The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
Gabbard, O'Rourke, Harris
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Without going into any precise numbers, my feeling is that Kamala Harris will win the Dem nomination, Trump will be impeached (but not convicted), and Harris will win the 2020 elections.

Too many scandals (fair and fake) will be weighing Trump down, he’ll lose Florida thanks to felons getting the vote, and the advantages of incumbency will be annulled by the coming recession.

Biden is too white and too creepy. Sanders is too white, too old, and too socialist.

Although Tulsi Gabbard will be the preferred choice of most of the anti-imperialist left and surprising numbers of the Alt Right, the coordinated media hysteria against her will be too much for her to handle. PredictIt doesn’t even bother including her in their 2020 Dem nominees pool.

Harris will undo what little Trump managed to do for his downtrodden white constituents – his main enduring legacy will be his judicial appointments. She will undo all that and relaunch Obama’s race war. The Europeans will enthusiastically sidle up to her after their extended Trump nightmare. Since the Dems will be howling for Russian blood at this point, we can expect to see more secondary sanctions from the US from 2020-21 and Russia’s possible designation as a state sponsor of terror. The Europeans may not join in but nor will they try to alleviate them as they have spoken of doing (but only spoken) for Iran.

There’s reason to believe that the trade war with China will outlast Trump. Plenty of Dems favor a hardline approach, and in any case this might be a necessary olive branch to white blue-collars as the US embarks on radical social reconstruction in the 2020s. This is helped along by the fact that the US will have allies in German industrialists, who are tired of Chinese industrial espionage. We can expect this to drive Russia and China even closer together.

That said, consider the following what if. Let’s suppose Tulsi Gabbard actually won, somehow.

Now I would think that it’s pretty obvious that if Trump – on the outer fringes of Russophilia by American elite standards – was railroaded into conducting an anti-Russian foreign policy by the deep state, then Gabbard will be even more of a walkover in this respect. Indeed, as commenter E. Harding points out, Gabbard actually voted in support of arming the Ukraine under Obama. Consequently, there’s good reason to believe she’ll be happy to be hardline if it takes the heat off the Russiagate mania, which will certainly continue should she become President.

Who didn’t vote for arming the Ukraine? Beto O’Rourke, interestingly enough. He was one of only two Democrats to do so. As E. Harding keeps explaining, O’Rourke has a surprisingly strong anti-interventionist record for someone both I and I imagine many others have previously considered to be yet another anodyne Democrat, whose only difference from neocons is that they call their adventures humanitarian interventions instead of regime change.

And unlike Gabbard, O’Rourke actually has a chance: 8% to Harris’ 16% of taking the Presidency on PredictIt. Assuming, at least, that the media don’t start digging into his voting record.

Anyhow, while Trump has taught us that individuals can’t change the flow of history, which is barreling towards a full-fledged New Cold War, if any one person can still avert it, it might be O’Rourke of all people. LOL.

Conversely, Gabbard might well be a poisoned chalice, like Trump.

But let’s be real. It will be Kamala Harris. At this point the very metaphysical threads of the universe are driving us towards that timeline. There can be no other.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: United States, US Elections 2020 
Hide 118 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. I have no idea if Russia will be spending money to help Gabbard, but I hope they do. No one has gone straight from the House to the White House since Garfield. Even as Veep candidtates they do poorly (eg Miller, Kemp, Ryan) And her campaign seems completely focused on foreign matters-it’s the economy, stupid.

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
  2. Let’s hope the EU falls before 2020. That could change the dynamic. Go Yellow Vests!

  3. utu says:

    Tulsi Gabbard’s and her India connection.

    https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/11/06/what-does-tulsi-gabbard-believe
    “In 2014, she travelled to India, where she met with the controversial Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who has become a political ally, and she is now a co-chair of the Congressional India Caucus.”

    “With her brown skin, black hair, and Hindu name, Gabbard is sometimes mistaken for an Indian-American.”

    “By forging relationships with Modi and other Indian leaders, Gabbard has made herself a prominent ambassador of American Hinduism, and she may be bringing Butler’s previously obscure movement closer to the global Hindu mainstream.”

    “Gabbard’s relationship with India is also a strategic alliance: she has defended Modi’s political organization, the Bharatiya Janata Party, which champions the view that India is—and should remain—an essentially Hindu nation. “

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    , @Dmitry
  4. Matt Forney says: • Website

    I’m deeply skeptical of Harris winning the general election (though I do agree she is likely to get the nomination).

    She’s Black Hillary, in that she’s both deeply unlikable and is pushing the same policies that Hillary did three years ago. She lacks Obama’s charisma and comes off as shrill and bitter, a sharp contrast to Trump’s easygoing personality. Her neoliberal policies will give Sandernistas plenty of reason to vote Green or stay home like they did in 2016.

    Harris is extremely unlikely to drag the Rust Belt states back into the Democratic column, and she could conceivably lose Minnesota (which Trump narrowly lost in 2016).

    I don’t even think she could win Florida: even with the felons voting, the Republicans have an extremely strong and motivated base there as well as total control over the state government, allowing them to blunt the influence of the felon vote through gerrymandering, voter ID etc. Consider that in a year in which the Democrats had the advantage nationally, Florida Republicans not only retained the governorship but knocked off Bill Nelson, a popular three-term incumbent senator, running Rick Scott of all people.

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    , @Wency
    , @Truth
    , @Escher
  5. He will lose Florida thanks to the Felons getting the vote? I have read about this and it’s an exaggeration. First of all it participation of newly enfranchised voters is very low and Florida’s felon demographics are different from most places. It includes a lot of elderly whites and Cubans who trend Republican. Of course were it would really hurt more then in Florida is the midwest. Lots of those snowbirds who live part time in Florida may be registered to vote in thire home states and those were much closer and had more EC votes the Florida. The felon enfranchisement in Florida is far from an assured victory tho it may have been on Virginia.

  6. Mikhail says: • Website

    Without going into any precise numbers, my feeling is that Kamala Harris will win the Dem nomination, Trump will be impeached (but not convicted), and Harris will win the 2020 elections.

    No way! Bookmark this. Corey Booker has an arguably better chance than her. Likewise if Bloomberg runs as a Dem, which is a stated possibility. Keeping in mind that it’s way too early to get a really good idea of what will probably happen. Even if it’s not Booker or Bloomberg, I doubt that KH will get the nomination. Keep in mind that she got an early jump.

    Agree that Tulsi Gabbard faces too much of a steep uphill battle against the creepy foreign policy of the neocons and neolibs.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  7. Mr. XYZ says:
    @anony-mouse

    I’m pretty sure that no one actually wants to follow in Garfield’s footsteps given what ultimately happened to him, though.

  8. Mr. XYZ says:
    @utu

    This is a clever move since it allows her to make the US and India closer together in preparation for the upcoming confrontation with China and Russia.

  9. Mr. XYZ says:
    @Matt Forney

    Do you think that Tulsi, Beto, Biden, Sanders, and Booker would be stronger 2020 Dem candidates than Kamala if one of them were to somehow get the nomination instead of Kamala?

  10. Mr. XYZ says:

    If the 2020 Democratic nominee was smart, they’d relentless criticize Trump and the Republicans for their corporate whoring. I mean, we have huge deficits and what do the Republicans do? You guessed it–another huge tax cut for the rich! And how exactly are the Republicans going to pay for this tax cut (if they’ll ever pay for it at all, that is)–you guessed it! By cutting the social safety net–including Social Security and/or Medicare!

    Economic populism really does appear to have the potential of luring some 2016 Trump voters back to the Democratic fold in 2020. It’s a huge shame that Richard Ojeda dropped out of the 2020 Democratic presidential race, though; after all, he certainly appears to be a hardcore economic populist and thus someone whom I would have seriously considered supporting.

    • Replies: @RobinG
  11. anon[365] • Disclaimer says:

    Although Tulsi Gabbard will be the preferred choice of most of the anti-imperialist left and surprising numbers of the Alt Right, the coordinated media hysteria against her will be too much for her to handle.

    Trump showed that the only winning response to the coordinated media hysteria is to give them the finger and make them even more hysterical. Tulsi Gabbard, being a liberal democrat, will not be able to do this. So yes, her ship will be torpedoed and sunk.
    This is another reason the Left will never put forward a winning anti-imperialist candidate. Trump was the anti-imperialist candidate in 2016, though the Left would not accept it.

    • Replies: @RobinG
  12. Why is “arming the Ukraine” is seen as anti-Russian policy exactly? The Ukraine is no closer today to retaking Donbass (despite Javelins) compared to when Obama was president. American Javelins won’t be able to stop Russian invasion, IF it happens.

    I agree that Gabbard will not be the nominee. The Jewry has nothing to gain from her presidency, and these people not only control the media, they also dominate campaign finance in USA. Who is going to fund Gabbard’s campaign?

  13. Dmitry says:

    Looking up about Tulsi Gabbarb and Kamala Harris.

    With the current fashions in America, both will be popular with the liberals and black voters.

    However, Gabbarb more presentable

    * She’s Democrat and a black young woman (female Obama?).

    While Kamala Harris:

    *She’s Democrat and an old black woman (black Hilary Clinton?)

    Gabbard is aligned with socialism of Bernie Sanders, so of course would threaten the US economy and undo the achievements of Trump.

    However, obviously Trump will win in 2020 as he is entrusted, and has been successful with most policies he had proposed during 2016. He’s popular particularly in the “swing states” like Florida.
    https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/25/trump-2020-elections-florida-1125442

    advantages of incumbency will be annulled by the coming recession.

    Where is the indication of this?

    Gabbard might well be a poisoned chalice, like Trump.

    Politics of Gabbard looks the same as Obama (for foreign policy and domestic policy) in 2008.

    Trump’s foreign policy in 2016, partly repeated some of Obama’s campaign in 2008, but with a more cynical attitude (“We should have taken over Iraq’s oil”).

    In 2008, Obama was advertising how he would end the Iraq War, “return home American soldiers”, be peaceful with Russia, etc.

    Then Trump repeats this idea in 2016. Probably there is a law of diminishing returns here, as by 2020, America is removing its army from Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan.

    So in 2020, the Democrat side will focus on other topics (as Trump succeeded in the foreign policy area).

    For Russia. Media in Russia was excited and warm to Obama in 2008 (and this continued a few years). Also they were the same nonsense for Trump in 2016 (although the warm feeling for Trump evaporates more quickly). Watching two elections, is enough to see that media predication have little relation to reality.

    • Replies: @Hyperborean
  14. JL says:

    Although Tulsi Gabbard will be the preferred choice of most of the anti-imperialist left and surprising numbers of the Alt Right, the coordinated media hysteria against her will be too much for her to handle. PredictIt doesn’t even bother including her in their 2020 Dem nominees pool.

    Not that I disagree, but this sounds an awful lot like the same reasons we were told would prevent Trump from ever becoming president (just switch “anti-imperialist left” and “alt-right” in the sentence), especially the coordinated media hysteria. Also, there is no mention of Elizabeth Warren, is she an even longer shot than Gabbard?

    • Replies: @Johnny Rico
    , @JP
  15. @Felix Keverich

    Has there ever been an enemy or rival of Russia, or any other country in the world, who you didn’t consider to be less formidable than the general consensus? I’m pretty sure that there wasn’t.

    Ukraine? Will collapse soon anyway, would be a cakewalk. The US? It’s on the verge of disintegration. Israel? Cowards, Jews can’t fight. Western Europe? Russia is much stronker! Eastern Central Europe? They are irrelevant dwarves. China? Weaklings. India? LOL. Africans? Niggers. Latin America? Worthless trash.

    So like a true fanboi you consider Russia to be the perfect superpower, and all others to be irrelevant, worthless weaklings. You are pretty delusional.

    • Replies: @WHAT
  16. Dmitry says:
    @Mr. XYZ

    Husband of Tulsi Gabbard is Indian (or something like Nepali?)

    For women politicians, she is good looking:

    • Agree: AP
  17. EldnahYm says:

    When conducting short term analysis, people put a bit too much emphasis on variables like demographics, ideological orientation, how much funding the candidate is going to get, etc. trying to fit things into neat and tidy models.

    Another tendency I see that seems to be flawed is to assume that the more groups a candidate appeals to, the better their chances of winning. This approach implicitly rejects the idea that the lack of coherency among the various groups can itself be a source of difficulty for a party. This seems an especially irrational approach when the choice isn’t between the Republican and the Democrats, it’s actually between the Republican, the Democrat, and not voting. Do these analysts ever say anything useful about changes in the third category from election to election? I don’t think so.

    If one synthesizes these two ideas(neither of which are original, they have been said many times), one may reach the conclusion that the Democrat coalition is much less coherent, much more conflict prone, and that what Democrats need to win in a particular election(short term analysis here) is a charismatic candidate who can paper over the differences. Bill Clinton, Obama, and JFK all fit this pretty well. They didn’t win because they were simply panderers who made a bunch of promises to everyone, all of the Democrats do that. They won because of charisma. It seems to me, none of the candidates listed above fit that description, and especially not Kamala Harris, as one commenter has mentioned.

    All of this stuff about demographics etc. is an important concern long term, but people are a bit too pessimistic regarding the next election. For example are felons really going to vote in high enough numbers to make a difference? It doesn’t seem obvious to me that they will. I see both Anatoly Karlin and Audacious Epigone taking it as all but given that Trump is going to lose the next election, even though no strong candidates have emerged yet and it is unclear why the world is going to be so different in 2020 from what it was in 2016. If they are going to speak with such confidence, they should give stronger reasons.

    I’m not dismissing their points as a non-concern, far from it, but I don’t think the weight they are putting into them is realistic.

  18. Dmitry says:
    @utu

    What is the nationality of Gabbard’s husband – something Indian?

    And Kamala Harris is half Indian/Hindu.

    From our pure entertainment perspective, it will be comical, to see an American woman president, American Hindu president – and America’s “First Husband”.

    But it won’t be in 2020 – Trump is the most likely to win .

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @Duke of Qin
  19. @Dmitry

    However, Gabbarb more presentable

    * She’s Democrat and a black young woman (female Obama?).

    While Kamala Harris:

    *She’s Democrat and an old black woman (black Hilary Clinton?)

    Harris is half-Jamaican, but Gabbard has no African ancestry.

    Her father is of mixed Samoan-European descent, while her mother is a European-American convert to Hinduism.

    The question is, if she has more European blood than her father, why does she look darker? Surfing?

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    , @Swedish Family
  20. From Occidental Dissent:

    Every potential 2020 Democratic candidate voted against Mitch McConnell’s amendment condemning Trump’s “precipitous withdrawals” from Syria and Afghanistan (Harris, Warren, Sanders, Gillibrand, Booker, Klobuchar, Merkley). Exception is Brown, who did not vote for whatever reason pic.twitter.com/4UCcUkRJOn

    — Michael Tracey (@mtracey) January 31, 2019

    https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1091092877109809154?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

  21. LondonBob says:

    Gabbard will make an impact regardless.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  22. Tulsi’s a Betty … she’s got my vote.

    As for Harris, she’d make that citizenship question I’ve been putting off for years a settled issue.

    • Replies: @Escher
  23. @Mikhail

    “Corey Booker has an arguably better chance than [Harris].”

    Only if he comes out of the closet; otherwise femme trumps homme, even is she is Tamil-Jamaican and he is authentic African American.

  24. dvorak says:

    But let’s be real. It will be Kamala Harris.

    You can’t say that about someone who’s never been battle-tested, who floated upwards. Harris has a poor reputation in private life (hard woman to work for) and this could come out through oppo research. She also has a holier-than-thou affect, that could be targeted by minor candidates Bernie, Beto and Tulsi.

  25. Sean says:

    Early favourites, but they won’t actually run a woman because Trump has shown he can beat a fully qualified woman. Why risk it happening again with a female who is far less qualified ?

    America is turning away from the economic aggressor and military parasite that is Germany, which has a future tied up with the EU as a captive market, Russia for energy supplies and China as consumer of German capital goods. Micheal Hudson mentions the emerging German alliance with Russia and China in his latest article. No one really believes in this Halford Mackinder stuff enough to fight over Ukraine now. China does not have to conquer Russia to exploit its resources.

    • Replies: @neutral
  26. iffen says:

    Harris may not get the Democratic nomination, but it is certain that she is the preferred candidate of the MSM. There are many articles, with many more to come, that exhibit a faux critical perspective detailing her political history. These are offensive defense pieces that will be cited and used when she comes under intense scrutiny. For example, questions about her relationship with Willie Brown will be met with: “That’s been dealt with before in her campaigns for DA and Senator,” “That’s old news,” “This is nothing new and is purely political.”

    Trump will carry Florida, but as others have pointed out he has to keep a couple of the Rust Belt states.

    Since race will be a major issue, we can hope for Steve’s fringe fratricide.

  27. neutral says:

    Agree with this, Kamala is going to win the Democrat candidacy with ease. She is black and female, which is pretty much all that is required to win, I can’t believe that there are still left wingers out there that think white males such as Beto have any chance. She also has the support of the deep state as she very clearly incapable of thinking independently.

    As for beating Trump, I suspect this is going to happen as well, but it will be more to do with a significant amount of whites not bothering any more as they increasingly realize that their votes are as pointless as those of whites in South Africa.

    • Replies: @Johnny Rico
    , @Rosie
  28. It would be best to avoid such prognostications. If you’re, say, a normal Russian in January 1917, you couldn’t, by and stretch of imagination & intelligence, imagine that some obscure quasi-apocalyptic sect would, after a string of bungled events, come to power after a deluge in which 9 million will have perished & impose totalitarian utopian regime no one has ever seen in recorded human history.

  29. Matt Forney says: • Website
    @Mr. XYZ

    Biden would have the best chance of winning because he’s a white male with a blue-collar background, blunting Trump’s advantage among that demographic.

    Sanders would also be a strong contender, as would Gabbard.

    Gillibrand might be a strong contender because she’s more likable than Harris and she’s pivoted her politics to triangulate both the party machinery and the far left (she backs abolishing ICE, for example).

    O’Rourke is a joke and a meme, and Booker would be able to beat Trump if he came out as gay. Warren has no chance.

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
  30. neutral says:
    @Sean

    military parasite that is Germany

    That is a strange definition of parasite, Germany is under US military occupation, if Americans really did want to leave this “parasite” I don’t see what would stop them? As for the future German alliances you speak of, how will this work when Germany consists of a majority non white population?

    • Replies: @Sean
    , @Authenticjazzman
  31. Jon0815 says:

    AK said:

    Without going into any precise numbers, my feeling is that Kamala Harris will win the Dem nomination, Trump will be impeached (but not convicted), and Harris will win the 2020 elections.

    Biden is too white and too creepy. Sanders is too white, too old, and too socialist.

    Mostly agree, although I think Sanders’ chances are underrated. If Biden doesn’t run then I think Sanders is the favorite to win Iowa, and it quickly becomes a Sanders vs. Harris race, in which Sanders’ populist socialism will be an advantage that offsets the disadvantages of aged white maleness.

    And Russia would surely be better off with Sanders in the White House than Trump.

    Now I would think that it’s pretty obvious that if Trump – on the outer fringes of Russophilia by American elite standards – was railroaded into conducting an anti-Russian foreign policy by the deep state, then Gabbard will be even more of a walkover in this respect.

    The reason Trump has conducted an anti-Russian policy is not that he was “railroaded” into it, it is that he is an ignorant, easily manipulated dummy. Also, unlike Gabbard, Trump was never a pure anti-interventionist: He has always been a fanatical hawk on Iran. Hence, he’s surrounded himself with neocon Iran hawks, who are also all Russia hawks. And so Trump never hears advice from anyone who doesn’t hate Russia, except when he talks to Rand Paul.

    • Replies: @Sean
  32. Annatar says:

    Personally I also think Harris has a good shot at winning the nomination, if only because the Dem establishment seems to be more powerful then the GOP establishment at getting their candidates in and the Dem elite seem to be coalescing around Harris, I disagree she is likely to win the general though, even leaving apart the incumbency advantage.

    Firstly, regarding the felon issue in Florida, nobody in the media other then Vox ironically seems to want to look at the data, only 418k out of 1.48m ex felons in Florida are black, the remaining 72% are non-black and a study done on 150k ex felons previously granted the right to vote in Florida found more non-black felons registered as republicans then democrats, the effect now is in all likelihood even stronger as Trump has made the GOP coalition even more downscale, hence even more non-black ex felons are likely to register as Republicans.
    https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2018/11/2/18049510/felon-voting-rights-amendment-4-florida

    If Trump holds Florida, holding 1 out of either Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania will be sufficient, the key group in all 3 states are non college whites which over time have steadily been getting more republican, Harris will be working against long time underlying trends in all of these states, if Trump holds 2 out of 3 states, even a loss in Arizona will be sustainable, if he holds all 3, there is virtually no scenario in which he loses. Personally, until Harris shows an ability to stop democratic bleeding with non college whites, I would sooner bet on Trump in 2020 then against him.

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Jon0815
  33. Dmitry says:
    @Hyperborean

    You’re right, I thought Samoans were a black people – but they are more brown colour.

    And then Tulsi Gabbard is also Hindu and has an Indian nationalist identity, although without any Indian blood.

    It’s a very postmodernist America already.

    I’m sure the next stage for America after transgender, will be transracial people, who invent their own race according to preferences.

  34. I see something interesting happening that benefits Kamala Harris. The media, the academy, the government, etc. has upped its game. You think they’re getting more fake and unbelievable every day, but they’re winning. At least in America. They’re dominant in the most important demographic: the managerial class. The Cathedral is more cohesive than ever, by my own observation.

    The best historical analogy is the Counter-Reformation, and the rise of the Jesuits as a reaction to Protestantism. They upped their game in the face of Luther and Calvin.

    I think if they can rally their own troops they can push Kamala over the line. They do run things, after all. No guarantees, though, I’m hoping for a happy surprise in Nov. 2020.

  35. neutral says:
    @Dmitry

    will be transracial people

    No it won’t, this has already be tried with that white women who wanted to be black, obviously blacks do not want to lose their special racial privileges. This is however never going to be allowed not because of blacks but because of jews, jews are not going to want every sub Saharan proclaim themselves a jew and thus move to Israel.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    , @Dmitry
  36. Dmitry says:
    @LondonBob

    As she is Hindu and Democrat, her election would require her to attract left demographics of America which are not pro-Israel.

    But she herself is associated with Hindu nationalists, so probably very pro-Israel after an election.

    I don’t have time to watch video, but she also speaks for “Christians United for Israel” conference..

    She is adopting Indian positions.
    https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/american-lawmaker-tulsi-gabbard-slams-pakistan-for-supporting-terror-outfits/articleshow/54728915.cms

    She has said anti-gay comments before, which is really unusual for the Democrat Party.

    She also wants to increase taxation on multinational corporations.

  37. Jon0815 says:
    @Annatar

    I think Harris would be the weakest of all the major Dem candidates against Trump (strongest would probably be Beto), but she’d still be a slight favorite.

  38. Dmitry says:
    @neutral

    every sub Saharan proclaim themselves a jew and thus move to Israel.

    With African Americans (from Chicago) wanting to move to Israel, that was more a historic movement of the 1970s.

    Today there are several thousands of African Americans from Chicago that live in in Israel, because they immigrated to Israel in the 1970s as part of a religion in Chicago which believed they were Ancient Hebrews.

    They live in their own district of Dimona (which is also where Israel’s nuclear reactor is) which is a tourist attraction.

    They became soldiers in the IDF as well. .

    • Replies: @Sean
  39. Dmitry says:
    @neutral

    No it won’t, this has already be tried with that white women who wanted to be black, obviously

    It reminds me of I saw last year a video about the white man who goes to the black university:

    Crazy they have built a special black university…

    • Replies: @Hyperborean
  40. It is somewhat interesting to speculate on the next CIA puppet ruler to be installed. However he or she will be utterly inconsequential for foreign policy. Our current CIA puppet ruler Trump, a purported anti-interventionist, has been reeling helpless under continual CIA attack. Fortunately, facts on the ground are forcing withdrawal from Afghanistan, Syria, and Iraq, and possibly Yemen. Recent years have reinforced one theme: everything that matters happens outside US borders, as chaotic US degeneration proceeds apace. Here at Unz’s place, we could mope around pining for a well-meaning CIA puppet ruler, but it might be better to practice internationalism from below: get us more forum participants from traditional US punching bags in the global South. These are the people who are actually imposing the anti-intervention principle.

  41. @Dmitry

    I’m sure the next stage for America after transgender, will be transracial people, who invent their own race according to preferences.

    White Latin Americans already implicitly do this with the ‘Hispanic/Latino’ category that was memed into existence by the government.

    Then there are people like Shaun King:

    https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/lp279q/picture174507916/alternates/LANDSCAPE_1140/Shaun%20King%20event%202

    There is this German woman, I don’t know if she lives in America or not though.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/4592146/martina-big-32s-boobs-born-white-tanning-injections-identifies-black/

    She seems a bit more obviously disturbed.

    Talcum-X is an exception, however. Even though they don’t mind being dominated by half-castes, American Blacks generally take offence to non-blacks trying to take advantage to their special status.

    A different example:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6603521/Hawaii-Congressman-Ed-Case-forced-apologize-saying-hes-Asian-trapped-white-body.html

    I suppose surgery needs to advance more first, so it will be more convincing.

    There are K-pop singers who change their appearance with surgery, dye and eye contacts, but I think they are merely imitating rather than actually pretending to be European.

  42. @Dmitry

    Crazy they have built a special black university…

    I can’t see the video right now, but historically in America blacks used to have their own higher education institutes (known as ‘HBCUs’), so I don’t think it is strange.

    Pillarisation is not particularly unusual. It used to be very strong in regions like Belgium, the Netherlands, Switzerland and Bohemia.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  43. anonymous[967] • Disclaimer says:

    If the deep state bends any president to it’s will and can nullify anything a president might want to do that’s contrary to it’s wishes then does it really matter who the next president will be? Or would a fully compliant one simply accelerate things to their final denouement while we’re looking to slow it down? The deep state prefers candidates that are controllable from the outset and having skeletons in the closet makes them more so. Predictions are hard, especially about the future as Yogi Berra might say. I see where Harris opined that private health insurance should be abolished and universal health care extended to all. This puts an industry with very deep pockets in an adversarial position to her so she may have sabotaged herself to some extent. The novelty of a black president has worn off but perhaps they can play up the female president angle. However, black females tend to ‘go off’ when pushed and are low on the likable scale. She’ll probably have a meltdown in front of the cameras and that’ll be that. Not very profound reasons to elect anyone but that’s the voting public for you. I can only see her as the Democratic nominee in one scenario and that is the Democratic insiders, after doing all their analyzing and number crunching, conclude they cannot win. Then they’ll have her as a symbolic candidate, showing the world how progressive they are and setting the stage for the next time around. Anyway, since one should expect the unexpected everything said here might be out of date a month from now.

  44. Anonymous[388] • Disclaimer says:
    @Hyperborean

    Those K-Pop singers still look fairly NE Asian (Korean/Japanese). The thing that attracts white men to Asians is their Asian features, especally epicanthic eyes. Surgery makes them look more Filipina and Latina slutty. Not a good look especially after 25.

    • Replies: @ia
  45. Gigi says:

    I follow trends in social media and the context is much more open than some people may think. Enjoy the ride.

    P.S. PredictIt does not work very well, and often it almost behaves like a Markovian process 🙂

  46. Sean says:
    @Dmitry

    United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3379 – Wikipedia
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_3379
    United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3379, adopted on 10 November 1975 by a vote of 72 to 35 (with 32 abstentions), “determine[d] that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination”.

    Israel suddenly needed to have racial diversity, so it got blacks from America and Ethiopia, and they served Israel well in getting United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3379 reversed.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  47. Sean says:
    @neutral

    Steven Walt: ” Pro tip: If you want your allies to spend a bit more on their own defense, try spending a bit less to subsidize them.“. With more and better European defence spending it would be a match for Russia. The British could do the navy the French the air force, and Germany the tanks

    Since Eisenhower it has been the case that US presidents have been trying to get the Germany to defend themselves or pay for the (once) thousands of US tanks and planes in Germany under Nato. American taxpayers seem to be willing to pay for the defence of Europe for now but the US under Obama had already publicly announced their pivot to the East to contain China, and as the US already has Germany’s fellow military freeloaders South Korea and Japan sponging off it in the East the defence of Western Europe is (or if you prefer the Mackinderesque belief that Ukraine is the key to world power) will fade. Germany had an alliance with a nonwhite country in WW2 so China is no problem or and its to far away for being a military threat.

    In a way, Germany needs the Russian military threat to continue in order for the advantageous economic links with China and Russia to grow stronger, but America to keep being forced to pay for defending Germany. Most Russian conventional military exercises of late have ended with the use of a battlefield nuke, which supports the idea that Russia is not confident about conventional war with Western Europe. They are still building their old model tank because they cannot afford to produce the latest one.

    https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/07/26/nato-isnt-what-you-think-it-is/
    For all the hype about a resurgent Russia and its obnoxious efforts to interfere in other states’ democratic processes, Russia is in fact a declining power that poses no threat to dominate Europe. Its population will decline over time, its median age is rising rapidly, and its economy remains mired in corruption and overly dependent on energy exports whose long-term value will probably go down as well. Remember, we are talking about a country whose entire economy—the ultimate foundation of national power—is smaller than Canada, South Korea, and Italy. Putin has played a weak hand well, but the brutal fact is that Europe does not need the United States to protect it, especially considering that France and the United Kingdom also have nuclear deterrents of their own.

    When Trump has complained about Germany predatory economic policies (he is not alone) being in tandem with Germany shifting the burden of its own defence to American taxpayers, the German government said its incorporation of a million refugee immigrants should be counted as part of its defence contribution. German business is building up the national “economy—the ultimate foundation of national power”. The refugee immigrants are probabally desired partly to keep wages down and as a similar strategy to tax dodging billionaires very public philanthropy saving them money. I don’t know how long it would take for Germany to become majority minority, but they still have far fewer non European immigrants than Britain and France.

    • Replies: @Beckow
    , @Johnny Rico
  48. @Felix Keverich

    The Jewry is still out on the Democrat nomination.

  49. Sean says:
    @Jon0815

    Being close to Iran is not in Russia’s long tern interests, because it will attract the ire of the Israel Lobby. Russia still does not really understand the power of the Lobby. They’ll learn.

  50. Sean says:

    This is helped along by the fact that the US will have allies in German industrialists, who are tired of Chinese industrial espionage. We can expect this to drive Russia and China even closer together.

    http://www.unz.com/mhudson/trumps-brilliant-strategy-to-dismember-u-s-dollar-hegemony/

    The Neocons who Trump has appointed are accomplishing what seemed unthinkable not long ago: Driving China and Russia together – the great nightmrare of Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski. They also are driving Germany and other European countries into the Eurasian orbit, the “Heartland” nightmare of Halford Mackinder a century ago.

  51. WHAT says:
    @reiner Tor

    One has to be awfully delusional to keep believing in khokhol fighting ability, lol. Western gayrope lacks military structures, know-how and materiel to fight, but then it`s gay anyway. Exactly same for butthurt belt.

    And yes, US is very afraid of anybody who can actually shoot back.

    • Replies: @AP
  52. songbird says:

    The Dems’ strategy for the next few decades might be to run candidates who are brown mischlings with at least half white heritage.

    I cannot see them fielding Nigerians – at least for now.

  53. Beckow says:
    @Sean

    What exactly would Europe be ‘matching‘ in Russia by increasing its military spending? With military force there are only two stable states: arming for attack or intimidation (US, Korea, Turkey,Israel, lately also Russia and China), or doing the absolute minimum (the rest of the world, incl. most of Europe).

    Arming half-way doesn’t work, there is almost nothing one can do with it. It is pure PR and media games. Spending another ‘1%’ if one’s heart is not in it, is a waste of 1%. Europeans are not about to die for anything, arming them better will not change it.

    Most Russian conventional military exercises of late have ended with the use of a battlefield nuke, which supports the idea that Russia is not confident about conventional war with Western Europe.

    So German tanks and Polish infantry are marching on Moscow (again), with French air force and English navy close behind, and Russia decides to tactically nuke them. Sounds about right, I recall Putin very firmly stating a few years ago that ‘Russia will never fight a war on its own territory, with the heavy casualties and destruction – like WWII‘. Not much anyone can do about it. Try to cross to Russia to capture St. Petersburg (led by brave Estonians!), or try to take over Kaliningrad – boom, you get nuked.

    What’s the point? Is the goal to depopulate large swaths of Europe, kill off the few remaining young white men, and then what? Maybe bring in Nigerians and Eritreans to restart the civilisation and pleasure the aging globalist women before they too move on to oblivion. Sounds like a great plan, let’s start building those tanks, those pesky Russians ‘are not confident’, maybe this time they will just give in…

    • Replies: @Sean
  54. Mr. Grey says:

    Tulsi Gabbard is the smartest candidate, but she’s an outsider, she is a little too principled to get the support of the establishment. Kamala is their girl. She’s way better at hustling and pandering than Corey Booker. Gillebrand is good too, but her skin is too pale for the Woke Dems. O’Rourke has to step up his game and start pandering to get more media coverage before he can be properly evaluated. Biden would be the safe bet if any of the newcomers fumble the ball. I don’t see any of these candidates matching Trump tweet for tweet. And the economy is doing well for now- that’s a big thing in Trumps favor.

    I want Kamala to get the nomination, I want to see her hustle fall apart in real time across all 50 states.

  55. @neutral

    ” Germany is under US military occupation”

    Total bullshit. The occupation ended in 1955, and since then Americans, on occasion, haved ended up in German jails, which would never had happened if they were still under occupation, period.

    That they are under a tremendous American influence, granted, however one should note that the neurotic Germans harbor a manic hatred for the US Republicans, and they love the US Democrats, without having any knowledge of the sordid past history of said Democrats.

    The looney Germans worship BC/HC/BO such as nowhere on earth other than Ireland.

    AJM

  56. Anonymous[232] • Disclaimer says:

    Agree that Harris will be the nominee, still unsure about whether she will win.

    Some thoughts:

    1. Harris may increase black voter turnout somewhat, but I don’t see any way she can generate Obama-level enthusiasm: she lacks his charisma and the novelty of a black President has worn off

    2. As per Matt’s post above, Harris comes across as very Hillary-esque, with a not-so-thinly-disguised arrogance and elitism that will turn off a lot of the swing-state whites that carried Trump to victory.

    3. Harris’ personal life is strange and I suspect she has some skeletons in her closet.

    4. Harris’ record is that of the standard model neoliberal tool, for many a great turn-off. Trump can exploit this, maybe even do some political judo (the Republican who is the fair-minded prison reformer vs. the Democrat who was a tough-on-crime hardass).

    Re: Russia, I think a lot of the venom and hatred will dissipate on the day Trump leaves office. Relations will still be frosty but most pols are pragmatic enough not to risk major destabilization over a few emails. The only people who would go Captain Ahab on Russia, imo, would be the hardcore Hillary partisans, which none of the current contenders appear to be.

  57. Dmitry says:
    @Sean

    I read now, they immigrated before this – in 1969. It was also illegal immigration from Chicago. Their number is only 5000 though, so it is a small group.

    They first moved from Chicago to Liberia (in Africa). While in Liberia, they decided they were the Ancient Hebrews (maybe like our friend Bliss says that the Ancient Greeks were black), and so immigrated to Israel.

    I guess they just arrive in Israel on tourist visas in 1969, and then do not exit. At first they were hostile with Israel, and later on became more friendly.

    • Replies: @songbird
    , @Sean
  58. Dmitry says:
    @Hyperborean

    I’m pretty sure it will be the next stage, after the transgender issue. I don’t understand how transgender people would be accepted in America, and the concept of transethnic identity will not be. The latter is a less extreme version (as does not involve the world’s most horrifying surgery) of the same idea.

    they are merely imitating rather than actually pretending to be European.

    Lol and it exists the other way round also, of Russian girls becoming “Japanese”.

  59. Dmitry says:
    @Hyperborean

    Within the context of 21st century American society, it is strange.

    Imagine, a university in America (or modern England, Russia or Sweden), in which only white people are allowed.

    There exists in Tatarstan, for example, “Tatar university”, or in Ufa, “Bashkir university”. But this is in reference to the titular nation and regional language of the republic, that is studied in the philology departments there. There would be no pressure against students not from the titular nationality.

    I recommend the video though – it’s a very unusual story.

    There is resistance in the black university, to accepting the white student and they prefer that it would be only black students allowed. (Perhaps there is also a worry that the only white student, would be too successful there).

  60. songbird says:
    @Dmitry

    I thought vaguely that the ADL hated them, and they thought they were the true Jews or something.

    It is kind of funny to me that they ended up in Israel. I ‘ve always said they would be pretty good in a post apocalyptic movie attacking a surviving nuclear power plant. It is therefore funny that they settled near one.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  61. @iffen

    Trump must keep every midwestern and upper midwestern swing state that he won in 2016.

    If Trump loses Florida, he probably couldn’t make up for it.

    To offset the loss of Florida’s 29 EVs, Trump would have to squeak out a win this time in four of these five States that Clinton won in 2016:

    10 Minnesota
    9 Colorado
    6 Nevada
    4 New Hampshire
    5 New Mexico

    I can’t see him possibly flipping any other 2016 Dem State.

    • Replies: @Aly
  62. @Hyperborean

    Forget about lunatic freaks. Everyone wants to be W-H-I-T-E. Of course not fat, bald, toothless,…. But basically impressive white phenotype: paleface, variety of eyes & hair colors, nose, facial features…

    Blacks, mestizos, Asians…. being white is their dream of dreams.

    Can’t blame them.

    White is the best. It’s like music. Just compare rather early stages of European music

    with Asian “music”

  63. Aly says:
    @RadicalCenter

    Trump can lose Florida and Wisconsin but win New Hampshire and he wins. Same thing if he loses Arizona instead of Wisconsin.
    Florida is very big so if he lose there that complicates things. But I think he can win Florida again.
    If he keeps Florida he can lose Pansilvania and Wisconsin/Arizona or even Pensilvania and Michigan and still win.
    I think Trump is most in danger in Michigan because this is where his closest win in 2016 was. I don’t know situation on the ground.
    Trump won 306 electoral votes in 2016. So he can lose 36 and still win. Also I think 269 will be enough also (in that case result is 269-269 and then House of Representatives elects President but every state gets 1 vote and that is determined by votes of congretional delegation of that state and there is more red states then blue).
    I don’t say Trump is a favorite to win but he has a chance.

  64. Dmitry says:
    @songbird

    Yes it’s funny in a postmodern sense – it must be one of the most surreal nationalities, even by Israeli standards (which is a country with some of the strange groups). They are similar to Mormons as they have multiple wives.

    They are bilingual in English and Hebrew.

  65. Aly says:

    Looking at 2020 race, ofc it depends who Democrat nominee is (Biden looks most formidable now, maybe Sharrod Brown and I would say Sanders), Trump maybe can try to flip New Hampshire, Minnesota, Nevada and Virginia (I don’t think he can win Colorado).
    He is underdog in all of these states but it’s not impossible to flip them.
    And I think he can win is some of this states independently of his results in other parts of county. For example Florida is always close, so result there doesn’t say much about results elsewhere. He can win Minnesota even if he lose Michigan or Pennsilvania. Same with New Hampshire, Nevada and maybe Virginia.
    Thinking about states he won in 2016 I think he is most in danger in Michigan, then Pennsilvania/Wisconsin/Arizona and after all that Florida. Democrats think they can flip North Carolina and Georgia. That’s stupid I think. If they can flip them they probably don’t need them in that case.

  66. If we’ve learned anything from the 2008 and 2016 Dem primary processes, it’s that the path to the nomination comes through black voters, specifically black women, who punch waaaaay above their weight electorally relative to their SES/education and who vote nearly monolithically. The field is crowded, too, so if Harris is able to lock down blacks as 538 correctly predicts she will, she is going to win the nomination fairly easily. More easily than Obama in 2008 or Clinton in 2016, I think.

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    , @AP
  67. George says:

    “PredictIt doesn’t even bother including her in their 2020 Dem nominees pool.”

    Is PredictIt a scam? Why wouldn’t they let the suckers bet on Gabbard?

  68. Mr. XYZ says:
    @Matt Forney

    Why do you think that Warren has no chance? Is it because she’s perceived as being more elitist than Biden and Sanders are?

    Also, why would coming out be so crucial for Cory Booker? I mean, the LGBT vote is like, what 5-10% of the total population? Also, don’t most LGBT voters vote for the Democrats anyway?

  69. Mr. XYZ says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    I’m still curious as to whether Kamala will be perceived as being Black enough by Black voters, though. Kamala’s Black ancestry–like Obama’s–is foreign rather than from American slaves and unlike Obama, Kamala doesn’t even have a Black spouse.

  70. AP says:
    @WHAT

    One has to be awfully delusional to keep believing in khokhol fighting ability, lol.

    Delusional Russian fanboy thinks it is always 2014-2015 in Ukraine.

  71. AP says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    So whom will Oprah choose?

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
  72. @Hyperborean

    The question is, if she has more European blood than her father, why does she look darker? Surfing?

    Your eyes are fooled by her tan and make up. Dark eyeliner and eyeshadow, especially, make most brunettes look vaguely Latino.

    Contrast a heavily made-up Lyubov Aksyonova

    with how she looks with no (or very light) make up in Russian winter

  73. Sean says:
    @Beckow

    What exactly would Europe be ‘matching‘ in Russia by increasing its military spending?

    European defence spending is not serious preparation for any kind of actual war.

    Russia is a cohesive country and that clearly makes it far more strong than Europe, which is a loose coalition of backbiting semi rivals who under the Nato charter would within their rights in declining to defend a Nato member (such as Estonia) even if it was attacked. No Nato member would agree to an attack on Russia and the Germans can get the only thing they want from Russia piped to them at a good price. Nato in 1989, had 5000 U.S. Army tanks in Germany, now it is a token force in Poland.

    Putin says he would not fight conventional war, but he is has built up his conventional forces, so it is probabally like Nato’s implied threat to nuke the Soviet Bear if it put a paw across the Iron Curtain: a bluff. Ostentatious nuking exercises are a Russian bluff to match a Western bluff. No one is going to blow their brains out because they can’t be bothered to take a bit of pain before probably winning. Western Europe is too built up for a big tank drive now. As for Putin, why on Earth would he start a nuclear war if invaded, when he could retreat East into endless strategic space with an excellent chance of winning in the end (not least because China would help keep Russia from being knocked out of the balance of power).

    Is the goal to depopulate large swaths of Europe, kill off the few remaining young white men, and then what?

    A long running conventional war would be far more likely than nuclear war. America did not use nuclear weapons in the Korean war or the Vietnam war. Before that and while America still had a monopoly of thermonuclear weapons and Russia was still defenseless America did not use or threaten to use its nukes unless the USSR stopped trying to become a nuclear power, even though Bertrand Russel and John von Neumann suggested that the USA do just that in order to prevent the world being blown up. It would have been logical, but humans in their decision making retain have primordial “diminishing returns” assessments that confer a basic aversion to risk. Calm down, and realise that it is all handbags at dawn.

    • Replies: @Beckow
  74. @Sean

    You might find this interesting.

    The American Way of Strategy: U.S. Foreign Policy and the American Way of Life (2006)
    by Michael Lind

    Protecting the Oil of the Industrial Nations (p.142-144)

    The Iraq War that began in 2003 did achieve one goal. It put the U.S military in charge of the country with the fourth-largest proven oil reserves in the world.

    Of the three major oil-producing nations in the Persian Gulf, Saudi Arabia remains a U.S. protectorate, Iraq at the time of this writing [2006] is occupied by the United States, and Iran is bordered by three U.S. client states that contain significant numbers of U.S. military forces—Iraq, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. “Regime change” in Iran that brought a pro-American regime to power would complete the conversion of several major oil-producing countries into U.S. protectorates. The most populous Arab country, Egypt, has been a subsidized U.S. client state since the Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel brokered by the United States in 1978.

    Many frustrated Americans hoped that U.S. involvement in the Middle East could be reduced if only the United States could liberate itself from dependence on Persian Gulf oil. They did not understand, and America’s bipartisan foreign policy elite was careful not to explain, that the United States was in the Middle East to protect not only its own oil but also that of other great powers, in order to discourage those great powers from building and projecting military power of their own.

    By the first decade of the twenty-first century, the United States derived only about one-fifth of its oil from the Middle East. Sixty percent of Middle Eastern oil went to Asia. Half of China’s oil came from the Persian Gulf region. The CIA estimated that by 2015 three-quarters of all Middle Eastern oil will go to Asia, with only one-tenth going to Western nations including the United States.”

    The fact that Japan heavily subsidized the liberation of Kuwait from Iraq by the United States in 1991 was a clue to the bargain between the United States and its major protectorates in the post-Cold War period. Thomas P. M. Barnett, an influential American strategic thinker who taught at the Naval War College, noted that “the West … has come to rely less and less on Persian Gulf oil … The United States, for example, imports more energy supplies from Canada than from any other nation, and gets the bulk of its imported oil from North and South America. According to Barnett: “In effect, U.S. Naval presence in Asia is becoming far less an expression of our nation’s forward presence than our exporting of security to the global marketplace.” Barnett argued that “in the end, this is a pretty good deal. We trade little pieces of paper (our currency, in the form of a trade deficit) for Asia’s amazing array of products and services. We are smart enough to know this is a patently unfair deal—unless we offer something of great value along with those little pieces of paper. That product is a strong U.S. Pacific Fleet, which squares the transaction quite nicely.”

    The power to protect by its nature is also the power to threaten. American policymakers did not make this explicit. But “Asia 2025,” the alarmist report about China published by the Pentagon in 2000, noted a potential weakness of China, Japan, and the two Koreas, observing that by 2020 Asia might consume three times as much energy as Europe. In a book published by the National Defense University, defense analyst Douglas E. Streusand wrote of “the American geopolitical imperative to retain control—the ability to use and to deny use—of the sea lines of communications between the Middle East and East Asia.” According to Streusand: “Asia, including China, depends on the United States, not merely on the actual sellers of the petroleum and natural gas, for its energy and thus for its economic prosperity and growth. The leverage of energy access control can counterbalance the leverage of China’s size and proximity on the Pacific Rim. It also offers significant leverage over China itself. From this perspective, the U.S. commitments in the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean protect not only our own energy supplies but also our status as a global power. Since we are currently engaged in a war against Osama bin Laden, who claims the American presence in Saudi Arabia as the principal justification for his hostility, there is no doubt that the U.S. presence in the Gulf brings painfully expensive baggage. But it is an essential component of the maintenance of global order.”

    The ability of the United States to cut off oil supplies to Asia did not go unnoticed in Asia. A zoos report commissioned by the U.S. Defense Department entitled “Energy Futures in Asia” cited the belief of Chinese officials that the United States had the military ability to cut off Chinese oil imports. To reduce its vulnerability to the United States, China sought to provide for its future energy needs by deals with oil-producing countries hostile to the United States, including Iran, Sudan, and Venezuela. In 2005 a bid, later withdrawn, by China’s state-owned oil company, the China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC), to take over the U.S. oil company Unocal, which had large holdings in oil fields and pipelines in Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey, created alarm in the United States. China went on to buy Canada’s Petro-Kazakhstan.

    In addition, according to a 2005 Pentagon report, “China is building strategic relationships along the sea lanes from the Middle East to the South China Sea in ways that suggest defensive and offensive positioning to protect China’s energy interests, but also to serve broad security objectives.” According to the report, China was pursuing a “string of pearls” strategy by building or upgrading naval bases in Bangladesh, Burma, Cambodia, and the South China Sea to deter the potential disruption of its energy supplies from potential threats, including the U.S. Navy, especially in the event of a conflict with Taiwan” in which the United States might impose a blockade preventing oil imports to China. With good reason the political scientist Robert A. Pape observed that “U.S. monopolization of Persian Gulf oil would be the single most significant act that the United States could take to increase its relative power, save for taking control of European or Asian resources.”

  75. @neutral

    There are those who believe the economy is a house of cards always teetering on the brink of collapse. “Doomers” such as James Howard Kunstler, etc.

    All you need is the economy going into recession for a bit as soon as Harris is inaugurated to dispel voters of the notion that black/female/Democrat is any type of solution for intractable problems.

  76. Beckow says:
    @Sean

    I think it is more likely to escalate to a nuclear exchange than stay as a long-running conventional war. People will use what they have when things start turning against them.

    Nato might be incoherent and not particularly united, but in these situations the most decisive country (or a group of countries) could escalate and pull all others with them. It could be Poland, UK, or even one of the small Baltic countries. Any misstep on the borders, any skirmish, given the media hysteria and the fact that nobody will want to lose face, the escalation could happen very quickly and without anyone actually planning it.

    After WWII the nuclear weapons were small and there were not enough of them. So a preventive attack on the Soviet Union would not be disabling. That was the reason US didn’t do it, not ‘aversion to risk‘.

    Calm down, and realise that it is all handbags at dawn.

    What does that mean? Nice saying, I am genuinely curious what does it mean?

  77. @Mr. XYZ

    Gabbard and Biden are probably the strongest possible general election nominees for 2020, in that order. O’Rourke seems like a joke, but I feel like there’s a chance lightning may strike there. His part in the story may not yet be over. Other than for Harris, the others are almost certainly of no consequence (I don’t know what exactly will happen with Bernie…but he won’t be the nominee).

    It’ll probably be Harris, of course, and she’ll lose.

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
  78. Sean says:

    I like Michael Lind’s recent pieces on bloks and class war a lot, but I don’t think that excerpt from a 2006 book is following a good line of reasoning. China has money and can buy all the energy it wants from Russia. Allow me if i may to point out that Japan was far more vulnerable to resource embargo than China ever could be. Korea was a clear cut case of the US misreading Chinese willingness to allow the US to intervene in its back yard. It was a clearly at best a draw and the US didn’t get the message because it was followed by a clear defeat.

    This Barnett character Lind quotes seems to have never heard of Vietnam and thinks intervention can remake a country. I think the problem in his view has gone from insufficient Globalisation of ME and Central Asian states, which the US took his advice to intervene in yet has failed to change for the better despite massive prolonged effort, to Western “nationalism, nativism, protectionism, and xenophobia”, and a growth slowdown by China. I think what he is complaining about is democracy. Barnett is a thoroughgoing Globalist who thinks the people don’t understand, but they seem to have comprehended what he has in mind for them.

    Going by http://thomaspmbarnett.com/ far from “squaring the transaction quite nicely” Barnett’s favored solution would displace most of the Western population from employment at good and rising wages ever more productively making things, to set them in competition with endless immigrants for service jobs that would be all that were remaining for averagely capable people. Everything would be made in China.

    So what you would and actually are getting is full employment with lots of low level jobs with stagnating wages, and low productivity because there would be no incentive for business to invest when the cost of labor was not increasing. The managerial class would be concentrated in property and financial speculation, and the most able people would crowd into those areas of the economy. In “Asia” (actually China) a powerful Russian-energy resourced economy’s growth and productive capacity would accelerate until it reached immense proportions. And Barnett thinks he is going to control this God-sized monster China (Globalzilla) by a basing system taking in Boratstan?

  79. Mr. XYZ says:
    @Kevin O'Keeffe

    What about Elizabeth Warren, Julian Castro, and Kirsten Gillibrand?

    • Replies: @Kevin O'Keeffe
  80. songbird says:

    What would be some good changes to the political process?

    Here’s my old one: president must get tattoo which says something like “we go not seeking dragons abroad.”

    new one: all candidates should be required to debate in blackface.

    • Agree: The Anti-Gnostic
  81. swamped says:

    the hot stove league heats up again; a languorous way to while away the long winter nights, handicapping the next election, with no better guide than the bumbling Nate Silver who couldn’t even get the last election right two days before it happened, let alone two years!who’s gonna’ win?who knows?!but whoever it is, it will be business as usual; elections don’t change a thing!

  82. The new Freedom House is now out. Hungary dropped back to the Partly Free category. Unfortunately there’s something to it, Orbán is now working hard to effectively ban Jobbik (they fined the party exorbitantly for ostensible “campaign finance violations”, the party’s further existence is now in question; a lot of the opposition media has been taken over by Orbán’s people, but of course not the most important TV channel, so he created very bad optics without achieving much in terms of results… he also managed to destroy all conservative/partly cuckservative media which supported him while also criticizing him occasionally, so now among intelligent people the Left has absolute media monopoly…), but it’s still ridiculous that countries where the police might knock at your door for your anonymous tweets get perfect (the Netherlands, Sweden…) or near perfect (the UK) scores.

    Anyway, Russia is still worse than in the 1970s under Brezhnev, LOL.

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Authenticjazzman
  83. ia says:
    @Anonymous

    The thing that attracts white men to Asians is their Asian features

    LOL. I doubt it.

  84. Wency says:
    @Matt Forney

    One big issue in the Rustbelt is that those blue collar Trump voters won’t show up. They tend to have turnout substantially below that of blacks and middle/upper class whites. The only reason they showed up last time was the belief that Trump would be something different and accomplish big things. You can blame his failure to accomplish things on other people, but that doesn’t win over people who are on the fence. It’s much more popular to be in the business of proclaiming your accomplishments than making excuses for your lack thereof.

    There might have been a similar effect with Obama; 2012 was a closer race than 2008, and while there were several factors at play, a key one is that “Hope and Change” didn’t materialize. When you promise transformation and deliver status quo, you’re going to lose some votes.

    The other issue in the Rustbelt is that Republicans have largely been booted from state offices there.

    Trump won the EC despite losing the popular vote by 2 points, which I believe is unprecedented. It’s not a game you can keep playing and expect to keep winning. To have much of a chance, he really needs to increase his popular vote share, and at the very least maintain it. And he starts off having lost 2 points due to demographics.

    Kamala is unlikable compared to Obama, but I don’t think she’s more unlikable than Hillary. She’s at least easier on the eyes. And Hillary was much more corrupt; Kamala slept her way to the top, but Hillary more or less openly accepted bribes from foreign governments.

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Authenticjazzman
  85. @Wency

    ” Those blue collar Trump voters won’t show up”

    Okay so your crystal ball is in working order, and if you reveal the lottery numbers for next Sat, we can split fifty-fifty.

    My Sister is living right in the middle of the rust belt : Michigan, and she says that everyone she knows is more than happy with DT’s performance til now.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US army vet, and pro jazz performer.

  86. @reiner Tor

    ” So now among intelligent people the left has absolute media monopoly”

    There is no such thing as an “Intelligent” leftist person, if someone is intelligent he/she would not be a leftist, as leftism is nothing more than the manifestation of an irrational, stupid, worldview.

    AJM

    • Replies: @iffen
  87. iffen says:
    @Authenticjazzman

    Forfeiture of Mensa membership for this one.

  88. Gerard2 says:

    There is no such thing as an “Intelligent” leftist person, if someone is intelligent he/she would not be a leftist, as leftism is nothing more than the manifestation of an irrational, stupid, worldview.

    Nonsense, different countries have different stages of development of which at various times, left and right wing policies can at times be clearly more beneficial than the other.

  89. Truth says:

    he’ll lose Florida thanks to felons getting the vote,

    That would probably mean he’ll win Florida:

    White people still make up the largest share of felons in Florida.

    https://medium.com/s/story/how-thousands-of-voting-ex-felons-could-impact-floridas-elections-ebc80388ff3d

    Harris will undo what little Trump managed to do for his downtrodden white constituents –

    That would imply he actually did

    something

    for them.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  90. Truth says:
    @Matt Forney

    She lacks Obama’s charisma and comes off as shrill and bitter, a sharp contrast to Trump’s easygoing personality.

    Occasionally, someone actually writes a comment that transcends snark.

  91. Truth says:
    @Dmitry

    I’m sure the next stage for America after transgender, will be transracial people, who invent their own race according to preferences.

    Well great. Then it appears that they have a candidate who will cover both plates.

  92. Sanders, Gabbard, Warren would have best chance for democrats to beat Trump, K Harris is just obama with a cooter, booker is obama 2.0, I just don’t see any whites outside of big cities showing up to vote for another failure like obama, same with Biden or the other white lady, people are looking for drastic change not status quo BS.

    I’m skeptical of all of them, Gabbard has been portrayed as antiwar and even anti-Israel, but looking into her past comments/speeches it seems the opposite. She was one of the few that approved of Netanyahus speech to congress over the Iran deal, she seems to be pretty pro-Israel from what I can find, and if she is Pro-Israel, she is pro-War and anti-Christian. She did tweet that Israel should stop shooting Palestinians when the embassy was being moved, but other than that she is very quiet on Israel-Palestine. She seems to be very pro-war when it comes to “the war on terror”. She also uses a lot of Israeli/Neocon talking points when it comes to “terrorists” and Iran and I would assume Hezbollah are terrorists in her view, not good. Gabbard acts like Trump did during the campaign, talking out of both sides of her mouth… they’re all silent on 9/11 truth, thats pretty telling.

    I’ve pretty much given up on the hope of voting our way out of this BS, after Bush, Obama, then Trump all doing pretty much the same things, breaking all their anti-war promises, I’m fairly certain that voting is just encouraging their evil. You can’t vote out the a-holes that are really in charge, Wall St, MIC, The Lobby. So why bother? I don’t think I can vote for someone not willing to stand up to Israel and the misery they have brought to the Christians in Palestine.

    She should clarify her position on Israel if she wants to be taken seriously. The Lobby is a problem. Would be nice to see DOJ go after them with FARA.

    Tulsi Gabbard Is Not Your Friend
    https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/05/tulsi-gabbard-president-sanders-democratic-party

    Dem: Why I decided to attend Netanyahu speech
    https://video.foxnews.com/v/4091784052001/?#sp=show-clips

    • Replies: @Mikhail
  93. Gerard2 says:

    So 2 of the main candidates are Indian ladies. Incredible.

    Whilst I don’t want to , or know anything about American politics…..seeing as this nonsense disporportionately affects the rest of the world I will comment that if you Strip away all the “black/Indian” and “woman” propaganda BS then this Harris just seems to be your typical American sleazebag identikit lawyer going into politics….in other words ..a non-story

    As it is , this women is your typical (natural) childless feminist LGBT blabla robot .

    Asians ( from subcontinent) and Africans in the Caribbean , for some reason get on much better with plenty of intermarriage – then those in Africa proper do. In South Africa blacks and Indians marrying I think is a rare thing

    A first generation Indian should not be that supportive of all this LGBT nonsense

    A first generation Indian immigrant should be quite elitist on border issues and not want a free-for all on illegal migration….much the same as Japanese-Americans aren’t eager to promote open-border policies

    • Replies: @Gerard2
  94. Gerard2 says:
    @Gerard2

    And then Tulsi Gabbard is also Hindu and has an Indian nationalist identity, although without any Indian blood.

    OK. Only 1 Indian-blood candidate

  95. Gerard2 says:
    @Dmitry

    It’s a very postmodernist America already.

    I’m sure the next stage for America after transgender, will be transracial people, who invent their own race according to preferences.

    Tiger Woods, Michael Jackson, Quincy Jones, OJ Simpson, Crosby………..there is some extremely f**ked-up sick nonsense in America that creates the abnormal black-white dynamic that all these most famous of negro-Americans seem to have…particularly Jackson.
    Something profoundly fake about many of these purveyors of multiculturalism must have impacted all those guys

    Possibly unfair to put Tiger Woods in there…because he may well identify more on the vietnamese side of things ( he is in fact , only 25% black)…but pseudo-anti-racist imbeciles will then racistly eliminate his vietnamese identity to then fake-promote his blackness

    • Replies: @Mikhail
  96. @Dmitry

    Husband is also a Hawaiian and likely some kind of mestizo of European, East Asian, and Hawaiian ancestry.

    The irony is the Kamala Harris is thought of as the black candidate because her father is a Jamaican born Stanford professor despite her mother being an Indian born Brahmin.

    Gabbard has zero Indian ancestry. She is a Hindu because her mother was a white Hippy and she is vaguely brownish because of her father’s Samoan ancestry and Hawaiian sun.

  97. Rosie says:
    @neutral

    As for beating Trump, I suspect this is going to happen as well, but it will be more to do with a significant amount of whites not bothering any more as they increasingly realize that their votes are as pointless as those of whites in South Africa.

    I am in a state of shock at how Senate Republicans are turning on Trump. They need to be punished, but I don’t think they can. Some other puppet of the Jewish plutocracy would just take their place anyway. There is no way out but through.

  98. Mikhail says: • Website
    @redmudhooch

    Somewhat amazing how no one at this thread (upon quick recollection and without checking) didn’t follow-up on my earlier point that Bloomberg might run as a Dem.

    As for Biden, I’m sensing that there will be (if not already) a belief that he’s too much of the past and not the best option for the Dems’ presentation of taking a forward thinking stance. Don’t get good vibes about Warren getting the Dem nomination.

    It’s wrong to believe that Harris has most of the Dem establishment locked up. A just released lengthy article on Corey Booker:

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/02/01/cory-booker-president-2020-profile-newark-projects-224539

    Rather interestingly, nothing mentioned of his love life. Perhaps he might be like Ed Koch – someone who never married, while not having been known to be romantically involved with someone over a prolonged period.

    Come to think of it, Jim Mattis is (based on the media) such a person.

    • Replies: @Swedish Family
  99. Mikhail says: • Website
    @Gerard2

    Woods is part Thai – not Vietnamese.

  100. @iffen

    Harris may not get the Democratic nomination, but it is certain that she is the preferred candidate of the MSM. There are many articles, with many more to come, that exhibit a faux critical perspective detailing her political history. These are offensive defense pieces that will be cited and used when she comes under intense scrutiny. For example, questions about her relationship with Willie Brown will be met with: “That’s been dealt with before in her campaigns for DA and Senator,” “That’s old news,” “This is nothing new and is purely political.”

    Excellent observation. These days, journalists are in effect part of the campaign staff, their readers little more than sales leads. I like the name too, “offensive defense piece.”

    • Replies: @iffen
  101. @Mikhail

    Rather interestingly, nothing mentioned of his love life. Perhaps he might be like Ed Koch – someone who never married, while not having been known to be romantically involved with someone over a prolonged period.

    Also known as a closet queen. 🙂

    • Replies: @Mikhail
  102. iffen says:
    @Swedish Family

    Excellent observation. These days, journalists are in effect part of the campaign staff

    Thanks. Today I listened to a discussion on NPR. One of the talking heads said that national populism was a threat to “democracy.” Populism is democracy in spades.

  103. Sean says:
    @Dmitry

    There was only a handful of them in Dimona by the early 1970s and US citizens don’t need a visa for Israel. They settled in a derelict Kibutz, Israel initially tried to get rid of them but later stopped. Most of them (including some fleeing the US one step ahead of the law) arrived after 1975 when the UN resolution of Zionism being a form of racism was passed and led to Israel re-assessing its status as a Jewish State for propaganda purposes. The Ethiopian Jews were certainly brought to Israel as a way of warding of the Third World suspicion that Israel was just a bunch of European imperialists.

  104. Hibernian says:
    @Truth

    White felons with records of white collar crimes may favor DJT; white legbreakers and hit men, not so much.

    • Replies: @Truth
    , @AP
  105. Truth says:
    @Hibernian

    They are going to vote for Bernie Sanders or Tulsi Gabbard?

    Will they take the bus down to the polling station to vote at all?

  106. Mikhail says: • Website
    @Swedish Family

    A crudely put line back in the day was: “Vote for Cuomo- not the homo”.

    Much unlike (as an example) Roy Cohn, there was never any evidence that Koch went that way.

  107. AP says:
    @Hibernian

    “Blue collar” criminals would probably vote the same way as blue collar non-criminals, if they vote.

  108. RobinG says:
    @Mr. XYZ

    It’s a huge shame that Richard Ojeda dropped out of the 2020 Democratic presidential race

    Yes, but his reasoning was decent, in line with his character. https://voteojeda.com/
    Thanks for mentioning him.

  109. RobinG says:
    @anon

    Trump showed that the only winning response to the coordinated media hysteria is to give them the finger and make them even more hysterical.

    So true, Donald is the champ. Tulsi pretty much gave them the finger at her Aloha Launch.
    If she can just LEAN IN and Maintain….

  110. JP says:
    @JL

    “Also, there is no mention of Elizabeth Warren, is she an even longer shot than Gabbard?”
    I’d give her odds about 1/1024 of winning.

    • LOL: iffen
  111. anon[405] • Disclaimer says:

    “The Europeans will enthusiastically sidle up to her after their extended Trump nightmare.”

    Short term, perhaps. Long term there will be no more white male US presidents, and soon there will be no more white presidents at all due to how the democrat party primary process unfolds. Once that reality sets in, I wonder how long European populations will tolerate openly racist non-European-American presidents telling them what to do; every racial slight they participate in, home and abroad, will reverberate around the world and exacerbate tensions. I don’t think they will say so openly, but demographic changes in the US may cause them to look elsewhere for partnerships.

    In the long run, I think Europe may find ways of throwing off American influence, perhaps by allying with Japan or China. Back when Obama was president, the US insulted India on various occasions over SJW politics; the American elite once openly dreamed of making India “America’s aircraft carrier” against China, and now that is all but a pipe dream. I expect the tendency to morally lecture the world to return with a vengeance under Harris. I wonder if the same fate awaits the European American relationship.

    “Dems favor a hardline approach, and in any case this might be a necessary olive branch to white blue-collars as the US”

    Maybe. However, I’m doubting it. The last time the radical left thought they had ultimate power they went off the rails, so I think a repeat is likely after 2020. Special interest groups hold enormous power within the democrat party and there will be a strong tendency to favor wealthy democrat constituencies over white working class people who have been permanently banished from power. That’s exactly what they did the last time they thought they had won the final competitive election.

    Besides, the democrats have been engaging in immoral wealth redistribution schemes from republican working class states to liberal states for years. That’s what Climate Change hysteria is really all about. Red states like West Virginia are coal country. Blue states like California provide green technology. American Climate Change hysteria is an effort to use moral pinning to guilt poor republican states into giving up their industries and wealth to blue democrat states. How do I know this? Because absolutely nothing stops blue states from dramatically raising fossil fuel consumption taxes and working to limit immigration. They don’t do those things because both would be detrimental to their economies. They want to guilt poor whites into giving them their cake so they can have it and eat it, too. That kind of dishonesty doesn’t bode well for future democrat-working class relations.

  112. Escher says:
    @The Alarmist

    Dang, that’s a nice sweet and spicy curry.
    I can see her getting some Republicans to switch sides.

  113. Escher says:
    @Matt Forney

    IMHO 2020 is still Trump’s to lose, unless the economy craters by then.

  114. Anon[115] • Disclaimer says:

    “Micheal Hudson mentions the emerging German alliance with Russia and China in his latest article.”

    This is the alliance that you should look out for. In the future, it may be very significant.

    Imagine the year is 2040. What does the world look like to the average German? Well, over the last 20 years, no European president has been elected president of the United States since Donald Trump lost in 2020. At first, this was met with a sigh of relief across the continent. However, in the intervening time, the SJW left in the United States has gone off the rails. The US, once a dream for many Europeans who wished to travel there and make their way – famous directors like Paul Verhoeven – is now a racist cesspit where white Europeans are openly hated and discriminated against; the US isn’t a place you can make it anymore if you’re white. After Obama won re-election, Marvel Comics removed most of their white male superheroes and replaced them with members of the “right side of history”. Hollywood also race and gender swapped a number of movies with disastrous box office results, and each time those controversies were met with racial outcry and wide-spread acrimony. That trend picked back up in 2021 and accelerated. Now, even American-produced historical period pieces are rewritten to include unseemly numbers of POC and nearly all portray Europeans as bad; defacing the statues of other cultures was often an act committed by conquering tribes.

    In this future, that trend has gotten even more Orwellian as social justice hate mobs have hounded creators to include ever more “marginalized” groups from their coalition. American culture no longer looks fun but sad, brutal, and joyless – and totally devoid of the kinds of people who look like you. Hollywood has gender and race-swapped most of its characters from European to non-European, so the US no longer has as much cultural cache in the old world as it once did; the US has lost cultural cache all throughout the important places of the world, namely Europe and Asia, so people don’t feel as attached to it as they once did. Advancements in CGI technologies have further allowed even small countries to create and market high-quality, photorealistic movies and television shows abroad. China dominates this market, and they now have cultural influence.

    For years, the United States has gotten ever more corrupt and politically extreme. Perhaps, in order to distract from domestic troubles, the USA has started a number of devastating wars across the world, some of which have seen Europe flooded with migrants as a result. Tensions are rising as the US and China go at it across Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and South America. Europeans increasingly are caught in the middle and don’t want to be involved in foreign wars.

    Over in Europe, the migrant problem never went away, so racial tensions continue to rise everywhere. The US is also marked by internecine racial infighting as diversity has increased due to immigration. It will be hard for some Europeans not to make the connection and worry for their future. The US in 2040 is a country racked with racial tension, anti-white animus (expect lots of historic American statues and monuments to come down), and economic strife. The incompetent minority occupation government has gone full Venezuela under Chavez; they’ve voted themselves huge free goodies that the shrinking white population cannot afford to pay for…and nor do they wish to. An economic crisis is around the corner. Meanwhile, the world economy has been subjected to an ever increasing American boom/bust cycle a la the 2007/2008 Housing Crisis (Minority Mortgage Meltdown) as the economy is mismanaged by the POC coalition through a combination of racial spoils greed, adherence to egalitarian dogma, and rank incompetence. Europeans blame the US for their economic misfortunes.

    Over the pond, there is discontent all over Europe. What is an industrious, ambitious German leader to do? Well, here’s a thought: he may decide to kick the United States out from Europe, and in the future it may be easier than you think. A good way for this leader to get the mob off his back might be to blame the United States for Europe’s ills. Since the US has been ruled by anti-Europeans for years (perhaps there will be conflict as the US demands Europe take in large numbers of immigrants), this may be easy to accomplish; they’ve seen the hateful commentary and race-swapping subtly directed at them for years in American movies, news, and in video games. Economically, the US isn’t the tiger it once was, so there is less of a retaliatory threat than there was in the past. Perhaps America’s wider economy and even its military is corrupted and drastically reduced in quality by myriad diversity quotas, further reducing the threat of defiance.

    With a weakening US and a discontented Europe, blaming the US for Europe’s problems might be the way to go in order to unify Europe and enhance Germany’s power. The European right would be satisfied because they would get to blame the US for Europe’s multicultural problems. The left will be satisfied for various economic ones; besides, Europe’s left has always sort of hated the United States. And with the backing of an immensely powerful future China and resource-rich, white Caucasian Russia, there will be the opportunity for new alliances to emerge.

    Don’t think it could happen? Consider what has happened so far and consider the future. Europe has worked to ignore American sanctions on Iran; Europe has for years ignored American sanctions on Cuba; German leaders met with Japanese officials last year to discuss containing the US; the EU has been working with Russia to maintain the INF treaty in defiance of Washington; the EU also reacted very negatively to US abrogation of the Iran Deal, loudly proclaiming they are not vassals and asking European countries not to buy the F-35 — “Europeans should pursue their own destiny” I think they said. The signs are all there. Now, extrapolate that over twenty or thirty years.

  115. @Mr. XYZ

    What about Elizabeth Warren, Julian Castro, and Kirsten Gillibrand?

    They are irrelevant, as are Corey Booker, Amy Klobuchar, and basically anyone else I didn’t mention. If I didn’t mention them, it was on purpose.

  116. Felt like commenting on one thread for predictions. Sanders is going to be elected President, Biden second place odds, in large part because it’s not clear he will even run, and he at least has some chance of beating Sanders in the primary. Trump has little chance of reelection, that much is clear.

    Harris would be lucky to finish in the top 5 in the Dem primary. People saying otherwise have at best no understanding of how American voters and the electorate behave or even exist (black women will be around 8-9% of the electorate, fwiw) let alone the media’s actions. Usual explanations for shortsightedness (pure racism/sexism etc) apply too of course. It would be hilarious to mock people for being wrong about her support just a few months from now should the media move on to supporting some other candidate, and there’s a very good chance that alone happens, but it’s not necessary. That’s because the US political class and more prominent people will also be as mistaken as the subset of alt-right bloggers and misinformed foreigners here and it will be more fun to mock them.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - If you are new to my work, *start here*. If you liked this post, and want me to produce more such content, consider *donating*.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Anatoly Karlin Comments via RSS