The Unz Review - Mobile

The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection

A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 iSteve Blog
NPR Host: Trump Is the New Andrew Jackson

Email This Page to Someone


 Remember My Information



=>

In the NYT, an NPR host writes:

Donald Trump’s Secret? Channelling Andrew Jackson
By STEVE INSKEEP FEB. 17, 2016 COMMENT

SINCE Donald J. Trump shot to the top of Republican polls last fall, pundits have tried to make sense of his popularity. He has been described as a modern-day product of reality-TV narcissism, or the second coming of European fascism. But as he cruises into the South Carolina primary after beating his rivals by double digits in New Hampshire, it’s clear that neither idea quite explains his strength.

Mr. Trump’s rhetoric resonates with a particular American political tradition. Voters may not know the details of that tradition, but they feel it viscerally when a politician taps into it. Mr. Trump has done just that by emulating a classic model of American democratic leadership.

A clue as to just which leadership model can be found on a map. While Trump fans are spread across the country, they are heavily concentrated in and near the Appalachian states — from Mississippi and Alabama all the way to western Pennsylvania and New York. The northwest corner of South Carolina is one of the most pro-Trump parts of the country. …

Is this true? I don’t have much sense of the geographical concentration of Trump supporters. Ethnically, Trump is German on his father’s side and Scottish Highlander (not Scots-Irish) on his mother’s side.

John McCain did well in Scots-Irish districts in 2008, but he was not seen as much of a threat by the Establishment because he is an Invade-the-World-Invite-the-World activist.

What could the voters of such a region possibly see in a loud and self-interested New York real estate tycoon? In some respects, he is a type of leader Appalachia has seen before. Students of history will recognize that Mr. Trump is a Jackson man.

Consciously or not, Mr. Trump’s campaign echoes the style of Andrew Jackson, and the states where Mr. Trump is strongest are the ones that most consistently favored Jackson during his three runs for the White House.

What Mr. Trump borrows from Jackson is not an issue, but a way of thinking about the world. Mr. Trump promises to fix his supporters’ problems, no matter who else is hurt. He’s a wealthy celebrity always ready for a fight, a superpatriot who says he will make America great again. He vows to attack government corruption and defend the common man. All this could be said of Jackson. …

Needless to say, Jackson and his Democratic Party enforced a certain idea of America — an America for white people. Jackson was personally cordial to people of other races, but their rights did not concern him. When white Southerners grew tired of Indian nations in their midst, Jackson forced them into internal exile in the West. He could have defended this policy using a Trump phrase: “We either have a country or we don’t.”

Mr. Trump’s proposal for a “total and complete shutdown” of Muslims entering the United States until the government “can figure out what is going on” has a brutal simplicity that echoes Jackson. So does his promise to force Mexico to pay for a border wall. The people Mr. Trump favors are to be protected from all harm. Nobody else matters. …

Could Mr. Trump ride the Jackson vote to ultimate victory? Not unless he adds to it. Jackson’s old coalition no longer dominates the electorate. Nonwhite voters are growing in numbers, and many white voters have told pollsters they would be embarrassed by Mr. Trump as president. Mr. Trump would have to reckon with one of Andrew Jackson’s cherished principles: In America, the majority rules. Assembling a majority today is not the same as it used to be.

Steve Inskeep is a host of NPR’s “Morning Edition” and the author of “Jacksonland: President Andrew Jackson, Cherokee Chief John Ross, and a Great American Land Grab.”

Like I said in Taki’s recently in “Alexander Hamilton, Honorary Nonwhite” and “The Ultimate Minority Right,” there have been four stages of evolution of political ideology in the West over the last 400-500 years:

(1) hereditary right

(2) majority rule

(3) minority right

(4) the inalienable right of minorities to become the majority (while maintaining all the privileges of a modern minority)

 

162 Comments to "NPR Host: Trump Is the New Andrew Jackson"

Commenters to Ignore
Agrees/Disagrees Only
[Filtered by Reply Thread]
  1. OT:

    Rapid salmon evolution

    DNA evidence shows that salmon hatcheries cause substantial, rapid genetic changes

    The genetic changes are substantial and rapid, the study found. It’s literally a process of evolution at work, but in this case it does not take multiple generations or long periods of time.

    “We expected hatcheries to have a genetic impact,” Blouin said. “However, the large amount of change we observed at the DNA level was really amazing. This was a surprising result.”

    http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2016-02/osu-des021216.php

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. Steve Inskeep has never been comfortable with the burden of following the old guard Bob Edwards on NPR.

    Now his clumsy NYT piece is more deep background support for anybody non-white on a new $20 bill. That passes for a bank shot on liberal media.

    • Replies: ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. The host of Morning Edition. Nobody plays the part of smug East-Coast Progressive media professional better than Steve Inskeep. His two trademarks are an insincere belly-laugh when a worthy interviewee says something mildly amusing, and a tone of incredulity that comes into play when reporting on the antics of low-class flyover country whites. He and NPR are a match made in heaven.

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. The coming onslaught will be vicious. You ain’t seen nothing yet.

    I remind my fellow Trumpers of the words of a Great American, “Hold! Hold! Hold!”

    (Well, if he had been an American and if he had actually said that.)

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. What Mr. Trump borrows from Jackson is not an issue, but a way of thinking about the world. Mr. Trump promises to fix his supporters’ problems, no matter who else is hurt.

    That’s bull. First, the only people Trump is supposedly going to hurt aren’t even Americans. They are either foreign muslims awaiting an invite, or predominately Mexican and Central Americans in the USA awaiting an amnesty. And if hurting people is defined as not letting them into your nation, well I support hurting well over 7.5 billion people.

    Second, what other politician doesn’t promise to fix the problems of their supporters? And don’t their solutions also involve hurting people? For example, Bernie would fix his supporters problems by giving them things obtained by taking more money from the middle and upper classes.

    Marco would fix his supporters problems by opening up the floodgates for the H-1b visas which in turn would hurt American STEM workers.

    Yet you only hear about some politician making promises when those promises are made to help people which guys like Innskeep (innskeeper) don’t like.

    Needless to say, Jackson and his Democratic Party enforced a certain idea of America — an America for white people.

    And so did the Founding Father of the USA and the First US Congress. Read the First Naturalization Act of 1790.

    • Replies: , ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. Anonymous
    says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    Steve, how does one develop the confidence of Donald Trump? He’s unflappable. I think if I had his confidence life and work would be a constant game.

    • Replies: , ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Trump has had exactly the same distinctive personality for all the decades he’s in the limelight. He’s the anti-David Bowie, never reinventing himself.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Guide to code words: Mr. Trump promises to fix his supporters’ problems, no matter who else is hurt. + Appalachia + Jackson = Trail of tears

    Breaking old news:

    Donald Trump and the Central Park Five: the racially charged rise of a demagogue

    http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/17/central-park-five-donald-trump-jogger-rape-case-new-york

    • Replies: ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Sorry, but I’ve got him as the new William Jennings Bryan (who appealed to many of the same voters as Jackson did). No military experience, Northern city boy, huge crowds at his speeches, opposes US military action abroad, cranky scientific opinions, has home in Florida, hair issues.

    • Replies: ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Journalists have the easiest job in the world.

    Take an arbitrary part of history that makes Salon readers suck in air disapprovingly.

    Then have one or two paragraphs where you put it next to the name of a guy you dislike. Words like “symbolic, redolent, represent, reminiscent, echoes, reflects” are important. Don’t make the link too logical, we’re not autistic here.

    Then close with a sarky indirect dig that’s not a conclusion to any argument but nevertheless sounds like it wraps something up. Hit post.

    God I wish I had no backbone, money making would be so easy.

    • Agree: SPMoore8, SPMoore8, AndrewR
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. I don’t think genetics has anything to do with Trump’s appeal; most of my roots are with Germans and Scots Irish but it’s way too facile to suggest that Germans and Scots Irish were even on the same page when it came to things like Indians and Slavery.

    What I do think that Trump does is that he has a wide populist appeal, and that’s something most Americans, can relate to, as long as their American identity is not “trumped” by some special interest group agenda or grievance.

    Jackson had notorious popular appeal, in fact he was the first real “man of the people” to become president. Trump has popular appeal. Full stop. That’s where the comparisons should end, in fact, I think the guy who made the comparison is making an invidious one: “Don’t want Jackson on the $20? You won’t want Trump either!”

    Actually, the one former president that Trump reminds me of in some ways is Teddy Roosevelt.

    Jackson was famous for the huge cheese wheel (about 1,400 lbs) he offered at a White House party, that was open to call citizens. I hope if Trump is elected he will have the good sense to make it a pizza, and at least half pepperoni.

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  12. Mr. Trump would have to reckon with one of Andrew Jackson’s cherished principles: In America, the majority rules.

    I suspect that the popularity of Trump is indicative that he is in sync with the majority of Americans.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Anonymous
    says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    Try The Power of Positive Thinking by Norman Vincent Peale:

    http://www.christianpost.com/news/trump-the-power-of-positive-thinking-and-american-evangelicalism-143903/

    Also see the New Thought Movement:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Thought_Movement

    The self-help genre, American business and salesmanship culture, Christian Science, “dianetics” in Scientology, hypnosis, the Prosperity Gospel and other forms of Evangelicalism, etc., were influenced by the New Thought Movement.

    Trump uses classic sales and hypnosis techniques from this genre:

    https://theweek.com/articles/600497/donald-trump-hypnotizing-gop-literally

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. I would say there’s far more similarity to Teddy Roosevelt, from the pugilism to the trust-busting protectionism he espoused. Who do these quotes sound like, minus the Victorian-speak:

    “Thank God I am not a free-trader. In this country pernicious indulgence in the doctrine of free trade seems inevitably to produce fatty degeneration of the moral fiber.”

    “In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin.
    But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American. There can be no divided allegiance here. [...] We have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”

    “If the minority is as powerful as the majority there is no use of having political contests at all, for there is no use in having a majority.”

    Jackson was a true populist in both the good (decentralizing banks) and bad (manifest destiny to an extreme and cruel degree) senses of the word. I’d say Trump is more play-acting the populist — he supports eminent domain for private interests after all — but at core he’s a nationalist, with support and sympathy for the working and middle class backbone of the country.

    Trump could certainly use more of the “speak softly and carry a big stick” approach, however.

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  15. Anonymous
    says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    Scott Adams summarized the responsibility of the POTUS a month or two ago:

    “The job description says the president needs to protect citizens from all threats, foreign and domestic. It is silent on the questions of hurting people’s feelings and protecting non-citizens.”

    It is illuminating how some people feel hurting non-citizen’s feelings trumps protecting citizens.

    “The people Mr. Trump favors are to be protected from all harm. Nobody else matters. …”

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  16. Pundits seriously underestimate Trump’s appeal to Blacks and Hispanics.

    How many Mexican men are going to vote for Hillary? Close to zero, Mexicans hate harridans, women who don’t know their real place is in the kitchen. As for Sanders, they don’t know what to make of a old style effete Jewish Liberal. Sanders might appeal to Asians, though. Hispanics like colorful personalities and they have a soft spot for big men. Men with cojones. Actually, Trump’s their kind of man. A white boss they’d like to have a beer with. Except for some Hispanic professional activists, they don’t give a damn about illegals. And close to half of Hispanic ladies secrectly dream of bearing a son for Trump. He’s the big man in the hacienda, after all.

    Most Blacks also respect an unapologetic white man . I really can’t see Black men rushing to vote for a Jewish dweeb like Sanders or an obnoxious feminist and/or carpet muncher like Hillary. Black men will stay home. Not sure about the sistahs.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. “Mr. Trump promises to fix his supporters’ problems, no matter who else is hurt.”

    “The people Mr. Trump favors are to be protected from all harm. Nobody else matters.”

    He said it twice. Doesn’t seem to realize that’s an endorsement.

    Trump favours Americans. Many Americans seem to appreciate this sentiment and would like to see it in their president.

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. The others commentators beat me to this, but this commentary is pretentious fluff, not unusual for NPR. The pre-Civil War United States was so different from the United States circa 2015, and the political issues were so different, is that it is almost intellectually dishonest to draw any comparisons between public figures in those eras.

    For example, when Jackson became President in 1929, neither Texas or California were even US territory. Florida had just been annexed, thanks largely to Jackson, but it was basically a low population part of the South, essentially northern Florida. Chicago was not yet close to being a major city. Obviously slavery still existed. There were still debates about whether the federal government could build “internal improvements” (let alone today’s entitlement programs or defense budget), whether states could nullify federal laws, whether it was a good idea for a President to have two terms, and whether having large numbers of Catholics mixed in with the population was a good idea. People spoke English and the basic structure of government was pretty much the same (though states had alot more autonomy). That’s pretty much it. This is also why Toqueville’s observations in the U.S., made about the same time, are greatly overrated in terms of their insights on modern day American.

    As for Trump’s antecedents, he is mostly sui generis, but does have similarities with Pat Buchanan and Ross Perot. There is some comparison that can be made with Teddy Roosevelt, in terms of being a larger than life figure from New York City who had a nationalist platform. You can’t go back earlier because in the nineteenth century, if someone entered political life after having a career outside politics, they came from the military, not business. Really I have a hard time imagining a businessman with Trump’s particular collection of businesses in the nineteenth century.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. Steve,

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/31/upshot/donald-trumps-strongest-supporters-a-certain-kind-of-democrat.html?ref=todayspaper&_r=1

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  20. Hypomanic personality.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. I’m not surprised that President Andrew Jackson is just the latest Bad Guy dredged up to tar Trump. Thin tendentious gruel.

    There are powerful analogues to our current era in the decades preceding The Civil War, at least so I have been arguing for years, including in the comments section here.

    Immigration is a National Question on the order of Slavery. The parallels are eerie, and do not bode well for the successor to the Whigs, the Republican Party.

    Those insistent that unending Immigration Surges and Amnesty are who we are is foreshadowed by those claiming the same about Slavery — and that it be enshrined forever, come what may for the American Project.

    • Agree: Thea
    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. ” The northwest corner of South Carolina is one of the most pro-Trump parts of the country. …”

    Assuming Mr. Inskeep is accurate in this observation, that might explain why Cruz is not doing particularly well in SC, where the demographics would appear to favor him, with its heavy evangelical population. Northwest SC, e.g., Greenville, just happens to be where Bob Jones U. is located. https://www.bing.com/mapspreview?&ty=17&q=Bob%20Jones%20University&mb=35.009117~-82.528229~34.738697~-82.200104&ppois=34.873908996582_-82.3641662597656_Bob%20Jones%20University_~&cp=34.873909~-82.364166&v=2&sV=1

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. I often listen to NPR.

    A few months ago Inskeep did a report on Orban’s Hungary. You would think he never took a history class. He said that the nation off Hungary was just created a little over a hundred years ago therefore how could they have a deep history or sense of nationhood.

    I would hope he at least had a passing familiarity with Atilla. Or Austria Hungary.

    Maybe he was lying.

    • Replies: , ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. That’s bull. First, the only people Trump is supposedly going to hurt aren’t even Americans. They are either foreign muslims awaiting an invite, or predominately Mexican and Central Americans in the USA awaiting an amnesty. And if hurting people is defined as not letting them into your nation, well I support hurting well over 7.5 billion people.

    Of course it’s bull, it’s leftism. If leftists don’t have something to guilt-trip you about, they’ll make something up, 100% of the time. If you’re not giving them your country, you’re “harming” them. And if you’ve given them your country but not your property, you’re “harming” them again. And if you’ve given them your country and your property, but not your praise, you’re “harming” them yet again. And if you’ve given them your country and your property and your praise, but you’re still around to remind them of their ancestral inadequacies, you’re “harming” them again. After you commit ritual suicide, it’ll be ritual hate of your memory until the sun goes nova.

    Trump could certainly use more of the “speak softly and carry a big stick” approach, however.

    Yeah, that would put him somewhere down with Kasich in the polls. Great plan.

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  25. Reuters-Ipsos has an ongoing daily tracking poll that allows users to create their own cross tabs.

    Trump’s strongest showing among self-identified Republicans is in New England, followed by the mid-Atlantic and then the Southeast. These census regions don’t quite allow for the Appalachian McCain Belt to be zeroed in on, but while he’s doing okay in states like West Virginia and Tennessee, he’s really crushing it in states like Massachusetts. It’s probably important to distinguish between total population support, and support among people who are likely to ultimately vote for the Republican nominee. In the case of the former, NPR would appear to have us write off Republican appeal in blue states.

    There is also a huge East-West divide, as Agnostic from Face-to-Face first made me aware of. In the Mountain West and West Coast, Trump’s lead over Cruz is in the single digits in the R-I poll. In New England, by contrast, it’s nearly 40 points, with Trump in first at 48% and Cruz at a very distant second at under 10%. It’d be interesting, Steve, to hear your thoughts on that if you have any.

    • Replies: , , ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. Anonymous
    says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    “Draft dodger Trump says sex in the Eighties was ‘his personal Vietnam’ during Howard Stern interview in 1997″

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3451452/Trump-says-sex-eighties-personal-Vietnam-Howard-Stern-interview-1997.html

    “Donald Trump told shock jock he felt ‘lucky’ not to have picked up an STD
    He said having sex in the 1980s was ‘dangerous’ and ‘scary, like Vietnam’
    ‘It is my personal Vietnam. I feel like a great and very brave soldier,’ he said
    Stern said Trump compared a vagina to ‘a potential landmine’ in private
    Trump avoided military draft age 22, because of bone spurs in both heels
    Republican front-runner revealed he’s ‘not into anal’ on Stern show in 2004
    He also discussed Melania and Ivanka Trump’s toilet habits in bizarre chat”

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  27. Other than the cross of gold, I can’t really think of any lasting legacy of his that would be known to a foreigner. Is your view of Trump as pessimistic? I believe Revilo P Oliver said that optimism is cowardice in our predicament.

    • Replies: ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. You mean Andy Jackson got zero percent of the “Straight out o’Compton vote”? Didn’t those Spanish speaking folks know the Democrats were gonna give the black man civil rights, just after the Republican’s freed them of course.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. I don’t have much sense of the geographical concentration of Trump supporters.

    Journalists keep looking for typical Trump voters, but the polls just keep showing his support among GOP demographics is remarkably flat. He skews just a little bit low income and non-evangelical, and over-performs with independant conservatives over party members.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. Take a look at the internals of some of the polls. One of the things that jumps out is just how broad based Trump’s support is compared to any one else. The beautiful people like to say Trump is riding a wave of angry white losers, but the data says otherwise. His support with college grads(winners), for example, is the same as with high school grads (losers). He polls better with NAM’s than any of the other Republicans.

    The fun thing about the Trump Effect is what it exposes about his critics. The great bogeyman of the ruling class these days is the meth addicted white guy living in Boone County. We know that because they associate this character with the monster currently tormenting them, Donald Trump. The Professional Right and the Professional Left share this same nightmare.

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  31. Well, Inskeep is obviously an idiot. He’s referring to the Great Compromise (probably) between the Austrians and the Hungarians around 1868, which created the “Kingdom of Hungary” in the modern sense (which included Slovakia, large parts of Transylvania (that’s Erdely for Rolling Stone readers), parts of Croatia and parts of Ukraine, too.

    It’s true that most modern nationalism, especially in Eastern Europe, didn’t start until about 200 years ago. But to claim that Hungarians do not have a sense of their (rather unique) identity in Eastern Europe (because the are non-Indo European and migrated to the Hungarian plain fairly recently, ca. 900 AD) is preposterous.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. Scottish Highlander (not Scots-Irish) on his mother’s side.

    Steve,

    I’m guessing you’ve read both Albion’s Seed and Cracker Culture?

    Anyway, I know there is some academic dispute about the truth of some of the claims in those books, but the upshot is that Scottish Highlanders and Appalachian Scots-Irish have more in common with each other than either group has with, say, Lowland Scots.

    Also, as to this meme that Trump can’t win a general election against any Democrat, Nate Silver has a web app that lets you calculate what a Republican nominee has to do to win.

    http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-swing-the-election/

    If you project that black turnout is 60% in 2016 (the same as it was in 2004, the last time that Obama wasn’t on the ballot), the ONLY thing Trump needs to do is increase non-college educated white turnout and improve non-college educated whites from 62% to 66% Republican. That’s it. That’s all he has to do.

    If he can say, get to 15% of the black vote, or increase college-educated whites from 56 to say 60% Republican, it turns into a blowout pretty quick.

    And if Bloomberg enters the race, who knows, but I’d guess Trump would win 45+ states.

    Edit: On the other hand, if, say, Rubio wins the nomination, and all else is the same, he would have to drive Hispanic turnout up to Obama-election-black levels of turnout, and win Hispanics 66-34 to crack 270 electoral votes. Not. Gonna. Happen.

    • Replies: ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. NPR Host: Trump Is the New Andrew Jackson | VDARE - premier news outlet for patriotic immigration reform
    says:
    • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment

    […] [Comment at Unz.com] […]

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  34. Ethnically, Trump is German on his father’s side and Scottish Highlander (not Scots-Irish) on his mother’s side.

    His mom was a Hebridean and a Presbyterian from Lewis Island. This island is a Calvinist Presbyterian stronghold, different from the largely Roman Catholic and Episcopalian (before the defeat of the Jacobites) Highlands. Culturally, she was “Scots Irish” as most of us who come from that part of the world would see it. She would have fit seamlessly into the great migration of Covenanters from Northern Ireland and Scotland if she’d been an early 18th century migrant to the colonies.

    So Mary MacLeod Trump was “Scots Irish” as much as any Scots Covenanter settled on the frontier as a buffer against Indians during the pre-revolutionary war era.

    • Replies: ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Anonymous
    says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    Trump supporters (talk about a motley crew):

    Mike Tyson
    Gene Simmons
    Cher
    Tom Brady
    Terrell Owens
    Jess Ventura
    Kenny Rogers
    Mark Cuban
    Wayne Newton
    Howard Stern
    Gary Busey
    Charlie Sheen
    Herschel Walker
    Chuck Yeager
    Mike Dirka
    Carl Icahn
    Ivana Trump
    Lou Ferrigno
    Ann Coulter
    Dennis Rodman

    http://www.bestyling.com/celebrities-support-donald-trump/

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. Anonymous
    says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    Trump’s strongest showing among self-identified Republicans is in New England, followed by the mid-Atlantic and then the Southeast. These census regions don’t quite allow for the Appalachian McCain Belt to be zeroed in on, but while he’s doing okay in states like West Virginia and Tennessee, he’s really crushing it in states like Massachusetts….There is also a huge East-West divide, as Agnostic from Face-to-Face first made me aware of. In the Mountain West and West Coast

    Trump’s support is basically the old New Deal coalition of the South and northern working-class ethnics and Catholics. Republicans in New England are no longer old stock WASP types, while Republicans in the West tend to be more WASP or German Protestant or descended from them like the Mormons.

    In terms of electoral support, Trump is more like FDR than Jackson.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. Anonymous
    says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    MacLeod is a Scottish Highlander clan:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clan_Macleod

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Also, as to this meme that Trump can’t win a general election against any Democrat, Nate Silver has a web app that lets you calculate what a Republican nominee has to do to win.

    They keep saying that, but common sense seems to say something else. 1) Hillary is a dud. She excites no one. Her support among blacks will be a reversion to the mean, and nothing like what Hussein saw (which was key to his victory). 2) Trump is generating a lot of excitement and bringing in new voters.

    Seems to me the only thing that can really hurt Trump in the general is if people who normally pull the lever for Republicans stay home. The question becomes, how many of them will stay home, preferring to see Hillary in the white house?

    Trump supporters (talk about a motley crew):

    Mike Tyson
    Gene Simmons
    Cher
    Tom Brady
    Terrell Owens
    Jess Ventura
    Kenny Rogers
    Mark Cuban
    Wayne Newton
    Howard Stern
    Gary Busey
    Charlie Sheen
    Herschel Walker
    Chuck Yeager
    Mike Dirka
    Carl Icahn
    Ivana Trump
    Lou Ferrigno
    Ann Coulter
    Dennis Rodman

    No Ted Nugent?

    Wow, so, one Jew? Or is Mark Cuban Jewish, for a total of two? Wait, I forgot Stern. So 2, 3 max. Doesn’t bode well. People keep telling us how many Jews Trump has in his family and inner circle…maybe somebody needs to the Jews, who seem to view him the way vampires view garlic and crosses.

    • Replies: ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. The open borders billionaires and their sock puppets, the MSM and establishment politicians, absolutely refuse to even hint at the very real issues and Trump’s policy positions regarding these. They know that to do this is to ensure his election. But not mentioning the elephant in the room just makes the issues more obvious to those with any vision or brains. Innskeep is just another sock puppet. His latest screed is beyond pathetic.

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  40. 1/ WJB Legacy-first major western politico to be openly anti-evolution.

    2/ Pessimistic on Trump’s chances to be POTUS. All US Presidents have either held elective office or appointed government office (incl military).

    • Replies: , ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  42. Amazing.
    The partisans of the most belligerent, bellicose, warmongers, like Trump, ignore the fact, that their paladin is just one more republican Viet Nam dodging coward.
    Their patron saint, the Cold Warrior, Reagan used the studio’s influence to spend WW II, the Big One, swanning around Hollywood in the jodhpurs and rising boots of a cavalry officer.
    Mission Accomplished war criminal Boy George Bush used daddy’s influence to dodge Viet Nam.
    Not one of these other republican pretenders to the Presidency, set foot in Viet Nam, Dan Quayle, Pat Buchanan, Willard Mitty Romney, Newt Gingrich or Oops Perry. Nor did uber warmonger Rush Limbaugh.
    In contrast two of the three Democratic baby boomers to get the nomination, Al Gore and John Kerry volunteered and served in Viet Nam.
    Those who have never witnessed the full time horror show that is war, those who have never seen, and smelled, the incinerated remains of old people, women and children, the obscenely termed “collateral damage”, are the loudest voices and greatest cheerleaders for war.
    Therein lies the threat, to our children, our Treasury and our standing in the world.

    • Replies: , , , , ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Anonymous
    says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    Wow, so, one Jew? Or is Mark Cuban Jewish, for a total of two? Wait, I forgot Stern. So 2, 3 max. Doesn’t bode well. People keep telling us how many Jews Trump has in his family and inner circle…maybe somebody needs to the Jews, who seem to view him the way vampires view garlic and crosses.

    Other Jews who support Trump:
    Jerry Lewis (considered a genius in France)
    Ilana Mercer
    Michael Savage
    Hasidim of Williamsburg, Brooklyn

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. Yep, and this stuff about Trump being especially strong in the lower left corner of northwestern South Carolina is of a piece with their desperate wish to believe Trump is some kind of boutique candidate of limited appeal.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. 2/ Pessimistic on Trump’s chances to be POTUS. All US Presidents have either held elective office or appointed government office (incl military).

    1) For most of our country’s history, holding high office in either the government or the military was just about the only way one could achieve the requisite fame to be a candidate in a national election. (quick, off the top of your head, name the most famous businessman from the 1850s.)

    2) For most of our country’s history, the only way to get nominated by a major party was to work your way up through the party’s ranks. The primary system that we have now didn’t solidify until the 1980s. Probably 1980 would have been the earliest year in which it would have been even theoretically possible to get a major party nomination as a total party outsider.

    3) There is some selection bias at work. People who want to be President don’t usually decide late in life that they don’t want to be President. Typically, people who are very good in politics move up the ranks in politics and eventually run for President. The first two reasons probably reinforce this. The major exception to this rule, of course, is military officers. Famous generals can and do run for President. Oddly, no Admiral has ever been President.

    I think there are some good arguments as to why Trump won’t won the general election. The fact that the historical trend is against him because he’s a businessman and not a politician is not one of those good arguments.

    • Replies: , ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. I would normally join you in pessimism about Trump’s chances for getting elected, but I never thought Obama would be elected, either. Today’s electorate has become weird and unpredictable.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. The partisans of the most belligerent, bellicose, warmongers, like Trump

    I think you are confused about some things… Most of us support Trump because he is the least likely to lead the United States into a quixotic invasion of a semi-random middle east country. We don’t like him because he’s warlike. We like him precisely because he isn’t warlike.

    The fact that he didn’t go to Vietnam does nothing to disabuse me of the notion that he isn’t interested in ridiculous foreign adventures.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Has a viable nation ever been founded that promised a home for everyone and anybody? I dare say not. And we are seeing now what happens to great nations once they lose that particular sense of purpose. Just as with people, a nation can not be all things to all people. When it tries, it ceases to exist in short order.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. One thing on Trumps supporters, from what I have seen it is very veteran and military heavy. I’d bet on Trump’s supporters to beat everybody else’s together in a fight. Just like Jackson’s supporters.

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  50. Just as with people, a nation can not be all things to all people. When it tries, it ceases to exist in short order.

    The USA is probably getting close to the point where it can no longer function as a nation. Here are some reasons why I am not confident in the long term future.

    1) The USA has a huge land mass and geographic diversity.

    2) The USA has an enormous population of over 320 million people which makes us the third most populous nation on Earth. Have any other nations beside India and China ever had so many people?

    3) The USA has an increasing population of non-Europeans in a country that was once almost 90 percent European.

    4) An ideological divide among European Americans that appears to be irreconcilable.

    We have always had the geographic issue, and it helped cause the Civil War despite a somewhat homogenous population. Add to this the other three points, and I don’t see how this girl continues marching along.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Knew the New England stats. The failure of the article (so pointless, btw) is that Trump supporters are not exactly made-up of Appalachian, Scots-Irish coal miners…as much as the NYT wants the rest of the USA (& Europe) to believe. Pundits and journalists may not have yet realized it is time to stop calling Trump supporters “trailer trash”, “fly-over state” denizens, non-college educated losers, dumb-asses, angry working class losers, pathetic, racist, scared wusses.

    Why even go to the past? Andrew Jackson, whaaa? – absolutely no sense – a lot of college kids don’t even know or care who Jackson was. Civil War is, like, old history.

    The Mountain States will eventually go for Trump…so many taciturn voters there – they just like to ruminate a bit longer; and, CA, well, may become a bellwether state for the first time, according to the list of celebrities a poster posted. This is a weird election: http://www.theweek.com/articles/606035/why-donald-trumps-viscious-attack-george-w-bush-brutallyeffective–brilliant

    OT: Hailey going for Rubio was sooo “fail.” a two-ticket immigrant Jack n’ Jill will really mobilize the ” Trump ambivalents.” USA will not go for that; not even the Democrats – youth will not trump experience, no matter how interesting your parents’ story about immigration is. Also, speaking about youths, they are still firmly with Bernie…not some 43-yr-olds who are part of the “sell-out” establishment. But, youths are moving to Trump, as well. Trump needs to reach-out to the college kids more…especially after his chat with Joe & Mika.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. I don’t know which Oliver Stone movie you wandered out of, but neither Trump nor anybody here endorses war with any country

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Your Jewdar needs replacing. You left off Carl Icahn?

    Holy crap. I didn’t even note the handle. Svigor? Come on bro, you’re better than this. Get some rest dude.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. I heard Trump say in an interview the other day that he was very bullish about carrying New York State. I believe him. He might lose New York City, but he would probably sweep upstate and Long Island, even against “native daughter” Hillary Clinton. If Bloomberg were to enter the race (which I doubt), I would bet on it.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. “Edit: On the other hand, if, say, Rubio wins the nomination, and all else is the same, he would have to drive Hispanic turnout up to Obama-election-black levels of turnout, and win Hispanics 66-34 to crack 270 electoral votes. Not. Gonna. Happen.”

    Why do you think that Rubio is the favorite Republican of the Democratic MSM at this time (young, handsome, speaks Spanish, has a Hispanic name, good speaker)? “The Republican candidate Hillary Clinton fears the most.” BS. They know he will lose to Hillary. And, if he is running in the fall, Hillary will not be challenged on her vote for the Iraq War as a Senator, her pushing the Libyan War as SOS, and her call for “no-fly zones” over Syria as a candidate or her views on illegal immigration and immigration generally. They know that Trump will rip her apart.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. Steve Inskeep has discovered the Transitive Property of Racism. Genius Grant in his future?

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  57. ” (quick, off the top of your head, name the most famous businessman from the 1850s.)”

    Cornelius Vanderbilt.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. Anonymous
    says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    “‘Vote for Trump!’ Neo-Nazi child molester’s message to the jury before he was jailed for 50 years”

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3307432/Vote-Trump-Neo-Nazi-child-molester-s-message-jury-jailed-50-years.html

    White supremacist August Kreis III was jailed for 50 years for sexually abusing two young children
    In his trial, he held a sign to the jury which said: ‘Vote for Donald Trump’
    After the neo-Nazi was sentenced he said he would ‘always hate the Jew’ and pleaded with people to ‘vote for Trump’
    Kreis, 61, was a member of the Ku Klux Klan and molested two girls between the ages of 10 and 14
    One, who is now in her 20s, branded him a ‘monster’ as he was jailed

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  59. About Trump’s strongest states being Andy Jackson states, I don’t actually know but I’d be surprised if the same sort of people live in those states today. Hard as it is to compare politicians almost two centuries apart, however vaguely, certainly regional politics haven’t stayed the same.

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  60. India bumps along in part because it’s highly federalist: the state of Kerala is pretty communist and next door in Karnataka (Bangalore) is pretty capitalist.

    • Replies: ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. “= Trail of tears”

    I sorta figured before reading the excerpts that it would be about Trump planning ethnic cleansing, possibly involving genocide. Because that’s one of the two things anybody remembers concerning Jackson, the other being his breaking of the second US bank. If you’re really up on things you might recall “now let him enforce it,” the Battle of New Orleans, King Mob, and Calhoun resigning. But none of that casts a bad enough light on Trump.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. I was among the first (if not the first) to post the connection of Trump to Andrew Jackson several weeks ago. Mainly because the parallels are fairly obvious: both were/are strong willed; (also both had Scottish connections although Jackson’s family originally came from the Ulster border counties in Ireland technically making him Scots-Irish); not above personal vendettas; fiercely loyal to those loyal to them; strong support among the lower classes; also quick tempered; and above all, willing to take a stand and face down those opposed to them on the various issues of the day.

    Trump, “the people’s billionaire” should be honored if not flattered to be compared to President Jackson.

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  63. The sistahs remember how Hillary went after their chosen one in ’08, and aren’t about to forgive for quite a while. They also remember how she, along with her husband, helped promote policies such as welfare reform, law and order regarding crime, and a bit of curtailing the more extreme abuses of affirmative action. Nope. They won’t rush up to vote for her either. They’ll either stay home or, vote for their local Congressional Black Congressman in their district. If they don’t have one, expect to see Hillary’s total number of black votes (when compared with the votes given to Obama in ’08 and ’12) to drop by about 1-2 million nationally.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. Also have to give a shout out to William Backhouse Astor, Sr., son of John Jacob Astor, the first multimillionaire in US. William carried the torch onward after his father’s passing in 1848 so William Backhouse Astor, Sr. would of course be tied with Vanderbilt for the title of most famous US businessman during the 1850′s.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. Expanding on the Jews for Trump list:

    Gene Simmons
    Mark Cuban
    Howard Stern
    Carl Icahn
    Jerry Lewis (considered a genius in France)
    Ilana Mercer
    Michael Savage
    Hasidim of Williamsburg, Brooklyn

    Lion of the Blogosphere
    Mickey Kaus (half his twitter is pro-Trump and anti-rubio/cruz/jeb
    David Horowitz (who publishes several other J4T):

    Ari Lieberman

    http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/261113/trumps-muslim-ban-and-constitutional-legality-ari-lieberman

    Deborah Weiss:

    http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/261630/trump-banned-britain-deborah-weiss

    • Replies: ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. It’s happened outside the US with a comparable personality.

    Larger than life Cecil John Rhodes became Prime Minister of the British Cape Colony in 1890, off the back of his business empire based on mining.

    He also founded and had a country named after himself as well as a university.

    Rhodes achieved all this, yet was only 48 when he died.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. I think there are some good arguments as to why Trump won’t won the general election. The fact that the historical trend is against him because he’s a businessman and not a politician is not one of those good arguments.

    There has never been a businessman President. True enough.

    But there has never been a woman President, and there has never been a Jewish President.

    So it looks like nobody will win this election.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. “(1) hereditary right

    (2) majority rule

    (3) minority right

    (4) the inalienable right of minorities to become the majority (while maintaining all the privileges of a modern minority)”

    First of all, this is not how Western political hstory went. This is a fabrication of your mind. The political evolution of the West was from hereditary right to equality before the law. That’s what one person one vote is: the extension of the general principle of equality before the law to the political arena. Secondly, “majority rule” and “minority right” are not mutually exclusive concepts. In fact, that’s what the Enlightnment was all about: that human beings have certain inalienable rights that cannot be denied by the political process. Democracy is the fairest way to decide public policies, in the sense that it is simply the extension of the principle of equality before the law and that everyone holds exactly the same weight politically, but the power of majorities applies ONLY to policies that do not involve individual rights. Otherwise, majorities could vote, for instance, for the end of democracy which would undermine the principle of equality before the law by removing from the losing minority any future rights of carrying weight in the political process, turning them into second-class citizens with no power in the political process. Therefore, certain rights are praeter-politics and cannot be removed by political decrees.

    I love how you pretend like majority rule and minority rights are mutually exclusive and the antithesis of the other, when in reality the two things have coexisted peacefully for 200 years in the West. Let me give an example: suppose that communists win an election somewhere in the U.S. They wouldn’t be able to enact legislation to take private property from their owners for the people. Why? Because the right to private propertry is a fundamental right, and cannot be removed by tghe political process.

    • Replies: ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. Trump’s shown no evidence of being a warmonger, which is probably why all the neocons have denounced him. He strongly opposed the Iraq War, for example, and if the S. Carolina debate is anything to go by, he still does. Educate yourself: http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/02/15/trump-is-right-about-iraq-and-that-should-stick-to-clinton/

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. I love how you pretend like majority rule and minority rights are mutually exclusive and the antithesis of the other …

    To the extent that one could be used to limit the other, they would have to be described as antagonistic.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Yes Trump seems to do best in the Greater New England and Rust Belt states. Mountain West and West Coast remains a bit of an enigma so far. Reckon he will flip more than a few Rust Belt in the Presidential, I saw one Fox News poll of Michigan where he beat Hillary by several points.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. Hillary had such a good time destroying Libya (and playing a big role in creating ISIS) she wants to go to war with Russia:

    http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2015/11/19/hillary-clintons-road-to-war/

    Hillary Clinton promised us a speech on what she’d do to destroy ISIS, but what she gave us was a speech detailing how she would destroy Syria – and drag the US down the road to another unwinnable war. What she essentially proposes is that we fight a three-sided battle – against ISIS, on the one hand, and against Bashar al-Assad, Russia, and Iran on the other.

    She elaborated on her “no-fly zone” scheme, saying she wanted to set it up only in the north. This means not only that the US air force will be protecting the “moderate” Syrian rebels – a coalition of US-supported head-choppers and al-Nusra, the Syrian affiliate of al-Qaeda – but also preventing Russian warplanes from flying over the huge swath of territory in the north controlled by the Islamic State – including Raqqa, their capital. So how does she intend to keep Putin out of the skies over Raqqa – by shooting down Russian planes, Chris Christie-style?

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. 2) For most of our country’s history, the only way to get nominated by a major party was to work your way up through the party’s ranks. The primary system that we have now didn’t solidify until the 1980s. Probably 1980 would have been the earliest year in which it would have been even theoretically possible to get a major party nomination as a total party outsider.

    No. Wendell Willkie in 1940. Not just a complete party outsider (like Trump, he had been a Democrat as late as three years before the GOP convention), but also a businessman who had never held elective office.

    I’m actually astounded that most observers, both in the MSM and on the internet, haven’t cited the Willkie phenomenon as a Trump precursor.

    • Replies: , , ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. Funny, like Homer at the dinner table..’Mel Brooks is jewish?!’

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. Today’s electorate has become weird and unpredictable.

    Not really: that Negroes will always vote for the Negro candidate, no matter how big a jerk, explains the 2008 and 2012 elections; that the native-born and White middle class and working class are concerned about attempts to grotesquely reshape the demographics of this country, the destruction of jobs in the USA and the US economy, and constant foreign wars for no purpose explain the 2016 election.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. The way this is gonna go is they’re going to let Trump run around picking off 35-45% of the primary votes. Then, no matter their lack of viability, they pay and pay to keep Bush, Kasich and Carson in to the bitter end merely for their collective 10 or 15%. Rubio and Cruz between them will pull Trump’s 40%. All this, give or take, the goal being to make sure Trump doesn’t have 50%-plus at the convention. Trump will have Twice as many of any single one of the others by far, but not an overall majority as of convention time. Then, all the primary delegates not named for Trump through the primaries/caucuses commit to Cruz or Rubio giving one of them the majority/nomination. This sticks it to Trump and all his delegates, but what can Trump do about THAT?

    • Replies: , ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. The people Mr. Trump favors are to be protected from all harm. Nobody else matters. …

    He writes that as though it’s a bad thing! Bizarre!

    ["The people Mr. Trump favors" in this context being, of course, indigenous nationals of the country in which he is standing for leader.]

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  78. Steve Inskeep replacing Bob Edwards is like Jimmy Garoppolo coming in for Tom Brady.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. Jackson fought and defeated the Central Bank. His image on the twenty dollar Federal Reserve Note is the devil dancing on his grave.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. What the hell kind of name is “Inskeep”? He said:

    “Mr. Trump’s proposal for a ‘total and complete shutdown’ of Muslims entering the United States until the government ‘can figure out what is going on’ has a brutal simplicity that echoes Jackson.”

    Nothing brutal or simplistic about letting Muslim illegals in who commit acts like 9/11.

    • Replies: ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. I’ll bet Inskeep’s book praises anti-mass immigration John Ross, and criticizes mass immigration acomodationist Matthew Ridge, and I’ll bet that Inskeep will be blind to the irony.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. The ignorance of reporters (I refuse to use the term journalist) is a constant theme of mine. I just don’t expect the fey pajama boys at NPR ( Do you have to be gay, or gay-seeming to get a job there?) to know anything about history. Further- I’m guessing Inskeep’s meme is “Jackson was bad, and so is Trump” Of course most of what people “know” about Jackson is not true and/or much more complicated than most people think – Indian Removal is a prime example! I do think that there is a comparison to be made between Trump and Jax, however- Jax believed that there were dark forces working against the interests of ordinary Americans as personified by the likes of Nicholas Biddle and Henry Clay, and he devoted his political life to thwarting those people. He was also an interesting combination of staunch Unionist, and an equally staunch believer in states’ rights. Unlike most working politicians today, Jackson believed that the Constitution was to be taken seriously. I hope that Trump does , too.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. Most posters here are pacifist or isolationists.

    I doubt many here view that any war in the Middle East, Vietnam or Korea as having been in the nation’s best interest.

    Certainly none are happy about the body count on either side nor the large debt incurred.

    Stick around. You might be surprised to see how much we have in common.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. This sticks it to Trump and all his delegates, but what can Trump do about THAT?

    Break his pledge and run as an independent in the fall.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. Anonymous
    says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    Steve Sailer, P.I.,

    Here’s some interesting info you should run to ground. From Col. Patrick Lang’s (foreign policy/military realist) blog. Applied Memetics.

    “a volunteer working in public relations for the Cruz campaign, Dan P. Gabriel, is a former CIA covert action officer and a founding partner of Applied Memetics, a company “focused solely on developing engineered influence for clients seeking to alter their tactical or strategic operational environments,”according to its webpage. The company specializes in propagating memes that ”can move through the cultural sociosphere in a manner similar to the contagious behavior of a virus,” in other words Applied Memetics specializes in propaganda.” http://www.infowars.com/the-men-behind-ted-cruz-neocons-and-a-cia-propagandist/

    “Gabriel volunteers his services to the Ted Cruz campaign: “a volunteer working in public relations for the Cruz campaign, Dan P. Gabriel, is a former CIA covert action officer and a founding partner of Applied Memetics, a company “focused solely on developing engineered influence for clients seeking to alter their tactical or strategic operational environments,”according to its webpage. The company specializes in propagating memes that ”can move through the cultural sociosphere in a manner similar to the contagious behavior of a virus,” in other words Applied Memetics specializes in propaganda.” http://www.infowars.com/the-men-behind-ted-cruz-neocons-and-a-cia-propagandist/ ” It would be fair to wonder who or what really owns Applied Memetics. pl

    Poor Ben Carson, who was the main target of these dirty tricks of Applied Memetics in Iowa. Trump needs to go nuclear on Cruz and this nefarious Washington insider operatives. The GOP is maneuvering to eliminate Trump in a brokered convention. The powers that be cannot allow the will of the people to prevail.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. Chuck Yeager’s still with us?

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. Not many people know about the civil war between the Ross party and the Ridge party- BRAVO!

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. What the hell kind of name is “Inskeep”?

    Ancestry.com has it as English, particularly from Lancashire. According to La Wik, Mr. Inskeep himself is adopted.

    http://www.ancestry.com/name-origin?surname=inskeep

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Inskeep

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. Inskeep Name Meaning
    English: habitational name from Inskip in Lancashire, of uncertain etymology.

    The first element of this place name has been tentatively connected with Welsh ynys “island” (compare Ince); the second with Old English c¯pe “keep” (noun) in the sense “osier basket for keeping or trapping fish.”

    “Keeping or trapping fish” … not a bad metaphor for modern journalism.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. I love how you pretend like majority rule and minority rights are mutually exclusive and the antithesis of the other, when in reality the two things have coexisted peacefully for 200 years in the West.

    Speaking of unfairness… You’re missing the key distinction between Negative and Positive Rights.

    I don’t love that the American Project is once again contending with a Great National Question. Then Slavery, now institutionalized, prospectively permanent, Mass Immigration. The analogous players, then and now, line up in a wholly unappealing way. Apparently to everyone given the utter lack of interest I’ve encountered for many years to my argument.

    Abolitionists then and now. Then to abolish the Institution of Slavery, now to abolish the Institution of Mass Immigration. …

    https://www.sethkaller.com/13th-amendment/historic-background/

    At least for me, it is difficult to miss the parallels. Perhaps the strongest being the claim of the moral high ground by everyone to the exclusion of everyone else.

    At this point it’s likely unclear why I chose this comment to write as I have. I did so because your pushback amounts to the claim that what Sailer identifies are distinctions without a difference. You’re mistaken. His error — though that is the wrong word — is in attempting to understand our current political moment within the context of the “evolution of political ideology in the West over the last 400-500 years.” We of course come from and are thus part of that tradition. But we were founded in (partial) opposition to it, and our current moment can only be apprehended, much less repaired, by looking at and to our own moccasins.*

    *”Walk a mile in my moccasins to learn where they pinch.”

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. The Central Park Five were and are guilty. You can read Ann Coulter and Nicholas Stix on this

    http://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2014/06/central-park-ii-its-about-race-stupid.html

    Keep Hoax Alive! The Myth of the Central Park Five Lives on

    http://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2014/06/keep-hoax-alive-myth-of-central-park.html

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. Seems the US Treasury Dept put Jackson on the Twenty. Perhaps to put a thumb in the eye of the Federal Reserve?
    ____wikipedia____
    Jackson first appeared on the $20 bill in 1928. Although it coincides with the 100th anniversary of Jackson’s election as president, it is not clear the reason the bill was switched from Grover Cleveland to Andrew Jackson. According to the U.S. Treasury, “Treasury Department records do not reveal the reason that portraits of these particular statesmen were chosen in preference to those of other persons of equal importance and prominence.”[5]

    The placement of Jackson on the $20 bill may be a historical irony; as president, he vehemently opposed both the National Bank and paper money and made the goal of his administration the destruction of the National Bank.[6][7] In his farewell address to the nation, he cautioned the public about paper money.[8]

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. Wendell Willkie in 1940. Not just a complete party outsider (like Trump, he had been a Democrat as late as three years before the GOP convention), but also a businessman who had never held elective office.

    The book Desperate Deception strongly hints that British Intelligence played a significant role in getting Willkie nominated. They wanted to make sure that both major party nominees were interventionists.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. Trump will have Twice as many of any single one of the others by far, but not an overall majority as of convention time.

    Meaning he will not win on the first ballot. How do Donald Trump delegates vote from the second ballot onward? Unless they are firmly for Trump they may be induced, bribed, payed off to stray to the chosen candidate of the Republican establishment. Every state Republican party has its own rules about how firmly delegates must remain with the candidate they came with to the Republican convention. Many states have rules that the delegates can break their pledge (to Trump in this case) after the first or second ballot.
    The Republican establishment will pull out all stops to get rid of Trump at the convention. They have millions and billions riding on this.
    It will be an act of genius and foresight if Trumps operatives made sure all/most Trump delegates are ultra-firm Trump supporters.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. It’s fascinating that Sailer wrote “The Replication Crisis and the Repetition Crisis” so shortly before “NPR Host: Trump Is the New Andrew Jackson,” without seeing the insight the former offers for the latter. Specifically, this:

    “…analysts grant themselves excessive post hoc liberties to crunch the numbers however many ways it takes to find something—anything—that is “statistically significant” (which isn’t the same as actually significant)…”

    This historian’s Trump-Jackson analogy is glaringly post-hoc. He teased out what appears to be significant for marketing purposes.

    We seem well into the collapse phase when it comes to making analogies. This is where we’re heading, I fear:

    http://moduslighting.blogspot.com/2010/10/how-we-lost-recipe-for-concrete.html

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  96. The USA is naturally a federalist nation. However, just as the US is beginning to need ever more federalism to keep the various factions at ease, the powers that be are doubling down on centralization. Or as you wrote in an earlier post about the gay marriage issue, they are now rounding up and shooting the survivors. This might keep the lid on the pot for the time being. But eventually things are going to boil over.

    • Replies: , ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. Anonymous
    says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    A lot of those people know Trump or are friends or acquaintances of Trump and like him personally and admire his success, rather than full-fledged supporters for political or ideological reasons: Most of those people wouldn’t have positive things to say about Pat Buchanan if he were running for president, despite the fact that Trump is running on Buchanan’s policies.

    “Gene Simmons Hits Trump on Immigration Remarks: Fear Creates Havoc and ‘Hate’”

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/gene-simmons-hits-trump-on-immigration-remarks-fear-creates-havoc-and-hate/

    “Mark Cuban on Trump: ‘He’s Trying to F—k the Country’”

    http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/12/11/mark-cuban-on-trump-hes-trying-to-f-k-the-country/

    “On the heels of Donald Trump’s repudiation of H-1B visas, billionaire entrepreneur Mark Cuban spoke out in favor of immigration for technology jobs.”

    http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/2015/08/18/mark-cuban-overseas-job-competition-makes-america-stronger.html

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. On topic as far as I’m concerned:

    Pope Francis: Donald Trump Is ‘Not Christian’

    “A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian,” Francis said when a reporter asked him about Mr. Trump on the papal airliner as he returned to Rome after his six-day visit to Mexico.”

    The pope didn’t say that Trump’s proposal wasn’t Cristian. He declared Trump himself as not. “Who am I to judge,” turned out to be opportunistic jibber jabber.

    The transition to New Style Catholicism just took another giant leap. In a number of important ways, it is the pope who is revealing himself as outside Catholic tradition and doctrine.

    • Replies: , ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. Anonymous
    says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    There’s also the Naxalites, Maoist guerrillas who have been waging a violent insurgency for about 50 years now and who have had control or significant influence in more than 25% of India’s land mass:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naxalite

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. Inskeep writes…”Trump promises to fix his supporters’ problems, no matter who else is hurt.” Isn’t this exactly what every politician offers to his supporters. You want abortion, cool, damn those pro-lifers and off to jail with them if their protests offend you. You can’t repay your student loans, no problem, eff those big banks and their contracts. Mr. Inskeep, politics is nothing more than getting the most voters to believe you will keep your promises and fix their problems.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. That’s bull. First, the only people Trump is supposedly going to hurt aren’t even Americans. They are either foreign muslims awaiting an invite, or predominately Mexican and Central Americans in the USA awaiting an amnesty. And if hurting people is defined as not letting them into your nation, well I support hurting well over 7.5 billion people.

    Very well said, Mr. Fan. This “hurt” crap is what struck me as well.

    For the mentality here you could cue Steve’s bit on “leapfrogging loyalties”. To folks of this ilk, “hurting” means being denied the right to come to here and sponge off what Americans have built, or to have an American politician not think your presence is peachy. If this is “hurting”, it’s equivalent to the “hurt” i inflict on people everyday by not sharing my house with them.

    Being more analytically wired, i’m always close to “head exploding” just contemplating the “logic” of people like this. Stripped down, basically there’s this assertion that random foreigners have some sort of property right to come to America, but that that Americans citizens have no property right in their nation. (And they’d assert that same for Europe or any white nation.) It’s just weird inside-out thinking that you can not apply and have any sort of successful political, economic or moral system.

    I can only conclude that it is motivated either by hatred, or extreme moral-preening of this new secular religion of multiculturalism\diversity.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. …I’ve got him as the new William Jennings Bryan (who appealed to many of the same voters as Jackson did).

    In 1896, Bryan was very much seen as the heir to the Jacksonian tradition, with particular reference to his advocacy on behalf of the free coinage of silver (which the banks absolutely did NOT want, and the small businessmen & yeoman farmers very much desired).

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. “Trump fans are spread across the country, they are heavily concentrated in and near the Appalachian states ”

    This goes hand in hand with the “Trump fans don’t have college degrees” meme.

    That was meant to say, if you’re for Trump, you’re ignorant. OR, smart people don’t vote for Trump.
    The same with the “hillbilly” reference.
    They (GOP establishment) are digging themselves a HUGE hole.
    No one is going to even go the distance, and they are going to need to back Trump, eventually.
    OR promote a proven 50 state loser.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. …expect to see Hillary’s total number of black votes (when compared with the votes given to Obama in ’08 and ’12) to drop by about 1-2 million nationally.

    If we assume a Hillary versus Trump race in November, Hillary will be very fortunate indeed, if she only gets two million fewer Black votes than Obama in 2012.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. Assembling a majority today is not the same as it used to be.

    Jackson’s enemy was a formidably powerful elite minority within a divided white majority. Same as it ever was.

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  106. Soon there may not be anyone on any bills. The Deep State wants to eliminate cash from circulation worldwide. Larry Summers says “It’s time to kill the $100 bill.” That means you, Ben Franklin.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. In 1940 the party insiders were frustrated that all of the major candidates were isolationists, so the party elite settled on Wilkie at the last minute so as to get a globalist nominee.

    Similar to Trump in that he wasn’t a career politician, but opposite in every other way.

    It would be like if the GOP convention were deadlocked between Trump and Cruz, so the GOPe nominated Bloomberg.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. Taco is exactly right. Donald Trump is (sadly) the least warlike of the current candidates. That’s why the comparison with Theodore Roosevelt is so off base. As the great historian Charles Beard wrote, TR was probably the only important figure in US history who thought that war was a good in itself.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. Your statement about Scots-Irish affinity with Scottish Highlanders is incorrect. Scots-Irish in Ulster were direct descendants of Lowland Scots. From Wikipedia: “These settlers [in Ulster] were mostly Lowland Scottish and Northern English people and predominantly from Galloway, the Scottish Borders and Northumberland.”

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. So are Stewart, Campbell, Murray and Ross, to name a few. These surnames are all common among Scots Irish.

    My point is that there isn’t much of an ethnic distinction between Scots Irish and other Celts – whether Highlanders or Irish – but instead a religious and cultural distinction. What set the Scots Irish apart originally was their Calvinist faith and their support for William of Orange, AKA “King Billy.”

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. Very good! You know your history! Willkie ran a surprisingly strong campaign although he was crushed in the Electoral College. Roosevelt constantly promised (just like Wilson had in 1916) that the U.S. wouldn’t get involved in World War II, a campaign promise that you quickly proceeded to break.

    Yes, I know that Japan attacked the U.S. on December 7, 1941 and that Germany declared war on about December 11. But the U.S. Navy had been on a de facto war footing against the Third Reich long before December 11 and the U.S. was anything but neutral in its support of Great Britain against Nazi Germany (lend-lease and swapping destroyers for naval bases, etc).

    I still think that the more interesting case is that of Senator Sanders who had an entire career in politics as something other than a Democrat (Progressive Party of Vermont) before declaring to be a Democrat for the sole purpose of running for President.

    Eisenhower might be another example, although Ike was atypical in many respects.

    • Replies: ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. Spot on. An attempt to centrally govern 320 million people of different races, religions, etc. spread out over most of a continent is doomed to failure. The federal structure is one reason why the U.S. has lasted as long as it has (hey, only one Civil War). Change that and eventually it’ll fail.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. The Church certainly has made the transition to champion of the Global South and social democracy much more smoothly than I had expected.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. In the event he’s denied the nomination at the convention, despite arriving with the highest delegate count, Donald Trump could do a number of things, but, honestly, at that point, I don’t think that what he does matters. The Trump supporters are not going to vote for the GOP nominee, at least not in numbers large enough to matter, and Hillary Clinton (who benefits from Superdelegates in her party’s nomination process) crushes the GOP palooka (40 to 45 state blow-out). The GOP is either taken over by a Trump putsch post-election, or effectively goes the way of the Whig Party of the 1850s. Bizarrely, although the GOP Establishment can’t stand Donald Trump, he is the party’s best bet to remain viable at the Presidential level.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. Funny you should raise that point about Cruz. Thierry Meyssan at Voltairenet also thinks his campaign is a “psy-op”, although he credits the company Cambridge Analytica (which has also collaborated with the CIA on foreign color-revolutions) for the work.

    http://www.voltairenet.org/article190187.html

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. Anonymous
    says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    With a comment like that, surely His Holiness would be willing to allow a few thousand Syrian Muslim refugees to take up residence in Vatican City? Going by his perspective, there could be nothing more Christian than that.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Majority rule? OMG, what a revolutionary concept! I wonder if those of us alive today will live long enough to realize this dream.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. Shame they don’t take comments on-air. I’d like to ask him how old he thinks Israel is.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. Anonymous
    says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    Most Americans support gay marriage:

    http://www.pewforum.org/2015/07/29/graphics-slideshow-changing-attitudes-on-gay-marriage/

    Of those opposed, probably only a minority feel very strongly about it.

    Due to modern technology and media, in some respects the US is more homogeneous than it was in the past, while being more heterogeneous in other respects.

    • Replies: ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. I can only conclude that it is motivated either by hatred, or extreme moral-preening of this new secular religion of multiculturalism\diversity.

    I do not doubt the reasons you give. But I am still absorbing that quote that Sailer posted the other day about Hillary. She reportedly told her supporter, “If we broke up the big banks tomorrow, would that end racism? Would that end sexism? Would that end discrimination against the L.G.B.T. community? Would that make people feel more welcoming to immigrants overnight?”

    Can anyone imagine that line ever flying in homogeneous nation? That can only happen when a population has been fragmented.

    To me this crystallized the whole point of the immivasion. At its core it’s about a ruling class attempting to rule over the most prosperous nations on earth by diluting their populations. It was done by the Brits in Northern Ireland. It was done by the Ottomans in Greece. It was done by the Soviets in the Baltics. And it is currently being done by the Chinese in Tibet.

    The main difference between those prior examples and what is happening to North America and Europe is that an occupying force is not bringing in ringers to dilute the population. It is ostensibly our own elite that is doing it to us. But the purpose is the same, bring in alien ringers to water down and disrupt the populace so as to facilitate taking control.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. Prior to Romney, the GOP establishment thought they could screw Paul and every conservative would just have to take it and vote for Romney or watch Obama be reelected. After the vote showed that Romney lost because people stayed home they came up with even more stupidity about not getting Mexicans to vote for them. They are still in their bubble, they think if they can finagle it to get their guy on the ticket conservatives will have to vote for him or take Hillary.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. From somewhere up this dreary, wet, perishing cold, windswept gulch -sorry, romantic glen and sea-loch. The kirk is about halfway-up on the north side.
    Trump coiffure fans will be pleased to know it’s called Grabhair (pr. approx. Graavair).

    Incidentally Lewis, the more northerly island where it is located, is traditionally possessed of an ayatollatarian Calvinism, Wee Frees and Allied Trades, swarming with Macleods, while the southern ones, Uist, are sort of recusant Papists, Macraes and similar. All nominally, of course.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. Let’s be honest: the analogy you have drawn is highly flawed. The ideological (and, more often than not, genetic) descendents of those who supported slavery are not the ones supporting open borders today. The open borders people are primarily descended from abolitionists. Abolitionists were willing to destroy the country in order to end a distasteful institution that would have become obselete within a generation anyway, and open borders types are willing to destroy the country in order to maintain a policy that will destroy the country within a generation if left unchecked.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. But the U.S. Navy had been on a de facto war footing against the Third Reich long before December 11 and the U.S. was anything but neutral in its support of Great Britain against Nazi Germany…

    Plus, there was the little matter of the peacetime draft. Unlike in Switzerland and Sweden, the purpose of this was not to protect our neutrality.

    Willkie ran a surprisingly strong campaign…

    The way was paved for him in the 1938 Democratic bloodbath. I suspect it was the decision that year that feeding pigs slop from your own north forty constituted “interstate commerce” that caused hundreds of rural counties from the Appalachians to the Sierra Nevadas to switch parties.

    By the way, Ayn Rand was a big fangirl of Willkie.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. Most Americans support gay marriage:

    http://www.pewforum.org/2015/07/29/graphics-slideshow-changing-attitudes-on-gay-marriage/

    “P-ew” is right.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. ” It was done by the Brits in Northern Ireland.” Well up to a point. The initial expulsions to Ulster were actually instigated by the last monarchs of Scotland, before they got the big national gig after Glenda Jackson carked it.
    Mainly “Scottish” Border tribes from the Middle and West Marches, who were not only suspected of remnant popery, but in the main “scant of ony religion”; atheist/pagan thieves, scofflaws and very dangerous and capable bandit horse-militias, whose main loyalties lay with their “English” kinfolk south of the Border (when they weren’t “deadlie feu’d” with them i.e. robbing and slaughtering each others’ clans, like Corsicans or Albanians). A bit like the Galloway men who kind of meld into the Antrim people across the water, and who were famously excommunicated in toto by the archbishop of Glasgow in an earlier phase of mass outlawry.
    With me so far? Trust me, you don’t want detail on this, or we’ll be here all night.

    They were of course followed in short order by the ejecta of the Wars of Religion, often Lancastrian or West Country minor gentry, who ironically were often English Catholics seeking sort of royal redemption having been pauperised and fined/distrained to desperation, and of course, new estates, at the expense of the Gaelic-Irish, the Norman-Irish, and who knows whatever other flavours of indigenous landlord. And of course, eventually King Noll and his New Model Blitzkrieg.
    America got invented about the same time, by similar folk, for similar reasons. Don’t know what happened to that.

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  127. Similar to Trump in that he wasn’t a career politician, but opposite in every other way.

    No, I think there are other strange parallels. People get bothered by Trump because he speaks not only off-the-cuff, but rather crudely by the “polite” standards of 2016. In 1940, Willkie’s handlers were going nuts because their guy refused to speak from prepared scripts and would throw out verbal grenades they had to spin away.
    Also, Willkie was, I believe the first major party presidential nominee to use the word “damn” in a public speech. In 1940, of course, everybody spoke like that in private but for Willkie to go there while the mike was hot was noticed. It would be like Trump dropping an F-bomb on camera (something his supporters had better be prepared for if he gets the nomination).
    The whole primary phenomenon of the network of local “Willkie Clubs” very much resembles the Trump strategy of bringing in voters who have maybe rarely, if ever, voted in a primary before. That the Willkie Clubs were well financed from New York rather than true grassroots organizing also resembles Trump’s preference (and ability) to buy a ground game in each state.
    Willkie and Trump both looked for support outside the usual GOP demographic–in the blue-collar workers in the Great Lakes states, and the former got a fair amount of it–especially when CIO head John Lewis endorsed him. Look for a nominated Trump to lurch left economically (and good for him).
    Lastly, Willkie, like Trump, went to the Convention well aware that TPTB were trying to engineer a brokered convention, and I think both went in loaded for bear. Willkie knew he had to get around 80% of the needed delegates on the first ballot to get sufficient momentum to eventually prevail, and I think Trump knows he needs to kick in the door just as forcefully and keep the pressure on 24/7 going into Cleveland.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. By the way, Ayn Rand was a big fangirl of Willkie.

    So was Robert Heinlein. It’s probable that the Willkie campaign was the catalyst from his earlier left politics (he was a big organizer of Sinclair Lewis’ EPIC movement and campaign for California governor in the 30s) to the right-wing views he had from the 40s on.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. Mouth kgt, you left out George HW Bush, but is that because he served with distinction in WWII?

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. I also agree that modern nationalism is one thing, but ethnic consciousness and the sense of being a people is a wholly different thing. You get that from waaay back in these parts.

    A Hungarian girl told me a joke once, that a tribe of Finno-Ugrics were migrating and they came to a fork in the road. The sign said “to the left, a beautiful and fertile plain with nice hills and a lake” and “to the right, an icy wasteland suffused in darkness and despair”. Some went right, and became Finns. The ones that could read went left and became Hungarians.

    Of course, genetic male ancestry marker statistics for the region shows that everybody is one big population potpourri, most of it very old and cultural affiliation was more along the line of whose peasant your ancestor was, where he was moved by lords to settle and who conquered him. The great warrior migrants, including the Bulgars, spent themselves in constant warfare and left a smaller genetic trace than expected, but left a greater cultural legacy, because people remember Alphas.

    http://www.rumaniamilitary.ro/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Haplogrupuri-Y-pe-tari.jpg

    The chart shows male ancestry ratios for every country in Europe and some sub regions. The N haplogroup is supposed to be the ancient Magyar (sources online also call it Uralic) one, but it is present in only 0.5% of the population (like in Romania), as opposed to 61.5% in Finland and 17% in Bashkiria, Russia. I believe the female marker for this population is more prevalent, as in any case of attrition by war.

    I’m thinking of, for instance, Bela the IVth, King of Hungary and Cumania, whose lands were so depleted by the mongol hordes by the time they retreated in 1242 that they had to be recolonized from Poland and the Holy Roman Empire, colonists who were mostly assimilated. The Bulgarians fought the Byzantines and everyone else in the region like crazy from the start of the First Empire in 680 until its conquest in 1018 and some of the noble survivors were sent off to Anatolia by their Byzantine overlords to lessen the possibility of rebellion.

    I just read an article by Revilo Oliver where he laments the constant wasting of the irreplaceable genetic wealth of the race, so that inspired this little post.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. Now I’ve seen it all. You’re collecting Jews like Pokemon :)

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. Hold it, hold it. Another possibility arises: The X factor of the minor candidates. Suppose a couple of the minor ones like Carson, Christie, Rand, and perhaps Carly who technically won delegates even though they are no longer in the race (Carson won’t last much longer). At the convention, these minor candidates (and perhaps someone like Rand Paul) officially release their delegates to vote for whomever they wish, as a way to strike back at the RNC for perceived ill treatment during the primaries? But suppose behind the scenes, however, these minor candidates make a deal with Trump and actually give their delegates over to him?

    With these additional delegates in his pocket, Trump would then have a stronger potential to win on the first ballot, or he’d at least have a better chance of doing so.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. Must say that the GOP election cycle with Trump vs. all the rest has a Super Bowl XXXIV feel to it. During the last 1:54, the Tennessee Titans made an heroic last drive down the field to reach the end zone, but came up a half yard short of the goal line, with the famous picture of Titans player lunging out to reach the goal line/end zone to score.

    I wonder how close Trump will get to reach the end zone and score (e.g. win the GOP nomination)? How close can he actually get?

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  134. They’re as likely to have seen or heard of “Inherit the Wind” as the “Cross of Gold” speech, I’d bet. He’s also famous for resigning from Wilson’s cabinet over opposition to WWI.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. Trump seems to have federalist instincts. He ascribes to Iowans and New Hampshirans identities as distinct as his own New Yorker personality.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. Wilkie was a stooge. They ran him so that there’d be no antiwar candidate to run against FDR, “isolationism” being then more popular than anyone now would care to admit. He was an outsider, technically, but right in line with what the insiders wanted.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. Come on now. Let’s be honest. In 1940, FDR was still quite popular and was running for a then unheard of third consecutive term in office. The fact that his internal polls consistently showed that he would crush the GOP nominee whomever it would be gave him that confidence.

    FACT: Herbert Hoover’s loss in ’32 and Alf Landon’s disaster in ’36 had literally broken the GOP at the presidential level and it took them nearly 15yrs to regain some of the respect that they had lost among ordinary voters.

    FACT: Outside of a few population centers, Wendel Wilkie in 1940 was a virtual unknown among ordinary folks when compared to FDR. Right now, Donald Trump has vastly greater name recognition on a national level than ever Wendel Wilkie, even at his prominent. How many people today can name Wendel Wilkie as anything other than……? An afterthought at best to FDR’s unprecedented third term? Very rarely do people remember the losers, especially those who get crushed in a presidential election.

    FACT: In 1940, there simply wasn’t any groundswell to remove FDR from office and the fact that Wilkie received the nomination tells one all they need to know about the GOP’s state of affairs in presidential politics. They had no one with the gravitas, the credibility, the name recognition that could match FDR in 1940 and wouldn’t for nearly another decade. That’s one reason they actively recruited Eisenhower in ’51-’52; they didn’t have anyone else to go to the mat with the Democrats before ’52. That elitist moneyed interests Dewey had a reasonable chance in ’48 says more about the particular year; it was a four person race where two parties took votes away from Truman. Had the race been between President Truman and Dewey, Truman would’ve won by an even bigger margin than he did. It took Ike, the consensus candidate with gravitas, name recognition across the board as well as total respect for his war service to finally give the GOP back the White House.

    Not surprising that Trump mentioned Ike in his earlier debates, since that would be the first president he would’ve recalled as a child.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. We weren’t just on a war footing, we were in an actual shooting war. FDR had handed down a “shoot on sight” order in the Atlantic. Which isn’t to overlook that Lend-Lease itself–supplying one side with war munitions free of charge–was an act of war. At least, that’s what the Germans thought, and I agree.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. Thanks for the genetic information, but since Haplogroup N originally came from China I don’t see why a European-based person would complain about that loss of the “genetic wealth of the race.”

    I am also unsure about the meaning of the high incidence of N among Latvians and Lithuanians (since they are Indo Europeans). Of course, the incidence among Finns and Estonians makes sense, since they are the northern branch of the Finno-Ugric (or F-U family, to coin an abbreviation). (While we are on the subject, “12″ in Estonian sounds risque in English.)

    As a longtime student of Hungarian I think the most important thing is the language; it pleases me that Magyar has flourished, just as it pleases me that the extreme Indo-European (I-E) conservatism of Latvian (and especially) Lithuanian have (somehow) survived. I’ve known a lot of Eastern Europeans and their looks are very varied. And, to be honest, it doesn’t matter to me, language and culture are the things that are irreplaceable.

    Furthermore, if one is really interested (not you of course, I’m sure you know all this), there’s a ton of information about the Khanty and Mansi on the web, including videos, of people who seem remarkably similar in their lifestyles to our own native Americans.

    Another anecdote: Some Khanty or Mansi went to Moscow, and they played Kodaly’s “Peacock Variations” which is 25 minute series of variations on an old Hungarian folksong. So naturally it starts off with a grave statement of the folksong in the low strings, at which point our Khanty or Mansi turned to his host and said, “They’re playing our song!”

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. Write in Trump.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. After a decade or so of being socially bludgeoned if you don’t support gay marriage, how many of the people in the survey answered ‘yes’ to the question for fear of being outed by the pollster?

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. Well, I’m barely an amateur and there was something terribly romantic about the Revilo Oliver quote about losing the heritage. Though I think that N is more associated with Turanic populations, Tatars as well. Wasn’t Q the one associated with the Mongols? I’m no Razib Khan at this, and I don’t particularly mind being corrected by my betters. So what if N originally came from China? We all come from somewhere and didn’t sprout from the ground. I don’t think that haplogroups are all that relevant to the population today anyway, other than as a window into the past. Would anyone notice if you were 1/32nd Chinese on a straight male line that would give you a specific haplogroup? One of the other haplogroups, E1b1b, is apparently North African in origin. It’s 15% of the male ancestry in my country. Haven’t you heard race is a social construct anyway? :)

    Other than the geographic designation and the fact that they’re a minority, I knew nothing of the Mansi. I’m not exactly sure why you would be so certain I’d know. I’m neither Russian, nor an expert.

    I remembered and went looking for an Enoch Powell quote on the nation state. I think he mentioned it in terms of Britain’s relation to the European Community.

    I do not know if the doctrine that the nation-state arose in the 19th century was still being taught … but it is erroneous. The nation-state reaches back far into the origins of Europe itself and perhaps beyond. If Europe was not always a Europe of nations, it was always a Europe in which nations existed, and were taken for granted, as a basic form of the State.

    The Daily Telegraph (9 June 1975), from Enoch Powell on 1992 (Anaya, 1989), p. 144.

    • Agree: SPMoore8
    • Replies: ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. Come on now. Let’s be honest. In 1940, FDR was still quite popular and was running for a then unheard of third consecutive term in office. The fact that his internal polls consistently showed that he would crush the GOP nominee whomever it would be gave him that confidence.
    FACT: Herbert Hoover’s loss in ’32 and Alf Landon’s disaster in ’36 had literally broken the GOP at the presidential level and it took them nearly 15yrs to regain some of the respect that they had lost among ordinary voters.

    Respectfully demur. Yes, the day after the 1936 election the GOP looked like it might as well pack it in and disband, but it came roaring back only two years later–the New Deal Dems were eviscerated in the 1938 mid-terms, one of the most unheralded “re-alignment” elections of American history. Basically, after the failure of FDR’s court-packing plan, and more importantly, after the stock market crashed again in 1937 and the subsequent “Roosevelt Recession,” the liberals in Congress were kicked to the curb–and between the Republicans and the southern conservative Democrats, Congress was then controlled by a center-right bloc that lasted clear until the landslide of 1964.

    And it was not until well into 1940 that it became clear Roosevelt would run–the Republicans had every reason to think they had a good chance in that year’s election. Thomas Fleming, the great paleocon historian (who has sometimes been in Unz, I think) made a good, polling-supported argument in his book The New Dealers’ War that, but for the candidacy of FDR, the GOP might well have won in 1940, and certainly would have won in 1944.

    • Replies: ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. I must have gotten confused because there is an echt-Magyar hereabouts (Reiner Tor?), and I assumed you were a Szekler from Erdely.

    I agree national and/or tribal and/or cultural and/or linguistic groupings are the foundation stone of all societies, and also, good neighbors. Why people want to destroy this, I’ll never understand.

    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. “Yes, the day after the 1936 election the GOP looked like it might as well pack it in and disband, but it came roaring back only two years later–the New Deal Dems were eviscerated in the 1938 mid-terms, one of the most unheralded “re-alignment” elections of American history.”

    Re-read what I wrote. I said, at the PRESIDENTIAL level. The Democrats controlled the White House from 1932-52. Thats twenty consecutive years. FDR was elected to four consecutive terms, the most a presidential candidate and incumbent will ever be per the 23rd Amendment (as well as the most in history).

    Yes, yes, yes, and the GOP did well in the ’46 midterms, but they weren’t able to translate it into recapturing the White House during this time. This is largely because they lacked a presidential candidate with broad based national appeal. They got lucky with Eisenhower, who wasn’t from the established GOP ranks. At the presidential level, the era 1932-68 more or less belonged to the Democrats.

    “And it was not until well into 1940 that it became clear Roosevelt would run–the Republicans had every reason to think they had a good chance in that year’s election.”

    Suurre, he wasn’t gonna run. Whatever the losing side has to tell themselves in retrospection decades after the fact, by all means keep believing in that polite canard. After all, most politicians after finishing their job, want nothing more to do with DC and just yearn to call it quits and retire so they can spend more time with their families, especially when they’re riding high and by all internal polls available will win in a landslide. Yep yep yep. Whatever.

    “Thomas Fleming, the great paleocon historian (who has sometimes been in Unz, I think) made a good, polling-supported argument in his book The New Dealers’ War that, but for the candidacy of FDR, the GOP might well have won in 1940, and certainly would have won in 1944.”

    Now come on. Honestly. Sour grapes with an added dash of ‘woulda, coulda, shoulda, if only’. If only Babe Ruth and Lou Gerhig hadn’t played for the Yankees, Connie Mack’s A’s would’ve won the 1927 and 1928 pennants. If only Peyton Manning hadn’t thrown that interception vs. the Saints in Super Bowl XLIV, the Colts would’ve won in a breathtaking closeout final second TD pass. Sure, cause hindsight is always easy; present tense living is hard.

    Dewey, the man on the wedding cake got trounced by FDR and then goes and runs vs. Truman and in a four man race, with most of the minor two parties taking more votes away from Dems than from GOPs,….he loses once again!

    We tend to mock the likes of William Jennings Bryan, for having gotten his head handed to him in three out of four presidential elections, because he didn’t know when to call it quits. No one had a chance vs. FDR in any of his four elections. No one. If such a candidate existed within the GOP ranks they would have run him in order to capture the White House. Its just as possible that the established historical view on the GOP ’40 candidacy of running Wilkie on the ticket is the correct one, the Occam’s Razor: namely, Wilkie ran as a GOP because the GOP wrote the election off ’cause they simply didn’t have anyone stronger to run vs. FDR, one of the most popular presidents of the 20th century.

    Just ask yourself a basic question: In US history books, the basic schoolbook in high school and college, how come more space is devoted to FDR and very little to Wilkie and Dewey, if they were all that? Americans love a winner.

    “Second place is first loser.”—Dale Earnhardt, Sr.

    • Replies: ,
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. If Steve Inskeep believes his own material, he’d better buck up on his Code Duello.

    http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/andrew-jackson-kills-charles-dickinson-in-duel

    …in 1806, future President Andrew Jackson kills a man who accused him of cheating on a horse race bet and then insulted his wife, Rachel.

    Contemporaries described Jackson, who had already served in Tennessee’s Senate and was practicing law at the time of the duel, as argumentative, physically violent and fond of dueling to solve conflicts. Estimates of the number of duels in which Jackson participated ranged from five to 100.

    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  147. By the way, Ayn Rand was a big fangirl of Willkie.

    So was Robert Heinlein.

    Heinlein was a fangirl?

    The things you learn here. The moon is indeed a harsh mistress.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. …the New Deal Dems were eviscerated in the 1938 mid-terms, one of the most unheralded “re-alignment” elections of American history.

    Unheralded because the Democrats held on to Congress despite the record losses. They were that far ahead.

    Basically, after the failure of FDR’s court-packing plan, and more importantly, after the stock market crashed again in 1937 and the subsequent “Roosevelt Recession,” the liberals in Congress were kicked to the curb–

    Actually, the change was primarily in the rural interior. Something like 800 or 1000 counties west of the Appalachians flipped from ’36 to ’40, and the ’38 election prefigured the ’40. I would imagine farm policy would have had greater meaning than the court or the stock market. There was, for instance, that notorious decision to treat feeding your livestock from your own grain stores as “interstate commerce”.

    Thomas Fleming, the great paleocon historian (who has sometimes been in Unz, I think)

    Don’t confuse the paleocon editor Fleming with the historian Fleming. They are two different people. I think it was the editor who appeared in Unz.com.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. How likely is your scenario given the way Trump has insulted them on multiple occasions? fwiw I am a Trump supporter but given how he has ragged on every opponent he needs to go into the Republican convention with a majority of delegates, a plurality just won’t cut it. Too many are looking for revenge.
    Trump can promise Cabinet posts and other Trump administration jobs. Maybe this will work.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments