... you can talk about whatever you want.
The photo above is today's sunrise, taken at 7:13. I never got around to showing you yesterday's sunrise, so let me put that here too, because I have a certain feeling about completeness and want to document all the sunrises that meet me at my sunrise run. This was also done at 7:13:
And please think of supporting this blog by doing your shopping through the Althouse portal to Amazon, which is always right there in the sidebar. Thanks!
Posts
246 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 246 of 246I think both parties are experiencing the degradation of an old coalition and the formation of a new one, typified by the insurgent candidacies of Sanders and Trump in 2015. Though they were on different ends of the political spectrum, they were unified by anti-elite sentiment. That's why the Bernie Bros got added to the basket of deplorables.
The Clintonite core of the Democratic Party is ferociously resistant to leftward pull on its ideology. It developed in response to the Carter and Mondale losses, and its ideological roots are centrist, "third nay" neoliberalism. They have a ton of support within elite institutions, and it was recently all hands on deck to derail the Sanders campaign. The Biden/Harris ticket was yet another establishment success in fending off its left wing. Biden is a classic DC establishment type, and Harris is an empty vessel.
The left has long benefited from the fact that the left wasn't a political movement so much as an identity movement with a set of political positions. People were democrats first, and then adopted the politics in order to stay part of the tribe. Trump's success was in creating a similar movement on the right. MAGAism isn't about any specific set of political positions, it's about being part of a larger identity, one that is unashamed of itself.
I played a round of golf with a tall red headed guy in a charity golf tournament once who was the sidekick of some late night tv show guy. Maybe Letterman. Can't remember his name. Apparently he was very famous. None of the other guys in our foursome knew who he was either.
My wife is friends with Kellyanne Conway.
@tim in vermont:
It’s not hard to define what Trump stood for. All of these points infuriate the globalists who own the media.
To the contrary, I think one would be hard-pressed to find a consistent message or guiding principles of Trump's related to any one of the examples you cited. I don't think Trump stands for much of anything and is pretty unencumbered by principles. I think he clearly has populist/nationalist instincts, but his understanding of the issues and underlying dynamics is very confused. On the hand, this can have the benefit of Trump endorsing pragmatic, all of the above, solutions-oriented results to political problems. But on the other, If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything.
The Trumpism and Trumpist factions have a lot of ideological overlap, a general disdain for Never Trumpers, and accurate diagnose Trump Derangement Syndrome within the media and populace. The most significant chasm is over their respective assessments and opinions of Trump. Trumpism tends to be mixed to negative with an overall feeling of disappointment. Trumpist tends to be much more positive and highly satisfied with Trump's performance.
I'm very curious about what drives these two differing assessments. Another data point is Nikki Haley. Trumpism generally loathes her, while Trumpist is much more positive. My pet theory is that Trumpism is a grassroots political movement that long predates Trump, while Trumpist is largely a partisan phenomenon in response to Trump. in the beginning, Trumpism was generally optimistic about Trump, while Trumpist was generally skeptical. Over the course of his presidency, these positions flipped.
The seriousness of the charge of rigged elections is substantial enough on its own that no additional evidence whatsoever is needed beyond the charge itself.
These allegations are too serious for evidence to be needed, yet the Trump team is still in court providing it as they are exceptional Americans.
You fools are too dumb to know how lucky you are having Trump in the fight.
"You fools are too dumb to know how lucky you are having Trump in the fight."
Even if that was sarcasm, believe me. I know.
back when Oprah was just starting to go national I stood next to her at baggage claim at O'hare. She offered me some popcorn. I met James Lovell a couple of times.
@Mr Wibble:
MAGAism isn't about any specific set of political positions, it's about being part of a larger identity, one that is unashamed of itself.
Very good point. I think the culture war aspect of Trump was important to his 2016 victory. He gave voice to anti-elite resentments and white identity politics instead of pitying those poor dumb rubes who bitterly cling to their religion and guns. I think the Tea Party movement had similar origins but shot itself in the foot by advocating dumb libertarianism.
I think the Tea Party and Trumpist movements share an essential flaw: they're still essentially committed to the Reaganite model of cultural conservatism and economic libertarianism but is still mostly united by its antipathy towards the left. "The left" is the right's version of the "deplorables." Both are scapegoats used by both parties to mitigate their own internal tensions.
Joe Smith,
I just know he would need to give me a stroke on every hole so that when he took my money I wouldn't feel cheated.
He would shoot a 66-68 with ease from the men's tees.
From the tips he was probably a scratch golfer with a normal course setup.
A 9/10 on the Stimpmeter, not a 13/14.
Trump cannot be counted on to lead a movement or point a way forward. His worldview is muddled and incoherent, and he is too driven by ego and self-aggrandizement.
This is the neverTrump view but I don't think this appeals to more than 10% of the electorate. Democrats, of course, have no idea of policy. They are all about Trump hate. We see it here every day. People who identify, right now, as Republicans are 95% pro-Trump. One reason why there are so few who agree with you (except Democrats) is the unique combination of an entrepreneur, not a corporatist like Romney, who has been stewing about policy for years. Just as Reagan evolved his philosophy when doing GE commercials, Trump has been talking about his most popular policies for years.
I think the Tea Party and Trumpist movements share an essential flaw: they're still essentially committed to the Reaganite model of cultural conservatism and economic libertarianism but is still mostly united by its antipathy towards the left. "The left" is the right's version of the "deplorables." Both are scapegoats used by both parties to mitigate their own internal tensions.
I disagree. The Tea Party was a primarily economic movement (stop spending so much!) that tried to work within the traditional GOP paradigm. It failed. It managed to win the House for the GOP only to get stabbed in the back by GOP leaders. But it taught a new generation of conservatives that they could organize, and helped to develop a right-wing identity. Trump carried that idea forward, but with a primarily cultural conservative movement, one that moved away from the economic libertarianism of the GOP establishment. Not entirely, mind you, but with some definite breaks.
Glenn Reynold's has a good line that he's used which is basically, "The Tea Party was us being polite. Trump is us being less polite. You don't want to see what comes after Trump."
OK, I give up. I will stop posting here.
Farmer astonishes the masses with: I don't think Trump stands for much of anything and is pretty unencumbered by principles.
He stands for America and Americans. And we unwashed deplorables like that. A lot.
@tim in vermont:
Please elaborate.
Sure. I think Trump's erratic, contradictory. flip-flopping, flexible, unpredictable style has a few potential explanations. One is the Scott Adams 4-D chess type. Another is incoherence. I think the weight of evidence is much stronger for the latter than the former.
Also, if Trumpism is as self-evident as you believe, what is the source of the factionalism within the populist right? And why is "Trumpism" even a word? What differentiates it from what Ted Cruz would've done? And what explains the Trumpist enthusiasm for Nikki Haley? She's a neocon internationalist.
Oh, no. More like dishonest and easily led. I met a lot of 'get out the vote' types in Chicago. Those that weren't raving drunks were all nice people. You just wouldn't leave any change on the table. If you could reliably get drunks, prostitutes and old people to the polls to vote democrat you had a job for life. A job you never had to go to. That's democrats. Their moral compass always points to where they moved the magnet. So, I'm going with a democrat stolen election because that's what you guys do.
So are you saying that the "fraud" is driving people to the polls or are you saying that the type of people who drive deplorables to the polls are the same type of people capable of pulling off an Ocean's 11 style heist?
I have major problems with the manipulative way Dems conduct GOTV, but I also do not think giving voters rides to the polls (without more) is in and of itself "fraud."
The Tea Party was a primarily economic movement (stop spending so much!) that tried to work within the traditional GOP paradigm. It failed. It managed to win the House for the GOP only to get stabbed in the back by GOP leaders. But it taught a new generation of conservatives that they could organize, and helped to develop a right-wing identity. Trump carried that idea forward, but with a primarily cultural conservative movement, one that moved away from the economic libertarianism of the GOP establishment.
I largely agree but Trump is more about Economics than culture. A lot of religious people support him (including blacks) because the political left is so hostile to any religion but Islam.
Cutting regulations and trying to equalize trade with China were both economic.
I also do not think giving voters rides to the polls (without more) is in and of itself "fraud."
Amusing straw man. How about giving ballots rides to the counting room?
@Mr. Wibble:
Glenn Reynold's has a good line that he's used which is basically, "The Tea Party was us being polite. Trump is us being less polite. You don't want to see what comes after Trump."
I think that's a decent metaphor, but it just reiterates my contention that they share a common origin. I think Sarah Palin was a clear precursor to Trump. Chosen largely for culture war reasons, heavy on talk radio/cable news boilerplate, and an emphasis on "real America." The left was over-the-top in its denouncement of Palin and the right was over-the-top in its defense.
think Trump's erratic, contradictory. flip-flopping, flexible, unpredictable style has a few potential explanations. One is the Scott Adams 4-D chess type. Another is incoherence. I think the weight of evidence is much stronger for the latter than the former.
Trump just lost to Joe Biden. It is really hard to overstate that level of political incompetence. We need to put the 4-D chess silliness out to pasture.
I also do not think giving voters rides to the polls (without more) is in and of itself "fraud."
Amusing straw man. How about giving ballots rides to the counting room?
How is it a strawman if I am just trying to pin down that guy's opinion?
Since your opinion is that someone was "giving ballots rides to the counting room," can you answer three very simple questions?
(1)Who are the boots on the ground?
(2) How many people are involved (ballpark)?
(3) Why do none of the people in question 2 have any interest in the million dollar reward?
@mockturtle:
And we unwashed deplorables like that. A lot.
Yes, I agree with that. And think it's a big part of the problem. It's too wrapped up in emotionalism. It clutters our ability to be objective, has contributed to these alternating derangement syndromes we get each election cycle, and it helps keep the working class divided. Elitism has occasionally been defined as the rule of an organized minority over a disorganized majority. It also contributes to the partisan fantasy that the primary divide in American politics is left versus right, Democrat versus Republican. Rather, it is elite versus non-elite. It is not bound by partisan affiliation, red state or blue state, or even national borders.
George W. Bush may have been the guy you wanted to have a beer with and who liked to clear brush down on the ranch, but he marched Republicans right down the globalist path. Facts don't care about your feelings.
Cheating will allow bad candidates to win over good candidates.
DD Driver cannot concede the possibility that cheating occurred.
That is because DD Driver is a committed Leftist.
And DD Driver would never turn on his political team.
Shim wouldn't even admit - for the sake of argument - that cheating was possible, much less likely.
And now shim is surprised that other partisans would not admit their criminal conspiracies?
Leftism is an excuse for stupidity.
Farmer: Is it pure emotionalism to want to defend one's country and its values?
Farmer doesn't really believe in American, just the crazy blood and soil theories, when we tell you what this clique of apparatchiks like obama have been up to for 25-40 years, it doesn't matter,
Cheating will allow bad candidates to win over good candidates.
DD Driver cannot concede the possibility that cheating occurred.
That is because DD Driver is a committed Leftist.
I'm the Leftist? Me? I'm the only one here who is even remotely bothered by Trump's cronyism (Foxconn, Kodak, Oracle); his disinterest in fiscal responsibility (Trump Checks for Everyone!); and his executive over reach (nationwide moratorium on evictions using the CDC).
I may be an asshole (some weirdo accused me of being a bot), but I'm not a leftist or a democrat.
Oh, so you're a lifelong Republican, I assume.
Yeah, sell that garbage elsewhere.
Your attempt to appeal to issues conservatives care about, while pretending Joe Biden will be a better fiscal steward, are stupid.
Seriously, that's just an awfully bad play on your end.
Give that shit a rest.
Your a Leftist.
You're a Democrat.
And any lies you tell about those two things makes you a punchline in the Althouse comments.
Again, I see that as a committed Leftist you cannot even concede that voting fraud may have happened in sufficient numbers to sway an election in a handful of Democratical cities.
Try to deflect again, liar.
“These allegations are too serious for evidence to be needed, yet the Trump team is still in court providing it as they are exceptional Americans.”
“You fools are too dumb to know how lucky you are having Trump in the fight.”
This is fun: Arizona Voter Fraud Witness Army Col. Phil Waldron Confirms Experts Saw Dominion Communicating with Frankfurt on Election Day (VIDEO). Apparently, the Trump team had people, including Col Waldron, a cyber warfare expert, watching the Internet traffic out of this country to the voting machine companies on Election Day. And he is currently testifying in an AZ hearing about the vulnerabilities of the systems, and that there was indeed significant traffic to the area where the Scytl server was supposedly seized by the US military several days ago in Germany (the Scytl server seizure by Army units has been contested by the MSM).
This suggests a couple things. One is that Trump and his campaign were expecting voter fraud using electronic voting machines, and prepositional assets to document it. And, secondly, that the Biden campaign, along with election officials are going to have a hard time refuting it. How do they go and refute the testimony of a retired Army cyber warfare expert who watched it happen in real time?
@mockturtle:
Farmer: Is it pure emotionalism to want to defend one's country and its values?
It is if you attempt to do so by building a cult of personality around a presidency. The problems you're identifying cannot be solved at the ballot box every four years.
@Narciso:
Farmer doesn't really believe in American, just the crazy blood and soil theories, when we tell you what this clique of apparatchiks like obama have been up to for 25-40 years, it doesn't matter,
Here are a few other people who, I guess, must not "really believe in America"...
"And since Detachments of English from Britain sent to America, will have their Places at Home so soon supply'd and increase so largely here; why should the Palatine Boors be suffered to swarm into our Settlements, and by herding together establish their Language and Manners to the Exclusion f ours? Why should Pennsylvania, founded by the English, become a Colony of Aliens, who will shortly be so numerous as to Germanize us instead of our Anglifying them, and will never adopt our Language or Customs, any more than they can acquire our Complexion." -Benjamin Franklin, 1751
"They will bring with them the principles of the governments they leave, imbibed in their early youth; or, if able to throw them off, it will be in exchange for an unbounded licentiousness, passing, as is usual, from one extreme to another. It would be a miracle were they to stop precisely at the point of temperate liberty. These principles, with their language, they will transmit to their children. In proportion to their numbers, they will share with us the legislation. They will infuse into it their spirit, warp and bias its direction, and render it a heterogeneous, incoherent, distracted mass." -Thomas Jefferson, 1787
"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen..." -Naturalization Act of 1790
"The influx of foreigners must, therefore, tend to produce a heterogeneous compound; to change and corrupt the national spirit; to complicate and confound public opinion; to introduce foreign propensities." -Alexander Hamilton, 1802
Farmer asserts: It is if you attempt to do so by building a cult of personality around a presidency.
It's not a cult built around Trump. It just happened that he was the only one willing to stand up against the MSM/Deep State and call bullshit on the globalists. I'd be equally content--perhaps more so--with someone else who espoused and strongly proclaimed the same values.
And, I might add, someone who refuses to back down, cave and apologize. Name anyone from the GOP--or any party--willing to stick to his guns the way Trump has.
Oh, so you're a lifelong Republican, I assume.
Yeah, sell that garbage elsewhere.
Nope. I'm a libertarian/small government conservative. Between Trump and Biden--just fucking shoot me--I guess I might have slightly (likely barely) have preferred Trump to Biden but not enough to vote for him.
"How do [Biden and election officials] go and refute the testimony of a retired Army cyber warfare expert who watched it happen in real time?"
Without weighing in on the truth of M.I. versus CIA etc, the answer is clear: the MSDNC will put the story on lockdown the way they do whenever the Owners want to keep something on the downlow. And/or leakspin anything that can't be squelched.
It may surprise some people here, but I am not and never have been much of a political partisan. I certainly have my prejudices and preferences, but no organized group has any claim on my loyalties, much less my money or my vote.
As the 2016 race shaped up, I recall conversations with friends and campus colleagues (including ROTC instructors) about how the professional military would react to Trump's illegal orders to torture everyone and start wars--that was about the level of analysis.
For me personally Trump then was a loudmouth, know-it-all, and boor -- IOW a pretty typical rich New Yawka. He liked to build big buildings and marry hot models, and had some show on TV, and just generally hobnobbed around with people I disdain anyway. I was open to some evidence that he was as godwawful in all respects as he (suddenly and uniformly) became to almost everyone I knew when he won the R nom.
I doubted the Russian Collusion tale from the beginning, but as his first term went on it became clear that 1) he actually had almost no influence on the operations of the permanent military and espionage apparatuses, who can do bad all by themselves, and 2) those very apparats and organs of state security had already been weaponized and used against him
and others.
The very monsters that the bien-pensant had nattered about keeping leashed had long since been let loose by their side.
Trump is a loudmouth, know-it-all, and boor, but Imperial DC is unworthy of respect or regard from any civil libertarian or critical thinker. The incoming gang is as scummy as American politics offers, and they will get hot embraces from those that stayed to work against Trump.
Narr
Let the tongue baths begin!
Narr
I'll say it while I can
@mockturtle:
It's not a cult built around Trump.
It was Trump himself who astutely observed, "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, OK? It's, like, incredible."
It just happened that he was the only one willing to stand up against the MSM/Deep State and call bullshit on the globalists. I'd be equally content--perhaps more so--with someone else who espoused and strongly proclaimed the same values.
I definitely agree that Trump's 2016 campaign managed to ride a wave of the anti-elite resentments sweeping across the western world. And I still believe that his 2016 victory is historically important. It's not even so much his "values" that I am critiquing but his competence and ability. My beef with the Trumpists is that it's mostly just the latest iteration of Republican partisanship. As such, I think it is too reflexively pro-Trump and too dismissive of criticisms of Trump. Too Trump-centric in other words.
As such, I think it is too reflexively pro-Trump and too dismissive of criticisms of Trump. Too Trump-centric in other words.
Standard NeverTrump response. We have about 5 of them over at Ricochet.
Trump is a loudmouth, know-it-all, and boor, but Imperial DC is unworthy of respect or regard from any civil libertarian or critical thinker. The incoming gang is as scummy as American politics offers, and they will get hot embraces from those that stayed to work against Trump.
I don't disagree with this. What happened was that he did most of what he had promised. That was unprecedented. Has any President done that since Eisenhower ?
Kennedy knew the "Missile Gap" was bullshit when he ran on it.
@Narr:
Trump is a loudmouth, know-it-all, and boor, but Imperial DC is unworthy of respect or regard from any civil libertarian or critical thinker. The incoming gang is as scummy as American politics offers, and they will get hot embraces from those that stayed to work against Trump.
I totally agree. And there is no current partisan solution to this problem. Loathing for Imperial DC is precisely what unites the "far" left and right. It isn't a coincidence the two candidates most ferociously opposed by the establishment were Trump and Sanders. And it has nothing to do with fascism or communism.
How do they go and refute the testimony of a retired Army cyber warfare expert who watched it happen in real time?
By lying, of course, and depending on RINOs like NR to lie for them.
At least Buckley is dead and doesn't know what has happened.
Michael K:
Standard NeverTrump response. We have about 5 of them over at Ricochet.
Mickey Kaus, Ann Coulter, Ryan Girdusky, and Mark Krikorian are not Never Trumpers. They were early and vocal defenders and supporters of Trump, and they have been extremely critical of Never Trumpers, the Lincoln Project, and The Resistance. Still, they have also been critical of Trump, but the nature of their criticism is quite different from Never Trumpers. Their goal is to move the GOP to a more nationalist/populist orientation, while the Never Trumpers prefer the status quo ante (i.e. liberal internationalism).
Just got around to scrolling through the comments today.
Question.
Does England even have 2.5 million Venerable people?
Doc K and Farmer agree with me.
Narr
I'm a uniter!
DD Driver said,"(3) Why do none of the people in question 2 have any interest in the million dollar reward?"
Two reasons really. It isn't enough. It isn't enough to get beaten up for testifying. Witnesses have bee beaten up. Depending on where you stand in the process, there is so much more to be made.
You honestly don't believe someone would spend a million dollars to be elected Sheriff when the job pays less than 30,000 a year. Do I need to explain graft to you?
Post a Comment