May 1, 2017

What was learned from focus groups of people in Wisconsin and Michigan who voted for Obama and then didn't vote in 2016 or voted for Trump.

Greg Sargent reports (in The Washington Post):
A shockingly large percentage of these Obama-Trump voters said Democrats’ economic policies will favor the wealthy — twice the percentage that said the same about Trump. I was also permitted to view video of some focus group activity, which showed Obama-Trump voters offering sharp criticism of Democrats on the economy.... In one, Obama-Trump voters were asked what Democrats stand for today and gave answers such as these:

“The one percent.”

“The status quo.”

“They’re for the party. Themselves and the party.”... 

231 comments:

1 – 200 of 231   Newer›   Newest»
Michael K said...

The present Democrat hierarchy has no idea. They are focused on Marxism but that is not where the money comes from.

Watch who Obama socializes with.

Kennedy complained that Eisenhower did not socialize with Army buddies but with rich men he had met as president.

Original Mike said...

Hillary paid for Obama's anti-growth policies.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

I'd been thinkin' eight years of job-creator nirvana was more likely than four. But, we may be able to keep this thing rollin' for sixteen years.

Between this sorta thing and Kansas and the fact that the US has a massive additional capacity for borrowing and spending--maybe twenty four years.

Rubes are really interesting, imho.




Carry on.

traditionalguy said...

The FDR+HST coalition is now The DJT coalition. And the Thomas Dewey money elites dressed up as McCarthyites fighting Russians is all the Dems have got.

Now that is a turn around that would give the Media Narrative a whiplash if they tried reporting it.

Nonapod said...

But that can't be! The Democrats are so moral and virtuous, and the Republicans are so evil and covetous. I know so because the Democrats would never shut up about it for the 8 years they held power.

Ambrose said...

"Shockingly"? - to whom?

Bill Peschel said...

When Obama told Wall Street "I'm all you have between you and the pitchforks," those damn voters were listening.

Bay Area Guy said...

I've spent many years in 3 cities: (1) New York (parents born and raised), (2) San Francisco Bay Area (raised) and (3) West LA (schooled).

There's a lotta 1 percenters in those locales. Upper West Side Manhattan, Pacific Heights in SF, and Brentwood,Westwood,Bel-Aire, and Beverly Hills in West LA.

Surprise, surprise, surprise -- I'd say about 80-90% are Dems.

These Wisconsin folks are darn savvy about how the real world works...,

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

How cool would it be to be a rich D.

We are told that smug mocking of DJT folks makes these folks more loyal to DJT. So, ya get to mock these folks, and this makes them vote for more tax and biz benefits for you.

Art of the Deal.

Balfegor said...

Re: 3rdGadePB_GoodPerson:

We are told that smug mocking of DJT folks makes these folks more loyal to DJT. So, ya get to mock these folks, and this makes them vote for more tax and biz benefits for you.

Yeah! Like eliminating the state tax deduction . . . oh wait . . .

Eric said...

This shocks Mr. Sargent and his colleagues at WaPo. Can he see a problem with that?

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

Bal,

Try and get that through congress.


buwaya said...

"Try and get that through congress."

The Democrats will vote against of course.

BTW, what party did you favor?

buwaya said...

"Yeah! Like eliminating the state tax deduction . . . oh wait . . ."

Being high-income California residents, this will likely cost us a lot.
Still, I favor it.
It is necessary for Californian fiscal and operational discipline.

MadisonMan said...

From the Article: He acknowledged Clinton’s “high unfavorable ratings” but added that “some of these problems pre-dated 2016.”

That is, from during the Obama Administration.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

Buw,

I was 3rd party for POTUS this time, R everywhere else on the ballot (as usual ("life long R", as they say)).



And, plenty of Rs know who butters their bread re that getting through congress.

Todd said...

“Certainly a subset of these voters were responsive to what Trump was selling them on immigration. But you had a lot of consistency with the Obama-Trump voters … in terms of the severe economic anxiety they face.”

So the hicks are racist but the Democrats were worried about the economy.

for-profit prisons that abuse inmates and do nothing to reform them

Wait, you mean the Government run prisons are all about skills training and reform? Really? No prisoners are EVER abused at Government run facilities? What is this guy smoking?

for-profit colleges that offer false hopes and incredible amounts of debt (my brother went to one)

So TRUE! No "non-profit" colleges EVER sell a student a false hope, nope, never! They never get students jammed up with huge student loans!

Damn, I hate how "non-profit" is tossed around like it makes any organization using it pure and up-standing. Do you know what "non-profit" means? It means you are not to show a profit. It means you MUST spend all you take in. It does not mean you don't waste money. It does not mean you do a better job than a "for profit". It does not mean they don't pay their "employees" insane salaries. It is not a magic wand of "purity". It is just different accounting rules.

Wilbur said...

Guy Cecil draws the conclusion from their interviews:
"The deck is stacked against most Americans in many ways. Pharmaceutical companies that gouge consumers, for-profit prisons that abuse inmates and do nothing to reform them, for-profit colleges that offer false hopes and incredible amounts of debt (my brother went to one). Democrats must take on these systemic problems and we must name names."

Are we supposed to believe these are the issues that were mentioned by voters in the interviews? And what the Dems should run on? Private-sector prisons? For-profit colleges? Are they courageous enough to take on these systematic problems and NAME NAMES?

Wow. He's either lying or they ARE truly clueless.

Original Mike said...

"The Democrats will vote against of course."

Of course. They're the party of the rich.

buwaya said...

"Wow. He's either lying or they ARE truly clueless."

He is reciting acceptably modified propaganda lines. They cannot admit to their own public the extent of the conflict of interest of their own backers, so they have to select, and limit, their cast of villains.

Sort of like what PB&J here likes to do. Speaking a line of an all-encompassing truth will make him explode, apparently.

tcrosse said...

It's time to revive FDR's term Economic Royalists. The term, as FDR used it, describes the Big Money boys of Wall Street, Silicon Valley, and Hollywood, only this time around they're not Republicans.

Chuck said...

I won't say that I am shocked, but I really do not understand any "Obama/Trump" voters.

Are there any Obama/Trump voters here?

I would have a lot of questions, for an Obama/Trump voter. And at the end of my questioning, I don't have any good feeling as to who will remain more confused and disillusioned; the Obama/Trump voter or me.

Bill Kristol is speaking here in Michigan in a couple of hours. He was interviewed on the Detroit NPR station this morning. And he was commenting on the extent to which Trump has been non-disastrous so far. Of course the selection of Justice Gorsuch was singled out as something that was executed to perfection and which is likely to outlast any Trump presidency. Of course, Trump gets little if any credit for the nomination, or the successful confirmation.

n.n said...

The double-edged scalpel of progressive propaganda. It seems the Ass was hoisted by its own petard. They lost me at [class] diversity (e.g. racism, sexism), social justice adventurism (e.g. elective regime changes), redistributive change (i.e. minority rule), presumed guilty (and trial by press), scientific mysticism (e.g. spontaneous conception, quasi-scientific assertions of origin), and what passes as religious/moral enlightenment: congruence, abortion rites. Redistributive debt, inflated costs, monopolistic practices, and and other anti-capitalist policies was so yesteryear. The progress of anti-nativism was expected but denigrating individual dignity, denying personal character, and convincing people that they were the bigots was a stroke of genius.

Earnest Prole said...

This just in: Democrats are the party of the urban elite and not the rest of the country. It's always funny when "smart" people are the last to get the memo.

n.n said...

Anyway, it remains to be seen if the other Party is better capable of an internally, externally, and mutually consistent reconciliation of moral, natural, and personal imperatives. While I remain cautiously optimistic, the root of all evil is the human ego and should not be underestimated. That, and the tightly wound ball of yarns has reached critical mass.

Drago said...

"lifelong republican" Chuck: "I won't say that I am shocked, but I really do not understand any "Obama/Trump" voters."

Or Not Obama/Trump voters.

Basically, the set of voters you do not understand is commonly referred to as "all voters".

This obvious and inescapable truth, once combined with your astonishing sense of superiority and self-proclaimed mind-reading skills, creates a most amusing sight indeed.

The flailing and rapid-fire adopting of whatever the latest Maddow-inspired talking point makes it even more hilarious.

The Godfather said...

How could anyone imagine that the party that nominated Hillary is the party of the status quo and the one percent?

Curious George said...

From Althouse's early Nancy Pelosi post:

"Isn't the Democratic Party a bit of a mess right now, too?

PELOSI: No, it isn't. The Democratic Party is unified. I would say -- my own critique of the Democrats, we have walked the walk, but we haven't talked the talk. All we do is fight for America's working families against special interests that the Republicans represent.

But that has not come across."

So, it's a massaging problem.

Drago said...

"lifelong republican" Chuck: "Of course, Trump gets little if any credit for the nomination, or the successful confirmation."

LOL

He's just the President who nominated Gorsuch. Why should he get any credit?!

You simply can't parody these "lifelong republican" morons.

David said...

"Are there any Obama/Trump voters here?'

Yep. I'm one. What would you like to know?

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Bill Kristol is speaking here in Michigan in a couple of hours. He was interviewed on the Detroit NPR station this morning.

Well of course he was.

NAFTA was passed with the collusion of Billy Bob Clinton. That Trans-Pacific free trade deal? Obama. Outsourcing and H1B visas and manufacturing moving over seas and unrestricted low-skilled (and sometime not so low skilled, being a mason is a skilled trade, try finding a non-illegal immigrant still doing it around these parts) has just as much support from the Democrat party as the pre-Trump Republican.

I have a theory. The reason so many in the Democrat party despise the lower and middle-classes is a defense mechanism. They know their policies are devastating to them, so they declare them to be "badz people," who are worse than Hitler. Because then screwing them over for financial gain isn't a shocking betrayal of the principles they claim to hold, its a moral necessity. In fact, its downright virtuous. Think of all the third-world people they are exploiting for cheap labor, I mean helping.

Hagar said...

The Republicans are the party of the rich; the Democrats are the party of the very, very rich.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

"Yep. I'm one. What would you like to know?"

Since she's bein' all secret about it, do you think Althouse is one of your kind?

tim in vermont said...

Surprise surprise surprise! The party of millionaire starlets and billionaire tech moguls that kicked their deplorable working class (people who actually perform labor for a paycheck) to the curb is perceived to represent the wealthy elite! How many illegals does it take to keep a stable of racehorses or a string of polo ponies anyways? A lot!

Larry J said...

For generations, the Democrats have claimed to be the party of the working people. For decades (if not forever), that simply has not been the truth. The Democrats are the party of ever growing government. People who've seen the factories close in their towns - in no small part due to the high cost of complying with government regulations and high tax rates - see that more government isn't going to help their communities. All government has to offer is soul-sucking welfare programs. Plus, the SJWs are crazy on stilts. People who're used to working for a living have little time nor understanding of the 37 genders. Being told they're a bunch of ignorant racists doesn't help, either.

Char Char Binks said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
I Callahan said...

This isn't as surprising as it seems. Wisconsin and Michigan are industrial states, to some degree. When the Dems threw John Dingell off the Energy and Commerce committee, and placed Henry Friggin Waxman in charge, thereby ushering in all of the global warming gaia BS and hurting manufacturing workers, it was a telltale sign.

tim in vermont said...

So, it's a massaging problem.

It's always the message, never the policies! Never!

tim in vermont said...

This isn't as surprising as it seems.

You found this even modestly surprising?

Char Char Binks said...

Turns out trying to win voters by calling them a basket of deplorables was a bad tactic. Hindsight is 20/20.

I Callahan said...

I would have a lot of questions, for an Obama/Trump voter. And at the end of my questioning, I don't have any good feeling as to who will remain more confused and disillusioned; the Obama/Trump voter or me.

Dear God. Didn't you say you're from the Detroit area? Talk to any UAW workers, and why they voted for Trump? Or are the NOKD's to you?

I sometimes wonder if people are really that self-unaware.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

So, 100+ days into Trump's presidency, the Democrat nabobs are just now struggling to comprehend that the voters they took for granted may not be buying their propaganda any longer? Or buying into the radical social engineering they want to perform?

Whoda thunk it?!

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

"Turns out trying to win voters by calling them a "basket of deplorables" was bad tactic. Hindsight is 20/20."

Or was it?

If the result is that you and your fellow rich folk end up paying lower taxes w/ fewer biz restraints, what's the downside? Seems like gettin' to make fun of rubes is like the cherry on the top of your cake that you're chowin' down.



Carry on.

Mike said...

Lincoln was right. "You can fool some of the people..."

khesanh0802 said...

This only reinforces Thomas Frank's analysis of the Democratic party in " Listen, Liberal or Whatever Happened to the Party of the People?". Frank is way over on the left for solutions, but his condemnation of the Dems and Hillary is spot on.

I Callahan said...

You found this even modestly surprising?

I didn't find it surprising at all. Apparently other people in this thread did, including one who claims he lives in the Detroit area.

tim in vermont said...

f the result is that you and your fellow rich folk end up paying lower taxes w/ fewer biz restraints, what's the downside? Seems like gettin' to make fun of rubes is like the cherry on the top of your cake that you're chowin' down

Yeah, that's why they ponied up so many millions and millions of dollars for Hillary to burn! Because they secretly wanted Trump! It's diabolical in its genius!

Drago said...

Mike: "Lincoln was right. "You can fool some of the people..."

Indeed. Just look at all the leftists lining up for the next experiment in "how fast can we make "us" like Venezuela?!!"

I Callahan said...

If the result is that you and your fellow rich folk end up paying lower taxes w/ fewer biz restraints, what's the downside? Seems like gettin' to make fun of rubes is like the cherry on the top of your cake that you're chowin' down.

Well, yeah, if you're only thinking in the short term. In the long term, you get Trump. Which is what they got.

Apparently, that wasn't such a wise choice after all...

tim in vermont said...

Working class full of deplorable rubes won't vote for your selected candidate... Hmmm. Maybe it is a "messaging problem."

I Callahan said...

Working class full of deplorable rubes won't vote for your selected candidate... Hmmm. Maybe it is a "messaging problem."

Heh! It's the thing the left tells themselves every time they lose an election. It couldn't POSSIBLY be that people don't agree with their agenda.

Drago said...

Tim in Vermont: "Yeah, that's why they ponied up so many millions and millions of dollars for Hillary to burn! Because they secretly wanted Trump! It's diabolical in its genius!"

The lefties are so turned around they can't help but twist themselves into human mobius strips of logic to explain away the simple fact that their political philosophies are insane and inevitably lead to mind, body and soul crushing reactions and sometimes, sometimes, enough people figure that out just in time to avoid becoming the next Peoples Paradise.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

"Apparently, that wasn't such a wise choice after all..."

As if he's gonna raise taxes on rich folks and put regulations on biz stuff.

Not sure why some of ya have a mental block re this.

Todd said...

Curious George said...
From Althouse's early Nancy Pelosi post:

"Isn't the Democratic Party a bit of a mess right now, too?

PELOSI: No, it isn't. The Democratic Party is unified. I would say -- my own critique of the Democrats, we have walked the walk, but we haven't talked the talk. All we do is fight for America's working families against special interests that the Republicans represent.

But that has not come across."

So, it's a massaging problem.

5/1/17, 2:56 PM


Interesting statement by Pelosi if that is a quote. If shorted by removing the unnecessary, it reads more clear as:

No, it isn't. The Democratic Party is unified. All we do is fight against the Republicans.

Not saying that is a bad thing. You need this sort of conflict in a two party system in order to [at times] force compromise BUT the Democrats have given up all pretense of compromise a LONG time ago. I am not a big fan of the Republicans but at this point in time that is all we have. I am tired of the Republics declaring defeat at the victory party. If they fought even half as hard as the Democrats do, we would have one heck of a thing going on right now versus this near bankrupt mess we actually have.

Drago said...

3rdgrader: "Not sure why some of ya have a mental block re this."

LOL

Yes, he/she just wrote that. Without irony.

tim in vermont said...

A "rube" is somebody who just doesn't understand that we are going to make sure jobs don't come back to these shores as long has it threatens our ability to accumulate even more massive wealth; somebody who doesn't understand that we are going to flood the labor market with illegals no matter what they say or do, because we want the cheap labor and we want the votes. No K-Y for the rubes even.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

Drago,

It's a heads ya win and tales ya win deal.

Tales is just more satisfying cause ya gets to make fun of rubes.

Drago said...

Every day I wonder "will today be the first day we get indications that the left is figuring out precisely what happened, why, and begins developing a common sense approach to their problem?"

Then I read comments here and elsewhere and I am comforted that the left haven't even begun to define the problem, much less develop corrective measures.

No wonder they, like Chuckie boy, are so invested in lunatic impeachment fantasies. They have nothing else.

Drago said...

3rdgrader: "Drago, something....something....whatever"

Carry on!

tim in vermont said...

Tales is just more satisfying cause ya gets to make fun of rubes.

I won't say PB&J is butt hurt, because that would be a rape joke, but he sure does seem to be struggling with the idea that the "rubes" won't vote for him, no matter how nastily he asks them. He would rather lose elections than give up his little frissons of superiority he gets by insulting people he despises. Archie Bunker felt the same way, saying bigoted things made Archie feel elevated. PB&J thinks that saying bigoted things makes a person feel low and mean, but I don't think it does, I think it gives them that unearned sense of superiority. PB&J can't get enough of that feeling.

DanTheMan said...

Any bitter clingers who then became basket deplorables?

I think Nancy P has it right. The insult messaging just needs some tuning before the people Dems detest start voting D again.

Chuck said...

I Callahan said...
I would have a lot of questions, for an Obama/Trump voter. And at the end of my questioning, I don't have any good feeling as to who will remain more confused and disillusioned; the Obama/Trump voter or me.

Dear God. Didn't you say you're from the Detroit area? Talk to any UAW workers, and why they voted for Trump? Or are the NOKD's to you?

I sometimes wonder if people are really that self-unaware.


Policy-wise, there's not a whole lot of difference, between Obama and Hillary. Or Marco Rubio and President Trump.

There may have been a few similar campaign tones shared by Obama, and Trump. Obama saying that he'll use the power of the government to favor unionized auto workers, and Trump saying the same thing. But in terms of real policy, there's an ocean of difference.

I think I know why some UAW workers voted for Trump (their union leaders told them no to) and it is because the UAW guys believed in a whole lot of garbage that came out of the Trump campaign. A border wall with Mexico (while we live 20 minutes from and almost-unpatrolled international border). Branding China as a "currency manipulator." Maybe there are UAW gun owners who made that their issue. (But then why vote for Obama?!?) I don't know how "Obamacare" mattered to them; the UAW's (pretty great) health care plan hasn't much changed, except to get more expensive, which has been happening for years, and for which Donald Trump hasn't offered any particular solution.

I don't know; I said I didn't know. I'd have lots of hard questions. And of course, my point wouldn't be to convince a UAW member which way to vote. I'd just want to know why, if Obama was his choice in 2008 and 2012, wasn't Hillary the next logical choice? And if Trump was the choice in 2016, why the heck didn't you turn out and vote for McCain and Romney in the previous two elections?

I do know for an absolute fact, that there were LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS of Michigan voters who turned out to vote for Obama, twice. And who then didn't vote at all in 2016. Those voters were the difference in how Michigan's electoral votes were swung. There were 130,000 of them in Wayne County alone. Mostly blacks, I presume, who felt uninspired by or unconnected to Hillary Clinton. (Wife of the First Black President, so go figure.) Those non-voters were the difference-makers in this state.

If anybody here is an Obama/Trump voter, and who wants to undergo questioning, please do let me know.


tim in vermont said...

At least Don Rickles was funny some of the time.

DanTheMan said...

Any Romney/HRC voters around? Might be equally interesting...

I Callahan said...

As if he's gonna raise taxes on rich folks and put regulations on biz stuff. Not sure why some of ya have a mental block re this.

Wait a minute - this is about Obama voters and why they voted for Trump. I know perfectly well why I did.

Original Mike said...

Todd said..."Interesting statement by Pelosi if that is a quote. If shorted by removing the unnecessary, it reads more clear as:
No, it isn't. The Democratic Party is unified. All we do is fight against the Republicans."

Listening to Pelosi and Schumer, that's all that motivates them. It's tragic.

tim in vermont said...

USA’s polling found that 43 percent of them said their income is falling behind the cost of living, and another 49 percent said incomes were merely keeping pace. “There’s a lot of commonality between these drop-off voters and the Obama-Trump voters,”

Of course this had zero to do with immigration right? Any opposition to immigration comes purely from a place of deplorable racism!

Chuck said...

Drago said...
...
No wonder they, like Chuckie boy, are so invested in lunatic impeachment fantasies. They have nothing else.


I'm not invested in any "lunatic impeachment fantasies." I would love it, if Trump were impeached, and I have said so. But as I have also said, I would never want it to happen, unless the evidence was so completely stone-cold that even the Hannitys of the world couldn't complain. I would want an impeachment that was so uncontestable that the Trump name would be consigned to a darker dungeon of American history than the Nixon name.

I'm not counting on it, and I am not imagining it, or picturing it. I am certainly not predicting it.

So now you can explain how or why you'd accuse me of being "invested" in a "lunatic fantasy." Based on which quote from me?

tim in vermont said...

Maybe we just had enough of the Rodham Hussein regime.

DanTheMan said...

>>I would love it, if Trump were impeached,

What high crimes has he committed? (Not just accused of on MSNBC)

Original Mike said...

"I'm not invested in any "lunatic impeachment fantasies." I would love it, if Trump were impeached, and I have said so."

Speaking of tragic...

I Callahan said...

I would love it, if Trump were impeached, and I have said so. But as I have also said, I would never want it to happen, unless the evidence was so completely stone-cold that even the Hannitys of the world couldn't complain.

The Trump Derangement Syndrome is so severe here that the patient doesn't even realize that you can't hold those two positions without suffering from the disease.

Chuck said...

DanTheMan said...
Any Romney/HRC voters around? Might be equally interesting...


George Will would have been one. There would be a substantial list, of Republican Old Hands, in the Washington/foreign policy set, who voted Republican all their lives, and who virtually campaigned for Romney (as I did), who voted for Hillary in 2016 (as I never would).

I think you can find such a list within the Wikipedia pages.

Will explained his thinking in several columns. It boiled down to his thinking that Donald Trump was a dangerously unstable maniac, and could not be trusted as president. It was entirely personal. Almost devoid of any policy consideration(s).

And, in some part (another part of Will's analysis) it was for the protection and preservation of the Republican Party. Will thought it would be better for the Party, to purge itself of Trumpism with a colossal electoral loss, than to have Trump become president and co-opt the future of the Party.

I am personally happy with my own Trump vote -- I differed from Will in that regard -- and what time seems to have shown is that while George Will didn't misjudge Trump, he did underestimate the extent to which Trump would be hemmed in by the Washington power structure, and would be less personally dangerous. Also misjudged was the extent to which Trump would turn his back on his most risible campaign promises.

tim in vermont said...

Osama bin Laden, Obama and Biden, Saddam Hussein, Rodham Hussein, I mean there has to be a joke there somewhere!

Maybe Obama showed that your middle name has to be exactly the name of a vicious dictator, not just rhyme with it. Hillary, always a day late and a dollar short.

Sam L. said...

Shows how out of touch the pollsters and reporters are.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

So far, so good. But Bezos should bump up the smugness, just to make sure that the ROI is guaranteed.

So much fun!

Lewis Wetzel said...

In my state, Hawaii, GOP presidential votes were about the same in 2016 and 2012 and 2008. The Democrat votes were way down in 2016 compared to 2012 and 2008. Hillary still won Hawaii by better than two to one, but I think that it's interesting that you saw the same Dem drop off in far-away, deep-blue Hawaii that you saw in Wisconsin.
(Adapted from Wiki)

2008:
Nominee Barack Obama John McCain
Electoral vote 4 0
Popular vote 325,871 120,566
Percentage 71.85% 26.58%

2012:
Nominee Barack Obama Mitt Romney
Electoral vote 4 0
Popular vote 306,658 121,015
Percentage 70.55% 27.84%

2016:
Nominee Hillary Clinton Donald Trump
Electoral vote 3[1] 0
Popular vote 266,891 128,847
Percentage 62.22% 30.03%

Kirk Parker said...

Todd,

"[non-profit] means you MUST spend all you take in."

It absolutely does not. A non-profit can definitely have a surplus that gets carried forward. All non-profit means is you can't have shareholders, to whom you distribute any of that surplus.

The rest of what you say is right on, mind you, including both the silly "badge of pure motives" and your conclusion: "it is just different accounting rules."

Chuck,

One possible category of understandable Obama/Trump voter: those who voted Obama but have started to wise up. It happens...



"it's a massaging problem."

And no happy ending in sight.

DanTheMan said...

>>I am personally happy with my own Trump vote

So you voted for him, and after a few months in office you want him impeached?

When did you want him impeached on day 1, or what?

Chuck said...

DanTheMan said...
>>I would love it, if Trump were impeached,

What high crimes has he committed? (Not just accused of on MSNBC)


I didn't claim any crimes. I didn't make any case for impeachment. What is so hard to understand here? I didn't predict any impeachment. I am not counting on any impeachment. I am not fantasizing about any impeachment.

I said I would love it, if it happened.

Here:

I would love it, if the Tigers win the World Series. I am not predicting it, and (with our current bullpen) not counting on it.

I would love it, if I won the Mega-Millions lottery. I am not predicting it, and (with several hundred million-to-one odds) not counting on it.

I would love it, if Donald Trump were found guilty of a felony and spent several years in a federal prison. I am not predicting it, and I am not counting on it.

See how this works? Dial back your Trump-mind about nine notches, and then read again what I wrote.

Chuck said...

DanTheMan said...
>>I am personally happy with my own Trump vote

So you voted for him, and after a few months in office you want him impeached?

When did you want him impeached on day 1, or what?

As long as the Federalist Society picked the next two or three Supreme Court nominees, that would be great!

exiledonmainstreet said...

Heh! It's the thing the left tells themselves every time they lose an election. It couldn't POSSIBLY be that people don't agree with their agenda.

5/1/17, 3:14 PM

Yes, isn't it funny that the party which continually mocks Trump's inelegant speech, takes pride in Obama's "eloquence" (actually it was expert teleprompter reading skills) and loved Billy Jeff's "everything but the kitchen sink" State of the Union marathons, has such a problem getting its' message out?

And here they have the MSM assisting them every step of the way. And gee, the dumb hicks still don't understand that "I'm with the government and I'm here to HELP!"

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

exile,

the hicks are saying, it seems, that the Ds are the party of the rich who, are only looking out for themselves.

So, tell me how these self-interested rich Ds are going to suffer w/ Rs giving them tax cuts and fewer rules re biz stuff?

Snatch.

exiledonmainstreet said...


"I'm not invested in any "lunatic impeachment fantasies." I would love it, if Trump were impeached, and I have said so"

That of course, would benefit chuck's beloved Republican Party so much. Why, just look at how the GOP flourished in '74 and '76 as a result of Watergate.

The Democrats are powerless and in disarray. However, they still have more than a fighting chance since so many in the Stupid Party are so stupid.

exiledonmainstreet said...


"So, tell me how these self-interested rich Ds are going to suffer w/ Rs giving them tax cuts and fewer rules re biz stuff?"

Tell me why Silicon Valley and Wall Street votes D.

I take it the self-interested rich were a bit concerned about the flood of cheap labor from Mexico drying up...

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

Mich and Wis were big targets of the Russian propaganda program.

Maybe we're giving too much credit to lib smugness re pushing these folks toward DJT. Is there a way to come up w/ questions that measure voter opinions v exposure to Russian propaganda?

It'd be a shame if lib smugness wasn't the primary motivator.


tim in vermont said...

As long as the government continues to create vast sums of cash through mechanisms like quantitative easing, the very wealthy are going to be able to suck it up, and the powerless are going to see their earnings devalued, and their savings devalued, all the while being forced to compete with a flood of cheap labor for wages and jobs themselves.

It's not that hard, PB&J, not that hard.

exiledonmainstreet said...

"Why, just look at how the GOP flourished in '74 and '76 as a result of Watergate."

And that was after Nixon was elected by a landslide in '72.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

exile,

Basically rich folks can't lose. R or D = win or win.

Such is life.

tim in vermont said...

Mich and Wis were big targets of the Russian propaganda program.

Ha ha ha! Did they unleash a cadre of elite internet trolls?

tim in vermont said...

I wonder how many of these voters cited "Russian propaganda" as their reason for voting for Trump? The Russians cleverly hacked their paychecks to lower them, cleverly put horrific economic pressure on them in other ways! It was just and incredible effort all around for Ivan!

exiledonmainstreet said...

"Mich and Wis were big targets of the Russian propaganda program."

Oh, yeah. I'm in Wisconsin, and I tell you, the Russian propaganda machine was relentless. Everyday, I found this pair on my doorstep, hissing, "Hey, comrade lady, do not vote for pantsuit lady, she is crook. Vote for wise and noble Trump, friend of our beloved Putin. You do that, we bring you nice vodka and Natasha make big pot of very fine borscht for you."

http://pre02.deviantart.net/dee8/th/pre/i/2015/146/c/4/boris_and_natasha_by_darcat1530-d8uuk9h.jpg

The constant pressure just got to me, ya know?

That borscht was delicious.

Original Mike said...

"Mich and Wis were big targets of the Russian propaganda program."

My monthly checks from Putin are much appreciated.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

TiV, exile,

The propaganda wasn't labeled as such.

Folks would need to be asked what the look at online.

And, FTR I hope it's just making fun of y'all, not Putin, that turns you into DJT voters.

Way more funny.

exiledonmainstreet said...

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...
exile,

Basically rich folks can't lose. R or D = win or win."

That's usually the case in life, isn't it?

But the working stiffs want to win occasionally. Under the Dems, it's lose, lose, lose, lose.

And they figured that out.

Lewis Wetzel said...

Blogger 3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...
Mich and Wis were big targets of the Russian propaganda program.


Are you serious, PB&J?
The Dem dropoff in Hawaii from 2012 was similar to the Dem dropoff in Michigan and Wisconsin.
Hawaii is an interesting case because it's political culture is unlike the political culture of the mainland, and no presidential candidates campaign here. Too few electoral votes.
Obama didn't have much of a "native son" appeal in Hawaii. He was raised elsewhere for most of his childhood, his parents and his grandparents were transplants from the mainland, and he left for the mainland as soon as he graduated from prep school.

Drago said...

3rdGrader: "Mich and Wis were big targets of the Russian propaganda program."

Do tell. Do tell. Any scintillating details? Wave after wave of Russian operatives on the ground practicing mass hypnosis? Handing out lots and lots of "walkin' around' rubles? Free borscht for votes? Ad campaigns featuring Soviet era posters on billboards?

Come on 3rdgrader! Don't leave us in suspense. How did those rascally Rasputin's pull this off?

Lol

Some ideas are so stupid and transparently false only leftists and "lifelong republicans" buy into them.

Chuck said...

exiledonmainstreet said...
"Why, just look at how the GOP flourished in '74 and '76 as a result of Watergate."

And that was after Nixon was elected by a landslide in '72.


It's a fair point, but by 1980...

Anyway, I think it is a problem that can be avoided if the Party successfully distances itself from Trump. Trump, the old New York Democrat:

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/21/politics/donald-trump-election-democrat/


3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

Lewis,

I saw what you wrote earlier. But, ya had a home town kid w/ BHO.

Apples and oranges.

exiledonmainstreet said...

"Folks would need to be asked what the look at online."

Like Podesta's emails? Which were, you know, actually written by Podesta? How nice of the Democrat Party to provide the Russians with anti-Democrat propaganda like that! They didn't even have to hire a writer to make the Dems sound sleazy and crooked and condescending. Podesta did that all by himself!

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

Hey folks, I don't want the Russian propaganda to be the big influence.

In fact, that would suck, imho.

Way cooler if y'all keep saying that being mocked by smug folks makes you DJT supporters.

That's my gig here.



Carry on.

Nyamujal said...

"A shockingly large percentage of these Obama-Trump voters said Democrats’ economic policies will favor the wealthy — twice the percentage that said the same about Trump. I was also permitted to view video of some focus group activity, which showed Obama-Trump voters offering sharp criticism of Democrats on the economy.... In one, Obama-Trump voters were asked what Democrats stand for today and gave answers such as these:

“The one percent.”

“The status quo.”

“They’re for the party. Themselves and the party.”... "

LOL! What the fuck are these people smoking? Yes, Trump/Ryancare, slashing taxes on the wealthy, rolling back Dodd-Frank, appointing the super rich to his cabinet including tonnes of ex-Goldman Sachs employees, etc is all anti-one percent.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I'll leave this Matt Yglesias rant here which perfectly sums up my feelings: https://twitter.com/willmuessig/status/842173151769427968

MadisonMan said...

Mich and Wis were big targets of the Russian propaganda program.

And we fell for it hook line and sinker. Gosh we're such rubes here.

David said...

The Wisconsin Democratic Party constitutes a lot of the reason why Trump prevailed. They made mistake after mistake in response to Walker. The recount, the boycott, the marching by the smug and overprivileged, the cultural contempt, the corrupt investigation into Walker. It's a long list. Plus the unrealistic aspects of the Democratic programs. Plus plus plus. And yet it was still close.

tim in vermont said...

appointing the super rich to his cabinet including tonnes of ex-Goldman Sachs employees, etc is all anti-one percent.

And the Democrats gave us such a contrast here. Did you know that a Citicorp executive in a private email named the Obama cabinet correctly almost to the person? How much money did Hillary take from Goldman Sachs for her cheerleader style speeches to the troops there?

Ha ha ha! Like the Democrats gave us a choice!

tim in vermont said...

The Democrats' big problem is that they enjoy mocking and deriding the people they need to vote for them way too much to stop.

David said...

"LOL! What the fuck are these people smoking?"

Keep it up, Big Boy. Tell those people who deserted your candidate just how stupid and out of touch they are. Why, they must be on drugs! Just keep showering them with contempt and any moment they will see how right you are, and what a horrible mistake they made in deserting the orthodoxy.

exiledonmainstreet said...

David said...
The Wisconsin Democratic Party constitutes a lot of the reason why Trump prevailed. They made mistake after mistake in response to Walker"

I think you're correct and would add that the recall effort really did wonders for the Wisconsin GOP GOTV. The structure they set up remained in place after the recall, and although it didn't prevent Baldwin's election or Wisconsin turning blue in 2012, they were quite well organized in 2016.

Bad Lieutenant said...


3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...
Drago,

It's a heads ya win and tales ya win deal.

Tales is just more satisfying cause ya gets to make fun of rubes.

5/1/17, 3:17 PM


You like to hurt people, don't you?

MaxedOutMama said...

I keep thinking of a Mark Twain comment "To lodge all power in one party and keep it there is to insure bad government and the sure and gradual deterioration of the public morals."

If I wanted a pure Republican government, I would be spreading the Russian rumor. But we all know a pure Republican government is just going to mutate into a disaster unless it has to compete hard in every election.

I am beginning to believe that we should just start another party to replace the Democrats, though. They are persisting in the circular firing squad maneuver too long.

tim in vermont said...

One thing no Democrat should feel the need to do is ask themselves if they are doing something wrong. No! They are surrounded by idiots! What torture that must be for them! Everybody else is stupid but them! Nobody understand that Democrats just want what's best for people losing their jobs to illegals, namely equality for all 29 officially recognized genders! Gender 30, lesbian trapped in a man's body, is not recognized, even though it has many members, like certain Indian tribes.

exiledonmainstreet said...

BTW, I must report that when I asked Natasha for her delicious borscht recipe, she gave me an evil smile and said, "Secret ingredient is moose and squirrel."

So the bastards not only flipped Wisconsin and Michigan, they finally got Rocky and Bullwinkle too!

exiledonmainstreet said...

You like to hurt people, don't you?

5/1/17, 4:47 PM

It appears PB compensates for his obvious intellectual shortcomings by sneering at poor people.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

Bad L,

A little good natured ribbing is innocent fun. No harm done.

And, maybe DJT is gonna MAGA factory jobs, or whatever it is normal folks are expecting.

So, the joke may be on the rich after all.

I dunno.

Robert Cook said...

The present Democrat hierarchy (is) focused on Marxism....."

This is completely delusional.

Drago said...

3rdgrader: "Way cooler if y'all keep saying that being mocked by smug folks makes you DJT supporters.

That's my gig here."

Actually no one here has said that.

Your gig apparently includes impenetrable obtuseness which, let's face it, is clearly in your wheelhouse.

tim in vermont said...

And, maybe DJT is gonna MAGA factory jobs, or whatever it is normal folks are expecting

A good start is not throwing up one's hands proclaiming that all is lost before even trying.

Virgil Hilts said...

My own two cents. Numerous people on and associated Wall Street orchestrated multi-billion dollar frauds in connection with the subprime market and caused the economy to collapse. Only one minor person went to prison. The others were too connected to democrats and those in government. By way of contrast (per the Atlantic) "following the savings-and-loan crisis of the 1980s, more than 1,000 bankers of all stripes were jailed for their transgressions."
As my grandfather used to say, Think of it!

exiledonmainstreet said...

"It's a fair point, but by 1980..."

So, chuck, you think the country would be in great shape if Trump got impeached and the Dems took over and ran things for another 8 years?

Because then we'd get a Reagan?

Your optimism is touching.

Drago said...

Robert Cook: "This is completely delusional"

It ain't Marxism yet if we don't have mass graves!

Of course, the only thing that keeps the Cooks from turning the US into a Soviet paradise is our opposition.

But the idea that the left doesn't dream that very dream is what is delusional.

buwaya said...

"The present Democrat hierarchy (is) focused on Marxism....."

"This is completely delusional."

I agree, this is an incorrect characterization. Their hierarchy is a rather esoteric lot, with their own in group priorities. Their followers however are fed, not on Marx, but on a stew flavored strongly with Marcuse. The owners of the party do not care for this diet, but they are happy to push it on the masses.

Robert Cook said...

">>I would love it, if Trump were impeached,

"What high crimes has he committed? (Not just accused of on MSNBC)"


It doesn't have to be high crimes; it can be misdemeanors.

That said, he committed a war crime by launching missiles into Syria. But then, he can't be impeached for that, as all of our recent presidents have committed the same war crimes, with the support of most in Congress. They're all guilty.

Known Unknown said...

Trumbull County, Ohio:

Obama +21.8 in 2012
Trump + 7.6 in 2016

That's a lot of sudden racists.

tim in vermont said...

Cookie, you use that word "war crimes" over and over, but I am not sure you know what it really means.

Drago said...

Nyamujal: "I'll leave this Matt Yglesias rant here which...."

LOL

Yglesias.

The juice box Voxers are the rocket scientists who claimed there was a 30 mile bridge from Gaza to the west bank on which Israel cruelly limited traffic!

Naturally Nyamujal finds the "serious" "journalism" and commentary there compelling.

Drago said...

tim in vermont: "Cookie, you use that word "war crimes" over and over, but I am not sure you know what it really means."

He means any and all actions taken by those who don't spend their entire day whistling The Internationale and watching reruns of "Reds".

Drago said...

Cookies time would be much more productively spent sending aid to the latest victims of his political philosophy in Venezuela.

Robert Cook said...

Well, he illegally launched missiles into another country, an act of war. Isn't that a war crime? Or are war crimes to be considered only acts committed in wars already underway? Trump already has that covered, too.

tim in vermont said...

Soviet invasion of Afghanistan? Not a war crime, but a "liberation." US invasion in response to an attack on our homeland? War crime! I get it, I get it.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Drago said...
Cookies time would be much more productively spent sending aid to the latest victims of his political philosophy in Venezuela.

5/1/17, 5:11 PM

Clearly the wrong people were in charge. If we only try it again, next time it'll work!

Earnest Prole said...

A shockingly large percentage of these Obama-Trump voters said Democrats’ economic policies will favor the wealthy.

And as if on cue, Barack Obama cashes in with a $400,000 speech to a Wall Street investment bank. Do Democrats have the slightest idea how this seems to struggling Democratic voters making one-tenth of that amount per year?

buwaya said...

The 400K is nothing, just one of many to come.

If you want to talk of serious money, look at the $60 million Bertelsmann publishing deal.
That one smells with a rare odor.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

"Do Democrats have the slightest idea how this seems to struggling Democratic voters making one-tenth of that amount per year?"

Let me guess, it will make these folks vote for the party that want's to cut taxes and regulations for rich folks.

I'm sure BHO is gonna hate gettin' to keep more of this (and the book deal, as Buw notes) dough.

Y'all sure showed him.




Carry on.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

So, y'all didn't like the Russian propaganda as an explanation for DJT love.

How about a theory that poor nutrition during the formative years is detrimental to cognitive advancement, IOW it's a path to folks shooting themselves, figuratively, in the foot?

If this is true, the rich Ds don't need to worry, DJT's got an app for that:

"Perdue announced that his department would be slowing the implementation of aggressive standards on sodium, whole grains and sweetened milks that passed under the Obama administration."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/05/01/trump-official-freezes-michelle-obamas-plan-to-fight-childhood-obesity/?hpid=hp_hp-more-top-stories_wonk-schoolmeals0454pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.da824a38a168

vicari valdez said...

Michael K said...
The present Democrat hierarchy has no idea. They are focused on Marxism but that is not where the money comes from.
5/1/17, 2:00 PM


you got it backwards based on what's being said in this article. it's not the democrats, it's the people who are focused on marxism.

Lewis Wetzel said...

PB&J, I think that working class voters understand that their personal economic prospects correlate pretty closely with economic growth, not with increased government spending. See the last eight years, for example. In the old days, pre 1980, Democrats talked about the importance of economic growth. Obama even did, early in his presidency. Not so much in his second term.
Trump says cutting taxes will bring higher GDP growth. Hillary didn't have much to say about the topic.

tcrosse said...

Let me guess, it will make these folks vote for the party that want's to cut taxes and regulations for rich folks.

Presumably the rubes are insufficiently mercenary.

BTW, I suppose it was the Russians who convinced HRC to skip Wisconsin and send Chelsea in her place. Brilliant !

cubanbob said...

exiledonmainstreet said...

"So, tell me how these self-interested rich Ds are going to suffer w/ Rs giving them tax cuts and fewer rules re biz stuff?"

Tell me why Silicon Valley and Wall Street votes D."

The bennies. Just look at all the bennies a Google for example gives that are a tax deductible expense for the company but not an imputed income to the employee. Funny how it's very difficult to get away with that in a Sub Chapter S corporation or an LLC. Now if Trump were to lower rates even more than he proposed but were to tax the imputed incomes the screams from the Democrats would be a joy to hear. Then he should propose eliminating the tax exempt status of muni bonds (going forward). Why misallocate capital? The finally eliminate the tax exempt status of non-profits. Tax the income from investments they have as ordinary income and eliminate the ability of foundations to apply their expenses to their required distributions. The howls will be joyous.

Earnest Prole said...

Let me guess, it will make these folks vote for the party that want's to cut taxes and regulations for rich folks.

There's no need to guess. The details are at the link; you just have to know how to use your cursor.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

"Then finally eliminate the tax exempt status of non-profits."

Churches?

And how about gettin' rid of the tax benefit for folks who don't own their homes sans loans?

Browndog said...

Excuse me while I take what an Obama2012 voter says with a grain of salt.

What I'd really like to get my mind around is this notion, often stated as fact, that if Hillary had only made a "campaign stop" in Wisconsin, she would have won the State.

buwaya said...

"How about a theory that poor nutrition during the formative years is detrimental to cognitive advancement"

This has been tested many times IIRC, and it doesn't hold water, beyond the edge case of near-starvation and malnutrition.

buwaya said...

"And how about gettin' rid of the tax benefit for folks who don't own their homes sans loans?"

I think that would make an excellent Democratic party plank.
I suggest you take it up with the DNC.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

buw,

How about making them fat?

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

buw,

I liked that one of the complaints w/ the healthy food is that kids toss it, therefore we should give them shitty food, so they'll eat a bunch and be fat, cause it feels good.

It seems like a lot of teachers dole out dumbed down curriculum to satisfy kids, and there's the thing where everybody gets a trophy in sports, so it makes sense to complete the lackadaisical loop w/ food.

John said...

Blogger 3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...
Mich and Wis were big targets of the Russian propaganda program.


Damn. I was wonderin' what all them hammer & sickles was all around town. I always thought I liked Hillary 'til them things showed up and convinced me otherwise. Golly, they're good cuz I saw stuff on CNN, MSNBC and CSPAN plus in them NYT & WAPO dealies that made me sick about her. They hacked everone I guess.

Wish we had better sources here in podunk WI!

Original Mike said...

What did Hillary propose for improving the economic well being of the middle class? Seriously, I'm drawing a blank.

Lewis Wetzel said...

So, I've been looking at a variety of states and comparing the vote total percentages, 2012 v. 2016.
I find that in deep blue, populous states like MA and CA, Hillary did as well or better than Obama in vote %. Se did worse than Obama in a lot of states that are red or purple. But if you look at the raw numbers rather than the percentages, Trump got about as many votes as Romney and McCain across the board.
Again, from Wikipedia (raw vote in millions):
2008
Obama McCain
69.5 60

2012
Obama Romney
66 61

2016
Hillary Trump
66 63

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that if any of the other R candidates would have gotten the nomination, the number wouldn't have been much different than what Trump got, but the distribution among the states would have given Hillary an EC win as well as a popular vote win. Hillary got almost as many votes as Obama got in 2012, which should put to rest any conspiracy theories about the Russians. How many millions of votes are we supposed to believe were "stolen" from Hillary by the Russki's?

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

"Wish we had better sources here in podunk WI!"

Well, ya can't change a state, but ya can change the state yur in.


Lewis Wetzel said...

Maybe there is some projection going on re: the Russians.
Historically, it's the liberal and DC elites that got fooled by Russian propaganda, and the blue-collar, fly-over country types who were the skeptics. The CIA, academic economists, historians, and foreign policy specialists had no idea the USSR was in a state of collapse.

bagoh20 said...

Did they ask about pussy grabbing and its effects on jobs, taxes, and North Korea's nukes? That question might have informed them on what they really missed.

John said...

Well, ya can't change a state, but ya can change the state yur in.

Sounds like the Ds strategy for the last few decades - attract all the like-minded sheep to the same few states (preferably to large metro cities) where they can all feel better about themselves agree on everything. [ignore the unintended consequences too]

The more the Ds migrate to the few Blue states, the longer they will not populate the White House - Electoral College and all, ya know?

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

"What did Hillary propose for improving the economic well being of the middle class?"

Who knows? That's water under the bridge. We aren't even clamoring to lock her up anymore.

The better question (which, obviously, should be an Althosue poll) is who is most likely to rely on adult diapers:

a) HRC
b) DJT
c) Both
d) Neither

Presumably, brain damage, in addition to golden-years status, results in uncontrollable excretions, so we'd need to go w/: a) or c.

And, if looking like you're walkin' around w/ a load in your pants means that you're walkin' around w/ a load, the answer is obvious: c.

Anywho, only blind political dogmatism could deny this reality.

I dunno.


buwaya said...

"It seems like a lot of teachers dole out dumbed down curriculum to satisfy kids"

Its not the kids they are out to satisfy, as I have seen, but their own selves, as they have been taught was the right thing. The dumb-downing begins at the upper levels of the schools of education that generate the cadre of the schools of education that teach your kids teachers.

Assuming that you have kids. It is a bit hard to get a picture of this reality unless you do.

Kids, they do as they are instructed over time to accept. They are malleable. Where I come from kids lived on rice and fish and vegetables and that was good.

buwaya said...

"We aren't even clamoring to lock her up anymore."

You really should. That more than anything would put the fear of God in your political class.
And she deserves it. As a politician she (and her husband) are the worst case of a high profile figure being for sale for personal gain to date.

It has been done so openly its absurd.

Lewis Wetzel said...

buwaya, I think that there is a disconnect between what parents think the public schools should be doing and what the education professionals who run the schools think that they should be doing.
parents think that their children should be taught to be educated, productive, responsible citizens. The people who run the education system want to teach children to be revolutionaries.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

"It has been done so openly its absurd."

Why hide. It's legal. And, unless you know something I don't know, individuals legally maximizing their own advancement is what capitalism is about.

I guess you could quaintly believe that some folks will choose to keep one hand tied behind their back because that's honorable, or something.

Presumably some folks do do that sorta thing, but they're easy marks to get beat by the HRC/DJT type folks, imho.

Kirk Parker said...

OMike,

"My monthly checks from Putin are much appreciated."

OK, so where can you cash a ruble-denominated check? Asking for a friend...

Paco Wové said...

"What the fuck are these people smoking?"

It doesn't matter, does it? Those people are the ones you have to convince to vote for you. You can try to insult them into compliance if you want.

Original Mike said...

..."individuals legally maximizing their own advancement is what capitalism is about."

Legally? Bullshit.

Original Mike said...

"OK, so where can you cash a ruble-denominated check? Asking for a friend..."

I've been selling them to Inga.

buwaya said...

" I think that there is a disconnect between what parents think the public schools should be doing and what the education professionals who run the schools think that they should be doing."

Certainly. There is such a disconnect.

"The people who run the education system want to teach children to be revolutionaries."

Partly. The idea is to solve all perceived social problems through educational interventions. Not to create revolutionaries as such, but to make everyone equal. This requires suppressing the best, or rather to redefine education such that there is no better or best, but a uniform sludge. This requires making the curriculum the sort of thing anyone can easily get, and to pretend to cultivate virtues that exist only by assertion and are impossible to measure. Thats why they absolutely hate tracking. Thats why they took down Jaime Escalante.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

OM,

That stuff wasn't even the reason y'all wanted to lock her up.

A little silly to now claim that this new stuff is illegal because in addition to not caring about this new stuff, the DJT admin has stopped fussing re the other stuff that y'all had previously claimed was illegal.

But, whatevs: You can, now, be judge, jury and sentencer re these new allegations: OM declares HRC guilty, off to the dungeon w/ her, and throw away the key!!


Feel better?

Original Mike said...

I have no idea what "new stuff" and "other stuff" refers to. I suspect nothing.

buwaya said...

"Why hide. It's legal. And, unless you know something I don't know, individuals legally maximizing their own advancement is what capitalism is about."

You are of course being disingenuous. Its your way. There isn't an ounce of sincerity in you. You are a fascinating person in your own way. You are probably an interesting case for your therapist.

Why I bother I don't know.

But, oh well - these people made their money by peddling political influence, as we both know. They had nothing else to sell. That is corruption, as we all know.

I have met functionaries of the Marcos dictatorship that were on the take, but were actually ashamed of what they were doing. They were, as far as that goes, better people than these.

Fernandinande said...

Why did Trump win?

Oh boy another one. "Cuz you guys suck, that's why" isn't complicated enough.

New research by Democrats offers a worrisome answer.

Unless I'm missing something, and I'm not going to read that article with a magnifying glass, there is no answer offered because they omitted an important number: how many or what percentage of voters were "Obama-Trump voters"?

"A shockingly large percentage of these Obama-Trump voters" - does that mean 99% of .00001% of the voters?

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

New stuff is HRC and WJC gettin' paid.

Old stuff is the stuff that y'all (incl DJT) said was a reason to lock her up during the campaign. A lot of ya were sure that Comey was gonna deliver the knockout recommendation re prosecution re that stuff, but didn't happen. At least he did everything he could think of for ya since a prosecution wasn't justifiable.

Lewis Wetzel said...

Perhaps the disconnect between the blue-collar types and the cultural elites can be illustrated by a few passages from the this LA Times op-ed:

Editorial Leave the national monuments alone
Enter President Trump. On Wednesday, he ordered the Interior secretary, who oversees national monuments, to review two decades of designations larger than 100,000 acres (more than two dozen monuments) and, if he decides it’s merited, propose legislation or administrative steps to modify the proclamations. The move dovetails with long-running efforts by some Western politicians to transfer federal lands to the states under the unpersuasive argument that states know best how to manage land within their borders, an argument that Trump seemed to endorse in his public comments when he signed the executive order.
. . .
But the monuments were carved out of existing federal land that has been under Washington’s control since the nation’s westward expansion — and which predates the states themselves. And the states have little interest in protecting the land: They want to be able to open it for extractive industries, which fits in with Trump’s desire to dig, drill and burn more fossil fuels with blithe disregard for the environment.
. . .
The trigger for Trump’s review was President Obama’s designation last year of the Bears Ears National Monument in Utah, a stunningly picturesque region that state political figures wanted to open to oil and gas drillers and potash mining companies.
. . .
The Antiquities Act was passed after Americans, following the lead of John Muir and other naturalists, recognized that there was more to the vast expanses of the West than land to be tilled, forests to be felled and ores to be mined.
. . .
The people need to remain awake, and they need to fight to ensure that neither the Trump administration nor the fossil fuel-friendly congressional leadership succeeds in this assault on our shared national heritage.


Jobs, jobs, jobs.
The Times suggests no alternative sources of job-creating economic activity.

Lewis Wetzel said...

At least he did everything he could think of for ya since a prosecution wasn't justifiable.
That was his opinion. Someone else may have had a different opinion. Comey didn't "find her innocent."

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

"Someone else may have had a different opinion."

Yup, like the new Attorney General. But, he took a pass too.

Original Mike said...

"...since a prosecution wasn't justifiable."

Bullshit.

Original Mike said...

"I have met functionaries of the Marcos dictatorship that were on the take, but were actually ashamed of what they were doing. They were, as far as that goes, better people than these."

And their apologists.

Lewis Wetzel said...

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...
"Someone else may have had a different opinion."

Yup, like the new Attorney General. But, he took a pass too.

5/1/17, 7:43 PM

I'm shrugging. It doesn't matter what Sessions thinks, does it? Maybe if Trump had offered the job to Cruz, and Cruz had accepted, he would have recommended a prosecution. You don't seriously believe that Hillary wasn't influence peddling, do you, PB&J? It's a matter of how confidant you are of getting a conviction, and how willing you are to pay a political price if she's found innocent.

buwaya puti said...

That they haven't been properly investigated for corruption, or for that matter a hundred other defaults (such as the security breaches of the server) merely goes to show how far into decadence the Washington establishment has fallen.
They apparently could not fall because they would take so many others with them. You have, among other things, an elite that is a conspiracy of sin, where each man's sin keeps him from routing out another's. In such a place an honest man is a deadly threat.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

"In such a place an honest man is a deadly threat."

Well then, I'm sure they're all really worried now that the swamp drainer DJT is in town.

buwaya puti said...

There were, and I knew, honest men who served Marcos, like Cesar Virata and Claudio Teehankee. They were not on the take. They could only do so much because the dictator was a dictator, and was untouchable.

But in Washington today it is not dictatorial power that stymies justice, it is a conspiracy of the guilty. All for one and one for all. All those with clout act guilty, with the timidity of those whose conscience is burdened.

Birkel said...

@ PB&J

Why would anybody here want to punish or hurt the rich Democrats? Do you imagine that we are as petty and ignoble as you, that we would hope for another's destruction? The sort of person who wants that, who would hope for a criminal conviction for a man who has never (so far as one can tell) had any criminal infractions, would be a Lifelong Republican, so called fopdoodle, and genuine ass hole: Chuck.

The rest of us here understand that a rising tide lifts all boats. And we're tired of witnessing some of those boats moored on the sandbars built by Democrats in hopes of capturing voters in the never ending blight of government entitlements. (Made with no apologies for my extended metaphor.)

I hope those rich guys get monumentally richer. I wish them nothing but success. I want them to succeed beyond their wildest imaginations. And I want them to do that without the regulatory bulwark, erected by Democrats, that keeps competition at bay. I want them to succeed in a free market by building products that other people wish to buy in free exchanges for value. This makes both parties to an exchange wealthier.

Economics is only a zero sum game when the government is choosing winners and losers. And I want that to stop, immediately.

gadfly said...

Andrew Jackson history retold by our president, establishing his qualification to hold the highest office.

I mean had Andrew Jackson been a little later you wouldn’t have had the Civil War. He was a very tough person, but he had a big heart. He was really angry that he saw what was happening with regard to the Civil War, he said, “There’s no reason for this.” People don’t realize, you know, the Civil War, if you think about it, why? People don’t ask that question, but why was there a Civil War? Why could that one not have been worked out?

Andrew Jackson died in 1845, 16 years before the war began, and only the Donald, through a seance, perhaps, was privy to the feelings of a 20 dollar dead President. It apparently hasn't occurred to Trump that there would likely be a question as to which side Jackson would oppose.

Birkel said...

@ Nyamujal

Why does a Brit, like yourself, care so much about American politics?

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

"Economics is only a zero sum game when the government is choosing winners and losers."

Ha. Folks I've put out of biz or limited their biz by beating them in the market place sure would like to believe that.

You're funny.



buwaya puti said...

That they haven't been properly investigated for corruption, or for that matter a hundred other defaults (such as the security breaches of the server) merely goes to show how far into decadence the Washington establishment has fallen.
They apparently could not fall because they would take so many others with them. You have, among other things, an elite that is a conspiracy of sin, where each man's sin keeps him from routing out another's. In such a place an honest man is a deadly threat.

Hagar said...

Wilfully obtuse, Gadfly., and Jackson prevented civil war in his time by making it perfectly obvious which side he would take - and the wannabe rebels believed him.

Birkel said...

@ gadfly

You do know that you are on a different thread, right? That thread is not this thread.

Grab your carry on.

Birkel said...

@ PB&J

So you made customers wealthier? And you did that as you made yourself wealthier?

Do you understand what the words "zero sum game" mean?

Grab your carry on.

Kirk Parker said...

Birkel,

In general you are correct, but there is a subset of rich Democrat we very much want to hurt... not just hurt, but completely drive out of public life. That subset is, of course, those like Tom Steyer, Nick Hanauer, and Nanny Bloomberg, who devote a part of those billions to cramming political sh*t down our throats. (And yes, the presence of Bloomberg on this list is NOT a mistake: (a) until running for office, he was a Democrat; (b) we hate nanny-state regulations being crammed down our throats regardless of the nominal party affiliation of the perp.)


And here comes gadfly to demonstrate once again his dishonesty: the complete quote from Trump began with the telling line, "had Andrew Jackson been a little bit later".

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

Birk,

You're making assumptions re other folks v myself.

Presumably, if you need to rely on your imagination that means ya can't stick w/ reality. Presumably you don't need to graduate from Trump U to understand that there are winners and losers in situations that don't involve the government choosing such.

I dunno.

Birkel said...

@ Kirk Parker

I do not want to hurt those people. I want them to use the First Amendment to say the many stupid things they wish. I want them to be rejected because they fail in the marketplace of ideas. Their holding stupid ideas does not make me poorer.

If those people do not hold the levers of power so that they can construct carve outs for themselves, and if government is smaller to boot, then I worry not about those rich idiots. I want them to be personally happy.

Now, if the natural thing happens between those fools and their money, I won't lose any sleep. But I cannot rouse myself to hoping against them.

Birkel said...

@ PB&J

Your continued inability to understand the term "zero sum game" is amusing.

Grab your carry on.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

"Economics is only a zero sum game when the government is choosing winners and losers."

Lewis Wetzel said...

Blogger 3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...
"Economics is only a zero sum game when the government is choosing winners and losers."
Ha. Folks I've put out of biz or limited their biz by beating them in the market place sure would like to believe that.
You're funny.
5/1/17, 8:04 PM


How did you put people out of biz, PB&J?
I'm genuinely curious. It's hard to make a nickel in this world the honest way.
How did you provide the same value at a lower cost than your competitors? Economy of scale is about the only way to do it, unless you are controlling the marketplace via patents or other IP.

Birkel said...

@ PB&J

You are ignorant. It amuses me. Thank you.

Grab your carry on.

Inga said...

Well, if Trump says Jackson had a big heart, who are we to question him? That would be disrespectful.

Birkel said...

@ Inga

Trenchant analysis, as always. Soros should invest a little more heavily in the night shift.

Lewis Wetzel said...

Blogger gadfly said...
Andrew Jackson history retold by our president, establishing his qualification to hold the highest office.

I mean had Andrew Jackson been a little later you wouldn’t have had the Civil War. He was a very tough person, but he had a big heart. He was really angry that he saw what was happening with regard to the Civil War, he said, “There’s no reason for this.” People don’t realize, you know, the Civil War, if you think about it, why? People don’t ask that question, but why was there a Civil War? Why could that one not have been worked out?

I don't claim to know what Trump was thinking, but he seems like a sharp guy.
People knew war was coming long before 1861. The Missouri compromise was deemed a failure at the time it was made. Jackson formed the Democrats as a bulwark against a federal government that was inclined to be anti-slavery and was adding new free states faster than it was adding slave states. One of the reasons Texas is so big is because breaking it into smaller states would have added more slave states than the North approved of.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

Well Lewis,

As Birk will tell you the key is that we're all in rising boats. Ya see, as long as the gov isn't picking winners and losers there's never any zero sum situations in biz.

So, I just got in my boat and Reagan and Bush raised me up.

Duh.

Inga said...

"I don't claim to know what Trump was thinking, but he seems like a sharp guy."

Trump is s a sharp guy, if he says Jackson was angry about the civil war before the Civil War started, who are we to question Trump? That would be disrespectful too.

Birkel said...

@ PB&J

So you extracted wealth from your customers and gave them nothing in return?

Grab your carry on.

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

"So you extracted wealth from your customers and gave them nothing in return?"

So you did go to Trump U.

Birkel said...

@ PB&J

It is amazing that you don't know what a "zero sum game" is but are willing to opine on the subject. I can see why your competitors feared you so.

Grab your carry on.

Lewis Wetzel said...

Y'know, Inga, I don't think that it works to your advantage to describe the people that beat your candidate in the election as stupid. I mean, what does that make you? You lost to a stupid guy.
I've watched this routine before. Ford, Reagan, G.W. Bush . . .
Or are you in the "Clever Jews put Trump where he is" camp?

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 231   Newer› Newest»