December 2, 2016

Rush Limbaugh gives me a shout out and called something I said "astute" — but there was something about it he had to contradict... which makes me say something that might be even more astute.

On the show today:
Ann Althouse. She's from Wisconsin. She has a blog -- she's had it for a while -- and she wrote a blurb last night, a post, about two political science professors who have recently discovered the term "low-information voter" and sought to define it.
He was pointing at this post of mine from yesterday, where I criticized the professors for characterizing Trump voters as "low-information" voters. I said that Rush Limbaugh has used the term for years "to refer to the people who are accepting the view of the world presented in the mainstream media (which he sees as thoroughly biased in the liberal direction)."

I thought polisci professors ought to be informed about what's on Rush Limbaugh's show, and I made the wisecrack that if "you're writing about American politics," and you don't know what's on Rush's show, "then you yourself are low-information."

Rush said my observation was "very kind" and "astute," but as he went on, I could see that he didn't really agree with the way I'd defined the term I'd given him credit for coining. In fact, ironically, the definition he proceeded to give matched up pretty well with the polisci profs' definition!

The polisci profs —  Richard Fording and Sanford Schram — had said:
Low information voters are those who do not know certain basic facts about government and lack what psychologists call a “need for cognition.” Those with a high need for cognition have a positive attitude toward tasks that require reasoning and effortful thinking and are, therefore, more likely to invest the time and resources to do so when evaluating complex issues.
That part of their definition fits with what Rush said on his show today when he got very specific about what he meant by the term. He said he coined the term back in 2008:
There was a TIME Magazine story that literally said a voluminous number of Obama voters never followed the news. And I said, "Well, there you go!" (laughing) I mean, makes perfect sense. So low-information voters began as low-information voters. They don't know anything! They don't follow the news. They're pure addicts of pop culture... but they don't have the slightest knowledge of politics. And they haven't been taught much about it, and that's what low-information voters are....
So that's different from what I said, which was that they do listen to the news, but — in Rush's view — they don't get enough information because the mainstream news has so much liberal bias. Rush is actually pretty close to what Fording and Schram said, it's just that the professors looked at the people whose lack of information coincided with liking Trump and Rush was looking at the people whose lack of information coincided with liking Obama.

If you lack information but you vote, what is your vote based on? The professors said:
Our research finds that Trump has attracted a disproportionate (and unprecedented) number of “low-information voters” to his campaign. Furthermore, these voters are more likely to respond to emotional appeals — whether about the economy, immigration, Muslims, racial relations, sexism, and even hostility to the first African American U.S. president, Barack Obama. They are the ideal constituency for a candidate like Trump.
Now, Trump won. So did Obama. Maybe elections are won by whoever does best at reeling in the LIVs.

I wonder if Fording and Schram have applied their science to the 2008 election. If they did, maybe they would write that their research finds that Obama has attracted a disproportionate number of low-information voters. That's what the old TIME Magazine article seems to have said.

And then wouldn't it also be that those voters too were swayed by emotional appeals? Fording and Schram list some emotional issues they think may have worked to bring LIVs to Trump — "the economy, immigration, Muslims, racial relations, sexism, and even hostility to the first African American U.S. president, Barack Obama."

But you could make a comparable list of emotional issues that brought LIVs to Obama — hating the war, fearing climate change, and the thrill of the first African-American President.

123 comments:

surfed said...

Scott Adams blog. It's all about feelings and perceptions - facts be damned

Robert Cook said...

"Maybe elections are won by whoever does best at reeling in the LIVs."

This is axiomatic.

Smilin' Jack said...

Rush Limbaugh gives me a shout out and called something I said "astute" — but there was something about it he had to contradict... which makes me says something that might be even more astute.

Posts praising your own astuteness might be more convincing if the headline didn't contain a glaring grammatical error.

Once written, twice... said...

Ann gets a shout out from Goebbels. How cool!

Otto said...

How is the recount going? Give us an update. What percent of the total recount has been completed?

tcrosse said...

The highly emotional reaction of HRC partisans to her loss suggests that they were not drawn to her by the coldest, hardest facts and logic, or even by the most fraudulent facts and invalid logic.

tim maguire said...

I see "low-information voters" as a pretty straightforward term. Voters who don't know very much about the issues of the day or about the politicians' records on addressing the issues the voter cares about. That may be because they don't follow the news or because they follow shallow content news sources. Whatever the reason, they are incapable of voting according to their priorities because they haven't learned enough to make the right (for them) choices.

Sebastian said...

"Ann gets a shout out from Goebbels." Good illustration of the LIV concept.

surfed said...

When everyone is a Nazi no one is a Nazi.

mockturtle said...

Rush was right in 2008.

robother said...

" the thrill of the first African-American President."

Cue B.B. King's greatest hit, The Thrill is Gone.

Bob Ellison said...

LIV is a new idea. LIVs have been around forever, but they were not identified as a group until about four years ago.

Big Mike said...

Maybe elections are won by whoever does best at reeling in the LIVs.

@Althouse, how could you possibly doubt it?

eric said...

I'm of the view that you should only be able to vote if you pass a relative easy test.

David Begley said...

What I learned from covering all of the candidates in Nebraska and Iowa at Power Line blog is that voting is a combination of reason and emotion. In that respect, much like a jury trial. For the Hillary crowd, some were voting for her based on the emotion of identity politics. The First Woman President! Others wanted to keep Obamacare or stop climate change. For some Trump voters it was the emotion of making America great again. Others voted for the hard and reasoned policies of lower taxes, restoring the rule of law (stopping illegal immigration) and defeating ISIS. Trump's campaign had way more policy provisions than Hillary's but he delivered it in an effective and emotional way. The policy stuff was there if you looked.

I tend to agree more with Rush's definition of LIV. The media, popular culture and school system creates such a strong liberal bias based mostly on emotion and that gets votes from people who aren't thinkers are keen on following the news.

Bob Ellison said...

On TV, you can still find people saying that it's time we had a woman President. It should be a good thing to elect someone with no penis to that office. We really ought to reach up to that level of getting that kind of human there.

Jack Wayne said...

Is a LIV more LI than a non-voter? I don't think so. They may be lower on information than some other voters but so what? E Pluribus Unum. I think voters, ALL voters, vote for strength. Some voters believe they need all the information they can get to decide who's stronger but so what? Obama was clearly stronger than McCain or Romney. Trump powered through Clinton. Bush was stronger than Gore or Kerry. Etc.

Mary Beth said...

I think there's low information voters don't want to know things and limited information voters who don't want to know about things that contradict what they already believe.

Comanche Voter said...

I have a life long friend--a fraternity brother and sometime college room mate who came out of the closet at around age 28 or so. He and his partner (I refuse to say "husband") have been in a committed relationship for the last 35 years or so. But naturally gay politics is a big part of my friend's life. (We simply don't discuss much by way of politics--easier on the friendship that way.)

But he was very excited about the possibility of electing the first woman President. He's a gay male, but he is one with all of the rest of the vagina voters. There are a number of single issue voters out there--many of them (including one of my daughters) vote solely on a woman's absolute right to an abortion. Many of these folks (my friend and daughter included) are highly educated people with post graduate degrees and intellectual careers.

But if you are a single issue voter--by definition you are a low information voter.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

The premise all around here (the polysci profs, Limbaugh, Althouse) seems to be that low information voters don't do as good a job at deciding how to cast their vote. We could also call then intuitive voters and celebrate the genious of their decision making prowess. I think Nate Silver wrote a book about this called The Signal and the Noise, although he was focused on the statistical and predictive aspect of the question. Information these days consists of a lot of noise. If you watch the news, particularly the cable news, you get a whole lot of noise and relatively little real information. So what is the value of being informed, if so much of it is noise?

traditionalguy said...

LIV is a term used to avoid confirmation biased. People refuse
Anything that they do not believe is the case, and refuse to accept good evidence to the contrary.

That is why winners tell them what the want to hear. DJT does that 100%. He never challenges a persuasion without a qualifier.

And he values appearances.

Virgil Hilts said...

Debate about voter ID, voter suppression, illegal and legal immigrants voting, convicted felons voting is really about the left trying to max. the number of LIVs on the welfare side who come out and vote, whether or not legally.
A theme of the Dark Enlightenment is that democracy can only exist until majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury, after which the majority will tend to vote for the candidate promising the most benefits and democracy collapses because of unsustainable fiscal policy. $20 trillion in debt? As Professor Reynolds likes to says, what cannot continue, won't. . Q is not whether democracy will survive, but rather (i) how long and, (ii) what comes after.

Sal said...

So if you think policy is going in the wrong direction on the economy, immigration, race relations, etc., and you want change, you're a "low information voter?" Got it.

Quaestor said...

Or you could test Hillary voters on their emotional reactions to sexism — Every white male is a misogynist. I anticipate that question would rank above 50% in the strongly agree category. Or Every white male is a racist. Among those "not My President" rioters I predict the ranking would be approaching 95% strongly agree, and among Hillary voters at large I wager that question would score above 50%. And so on.

Fording and Schram are a couple of bullshit artists. Both sides are "low information" from the perspective of the opposition. Furthermore there is a likelihood, a remote one, that both sides are correct in their bias, and a much larger likelihood that one side is correct and the other is making excuses. The fact that a non-political scientist like Professor Althouse can so easily demolish their study strongly suggests which side that is.

David said...

Scott Adams explained it better.

David said...

Correction, Mr. Limbaugh. It's not "a" blog. It's "the" blog.

Quaestor said...

Comanche Voter wrote: [He] was very excited about the possibility of electing the first woman President.

Your friend had an opportunity to vote for the first female vice-president eight years ago. You should ask him if his racism (voting for someone because of his race is an example of racism, no?) trumped his sexism on that occasion.

buwaya puti said...

"So what is the value of being informed, if so much of it is noise?"

Listen to noise from all sides, and you can go far in processing the noisy signals and reducing noise in the result, and so being informed.
It does take effort though, including a genuine exercise in tolerance (the real thing, not the fake so many are eager to teach today).

Pete said...

Congrats on the shout out, Althouse. For the Limbaugh naysayers, his accomplishments in the media can't be ignored. Good on Althouse for recognizing this.

AprilApple said...

A low info voter is someone who gains what they think is knowledge about politics and economics for Madonna or the women on The View.

tim in vermont said...

LIVs have been around forever, but they were not identified as a group until about four years ago.

I think "lumpenproletariat" is a word that goes back to Marx. Who may have been a fool, but he was very smart. The two often go together.

lum·pen·pro·le·tar·i·at
ˈləmpənˌprōləˈte(ə)rēət,ˈ
(especially in Marxist terminology) the unorganized and unpolitical lower orders of society who are not interested in revolutionary advancement.

n.n said...

To be fair, most people have other priorities, by necessity and choice. Their great political ambition and aspiration is that no one in particular will run amuck. In a society with a robust distribution of competing interests, they are right more often than not. While a catastrophic anthropogenic climate change could be forced through cumulative effect, it is unlikely to happen without acutely overlapping and convergent interests, domestic and foreign.

tim in vermont said...

How is the recount going? Give us an update. -Otto

The first day of Wisconsin’s presidential recount narrowed the gap between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and President-elect Donald Trump by precisely one vote.

tim in vermont said...

I listened to Rush more or less religiously for 30 years. I don't anymore, but when he first came on man, I couldn't believe that there was somebody out there who had Dukakis pegged. I am sorry I missed the show today though.

n.n said...

tim in vermont:

The Left was right, there was no fraud, which calls into question their change of heart following a loss with the historically significant election of the first "Donald J Trump".

EMD said...

"To be fair, most people have other priorities, by necessity and choice. "

I have referred to these people as "busy" voters. They're relatively intelligent and perhaps well-read. It's just that their lives do not revolve around activism nor politics, and by choice focus their attention on other things in their world. Trump was able to capture a good portion of busy voters by trading in ideas and themes rather than delving into policy specifics. They simply don't have the time to involve themselves heavily in the political news of the day.

You may also call these voters "big picture" voters.

My name goes here. said...

Hi Rush!

OMG! That's means there is a non-zero chance that he has read my comments!

I wonder if he posts here?

Eric, is that you?

My name goes here. said...

Tim in Vermont is an anagram of Motormen Firm Tv. That could be him.

tim in vermont said...

Secretary of State John Kerry lamented Friday that technology has allowed the quick spread of false information to the point that people are struggling to "know what´s real and what isn´t." "This is one of our chief challenges today, is to manage information and to do it in a way that average folks at home can know what´s real and what isn´t, what´s true, what´s false, and try to build consensus around a common set of understandings,"

Yeah, we believe you are sincere, John. Whose medals did you throw over that fence, BTW? And what was Christmas morning like in Cambodia?

My name goes here. said...

Maybe Hagar.

My name goes here. said...

I guess it could be me. I will have to check.

My name goes here. said...

Holy Moley!

Rush could be Laslo!

BN said...

An LIV gets all their news from John Stewart or Rush Limbaugh.

Michael said...

Whoa, whoa. People are not necessarily either policy geeks or driven totally by emotion. They have pretty good information regarding their own personal lives and those of their friends, neighbors, and colleagues - and they act quite rationally on the basis of that information. The most compelling question in Presidential politics is: are you better off than you were 4/8 years ago (and is the country)? In 2016 enough people in enough states thought not.

rhhardin said...

They're more or less the same definition. The MSM does soap opera for business reasons, so it's both appeal to emotion (of women!) and leftist bias news (since the lefty pols free-ride on it).

Trump may do emotional appear but it's not soap opera. They don't coincide on the right, and they do on the left.

walter said...

"But you could make a comparable list of emotional issues that brought LIVs to Obama"
--
And Berno..free-dumb!

Big Mike said...

@tim in vermont, Kerry understands what fake news is -- it's everything published on pages A1 through A12 of the Post.

Alex said...

"Ann gets a shout out from Goebbels."

Probably a LIV that got his talking point from some SJW-site like Daily Kos. Probably has no idea about Nazi Germany, never read William Shirer's "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich".

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

Blogger Unknown said...
Trump makes Sarah Paln look like a genius, regardlng Trump's Carrier "deal". Trump is a low information President elect.

http://www.youngcons.com/sarah-palin-but-wait-the-good-guys-wont-win-with-more-crony-capitalism/

"When government steps in arbitrarily with individual subsidies, favoring one business over others, it sets inconsistent, unfair, illogical precedent. Meanwhile, the invisible hand that best orchestrates a free people’s free enterprise system gets amputated. Then, special interests creep in and manipulate markets. Republicans oppose this, remember? Instead, we support competition on a level playing field,
remember? Because we know special interest crony capitalism is one big fail.

Politicians picking and choosing recipients of corporate welfare is railed against by fiscal conservatives, for it’s a hallmark of corruption. And socialism. The Obama Administration dealt in it in spades. Recall Solyndra, Stimulus boondoggles, and all their other taxpayer-subsidized anchors on our economy. A $20 trillion debt-ridden country can’t afford this sinfully stupid practice, so vigilantly guard against its continuance, or we’re doomed."

Seeing Red said...

No TIF districts for you!

Seeing Red said...

Or state-between-state competition for auto plants, corporate headquarters, distribution warehouses, Hollywood tax credits, etc!

Unknown said...

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-phone-call-to-taiwan-likely-to-infuriate-china-2016-12?op=1

"President-elect Donald Trump spoke with the president of Taiwan by phone on Friday, in a move likely to infuriate Beijing and hinder US-China relations.

"President-elect Trump spoke with President Tsai Ing-wen of Taiwan, who offered her congratulations," according to a readout of the call released by Trump's transition team.

The US suspended formal diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 1979 after establishing a One China position — which states that "there is but one China and Taiwan is part of China" — in an effort to establish diplomatic channels with Beijing.

Beijing views Taiwan as a province of China, whereas Taiwan — which has its own democratically elected government — has a more complicated view of the nations' relationship.

"There is no change to our longstanding policy on cross-Strait issues," said Ned Price, a spokesman for the White House's National Security Council."


Seeing Red said...

You post that like its a bad thing.

The inscrutable Commie Dragon had to haul Kissenger's 93-y.o. Ass to China to figure Trump out.




Unknown said...

You people truly are fools.

rhhardin said...

Girlfriend sees returned boyfriend kill an assailant:

GF: You're a psychopath.

BF: No, no, no. A psychopath kills for no reason. I kill for money. It's a job. That didn't sound right. Let me see if I can put it another way. If I show up at your door, chances are you did something to bring me there. Everybody's doing it. It's like the natural order. I mean, the states do it. Sometimes there's due process and sometimes pilots carpet-bomb cities, you know? Riot cops shoot demonstrators. That's indiscriminate. I don't do that. You should read the files on some of these fuckers. I mean, it reads like a demon's rsum. Look, I bottomed out here. I've lost my taste for it completely. That's why I came back. And I wanted to see you. I wanted to start over, leave that behind.

GF: So I'm part of... I'm part of your romantic new beginning, right? How come you never learned that it was wrong? That there are certain things you do not do, you do not do in a civilized society?

BF: What civilizations are we talking about?

- Grosse Pointe Blank

Mr. Right is also good.

Unknown said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
rhhardin said...

There's a good analysis of white supremicist, the term, in Radio Derb this week.

AprilApple said...

update - Hillary still lost.

Unknown said...

Blogger Unknown said...
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/12/donald-trump-decides-poke-chinese-dragon

"Of course, maybe Trump was just calling to ask for a business favor:

The mayor of Taoyuan confirmed rumors on Wednesday that US president-elect Donald Trump was considering constructing a series of luxury hotels and resorts in the northwest Taiwanese city. A representative from the Trump Organization paid a visit to Taoyuan in September....Other reports indicate that Eric Trump, the president-elect's second son and executive vice president of the Trump Organization, will be coming to Taoyuan later this year to discuss the potential business opportunity."

You people truly are the low information voters.

AprilApple said...

A low information voter is someone who gains what they think is knowledge about politics and economics from Madonna, Katy Perry, Lena Pudding or the women on The View.

*fixed

rhhardin said...

Maybe the Taiwan thing is an instance of America bargaining for Americans.

Unknown said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
AprilApple said...

Update: Hillary lost again.

AprilApple said...

I'd rather have a business person that a lying crook.

Unknown said...

Update:

Apple is a LIV extraordinaire.

Unknown said...

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/308595-former-bush-spokesman-on-trumps-taiwan-call-china-will-go-nuts

"Former George W. Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer tweeted that "China will go nuts" after President-elect Donald Trump made a historic phone call to Taiwan on Friday.

"Uh-oh. I wasn't even allowed to refer to the gvt 'of' Taiwan. (I could say gvt "on" Taiwan.) China will go nuts," Fleischer tweeted."

You people voted for this doofus.

walter said...

The Trump family needs to find more honorable ways to make a living..like speechifyin'

Seeing Red said...

Did Trump call?

Or did Taiwan?

FullMoon said...

Unknown said... [hush]​[hide comment]

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/12/donald-trump-decides-poke-chinese-dragon

"Of course, maybe Trump was just calling to ask for a business favor:

The mayor of Taoyuan confirmed rumors on Wednesday that US president-elect Donald Trump was considering constructing a series of luxury hotels and resorts in the northwest Taiwanese city. A representative from the Trump Organization paid a visit to Taoyuan in September....Other reports indicate that Eric Trump, the president-elect's second son and executive vice president of the Trump Organization, will be coming to Taoyuan later this year to discuss the potential business opportunity."

You people truly are the low inforamation voters.


Why would he waste time creating building jobs and creating tax generating businessess? He now has the opportunity to follow the Billary example and sell out the USA to highest bidder. And make million dollar speeches.

AprilApple said...

Papercut unknown has the goods.

AprilApple said...

Walter - heh.

Unknown said...

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2016/12/03/2003660473

"Trump reportedly agreed to the call, which was arranged by his Taiwan-friendly campaign staff after his aides briefed him on issues regarding Taiwan and the situation in the Taiwan Strait, sources said."


Seeing Red said...

Yet at Insty, someone pointed out Obama sold Taiwan arms.

But was there a peep?

Seeing Red said...

Whoa, he was briefed?

I thought he wasn't being briefed.

It's so hard to keep up these days.

Transition in chaos, then it's not,

Not being briefed, then he is.

OTOH, I thought Oz Land was pivoting to China, which is not in our interest.

The first person he meets is Abe, talks to Duerte who actually started pivoting to the ChiComs.

Hmmmm, like someone commented at Insty, Obama said he was going to pivot to Asia, but Trump might actually be doing it.

I thought talking is good?

The rules keep changing, it's hard to keep up.

EMD said...

"Ann gets a shout out from Goebbels."

Goering was the fat one.

Wade Calvert said...

So LIV's are on both sides and determine outcomes. True. I'm done over-analyzing this thing. It comes down to a single explanation no matter the spin I read. Normal, average, decent, cordial, working white people felt like they were being called racists and bigots for doing nothing more than living their non-political lives. That's it. End of story.

walter said...

Seeing Red,
Just remember there are white hats and black hats.

walter said...

I can't wait for that intrepid journalist Chelsea Clinton to begin fisking all this.

Unknown said...

Just remember who keeps North Korea in check.

walter said...

Exactly, a phone call to Taiwan could unleash Lil Kim.
But then Trump has honorary ambassador Dennis Rodman.

Unknown said...


No a phone call won't unleash Kim, however China may turn a blind eye to Lil Kim playing with missels that could reach California.

walter said...

Yeah..yeah..nuke their market. Sure thing...

walter said...

Hmm..hearing it was FROM Taiwan.

walter said...

unknown..slow down..seem to be making a lot of typos with your rage.

Jupiter said...

The intent of the founders was that voting would be a duty, imposed upon those best able to perform it. For this reason, it was restricted to mature men who owned property, and could therefore be expected to be knowledgeable about affairs as a result of long experience in their management.

The Progressives have constantly acted to expand the ranks of voters. At the same time, they have taken it for granted that people vote for whatever best suits their personal interests, and have in fact encouraged people to believe that voting selfishly is not merely the free exercise of a civil right, but the highest expression of a patriotic duty. Al Gore now suggests that the elimination of the electoral college would "increase participation". He apparently believes that the advantages to the Republic of "increased participation" are as evident as the tropical fish swimming where the Polar Ice Cap used to be.

It seems a little late to me, for the Left to open their big, fat mouths about "low-information voters". If it were up to them, there would be no other kind.

FullMoon said...

Unknown said...


No a phone call won't unleash Kim, however China may turn a blind eye to Lil Kim playing with missels that could reach California.


There goes 55 dem electorol vote.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Could the meaning of LIV have changed over time, Professor, at least as Limbaugh uses it? There is a long American tradition of adopting the insults your opponents use against you--of taking them on proudly.

I haven't listened to Limbaugh in several years--the last few times I tried his show seemed like wall-to-wall commercials with very little actual content. The worst is when they do a block of commercials, come back, do a quick 15 seconds of talk, play a show bumper, and then another full bock of commercials!

Jupiter said...

If democracy has virtues, they lie, not in the quality of decisions democratically reached, but in the expectation that who has made his bed will lie in it, and that a fool who finds himself outvoted by a multitude may not concede that he is wrong, but will surely concede that he cannot hope to prevail. Again, the Left has fatally undermined both of these sound and convincing arguments, in order to win the right to collect taxes for a few more months.

When Obama was presented as a Constitutional scholar, I had to laugh. The presumption! The half-educated dabbler could barely read the Constitution, and not because he needed glasses. The laugh is on me. Obama understood, better than the rest of us, not how to preserve the Constitution, but how to destroy it. The Left has given us a populace which cannot and will not be governed as a Republic. And now they say, that they are shocked, they are frightened? They cower and cry, "Oh, it cannot be so!", as the creature they have summoned prepares to mount his throne? Say rather,

"Hail, Caesar! Hail!"

tim in vermont said...

Funny how Unknown is all for sucking up to China, despite China's imperialistic peccadilloes, but is ready to declare war and send other people's sons off to fight Putin practically this minute.

This is the same Unknown who breathlessly came here to report that 100 neocons had singed a letter against Trump supporting Hillary.

Bad Lieutenant said...


Unknown said...
Just remember who keeps North Korea in check.
12/2/16, 8:11 PM

Maybe China is the one who should remember that. And do it, assholes! Trump was the first one to say just that. It's funny that you guys think that he is stupid because you are literally not intelligent enough to understand what he is doing.

Guildofcannonballs said...

"Hail, Caesar! Hail!"

You got that right.

The Coen's made that, and I bought it, as a welcoming for Trump to the White House.

And Limbaugh has been stealing my act here on Althouse for years. I never gave a shit 'bout money or credit though.

Reagan, Catholic, and an ungodly-sized penis is why.

Seeing Red said...

No one cared about the missiles before, so why now?

Besides, Japan is closer.

Guildofcannonballs said...

"Guildofcannonballs said...
Hail, Cesar was written as a Catholic welcome to Donald Trump into the White House.

Very impressive film, better than Barry

Lyndon visually.

Some here will think it tacky, gauche, heavy-handed, overwrought, and artsy/fartsy.

After repeated viewings they shall repent and abide.

7/19/16, 6:28 PM "

If you people would quote and worship me, then I wouldn't have to be gauche and do it myself, aighT.

walter said...

guild,
"ungodly sized penis" may not amount to much. Aaannnnd..who the ___ cares.

walter said...

(besides Titus)

My name goes here. said...

BN, it is not possible to listen to Rush and be LIV. Because Rush actually reads legacy media (NY Times, WashPo, Boston Globe, etc.) to his audience or plays media (CNN, ABCCBSNBC, etc.) and then does analysis.

You might form conclusions that are different than yours (or mine) but it is not really possible to pay attention to Rush and be Low Information.

William said...

Just how much Information is the proper amount of information? Is it like Vitamin C in that you need a certain minimum or you get electoral scurvy or some such thing......Some soups you just need a one spoonful taste to determine their worthiness. The same is true for shit sandwiches and douchebags.......I voted for Trump. It was my impression that he would screw up less things than Hillary. I didn't go to his website and research his tax policies before reaching that conclusion. Perhaps later events will prove me wrong, but I had sufficient information to make my decision.

walter said...

If your information is from shit sources, less may be more. However, you may require all to determine which is which.

walter said...

Also has to be viewed within recent revelations of prominent Dems like Brazille and Haberman being on the record colluding..

Jay Vogt said...

Nice you got noted . . . . as you should, but this all kinda meta (as they say nowadays)

Mike said...

Rush gave the comments a shout out too, technically. He recommended people go here and read the post and comments. I see doofus Unknown is exhibiting strange new respect for Sarah Palin.

Are we sure Ingarage's spawn isn't a parody account?

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

Fording and Schram are posers. This is junk science, along the lines of "studies show that conservatives are more likely to be sociopaths".

Want to see low information voters? Check out all the MSM reporters who gestured along with the "hands up don't shoot" narrative* in the Micheal Brown case. It's ironic too, as these people are supposed to be serving as our information brokers and are closer to source.

*Fording and Schram are not not aware it was all misinformation debunked at trial via autopsy and ballistic reports. Brown never had his hands up in surrender, and the witness who claimed such retracted his story once he was put under oath. Low information indeed. Maybe you guys should have gone into gender studies afterall.

Fen said...

they are incapable of voting according to their priorities because they haven't learned enough to make the right (for them) choices.

Yup. That's essentially what the LIV narrative is suggesting. Next up, Fording and Schram will put out a new study claiming we should revisit the 19th Amendment because women are hardwired to let emotion trump reason, especially once a month.

We can see where the LIV path leads. We will have none of it.

Liberty also means the right to do stupid things. Even in ignorance against your own self-interest. It's kind of a canary in a coal mine - we groan when someone says they voted for Bob because they find his accent adorable, but its also a sign that the autocrats who want to manage our daily lives and create a new "soviet man" are not ruling over us.

And I thank Trump for revealing that the "intellectual class has no clothes". It's been hilarious watching the "smart" and "sophisticated" class bumble around all month. All that education and they STILL don't get why their team lost.

Pro Tip: Keep dismissing 61 million Americans as ignorant racist sexist bigoted toothless rednecks sleeping with their sister in a doublewide and dreaming of nuking Mecca. Surely that will shame us into submitting to your superior intellect. But maybe wait until we've stopped laughing at you.

bagoh20 said...

"Rush Limbaugh gives me a shout out and called something I said "astute"...

Maybe he's back on the drugs.

rhhardin said...

Talking to Taiwan makes US jobs less likely to move to China.

James Hofbauer said...

These words blew me away, especially contemplating the depth and reality that many in academia really think this way. Those with a high need for cognition have a positive attitude toward tasks that require reasoning and effortful thinking and are, therefore, more likely to invest the time and resources to do so when evaluating complex issues. In other words, those who disagree with me do not have a ‘high need for cognition’. They are not thoughtful; learning from life, reading, prayer, and experience; rather they are shallow and beneath me. As a superior endowed with intellectual needs others do not possess, it is my duty to use my education to demean and devalue them. Thanks and where do I line up to vote for that arrogance. It is essential to understand Rush’s premise that every individual is intelligent, capable, and possessing a ‘high need for cognition’. It is an ideology of profound equality; a humble, aggressive, and strong faith in God and one’s fellow man. It is the elitist bullshit that is being trounced upon.

James Hofbauer said...

The quote was italicized. I must have messed up posting. Apologies.

Paco Wové said...

"Goering was the fat one."

Yeah, but LIV's don't know that.

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

why I'm not freaking out over Trump

"Who can take journalists — who’ve never once uttered a word of concern over the Democratic Party’s crusade to empower government to ban political speech by overturning Citizens United — seriously when they lose it over a tweet about flag burning?"

...

"What’s really upset Democrats, it seems to me, is that traditional conservative policy proposals, the sorts of things hat Republicans have campaigned on for years — the policies that have helped them win more than 1,000 local seats and governorships and two wave elections — will probably be moving forward. The overwrought rhetoric used to describe overturning Obamacare or reforming entitlements – “gutting” and “privatizing,” etc. — would be precisely the same if we had President-elect John Kasich."

AprilApple said...

More Harsanyi
"Trump’s cabinet nominees are the kind of run-of-the-mill selections any Republican would pick. You’ll remember that last week America was supposed to freak out about the chaos and sluggishness of the transition process. Then we were supposed to freak out about the potential white-maleness of the cabinet. Well, Nikki Haley, Elaine Chao, Seema Verma, and Betsy DeVos are going to be just as extreme to the Left as an actual extremist.

I mean, Dr. Tom Price is going to be accused of plotting the death of the poor because he opposes Obamacare, no matter how many times the American Medical Association endorses him as secretary of Health and Human Services. This is because he’s a Republican, not because he’s being nominated by Trump."

Paco Wové said...

"The overwrought rhetoric used ... would be precisely the same if we had President-elect John Kasich."

Yeah, I first realized this when I saw people having the vapors over Pence, and how he was even worse than Trump, and how Pence would personally electroshock all the gays in America, etc... as far as I know, Pence is fairly mainstream as Republican politicians go. If the lefties are going to freak out over him, it's pretty clear they can't abide any opinions that aren't their own.

Robert Cook said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Robert Cook said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Robert Cook said...

"The intent of the founders was that voting would be a duty, imposed upon those best able to perform it. For this reason, it was restricted to mature men who owned property, and could therefore be expected to be knowledgeable about affairs as a result of long experience in their management."

"Imposed upon?" I think you mean "permitted only to." The vote was permitted only to "men who owned property" because they were wealthy, and being so, were sure to vote "the right way." There's no percentage for the wealthy in actual democracy, if the rabble have the power to make decisions in their own interests.

Or at least, there wasn't before the modern-day science and practice of "propaganda" and "public relations" was created, (in America). Now, the rabble can be convinced to vote for candidates and policies that are inimical to their interests through the wonders of the same medium that convinced women to smoke as an act to declare their feminist independence from patriarchal dominance.

mockturtle said...

Oaco Wové states: If the lefties are going to freak out over him, it's pretty clear they can't abide any opinions that aren't their own.

They will always find something to freak out about. It's what they do. What we need to do is ignore them.

mockturtle said...

Sorry. Paco Wové.

Bruce Hayden said...

Maybe Trump is wrong to be talking to Taiwan. But, maybe he is smart like a fox. China right now is probably not in a good position to complain too much. They have an export driven economy that they need to convert to something else, and can't. We owe them a lot of money as a result, that they desperately need back, with their cooling economy and rapidly aging population. Remember the old adage that if you owe someone $1,000, it is your problem, but if you owe them $100 million, it is theirs? I think that this could be a peremptory shot across China's bow, waking them up. To the new world reality of an ascendant America, after eight years of Obama weakness. I expect that we will ultimately get back to the One China policy, but probably not before some concessions on the part of the PRC.

rcocean said...

I hope Rush visited the Althouse Amazon Portal for all his Holiday shopping!

Fen said...

Rush Limbaugh gives me a shout out and called something I said "astute"

bagoh: "Maybe he's back on the drugs"

Hey, I thought part of your plea agreement was to stay off the internet and away from 12 year old boys. Should we call your parole officer?

Shorter - you're mocking a guy who got addicted to pain medication. Fuck you. I hope you get cancer so I can come visit you in the hospital. We'll talk more about Rush while I crimp your morphine drip.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Fen, brother, you're testy lately. It's unlike you. Hope you are well.

It's okay, you can attack me for making this observation. I forgive you in advance. :-)