November 10, 2016

Stories that begin "Trump Won Because" and name some specific thing can't be right.

Here's an example, from Reason.com, which might make some good points, but it's just annoyingly overstated: "Trump Won Because Leftist Political Correctness Inspired a Terrifying Backlash/What every liberal who didn't see this coming needs to understand."

And over in the sidebar, I see: "Trump Didn't Win Because He's Trump. He Won Because Clinton Is Clinton/While many will call this a mandate for Donald Trump, it's better read as an anti-mandate for Hillary Clinton."

Other "Trump won because" headlines I'm seeing:

"Donald Trump Won Because of Facebook" — New York Magazine.

"Trump won because college-educated Americans are out of touch" — a professor published in The Washington Post.

"Trump Won Because Democratic Party Failed Working People" — according to Bernie Sanders.

"Trump Won Because Of An ‘Under-Educated Electorate’" — according to Wendy Davis.

"Dear America, This Is Important -- Trump Did Not Win Because of Racism" — David French at The National Review contradicting Van Jones on CNN.

"Donald Trump won because he listened to the people" — a columnist at MarketWatch.

"Trump won because voters believed the system was corrupt. They were right" — a columnist at the UK Telegraph.

"Trump Won Because Voters Are Ignorant, Literally/Democracy is supposed to enact the will of the people. But what if the people have no clue what they’re doing?" — Foreign Policy.

181 comments:

n.n said...

Oh, wow. Round and round. Well, someone is right.

sean said...

Don't judge an article by its headline. The first linked article (which I thought was pretty good) only mentions backlash against political correctness as one factor, not as the sole factor, propelling Trump to victory.

holdfast said...

Trump won because he got more Electoral College votes.


And also space aliens.

buwaya said...

"Donald Trump won because he listened to the people" — a columnist at MarketWatch.

This is the most general and closest to a full explanation.

Nigel Tufnel said...

"Trump won because voters are ignorant."

Trial lawyers who blame the jury soon find other practice areas.

tcrosse said...

"Trump won because voters are ignorant."
Adlai Stevenson used to say that about Ike.
You run a campaign with the electorate you've got.

Fritz said...

n.n said...
Oh, wow. Round and round. Well, someone is right.


Not necessarily. In an election with a tight outcome, that is to say, almost every presidential election, any factor that contributes to one's votes at the expense of his opponent's can probably said to be the reason he/she won. The winner is the person that puts the most of those together, so many or all can be right, and thus, in a weird way, wrong at the same time. There probably is no single decisive factor.

Greek Donkey said...

NPR is doing a series of stories about what a Trump presidency will look like. Spoiler alert: it doesn't look good to them.

Remember when news was news and not speculation and fluff and feelings?

exiledonmainstreet said...

I listened to NPR on the way home (yes, for the tears) but they had two quite interesting stories.

One was about the significantly lower turnout among millennials. They (and blacks) were so fucking terrified of a racist super dictator taking over America that they didn't bother to get their asses to the polls on Tuesday.

The other story of interest was about a startup company in San Fran whose online poll was startlingly accurate in comparison to the others. (I'm sorry I can't recall the name of it.) They had predicted a Trump victory weeks ahead of time based on the tremendous demographic shifts they were seeing.

According to their data points:
95% of registered Republicans said they would vote for Trump.
Only 55% - 55%! - of registered Democrats said they would vote for Hillary.
40% of registered Dems ended up voting for Trump - and the majority of them had voted for Obama in '08 and '12. Then, apparently, they mysteriously turned racist.
Most amazingly, of the registered Dem voters who crossed over to vote for Trump, a majority were women.

Actually the most amazing thing was that NPR reported this. It interferes with the racist white man narrative the MSM is pushing.

Libs, you want to blame someone for Trump? Look at yourselves.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Success has many fathers...

Oso Negro said...

Damn. And here I thought he won because he won states totalling more than 270 electoral college votes.

Mark said...

In the general election, before you ever got to the Republican nominee, whoever it was, you had the overriding and critical imperative of stopping Hillary and Clintonism. That took priority over all other considerations.

If you want to gauge the amount of actual pro-Trump support, then you need to ask not why he won the election, but why he got the nomination.

Gahrie said...

The Republican vote totals over the last three presidential elections are nearly identical. The Democrats have lost nearly 10.5 million voters since 2008.

glenn said...

Helpful hint: It wasn't the Republicans who dumbed down the schools so little Bobby and little Betty could keep up.

Mark said...

One was about the significantly lower turnout among millennials.

Well before summer 2015, most of the under-30 crowd could say, "Who the hell is Hillary Clinton and why does she think that she automatically is entitled to my vote?" Those with little knowledge or memory of 1991-2001 had no reason to cheer for her coronation or otherwise get excited about her. Meanwhile, the vast majority of people who were of age to be politically minded in the 90s thought either openly or secretly in the back of their minds that she should just go the hell away and leave the country in peace.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

ExileD,

How'd that ub-lib lamestream media work for you v con media and actual journalism?

That sort of media environment is what produced Ronnie. W/ todays many professional cons, we got DJT.

Just sayin'

Mark said...

the majority of them had voted for Obama in '08 and '12. Then, apparently, they mysteriously turned racist.

Trump got a higher percentage of the black vote than usual.

With respect to that racism charge, for anyone paying attention the last several years, I don't think there is anyone who could cite to Trump ever saying something negative about blacks. He did, of course, have some strong words with respect to immigration (which would involve Hispanics and Muslims). And a lot of blacks do not buy into or appreciate when that "racist" label is applied with respect to non-black minorities. And most blacks DEFINITELY do not like the pro-LBGT agenda be equated to the civil rights struggle.

Fandor said...

TRUMP WON because HE KNEW WHAT WAS IN THE HEARTS of AMERICANS and vocalized it to a tune we could all (or most of us) could dance to.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

"I don't think there is anyone who could cite to Trump ever saying something negative about blacks."

Doesn't he still say the Central Park Blacks are guilty even though the DNA and the actual perpetrator say otherwise?

Likewise, didn't he like fussing about POTUS Blackenstein being from a Kenyan usurper?

Anywho, maybe he never said any of that.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

"TRUMP WON because HE KNEW WHAT WAS IN THE HEARTS of AMERICANS and vocalized it to a tune we could all (or most of us) could dance to."

Is this the rat thread? Anywho, this pied piper POV makes sense.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Also, does "(or most of us)", no longer mean most of us?

Check your vote count.

Just sayin.

Bay Area Guy said...

I'll give it try:

Trump Won because:

1. Our Founding Fathers had the deep insight to create the Electoral College, rather than a pure democratic vote based on majority rules.

2. A small segment of heroic, rural, union, brethren in Wisc, Penn and Michigan, basically said,"F&ck it, we're going with the Donald.

God Bless 'em. The Deer Hunter wedding scene

David Begley said...

Trump won because of the industrial Midwest. Winning Wisconsin was the key. And I wrote here that Wisconsin would lead the way for the Republic.

David Begley said...

Bay Area Guy.

Right you are. If it was a pure popular vote, only NY, CA, TX and FL would count. Run up the score in the big states.

Just now, Trump won AZ's 11 EC votes.

exiledonmainstreet said...

"How'd that ub-lib lamestream media work for you v con media and actual journalism?"

NPR is doing Monday morning quarterbacking now. They weren't engaged in doing much "actual journalism" before the election.

"That sort of media environment is what produced Ronnie. W/ todays many professional cons, we got DJT."

It's funny because what I am hearing now from the "ub-lib lamestream media" sounds an awful lot like what they were saying about Reagan after the '80 election. "He's an old fool who's going to persecute black people and start WWIII!!" I was a liberal then and that's what I thought too, although it never occurred to me to go out and burn the flag and scream at the clouds because of it.
Social media has simply magnified and intensified the hysteria.



Tyrone Slothrop said...

A few of these pieces have been incisive, but by far the majority are along the lines, "We just didn't understand what idiots the American people are!" So, let me tell you why Trump won. Good-hearted Americans were just tired of being called racist, sexist, homophobic bigots by the mental midgets with degrees who think they're better than the rest of us. That's it.

Mark said...

"the Central Park Blacks"

OK, I had to google that. So apparently after a woman was brutally raped and left in a coma, five suspects who were arrested confessed to the crimes. Trump took out an ad condemning the vicious attack that the defendants had confessed to. The defendants were later convicted. Apparently four of the defendants were black (even though you lumped them all together as black -- apparently all persons of color look alike to you).

So are you saying that if the defendants were white, he would have been perfectly fine with this vicious attack that left a woman nearly dead?

What about you, do you not care about this woman? Are you an apologist for rape? What the hell kind of woman-hater are you? These anti-woman comments from you are disgusting.

coupe said...

Trump won because Jeb Bush was low energy, even though they already punched his ticket and gave him millions.

traditionalguy said...

Trump won because he offered competent fighter to be leader to Americans who had been sold out by the Bush Family's charade to a European New World Order, and next had been turned over by the GOP Congressmen to Obama's mercies to lead them.

Once they trusted him, Trump had all the loyal warriors he needed. Lincoln's Army of the North had been a loser until he appointed a winner to lead them in 1863 at about the same time the Southern Army lost its leader, the blue eyed Presbyterian fighter named Jackson.

Achilles said...

Not one mention of globalism and out of touch elites, urban vs. rural, borders, culture. etc. This wasn't ideological or racial. This was tribal. The paradigms could not be farther apart.

The closest you can come to describing it is patricianism vs. individualism.

There are a lot of people who want a big government/corporate patrician class to take care of them. They like big companies where you go to work and you get what you get and the government fills in the cracks. A small technocratic elite manages and directs and a permanent underclass goes with the flow. Both parties subscribe to this model. They just change the deck chairs a little.

There is no room for small business or individuals to make their own life in that model. This was the entrepreneurs and individuals given a voice. Globalism and unfettered immigration are the fulcrum's of this conflict.

Mark said...

Meanwhile, that well-known racist newspaper, the New York Times, reported, “The youths who raped and savagely beat a young investment banker as she jogged in Central Park Wednesday night were part of a loosely organized gang of 32 schoolboys whose random, motiveless assaults terrorized at least eight other people over nearly two hours, senior police investigators said yesterday.”

Those Times reporters are regular Klansmen for saying that about the "Central Park Five," aren't they?

Farmer said...

According to their data points:

40% of registered Dems ended up voting for Trump


Not exactly. 40% of the app users pledged - on the app - to vote for Trump.

dreams said...

Here is another story for your list.

"Classes Being Canceled Because Trump Won Is Why Trump Won"

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/442083/donald-trump-school-closing-2016

Mark said...

You want to know how and why Trump got at least some of his votes?

It was because of POS's like this PB&J guy who kept trying to slime Trump with these BS attacks, which led some people out of a sense of fairness to defend him.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Mark,

Go back to your google machine. You missed an awful lot. [Maybe you were using Bing.]

Achilles said...

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...
Also, does "(or most of us)", no longer mean most of us?

Check your vote count.


We have. A couple corrupt blue states inflated Clinton's vote totals. There are millions of illegal votes in her total from California and New York and Illinois. They almost flipped Florida with "New" hispanic voters. This is one of the reasons why we have an electoral college to insulate us from election fraud.

Jon Ericson said...

MILO visits media row at the Trump victory party

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Ach,

There were times during the election where I worried DJT wouldn't work out as a dependable TPer-R. But, the market is signaling his bank deregulation, and other deregulation, and tax cuts for rich folks, and to hell w/ the deficit POV.

So, it's cool.

exiledonmainstreet said...

So, it's cool.

11/10/16, 7:07 PM

LOL, yeah, I'm sure you're all cool with it.

Really.

Jupiter said...

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...
"Doesn't he still say the Central Park Blacks are guilty even though the DNA and the actual perpetrator say otherwise?"

Yo, Peanut! Guess what? They *were* guilty. Guilty as Hell! And they admitted it. And they described the crimes they committed on that poor woman's body in detail. And yes, they weren't the only ones. Most of the guilty got away. And no, they weren't all black. But they were all male. Does saying that make me a sexist, Peanut?

Oh, and BTW, Donald Trump won the last Presidential election in the United States of America. In case you hadn't heard. See ya later, Peanut!

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

JE,

What, exactly, is Milo's point?

Not sitting at banquet hall tables w/ shitty beer and ice-cream while watching TV is ???????

Wouldn't a more interesting take be to ask why each TV channel needed TV watching seating for what looked like at least fifty people? WTF would more than fifty people from each CNN and Fox sitting at tables watching a TV screen be doing, that's useful?

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

"LOL, yeah, I'm sure you're all cool with it.

Really."

You got me. Actually, I'm worried DJT will cut my food stamps. I guess it's back to dumpster diving.

exiledonmainstreet said...

According to their data points:

40% of registered Dems ended up voting for Trump

Not exactly. 40% of the app users pledged - on the app - to vote for Trump.

11/10/16, 6:58 PM

Thanks for clarifying that. I was listening while trying to maneuver in rush hour traffic. I remembered the numbers but not the details of how the app worked.

Jupiter said...

Oh, and about the election. O'Reilly says that about a million blacks who voted in 2012 didn't vote in 2016. If they had, it would have shifted several of the states that Trump won into Hillary's column. Apparently, they were unwilling to drag their government-assisted black asses down to the polls to vote for some white bitch. So, do we call that racism, or sexism? I leave it to the experts in the Democratic Party. Another dirty job that Americans won't do!

exiledonmainstreet said...

PB, yeah, because you mention constantly that you're fantasically rich. And handsome. And pull babes like nobody's business.

There are a lot of successful people who comment here, but with the exception of Titus, I have never seen anybody so eager to constantly remind people of his own fabulousness.

Uh huh.

ALP said...

The hysteria among Seattle residents is breathtaking. Most seem to feel that seconds after Trump is sworn in, the raping and lynching will begin unfettered in the streets. That Trump being in the White House will embolden every dysfunctional racist and homophobic moron to grab their gun and start hunting.

So by this logic, had Hillary won, the most despicable of racists and misogynists would all have thrown up their hands and said "Well, that was fun while it lasted". Really?

I'd love to have one of these hysterical types explain to me how they think sitting presidents have this much effect on personality and values formation.

EDH said...

To Wendy Davis and Foreign Policy... why weren't those same voters ignoramuses when they voted for Obama?

These former Obama strongholds sealed the election for Trump

Donald Trump delivered on his promise to flip the Democrats’ electoral hold on the industrial Midwest.

Across swing states — and others previously thought to be safe for Democrats — Trump colored dozens of counties red that hadn’t gone Republican in decades.

Of the nearly 700 counties that twice sent Obama to the White House, a stunning one-third flipped to support Trump.

Trump also won 194 of the 207 counties that voted for Obama either in 2008 or 2012.

Counties Obama won twice = 209 for Trump 467 for Clinton

Counties Obama won once = 194 for Trump 13 for Clinton

By contrast, of those 2,200 counties that never supported Obama, Clinton was only able to win six. That’s just 0.3 percent crossover to the Democratic side.

Clinton had more opportunities to peel counties from the Republicans. Historically, Democrats rely on few (but very populous) counties to chart a path to victory. Republicans, by contrast, draw support from a wide swath of many more rural and suburban counties.


cornroaster said...

Gahrie said...
The Republican vote totals over the last three presidential elections are nearly identical. The Democrats have lost nearly 10.5 million voters since 2008.

As mentioned in a comment on another posting on this blog, I wonder whether this may be partially the result of voter ID laws. I realize that the vast majority can be attributed to lower voter enthusiasm on the part of Dems, but I do wonder if there was some voter fraud that is in part being prevented by such laws. I realize that Dems will attribute any effect of voter ID laws lowering the total of their votes to voter intimidation, but I wonder...

Jupiter said...

ALP said...
"The hysteria among Seattle residents is breathtaking. Most seem to feel that seconds after Trump is sworn in, the raping and lynching will begin unfettered in the streets. That Trump being in the White House will embolden every dysfunctional racist and homophobic moron to grab their gun and start hunting."

It does seem a little strange, that the Lefties are all so hot and bothered. We all know Trump is going to start World War III in about 20 minutes, and then it's Game Over, right? He's probably sitting there in the Oval Office playing catch with the Nuclear Football right now. You'd think the poor Lefties would want to spend these last few moments with their loved ones. Well, I suppose they don't have any loved ones. Maybe they could watch some Rachel Maddow reruns. Same kind of thing, right?

Laslo Spatula said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
FullMoon said...

Jupiter said... [hush]​[hide comment]

Oh, and about the election. O'Reilly says that about a million blacks who voted in 2012 didn't vote in 2016. If they had, it would have shifted several of the states that Trump won into Hillary's column.


O'Rielly assumes the million would have voted for Hillary.
I assume they voted against her, by staying home.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

ExileD,

Sure, I'm often obnoxious and off putting. And, I think it's only reasonable to assume that I'm complete BS: anonymity on the tubes is, basically, the opposite of reliable.

But, aside from that, in my pea brain, during the campaign, it wasn't certain that DJT would placate the dopes in order to further advance the winners. And still, maybe the initial indications (e.g. unleashing bankers, slashing restraints, and lowering taxes for big dough (i.e. not losers, as DJT sees it) folks) won't pan out. But, it's looking pretty good. They're F-ing floating Dimon and an ex-Goldman man for treasury!

Anywho, time will tell.

Sebastian said...

Trump won because he is Trump. So there.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

How cool would it be for DJT to stuff his cabinet full of NY folks in the positions of greatest power.

It's important to not get too far ahead of ourselves. But, this could be such an awesome four years.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

And NJ folks.

Don't for get Mr. Bridgegate.

Jupiter said...

FullMoon said...
"O'Rielly assumes the million would have voted for Hillary.
I assume they voted against her, by staying home."

I realize that believing you can predict people's behavior on the basis of their race is racist. I also realize that at least 9 in 10 Black Americans vote Democrat, when they find themselves confronting a ballot.

I must admit, I'm a little surprised that the Free Shit Army proved to be so feckless.

Comanche Voter said...

You know--Trump won because he got more votes in the right places. End of story. All else is codswallop.

SukieTawdry said...

I had an irresistible impulse to see what the ridiculous Wendy Davis had to say. Included was this gem:

“And I don’t think it’s too cynical to say that the true right-wing conspiracy going on in this country is the under-education of the populace. It has benefitted them and it is not an accidental outcome.”

The sorry state of education in this country is a right-wing conspiracy. I don't even know what to say to that.




exiledonmainstreet said...

EDH said...
To Wendy Davis and Foreign Policy... why weren't those same voters ignoramuses when they voted for Obama?"

They're salt of the earth down home folks when they vote Dem and stupid rednecks when they vote for Republicans.

BN said...

Trump won because I bet $100 against him. I always lose. It's black magic and I only use it very, very sparingly.

I thought for sure we'd get what we deserve.

Now I wonder if we're not redeemable after all.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

"The sorry state of education in this country is a right-wing conspiracy. I don't even know what to say to that."

Is it true that Carson is up for the Dept of Ed? And, is he really a creationist?MAGA.

Sally327 said...

This isn't really on topic but I find it kind of fascinating that a New Yorker has won the Presidency. The last one to do that was FDR. (and yes I know that either way a New Yorker was going to win except Hillary isn't really a New Yorker.) I find it kind of fascinating that all those southern states voted for this New Yorker, who is such a Yankee. Which yes, Romney won those states too as a Massachusetts guy except he's not really from there plus he's a genteel Yankee, like George H.W. Bush. And McCain, he's a war hero so where he was from didn't really matter.

I'm from the northeast originally but I've lived in southern states for the last 16 years and southerners, true southerners, they have a specific (largely negative) point of view about a certain kind of northerner and Donald Trump fits it exactly. Loud, arrogant, pushy, rude, blunt, etc. Which is maybe why all of that didn't bother them, he's supposed to be like that, he's from New York. He's authentic on some kind of basic dna level and Hillary Clinton isn't. And he never pandered, never trotted out a phony southern accent or showed up at Nascar or something.

I know everyone is amazed that he won the Rust Belt states but I'm amazed he carried the south.

Harold said...

Trump won because he got the most votes in the right places. Every one of those headlines is partially true, but mostly not. Except for this one, which is 100% true: "Dear America, This Is Important -- Trump Did Not Win Because of Racism" .

iowan2 said...

Trump won because that was his goal.

I was paying attention during the primaries, an anecdote was offered. Trump said he was going to run for president, 'who do I call in the RNC to be the candidate?' Someone explained that the RNC doesnt decide, you have to win the primaries. Ok, When is that election? No, you have to win one at a time. start with Iowa, then New Hampshire, etc,etc. Trump says Oh, Ok lets get to Des Moines.

The point is Trump listens, then starts completing small tasks, working to the goal.

Trump attains goals.

Drago said...

So now that it is clear that the national Republican party, at all levels, will make even greater gains in 2018 (given the impenetrable ignorance of the left), ones mind turns to what might be the year 3/4 legislative goals of a Trump presidency.

Out of concern for our college age Lefty "friends", I would recommend a federal program to provide footy pajamas and extra playdough for their safe spaces.

And balloon animals. Lots of balloon animals.

Drago said...

Poor PBJ. Those black neurosurgeons can be so intimidating!

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

"Trump attains goals."

Well, he's really, always focused on and obtained one goal (not paying taxes to the federal gov, not provable charity (though he's documented as having fibbed about charity), not giving an F about con values, not hiring only Americans, not making things only in America, not being devout, not being a faithful husband).

Obviously, his goal has always been helping rural folks and normal income folks. That's why he's planning to pack his cabinet w/ NY bankers and such.

It hasn't even started yet. More than four years of this sorta fun!

wildswan said...

Trump won because a majority saw through the deceptions of the mainslime media but a very large group has not seen through the magicians' tricks and has no idea of their own delusional state.

The mainstream media made up this awful Trump image which they gave the Democrats as a banner to carry, an awfulness banner which was supposed to shame Trump voters (and hide Clinton's shame). The awfulness of Trump wasn't true so the banner had no effect on those who knew it wasn't true. But those who believed it was true are now terrified; they think The Awfulness has turned around and is chasing them.

In my mind the day for believing the mainslime media has long gone by. So it's hard to understand the people who believe Chuck Todd, Rachel Maddow and the other Democratic operatives with by-lines. It's hard to understand how scared they are. And the mainslime is pumping them up with more fear.


Drago said...

What's most amusing is PBJs "this is so fun" act.

Hilariously transparent "me thinks he doth protest too much" posturing.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

I hope the DJTers can drag out retrospective jabber about BHO, HRC and the way the MSM was mean to DJT for at least 100 days into the term.

Even if they figure it out fairly soon it'll still have been awesome, but hopefully it'll run as long as possible. Blaming the Mexis, Mooslims, MSM, etc should keep them inline for a while.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Right Drago,

There's no reason for y'all to put pressure on DJT, he'll come through. The only way he wouldn't is if you don't have his back.

Defend away.

sane_voter said...

All of this wailing by these leftists just a day after the election about how bad Trump will be just makes it easy for him to exceed expectations.

Thank you Lefties!

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Drago,

Which bankers and NY/NY folks would you like to recommend to DJT as he works to set up a government that will work for the working class and normal income folks?

Dimon has good hair.

Drago said...

The best part of this election outcome? Just go back and read the election post-mortems of the Republican and/or conservatives after 1992 and 2008.

Republican party is dead!
Never to return!
We are all socialists now!

The left: they just "know" stuff! Not how to keep the lights on or toilet paper on the shelves in Venezuela of course, but still.

Cacimbo Cacimbo said...

The day Trump announced he promised to build a wall on the southern border. Every rally there were chants "build the wall."Yet none of the analysts mention the refusal of both parties to enforce our immigration law for decades as a factor.

Drago said...

Poor PBJ.

It's such a difficult situation to be in, having nothing to say in favor of his party or its policies.

This is the real story of the obambi era: the decimation of the dem party at all levels.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

I did see a piece at HotAir that suggested R voters should immediately focus on what the Rs do, now that they'll have control of everything (Federally speaking).

Dont' do that!!!!

Rather, what's that you say about the lib media being mean to DJT? And, this or that bad thing re HRC? Do tell.

Carry on.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

BHO did what?

Lets focus on that.

Fabi said...

I just read that PB&J claims to be rich. That's cute.

Fabi said...

He's really flipping out, Drago -- he's totally upset and consumed. It's going to be a great eight years!

Drago said...

The lack of any appeal can only lead the left further down the extremist path. Worse for them is that the very short window of PC/SJW ascendent power is on the way out.

And that my friends was their only hope: the preemptive shutting down of all dissent.

Without that power the left is forced to engage on a level playing field and, as PBJ has demonstrated over and over again, the left is utterly incapable of such engagement.

So what's left? The same old same old attempt to harangue/insult their way to victory.

Thank goodness they haven't adapted yet. I doubt they can even spell "OODA Loop".

Jupiter said...

Former Texas state senator Wendy Davis says Donald Trump won Tuesday’s election thanks to an “under-educated electorate.”

Hmmm... More Americans have college degrees than in any previous era, by a wide margin. I think maybe Wendy is talking about "re-education". You don't get that in school. You have to be put in camps.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Right Drago,

The left is a total disaster.

And now that Rs will control everything (Federally), Let's discuss evil Ds while the DJT folks are left to themselves to fill the powerful cabinet position w/ NYNY, NJ, bankers, et. al. folks.

That'll drain the swamp.

Drago said...

Fabi, my favorite part of PBJs performance is the adolescent inability to move beyond a clearly unsuccessful rhetorical tactic.

Instead one can expect an even more frenetic doubling down of that which has already proven to fail.

Drago said...

Remember, what you see with PBJ is a continuation of the Clinton campaign strategy which was amplified by the media and, ironically, accelerated the departure of Dems from their column and returned these Reagan Democrats into the Republican fold. This after a 36 year hiatus.

Amazing really.

Jupiter said...

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...
"Let's discuss evil Ds while the DJT folks are left to themselves to fill the powerful cabinet position w/ NYNY, NJ, bankers, et. al. folks."

Hmmm. So you agree that Clinton's donor class is an unredeemable pack of unspeakable criminal scum? There may be hope for you yet, Peanut. Are you beginning to think that maybe the insanely wealthy people who gave Hillary all that money did not have the best interests of average Americans at heart? Maybe you're a Bernie voter, Peanut. Do you feel the Bern?

Drago said...

As with the Soros funded and Democrat directed street demonstrations which inevitably turn violent, the left has completely squandered (thus far) the electoral structural advantage they built over the last 50 years.

We can be grateful to these moronic new lefties for their astonishing incompetence.

If Tip ONeill had thus type of structural advantage the Republicans would be wiped out!

Again, we are fortunate to have the PBJs opposite us!

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Drago,

You really take direction well. Thank you for doing what I asked by continuing to focus on the Ds, rather than focusing on what DJT and the Rs (who are actually going to be in power) are doing.

If you could take a minute away from the vitally important anti-D discussion, do you prefer a JPM man or a former Goldmanman for Treasury?

Ha.

mccullough said...

I think many people are single issue voters in the sense that whatever they think
is the most important issue outweighs the other important issues they may not agree with their candidate on, even if they strongly disagree with their candidate on these other important issues.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Jup,

I know it's fun to bask in the victory.

But, cons may want to keep one eye on what the Rs are doing. They're going to control everything on the Federal level. Presumably some of you will have some expectations that you'd like to see implemented. Fussing about out of power Ds, doesn't do much, where the rubber meets the road.

Just sayin.

Drago said...

It will be a very simple matter in 2018 for the Republicans to extend their lead in a Democrat down cycle. Particularly in the Senate.

Just a few policy victories that are tailored to the disaffected, a genuine Kemp-like outreach to the inner cities (tied to immigration clamp down to improve the financial and marketability situation for African Americans), a conservative supreme Court nominee and saying adios to obambicare and rollback of the obambi executive action over-reach and Shazam!

It's not remotely complicated.

The PC/SJW snide insulting lefty attacks will simply round out the picture.

Too easy.

2020 of course is a complete wildcard do the reps better make hay while they can.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Of course Scott Adams says most folks don't actually care about issues.

It's supposed to be all about confirmation bias, and so on.

It'd be nice to see some folks in these threads not fall into the Adams' "most folks" category.

Or, just blather on about out of power Ds.

Carry on.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Anyone care if DJT puts bankers in charge of important aspects of the Fed gov?

Or, what's that you say about something terrible related to out of power Ds?

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Like I note before, I did see a HotAir piece where the focus was on making sure DJT and Rs do what cons want.

I guess this hood just isn't into that sorta thing.

What's that you say about some terrible thing out of power Ds did?

Carry on.

Drago said...

It's often argued that the Dems are not truly helped by their fellow bubble dwellers in the major media organs.

I would have to agree with that as the evidence is overwhelming that the lefts inability to articulate any vision beyond taking from others and gathering up more raw power to Lord over others inevitably results in massive over-reach and miscalculation.

So, all things considered, particularly in this alternate media age, the conservatives are rather well served by this obvious bias. Again, a big plus going into 2018.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Drago,

Good thinking to focus on Ds in 2018.

It'd be silly to think about the actions of DJT and the Rs in congress as they setup and implement the Federal government for the next two years.

Whatever they do it's cool. They can be trusted. Because they love America.

Anywho, do go on about the evil Ds in 2018.

Carry on.

Jupiter said...

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...
"Jup,
I know it's fun to bask in the victory.
But, cons may want to keep one eye on what the Rs are doing."

We have been keeping an eye on what the Rs are doing. Importing Ds, mostly, and helping their buddies the Ds pound the country into the toilet to save foreign Muslims from the consequences of being Muslim foreigners. It's almost like an R is just a D on stilts. That's why Jeb and Marco will not be moving into the White House in January. Too stilted.

Fabi said...

All they have left is insults, Drago. They're powerless for a long time. They took so much glee in declaring the Republican dead after Obama's election and their constant dream of demographic dominance that they lost touch with the reality on the ground. Lulz

Drago said...

It will be interesting to track precisely how long it takes for PBJ to mutate out of massively failed clinton campaign mode and into something more recognizably effective.

He's like one of those island trapped WW2 Japanese soldiers who doesn't know the war has ended so he keeps fighting using the same tactics without resupply or updated intelligence.

A wind up toy really.

And people wonder why it is that the Dems are forced to create armies of fake AstroTurf posters to advance their cause. The answer: they simply can't adapt on their own.

Drago said...

I personally think it will take PBJ at least 12 months to move to a different tack.

Time will tell of course.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Jup,

Even I'm not sure the Rs are that bad. But, even if they were totally trustworthy, now is still the time to be the proverbial good angels on their shoulders that remind them they need to do the right thing....or else.

If they know there's no "or else" because they can distract you by saying "look at the socialist D", you have no leverage, imho.

Drago said...

Hmm, maybe 18 months for PBJ to adapt.

Fabi said...

"...or else."

Or else what? The powerless issuing threats is so charming. Thinking they're "good angels" is stunning in its delusion. Lulz

Keep hopelessness alive!

Drago said...

It has to be killing Sanders to know that he read this electorate correctly and might have pulled it out.

Ironically for him, given how easily led and directed the lefties are, Hillary was simply able to dictate to lemmings on the left their marching orders....right over the cliff.

There simply werent enough Rhythm and Balls in the party to chart a different course.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Drago,

So, you know today that DJT and the Rs in congress will come through for conservative principles. So, rather than care about what they do, it's best to not fuss w/ that because it makes more sense to start thinking about how the Senate map in 2018 greatly favors Rs.

And, to your core, you know that I'm the misguided hack.

Cool.

And, carry on.

Jupiter said...

Drago said...
"I personally think it will take PBJ at least 12 months to move to a different tack."

Nonsense. Peanut has moved quite adroitly from mocking us as benighted fools and losers to concern trolling us as fair-minded winners. He must be a pro, I'm thinking.

Which reminds me, Peanut, I'm not a con. To be a conservative, you have to have something to conserve. There was a lot to like about this country, once. Now it's a nice piece of real estate, or will be, once they clear these pesky natives off. Anyone who hopes to MAGA is actually a reactionary.

Drago said...

Notice how desperate PBJ is to avert his/her/xis/xer gaze from the implications of this election and use that feedback to course correct.

Fascinating case study.

Jupiter said...

Where's that "lifelong Republican" Chuck, BTW? Remember how he used to tell us all what a tragedy it was that we had squandered this perfectly winnable election on the one candidate who couldn't possibly win it? More in sorrow than in anger, that was Chuck. Not that he wasn't plenty angry.

Good news, Chuckles, that election was even more winnable than you thought it was!

Chuck?

Jon Ericson said...

"Man riding in public transport gives his opinion"

iowan2 said...

We do know why Clinton's wife lost. George Bush. It's been 8 years and the leftists are still blaming GWB.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

I do realize that I'm a little early for sounding the alarm.

I.E., y'all do have a good chunk of time to enjoy the victory before all the important decisions are made. We're only a couple days from the election.

But, call it concern trolling if you want, a bit down the road it would be wise to make sure you're putting pressure on DJT and the Rs, imho. Fussing w/ out of power Ds is like shooting fish in a barrel, fun (I guess), but sorta distracting, imho.

For the record, I do agree that Rs will cleanup in the 2008 election. But, it seems less certain that they'll deliver the way y'all want, especially if you aren't vigilant in checking them, imho.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

OTOH, maybe Adams is right. Issues and governance don't matter.

Carry on.

Drago said...

Interesting.

PBJ now moves into the "I will try the slightly more moderate tone approach to draw in responders" not realizing that one would need a track record to support such a tactic.

It's like he's just flailing about.

Whatever everyone else does, don't clue him in. I want to see where this goes next.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Sounds like I started to draw in Drago.

Drago said...

Hmm, the targeted personal approach.

Shh. Nobody tell him. He needs to figure this out on his own.

Jupiter said...

You know, Peanut, I'm not basking in any victory. I'm not one of those sanctimonious shitheads who think Trump is unfit to occupy the same seat once warmed by the sainted Lyndon Baines Johnson because he has referred to a vulva as a pussy. But I don't kid myself that Trump is going to defeat the gang of parasites and traitors running Washington, either. This is just a reprieve, and probably not a long one.

But at least this means I can stop worrying about whether -- and how -- I am going to kill the honest man the parasites send to take my guns away. That concern has not vanished, but it has receded. I bought an AR when I thought Hillary might win, but I haven't put it together yet. And I haven't bought a flak jacket, which you're pretty much going to need if you're even thinking of taking a few with you. No, it looks like we all get a few more years.

A reprieve.

mikee said...

My wife, holding in her hand the $100 she won from me because Hillary did not win (thank God), made another bet with me - she predicts Trump will win again in 2020.

I disagreed, because of his age and because he has to take a yuuuuuuge cut in his lifestyle to be President.

You heard it here first - Trump is a one term president.

Of course, the Republicans might just be whipped into shape enough over the next four years to actually run another winning campaign, as soon as they decide who will be Hitler to the Democrats in 2020.

mikee said...

My wife, holding in her hand the $100 she won from me because Hillary did not win (thank God), made another bet with me - she predicts Trump will win again in 2020.

I disagreed, because of his age and because he has to take a yuuuuuuge cut in his lifestyle to be President.

You heard it here first - Trump is a one term president.

Of course, the Republicans might just be whipped into shape enough over the next four years to actually run another winning campaign, as soon as they decide who will be Hitler to the Democrats in 2020.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

But seriously, I do know that blabbing in threads is meaningless.

But, I don't see a downside to y'all sending emails to whatever DJT and Congressional folks depend on your vote, and making it clear that you expect certain things now that the Rs will control all of the Fed stuff.

Use your best, most powerful arguments to put pressure on them, for con principles.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

IOW, any asshole who can fill these threads w/ blather about bad Ds, and R victories in 2008, but still can't bother to shoot off pressuring emails to DJT and cons in congress who actually matter seems sorta lame, imho.

Any of y'all emailed (re so-called conservative principles) DJT's folks and your congress folks?

Carry on.

Drago said...

He still doesn't get it.

Troll level 3.78 (10 pt scale)

FullMoon said...

Jupiter said...

FullMoon said...
"O'Rielly assumes the million would have voted for Hillary.
I assume they voted against her, by staying home."

I realize that believing you can predict people's behavior on the basis of their race is racist. I also realize that at least 9 in 10 Black Americans vote Democrat, when they find themselves confronting a ballot.

I must admit, I'm a little surprised that the Free Shit Army proved to be so feckless.

The million who stayed home were the working black people. The bums voted for H

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

I may have discovered an indicator that, at least somewhat, identifies the folks Scott Adams says don't care about facts.

-->If you can blather and blather and blather about supporting this or that political party, but it never occurred to actually contact and put pressure on the politicians that represent you = you're an Adams dope.

Don't feel bad, he's say the vast majority of the population falls into this ditch.

Adams dope is as Adams dope does.

Drago said...

Try again.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

"Try again."

In this thread, have I mentioned my cock is big?

That's my go to, when all else fails.

Jon Ericson said...

Think John Podesta or Josh Earnest. Not so harsh.

Drago said...

Well, you are certainly correct that all else has failed.

Fen said...

Pb&J: Mark, Go back to your google machine. You missed an awful lot. [Maybe you were using Bing.]

How come you can't do it yourself? Did your education not include how to properly back up your assertions with evidence? Do you know how to quote something from an article? We learned that in 6th grade.

How come, every single time in the last 6 months when I asked a Lefty to source their allegation of racism, they ALWAYS pointed to "its over there somewhere"....?

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Fen,

The black dudes were cleared. I was saying that, but in a smarmy way. I know: shocking.

Fen said...

I personally think it will take PBJ at least 12 months to move to a different tack.

And this is why Trump won. The likes of PBJ are the Left's "thought leaders"...

I guess it's time for another "study" to reassure them them aren't inferior.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Anywho, I guess there's no reason for cons to think about putting pressure (by, at a minimum, emailing folks who actually mater, rather than jabbering in threads about out of power Ds) on the DJT folks.

Presumably DJT has a well established track record as a principled con, and he embodies trustworthiness. So, don't bother.

Carry on.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

What's that you say about this or that terrible out of power D?

Jon Ericson said...

"People have to die"

Fen said...

PBJ: "I was saying that, but in a smarmy way."

Irrelevant. I was asking if you knew how to back up your allegations by quoting/citing a source... Like this:

"Our results indicate that Democrats suffer from small penis syndrome" - Meadows, The Lancet 377.9769 (2011): 932-940.

See, in civilized cultures, it's poor form to accuse someone of racism without being able to back it up. Usually gets your teeth kicked in.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

JE,

That's horrific.

Luckily, soon DJT will be in power and that sort of thing will be an excellent opportunity to have the Feds declare marshal law. As you heard in DJT's acceptance speech, he'll be ending crime. Some may have scratched their head and asked how the Feds would do that. Of course a good conservative knows that DJT can send in the Feds to control the population.

Carry on.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Anywho,

what's the latest w/ small penis, out of power Ds?

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

The real threat = small penis, out of power Ds.

Never mind the folks in power.

Carry on.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Paging Mr Adams.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Martial Law!

Jon Ericson said...

Cher's home is for sale

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Have folks noticed that Nancy Pelosi had work done to her face?

Biden has plugs.

BHO golfs a lot.

HRC should be in jail.

2018 will be good for Rs in the Senate.

Ds have wee little wee wees.

Any other important things for Rs to focus on now?

I can't think of anything.

Carry on.

Quaestor said...

Just sayin'

PB&J always closes his more than typically incoherent screeds with Just sayin'.

Just sayin'

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Ques,

Carry on.

Drago said...

It's still Nov 7 for PBJ.

Drago said...

My favorite news of the day?

It's Ellison or Howard Dean for DNC chair!

You can't make this stuff up!

Drago said...

Remember, Howard is the fella who had a deep philosophical and theological falling out with his church years ago.....

The bone of contention?

A. Bike. Path.

Lol

#DeeplyPrincipled!

exiledonmainstreet said...

Please let it be Howard Dean. Please.

Night Owl said...

Drago said:
"It has to be killing Sanders to know that he read this electorate correctly and might have pulled it out."

Agreed. I said this on another site months ago, before Trump had won the GOP nomination, and think it sums up the galling situation the left finds itself in:

"The left has been stirring up class divisions forever, and in the last election were successful at painting milquetoast Romney as the "evil rich Mr. Moneybags republican vampire sucking the life out of the American worker". Well this election cycle is all about class issues, and as they say, be careful what you wish for.

Trump is not your father's Republican-- meaning he cannot so easily be portrayed as representative of the "evil" one-percenters, not when you look at who his enemies are -- the GOPe and other elite-- and who his supporters are.

If Trump wins the nomination, he just might suck enough private-section union workers away from the Dems to win in the fall. And wouldn't that be the ultimate irony for leftists who dreamed of a class-war, if the proletariat elect a "Republican" fat cat as their champion."

Lyle said...

Drago,

It would be awesome if they put up Ellison. I read that today and was like there are no thinking people leading the Democrats.

Bad Lieutenant said...

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...
IOW, any asshole who can fill these threads w/ blather seems sorta lame, imho.

-Yes, you do.

Any of y'all emailed (re so-called conservative principles) DJT's folks and your congress folks?

-Funny you should ask that. I was considering leaving my Wall Street job to work for the administration if they need someone like me. I don't know anything about doing that though.


Carry on.
11/10/16, 9:43 PM

-Oh, so you're shiloh? I thought ARM was shiloh. So confusing. Does it confuse you? Rhetorical!

Bad Lieutenant said...

BTW, indeed, it would be interesting and valuable to discuss next steps in the first hundred days and what happens before he takes office. I wonder if Ann will facilitate or obstruct that.

Probably be more helpful if you would shut up, too. But go on Trigglypuff, exercise your first amendment rights, blabbity blah. Just for the record though, you are one tiresome bint.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Bad L,

Even if you don't work for them, at least you and others could email a bit to try and hold their feet to the fire, so you're sure your so-called con principles aren't sold out. It's no excuses time, w/ R control.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

IMHO, at this moment, it's more important to exert influence while the government is being devised and the policy direction is being hammered out.

Y'all have plenty of time to fuss about how awful the out of power Ds are after you're sure the Rs are doing what you expect.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Carry on.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

OTOH, do folks remember the Dean scream?

exiledonmainstreet said...

" He's authentic on some kind of basic dna level and Hillary Clinton isn't. And he never pandered, never trotted out a phony southern accent or showed up at Nascar or something."

Yep. I think that's true. And it is amazing when you think about it. Normally pols either play up plebeian roots (hey, did you know John Kasich's dad was a mailman?) or, in Hillary's case, do sickening pandering. Remember, in 2008 she was trying to appeal to the same people she called "deplorables" this time around. She drank shots with guys in a tavern in Ohio! She said her dad took her duck hunting!

And this year, after she wrote off the white working class and tried to pull in blacks, we were treated to stories of how she carries around hot sauce in her purse. Actually, I think she carries a flask of Grey Goose vodka in her purse.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Is this really how you live your life, Jelly? How do you deal with people in everyday life? You can't be this abnormal, especially if you're quote unquote rich.

why don't you stop posting for a week and maybe people can stop paying attention to you and talk about these very issues you mentioned. but you're so masterful that nobody can think at all When you talk. So you really could bring down the entire nation. So for love of country, why don't you give it a rest.

Dave in Tucson said...

In situations like this, people love to have a simple explanation, like one of those Ellery Queen mysteries, that end with "I know why Trump won and Clinton lost, and the reason is in this room tonight!"

The reality is, there's a lot of different forces working together that pushed the election the way it went.

First of all yeah, Trump tapped into a definite Zeitgeist on at least some of the right. But again, I'm not sure it was just one issue. People are fed up with political correctness. People are fed up with so much attention on minority issues. Remember "it's the economy, stupid"? When did that stop being a Democrat catch phrase? People are also really tired of getting called stupid and racist for disagreeing with leftist talking points.

Second of all, it can't be overemphasized how bad of a candidate HRC was, for multiple reasons:

* The whole bootleg email server thing. Even just the facts not in dispute should be enough to disqualify her for the presidency.

* James Comey refusing to pursue an investigation/prosecution on those emails. Maybe HRC thought she was off the hook, I suspect a lot of people just assumed he was just another Clinton stooge. The optics for this were terrible.

* She's a terrible public speaker. Just go rewatch (if you can) the "why am I not 50 points ahead of Trump" video. That performance was cringe-worthy even if she was running for mayor.

* The constant drip, drip, drip of Wikileaks revelations.

* The fact that a big chunk of liberal voters apparently thought what America needed right now was to tack even harder to the left than we have under Obama.

Bad Lieutenant said...

incidentally, while this thread is not about the subject you have decided to seize upon, it's a perfectly valid question, I agree. I wish the hostess would show some interest in substance, but having voted for Hillary, that's probably not her speed.

Bad Lieutenant said...

By the way, you know who Hillary's speaking/campaigning style reminds me of? C. Montgomery Burns, from The Simpsons.

mockturtle said...

" He's authentic on some kind of basic dna level and Hillary Clinton isn't. And he never pandered, never trotted out a phony southern accent or showed up at Nascar or something."

The thing that first impressed me was when he was campaigning in the Iowa primary. All the other candidates were there in jeans and plaid shirts [de rigueur for politicians in Iowa, I guess]. So, in flies Trump in his private jet and wearing his navy blue suit and red tie looking like what he really is--a city slicker. He may be the most genuine candidate of my lifetime.

Bruce Hayden said...

Trump won because I bet $100 against him. I always lose. It's black magic and I only use it very, very sparingly.

From my point of view, Trump won because I bought another gun Monday. It was scheduled for early 2017, but moved up in fear of a Crooked Hillary win. And, I wasn't the only one - the place I bought it had set a store record both on Sat. and Sun., when the "instant" background check was taking 4 hours or so. Monday, it was down to only maybe 2 hours. A lot of people were predicting a big gun scarcity for at lest the rest of the year, as everyone stocked up after her (expected) win.

The thing is that I believe in Murphy and his law. If it can go wrong, it will go wrong, and in the worst possible way. Discovered this in my first career as a software engineer, and found it useful in my second, as a patent attorney. So, I knew, deep down, that if I didn't buy that gun before the election, it wouldn't be available at nearly that price, if at all, afterwords. If, of course, if Crooked Hillary were to win. So, the best way of making sure that something happens (i.e. Trump winning) for me is to plan for the worst (i.e. Crooked Hillary winning), and, esp. if the planning requires a personal investment (e.g. the gun).

Now, I have been told, on numerous occasions, by people who know me (including, in particular, my partner) that my personal actions cannot affect something as major as a Presidential election. But, try convincing my subconscious of that. I know, in my heart of hearts, that that gun purchase is what propelled Trump over the top.

Bruce Hayden said...

Second of all, it can't be overemphasized how bad of a candidate HRC was, for multiple reasons:

* She had no energy, and was campaigning sporadically, probably due to her ill health, and maybe a bit of alcoholism. Meanwhile, Trump was doing as many campaign stops in one day, as she would do in a week, and do it day in, and day out.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

"why don't you stop posting for a week and maybe people can stop paying attention to you and talk about these very issues you mentioned."

Isn't that the catch? These threads are packed w/ (deserved) ball spiking and (presumably cathartic) fussing about the mean/mistaken libs/MSM. But, I'm the voice in this wilderness saying that cons should be putting pressure on the Rs as the upcoming government and plans are being determined. Call it concern trolling if you want, I seem to be the only voice saying that this is the time when important decisions are being made = pay attention.

Let me put it this way, if the right things happened now w/ the Rs in power, it'll be harder for me to F w/ y'all down the road if you aren't burned by your own side. Voting is fine, but after that keeping the pols in line is more important (the special interests will be checking in w/ them, even if y'all don't), imho.

Anywho, carry on.

Jon Ericson said...

cool!

Darrell said...

The black dudes were cleared. I was saying that, but in a smarmy way. I know: shocking.

Because of the sloppy sampling of the forensic team/ emergency-room nurses. DNA tech was new and expensive and techs took a single sample near the vaginal opening. They got the DNA of the last contributor. The Left wing did the rest, voiding the convictions. All had confessed with little prompting giving copious details that matched witness statements.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

JE,

A) that's old news.

B) that mannequin thing has jumped the shark. Even Bill Simmons on his last HBO show said so.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Plus Bad L,

Are you sure my absence would be a benefit to your proposed con confab?

Someone looking for the holes from a different POV isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Just sayin'

Seeing Red said...

Voters are ignorant?


Or Grubered?

Seeing Red said...

Cubs won the World Series. Hell froze over, I should have bet the market. It was the sign.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

BTW, I'm not sure how y'all should petition DJT and the Rs to make sure the upcoming gov is as you expect it to be.

Your only leverage they care about is your vote.

Beyond that I guess you could blather about what you feel is the "logic" of your POV.

You could also go w/ some sort of emotional POV, like if ...... then ........ for America. And so on.



Anywho, I know some of y'all already unconditionally worship DJT, tradguy style, but there are probably a more than a few of y'all that are at least a bit less certain. Speak now, or forever be mocked, like tradguy (after his Palin love).

Chump is as chump does.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

If you're rich you could use that to gain/buy influence.

That works.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Anywho, more importantly, have folks heard who is going to run the DNC?

Achilles said...

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...
I do realize that I'm a little early for sounding the alarm.

I.E., y'all do have a good chunk of time to enjoy the victory before all the important decisions are made. We're only a couple days from the election.

But, call it concern trolling if you want, a bit down the road it would be wise to make sure you're putting pressure on DJT and the Rs, imho. Fussing w/ out of power Ds is like shooting fish in a barrel, fun (I guess), but sorta distracting, imho.


You nominated Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders.

We nominated Donald Trump over 16 political insiders.

If you can't figure out my point... well of course you can't. You are really kinda stupid so here it is. Republican voters decided something was wrong with the political class and chose a different path. Democrats decided something was wrong... and nominated the epitome of the political class.

And of course by this point you probably still haven't got it. Because you are stupid. So to clarify republicans pay attention to the people in charge and punish insubordination/failure. We have pulled down quite a few failed oligarch pets in high positions Like Boehner, Cantor, etc. I know it seems like a crazy concept to you because it seems like democrat voters just take whatever shit is dropped in the bucket in front of them like good little peons.

And you are boring. I know you think you are being clever but you really aren't. We understand exactly what you are trying to do because it isn't like you are the first disingenuous lefty troll we have seen.

I appreciate R&B more and more every day.

Gahrie said...

Just for the record:
2008 - 58.2% turnout
Obama - 69,498,516 votes
McCain - 59,948,323 votes

2012 - 54.9% turnout
Obama - 65,915,795 votes
Romney - 60,933,504 votes

2016 - 55.6% turnout
Clinton - 60,523, 087 votes
Trump - 60,086,008 votes

It wasn't White racists or haters who elected Trump....the Republican vote has been consistent over the last three elections. The 9 million missing Democratic voters elected Trump.

Rusty said...

It was never about Trump.
Until it was.

AprilApple said...

Hillary is a corrupt lair... and she needed to lose.

AprilApple said...

Heh

It's over prog-fascists. and it is delicious.

Johnny Sokko said...

He simply won.

Sam L. said...

I note some elements of truth, but most are fever dreams of the Left. Self-awareness is not their bag.

HT said...

At the seriously literally divide, Giuliani seems not to have gotten word:

“The wall is going to take a while,” Giuliani said. “Absolutely he’s going to build it, it’s a campaign promise. He’s not going to break a campaign promise.”