January 21, 2016

"Trump Fear Stalks Davos as Elite Pray for Spring Reality Check."

Fabulous headline at Bloomberg. Excerpt:
The prospect of Trump in the White House is ratcheting up anxiety among the 2,500 business and political leaders gathered at the Swiss ski resort for the annual World Economic Forum....

“I am amazed at Davos about how many people are taking Trump as seriously as they are,” said Martin Sorrell, WPP’s chief executive. “I think it doesn’t matter who the Republicans put up, I think Hillary will win.”...

“If you bother to read some of the serious analysis of Trump’s support, you realize that it’s a very fragile thing and highly unlikely to deliver what he needs in the crucial first phase of the primaries,” said Niall Ferguson, Laurence A. Tisch professor of history at Harvard University. “By the time we get to March-April, it’s all over. I think there’s going to be a wonderful catharsis, I’m really looking forward to it: Trump’s humiliation. Bring it on.”
To what wonderful catharsis and humiliation are you looking forward?

147 comments:

madAsHell said...

I think Davos might be part of the problem.

Michael K said...

This what the end of the gray train looks like and why I like Trump for all his braggadocio and bluster.

I Have Misplaced My Pants said...

I'm looking forward to the humiliation of smug assholes like Niall Ferguson as they are out of jobs when higher education collapses.

Jim said...

Blogger madAsHell said...
I think Davos might be part of the problem.
Yes. Trump is pissing off all the right people. And it is about time.

Laslo Spatula said...

"...Elite Pray for Spring Reality Check."

The Elite, Praying. I'm sure the Golden calf is Listening.

I am Laslo.

Diamondhead said...

If word gets out that Davos doesn't want Trump, he's finished.

Gahrie said...

To what wonderful catharsis and humiliation are you looking forward?

Hillary's perp walk. In a perfect world, it would resemble Cersei's ordeal in GoT.

clint said...

Does Hillary in an orange jumpsuit count?

Of course, I *think* that's just about restoring the rule of law. But if there's *also* some shadenfreude involved, I won't complain.

traditionalguy said...

I want to see Rafael Cruz defeated and given a vice-Presidency with The Royal Bank of Canada. Only a man with his dual citizenships could handle the Canadian dollar exchange rate with the United States dollar for RBC. And he speaks Spanish too.

BTW the Canadian dollar is down 40% now making 100 of our US dollars worth 140 Canadian dollars.

It is time for a week at The Stratford Festial again this summer.

Tank said...

As lots of us have said, the right enemies.

Sounds like the New Yorker who could not understand how Nixon won because no one she knew voted for him.

Big Mike said...

“I think it doesn’t matter who the Republicans put up, I think Hillary will win.”...

In a country that truly believed in the Rule of Law Hillary Clinton would be behind bars.

The sort of folks who go to the WEF think that come the Revolution they'll still be running things, only with more power than they've ever had before. If they had more self-awareness they'd grasp that come the Revolution they'll be the first ones left dangling under street lights.

Tank said...

Trump in the WH and Cruz on the S Ct.

And heads exploding all over.

Ah, we can dream, no?

Jeff Gee said...

I've been hearing for six months that Trump is about to implode, crack-up, walk in front of a bus, trip over his own dick. The human mask will slip THIS time and all America will see the lizard face beneath.

Hard not to love the "This... can't... really... be.. HAPPENING!!" vibe taking over my Facebook feed.

Brando said...

I would relish the end of the Clinton Restoration. Beyond that, the rest is just a matter of who gets to preside over the decline. The debt will grow, economy will stagnate, and the rule of law will become ever more a quaint idea. But at least there would be some sense that these grifters couldn't pull off one last con.

William said...

I like Niall Ferguson. His books are well written and researched. He also has a cool stage presence. He has the exact same Scotch accent as Sean Connery which gives weight to his comments. He's one of the few conservative voices in academia.......Trump doesn't have much appeal to intellectuals, even conservative ones. . George Will will probably soon threaten to leave the country if Trump is elected. Krauthammer might commit suicide.

rehajm said...

All you need to know about Davos:

The Belvedere ... is the annual meeting’s hub after dark. Often, there are a half-dozen parties going on at once. To get into it,...you must pass through airport-like security ... The line, on this night, was long enough that a Nobel laureate in economics, who, moments earlier at the Hotel National, had been holding forth on unfairness, deemed it worth cutting.

Kirby Olson said...

I want Hillary to sit in prison and grow her fingernails to a hundred feet in length to scratch at her guards' eyeballs.

Char Char Binks said...

It may be enough to make me vote for Trump.

traditionalguy said...

Davos guys are successors to the Aristocracy guys that ruled in The British Empire so well. Niall thinks that all things good that ever happen arise from the British Empire; and they are coming over here again to teach the Colonists how it should be done.

But that Damn Dutchman with a Scots Presbyterian faith wants to keep New Amsterdam's values. What's London to do???

cubanbob said...

Trump the billionaire populist. The Davos crowd can't fathom this and frankly on the face of it, it seems absurd but there you have it. As for now it looks like we are going to have a New York City election: a brash, blustering New York real estate hustler developer versus a New York Communist. Whatever else this campaign won't be boring.

As for the piece, I can't imagine why anyone at Davos besides wishful thinking actually believes that Hillary is going to win. Maybe they are all government bond dealers and are hoping that Hillary will be their angel but other than that why they think the majority of the country wants a Third Obama Administration under the ministration of a woman facing criminal referrals appears to be magical delusional thinking.

damikesc said...

The clowns at Davos humiliation. Anybody they vigorously oppose is a good choice for me.

I want to see Rafael Cruz defeated and given a vice-Presidency with The Royal Bank of Canada. Only a man with his dual citizenships could handle the Canadian dollar exchange rate with the United States dollar for RBC. And he speaks Spanish too.

I thought the Canadian dollar was strong. Has this weakening been going for a while or is it a Trudeau thing?

Big Mike said...

@Misplaced your Pants, Niall Ferguson has written some very insightful articles on economics, and I have to admit that I truly enjoyed reading his takedown of the New York Times resident economic idiot Paul Krugman ("Krugtron the Invincible," Parts 1, 2, and 3). I've been planning read his latest book The Great Degeneration: How Institutions Decay and Economies Die for a while now.

Here's what I don't get. The Amazon writeup for The Great Degeneration bills it as "an incisive indictment of an era of negligence and complacency — and to arrest the breakdown of our civilization, Ferguson warns, will take heroic leadership and radical reform." Well, did he think that "heroic leadership" would look like politics as usual? Perhaps he doesn't like the notion that Donald Trump is the leadership he has been looking for, but Trump is who's running.

mccullough said...

I'd like to see Tom Brady on the podium looking at Roger Goodell just after the Patriots win Super Bowl 50.

Curious George said...

"William said...
He has the exact same Scotch accent as Sean Connery which gives weight to his comments. "

No. Not even close.

Big Mike said...

@damikesc, the Canadian dollar was pretty much on par with the US dollar as recently as 2013. It's been drifting down since then, and seems to be accelerating since Trudeau's election.

furious_a said...

DAVOS: Nuke the site from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.

eric said...

Blogger Gahrie said...
To what wonderful catharsis and humiliation are you looking forward?

Hillary's perp walk. In a perfect world, it would resemble Cersei's ordeal in GoT.


I loved that scene. The actress is very attractive.

Now you've ruined it for me. Hillary naked? Some things you can't un-see. Thanks for that. You've ruined something beautiful.

David said...

"To what wonderful catharsis and humiliation are you looking forward?"

ISIS in full retreat begging for mercy.

gerry said...

The Elite, Praying. I'm sure the Golden calf is Listening.


Perfect, Laslo.

Big Mike said...

@David, how about ISIS leaders shooting their retreating troops until there's no one left but them ...

and the Marines.

David said...

Niall Ferguson is no dummy, but we will see. I am surprised that he is so rabid on the subject. Maybe Harvard is starting to get to him.

Birkel said...

damikesc,

The Canadian dollar began significantly declining against the US dollar immediately after Trudeau was elected. The very next day trading opened, the decline started.

David said...

McCulloch--Now that the Packers and Steelers are out (I grew up in Pittsburgh and lived in Wisconsin for decades) I'm rooting for the Patriots. I imagine Bob Kraft will wait until Brady joins him to accept the Lombardi Trophy from Goodell, That will be a delicious moment, if it comes to pass.

furious_a said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
David said...

"The Canadian dollar began significantly declining against the US dollar immediately after Trudeau was elected. The very next day trading opened, the decline started."

Perhaps it's Trudeau, but that decline has been ongoing for quite a while, and the collapse in oil prices has nearly everything to do with it.

Michael said...

Niall is a brilliant historian. But history is the study of the past.

traditionalguy said...

As for football, I really want to see TCU run the table and laugh. When they have one loss, they get pushed out of the playoff to get the biggest TV audience for the NCAA Establishment.

furious_a said...

Hillary's perp walk. In a perfect world, it would resemble Cersei's ordeal in GoT.

Eeeuwww, eye-bleach...or...

...the crowd Leona Helmsley faced as she emerged from her sentencing hearing.

gspencer said...

Best seller in 2017, carrying over to 2018,

"The Collected Predictions of Donald Trump's Demise"

(dedicated to David Brooks, Charles Krauthammer, et alia)

Special Rose Garden ceremony, September, 2017, hosted by President & Mrs. Trump,

David Begley said...

I thought Niall moved to the Hoover Institute at Stanford. Regardless, the Davos crowd's condemnation of Trump is an endorsement for many voters. They want to burn Davos down considering how badly the elites have screwed things up.

Paul said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
khesanh0802 said...

@gspencer Wonderful!

David Begley said...

@Big Mike

"I think it doesn’t matter who the Republicans put up, I think Hillary will win.”...

In a country that truly believed in the Rule of Law Hillary Clinton would be behind bars."

Abandoning the Rule of Law is why we hate the elites. Since they have theirs, they are happy with Hillary as long as the money keeps flowing uphill.

Michael K said...

"He's one of the few conservative voices in academia.......Trump doesn't have much appeal to intellectuals, even conservative ones."

I agree. Plus he is married to Ayan Hirsi Ali and they have a child.

I think a lot of conservatives are afraid Trump is either a trojan horse or will fail and let Hillary in. A lot of Europeans believe that crimes are no bar to political office. Jaques Chirac was under indictment for felonies committed when he was Mayor of Paris. He was president and could not be tried until out of office. Then he walked.

Some conservatives may come around as he gets more and more the obvious winner. I still don;t like his manners and his braggadocio but he says the right things and has the right enemies.

PB said...

All the self-described elite flying into Davos on private jets and whining about climate change and the ignorant little people have it coming and deserve to get it good and hard.

Sebastian said...

This is what crony capitalism looks like. It almost makes me want to vote for Trump. Almost.

Fabi said...

The Davos jerks are as clueless as the rest of the establishment. The barbarians are at the gate.

Fernandinande said...

More than ever, leaders need to share insights and innovations on how best to navigate the future.

"The Annual Meeting in Davos-Klosters remains the foremost creative force for engaging the world’s top leaders in collaborative activities focused on shaping the global, regional and industry agendas."

IOW, the World Economic Forum consists of "central planners" who use governments to line their own pockets.

mikee said...

There is no one so hated as one almost exactly the same as oneself, just different enough to condemn for the heresy of that difference. Emo Williams has a great skit on the reason Davos billionaires hate Trump so much.

For my Schadenfreude Sunday with a cherry on top, I'd like to see the ATF disbanded for running Fast & Furious, knowingly providing Mexican drug cartels with US firearms in order to create proof of a crisis, to allow 2nd Amendment restrictions by Obama and Hillary. If the ATF had at least told the Mexican government they were sending 1500 to 2000 weapons to drug cartels, it wouldn't have been nearly so stupid. Between 200-400 Mexican civilians dead, and at least 2 US law enforcement officers. Yes, it was a long time ago. I hold grudges.

And let us remember that El Chapo owned one of those Fast & Furious guns, a .50 BMG rifle, when he was arrested.

Writ Small said...

I've reconciled myself to Trump, pretty much. I read Grackle's "five stages of grief" post in another thread and I found that snarky but basically true.

If Trump wins the nomination, I have this to look forward to: Rush and Mark Levin and Laura Ingraham's plan to use Trump to destroy credible candidates allowing Cruz to pick up the nomination in the end failed. That's payback for being too clever by half and thinking you can manipulate your audience.

If Cruz wins the nom, then I get to point out that Trumpsters were so caught up in anti-establishment fervor, they didn't realize it was just a different group (talk radio) manipulating them.

If Trump loses the general to the utterly corrupt Hillary, I get to make this argument: We let the emotional wing of the party have a go and look what that got us. Can we please go back to nominating the most conservative person who has broad appeal and a track record of success?

If Trump wins the general, then I get this initial satisfaction: All you "centrists" who said you would support Romney if the Republican nominated him last cycle, Trump is your payback for re-electing the awful Obama.

If Trump wins the general and is a terrible president whose narcissism and economic protectionism lead to a painful recession and foreign policy disasters, I get to say that all the warning signs were there, "conservatives." Look what you have wrought.

If Trump wins the general and his narcissism leads him to connect the US to himself to the point where he makes good foreign policy decisions and his pragmatism coupled with healthy Republican opposition lead him to abandon some of bad economic tendencies to the point where we actually get a good economy again, then I was colossally wrong about everything, but that would be a small price to pay.

David Begley said...

I figured out the scam of global warming from a former Wal-Mart CEO speaking at Davos several years back.He said WMT was all in for fighting ACG but his customers were not yet on board because they couldn't afford it. I then realized that the gross margins on the new REQUIRED light bulbs is way more than on the old light bulbs that are no longer available. This gross margins story and switch to all things green works across the board for WMT's bottom line.

Global warming is all about higher profits and moving the energy industry from the old crowd to the right people on both coasts with a cut for Goldman when they IPO the enterprise. Ask Tom Steyer and Elon Musk. But for tax credits there would be no Tesla.

David Begley said...

Fergy is at both Harvard and Stanford. Bi-coastal.

Original Mike said...

"Does Trump have the organization in place, in all 50 states etc?"

Excellent question. Anybody know?

Ignorance is Bliss said...


Should have been titled:

Elite Pray, Loathe

Michael K said...

" I then realized that the gross margins on the new REQUIRED light bulbs is way more than on the old light bulbs that are no longer available. "

This is why I hate Fred Upton with a fire that will not go out. Light bulbs had become a commodity and the GE and Sylvania people got Congress to outlaw them so the new bulbs, pieces of crap made in China, would be the only choice. California went even farther and put the ban in place a year ago. I ordered what I had hoped would be a lifetime supply of incandescent bulbs and keep them in storage. I seem disgustingly healthy and may have to try to find more.

Sam L. said...

That headline MADE my day!

AllenS said...

I believe that Trump is the organization in place. You don't see bundles of money going his way like every other politician running.

Bay Area Guy said...

The rich elite Davos crowd -- where are Bernie's tax hikes when you really need them? The inequality, the inequality, the inequality

I do like to ski though, but never at Davos. More like Lake Tahoe. Not sure that makes me an elitist.

The mere name "Davos" evokes imagery of John Kerry holding court with a group of rich Beta Males, drinking sherry over foie gras. I can't handle it, Man.

Paddy O said...

Writ Small @10:41 Excellent comment, nicely describes my thoughts as well.

David Begley said...

Bay Area Guy.

Sec. Kerry is at Davos. Actually coherent on the Iran deal. For once.

Next heading to see our good friends the Sauds. We blew our chance to put OPEC in its place.

cubanbob said...

“I am amazed at Davos about how many people are taking Trump as seriously as they are,” said Martin Sorrell, WPP’s chief executive. “I think it doesn’t matter who the Republicans put up, I think Hillary will win.”...

“If you bother to read some of the serious analysis of Trump’s support, you realize that it’s a very fragile thing and highly unlikely to deliver what he needs in the crucial first phase of the primaries,” said Niall Ferguson, Laurence A. Tisch professor of history at Harvard University. “By the time we get to March-April, it’s all over. I think there’s going to be a wonderful catharsis, I’m really looking forward to it: Trump’s humiliation. Bring it on.”

Three fools wearing their coats of impenetrable folly. Of course there is a possibility Trump will implode and the Hillary might win but a certainty? A more likely scenario is Trump wins the nomination and so does Sanders. Well boys, in that match who are you going chose? Speaking of humiliations the only candidate facing criminal indictment is Hillary Clinton.

Fabi said...

Trump had organizations in place in 20 states eight months ago. I haven't investigated the growth of his state-by-state organizing since then. I assume that he has it under control -- that's kind of his thing.

Quaestor said...

Does Trump have the organization in place, in all 50 states etc?

Curious thing about organization, like pureed sponges they tend to self-assemble out of the wreckage of defunct organizations. At the core of every state organization is one or more office-seekers looking for employment. The smart ones don't put the cart before the horse ideology-wise, their loyalty goes to the candidate most likely to give them a cushy job. Jeb started 2015 with the best organization a billion dollars in pledges could buy. Now that he is not even a top-tier candidate his organization has begun to hemorrhage staff members who are now on the look-out for the main chance. Trump's nationwide organization will pop into existence like overnight mushrooms once he's won Iowa, NH, and SC.

Amadeus 48 said...

Writ small--nailed it!
Michael K and David Begley-- Adam Smith nailed this 240 years ago and now it has a name--rent seeking. This easiest way to preserve your incumbant market position is to make competing products unduly costly or illegal through legislation or regulation. Upton was a chump who got played like a fiddle by GE and Sylvania.
I too have a storage locker full of incandescent bulbs, but I expect green bulbs will get better than they are now--but with higher margins. (Sigh!)

Skeptical Voter said...

Well I do like to see the boys and girls at Davos getting all wee wee'd up (to borrow a phrase from our New (but now slightly dinged up) Messiah.


And since our global economy seems to be going to hell in a handbasket anyway, might as well have some fun on the ride down. At least the fun is free.

Ian F. Shield said...

The humiliation that it would be really wonderfully cathartic to witness would be that of the smug, selfish, brain-dead fatcats of Davos.

Not that I like Trump, I hasten to add - if he somehow ends up a president, I expect that he will govern pretty much the way Hillary would.

Birches said...

All this Elite hand wringing is just making me identify with Trump. Nice work, idiots!

lgv said...

Wow. I wonder what specifically they fear about a Trump presidency.

It's great knowing that 2,500 of the world's elite, gathering in Davos really understand the US electorate.

"To what wonderful catharsis and humiliation are you looking forward?"

The demise of the Clinton machine. Bill, as the campaign asset, has been neutered. The email server indictment. The Benghazi video explanation. The Clinton Foundation shakedown scheme. The bullets over Bosnia. Being fired from her Watergate job. The realization of the electorate that she is a pathological liar and amoral, that she says everyone else as beneath her, that she is incapable of empathy.


James Pawlak said...

Wishful Thinking!

Mark said...

At this point you have to have your head pretty far up Uranus to declare that Trump's support is "fragile." He was supposed to have faded long ago; instead people are waiting in line, freezing their tushes off, to hear him.

Davos is pretty much today's Versailles.

eric said...


If Trump wins the general and his narcissism leads him to connect the US to himself to the point where he makes good foreign policy decisions and his pragmatism coupled with healthy Republican opposition lead him to abandon some of bad economic tendencies to the point where we actually get a good economy again, then I was colossally wrong about everything, but that would be a small price to pay.


There is a reason doom and gloom sells. Because it always happens. Eventually. Every year someone predicts a stock market crash. Eventually, someone is right and they are the new guru who can predict everything. No money to be made predicting sunshine and ponies for everyone.

Let's hope for the best and plan for the worst.

I'd prefer a Cruz presidency to a Trump presidency. But my top three candidates remain Cruz, Carson and Trump. It warms my heart to see those guys beating the establishment guys. I will consider it a huge win if any one of them wins. Especially because I'll love to hear Michael Medved eat crow.

Freder Frederson said...

In a country that truly believed in the Rule of Law Hillary Clinton would be behind bars.

So would Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Yoo et al. And Patreus too.

Birches said...

From an Electoral standpoint, Trump is a bad choice...almost as bad a choice as Romney/Ryan. He can't win his home state. But it's not like Hillary! or Bernie are going to appeal to the mushy middle states either. I don't know, maybe it's a wash...

damikesc said...

Ditto Obama and Bill Clinton...

grackle said...

To what wonderful catharsis and humiliation are you looking forward?

I’m looking forward to the death of knee-jerk political correctness.

George Will will probably soon threaten to leave the country if Trump is elected. Krauthammer might commit suicide.

Although they have been wrong about Trump I like both pundits. They are both talented writers who will adjust to the new reality. Maybe President Trump will invite them to the Whitehouse.

Fabi said...

Poor little, Freder. Are Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Yoo or Patreus [sic] currently running for President? They're not. So what the fuck are you talking about, boy? Tu quoque much?

Original Mike said...

"Trump's nationwide organization will pop into existence like overnight mushrooms once he's won Iowa, NH, and SC."

I was thinking more of getting on the ballot in all 50 states. Can you do that overnight?

Michael K said...

Poor Freder. How about them Muslims, Freder ?

"Davos is pretty much today's Versailles."

Yes, but Versailles didn't have head chopping Muslims. They did have head chopping Frenchmen, of course.

At least they are safe until they go home. All those heavily armed Swiss.

Original Mike said...

"From an Electoral standpoint, Trump is a bad choice...almost as bad a choice as Romney/Ryan. He can't win his home state."

I wouldn't be so sure.

Mac McConnell said...

Niall Ferguson is brilliant and fairly conservative. He has said that the Obama foreign and domestic policies have been disastrous. I believe he would agree that Hillary Clinton's sharing those policies and continuing them would be a disaster.
He doesn't like Trump because Trump will say and do anything to be elected. Trump is a populist in the worse way, many things Trump says are not logical or doable, but angry voters like to hear them.
Most supporting him will be very disappointed if he is elected. trump is to the left of RINO McCain.

Sammy Finkelman said...

It's been estimated that if Trump consistently gets above 30% of the vote, and nobody else is close, and nobody else wins any states, he will get a majority of the delegates. This could be a little bit wrong because in caucus states votes can be re-aligned, but it is said that the Republican delegate selection process is such.

If he comes into the convention with less than at least 38% or so, or less than 50% when combined with Ted Cruz, he won't get the nomination, but he could rack up delegates even if he never, or almost never, gets over a third.

RonF said...

I want to see Niall Ferguson humiliated.

dreams said...

I'm surprised at what Niall Ferguson said, I thought he was a sensible guy.

cubanbob said...

Freder Frederson said...
In a country that truly believed in the Rule of Law Hillary Clinton would be behind bars.

So would Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Yoo et al. And Patreus too.

1/21/16, 11:26 AM"

You really think that after being Boss for seven years and thoroughly politicizing the DoJ Obama would shy away from prosecuting Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush ( in that order) if he could? Maybe the crimes you are fantasizing are just fantasies of your febrile imagination. As for Petraeus, unlike Hillary he didn't betray us to the Chinese and the Russians. Comparing him to Hillary is like equating shoplifting to armed robbery. While both are crimes they aren't on the same scale. Hillary for Prison 2016.

Quaestor said...

Davos attendees are supposed to be elites, right? Which means they're smart, right? The fear and loathing emanating from Davos is supposed to deflate Trump and dissuade his supports, right?

So how come supposedly smart people would think pontificating against Trump from Davos would have anything but the reverse of the intended effect?

Quaestor said...

As for Petraeus, unlike Hillary he didn't betray us to the Chinese and the Russians. Comparing him to Hillary is like equating shoplifting to armed robbery. While both are crimes they aren't on the same scale.

Some clever journalist (are there any, truly?) should ask Hillary if she thinks Petraeus deserves to be reinstated.

buwaya said...

In re Trump vs Davos -
This is mainly a social conflict IMHO.
They don't like his style and I think, more than the man himself, they especially don't like his supporters, because they don't like THEIR style, to put it mildly.
If he were more polished vis-a-vis the fashionable standards of the ruling class they would have a different opinion, but of course he would attract different supporters, which is the point of course.
Its not like ANY of the potential candidates (save Cruz perhaps) of the current mix have specific policies in mind, nor is there any consistency with respect to policies in their previous statements or public histories.
This all seems to be, on the side of the elites, a class and tribal conflict more than one of substance. On the other side there are strong elements of that, but the driving force is economic distress and anxiety - real issues.
Brooks article of a few days ago is illuminating. He calls for more bread and circuses to pacify the revolting proles, who of course are revolting in more ways than one.

Michael said...

Niall doesn't like Trump for the very reason most intellectuals don't or won't like him. NOSD. Not our sort dear.

buwaya said...

To expand on Brooks as an indicator of attitudes, there is not just an unwillingness but apparently an inability to enter the world view of the other side, other than on a very superficial level.
This is worse blindness in some ways, for a man like Brooks, than that of the French Ancien Regime. He does not have the excuse of actually being an aristocrat.
A curiosity made more odd in the modern world, when everyone's world view and interior life is open for survey and inspection.
I highly recommend Hippolyte Taine's "Ancien Regime" for the role of social attitude, driven by status competition, in public policy, and the extremes of disassociation from reality this can cause.
Here -
http://www.unilibrary.com/ebooks/Taine,%20Hippolyte%20-%20The%20Origins%20of%20Contemporary%20France.%20The%20Ancient%20Regime.pdf

Michael K said...

"Most supporting him will be very disappointed if he is elected. trump is to the left of RINO McCain."

I don't think so. Much of this argument was made about Romney and MassCare, etc.

I think nearly everyone agrees now that Romney would have solved a lot of what we see now.

Trump might be a one term president, partly due to his age. We are at a point in history where what happens next is in doubt.

Maybe his role is to clean out the Augean Stables.

Anglelyne said...

Big Mike: The sort of folks who go to the WEF think that come the Revolution they'll still be running things, only with more power than they've ever had before. If they had more self-awareness they'd grasp that come the Revolution they'll be the first ones left dangling under street lights.

You know, I'm not a blood-thirsty girl. Sure, I enjoy a relaxing lampost, day-of-the-rope, or Mme Defarge fantasy like anybody else, but, no, that would never be a real-life thing for me.

I'm much nastier than that.

I just want to see these assholes forced to live, for the rest of their lives, up-close-and-personal, with the consequences of the policies that they've been so avariciously and sanctimoniously forcing down the throats of people who lack the means to comfortably segregate themselves, as these clowns can.

Come the Revolution, I probably would've even given 'em a pass for the avarice. (Who among us doesn't have a touch of the greed-bag, if only on a piddly scale?) It's the sanctimony the just tears it, it is. Pace Bertie Wooster, I think it'll be the temptation to sermonize that'll do for 'em in the end, not the temptation to swank.

eddie willers said...

I'm surprised at what Niall Ferguson said, I thought he was a sensible guy.

Such a short blip to end the "article". Methinks we have a 'taken out of context' blurb here.

Mac McConnell said...

The establishment hates Trump, they fear Cruz. Who do you believe will be co opted? Trump doesn't need co opting he's already part of the establishment. Who will make a lasting change? Which one at present says contradictory things? Which one supports single payer healthcare? Partial birth abortion?

AJ Lynch said...

I value the concerns of the Davos attendees when I consider the fantastically great shape our world is in. And I appreciate the fact that the Davos folks played a large role in getting us where we are.

AJ Lynch said...

I sure hope ISIS does not pull off a successful attack and hurt any of these great people.

Birches said...

I sure hope ISIS does not pull off a successful attack and hurt any of these great people.

I feel a little bad for laughing at that. But laugh, I did.

Original Mike said...

"I feel a little bad for laughing at that."

I don't.

Paul Snively said...

Writ Small has enumerated the possible outcomes and my feelings about them better than I could have myself.

Ultimately, it's easy. The alternative is almost certainly going to be pathological liar/bought-and-sold/blood-on-her-hands Hillary, or Lenin-with-more-than-a-touch-of-Stalin Sanders. If ever there was a time to hold my nose and vote for the badly-flawed (R) guy, this is it. Because we are in deep funhouse-mirror electoral times, minus the fun.

MountainMan said...

Anglelyne said: "I just want to see these assholes forced to live, for the rest of their lives, up-close-and-personal, with the consequences of the policies that they've been so avariciously and sanctimoniously forcing down the throats of people who lack the means to comfortably segregate themselves, as these clowns can."

Wonderful. Best paragraph I've read all day.

tim maguire said...

Fabi said...The Davos jerks are as clueless as the rest of the establishment. The barbarians are at the gate.

The barbarians hold the palace. Civilization is at the gate trying not to get pushed out.

Bill Peschel said...

***stands and cheers Anglelyne***

Brilliant. Simply brilliant.

This seals my support for Trump, but I'll be happier with Cruz.

Nyamujal said...

To win nationally, a GOP candidate needs 60% of the white vote and 30% of the minority vote. Romney got 17% of the minority vote and he lost. I doubt Trump could potentially get more than 2% of the minority vote. He has a lot of baggage largely because of his past comments which could easily be used against him by whoever the Dems nominate. Plus nationally, his net favorable ratings are very bad.
That said, I talk to Trump supporters from time to time and when I ask them why they hate politicians they say, "They lie, they're divisive, they make promises they can't keep, they're only concerned with poll numbers,etc". Yet, here's a guy who lies a lot, is very divisive, constantly brags about poll numbers as if being popular is an indication that he's right, and is talking about policies that would never pass through congress. It's ironic that people who're otherwise cynical about politics on this blog are supporting him.
I think Trump's appeal lies in saying things that are taboo on a national stage, and playing the media like a fiddle to get more air time. He's been great at that for years. But until I hear him wonk out on domestic and foreign policy and give a clear implementable manifesto, I refuse to take him seriously.

Anglelyne said...

Mac McConnell: Most supporting him will be very disappointed if he is elected. trump is to the left of RINO McCain.

I don't think "most" supporters care about that in the way you're assuming they do. Don't know why people keep banging on about this "not conservative" stuff, as if conservative/liberal were still the defining dichotomy here. It's missing the forest for a niggling study of a subsection of an understory of a botanical microclimate on the forest floor.

People vote their perceived interests, not ideologies. This short article was linked in a previous thread, and it's worth a read if you missed it. Nice, succinct, accurate observations on what's going on here. The "conservative" American has been "conservative" in the Anglo-American, Economist magazine sense in a period when that political/economic ideology was working out well for him. It isn't anymore, so it becomes, quite rationally, a matter of sublime indifference to him what some Cato Institute wonk or George Mason University economist-sperg or GOPe trough-guzzler has to say about "true conservatism" (if he ever had any but a circumstantial, not-very-deeply thought-through attachment to this stuff in the first place).

Michael said...

Anglelyne

I can take the avarice. Maybe have a bit of it myself. It is the sanctimony, the preening, the smugness, the superciliousness that grates unto death. That and their virtuous bumper sticker slogans.

Michael said...

Further to Anglelyne's point, this "not a true conservative" argument has taken on concern troll status. The "true conservative" has been blown up like a dollar watch and we had better be thinking that perfect is the enemy of the good, even of the very good.

Nyamujal said...

Trump and Sanders are populists. There have been a lot of populists in US history from Williams Jennings Bryan, to Huey Long and Trump+Sanders. The big two parties always win by co-opting some of their policies in the primaries and then triangulating to the center in national elections. The same will happen this year too. People on the left and right are pissed with the establishment, but that anger won't result in Trump or Sanders getting elected.

buwaya said...

"But until I hear him wonk out on domestic and foreign policy and give a clear implementable manifesto, I refuse to take him seriously.'

But no serious politician actually does this in a substantial way, and to the extent they pretend to do it is just a form of flimflam bait designed to catch a particular species of fish.
You are just asking for a flavor of flimflam that appeals to you.
To put it another way, "wonking out" in this context is just an airing of fantasies. Speaking as a dedicated wonk, who has spent a lot of time listening to international agency lectures (WB, ADB, etc.).

damikesc said...

I doubt Trump could potentially get more than 2% of the minority vote. He has a lot of baggage largely because of his past comments which could easily be used against him by whoever the Dems nominate. Plus nationally, his net favorable ratings are very bad.

But what are they compared to, say, Hillary?

Nobody is taking Bernie seriously at all, so those numbers are immaterial at this point.

Ann Althouse said...

"I doubt Trump could potentially get more than 2% of the minority vote. He has a lot of baggage largely because of his past comments which could easily be used against him by whoever the Dems nominate. Plus nationally, his net favorable ratings are very bad."

Has Trump said anything edgy/wrong that related to black people.

As I talked about in the Bloggingheads with Glenn Loury, Trump's transgressions that have drawn criticism as racist/bigoted have related to Muslims and Hispanics.

Nyamujal said...

Trump hasn't "genuflected" to the BLM movement: http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/donald-trump-blasts-black-lives-matter-movement-in-a-major-way-boom/ , and he had a tweet on Black crime that drew a lot of flack: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/nov/23/donald-trump/trump-tweet-blacks-white-homicide-victims/ .
Glenn is great and I love his diavlogs with McWhorter but I think he was grappling with Trump's ideas on immigration and Muslims at an abstract, intellectual level (A nation state has the right to enforce its borders and decide who to include in its polity, and maybe some vigilance viz terrorist threats is a good thing- "see something, say something"). I can easily see the two stories I've mentioned above being used to really hurt Trump in the generals.

Nyamujal said...

More potential fodder: http://gawker.com/woody-guthrie-despised-his-landlord-donald-trumps-racis-1754282007,
http://www.villagevoice.com/news/how-a-young-donald-trump-forced-his-way-from-avenue-z-to-manhattan-7380462.
I should've been clearer in my last post. What I was trying to say was that Loury was talking about the ideas of Trumpism and analyzing them. I wouldn't take that as a sign of his support for Trump. Actually, I think he mentioned earlier in the dialog that he'll vote for Hillary if she's nominated.

Mac McConnell said...

All any republican candidate needs to do is replicate Romney's minority vote and get 3.3% more white votes to win. It's the white voters that are responding to this angry populism, so maybe 3.3% won't be hard to accomplish.

MaxedOutMama said...

You find the strangest things!!!

Catharsis and humiliation sound to me EST-like, and I never saw the point of that. I will just sit out this new craze. It's not precisely inviting.

I am also exercising my right, as an American of the non-frozen flyover country, to leave my pants dry in the closet where they belong when not on my body.

Writ Small said...

@ Nyamajal - I believe Althouse's point is that Trump (really any Republican, I would say) has a strong opening with African Americans this cycle. Trump's (really the party's) anti-illegal immigration stance would benefit many low income blacks directly by reducing the flow of job competitors driving wages down. In 2012, Democrats had a much better hand. Loose immigration may have hurt blacks, but Obama atop the ticket assured they were kept in the fold.

Your broader point about Trump's overall high negatives, however, is very well taken. Serious Trump advocates must answer this, because his current negatives make him virtually unelectable in the general election. Althouse seems to be banking on a massive wave of Trump reconsiderations. That's not impossible. Bandwagons are jumped upon. This risk there is that Trump, among current Republican candidates, has the lowest level of "undecided." This means Trumpsters have to not only pull over the waverers. They must convert the anti-Trump.

Anglelyne said...

buwaya: But no serious politician actually does this ["wonk out on domestic and foreign policy and give a clear implementable manifesto"] in a substantial way, and to the extent they pretend to do it is just a form of flimflam bait designed to catch a particular species of fish.
You are just asking for a flavor of flimflam that appeals to you.


+++

If there's a candidate out there who has a "policy prospectus" that is anything more than a wish-list and a general expression of his attitude toward any particular issue, I haven't seen it. Beyond that, knowledge about a candidate's competence to achieve desired policy goals, and what degree of credibility (if any) to assign to the wonky flim-flam, has to be gleaned from other sources.

Amanda said...


"Has Trump said anything edgy/wrong that related to black people."

Yes.

That racist Trump tweet about blacks killing whites isn’t just false — it’s neo-Nazi propaganda.

Amanda said...

Also Black Lives matter protestors have been roughed up by his security staff and those attending his rallies.

damikesc said...

Also Black Lives matter protestors have been roughed up by his security staff and those attending his rallies.

Security tossed disruptive people out of an event they weren't invited to?

SHOCKING!!!

Amanda said...

Tossing them out and beating them up are two different things.

Amanda said...

Also, if Trump is so thin skinned he can't tolerate a protestor and have them removed without his staff roughing them up, then you have a man who has no business being President of the most powerful nation on earth.

eric said...

Blogger Anglelyne said...
Mac McConnell: Most supporting him will be very disappointed if he is elected. trump is to the left of RINO McCain.

I don't think "most" supporters care about that in the way you're assuming they do.


I mostly don't care, as a conservative, if Trump is to the left of McCain. My concern about Trump is his Supreme Court picks.

How would this fair against McCain? I'm pretty confident, having been in the Senate for so long, McCains SCOTUS picks would be a disaster for conservatives. He would want to pick someone the Senate could get behind. Ugh. In this regard, Trump wouldn't do worse than McCain.

As for immigration, I can't see how Trump could be anywhere near McCain. He would be as bad as Obama.

So you see why saying The ump is to the left of McCain doesn't bother us conservatives? What, Trump believes in universal healthcare? Tell me how he is going to get that past a Republican congress. Yeah, exactly.

Most of Trumps power is muted by Congress, or I should say, the Presidents power. This is why my main concern about Trump is, who will be pick for SCOTUS?

Otherwise, such concern trolling doesn't bother me.

Nichevo said...

Amanda said...
Tossing them out and beating them up are two different things.
1/21/16, 5:42 PM


Link?

Original Mike said...

"Also Black Lives matter protestors have been roughed up by his security staff and those attending his rallies."

Of course they were.

Amanda said...

Birmingham, Alabama (CNN)Donald Trump suggested Sunday the half-dozen white attendees at his campaign rally on Saturday may have reacted appropriately when they shoved, tackled, punched and kicked a black protester who disrupted his speech.

Amanda said...

What's odd is how selective a memory so many of you folks have. How is it that I can remember these incidents?

Original Mike said...

From Amanda's link:

"I would be a little cautious with Mercutio Southall," [Birmingham Police Lt. Sean Edwards, the department's public information officer] added. "He has been an agitator from day one. Mercutio is always the agitator."

Johnny Sokko said...

"How could McGovern lose? Everyone I know voted for him."

Amanda said...

Original Mike, well seeing as he's a known agitator maybe they should've just tased him, then thrown him out.

Original Mike said...

And maybe it didn't happen nearly the way he said it did, Amanda.

Amanda said...

Watch the video, Original Mike.

Original Mike said...

I did watch the video, Amanda. It's difficult to tell what's happening at a couple of places, but all in all I would say to shows he was not beaten up.

Nyamujal said...

buwaya: But no serious politician actually does this ["wonk out on domestic and foreign policy and give a clear implementable manifesto"] in a substantial way, and to the extent they pretend to do it is just a form of flimflam bait designed to catch a particular species of fish.
You are just asking for a flavor of flimflam that appeals to you.


Yes, but Trump's answer when he's probed on any issue is some flavor of, "I'll figure it out because I'm great. Just elect me and I'll make America great again". When he's probed even more he gets flustered and gives a rambling, incoherent answer even on friendly venues like the O'Reilly show.
Reagan was a lot more politically astute and knowledgeable than the left gives him credit for. He spent a lot of his life reading Hayek, the Chicago school economists, and genuinely believed in small government and promoted ideas that the GOP is tied to even today. Everyone in his staff knew the things he stood for- 1. Small government, 2. Defeat Communism. Obama also had concrete policy measures including cutting capital gains for small businesses, making changes to the healthcare system, etc. In short, even if you agree or disagree with their policies, they could outline the vision they had for the country, the problems the country was facing, and possible solutions for those problems and were hence predictable. Love them or hate them, you knew what to expect. Trump on the other hand says what his audience wants to hear. When he addresses policemen, he talks about an instant death penalty for cop killers. The other day he talked about forcing Apple to manufacture their products in the USA and talked about imposing a hefty tariff on Chinese goods. Can he do that? Will it ever pass? Does it even make sense? No. That coupled with his track record of constant shifts on various issues is very concerning. He sounds like a huckster and BS artist every time I hear him speak. Yes, he's a great salesman but I don't trust him to lead this country.
People are talking about revolution and about taking down the establishment. Be careful what you wish for...

Michael K said...

" How is it that I can remember these incidents?"

Delusions ?

They can seem real, especially when you are hoping they are,

Jonathan Graehl said...

Trump will get somewhere between 25-60% of "the minority vote" (less a few percent if you include asians). 2%? What are you smoking?

Consequences for Hillary's criminality seem mostly up to Obama - media won't rake her unless dem consensus wants her out but she refuses. I wonder if Obama will let her off (pardon or otherwise) in exchange for her exit.

Trump's camp will release serious position papers that mean about as much as any politician's, if you're into that sort of thing. They have a few already.

buwaya said...

But Obama -
" including cutting capital gains for small businesses, making changes to the healthcare system,"
Didn't cut capital gains for small business in any significant way - its pretty useless because of all the attached strings.
Burdened small business both through legislation and through regulation, which has driven small business creation and survival to dismal new lows, though the message (re capital gains) was it seems intended to show some consideration for small business.
And the devil in the health care reform was, well, in the mass of detail, which was far more important than the vague intention.
Absolutely nothing he said was relevant to anyone doing a retroactive analysis of his actual policy achievements in terms of genuine deliverables.
We most certainly are not analyzing competing management contract offers.

I am not piling on Obama, this is just an example, even for promises that were kept. You can say precisely the same about nearly all politicians.

As for Reagan, he was to some degree the exception, though he didn't really give a road map or any significant details. He promised to reduce taxes, which he did; he did not really deliver on reducing regulation, though he tried (the Carter administration+Congress actually did most of the reducing, too late to see a result or get credit), and he did deliver on increasing military spending which was on its way up anyway (see Carter, who came to his senses here too, also too late). For the Cold War Reagan really offered only an intention and not a plan.

Since then there have been no Reagans.
If Trump makes only a vague promise of an intention to improve things, then I can only credit his honesty.

traditionalguy said...

Amanda, or whatever her real name is, is making it up as she goes. The incident she uses as an example of a Bad Trump was a man who started the fight by swinging haymakers at the police who were peacefully escorting him out. He wanted a fight bad because that was what Amanda's bosses had hired him to go in and do that night as a publicity stunt.

dick said...

DAVOS elite flying private jets and bitching about my back yard bbq.

They fly in leftist DiCraprio to lecture them on AGW while he is building a multi-million, beach front, estate in Belize....close to sea level. Imagine Trump will work with Congress to change taxes on hedge funds, finally.

Original Mike said...

Remarkable that a guy who was beaten-up did not require medical attention.

jr565 said...

So, trumpettes, please explain trumps immigration policy for me. He wants to build a wall. ok, I'm with him there.
He wants to deport all illegals? Ok, that might be a bit hard to do. Maybe simply don't provide benefits so they leave on there own and deport those we find. End sanctuary cities. Penalize companies that hire illegals. Guest worker program. E verify. But ok. I'm still with him. Not realistic, but let's go with it.

Then he wants to let the good ones back in after vetting them all through an expedited vetting process. And those he lets back in will be legal. A vetting process of 15 million people. Who we just shipped off to Mexico. How many people are we going to have on hand to expedite this vetting process? Is that Donald trumps job plan? Hire people to vet the Mexicans we are going to let back in?

Um..... Isn't that amnesty? They are allowed to come back in. (The good ones. Just the good ones) and those that come in can legally stay. That sure seems like amnesty to me. So trumpettes, you are actually for amnesty.
How could a thinking person offer either of those proposals? And how could a thinking person offer BOTH of those proposals?
If you are going to let the good ones back in, why are you proposing we kick them out. THATS DOUBLE THE WORK! couldn't we vet them before kicking them out so we don't have to spend extra time and money kicking them out and then inviting them back in? And he's going to make the good ones LEGAL?! you mean like a pathway to citizenship? Like what Marco Rubio was suggesting. Only tack on two really stupid and costly proposals first. First KICK THEM ALL OUT. Then vet them and let the good ones in.
If you are for that, really, why are you not for amnesty? BECAUSE THATS WHAT IT IS.

do those pushing this just want to make Mexicans trvel back and forth a bunch of times? Or do they not realize that trump is proposing this?

jr565 said...

And if you think I'm wrong here his is proposing this:
http://www.mlive.com/news/us-world/index.ssf/2015/07/trump_deport_11_million_then_l.html

"It's a plan Trump offers with few specifics — and one complicated by the messy realities of the nation's immigration system.

Such an effort may be more difficult than Trump realizes because deporting so many people means finding them first. The government does not know the identities of many of the millions of people who have come into the country illegally or remained after their legally issued visas expired. Locating immigrants who don't have a legal immigration status has stymied officials for decades.

Deporting them all "is impractical and is opposed by a large majority of Americans," said Clint Bolick, an Arizona lawyer who co-authored a book on immigration policy with former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, himself a GOP presidential candidate.

During an interview Wednesday on CNN, Trump said the "good ones" could return via an "expedited" process and then remain in the country legally.
Oh, so you mean amnesty!



The billionaire businessman and former reality television star has shot to the top of polls in the crowded race for the Republican presidential nomination in large part because of his hardline stance on immigration.

"I want to move 'em out, and we're going to move 'em back in and let them be legal," he told CNN."


We're going to move them back in! AND LET THEM BE LEGAL.



But the gang of eight proposal was bad. For some reason. And Rubio is for amnesty. But not trump. No way! Even though he says he would make them legal after inviting them back in. Actually he doesn't even say invite them back in. He says MOVE them back in.
Maybe we are going to pay for the buses that will ship them back to the states?

buwaya puti said...

You are over thinking this.
Trump is being rhetorical. He hasn't got a plan, he has the intention to "do something". I think everyone has got the message that he's going to wing it.
Which is what everyone else has always done and intended to do, that is, to wing it. Detailed plans pretending some deep knowledge of, well, something relevant to policy, and some connection to desired real world effects, are fantasies.
The truth is that what emerges as public policy is the result of appointments (hiring) and negotiations, the details of which cannot be forseen and the outcomes of which are a matter of hope and faith.
That's the realistic view.

Nichevo said...

Perhaps if they think they will be let back in, they will leave without shooting.

Simon said...

Trump's indictment and conviction by the next President would be a nice catharsis.

Simon said...

Jim said...
"Yes. Trump is pissing off all the right people. And it is about time."

This is the kind of juvenile attitude that powers Trump. "He isn't a conservative or a libertarian, but the people whom I hate in turn hate him, and he's willing to jab them in the eye." It's pathetic identity politics.

Todd said...

Simon said...
Jim said...
"Yes. Trump is pissing off all the right people. And it is about time."

This is the kind of juvenile attitude that powers Trump. "He isn't a conservative or a libertarian, but the people whom I hate in turn hate him, and he's willing to jab them in the eye." It's pathetic identity politics.

1/22/16, 8:10 AM


I think at this point it goes beyond that. It is "a pox on both of their houses". [I believe] the middle feels like it has been so screwed over by both parties that it is time to upset the apple cart. The middle is tired of all of the DNC freebies and lawlessness and of the RNC tough talk with a spine of clay. There are too many lifetime pols in the big house and Government is too big and too intrusive and TOO inefficient and wasteful. Too many politicians have said the right things and not delivered. Many feel it is time for a real outsider. [For them] at least Trump isn't going to DC to make his fortune like most that are there. He already has his. He has shown he knows how to run a big organization AND make money so [to many] what the hell, lets give him a shot. Could he really do worst than a community organizer has?

I repeat, I am not a "Trump man" but I can understand the frustrations that would lead many there.

grackle said...

Jr565: So, trumpettes, please explain trumps immigration policy for me.

Go to Trump’s website, look up his immigration policy and read it for yourself. Why should we do your research for you? What I’m wondering about this commentor and some other Trump opponents is exactly what immigration policy do they favor? And which candidate do they favor?

They do a fair job when riffing on Trump, I’ll give’m that – although I believe the AP hit piece published back in July of last year cited by jr565 is kind of strange. Doesn’t he have something a little more current? However, we are carefully kept in the dark about their candidate preference, their immigration policy preferences. See the pattern, readers?

Andy Krause said...

The problem for the intellectuals and pundits is that if Trump wins, their opinions are worth exactly nothing from that moment on. Going from a big media persona to Dan Rather territory is what scares them and causes them to lash out.
There are also a lot of smears and rants in the comments, "has no plan" "identity politics" "trumpettes" etc. I'm impressed by the mental geniuses on display that know all these things to true when it is just cognitive dissonance.