February 24, 2016

"We won with young. We won with old. We won with highly educated. We won with poorly educated. I love the poorly educated."

"We’re the smartest people, we’re the most loyal people, and you know what I’m happy about? Because I’ve been saying it for a long time. 46% were the Hispanics—46%, number one with Hispanics. I’m really happy about that.... We’re going to keep—as you know Gitmo, we’re keeping that open, and we’re going to load it up with bad dudes. We’re going to load it up with a lot of bad dudes out there. We’re going to have our borders nice and strong. We’re going to build the wall, you know that. We’re going to build the wall. And I have a lot of respect from Mexico and you just heard we won Hispanics. But let me tell you Mexico is going to pay for the wall, right? It’s going to happen. It’s going to happen. They know it. I know it. We all know it.... We’re going to be the smart people. We’re not going to be the people that get pushed around all over the place. We’re going to be the smart people. You’re going to be proud of your president, and you’re going to be even prouder of your country, OK?"

Donald Trump, on winning Nevada. Full text. Full video:



I'm adding the "pride" tag. His theme is pride — self esteem. I think the message is: Even if you're poorly educated — especially if you are poorly educated — you are smart, and you are American, and you should feel great. All those other politicians look down on you, and they look down on the country. They insult it. They use the worst insults, like "racist." They'd have you believe that it's racist to say "Make America great again" and to want to preserve the benefits of America for Americans and to increase those selfishly guarded benefits. But it's not something to be ashamed of, it's being smart. And he's very smart, and we — you, with me leading the way — "are going to be the smart people."

262 comments:

1 – 200 of 262   Newer›   Newest»
Oso Negro said...

Americans have been secretly longing for an autocratic strongman Democrat running as a Republican. So much more pleasant to vote for than Madame Mao Clinton.

wendybar said...

I am a conservative, and I see another Obama with Trump...He is for bigger government, universal healthcare, eminent domain, ect....Be careful what you wish for....you just may get it.

Brando said...

"I am a conservative, and I see another Obama with Trump...He is for bigger government, universal healthcare, eminent domain, ect....Be careful what you wish for....you just may get it."

This year will be lose-lose for conservatives. Our best bet is to count on gridlock and incompetence to keep anything too damaging from happening.

Even if Rubio had won Nevada, I don't see anything stopping Trump from getting the nomination. A plurality of Republicans have decided that they want a strongman, a god-like figure, and don't care about any warning signs he gives them. But fair's fair, and if that's what they choose then we're screwed either way.

readering said...

Amazing. The field has included current/former governors of Florida, New York, Ohio, New Jersey, Virginia, Wisconsin, Arkansas and Louisiana. Also current/former senators of Pennsylvania, Texas, Florida, South Carolina and Kentucky. Yet they've all been clobbered by an elderly non-politician who spent most of his adult life outside the Republican party and who has almost no understanding of policy issues, no expert advisors and an uncontrollable temper.

David Begley said...

Dispirited this morning.

The only candidate who will lose to Hillary will win the nomination. We will then have an unindicted criminal in the White House.

When the MSM and Dems really focus on the negative stuff on Trump, it will be a landslide loss.

glenn said...

It's pretty simple guy and gals. When the Donald was running around giving the Establishment Repubs wedgies the press couldn't wait to quote him or put his mug on television. It never occurred to them that he might gain enough traction to have a serious shot at getting the nomination and a chance of getting elected.
Think about it.
Hillary says "Vote for me because I'm a woman.
Bernie says "Vote for me and I'll give you some of his"
Ted Cruz says "Vote for me and I'll kick over all those rice bowls in Washington".
Donald Trump says "Vote for me and the emergency room at you local hospital won't look like a bus station in rural Mexico"
Might not be fair but I think I know who is going to win that argument.

PB said...

Let's break it down. We're a 50-50 country, fairly evenly split between Republicans and Democrats. The vast majority of Democrats support Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton. About half of Republicans are supporting Donald Trump. That means only about 25% of the US population is sane.

AllenS said...

Has it ever occurred to you anti-Trump commenters, that a whole lot of people are just sick and tired of professional politicians? You say Trump won't do what he says he'll do, and then completely forget every other politician that came before him never does what they say they'll do when running for the position.

tim maguire said...

Pretty awesome that Trump won among Hispanics. Republican Hispanics, but still.... It might almost make a Trump candidacy worth it if he could put that racist Hispanic "duel loyalty" smear to bed.

samanthasmom said...

I think a large part of Trump's appeal is the respect he shows for the American people. We've had four years of being told we're racist, bigoted, and phobic xenophobes. When someone comes along and tells us we're smart, too generous and welcoming for our own good, and deserve to be proud of the fruits of our labor, it resonates. Jimmy Carter lost his bid for re-election when he gave his "malaise" speech. His being impotent during the hostage crisis was what sealed the deal, but a man who couldn't lead telling the American people they were suffering from "a crisis of confidence" in their government was a bridge too far. Folks were dealing with a major energy crisis, mortgage rates close to credit card rates, and high unemployment, but it was their fault because they didn't "believe". The speech was like asking the audience to clap for Tinkerbell. We needed a bold leader, but we got Roger Milquetoast. It's no wonder Reagan cleaned his clock. Donald Trump's success at the polls and in the caucuses has been years in the making and should come as no surprise to anyone.

Brando said...

"Has it ever occurred to you anti-Trump commenters, that a whole lot of people are just sick and tired of professional politicians?"

Yes, and we're sick of them too. We just don't think this person is the solution as he seems to have every attribute of a professional politician in spades. Promising things he cannot deliver? Flip flopping? Trading influence? Betraying a thin grasp of facts? Selectively picking information that suits whatever his position du jour is? He is all of those things on steroids. It's like saying "I'm tired of junk food, I'll just have Doritos for dinner."

"You say Trump won't do what he says he'll do, and then completely forget every other politician that came before him never does what they say they'll do when running for the position."

Please don't misinterpret our criticism of Trump for a free pass for the Bushes, McConnells, et al. We don't excuse them, either. We're not arguing about the condition, we're arguing about the prescription.

tim maguire said...

AllenS said...Has it ever occurred to you anti-Trump commenters, that a whole lot of people are just sick and tired of professional politicians?

It's occurred to everyone, except, possibly, Jeb Bush supporters.

damikesc said...


Even if Rubio had won Nevada, I don't see anything stopping Trump from getting the nomination. A plurality of Republicans have decided that they want a strongman, a god-like figure, and don't care about any warning signs he gives them. But fair's fair, and if that's what they choose then we're screwed either way.


It's, ultimately, guys like Rubio's fault. You refuse to change your tactics in the face of a changing opponent and you deserve to lose.

AllenS said...

Brando, consider seeking a second opinion.

I know a lot of union men who have never voted for a Republican in their lives who will vote for Trump. I don't think that Trump needs light-weight, I'm scared of my shadow Republicans to pull this off.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

they've all been clobbered by an elderly non-politician who spent most of his adult life outside the Republican party and who has almost no understanding of policy issues, no expert advisors and an uncontrollable temper.


Politics as usual simply cannot continue in a supposed republic when the elected representatives refuse to advocate for huge swathes of the electorate and instead actively work against their interests for the benefit of a small number of well connected, wealthy "elites."

Donald Trump is what happens when both major parties abandon the lower and middle classes to their fates in the name of open borders and globalization.



What should

MathMom said...

This Trump acceptance speech was at a Fleischman-Kincaid Grade Level of 3.2.

I'm starting to worry about this. I have run many texts of his interviews and speeches through the grade-level analyzer, and the highest has been 6th grade.

MathMom said...

Oops. Full text of his speech was Grade Level 3.5.

Brando said...

"It's, ultimately, guys like Rubio's fault. You refuse to change your tactics in the face of a changing opponent and you deserve to lose."

I don't know what Rubio could have done, or what Cruz could have done--and they've both taken very different approaches to this election. Trump has an unbreakable core of supporters who will never give up on him.

"I know a lot of union men who have never voted for a Republican in their lives who will vote for Trump. I don't think that Trump needs light-weight, I'm scared of my shadow Republicans to pull this off."

Insofar as you mean that Trump will win over new voters, we'll have to see how that bears out in the general election. White working class voters have been steadily moving towards the GOP as the GOP has been losing suburban white collar voters, and while Trump's appeal is sure to break the previous pattern for the GOP, current national polling shows he is also losing voters to his Democratic rivals. There's still months to go, so anything can change.

I think Trump will get the nomination, and it's possible for him to win the general election only because Hillary is uniquely bad at campaigning, but even if he got elected I think the best we could hope for is he accomplishes nothing. You disagree of course, and time will tell which of us was right.

rich hahn said...

Not a lawyer - check
Not a Harvard graduate - check
Not a lifelong politician - check

PB said...

Since this is an unusual season, perhaps the election will turn on who each candidate selects as VP. Who could Trump have as his VP that would put him over the top? One of the other presidential candidates? Another non-politician?

Sharc said...

Two possibilities. Either he does what he says and we finally reinstill some pride and optimism in the country, or he's a fraud who burns down the whole GOP so that we have to start over. I'd prefer the former, but I can live with the latter if it comes to that.

He'll beat Hillary. Dems are unmotivated by her. Trump will get blue collar voters tired of being demonized by the other Dem factions. And enough low information Dem voters will just vote for his celebrity, in the same way they would vote for Taylor Swift or Brad Pitt based on seeing People Magazine at the grocery. I can live with that too.

Phil 3:14 said...

But the people refused to listen to Samuel. “No!” they said. “We want a king over us. Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles.”

AllenS said...

Brando said...
... even if he got elected I think the best we could hope for is he accomplishes nothing.

Let's say POTUS Trump attempts to cut off all benefits to illegals, and attempts to stop all dumping of steel on this nation, and the politicians of both parties stop him. Are you willing to say that this is what you are hoping for?

David Begley said...

I also blame Fox for the rise of Trump. The attitude at Fox amongst many of them is: He's rich, from NY and a TV star. Fox gives him unlimited time and hardly presses him. How about five minutes on Trump's "own personal Vietnam" statement? His USFL failure? All the unsecured creditors and equity holders stiffed in his four BKs? Why four BKs? Wasn't one BK enough? There are so many negatives on Trump and they have hardly been explored. When Hillary wins, I will assign considerable blame to Fox.

Jeff said...

Shit, I just barfed into my coffee.

CStanley said...

Has it ever occurred to you anti-Trump commenters, that a whole lot of people are just sick and tired of professional politicians? You say Trump won't do what he says he'll do, and then completely forget every other politician that came before him never does what they say they'll do when running for the position.

I don't think its that this hasn't occurred to us. I think a lot of us are fed up with politicians....but a certain percentage sees Trump as an antidote and the rest of us feel he's just a different poison. At best he seems to me like a drug purported to cure an illness but it comes with a terrible side effect profile.

damikesc said...

I also blame Fox for the rise of Trump. The attitude at Fox amongst many of them is: He's rich, from NY and a TV star. Fox gives him unlimited time and hardly presses him. How about five minutes on Trump's "own personal Vietnam" statement? His USFL failure? All the unsecured creditors and equity holders stiffed in his four BKs? Why four BKs? Wasn't one BK enough? There are so many negatives on Trump and they have hardly been explored. When Hillary wins, I will assign considerable blame to Fox.

Given that they also fellate Rubio heavily, this seems like a poor excuse. Rubio has tons of coverage, almost all positive, on Fox and isn't exactly lighting the world on fire.

Chuck said...

I LOVE THE POORLY EDUCATED!

Brando said...

"Let's say POTUS Trump attempts to cut off all benefits to illegals, and attempts to stop all dumping of steel on this nation, and the politicians of both parties stop him. Are you willing to say that this is what you are hoping for?"

Illegals are already ineligible for federal benefits, but if Trump actually tried to better enforce that then of course I'd be supportive. I don't think he's particularly suited towards getting that done--he doesn't seem to know how agencies work and would run into the same operational mess that kept previous presidents from eliminating fraud. As for dumping steel, putting high tariffs on imports has always backfired, as it did when Bush tried it in 2002 (it raised costs for domestic automakers, who in turn found their cars less competitive to sell) and so far I haven't heard him suggest any other way he would convince other countries to stop this practice other than saying what a great dealmaker he is.

So no, if he did propose something I agreed with of course I'd want to see it succeed--I just have no trust in the guy to propose or implement anything positive because he is at least portraying himself as an angry, drunk uncle who says whatever comes to mind and while that's amusing and cathartic, it suggests that any number of idiotic policies would emanate from his White House.

Michael K said...

"who has almost no understanding of policy issues, no expert advisors and an uncontrollable temper."

It's amusing to see the horror among the Republicans who confidently voted for hacks like Paul Ryan and kept expecting them to do what they promised. Ryan has never had a job outside government.

"Fox gives him unlimited time and hardly presses him. "

Fox has almost destroyed its brand by trying to take him down. Megyn Kelly started by acting like a high school girl at the first debate. She had even changed her hairstyle to try to look more sophisticated. Trump has been given lots of time by all the networks because he sells viewers.

I am still not convinced that I know what he will do when elected. I do think we might be seeing a landslide with voters from both parties revolting against what Peggy Noon calls "Political Correctness"

A shrewdness in Sanders and Trump backers: They share one faith in Washington, and that is in its ability to wear anything down. They think it will moderate Bernie, take the edges off Trump. For thus reason they don’t see their choices as so radical.

As for Mr. Trump, it is not without meaning that his supporters have had eight months to measure the cost of satisfying their anger by voting for him. In New Hampshire, 35% of the electorate decided that for all his drama and uncertainty they would back him.

The mainstream journalistic mantra is that the GOP is succumbing to nativism, nationalism and the culture of celebrity. That allows them to avoid taking seriously Mr. Trump’s issues: illegal immigration and Washington’s 15-year, bipartisan refusal to stop it; political correctness and how it is strangling a free people; and trade policies that have left the American working class displaced, adrift and denigrated. Mr. Trump’s popularity is propelled by those issues and enabled by his celebrity.

In winning, Donald Trump threw over the GOP donor class. Political professionals don’t fully appreciate that, but normal Americans see it. They get that the guy with money just slapped silly the guys with money. Every hedge-fund billionaire donor should be blinking in pain. Some investment!


Stop acting like a bunch of old maids (as obsolete as that term is) and think about what this means.

Karen of Texas said...

I am still undecided. Although I won't be voting for Trump in the primary, if he is the nominee, I will vote for him over Hillary! or The Bern. I think Trump's VP pick will tell a great deal about what he's really thinking and what a potential Trump presidency may be like. I know a great many Bernie supports who are saying they will stay home or write in Bern if Hillary is the nominee. I also notice a lot of Dems trying to cut that thinking off at the knees - they've got a Romney situation unfolding in their sandbox. I don't think Trump is a sure bet to lose to Hillary. I think he might pick up disaffected, pissed off, Bernie supporters.

Writ Small said...

"I love the poorly educated."

Donald loves anyone who validates him. Conversely, he despises anyone who criticizes him. Flattery will get you everywhere with the Donald. Ask Putin.

A man who psychologically craves flattery often projects his needs onto others. The answer to the poorly educated is not education. It is flattery for them, too, pride in their lack of education. Think about it. Educated people haven't prevented all injury. They haven't stopped all feelings of inadequacy. Maybe education makes people dumb and the lack of it means they're smart.

Who else loves the poorly educated and deals in flattery? Folks sending out emails from Nigerian princes, among others.

C.S. Lewis in "Mere Christianity" identified the Great Sin. Looking through the stories of the Bible, this single sin was again and again at the root of all falls from grace. What was it? What single moral defect was most incompatible with being close to the Christian God?

David Begley said...

Hannity - State
O'Reilly - Defense
Ducey - Treasury
Kilmaede - Amb. to England.

Jeff said...

The orange Mussolini. We are so screwed.

Trump was brought to you by the bailouts. Politicians of both parties, liberals and supposed conservatives alike, abandoned their principles to make sure none of the rich Masters of the Universe on Wall Street missed a bonus check. It was disgusting and disheartening, and now the voters want to blow it up.

It takes only half a brain to realize that trying to blow it all up will only make things worse, but that's why, as MathMom points out, Trump is aiming his appeal at the stupid. Blame everything on the damn furriners and the edumacated snobs. How low can we go?

We have centuries of history that show us free trade and relatively open immigration works. Adam Smith and David Ricardo made the case for free trade centuries ago, and they've never been refuted. Empirical study after empirical study shows they are right. Just compare North vs South Korea, or East vs West Germany. Big government, restricted trade and restricting movement across borders don't work, and they are most assuredly what Trump is campaigning on.

dreams said...

"I love the poorly educuted." Yeah, everyone loves that, I expect everyone (the elite) to negatively spin that innocent covering all the bases comment.

Anglelyne said...

Oso Negor: Americans have been secretly longing for an autocratic strongman Democrat running as a Republican...

It's symptomatic that both Democrats and "conservatives" reach for the strongman* trope to explain things to themselves. But Versailles is a more apt political analogy here than Weimar.

dreams said...

I find it amusing to read the hysterical pundits who are in full panic mode ranting and raving about the stupid dumb voters and their angry votes for Trump.

Fabi said...

Phase 1. Call Trump supporters stupid and insane
Phase 2. ???
Phase 3. Wonder how Trump won the nomination

Tank said...

glenn said...

.....

Donald Trump says "Vote for me and the emergency room at you local hospital won't look like a bus station in rural Mexico"


This made me laugh, because it is so racist, and has just the right amount of truth in it. At the U Wisconsin they will say "racist," but at your local bar they will say "yeah, tell it Dude."

I don't even like Trump, but I don't like anyone running now. Trump is the opposite of my kind of candidate, a boring, hardworking guy who stays in the WH and spends his time reducing the size of gov't and restoring the Republic we once had. But, it's obvious (except to vast swaths of people LOL) why he's doing so well. I should like Cruz for his positions, but the guy is ... I don't know, tough to like.

MartyH said...

Our choice this year will be between two Americans, each great in their own way-PT Barnum and Al Capone. I'll take the carnival barker over the racketeer.

Brando said...

"I don't even like Trump, but I don't like anyone running now. Trump is the opposite of my kind of candidate, a boring, hardworking guy who stays in the WH and spends his time reducing the size of gov't and restoring the Republic we once had. But, it's obvious (except to vast swaths of people LOL) why he's doing so well. I should like Cruz for his positions, but the guy is ... I don't know, tough to like."

A boring, hardworking guy who stays in the WH and spends his time reducing the size of government isn't going to excite anyone enough to get elected. What people want is grand promises that couldn't possibly be fulfilled, and a poke in the eye to the people they hate. Competence and ethics are just ballast.

Tank said...

@Brando

We agree, and that is one reason, we are doomed.

wildswan said...

I guess if Trump goes wrong everybody will be poorer and America's status will slip and dangerous dictators will rise. Whereas Hillary promises to continue the status quo in which everybody gets poorer and America's status slips and dangerous dictators rise. She promises this.

Whereas maybe Trump won't go wrong.

Saint Croix said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Virgil Hilts said...

Great essay from about a week ago. -- http://www.the-american-interest.com/2016/01/17/andrew-jackson-revenant/
Trump represents the Jacksonian Surge (which is similar to the repulsion away from political correctness). Trump is a big f-you to all of the efforts by the elites of both parties and in the universities and in the MSM to reject and destroy what was the essence (flawed essence, but great nonetheless) of America. There are a lot of us that don't like Trump but share his hatred of those efforts. Don't mistake support for Trump for mere authoritarianism.

Sebastian said...

"the respect he shows for the American people" Ah, that's what it is. The Donald is all about "respect." But will he still "respect" us the morning after?

AReasonableMan said...

Ron Winkleheimer said...
Donald Trump is what happens when both major parties abandon the lower and middle classes to their fates in the name of open borders and globalization.


And lie about it. If a traditional Tory party did this, in an open and principled manner, no one would be surprised. I would support the general idea of there being a 'business' party focused on the priorities of the Davos/Economist caste. What has happened here, however, is that both parties have been captured by the same caste. Something had to give eventually. People have been voting against their economic interest since Reagan and Clinton I - "If something cannot go on forever, it will stop".

traditionalguy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
traditionalguy said...

This is fun. A comment thread full of bitter enders declaring they would rather the nation die for the Emperor before they will give up Conservative Bushido and let the Americans rule over them.

It must be ironic joke morning at Althouse. But guess who are the ones willing to face reality because there is a Realist named Trump here now, and who are the ones clinging to a useless self image that it is courage to wait for Adam Smith and Pastor Cruz to save you.

Meanwhile there is a War to win over actual World Socialism.

dreams said...

"I love the poorly educuted."

Because the Donald doesn't have a mean bone in his body so said a company CEO and friend of Trump on CNBC a few weeks ago.

M Jordan said...

Yesterday I laid out a scenario in which Rubio and Trump would eventually be locked in a dead heat. That scenario was based on the belief that Rubio would get the bigger share of the vote of candidates dropping out. Last night put my logic in the grave.

Trump gained 14% over his S. Carolina totals, from 32 to 46. Bush only had 8 to give him but it looks like he pretty much did that. Rubio and Cruz stated about the same, Rubio gaining about 2%, Cruz none.

It's over. Trump is the nominee. For those Repubs who despair at this, consider: last night 75,000 Republicans voted in the Nevada caucus. That's up from 30,00 in 2012. More importantly, it's about 6 times as many as Democrats voted in last week's Democratic caucus. 13,000 Dems went to the polls in a hotly contested Sanders-Clinton race. 13,000 vs. 75,000.

This same turnout story has happened in all four primaries/caucuses.

Donald J. Trump is our next president. Deal with it, America. You too, world.

Shouting Thomas said...

You know, when Althouse isn't blabbing her own wretched self-interest, i.e., feminism and gaydom, she's actually quite sensible.

You incredibly intellectual, high IQ guys all just missed her sensible point, then proceeded to illustrate it in spades.

We're all tired of jackasses braying about their incredible intellects and telling us they deserve to rule us.

We've seen what rule by Goldman Sachs and Simpson Thatcher looks like. It looks like a lot of high IQ jackasses stealing everything they can get their hands on. While simultaneously lecturing us on our stupidity and racism.

Understand?

MaxedOutMama said...

Well, re the "smart people who are not going to be pushed around", I believe he uses that "pushed around" in the collective sense. He has spoken at great length about American not winning, America not negotiating good deals, etc.

It is easy to describe Trump as a populist, but he is strongly nationalist.

The "smart people" refers to the inner culture, the winning/not-pushed-around refers to the rest of the world.

I have listened to quite a few of his speeches on Youtube, and he's banging the same drum. I have no doubt that he believes what he says.

There is very little of envy in Trump's speeches, and a great appeal to patriotism and hope.

Anglelyne said...

Jeff: We have centuries of history that show us free trade and relatively open immigration works.

The U.S. for most of its history was not a free-trading nation. Nations that have recently industrialized and joined the ranks of the wealthy did not do so by free-trading.

For a brief couple of centuries the U.S. had "relatively open immigration", with a couple of "great waves" into a nation expanding into a wide-open continent (which tells you nothing about how well that would work when those conditions no longer applied). This was followed by a highly restrictive period (because mass immigration was starting to cause problems, once those conditions no longer applied).

I mention the above not because they prove anything about the wisdom of any particular policy on trade or immigration, but just to ask that people at least get their history straight when they talk about these complex issues. And they are a lot more complex, as they play out in the real world, than is satisfactorily covered by glib invocations of comparative advantage.

Jus' sayin'.

My name goes here. said...

"Who could Trump have as his VP that would put him over the top? One of the other presidential candidates? Another non-politician?"

Governor Susana Martinez.

ALP said...

Wow, I just realized Trump is the closest thing to "Bulworth" we'll ever have.

rehajm said...

And they are a lot more complex, as they play out in the real world, than is satisfactorily covered by glib invocations of comparative advantage.

This is crap! Excuses for perpetuating bad policies. Free trade and legal immigration are huge net positives for the improvement in the standard of living for all human beings. Not to suggest you shouldn't control your own borders, but where there is access to capital and the open travel of people, goods and services humans thrive. Where it is absent people suffer. Proven time and time again around the globe for centuries.

traditionalguy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
traditionalguy said...

Think on the bright side guys. Trump brings his own Airforce One and his own Marine One into the marriage as a dowry.

And like George Patton, he has studied leadership of an Army of privates his entire life. So what if he intentionally speaks directly to them in their language, as he should if this war is going to require their blood and his guts.

Amanda said...

Of course he loves the poorly educated. What other megalomaniac nationalist with funny hair had great support from the poorly educated? The fatherland and pride...and the angry seething masses, haven't we seen this before? Trump is the face of the majority of conservatives, congrats.

Meade said...

PB said...
"Since this is an unusual season, perhaps the election will turn on who each candidate selects as VP. Who could Trump have as his VP that would put him over the top? One of the other presidential candidates? Another non-politician?"

Ivanka.

AllenS said...

Thank you for the numbers, M Jordan. Here's some more numbers: I have a little over a ton of prepared steel (no more than 3' long and no more than 14" wide) for scrap. Because of the dumping of steel on this country, last spring "3 foot" was $140 a ton. This fall it was down to $80. It's back up, but not by much - $95. There are a lot of unemployed iron ore workers in Northern MN, which is a Democratic Party stronghold because of this surplus steel. Who do you think they will be voting for?

SGT Ted said...

You incredibly intellectual, high IQ guys all just missed her sensible point, then proceeded to illustrate it in spades.

We're all tired of jackasses braying about their incredible intellects and telling us they deserve to rule us.

We've seen what rule by Goldman Sachs and Simpson Thatcher looks like. It looks like a lot of high IQ jackasses stealing everything they can get their hands on. While simultaneously lecturing us on our stupidity and racism.

Understand?


This.

Paul said...

"There is very little of envy in Trump's speeches, and a great appeal to patriotism and hope."

What we are witnessing is the reinvigoration of the American spirit. There is nothing quite like it. Trump has tapped it and it's easy to see why none of the other candidates was able to do so.

Limited blogger said...

It is exciting to think of who Trump will select as a VP. The possibilities are endless, and the choice will be quite meaningful.

Unlike Hillary's choices, which will be limited to someone who will not overshadow her, nor be smarter than her.

Bob Boyd said...

It's the elites who are scared for a change. That can't be all bad.

SGT Ted said...

This is crap! Excuses for perpetuating bad policies. Free trade and legal immigration are huge net positives for the improvement in the standard of living for all human beings

People who disagree with the open borders policies of the Dem/GOP establishment and their big money donors don't want PRNK borders policy. Nor is Trump proposing such. Anti-Amnesty and pro-enforcement of existing immigration law doesn't mean "zero immigration" and to suggest such is a big fat leftwing lie.

Our current immigration laws are not bad policy. The lack of immigration enforcement and the abuse of HB1 visas to replace Americans with indentured foreign labor is the bad policy currently and is depressing wages in both traditional working class and tech job sectors.

Free trade is another issue.

Eustace Chilke said...

It's true I'm fed up with all those vile fuckers in the ruling class who think there should be such a professional class and that they belong in it and, far from making my life concerns a priority, never even consider my concerns. I'm so tired of being smarmed at at tut-tutted and patronized and safe-spaced and discounted that I might never stop vomiting in disgust. Since my earliest political awareness, or from very early on at least, I have doubted every word they speak. I don't believe them. Neither do I believe Trump. The disappointment, if it should follow his ultimate success, will be yuuuuge. It's a hell of a world when the nearest thing to consolation will be a reminder that the other guys would have been just as awful.

rehajm said...

The lack of immigration enforcement and the abuse of HB1 visas to replace Americans with indentured foreign labor is the bad policy currently and is depressing wages in both traditional working class and tech job sectors.

Human rights abuses or work rules violations shouldn't be tolerated but 'depressing' wages isn't necessarily a bad thing. Ask employers if they're harmed by 'depressing' wages or better yet ask the extra workers that employer can hire because the cost of labor is lower.

TosaGuy said...

My prog friends on FB are cherry picking out of context the "We won with the uneducated. I love the uneducated" as a slam on who are Trump supporters. Good luck ever trying to win them to your side on an election.

The prog left has taken the term non-educated/uneducated from its standard meaning of not attending college, and converted into meaning a person is purely ignorant and stupid. Makes sense because the prog left no longer wants or desires the Dirty Jobs vote.

tim in vermont said...

Unlike Hillary's choices, which will be limited to someone who will not overshadow her, nor be smarter than her.

Joe Biden probably won't take the job, Al Gore too busy enjoying his riches. I am not sure where she is going to find a Democrat both prominent enough, and with a lower IQ than she.

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

"I love the poorly educated." ESPECIALLY the poorly educated.

tim in vermont said...

Good luck ever trying to win them to your side on an election.


It has been open season on trailer trash ever since Carville made his joke about hundred dollar bills to cover for a rapist. And then they sincerely wonder why people in Kansans won't vote for them. "What's the matter with them? Don't they get that we are smarter?" It's a mystery Democrats, a mystery. And we can point this out in front of Democrats all we want because they are too stupid to recognize the truth of it.

Big Mike said...

@rehajm, better yet, how about asking someone still paying off student loans after busting his butt to earn a STEM degree what it feels like to be called into a meeting and told "All you Americans are fired."

rehajm said...

I am not sure where she is going to find a Democrat both prominent enough, and with a lower IQ than she.

Massachusetts.

tim in vermont said...

"I love the poorly educated." ESPECIALLY the poorly educated

Jesus loved the poor too so start making fun of him. Remember when Barack Obama used to care about the poor? You know, when he was a community organizer? Now he cares about the bankers who are making billions off the trillions he is borrowing.

tim in vermont said...

Massachusetts

No way she picks a running mate that is better looking than she is and a female.

Limited blogger said...

I don't know how Trump does it. In a style only the Donald can pull off, he phrases something so kinda awkward, that you initially recoil. Then you analyse it, and you realize it was genius! The Republican establishment had given up on the 'working class'. Trump has swooped in and made them a right leaning voting block.

rehajm said...

better yet, how about asking someone still paying off student loans after busting his butt to earn a STEM degree what it feels like to be called into a meeting and told "All you Americans are fired..

I don't need to be told that's personally hard and disruptive, but the anecdotes don't tell the whole story. In a dynamic economy those workers find new jobs, often better jobs.

Jim Nicholson said...

He won with the fascists. There are a lot of them now.

Meade said...

"Ivanka. "

Although she might not qualify as a "natural born citizen" because, when she was born, her mother was not an American citizen.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

Hillary's obvious VP choice would be Warren. She will need to energize the left. I wouldn't be surprised if there is already an agreement between the two. I can't imagine why else Warren decided not to run. She would be beating Hillary like a rented mule if she had.

If Trump picked Carly for VP I would consider voting for him but that ship has probably sailed. Besides, Trump would probably prefer another Democrat.

Brando said...

"It's true I'm fed up with all those vile fuckers in the ruling class who think there should be such a professional class and that they belong in it and, far from making my life concerns a priority, never even consider my concerns. I'm so tired of being smarmed at at tut-tutted and patronized and safe-spaced and discounted that I might never stop vomiting in disgust. Since my earliest political awareness, or from very early on at least, I have doubted every word they speak. I don't believe them. Neither do I believe Trump. The disappointment, if it should follow his ultimate success, will be yuuuuge. It's a hell of a world when the nearest thing to consolation will be a reminder that the other guys would have been just as awful."

My one quibble is that if Trump did beat the odds and get elected, and failed and flip flopped miserably, there would be no disappointment from his fans because he would blithely claim that he actually was successful and they will believe it because they buy anything he's selling. Border wall? Look at this 300 feet of wall we just put up! And Mexico is paying for it, by which I mean we aren't giving them any extra foreign aid this year!

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

* Meade the Merciless *

rehajm said...

No way she picks a running mate that is better looking than she is and a female.

There's a bullpen of ugly stupid dudes, too.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

No way she picks a running mate that is better looking than she is and a female.

Desperation makes strange bedfellows

Bay Area Guy said...

Too much pessimism. Every poll says The Donald is going to win - and then he proceeds to win, and folks still seem surprised when, in fact, he does win.

The thing that signaled to me that he was a major player was the major National Review editorial "Against Trump". I thought this was a terrible mistake. How on earth can you be against Candidate A, but not for Candidate B? In 1964, NR wasn't against Nelson Rockefeller, it was for Barry Goldwater. In 1980, they were for Reagan, not merely against GHW Bush. You must pick and a support a SPECIFIC candidate to beat a SPECIFIC candidate.

Anyway, even though I didn't support Trump in the primaries, I salute him for winning fairly & squarely. This Fall? Hell yeah, I'll be voting for him against that wretched Hillary. Proudly. The RCP average has Hillary over him by a mere 2 points. So, the General is within grasp, if the splintered GOP lick their wounds, mend fences and start to consolidate.

Learn to love The Donald, I say.

Eustace Chilke said...

I remember the ubiquitous rationalization that stupid people had elected Reagan. But words like clever and stupid are not useful descriptors of mass movements. Calling groups of people stupid is just a way to make yourself feel superior and salvage a bit of consolation after you've had your ass kicked. There is abundant entertainment in this year's political play, whatever else you can say about it.

Big Mike said...

A little more graciousness would not have harmed Trump's image. Still, I hear echoes of "morning again in America" in the speech, and that's good.

Big Mike said...

In a dynamic economy those workers find new jobs, often better jobs.

In a dynamic economy, yes. But if you imagine that Obama's economy is "dynamic" then I hope you're smoking what you're smoking in a state where pot is legal.

Paul said...

"My one quibble is that if Trump did beat the odds and get elected, and failed and flip flopped miserably, there would be no disappointment from his fans because he would blithely claim that he actually was successful and they will believe it because they buy anything he's selling."

Pure unadulterated bullshit. You're a real condescending prick aren't you? But you have a lot of company here.

Trump's supporters see him as a chance to have a chance. They'll be as disappointed as anyone if he fails to stop or even slow down the implosion of the country.

We just think the other candidates have even less of a chance to achieve this.

And beat whose odds? Yours? You've been wrong about everything else.

The Cracker Emcee said...

"The highest has been 6th grade"

Democrat whirlwind, reaped.

Always laugh when I hear Trump mocked by the Donks. He's their creation. Eight years of a joke President followed with a felonious candidate. What, exactly, were they expecting? Another clueless McCain, I'm sure.

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

Looks like the meek will inherit the United States.

Gusty Winds said...

Doesn't "love the poorly educated" speak to a large percentage of the Democrat base that the overly educated liberal campus elites take for granted for decades?



rehajm said...

In a dynamic economy, yes. But if you imagine that Obama's economy is "dynamic" then I hope you're smoking what you're smoking in a state where pot is legal.

We can agree on how poorly Obama's economy is, but let's not make it worse by perpetuating bad policies.

Hagar said...

And once more the Republican turnout is way up and the Democrat way down.

Paul said...

"Still, I hear echoes of "morning again in America" in the speech, and that's good."

The American spirit. Watch out when it awakens, especially after the drubbing it has taken at the hands of a Jimmy Carter or Barack Obama.

tim in vermont said...

Although she might not qualify as a "natural born citizen" because, when she was born, her mother was not an American citizen.

Oh maan! You mean I can't run? Plus because it was my mother who was Dutch, and not my father, I didn't get Dutch citizenship either! A man without a country I am.

Stan Smith said...

We're all tired of jackasses braying about their incredible intellects and telling us they deserve to rule us.

And Trump is different, how?

rightguy2 said...

Trump is the prohibitive favorite to be the republican nominee. Despite what polls currently say, I think he will destroy any potential democrat candidates, including most especially Herself, the pudenda candidate, as Trump is a street fighter and he will do whatever it takes to win, including telling the ugly truth about Hillary and her HINO.

Having said that, I have no idea in bloody hell what the man will actually do as president. We can only pray that he will rise to the occasion and be a good and just president. Otherwise, its the end of the world as we know it, as I see the current democrats to be an existential threat to our republic, its traditions, and our very way of life.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

Desperation makes strange bedfellows

If you don't believe me, just ask Huma.

SGT Ted said...

If the GOP hadn't betrayed their base and broken their promises in favor of the corporatist donors agenda, Trump wouldn't be doing so well.

Meade said...

I did not vote for Reagan in 1980 but I voted for him in 1984.
I did not vote for Bill Clinton in 1992 but I voted for him in 1996.
I did not vote for George W. Bush in 2000 but I voted for him in 2004.

I will not vote for Trump in 2016. But I might vote for him in 2020.

Big Mike said...

@rehajm, funny, I'd say the same to you. Wage-busting is bad policy, and allowing H1B visas to be used for wage busting is a very bad policy.

mezzrow said...

I have lots of Democrat friends locally who know I made the switch to R from D some years ago.

Almost all those not in academia or the media have confided to me that they will vote for Trump while swearing me to secrecy. I'm beginning to get to where I agree with Adams. It's hard for me to see Trump as a Jacksonian man on a horse, but that's what we're looking at.

Those of us here are all to some degree a victim of Pauline Kael syndrome, particularly our esteemed host. That, or Adams managed to hypnotize me in that video.

One of these.

rehajm said...

Wage-busting is bad policy, and allowing H1B visas to be used for wage busting is a very bad policy.

'Wage busting' is not a thing. There's a market for labor, supply and demand for labor, and an equilibrium price. None of these are static.

And who the hell are these STEM workers that can't find jobs? GE would love to talk to them...

mezzrow said...

I did not vote for George W. Bush in 2000 but I voted for him in 2004.

I will not vote for Trump in 2016. But I might vote for him in 2020.


I'm nodding while reading here, Meade. I can't predict what I'll do in November, myself.

William said...

The poor and the poorly educated are ennobled when they vote Democrat. Only then do those huddled masses yearning to be free achieve greatness. God help them if they vote Republican. Then they're mired in poverty and ignorance.........I agree with others here who consider a lack of flamboyance a feature and not a bug in a presidential candidate. McKinley, Coolidge, Eisenhower. Such men radiate a dull sheen that's more reassuring than all that neon blinking. But Republicans now have to face the sad, disquieting truth that their candidate will be the most exciting one.

Gusty Winds said...

In terms of loving the poorly educated, Trump and the Pope now have something they agree on.

tim in vermont said...

Wage busting' is not a thing. There's a market for labor, supply and demand for labor, and an equilibrium price. None of these are static.

So manipulating the supply of labor within national borders by ignoring the interests of the citizens within those borders to serve the interest of large political donors is not a thing? Who knew?

Anglelyne said...

rehajm: This is crap! Excuses for perpetuating bad policies.

So tell us the story about how, say, Toyota corp. grew to a position of global dominance by Japan scrupulously adhering to the no-protection no-subsidy free-trade principles espoused by economic advisors back in the day. Or how Korea and Taiwan went from impoverished to wealthy by abjuring all protectionism. You can't, because they didn't.

That's all I'm pointing out, rehajm - you can't just invoke North Korea and Venezuela and call it a day.

Free trade and legal immigration are huge net positives for the improvement in the standard of living for all human beings.

Sure - unless and until the negative political and social externalities of these policies pile up and blow up in our faces, which has happened, ahem, "time and time again around the globe for centuries". Which I think we can all agree is bad for business.

Static Ping said...

I dunno. Maybe this is what happens when the Rule of Law dies. When it becomes clear that the law applies only to some people, which has been the recurring theme of the Obama administration, it is not irrational to latch onto anything that will protect you, even if it violates your principles or even seems like a bad idea.

I think Trump is a terrible choice for President, but from my perspective it is difficult to come up with a good scenario at this point. The Democratic Party is essentially against Rule of Law as general policy and the Republican Party seems impotent. It is unclear if the Constitution means anything anymore. If you are going to get a strongman, I suppose voting one in is better than the alternative.

One must remember that Julius Caesar did not come to power out of nowhere. He didn't just march into Rome and overthrow the government. The republican institutions of Rome had broken down to the point of uselessness leaving a vacuum to fill, which he filled nicely. It must also be noted that Sulla tried to prop up the republican institutions by force, which didn't work.

Birches said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Birches said...

Brando is on fire in this thread.

tim in vermont said...

Free trade and legal immigration are huge net positives for the improvement in the standard of living for all human beings.


Oh, you are talking about theoretical "free trade" and "legal" immigration! I had no idea you were talking about fairy tales about some mythical world. Carry on!

Brando said...

"Pure unadulterated bullshit. You're a real condescending prick aren't you? But you have a lot of company here."

I must have touched a nerve. I guess you Trump fans hate "political correctness" but if anyone comments on your devotion to your hero-god, you get all sensitive. Perhaps you need to find a "safe space".

BrianE said...

I've heard various proposed alliances among the GOP candidates, but there is one path to stopping Trump I haven't heard. Rubio/Cruz. Rubio and Cruz would need to make up and I don't know the level of animosity between the two.
It may make the supporters of both men head's explode.
It would give people sympathetic to the anti-establishment message a place to go with Cruz and satisfy the establishment side, as they would suddenly find Cruz's softer side.
The kicker would be what percentage of Cruz supporters would bolt to Trump?

Ron Winkleheimer said...

I don't need to be told that's personally hard and disruptive, but the anecdotes don't tell the whole story. In a dynamic economy those workers find new jobs, often better jobs.

Well, I have the one friend who delivers groceries, that gets him out of a cubicle, so in a way I guess that is better. And the other friend, who took up handy man work, lots of exercise. And the other guy who inspects gas mains or something. Clearly their years of study and the cost of attending university were well invested.

dreams said...

"Free trade and legal immigration are huge net positives for the improvement in the standard of living for all human beings."

Free trade is good, its the reason for human progress and so is some responsible legal immigration however we have a lot of illegal immigration and sanctuary cities with an insecure border and that isn't good, its suicidal.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

I guess he's the candidate for people for whom it wouldn't be "the first time in [their] adult lives [they'll] be proud of their country" if/when he's elected.

dreams said...

"I've heard various proposed alliances among the GOP candidates, but there is one path to stopping Trump I haven't heard. Rubio/Cruz. Rubio and Cruz would need to make up and I don't know the level of animosity between the two.
It may make the supporters of both men head's explode.
It would give people sympathetic to the anti-establishment message a place to go with Cruz and satisfy the establishment side, as they would suddenly find Cruz's softer side.
The kicker would be what percentage of Cruz supporters would bolt to Trump?"

One loser plus another loser equals a winner, yeah you and Jonah Goldberg have got the ticket.

Drago said...

Brando: "My one quibble is that if Trump did beat the odds and get elected, and failed and flip flopped miserably, there would be no disappointment from his fans because he would blithely claim that he actually was successful and they will believe it because they buy anything he's selling. Border wall? Look at this 300 feet of wall we just put up! And Mexico is paying for it, by which I mean we aren't giving them any extra foreign aid this year"

Unfortunately, that is a rough variant of what the Rep establishment has been telling us for years all the while selling us down the river on immigration. And I mean all the way down.

After which all these other policies everyone is yacking about will be settled "once and for all" in the dems favor and we'll never look back.

And I say this as a Cruz voter.

dreams said...

"I did not vote for Reagan in 1980 but I voted for him in 1984.
I did not vote for Bill Clinton in 1992 but I voted for him in 1996.
I did not vote for George W. Bush in 2000 but I voted for him in 2004.

I will not vote for Trump in 2016. But I might vote for him in 2020"

Gosh, you're in a rut, you just can't seem to get it right the first time.

Bay Area Guy said...

@Meade

I did not vote for Reagan in 1980 but I voted for him in 1984.

Yeah? Who did you vote for and why?

I did not vote for Bill Clinton in 1992 but I voted for him in 1996.

Yeah, who did you vote for and why?

I did not vote for George W. Bush in 2000 but I voted for him in 2004.

Yeah, who did you vote for and why?

Historically, you seem to be making the same mistake over and over again, but then just saddling up to the man in power, after the fact. Not too bad, but curious.

Brando said...

"Well, I have the one friend who delivers groceries, that gets him out of a cubicle, so in a way I guess that is better. And the other friend, who took up handy man work, lots of exercise. And the other guy who inspects gas mains or something. Clearly their years of study and the cost of attending university were well invested."

The thing is there's a lot of various issues involved with why so many people here are unemployed and underemployed--foreign competition, mis-education (e.g., college degree not necessary for the work you're doing), labor and technological efficiencies making it so businesses can get by with fewer employees, and government regulation making hiring and retaining people less attractive. All of those have to be addressed, and of course some can't be fixed (we're not un-inventing ATMs, for instance) but cutting off the flow of labor into this country isn't going to fix it (particularly if the labor we're cutting off are not going for the high competition jobs). In my last company I recall the big issue they were having was finding skilled employees, and getting HB1 visas for guest workers who could do the work--it wasn't like they were turning down native born workers to get the work done cheaper (not in that business).

I'd welcome a candidate who conveyed that they understood these issues and had some creative ideas for addressing them--from the Left we hear "higher minimum wages!" and "more spending on education!", from the Right we hear "cut taxes!" and from Trump we hear "build that fabulous wall!" Perhaps none of them know what to do so they just repeat their usual talking points which surprise surprise, tend to fit into their pre-existing political biases.

Americans are right to be pissed about this and depressed with these options.

Big Mike said...

'Wage busting' is not a thing.

You're wrong, and you don't know it. That's as good a working definition of ignorance as you'll find in a dictionary.

Brando said...

"Unfortunately, that is a rough variant of what the Rep establishment has been telling us for years all the while selling us down the river on immigration. And I mean all the way down.

After which all these other policies everyone is yacking about will be settled "once and for all" in the dems favor and we'll never look back.

And I say this as a Cruz voter."

I agree with all of that. My feelings towards Trump are in no way giving an excuse for the hucksters who begat him.

I Callahan said...

My one quibble is that if Trump did beat the odds and get elected, and failed and flip flopped miserably, there would be no disappointment from his fans because he would blithely claim that he actually was successful and they will believe it because they buy anything he's selling.

As someone who is not currently a Trump supporter, but who's keeping his options open, I have to concur with Paul and say that the above reeks of a bit of elitism. It's as if you can't possibly see why people are voting for Trump in droves, so your answer is that his supporters are completely blind. Your comments are usually more even-handed than this. Some of the erstwhile conservatives in this forum are starting to sound like the same liberals they've decried for elitism in the past.

That said - give the American electorate some credit. They've heard that they're stupid 100 times before, including when Reagan was elected. They were wrong then too.

If Trump wins, and turns out to be the lying blowhard he's being portrayed as, I will eat my words and complain like everyone else. Then he'll just be another politician who lied to us. However, what he's selling is more appealing than anything the other candidates (with the exception of Cruz) is selling. And if he can at least deliver partially on it, it will go a long way to helping to restore the republic we're losing.

rehajm said...

Clearly their years of study and the cost of attending university were well invested.

Lump of Labor Fallacy.

If your high skilled friends in can't seem to compete with foreigners in their little niche in the world, perhaps they aren't as skilled as they think?

Drago said...

Meade: "I did not vote for Reagan in 1980 but I voted for him in 1984.
I did not vote for Bill Clinton in 1992 but I voted for him in 1996.
I did not vote for George W. Bush in 2000 but I voted for him in 2004.
I will not vote for Trump in 2016. But I might vote for him in 2020"

Dreams: "Gosh, you're in a rut, you just can't seem to get it right the first time"

It's not working Meade.
It's just not working.
Every decision you've made relative to 'first time candidate voting' has been wrong.
Every first time vote you've cast has been the complete opposite of everything you thought it should be.
Every 'first time vote' political instinct you've manifested had to be corrected.

The election in 2016 is just in time for Meade to adopt a brand new strategy of doing precisely the opposite of what he thinks he should do!

And, like George Costanza in Seinfeld, there will be no telling what could happen from simple first step of doing the opposite!

You might even end up with an attractive and intelligent blonde who appreciates your "opposite-ness"!

Drago said...

Brando: "I agree with all of that. My feelings towards Trump are in no way giving an excuse for the hucksters who begat him"

To spend so much energy and strum and drang on the symptoms of the problem and not the root cause of the problem is simply folly.

Drago said...

Brando: "My feelings towards Trump are in no way giving an excuse for the hucksters who begat him."

And yet, operationally, your feelings towards Trump do give an excuse for the hucksters who begat him.

And operationally is really all that matters at this point.

Your choice will likely be Trump vs Clinton.

That's it. You go to "Election" with the slate of candidates you have, not the slate you with you had.

Choose.

Paul said...

"I must have touched a nerve. I guess you Trump fans hate "political correctness" but if anyone comments on your devotion to your hero-god, you get all sensitive. Perhaps you need to find a "safe space"."

Touched a nerve? No you projected your condescending fantasy of what a Trump voter must be according to the parameters of your narrow minded and petty little world view and got called on it.

Again for the purpose of trying valiantly to penetrate the substrate of cement between your ears Trump's failure to perform in office will lead to the profound disappointment and disgust of every Trump voter I know. And I know a lot of them so kindly fuck off.

Michael said...

I have friends who are huge Cruz supporters who swear they will not vote if Trump is the candidate. I believe they will change their minds, hope they will. Because mounting high horses named Smug or Sanctimony will get them nowhere.

Brando said...

"It's as if you can't possibly see why people are voting for Trump in droves, so your answer is that his supporters are completely blind."

Fair enough, and I appreciate your addressing what you disagree with in my post. I do understand why people support Trump (even if I don't) because like them I'm fed up with the way the GOP and Washington in general have been doing the same old same old. I also get that when someone charismatic (and he is) validates you, and mocks the people you think are looking down on you (and many are) it is invigorating. My problem with those fans, though, is that while they've picked this horse to ride, it really does seem as though none of the serious problems raised about the man are being challenged on the merits--his background, his character, judgment and temperament, and the specifics of what he proposes (or unproposes when he changes his tune). When one's supporters seem to latch onto faith in the leader rather than reasoned counterarguments, it seems senseless to me.

"If Trump wins, and turns out to be the lying blowhard he's being portrayed as, I will eat my words and complain like everyone else."

Likewise, if he gets elected and governs wisely, I'd happily eat my words.

Brando said...

"Again for the purpose of trying valiantly to penetrate the substrate of cement between your ears Trump's failure to perform in office will lead to the profound disappointment and disgust of every Trump voter I know. And I know a lot of them so kindly fuck off."

What a thoughtful, reasoned response. I guess that's all you have so I won't waste time responding to you further.

Jason said...

I am not sure where she is going to find a Democrat both prominent enough, and with a lower IQ than she.

Massachusetts.


You certainly won't find her on the Rez.

Drago said...

Brando: "My problem with those fans, though, is that while they've picked this horse to ride, it really does seem as though none of the serious problems raised about the man are being challenged on the merits--his background, his character, judgment and temperament, and the specifics of what he proposes (or unproposes when he changes his tune)."

Which is not evidence of something lacking in Trumps supporters but instead is an astonishingly profound statement pertaining to the willful and purposeful "failure" of the republican establishment.

And that is where your attention should be focused.

Brando said...

"And yet, operationally, your feelings towards Trump do give an excuse for the hucksters who begat him."

I don't think my feelings are quite so influential! But of course when it is all said and done we do have to choose with the choices we have, ugly as those choices may be.

Jason said...

This Trump acceptance speech was at a Fleischman-Kincaid Grade Level of 3.2.

I'm starting to worry about this. I have run many texts of his interviews and speeches through the grade-level analyzer, and the highest has been 6th grade.


That's a feature, not a bug.

Problem is, for all their 'education,' too many Americans haven't figured this out.

Smart people can speak plainly and directly. In short sentences.

It's dumb people and confused people who can't.

Drago said...

Brando: "What a thoughtful, reasoned response. I guess that's all you have so I won't waste time responding to you further"

Well, to be fair, according to you that other poster, being a Trump supporter, supposedly lacks the facilities for a "thoughtful, reasoned" response.

Paul said...

" Some of the erstwhile conservatives in this forum are starting to sound like the same liberals they've decried for elitism in the past."

I continue to beat the drum that rigid ideologues of either stripe inhabit the same arrested emotional terrain.

Mike said...

Trump draws from the Reagan Democrat pool too, which scares the Hildebeast. She knows the Democrats have turned their collective backs on the blue collar worker, and she's stuck in toeing the Obama line to keep him from drip-drip-dripping her lousy approach to national security (secret server!). She's hugging him so tight there's no daylight between POTUS and his former SoS. No daylight: all-in on Black Lives Smatter, talking in her bad negro dialect again, repudiating every single policy victory of the Bill Clinton presidency, throwing the fake hate on her erstwhile buds on Wall Street. Most of these are positions she will reverse in the Fall should she be nominated.

But Trump has benefited from being a known entity, from his dozen or so years on The Apprentice. The lame-ass media hit-jobs that routinely sink Republicans do not work on him. He rejects the premise. In fact all their premises. His support is as much appreciation of the issues he's staked out -- especially illegal immigration -- as it is his ability to project a big FUCK YOU to the two ruling parties. To R's he says "I'm a bigger better Republican than the idiots running the party." The votes validate that. (And I appreciate it having been burned by the weak-spined R's over and over to a hellishly frustrating degree.) To D's he says, "I played the game and paid the Danegeld but the Democrats are out of ideas and out of viable candidates. Look at them!" There's plenty of disaffected Democrats too who are sick of this stagnant economy and the Black Messiah bowing to dictators while letting the third world flood us with refugees and unaccompanied minors in a bid to drive wages down even more and cultivate a new voter class. Obama's decision to fire the voters he had and bring in new ones ain't panning out for the Dowager Empress of Chappaqua. Although she could still be the nominee, she fears facing the fearless Trump who does not play by The Rules and will ruthlessly attack her from now to November.

Brando said...

"Which is not evidence of something lacking in Trumps supporters but instead is an astonishingly profound statement pertaining to the willful and purposeful "failure" of the republican establishment."

If there is a silver lining here, it may be a cleansing of the rot that led to all this. I have to think next time someone tries to raise $100 million to blow it on paid ads and consultants and come up with Jeb's results, the money won't be forthcoming.

Birkel said...

Please, all of you who say I must support the GOP nominee, tell me one thing you expect Trump to accomplish if he is elected.

He says, variously, that he will build a wall and have Mexico pay for it. Place your markers now.
He says very little else that is specific, so I ask you to place your markers, now, on the accomplishments we will see that "Make America Great Again".

As a believer in the proper constraints of Constitutional governance, a neo-Federalist if you will, what policies should I expect that will return America to her proper footing?

Enough with the horse race bull shit.
Policy specifics or Cult of Personality -- choose.

Bay Area Guy said...

The closest analogy I can think of for this election is 1992, if Perot had run as a Republican, and upset GHW Bush, to win the GOP nomination.

There is a large segment of the electorate who are unhappy with the status quo, and unhappy with both parties. They seem to have found their voice with the Donald.

Memo to the anti-Trump members of the esteemed Commentariat

It'll take a little but of adjusting, but give it some time. Focus your wrath on the thought of Hillary winning the election, cementing Obamacare and Amnesty into law, and appointing some leftist wacko professor to the Supreme Court, to overturn Heller (famous 2nd Amendment precedent).

That will focus your thoughts.

Learnin' to love Trump!

Brando said...

"Well, to be fair, according to you that other poster, being a Trump supporter, supposedly lacks the facilities for a "thoughtful, reasoned" response."

And he goes and proves my point. I've heard much better arguments on Trump's behalf from Cruz supporters, interestingly enough.

hombre said...

The mediaswine are sandbagging Trump. Once he gets the nomination they will ravage him with the oppo research.

They don't have to sway hardcore Trumpadopes. They only need to convince about 15-20% of the electorate. Child's play.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

You know, it occurs to me watching Trump (on CNN with the sound off in the elevator) that he seems like he's enjoying himself, having a good time. Obama seemed like he had a good time campaigning. So, really, did GWBush. Bill Clinton did, for sure. John Kerry didn't. Mitt Romney, kinda. Al Gore, no.

Does Hillary seem to be having a good time on the campaign trail?

HoodlumDoodlum said...

My cynical mind still goes back to the 2012 election. I think that was the moment to turn things around. It wasn't all that close! It seems too late, now.

rehajm said...

'Wage busting' is not a thing.

You're wrong, and you don't know it. That's as good a working definition of ignorance as you'll find in a dictionary.


You want a name at least call it what it is- government sponsored market intervention and price controls of labor markets.

Wage and price controls bad for workers. And you don't know it. That fits your definition of ignorance, too.

The Cracker Emcee said...

" In my last company I recall the big issue they were having was finding skilled employees, and getting HB1 visas for guest workers who could do the work--it wasn't like they were turning down native born workers to get the work done cheaper"

They weren't training native-born workers either, were they? As much as I despise the 'Crats I do think that owning a business here, like being a citizen here, entails certain resposibilities to the community beyond just paying your taxes and subjecting your employees to an annual United Way drive. America is not a fucking trough.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

If your high skilled friends in can't seem to compete with foreigners in their little niche in the world, perhaps they aren't as skilled as they think?

So there is no advantage to being an American citizen living in the USA at all?

That seems to be your contention. That Americans just need to get used to competing with people who are being imported from overseas and housed six to an apartment and are unable to switch employers and are paid a fraction of what the job was formerly paying.

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/asia-pacific/india/131210/the-indian-tech-worker-h-1b-visa-scam

Did you know that half of the graduates of STEM programs don't actually get jobs in STEM fields?

If the social compact in the United States is going to hold then the wealthy and government elites are going to have to take into account the interests of all the citizens, not just the ones who benefit from cheaper labor.

Sigivald said...

But let me tell you Mexico is going to pay for the wall, right? It’s going to happen.

Because they just will so shut up!

As God is my witness, the man almost makes me want to see Hillary Clinton win.

(And I say this as someone who was willing to vote for that hack McCain, with nose-holding, in a pinch.

On the plus side, at least he won't have a magical Congress willing to do anything he says, so it won't be a total train-wreck; this is also our hope for salvation if we get the alternate terrible outcome of a Sanders win.)

Birkel said...

Please, all of you who say I must support the GOP nominee, tell me one thing you expect Trump to accomplish if he is elected.

He says, variously, that he will build a wall and have Mexico pay for it. Place your markers now.
He says very little else that is specific, so I ask you to place your markers, now, on the accomplishments we will see that "Make America Great Again".

As a believer in the proper constraints of Constitutional governance, a neo-Federalist if you will, what policies should I expect that will return America to her proper footing?

Enough with the horse race bull shit.
Policy specifics or Cult of Personality -- choose.

(second attempt)

I Callahan said...

My problem with those fans, though, is that while they've picked this horse to ride, it really does seem as though none of the serious problems raised about the man are being challenged on the merits--his background, his character, judgment and temperament, and the specifics of what he proposes (or unproposes when he changes his tune). When one's supporters seem to latch onto faith in the leader rather than reasoned counterarguments, it seems senseless to me.

OK, this is where the disconnect is. The only counterpoint I can make is that all of the candidates, and all politicians in general, have character / background / judgment / temperament issues of some kind. Politicians are just good at hiding it from the public. You have to be an egotistical maniac to be a politician anyway. As for specifics, he has them, and they're on his website.

My point is this: it's not faith in Trump as much as it is lack of faith in anyone else running. Maybe that's unfair to the others, but for years voters have heard from the GOP that they will make changes, and they don't even try. Personally, I don't think Trump could possibly be worse than Sanders or Clinton, even if he waffles on all of his promises.

rehajm said...

Oh, you are talking about theoretical "free trade" and "legal" immigration! I had no idea you were talking about fairy tales about some mythical world. Carry on!

You want to get persnickety, Tim? Fine. I'll stand by the real world 'trade' and 'immigration', too.

Brando said...

"The only counterpoint I can make is that all of the candidates, and all politicians in general, have character / background / judgment / temperament issues of some kind. Politicians are just good at hiding it from the public."

That's fair--normally by the end of primary season it comes down to who you despise the least. I had my issues with Romney but in the end figured he was the right man for the time, and if he had just been a better politician he might have pulled it off (though close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades).

"Personally, I don't think Trump could possibly be worse than Sanders or Clinton, even if he waffles on all of his promises."

Hillary I fear the worst of all, because her lawlessness means she won't be constrained by any balance of power and the media is less likely to turn on her.

Phil 3:14 said...

I hate the elites.

That's why I'm voting for Trump.

rehajm said...

So manipulating the supply of labor within national borders by ignoring the interests of the citizens within those borders to serve the interest of large political donors is not a thing? Who knew?

The best way to stop people from gaming the H1B program is to get rid of the H1B program. Let any high skilled worker stay.

It's also a great way to protect the interests of the citizens.

Birkel said...

Please, all of you who say I must support the GOP nominee, tell me one thing you expect Trump to accomplish if he is elected.

He says, variously, that he will build a wall and have Mexico pay for it. Place your markers now.
He says very little else that is specific, so I ask you to place your markers, now, on the accomplishments we will see that "Make America Great Again".

As a believer in the proper constraints of Constitutional governance, a neo-Federalist if you will, what policies should I expect that will return America to her proper footing?

Enough with the horse race bull shit.
Policy specifics or Cult of Personality -- choose.

(third attempt)

rehajm said...

It's also a great way to protect the interests of the citizens.

When I wrote this I assumed 'interests of the citizens' meant good jobs wth good wages and salaries, and higher standards of living.

Based on the pushback Im getting that might have been an inaccurate assumption.

Q said...

Free trade and legal immigration are huge net positives for the improvement in the standard of living for all human beings.

America does not enjoy free trade with many countries, including most of those in Asia. You're using "free trade" to mean nothing more than "trade I personally like", not in any technical sense. Currency manipulation as practiced by our trade partners is an even more effective way of distorting the market than are tariffs.

Q said...

When I wrote this I assumed 'interests of the citizens' meant good jobs wth good wages and salaries, and higher standards of living.

Based on the pushback Im getting that might have been an inaccurate assumption.



Stop the pompous, pretentious nonsense. You're not defending anything more noble and principled than your own personal best interests, in the service of which you are perfectly happy to screw over large numbers of other people.

Lydia said...

"Who could Trump have as his VP that would put him over the top? One of the other presidential candidates? Another non-politician?"

Governor Susana Martinez.


Yep.

traditionalguy said...

Trump doesn't have to detail every move he will need to make as President to restore American greatness just to give Birkle the chance to ridicule him. The only plan The Donald needs to promise to do is revert the Federal Government to being a law abiding institution, and to fire every incompetent and corrupt insider pig at the trough.

The rest is up to the people's representatives in Congress to trade off slush funds for their friends. Trump is not running for the Dictator.

That's about it.

rehajm said...

Stop the pompous, pretentious nonsense. You're not defending anything more noble and principled than your own personal best interests, in the service of which you are perfectly happy to screw over large numbers of other people.

No. I'm seeing too many supposedly conservative voices getting it wrong.

damikesc said...

but cutting off the flow of labor into this country isn't going to fix it (particularly if the labor we're cutting off are not going for the high competition jobs).

It's not like companies are not profitable. Some make crazy money. And Silicon Valley STILL imports H1B visas and ignores American workers. They conspire to fix wages at a low level.

Why should American unskilled workers get the shaft because a foreign one will work for less money? Our policies, first and foremost, should benefit American citizens. Not companies. Certainly not "the world". Us. They should benefit US.

If your high skilled friends in can't seem to compete with foreigners in their little niche in the world, perhaps they aren't as skilled as they think?

Disney has been caught firing American and forcing them to train their foreign replacements.

Are these Americans suddenly incompetent? If so, why are they being forced to train the ones taking their jobs or risk losing their separation package?

If you can hire two equally qualified people, but one you can pay far less and you basically control his visa and ability to remain in the country --- well, it'll be hard for anybody to be talented to overcome that.

Please, all of you who say I must support the GOP nominee, tell me one thing you expect Trump to accomplish if he is elected.

You get Trump or Hillary. Those are your choices.

For all of your misgivings about Trump, where, exactly, will Hillary be better than him?

Will she be more open and transparent? That's a no.
Less corrupt? Fuck no.
Are her policies BETTER? No.
Any more detailed? Also no.

cubanbob said...

I'm a Cruz guy. No matter what the results of Super Tuesday I'm voting for Cruz in my primary.
That said, if Trump is the nominee and it looks like he will be, I will vote for him in the general and I will enjoy the spectacle of his flaying of Hillary and the left during the campaign and during the debates. With Trump the key thing for those conservative anti-Trump voters is to make sure you show up and vote a straight Republican ticket and for the most conservative member of Congress you can. Trump isn't stupid and if he is kept on a reasonable leash by a Conservative majority Congress he won't become a second Arnold Schwarzenegger.

For all the Trump bashers here (and I'm occasionally one of them) the simple reality is there will be an election in November and the Democrat candidate will either be an out, loud and proud Communist or a grifter, criminal, traitor and limousine champagne sipping barely in disguised Communist. No matter what, Trump will not be as bad as the Democrat. One of the fun things about a President Trump is that when ex-President Obama starts with his nasty comments on the current president Trump won't be W, he will rip Obama to shreds along with any leftists. I just hope Trump if elected chooses his cabinet and agency officers wisely and picks someone who Conservatives like as his VP. Heck if Trump offers to nominate Cruz to replace Scalia I'll send him a campaign donation.

Birkel said...

damikesc:
You offer horse race bull shit. I already know all that bull shit and I assume I will get the same results I have not liked in the past.

traditionalguy:
Your opinions are worthless. I will mock you relentlessly when, yet again, I am correct on these matters.

Brando said...

"Trump doesn't have to detail every move he will need to make as President to restore American greatness just to give Birkle the chance to ridicule him. The only plan The Donald needs to promise to do is revert the Federal Government to being a law abiding institution, and to fire every incompetent and corrupt insider pig at the trough."

No reasonable person expects intricate details down to the letter, but if someone is promising to make the country better it's not too much to ask for some specifics as to how this will get done. Obama made vague promises to get past partisanship, bring in technocrats and improve America, and later we discovered that meant a mess of a health care plan, tossing money at Reid and Pelosi's pet projects, and a set of financial regulations that would not have prevented the last crisis and certainly won't prevent the next one. I don't think it's unfair to drill down a least a little more.

rehajm said...

America does not enjoy free trade with many countries, including most of those in Asia.

Fine. I'll just call it 'trade' then. Trade and immigration are huge net positives for the improvement in the standard of living for all human beings. Still good for American workers.


Shape Shifter said...

Build the Wall, Grow the Economy, Strengthen our Military, Secure our Nation, Support our Police, Enforce our Laws, Follow the Constitution....all other issues take a back seat. TRUMP '16

Birkel said...

Shape Shifter:

I have you down for "Cult of Personality" so thank you for the input.

Q said...

Adam Smith and David Ricardo made the case for free trade centuries ago, and they've never been refuted.

I doubt if you've ever read either of those mens work. Adam Smith did not share your worshipful attitude towards businessmen, of whom he said:


"The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order, ought always to be listened to with great precaution, and ought never to be adopted till after having been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most suspicious attention. It comes from an order of men, whose interest is never exactly the same with that of the public, who have generally an interest to deceive and even oppress the public, and who accordingly have, upon many occasions, both deceived and oppressed it."

Q said...

Fine. I'll just call it 'trade' then.

So you're admitting you support mercantillist trade? That's still "trade", after all.

Drago said...

Birkel: "Enough with the horse race bull shit.
Policy specifics or Cult of Personality -- choose."

Again, why are these the only 2 choices offered?

Why can't it be "policy specifics OR Cult of personality OR appropriately timed Protest Movement against leadership that is open cahoots with the Dems anyway OR (insert other options here)"?

And besides, at this point who even cares?

The probable likelihood now of a Trump Primary victory (tough on me as a Cruz supporter) reveals the only remaining relevant question: Trump vs Clinton?

So, which shall it be? If you say neither, Hillary thanks you in advance for your operational support of her candidacy.

Birkel said...

Q:

What you quoted was about something other than "free" trade. If you take the "free" out of free trade, doubtless there are innumerable criticisms.

But then, that is hardly a point of discussion.

Szoszolo said...

"This Trump acceptance speech was at a Fleischman-Kincaid Grade Level of 3.2."

Half the people in this country have double-digit IQs. Trump can be understood by everyone. That's smart campaigning.

Birkel said...

Drago:

When I want condescension, I'll know where to come next time.

My premise, never addressed, is that the Leviathan State must be thwarted. Fine, comments sections on the Althouse blog are a bad place to make thoughtful suggestions. But at least consider the issue that I have been raising repeatedly.

Birkel said...

Szoszolo:

I agree completely.

tim in vermont said...

"Pure unadulterated bullshit. You're a real condescending prick aren't you? But you have a lot of company here."

Sigh... Home sweet home page.

Matt said...

Trump = Mao. The idea that poorly educated are better because they are more wholesome and hard working and real compared to the elite is a Marxist idea. How the heck are Republicans falling for this absurdity? Also, tell me, WHO ever claims to be uneducated? Do people voluntarily stand up or rise their hand to claim they are poorly educated?

Meade said...

"Do people voluntarily stand up or rise their hand to claim they are poorly educated?"

Mostly we just fail to proofread.

Anglelyne said...

Birkel:

Enough with the horse race bull shit.
Policy specifics or Cult of Personality -- choose.


What policy specifics are you expecting your preferred candidate to translate straight from campaign position papers to law? Rhetorical question, he can't. What specific policy goals re given issues will the candidate pursue? You don't have to answer that, either, because I'm not that lazy, and I don't expect you to do my homework for me. I can look these things up myself, and I have.

I believe the "fallacy of policy specifics" has been discussed in these parts.

("Build a wall" is campaign rhetoric, not a "policy specific", since no president has the unilateral power to do any such thing. All it does is signal a seriousness about border security, which voters can evaluate relative to the expressed policy goals of other candidates.)

(third attempt)

You do know how to look up candidates' position papers on various issues, don't you? I'm afraid you'll find them all very general, even when they're making a pretense of specificity.

Big Mike said...

You want a name at least call it what it is- government sponsored market intervention and price controls of labor markets.

In other words, wage busting. I've seen it numerous times, nearly always government sponsored, but that is probably because at the times I've seen it, it was done on a government contract with the full complicity of the government.

Wage and price controls bad for workers. And you don't know it. That fits your definition of ignorance, too.

I do know about wage and price controls; I was working for a government contractor back during the Nixon controls. The issues are well-understood by me at a personal level and not at an abstract or theoretical level.

And who the hell are these STEM workers that can't find jobs? GE would love to talk to them.

But what if the fired workers aren't located where GE has those jobs? Will GE pay their relocation expenses? What if they can't leave the area because of their spouse's job? Or because they provide support for a sick relative? Or because the area where GE has those jobs has a much higher cost of living? Or because they can't sell their house after wholesale firings have left the real estate market glutted with unsold houses?

It's one thing to be an IT person in an area where there are lots of IT jobs (or a textile worker in an area where there are lots of textile-related jobs or a woodworker in that part of North Carolina where so much furniture is made). I spent well over 40 years in a part of the country -- the Washington metropolitan area -- where there is always a surplus of high tech job openings over qualified workers. So if I lost my job (and massive layoffs are a way of life in the Washington metro area as contracts are completed or canceled by the government with nearly no notice) I could have found one as good or better the day after I received my notice. Silicon Valley is like that, and so is Austin, TX. Doesn't work that way in other parts of the country.

Birkel said...

Drago:

Further, Drago, without policy specifics one can only be supporting a Cult of Personality. That is where we are.

I am not advocating, just observing. And your Hillary Clinton threats bother me not in the slightest. I doubt I'll be around to see the death throes of this nation. And I have enough wherewithal to avoid the worst of it. Some will not be so lucky.

Birkel said...

Anglelyne:

Nothing you said was useful. Thanks for playing.

If there's not even a head fake toward the most pressing, underlying issues of the day then there won't be any forthcoming policies if elected.

Matt said...

Meade
Point taken. You're an elitist who pretends to be 'simple folk'. Some Republicans like Mao's message....

Anglelyne said...

Q: I doubt if you've ever read either of those mens work.

That would be the way to bet.

Jonathan Graehl said...

Obvious Idiocracy reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGUNPMPrxvA

I'm not afraid of President Trump. I think he'd be a fine president. What I'm afraid of is what happens 40 years from now when everyone is using his tactics; I think it won't just cancel out; the fact that everyone is playing that way will get the wrong people voting for the wrong reasons.

Then again I can't really in principle object to a government representing the values of its people. I grew up believing that's the only correct government and still do. What I hope for is that the system of government can have a chance of actually optimizing those values. Asking the electorate to choose specific policy options is insane given the complexity of our modern system.

dreams said...

"Half the people in this country have double-digit IQs. Trump can be understood by everyone. That's smart campaigning."

And a lot of us think that we can get some of those Democrats to vote for Trump.

rehajm said...

But what if the fired workers aren't located where GE has those jobs? Will GE pay their relocation expenses? What if they can't leave the area because of their spouse's job? Or because they provide support for a sick relative? Or because the area where GE has those jobs has a much higher cost of living? Or because they can't sell their house after wholesale firings have left the real estate market glutted with unsold houses?

Man up and figure it out.

Welcome to the market economy.

Q said...

If there's not even a head fake toward the most pressing, underlying issues of the day then there won't be any forthcoming policies if elected.

What do you think are the most pressing, underlying issues of the day? Because Trump has had plenty to say about trade and immigration. Your not liking what he's saying is not the same thing as him not saying it.

Q said...

Man up and figure it out.

Welcome to the market economy.



You're writing words but not actually saying anything. The "market economy" is not identical with the desires of employers, and no free market economist has ever claimed it was.

tim in vermont said...

The idea that poorly educated are better because they are more wholesome and hard working and real compared to the elite is a Marxist idea.

Well isn't it fun to take people completely out of context! He included lots of groups in his declaration of love, he just felt like throwing a little extra on the people the Democrats piss on day in day out, thread in, thread out. Just look upthread to see.

Anglelyne said...

Birkel:

Nothing you said was useful. Thanks for playing.

If there's not even a head fake toward the most pressing, underlying issues of the day then there won't be any forthcoming policies if elected.


That's an impressively pompous way of saying that you'd rather scratch your ass and babble about "cults of personality" than take the trouble to compare a few easily accessible position papers.

Q said...

And who the hell are these STEM workers that can't find jobs? GE would love to talk to them.

How would you know what GE would love? The normal business practice of large American corporations is to regard American workers as the last resort. They give first preference to non-American workers.

William Chadwick said...

If that's true, Trump must ADORE garage mahal.

Drago said...

Birkel: "Drago: When I want condescension, I'll know where to come next time."

In your mirror in the morning as you prepare to go about your day?

Birkel: "Further, Drago, without policy specifics one can only be supporting a Cult of Personality. That is where we are."

You are wrong. I can see that you become quite indignant when others refuse to play in your rhetorical sandbox.

Birkel: "I am not advocating, just observing. And your Hillary Clinton threats bother me not in the slightest."

Note to self: Simply observing that it's likely to be a Clinton/Trump matchup at the end constitutes a "threat" in Birkel-world.

Birkel: "I doubt I'll be around to see the death throes of this nation. And I have enough wherewithal to avoid the worst of it. Some will not be so lucky."

Well, that was relevant.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 262   Newer› Newest»