[Trump] leads among Republican women and among people in well-educated and affluent areas. He even holds a nominal lead among Republican respondents that Civis estimated are Hispanic, based on their names and where they live.Much of this article strains to find racial material, dragging in evidence of the Google searches in various areas. Maybe you can tell where the racists are by where people search for racial epithets, and then maybe Trump supporters in the same area are the same people who did the searches. Cohn concedes that this evidence is weak, but it's not so weak that he doesn't bother with it.
But Mr. Trump’s lead is not equal among all G.O.P. groups, or across all parts of the country. His support follows a clear geographic pattern. He fares best in a broad swath of the country stretching from the Gulf Coast, up the spine of the Appalachian Mountains, to upstate New York....
His geographic pattern of support is not just about demographics — educational attainment, for example. It is not necessarily the typical pattern for a populist, either. In fact, it’s almost the exact opposite of Ross Perot’s support in 1992, which was strongest in the West and New England, and weakest in the South and industrial North....
What stands out to me after reading the whole article, however, is that Trump obviously has a lot of support among a wide range of people, including many that you wouldn't expect if you've been relying on mainstream media for information: women, well-educated people, Hispanics. There needs to be much more serious analysis of what is going on. American politics is outrunning the pundit class, which has lost a lot of ground tripped up on the delusion that this can't be serious.
Posts
71 comments:
"There needs to be much more serious analysis of what is going on."
Pardon my ignorance, but does there really?
The level of support and the persistence has surprised me. I don't like him but I wasn't too happy about any president since Reagan. Obama has moved the bar so much that anything goes now.
People are really angry and he has said all the right things, even if in an annoying way.
He has all the right enemies.
I think Cruz or Rubio might still pull it out.
I am resigned to a president Trump if it happens. I don't know if I could handle a president Hillary. Obama was bad enough.
The naughty google searches & Trump support maps are similar to the census map of black population percentage. But MiniTrue knows that blacks don't support Trump.
This needs more analysis like a burning building needs more analysis. Sometimes you just have to stop being mesmerized by the flames, stop fueling the conflagration and recognize destruction for what it is.
There needs to be much more serious analysis of what is going on. American politics is outrunning the pundit class, which has lost a lot of ground tripped up on the delusion that this can't be serious.
The analysis is easy: The American people are rebelling against the elite establishment who have been attempting to run their lives (and becoming more and more successful) since at least the 1960's, and arguably back to the original Progressives at the turn of the 20th century.
The Left is supporting Sanders, who like Trump by all rights would be little better than a joke, for the same reason they support Trump...he is anti-establishment. (Though how I can say that about someone who has spent his whole adult life in Washington is baffling)
The attempts by the media and the establishment to attack them only make them stronger. Things like the omnibus bill only make the anti-establishment feelings stronger.
The only way to get rid of Trump and Sanders is to have a legitimate candidate start giving the American people some hope that he will listen to their concerns and act in their interests, something not one of them has managed to do yet.
Two years ago I supported Ryan and didn't think at all about Trump.
Now I support Trump and detest Ryan.
Analyze that.
Very interesting. I admit that I'm starting to warm a little to Trump. Finally drawing attention to Bill Clinton's predatory actions and Hillary Clinton's complicity went a long way, for me. Nothing has made me more frustrated in contemporary politics than to see her treated as even remotely acceptable to any cause associated with feminism. I still have a lot of reservations, but I have reservations about every other possibility (and always do). My super-Tuesday vote is still very much up for grabs. I'm really enjoying watching Althouse warm to him at the same time that I do.
I'm looking forward to the post-game on this whole election, after the votes are cast and the dust clears - what will people say when they look back at it?
Think of Trump & Sanders as anti-bodies to an infected body politic. It's not what you WANT, but what you NEED.
this is why the pundit of the year is Scott Adams
http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/222618/
Old Hickory scared the Establishment of his day even worse than Crazy Donald scares anyone.
Abolish the Bank of the United Staes ( Fed) anyone?
Wait until Trump tells us what he really thinks.
"something not one of them has managed to do yet."
Very few people remember how scary a candidate Reagan was in 1976.
The left hated him until they found someone they hated even more, GW Bush, and then Reagan "could not be nominated in the 2012 Republican Party."
I still think Trump represents the 21st century Andrew Jackson, minus the accomplishments, of course.
Accomplishments don't matter in 2016. Obama took care of that.
The only way to get rid of Trump and Sanders is to have a legitimate candidate start giving the American people some hope that he will listen to their concerns and act in their interests, something not one of them has managed to do yet.
Exactly. I think the pundit class understands the issues that the American people have with the government establishment, they just don't want to acknowledge them because then they would have to address them. And that is something they are loathe to do.
1) People feel there is too much immigration, that immigrants aren't assimilating into the culture (that in fact they are being discouraged from doing so), they resent the Spanish language signs that they see in Walmart and Home Depot and don't see why you should be asked if you speak Spanish when you call a business or government office. They feel that immigration is driving wages down and that the Democrat party is encouraging immigration to change American demographics to its advantage and that the Republican party is going along because the party's donor class wants cheap labor. They are tired of being told that these feelings are self-evidently racist and nativist (and don't understand why nativist should be considered derogatory). They are furious that nobody in DC is addressing these concerns and in fact are trying to shut people up who wish to talk about them.
2) They know that the so-called MSM are in no way independent. That they are in the bag for either the Democrat or Republican establishment, depending on who owns the corporation. They have gotten as skilled at figuring out what is going on by seeing what is left out of the news as a Soviet citizen was when reading a copy of Pravda. In addition, they now have access to alternate sources of news and commentary. Therefore, knowledge of thuggish, illegal, and otherwise bad behavior that might have been known to a limited few in the past is now widely disseminated.
3) They know that the government and big business are corrupt. Pretty much a conspiracy against the middle class meant to keep those already in power from losing their positions, no matter what they do, socialize losses, and privatize gains. They still resent the bail out of the banks with the white hot heat of a thousand exploding suns because they certainly didn't get bailed out when their retirement accounts took a dive.
4) Outsourcing and in-sourcing (bringing in cheap labor to replace middle class workers) is starting to hit middle and upper-middle class workers, threatening their jobs and their children's futures. Thus the educated people who support Trump.
5) Americans have limited interest in foreign affairs. However, they don't like looking weak or like chumps. Right now that's how we are perceived by the rest of the world. That pisses us off and we blame the government for it.
6) Education seems to be designed to denigrate Western Civ in general and the United States in particular. Standards are non-existent in higher ed and the people who attend our "elite" universities that we hear the most about seem to be whiny brats that spend a great deal of time complaining about their oppression while attending schools whose annual tuition is more than what the vast majority of people make in a year. And they know that these people are quite likely to go on to a position in government where they will have authority over other people who just want to be left alone.
Basically, government is obtrusive, incompetent, and in many cases malevolent. Big business is obtrusive, destructive, and crooked.
And of course there is the anger over a coarsening (and downright stupid) culture where Bruce Jenner is celebrated as a courageous woman, Beyonce is celebrated for her feminism because she danced in a provocative manner next to a sign that said feminism, and people are fired for holding the same beliefs that Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama claimed to hold until only a couple of years ago.
"Much of this article strains to find racial material..."
File this line away. It should prove useful on a nearly daily basis.
....because racists need to Google racist sayings, instead of already knowing what they mean.
That is an assumption of astounding stupidity.
I think there is a cycle that happens with many pundits.
They appear on the scene and they are interested in politics. They appear on the scene because they've done some really solid work in punditry, somewhere obscure. Nowadays, it's the internet and blogs. So here comes the pundits who have gathered an audience in the past by doing really solid punditry.
Pretty soon, they aren't doing solid punditry anymore. Pretty soon, they are doing a mix of solid punditry and hobnobbing with famous people, mostly pundits, but some politicians. Things aren't like they thought they were. These people are real people! And now they get to say they know them! Wow.
Then something happens. They change. A sort of ego creeps in. They now have inside knowledge, which is better knowledge than they had before. They've been invited to the parties. They've been to the homes, the residences, the boats, the vacation houses, wherever these people live and play. Now they have insight. Before, all they had was impartial, cold, numbers driven analysis. But now? Now they are on the inside.
And being on the inside means access. Access to influence. Politicians A,B and C know me! Media personality A, B and C know me! They listen to me! I have influence. I better be careful what I say and write. It has to be interesting. It has to be apt. It can't be crazy. Etc.
And pretty soon they are writing what everyone else is writing. And they are dull. And boring. And trying to influence the people they know, rather than report on what they see happening. When they write that Rubio or Bush is going to surprise, what they are really writing is, "Listen to me! Vote for Bush or Rubio!!" When they write, "Carson can't win, he doesn't have the infrastructure." What they really mean is, "Don't vote for Carson you rube! You don't know what I know!!"
Granted, there are people who have kept their heads. Ann Althouse is one of them, for example. I do feel like she tries to influence us through her writing, who doesn't? But I've never felt like she is listening to others and trying to please them. There are a few Fox News personalities that I think have been consistent through the years. But a lot more fall into the "influence" trap and aren't really trying to observe and tell us something, but instead, are trying to influence us. A great example of this, I think, is Paul Mirengoff at Powerlineblog. He seems to have gone whole hog into the idea that he has influence over his readership, makes my eyes roll.
If you want a little more intellectual support for what you're seeing, you might read Angelo Codevilla's essay from about 2010 or so where he postulates the existence of a "country class" and a "ruling class". The "country class" is quite diverse--flyover country folks, small businessmen, working class folks of all stripes. The various groups within the country class have divergent agendas, but one thing they all share is that they are flat flippin' fed up with our political and cultural elites who want to tell them how they should run their lives.
There's a lot of blowhard bozo in The Donald. Heckfire, he's a member of the ruling class his own nasty self. But he seems willing to break the mold--and so he's attracting support. He may not actually be willing to do much for the "bitter clingers" that Obama despises--but at least he won't sneer at them.
This.
"What stands out to me after reading the whole article, however, is that Trump obviously has a lot of support among a wide range of people, including many that you wouldn't expect if you've been relying on mainstream media for information: women, well-educated people, Hispanics."
The disdain that the Will, Krauthammer, Kevin Williamson set have toward Trump supporters is incredibly stupid. They assume that all Trump supporters are rubes. Not so. Many Trump supporters feel, rightly so, that coventional candidates are useless. They go to D.C. and immediately become corrupted. So what difference does it make? Dismissing the Trump supporters off-handedly is not just stupid but it is actually one of the causes of the rise of Trump. Many people, educated and uneducated, religious and non-religious, intelligent and not so smart, think the system needs to be radically challenged. The conventional conservative media heads are part of the problem. They demonstrate the problem.
So the Broads support Trump. Great news. Somebody hire that pollster.
If Romney had only one of Trump's testicles he would be president today.
"Many Trump supporters feel, rightly so, that coventional candidates are useless. They go to D.C. and immediately become corrupted."
This is not just characteristic of national politics. I have been involved in local and state politics for years.
A few years ago, a group in my small city got tired of an inside clique in city hall who were rewarding friends and naming buildings after themselves. We organized a local group called Committee for Integrity in Government and succeeded in defeating the clique majority of the city council. We solicited citizen candidates and helped elect them.
Do you know what happened ? They made new friends and turned on us. Lord Acton had it right.
The committee is inactive.
@Gahrie: "The American people are rebelling against the elite establishment" So far, only minorities in both parties, among people polled. Most of these rebels just want to keep their established entitlements--or expand them.
@Ron: "the anger over a coarsening (and downright stupid) culture" To which Trump is the obvious antidote.
No, I don't despise Trump supporters. I share the frustration over illegal immigration. I like someone who takes on the MSM and the Clinton mafia. I'll take some of that make-America-great red meat. I'd just prefer an actually conservative president who has actually thought about the full range of major issues s/he'll have to deal with, who has actual plans that promise actual solutions, and who can be trusted to appoint people of conservative temper, both in the executive branch and to the Supreme Court. And of course, I want someone who can win FL, OH, and VA--an empirical, not a philosophical issue: Trump may be able to pull it off, but it seems very unlikely. Rubio/Cruz gives the GOP a better shot, as electoral strategy and future governance.
Somebody posted Hitler quotes under a Trump photo on a Trump Facebook page and Trump followers liked it 103 times and even shared it shared it 28 times in 11 hours.
Yes that sounds just about right.
Sebastian said
Rubio/Cruz gives the GOP a better shot, as electoral strategy and future governance.
You went on and on, making me think, now here's a guy who gets it. Here's a guy who is as frustrated as I am.
And then you mention Rubio as someone who'll gett'r done?
Wow. You're maybe a young guy? I hope so. Such naivete is only for the young. I seriously hope you're not past 30 and thinking such nonsense.
Blogger Michael K said...
"Many Trump supporters feel, rightly so, that coventional candidates are useless. They go to D.C. and immediately become corrupted."
This is not just characteristic of national politics. I have been involved in local and state politics for years.
A few years ago, a group in my small city got tired of an inside clique in city hall who were rewarding friends and naming buildings after themselves. We organized a local group called Committee for Integrity in Government and succeeded in defeating the clique majority of the city council. We solicited citizen candidates and helped elect them.
Do you know what happened ? They made new friends and turned on us. Lord Acton had it right.
The committee is inactive
Yep. Satan's best lie is, if you get the right people in government, it'll work.
Sadly, no government works just as bad as corrupt government. The only answer that really works is a small government. And a small government is really super hard to maintain. It always wants to eat more and more and more and grow and grow and grow.
The only people who should be elected now are people who agree to tear some part of it down. And there isn't anyone like that running, except perhaps Trump. He has promised to dissolve the EPA. That'd be one hell of a thing if he accomplished that task.
I spend my time googling "witty, handsome, and well-hung."
@Sebastian
People just don't trust Rubio about immigration. Cruz seems to be a possibility. At this point a Trump/Cruz ticket seems a distinct possibility. I'm not saying that as a Trump supporter, but as someone who is observing the phenomenon.
"Maybe you can tell where the racists are by where people search for racial epithets"
That's precious, right there. Well played.
And that is something they are loathe to do.
Loath. Loath. Loath.
Sorry.
Eric said: "Granted, there are people who have kept their heads. Ann Althouse is one of them, for example. I do feel like she tries to influence us through her writing, who doesn't? But I've never felt like she is listening to others and trying to please them."
Thanks. And the truth is, I don't care much about influencing people. I care about being read, but mostly I care about being interested in things, playing with ideas, and living freely in writing.
"Somebody posted Hitler quotes under a Trump photo on a Trump Facebook page and Trump followers liked it 103 times and even shared it shared it 28 times in 11 hours. Yes that sounds just about right."
What sounds right? The numbers are small and how do you know that those who click to follow someone are actually supporters? Seems like the easiest false flag bullshit that ever came down the pike.
I have to agree with Ron Winkleheimer's analysis of why Donny is getting such support. I personally detest Donny but I understand why people are supporting him.
This is the Hitler quote "attributed" to Trump - "As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice." Sounds pretty benign to me - very rare is the person who has an encyclopedic knowledge of all quotations made by everyone in the history of the world, including your typical low-info click savant like Amanda (or maybe "she" is Garage Mahal).
A diverse spectrum of racial epithets... in the urban jungle.
Blogger Ann Althouse said...
"Somebody posted Hitler quotes under a Trump photo on a Trump Facebook page and Trump followers liked it 103 times and even shared it shared it 28 times in 11 hours. Yes that sounds just about right."
What sounds right? The numbers are small and how do you know that those who click to follow someone are actually supporters? Seems like the easiest false flag bullshit that ever came down the pike.
That's actually quite small potatoes. I follow Trump on Facebook and usually he's got 10's of thousands of likes, sometimes in the hundreds of thousands. And thousands to 10's of thousands of shares.
A few hundred? I'm surprised it's so low.
Blogger Ann Althouse said...
Eric said: "Granted, there are people who have kept their heads. Ann Althouse is one of them, for example. I do feel like she tries to influence us through her writing, who doesn't? But I've never felt like she is listening to others and trying to please them."
Thanks. And the truth is, I don't care much about influencing people. I care about being read, but mostly I care about being interested in things, playing with ideas, and living freely in writing.
Sometimes, the way you write your posts are written to influence how the comments go. Or at least, it seems like that to me. Sometimes you write something along the lines of, "I dare you, go ahead, do it." <---- Not an exact quote, just pulling from memory.
Because you're trying to influence how the commenting section goes.
Other times I feel like you're trying to have an influence on my thinking by challenging me to think about what was written, how it was written, and your response to what was read. I believe you use the phrase, "Think deeply about it." or something like that. It feels to me like the author (Which, in this case, is you) is attempting to influence my thoughts on the subject.
Ron Winkleheimer said...
"People just don't trust Rubio about immigration."
I think the problem is, it's hard to understand what Rubio is saying a lot of the time. His message would be easier to follow if he took Mark Zuckerberg's dick out of his mouth once in a while.
"Much of this article strains to find racial material, dragging in evidence of the Google searches in various areas."
This is a crappy way to measure public attitudes. A few years ago much was made of the fact that many pornography search terms originated in areas usually thought to be conservative -- Utah, for example. OMG, what hypocrites!
The problem is that in these socially conservative areas, there are people who aren't social conservatives, and the normal outlets they may find for their . . . entertainment . . . aren't as easily accessible as they may be in more liberal parts of the country. Fewer strip clubs, hookup bars, what have you. Google search terms metrics are meant to be used by advertisers, not social scientists.
Basically you shouldn't assume that because a zip code is 60% Mormon households, that 60% of the searches for porn from that zip code originate with Mormons (maybe they do, maybe they don't).
Here's your serious analysis Ann. All the Presidents before Coolidge and all the Prrsidents since, plus the Congress and SCOTUS have done their all to overturn our Constitutional traditions. The Constitution was poorly written and We The People have relied on our government to follow tradition and continue to fool the rubes into believing that our government is limited. But, through time, the traditions have been overwhelmed and swept aside. So our Constitution now stands revealed as a Social Contract that promised unlimited government and is now delivering it good and hard. Can I be catty and point out how much historians, political scientists and Constitutional scholars have aided and abetted this unveiling? Essentially we have gotten what we were promised 225 years ago and we have ALL been working very hard to bring it to fruition.
Mission Accomplished.
"Somebody posted Hitler quotes under a Trump photo on a Trump Facebook page and Trump followers liked it 103 times and even shared it shared it 28 times in 11 hours. Yes that sounds just about right."
What sounds right? The numbers are small and how do you know that those who click to follow someone are actually supporters? Seems like the easiest false flag bullshit that ever came down the pike.
Umm, What exactly were the quotes?
If you search Amanda's Hitler quotation, one of the first hits is the Wikipedia article on Religious Views of Adolf Hitler. Turns out (no surprise) that that was one of lies he told in 1922 to get Christians to vote for him, and that it expressed pretty much the exact opposite of his actual hostile opinion about Christianity. Which makes Amanda, and the people she links to, that much more dishonest.
If there were some way to know for sure just who liked and shared the fake Hitler quotation, and who posted it on the Trump site to start with, I'd bet $100 that Amanda or someone she knows was involved.
The Constitution was poorly written
Not really.
The real problem was the creation of the Bill of Rights, which changed the fundamental nature of the Constitution.
The government was transformed form one that could only do what it was expressly given the power to do, to one that could do anything it wasn't prevented from doing.
I still feel that trump has more opportunity to make inroads into minority voters than any republican in two decades. His focus on immigration resonates with wage stagnation and the enormous under reported unemployment numbers. Black folks know that unlimited immigration, legal and illegal are in direct competition with them.
"There needs to be much more serious analysis of what is going on."
Ok. But you go first.
"What's going on" is that Americans know we're being ill-served--in fact, we're being had--by the crooks, cretins, and poltroons who stalk the halls of Congress and the White House, who have been resident in these respective places for decades and who see their proper and only place as serving the financial elites and their interests.
In this environment of rot and corruption, Americans are hungry to hear someone who does not seem to be one more of their ilk. We all know there's no one in the race for the nomination who has even a whisper of the qualifications (or the quality of person) the office demands and that we deserve. So hungry are we to hear someone who seems different, and determined to really change things--to offer "Hope" and "Change," as the last such people's hope branded himself--that even a Donald Trump is seen by many as vastly preferable to the mental midgets and moral monsters among whom he strides. Such is the fruit of diminished expectations.
(I say "even a Donald Trump," as it is should be obvious to all he is no better qualified or suited to be President than his drab competitors...but then Ronald Reagan managed to win two terms and many are still so deluded as to believe he was a good president and not an increasingly senile figurehead.)
"the data shows that Mr. Trump..."
At first I read "data" as "dada" and I thought , you get me! You really get me!
I also read that Hitler liked puppies. Hillary likes puppies too, so...
"The only way to get rid of Trump and Sanders is to have a legitimate candidate start giving the American people some hope that he will listen to their concerns and act in their interests, something not one of them has managed to do yet."
Here’s what I don’t get about this comment. What makes either Trump or Sanders illegitimate candidates? I would never vote for Sanders because I’m not a socialist and know that socialism only makes people poorer and allows the political class greater power. But that does not make his candidacy illegitimate.
What’s illegitimate about Trump? He’s articulating what many, perhaps a majority of people believe. Do you mean that he’s not a professional politician? It seems that the use of the term “legitimate candidate” is a way of demonizing a person; the kind of verbal trick that’s exemplified by the term “climate denier.”
The Constitution was well thrashed out and Governeur Morris wrote it up with a felicitous pen. Nor is there much to find fault with in the amendments, except the 17th and perhaps the marvelous 14th.
However, they are still just pieces of parchment with writing on them. It takes electing people of good will to public office if compliance with these documents is to be expected.
As Benjamin Franklin said, "A republic, madam - if you can keep it."
.but then Ronald Reagan managed to win two terms and many are still so deluded as to believe he was a good president and not an increasingly senile figurehead
You're never going to forgive him for defeating the USSR and winning the Cold War, are you?
What stands out to me … is that Trump obviously has a lot of support among a wide range of people … women, well-educated people, Hispanics … American politics is outrunning the pundit class, which has lost a lot of ground tripped up on the delusion that this can't be serious.
I saw and still see Hillary as a fragile candidate. I thought that she was going to drop out early and hand the nomination to Biden but Biden wouldn’t go along with the plan, perhaps because the cagey Biden sensed that Trump was unbeatable.
After all, if Biden had entered and won the election over Trump Hillary and Bill would still be sitting pretty with their foundation pulling in millions, possibly billions, for at least 4 more years without anyone in the Whitehouse that would or could put a stop to it. Hillary and Bill are going to lose a great deal of money when Trump wins in the landslide that is coming. Their foundation’s donations will dry up once they are out of power. And they cannot be sure that the next AG under Trump will not find reasons to indict them. They’ll have to tread lightly under a Trump administration. They could have had their cake and have eaten it too. Trump will take that away.
Prediction: Trump will destroy Hillary before the election. In fact Hillary is already destroyed. She is the Walking Dead. This will become more evident as time goes by.
Prediction: A sizeable percentage of Democrat voters will crossover to Trump in the general election. I say 10 to 15% of voters who have voted for Democrats in past elections will vote for Trump.
Prediction: Trump will set records on the number of Latinos that will vote for him.
Prediction: The number of blacks that will vote for Trump will set records for a GOP candidate.
What’s illegitimate about Trump?
He's a rabblerouser and a demagogue, but as Obama has shown us, that is enough to get you elected. However, he has no political philosophy, no guiding principles, and as far as I can tell very few ethics. He's not a conservative, and not a Republican, he's an opportunist. In a sane world, his candidacy would be a laughingstock. Here lies chaos.
The American people are angry, and he gives voice to their anger when no one else would. I get it, I'm angry. I enjoy watching Trump attack the media and the establishment. But I'm old enough and educated enough to fear chaos.
"I'm no Trump supporter but..."
Virtue signaling Althouse style.
“However, he has no political philosophy, no guiding principles, and as far as I can tell very few ethics. He's not a conservative, and not a Republican, he's an opportunist. In a sane world, his candidacy would be a laughingstock. Here lies chaos.”
What makes you believe he has no political philosophy? He’s a businessman but even businessmen have a political philosophy. I’m a business man and deeply conservative and religious. It’s not something that I share with the world, just a few friends.
He’s not a Republican? Right now he is. What does it take to be a Republican? John McCain is a Republican, as is Olympia Snowe and John Boehner and all of them are viscerally opposed to people like Ted Cruz who seems to be carrying the “Conservative Republican” banner.
He’s an opportunist? You mean he’s taking the opportunity of the gaping hole left by the Republican establishment to create a movement?
Why is he polling better than Ted Cruz (who, if I were God would be my choice for President)? Is it because he’s breaking through the relatively soft political voices on the Right and going where they are afraid to go for fear of offending the almighty Media and the “voices of moderation” like George Will on the Right?
This world is not insane and there is no chaos. What we are experiencing for the first time in my lifetime is a politician – Barack Obama – who does not believe he’s bound by the constitution and the separation of powers, and a Republican political establishment that will not act effectively to stop a lawless President. They have abandoned the power of the purse and won’t get within miles of the threat of impeachment for breaking the law. Welcome to a constitutional crisis that everyone is afraid to acknowledge.
Soft voices of moderation and appeasement got us here. It’s not going to get us back on track. If Hillary is elected she will enshrine the new – post constitutional - political reality. At this point people are waking up to the fact that the Democrats have a powerful political machine that another calm, soft voiced, Republican patsy will get the Mitt Romney treatment. That’s Trump’s difference and people are beginning to see it after writing him off as a flash-in-the-pan political lightweight. You may want to rethink your assumptions.
"'I'm no Trump supporter but...' Virtue signaling Althouse style."
You put something in quotes that no one said. Certainly, I didn't say it. My posts in recent weeks have been scrupulously agnostic about the man. I assure you that you do not know what I think of him, but go ahead, I dare you to try to figure it out.
Last summer or spring -- it's hard to find -- I believed Trump was not a serious candidate and did not deserve the press attention and I wouldn't even write his name. He's certainly proved his seriousness by now, and I haven't said anything in that vein for months.
You know somebody has to be President. I never think anyone deserves it, but somebody, presumably somebody in the weird array we've been looking at, is going to be President. I don't trust any of them, but Trump is different from all of them and has a unique character and skill set.
Sorry AA I wasn't referring to you personally but rather the Althouse blog commemting community. I see so many comments prefaced with a similar statement. I find it amusing.
This world is not insane and there is no chaos. What we are experiencing for the first time in my lifetime is a politician – Barack Obama – who does not believe he’s bound by the constitution and the separation of powers, and a Republican political establishment that will not act effectively to stop a lawless President. They have abandoned the power of the purse and won’t get within miles of the threat of impeachment for breaking the law. Welcome to a constitutional crisis that everyone is afraid to acknowledge.
I understand the problem. I even understand that Trump is doing a valuable service by attacking the MSM and Establishment with his candidacy. Regular readers must acknowledge that I am supportive of those who support Trump. I want to support him also....but come on seriously?
The scariest thing is (and it is something no one is talking about...Godwin's law etc) If you know anything about history, Trump is following the playbook used by Hitler and Mussolini, the rabblerousing demagogue. Given Obama's actions in weakening our Constitution, the idea of a Trump presidency scares me, especially if he wins in a populist landslide.
I doubt that Cohn is aware that his article intimates that if Trump is the GOP nominee, Hillary is in deep trouble.
That "racist" take in the article is the biggest hill of bollocks I've seen this year. (Admittedly, there's a lot of year left!)
Nate Cohn isn't seriously arguing that NY is solidly for Trump because it's made up entirely of racists. He's arguing that for the South, giving himself an out for TX and FL because they have actual candidates of their own.
And whence these Google search patterns, anyway? Disaggregated data from Google? Sort by state (or county, looks like), just leave the names off? Creepy.
I want to know what's with the big Trump area in OR. I think I'm in it, though no one's asked me my opinion.
I admire Trump for upsetting the apple cart. But then what shall we do for apples ?
Well, one of the labours of Hercules was to clean out the Augean stables. He was not required to refill them.
If you're OK with the guy you like dismantling the protections of the Constitution, you might not be pleased when somebody you don't like gets into power.
Paul: Please keep your assorted projections out of my mouth.
Trump has been undervalued:
1. He has done more for the First Amendment and for speaking and thinking freely in our culture than has anyone else this year (and perhaps in many, many years) because he has said "forbidden" and striking things out loud, avowedly,and with serious intent. Nothing he has said is really beyond the realm of what should be seriously discussed or considered; it has only been beyond the realm of what the intellectually constipated, politically correct left and MSM can tolerate. Whether he is right or wrong on particular things is not pertinent to this point. Trump is actually a breath of fresh and bracing air, in precisely the same way that Althouse sometimes is. He makes us think and live more openly and freely. Many people are responding to this. They like freedom.
2. He is a serious and substantial man of real accomplishments. I know the left will claim he was born rich, but there are many, many people who were born into moderate wealth. Very, very, very few of them have built what Trump has built. He is without doubt a man of major talent and serious accomplishment--something that was not and is not true of Obama, nor of many (any?) of the other candidates. There is a reason that Bill and Hillary attended his daughter's wedding a few summers ago.
3. Trump built what he built legally and without using a base of political power, like the Clintons or Harry Reid or so many others have done. And the building he has named after himself HE OWNS--unlike the politicians high and low who are constantly naming the buildings and roads and airports that belong to us after themselves.
Trump is knocked because he's faced bankruptcy in business. Considering that this nation is presently bankrupted, Trump, at least, has experience in recovering from such.
Lacking political experience is a selling point, not a detractor. It is the experienced pols who've brought us to our present predicament of cascading disasters.
Trump is Dirty Harry to Obama's Barney Fife. One acts while the other dithers and whines.
I assure you that you do not know what I think of him, but go ahead, I dare you to try to figure it out.
Har!
Ann, here's your analysis:
What Trump represents is the deep anger at the leadership of BOTH parties who support policies that hurt working class people.
Illegals drive down wages. After all, why would you hire ME, a master cabinetmaker/carpenter for a job when you can hire THREE illegals for the same price, pay no taxes, pay no SSN, no medicare, no worker's comp...? Why would you hire me for anything if you can replace me with far cheaper labour?
H1B (guest workers?) drive down the wages and drive citizens/legal residents out of work for much the same reason. Why would you hire them to work when you can bring in foriegners and pay them 2/3rd's?
ObamaCare...we elected the GOP to control both houses of Congress because they told us if we did, they would repeal ObamaCare...and continue to do so until they had the numbers to overturn a veto...we gave them control, and with the "Omnibus" spending bill (btw, whatever happened to the idea of 1 spending bill per department?) just put Nance Pelosi & Harry Reid back in control of Congress by giving Obama every damn thing he asked for?
We're tired of being lied to by our politicians...not just the normal crap they tell us te get elected, but outright lies now...
I will only vote for Trump if he wins the nomination, but I work with a number of people who will vote for him in MI's primary in a few months...they're/we're tired of being lied to and persecuted by DC...
...Ann, that's your analysis...the GOP leadership have betrayed the base of the party, and the base is showing how pissed they are by backing a "straight talking" (i.e. non PC) guy. I think Trump is a bufoon, but you better get used to the idea of him being the nominee because that is more and more likely every damn day.
However, he has no political philosophy,
Neither have I, neither have a lot of folks, so we are not much bothered about all that crap. As far as I can tell “political philosophy” of one type or another has gotten America into a hell of a mess. And we do know one particular “political philosophy” of which Trump is a wonderful example: Capitalism. Trump is one hell of a capitalist. Trump “believes” in capitalism. I’m not sure the other candidates do. Not deep down, not in their hearts.
no guiding principles,
Here are a few Trump principles for the commentor:
Never let the MSM dictate the terms of the debate, put America first, secure the borders, pause wholesale Muslim entry into the USA(Readers, remember when the Muslim “pause” was controversial?), build the wall. Stop allowing foreign leaders to screw America with idiotic trade deals, political deals and arms deals, get American corporations to build their products in America, take steps to repatriate American corporations, have a foreign policy that is based on reality instead of bribes(foreign aid), apologies and unicorns.
and as far as I can tell very few ethics.
Readers, don’t we need examples of Trump’s ethical lapses before we can accept this statement? I’m sure the commentor will oblige. Let the debate ensue.
He's not a conservative, and not a Republican, he's an opportunist.
Translation: Trump is not an ideologue. Trump is a practical realist, a pragmatist.
But Trump is surely a Republican. After all, Trump is about to win the nomination of the Republican party for POTUS. The Republican voters in the Republican primaries will determine whether Trump is a Republican or not. In fact Trump himself, as the soon to be nominated leader of his party, the Republican party, will define who constitutes a Republican and who doesn’t.
The commentor should google “the no true Scotsman” logical fallacy.
I have a sneaking suspicion that Trump’s GOP will be inclusive, will be a “big tent” Republican party and will welcome those who wish to join up. You’re either on the bus or you’re off the bus.
What should stand out to anyone with a basic grasp of U.S. history is that Trump's support maps almost exactly onto the traditional geographic strongholds of America's Jacksonian folk community.
Terry,
The problem is that in these socially conservative areas, there are people who aren't social conservatives, and the normal outlets they may find for their . . . entertainment . . . aren't as easily accessible...
You skipped right past the blindingly obvious:
In socially conservative areas, there are more people who are not familiar with pornographic terms so they look them up.
For example I had no idea what "teabagging" was when I first read it in the "news".
Moneyrunner,
Why is he polling better than Ted Cruz (who, if I were God would be my choice for President)?
If you were God you would know better. ;)
Cruz is two-faced. He supports amnesty for illegal aliens. He supported the Gang of Eight. He supported TPA and TPP. He has until now fooled a fair number of people who believe he's a conservative, but in reality he's no more conservative than McConnell, Boehner or Ryan.
Libtard: "so deluded as to believe he was a good president and not an increasingly senile figurehead"
No shame at all. The Left tried to assassinate Reagan, and when that failed they blamed his weakness from being shot on senility.
MoneyRunner: This world is not insane and there is no chaos. What we are experiencing for the first time in my lifetime is a politician – Barack Obama – who does not believe he’s bound by the constitution and the separation of powers, and a Republican political establishment that will not act effectively to stop a lawless President. They have abandoned the power of the purse and won’t get within miles of the threat of impeachment for breaking the law. Welcome to a constitutional crisis that everyone is afraid to acknowledge.
Soft voices of moderation and appeasement got us here. It’s not going to get us back on track. If Hillary is elected she will enshrine the new – post constitutional - political reality. At this point people are waking up to the fact that the Democrats have a powerful political machine that another calm, soft voiced, Republican patsy will get the Mitt Romney treatment. That’s Trump’s difference and people are beginning to see it after writing him off as a flash-in-the-pan political lightweight. You may want to rethink your assumptions.
Best analysis I've read all week. Thank you.
Our borders are gone. We are letting in millions of illegal immigrants and giving them more benefits than our veterans. The illegals are bringing in drugs to poison our children, committing heinous crimes against our citizens, depriving our unemployed of job opportunities, and costing us billions to house in our prisons. One candidate stood up above the politically correct strictures that gagged every other GOP candidate, including Ted Cruz, and said what the people wished could be said. Unlike every other politician, he stood by his words. Trump made illegal immigration an election issue. Nobody else would do that. Yeah, we’d get all the usual platitudes about building a fence and securing the border, but we hear it every election cycle, and nothing gets done. The clincher is that Trump doubled-down and said he would end birthright citizenship — which may only need an act of congress — and deport every illegal alien. Notice how the hue and cry about Trump’s immigration has quieted as his poll numbers have risen.
After the San Bernardino and Paris terrorist attacks, Trump called for a halt to Muslim immigration until the authorities could separate the jihadists from the genuine refugees. Once more, the left, the pundits and the other GOP candidates went crazy. But the folk, who are deeply suspicious of Islam, and with good reason, approved. Trump’s poll numbers went up again. BTW, the GOP approved Obama’s Syrian immigration wishes in the omnibus bill – 200 thousand un-vetted Muslims are being granted carte blanche plus benefits.
Politicians are expert at talking the talk. When it comes to delivering on the talk, they fail. Mostly, they fail because it is against their self-interest to succeed. Some say it is because they are bought by special interests, such as pro-open border advocates like the Chamber of Commerce. Others say that actually doing anything reduces their ability to extort money from special interests. Either way, Joe Public loses. Enter Mr. Trump, the man who admits to contributing to politicians on both sides of the aisle, because it gives him access. He tells us he is funding his own campaign and won’t take Super-PAC money or allow Super-PACs to be created for him. He is the insider turned outsider.
The Clintons are sacred to the media. GOP candidates are reluctant to attack them on their lack of ethics. When Hillary lied about ISIS using videos of Trump to recruit, Trump laid into her and her husband. And he has Bill’s frequent visits to Epstein’s under-age sex palace as back-up. The MSM can ignore other GOP candidates bringing this stuff up, and they do. But, they can’t ignore Trump. So, he can go where no other GOP candidate can go, and attack the Clintons, their shady deals, their foundations, their foreign donors and get media coverage.
Can we trust Trump to deliver on his promises? He is not in it for the money, so that’s a good sign. Well, he might be in it for money, but then he’d be running like Jeb, and not offending any special interest. He seems to be running because he believes his negotiating and organization skills can get things done and bring back the America that is slipping away from us. The great country that won WW2 with its industrial might is a shadow of its former self. Can that country come back? Trump supporters see him as the only candidate with any hope of doing that.
As to the punditry, well they were all Obama fan-boys back in the day.
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/12/29/not-coincidental-trumps-2015-conservative-critics-were-obamas-2009-fan-boys/#more-110313
Post a Comment