Susan Sarandon Refuses to Apologize for Refusing to Back “Dangerous” Hillary Clinton

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
November 27, 2017

It’s a little bit surprising that more middle-aged and post-menopausal women weren’t scared to death of Hillary Clinton.

Typically, women can sense things about women, and typically, bloodthirsty careerist women scare normal women, because they have an ability to understand just how ruthless and amoral they are capable of being n order to promote their personal agendas.

No woman believes the “exactly the same except with bob and vagene” argument that soyboy males have bought into.

Fox News:

Actress Susan Sarandon is having a tough time since the 2016 election as the star is now being attacked by the left for refusing to support Hillary Clinton.

Despite campaigning for Hillary in 2001, she was a supporter of Bernie Sanders in 2016. When he failed to take the Democratic nomination, the actress did not shift her star-powered support to Hillary, which got the attention of the moderates and the left in a very negative way.

“I got from Hillary people ‘I hope your crotch is grabbed,’ ‘I hope you’re raped.’ Misogynistic attacks. Recently, I said ‘I stand with Dreamers and that started another wave,” she told The Guardian in a recent interview. “From the left! ‘How dare you! You who are responsible for this!’”

Yeah, leftists say that “I hope you get raped” thing to any woman who they view as going against the collective female agenda.

They will say absolutely anything that they feign moral outrage over when rightists say it. They are almost cartoonish without any type of principle whatsoever.

Since the election, Sarandon’s career has been marred by all things politics. She couldn’t even appear on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” without the host asking her to defend her political position. However, she stands by her decision to, as a New Yorker, vote for third party candidate Jill Stein over Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. However, it’s the assertion that fans got that she believed Hillary would be more dangerous than Trump in office that’s been hard to shake.


The assertion stems from an interview she did with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes on “All In With Chris Hayes” she gave prior to the Democratic National Convention.

While Sarandon has not publicly given her support directly to Donald Trump, she seems to be very confident in her belief that a Clinton presidency would not have people on the left as better off as they think they would be.


Asked if Clinton was more dangerous than Trump, Sarandon explained, “I did think she was very, very dangerous. We would still be fracking, we would be at war [if she was president]. It wouldn’t be much smoother. Look what happened under [Barack] Obama that we didn’t notice.

Clinton has a long record of supporting US interventions. Her vote for the Iraq war, the zeal with which she pushed to take down Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, down to her giddy celebration at his death, are just some of the reasons pacifists chose not to vote for her.

While Trump has failed to end US interventionism since coming to power, Clinton had advocated for a no-fly-zone over Syria, which would have likely led to war between the US, and Syria and Russia. Clinton admitted a no-fly-zone would “kill a lot of Syrians,” in a 2013 speech leaked by WikiLeaks before the election. She also maintains a hawkish stance on Iran, and promised in 2008, “If I’m president, we will attack Iran. In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them.”

Sarandon voted for Stein in New York, which, she explains “was probably the easiest place to vote for Stein,” as Trump was not going to win that state. “Bringing attention to working-class issues is not a luxury,” she said of her decision. “People are really hurting; that’s how this guy got in.

Well. We would certainly have a lot more wars if Hillary had won.

She was not just talking about escalating wars in secret speeches leaked by Wikileaks – she was campaigning on shooting down Russian jets over Syria to protect ISIS, which would have literally meant WWIII. She was giving PUBLIC, televised speeches about it. She also originally campaigned on support for insane international trade deals before Trump’s positions on the issue caused her to walk that back.

So I’d basically support everything Sarandon is saying here. Strange bedfellows and all that. The fracking thing is meh, but if we had his type of leftist leadership, there would be common ground and we could at least have real discussions about real issues.

Instead the left is just promoting insane, nonsensical stuff. Though to be fair, the Jewish controlled neo-con establishment is doing the same. Just abject lunacy on both sides – even while there are so many obvious, rational discussions we could be having.

Leftists used to be anti-war, anti-globalism and pro-working class – that was the case up until Bill Clinton, and through most of his term – and now they’re just about tranny bathrooms and exterminating white people. Older leftists (Sarandon is 71) must generally feel some cognitive dissidence with regards to this sea change in the direction of the ideology.