume anyone who does not support Hillary must like Donald by default.

I don't like or support Trump, but I also don't like or support Clinton.

The press has to stop looking to the past. They have to shake off the narrative that Clinton is the only woman in America who could be president. They have to drop their toxic vendettas and petty little games.

Hillary couldn't win because she hasn't a clue what's it all about. She may have cleaned up her husband's messes, but being a cleaner and being a leader require two completely different skill and mind sets.

An artist makes a mess when working -- just because you have to clean up that mess, don't think you can be a superior artist. It takes more than removing that mess to have what takes to make something viable and of value.

Clinton didn't have it. The press didn't see that painfully obvious fact, and are still as clueless as ever.

Move on. Stop wishing out loud, and start doing what you proclaim to do: cover the world around you.

Because for every temper tantrum you are publishing, somebody is getting away with harming another person.

And there is no excuse for that.