The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 iSteve BlogTeasers
What the 6-Point-Star Insanity Is Really About
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

As I explained in Taki’s Magazine five weeks ago:

Gotham Goes National
by Steve Sailer
June 01, 2016

The core of the Trump Phenomenon is the question of freedom of expression.

Donald Trump has come to be seen by both his enemies and his supporters as the living embodiment of a potential revival of the American tradition of free speech after the Obama ice age of political correctness. Trump’s backers tend to believe they have more to gain from frank, outspoken debate (whether in pragmatic advantages or simply in entertainment value), while his opponents assume that they, personally, have more to lose from a return to a freer market for ideas. …

Trump’s evident love of making money meant that he wasn’t seen as a threat to the established order, because our system is practiced at controlling dissent through economic squeezing.

The key month in the emergence of the Legend of Trump, however, came immediately following his June 16, 2015, announcement of his candidacy, when business behemoths like NBC, Macy’s, Univision, Carlos Slim, and the golf tours of America and Britain all threatened to break their corporate relationships with Trump for pointing out that Mexican elites are dumping their unwanted population on America.

Normally Americans meekly back down with apologies when confronted with that kind of corporate firepower. But Trump responded that he had 10 billion dollars so he could afford to tell the truth. Granted, Trump probably doesn’t have close to 10 billion dollars, but that only made his political audacity seem even more heroic.

This perspective helps explain much of the otherwise hallucinatory rhetoric about what Trump supposedly believes. We are constantly told by both the mainstream media and by a handful of showboating right-wing extremists that Trump must, deep in his heart, support fascism, anti-Semitism, and the Ku Klux Klan. …

Meanwhile, in the depths of Twitter, a small number of individuals with extravagant haircuts tweet agreement with the Times; only, they assert that it’s not deplorable, it’s awesome that Trump is really a secret Nazi.

But nobody ever seems to come up with any palpable evidence for these accusations/hopes, despite the endless hours of interviews Trump has given the press. As far as I can tell, Trump has commonsensical citizenist views on immigrants (why take less than the best?), while having highly mainstream views on the two most divisive American ethnic groups, blacks and Jews. Thus, Trump is well regarded by the more rough-hewn black and Jewish ethnocentrists, such as Ice Cube of N.W.A and Likudnik Sheldon Adelson.

Why, though, the widespread imputation of crimethink to Trump?

Deep down, everybody more or less knows that the current conventional wisdom is genteel flapdoodle, and thus they project their fears and hopes onto Trump. Everyone is vaguely aware in this eighth year of the Obama administration that the dominant goodthink is ludicrously out of sync with reality. Thus, there is an endless supply of “hatestats” that they worry/wish Trump could, at any moment, let slip.

For example, it appears to be widely assumed that Trump, like the little child in Hans Christian Andersen’s The Emperor’s New Clothes, could blurt out that, say, the reason blacks get in trouble with the police so much is because they murder people at seven to eight times the rate of whites. Or Trump could mention the highly relevant fact that Jews, despite being only one-fiftieth of the population, make up one-third or more of the Forbes 400.

In reality, though, Trump’s general worldview appears to be that of a typical New Yorker, only minus the ostentatious virtue signaling.

 
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. iSteveFan says:

    Thus, Trump is well regarded by the more rough-hewn black and Jewish ethnocentrists, such as Ice Cube of N.W.A and Likudnik Sheldon Adelson.

    Has Adelson donated yet to any Trump related PAC? He said he was in for $100 million.

    Normally Americans meekly back down with apologies when confronted with that kind of corporate firepower.

    Well he just backed down on the star.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Glaivester

    Well he just backed down on the star.
     
    Probably because it was irrelevant and a distraction. He didn't back down on anything he did deliberately in order to appease his enemies.

    He does back down to appease his supporters, though - that's what people like. He cares what his supporters think, not what people who hate him think. But he is not going to deliberately give them bait when it is so totally irrelevant as the hexagram controversy.
    , @Ed
    Seems like a silly cross to die on when that wasn't his intent. Let the media look stupid by obsessing over it even after he's taken it down. The man's grandkids are being raised Jewish. One of his most trusted advisors is his orthodox Jewish son-in-law, yet the pathetic media and GOPe shills wants us to believe he's anti-Semetic, ok.
    , @dahoit
    Maybe he's backed down,but as with a trial,evidence ruled not admissible is still heard by the jury.(US)
    Go Trump.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /isteve/what-the-6-point-star-insanity-is-really-about/#comment-1478761
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. RW says:

    Trump is probably tweeting this borderline stuff for the free publicity it brings him. Helps keep his profile high.

    Read More
  3. Thomas says:

    90% of American Jews, at minimum, would always be terrified of Trump or any similarly explicitly nationalist politician, for reasons that are well-known but never said aloud (tl; dr: because Hitler). Even Republicans pre-Trump weren’t allowed to be explicitly nationalistic for any country other than Israel.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iSteveFan

    90% of American Jews, at minimum, would always be terrified of Trump
     
    I think the big dust up over the 6 pointed start was meant more to keep those 90% frightened than to hurt Trump with other voters. Clearly most gentiles would have never seen the linkage with that solid colored star. I didn't given my experience with the 6th Infantry Division. But if it can keep Jews who are tempted to vote Trump from straying, then mission accomplished.
    , @Maj. Kong
    Eh, its more the Tsar than the Fuhrer.

    Most of the Jews in the US originated in the 1880s-1914 immigration from the Russian Empire. Any Russian expression of nationalism to them meant a Cossack raid. More glaringly, it meant a government that induced pressure to convert to Orthodoxy. Much of what we call the "war on Christmas" is mostly Jewish angst that public display of Christian symbols will induce their children into converting.
    , @Chrisnonymous
    No, it's the opposite. The Hitler reason is said aloud often and loudly, while the real reasons (eg, peculiarly Jewish virtue signaling, etc) are never voiced.
  4. iSteveFan says:
    @Thomas
    90% of American Jews, at minimum, would always be terrified of Trump or any similarly explicitly nationalist politician, for reasons that are well-known but never said aloud (tl; dr: because Hitler). Even Republicans pre-Trump weren't allowed to be explicitly nationalistic for any country other than Israel.

    90% of American Jews, at minimum, would always be terrified of Trump

    I think the big dust up over the 6 pointed start was meant more to keep those 90% frightened than to hurt Trump with other voters. Clearly most gentiles would have never seen the linkage with that solid colored star. I didn’t given my experience with the 6th Infantry Division. But if it can keep Jews who are tempted to vote Trump from straying, then mission accomplished.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    So this was an own goal. Maybe it was caused by not having enough Jews around campaign HQ. Should have showed this to his son-in-law before retweeting - he would have seen the not-so-hidden message right way.

    Maybe he can use a noose next to appeal to the black vote. I'm going to "hang" Hillary out to dry! Nooses are associated with the hangman game, with the legal execution of war criminals, etc. and not just lynching, so no problem.
    , @iffen
    if it can keep Jews who are tempted to vote Trump

    The theme that Trump is a racist Nazi is not directed at Jews. It is directed at educated white women who are uncomfortable trying to sort through all sorts of racist and anti-Semitic babble and accusations.
  5. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    It wasn’t a Star of David (with the two interlocking triangles) but if it was then that would be fairly accurate in terms of donations to the Democrat Party being absolutely dominated by Jews.

    The hissy fit is about the star being overlaid on the campaign cash photo. But Democrat campaign cash is Jewish cash. That is reality. Deal with it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @DCThrowback
    In Jeff Connaughton's excellent "Why Wall Street Always Wins", the author, who was a senior aide to Joe Biden for several decades, blithely explains that whenever Biden needed money, he would contact his network of Jewish lawyers for contributions. He explains this matter of factly because he is out of the game. I thought it was hilarious.

    http://amzn.to/29jbttq

    The book overall is a great read to contrast what happens when a senator is allowed to vote freely. Biden's last two years were served by Ted Kaufman, who went hard after Wall Street after the housing debacle since he had no intention of running again in 2010. It stood in stark contrast to the wishy-washy Biden, who was always failed to balance the needs of the country with his own aims for higher office.
  6. Glaivester says: • Website
    @iSteveFan

    Thus, Trump is well regarded by the more rough-hewn black and Jewish ethnocentrists, such as Ice Cube of N.W.A and Likudnik Sheldon Adelson.
     
    Has Adelson donated yet to any Trump related PAC? He said he was in for $100 million.

    Normally Americans meekly back down with apologies when confronted with that kind of corporate firepower.
     
    Well he just backed down on the star.

    Well he just backed down on the star.

    Probably because it was irrelevant and a distraction. He didn’t back down on anything he did deliberately in order to appease his enemies.

    He does back down to appease his supporters, though – that’s what people like. He cares what his supporters think, not what people who hate him think. But he is not going to deliberately give them bait when it is so totally irrelevant as the hexagram controversy.

    Read More
  7. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:

    Meanwhile, in the depths of Twitter, a small number of individuals with extravagant haircuts tweet agreement with the Times; only, they assert that it’s not deplorable, it’s awesome that Trump is really a secret Nazi.

    Are you referring to Milo Yiannopolous?

    http://yiannopoulos.net/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot
    No, the guy who runs DailyStormer and had a faux-hawk.

    Milo was raised Christian and claims to be partly ethnically Jewish.
  8. wren says:

    From the Washington Post.

    Trump said the tweet portrayed “a basic star, often used by sheriffs who deal with criminals and criminal behavior,” as part of an effort to convey that “Crooked Hillary is the most corrupt candidate ever.”

    Of course this is pretty obvious to anyone who can think, but it also seems to be just one more thing that I have read on iSteve before Trump has said it.

    Read More
  9. Dave Pinsen says: • Website

    If the alt-right edge lords want to help Trump, they ought to create kosher Twitter accounts for him to retweet. Trump doesn’t have the staff to vet every account he retweets.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ed
    The alt-right finally has a viable candidate that somewhat mirrors its views and they seem to be the ones harming him the most. These guys aren't the sharpest knives in the kitchen that's for sure.

    While I think this is muchado about nothing it doesn't get him any more votes. It doesn't make him any more presidential so to me it's a negative.
  10. Broski says:

    Two possibilities:

    1. The boring one – the star tweet was an unintentional error, and the media is running its usual game and trying to inflate a nothing burger implicating Trump into a valid indictment with the voting public and/or the donor class.

    2. The interesting one – Trump did this on purpose to rile up the antisemite police.

    Let’s ignore possibility 1 because it’s boring. So, why might Trump intentionally put up a very subtle antisemitic dog whistle for a few hours only to replace it with a sanitized version a couple hours later (the red star image was replaced with a red circle)? Well, who the heck would even pick up on such a thing via monitoring Trump’s twitter? Hypersensitive Jews! That’s who.

    I don’t think Trump is an antisemite in the makes-jokes-about-ovens sense of the word, but a WASP New York real estate billionaire sure as heck knows that Jews and Jewish influence are very different than middle America understands. Actually, what he knows is that Jews qua Jews exist at all, while middle America rarely gives them a second thought, other than liking Israel because “they’re our only allies in the Middle East, and a western(ish) democracy!”

    Trump’s main opposition as a founding-stock nationalist is paranoid, ethnocentric Jews (“international bankers” in the humorous Siskel and Ebert clip Steve put up a few days ago). There are a lot of them among the Jewish population. What pending moves he foresees in the chess game are only apparent at his elevated level of understanding and strategy, but the most likely reason that Trump has done this is that his adversaries are making a mountain out of a molehill regarding, for the first significant time, Jewish issues.

    Moving forward, he will be able to point to this episode as precedent that the antisemite police are just another group of idiots out to get him. They flipped out over a little fleck of BS before, and if they do it again in the future, they’re just the same whiners. He’s exposing them publicly on an issue that is insignificant, and thereby inoculating himself against accusations of antisemitism for the rest of his career.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    "What pending moves he foresees in the chess game are only apparent at his elevated level of understanding and strategy"

    Or then again, maybe Trump is justing winging it like everything else?

    , @BB753
    Except Trump isn't really a WASP in the ordinary sense of the word.
    , @Jack D
    Yes Trump is a super-genius planning triple bank shots and not someone who just got rolled by an alt.righter who slipped in an antisemitic meme.
    , @dahoit
    Exposure of those who control US and can't be criticized is always a good thing.
  11. @Broski
    Two possibilities:

    1. The boring one - the star tweet was an unintentional error, and the media is running its usual game and trying to inflate a nothing burger implicating Trump into a valid indictment with the voting public and/or the donor class.

    2. The interesting one - Trump did this on purpose to rile up the antisemite police.

    Let's ignore possibility 1 because it's boring. So, why might Trump intentionally put up a very subtle antisemitic dog whistle for a few hours only to replace it with a sanitized version a couple hours later (the red star image was replaced with a red circle)? Well, who the heck would even pick up on such a thing via monitoring Trump's twitter? Hypersensitive Jews! That's who.

    I don't think Trump is an antisemite in the makes-jokes-about-ovens sense of the word, but a WASP New York real estate billionaire sure as heck knows that Jews and Jewish influence are very different than middle America understands. Actually, what he knows is that Jews qua Jews exist at all, while middle America rarely gives them a second thought, other than liking Israel because "they're our only allies in the Middle East, and a western(ish) democracy!"

    Trump's main opposition as a founding-stock nationalist is paranoid, ethnocentric Jews ("international bankers" in the humorous Siskel and Ebert clip Steve put up a few days ago). There are a lot of them among the Jewish population. What pending moves he foresees in the chess game are only apparent at his elevated level of understanding and strategy, but the most likely reason that Trump has done this is that his adversaries are making a mountain out of a molehill regarding, for the first significant time, Jewish issues.

    Moving forward, he will be able to point to this episode as precedent that the antisemite police are just another group of idiots out to get him. They flipped out over a little fleck of BS before, and if they do it again in the future, they're just the same whiners. He's exposing them publicly on an issue that is insignificant, and thereby inoculating himself against accusations of antisemitism for the rest of his career.

    “What pending moves he foresees in the chess game are only apparent at his elevated level of understanding and strategy”

    Or then again, maybe Trump is justing winging it like everything else?

    Read More
    • Agree: MEH 0910
    • Replies: @Broski

    Or then again, maybe Trump is justing winging it like everything else?

     

    Perhaps. On the other hand, Trump's only serious error in the campaign thus far, as reflected by poll numbers, was the "Mexican judge" episode. Even that may have been test marketing--just how fervent is the anti-immigrant (i.e., mainly anti-Hispanic) sentiment in the country? Indeed, if he had focused on the judge's membership in a group with "la raza" in its name during that 6 minute interview, rather than repeatedly calling the guy a "Mexican," it may have come out much better for him.
    , @Danindc
    Steve, there's a big difference between winging it and seeing what happens.....

    https://youtu.be/4xdqgzNNHn0

    This is the funniest movie ever made btw. By far.
    , @whorefinder
    Thus far, he's "winged" it to destroy 17 other candidates and put himself in a dead heat with the Dem nominee. I would trust the man's political impulses right now, even if they're just impulses.

    One thing Donald should know how to do is manage the optics of accusations of racism. He's worked in real estate, he's had to deal with HUD and the local NYC Leftist-religious fanatics heck-bent on housing equality. He made bank when it was practically communist Russia in his city. I think he can handle this.
    , @Chrisnonymous
    There are many more persuasive and better-looking dumb-images on the subject of Hillary as crook. Why not pick those? This one was so weak as to be either intentional or stupifyingly densein its choice.
    , @Glaivester
    On the other hand, Scott Adams has suggested that Trump's seemingly random actions are actually pretty strategic if you understand persuasion techniques. Whether he is just really good at "winging it" or whether he is planning everything but making it look random, I don't know.
  12. BB753 says:
    @Broski
    Two possibilities:

    1. The boring one - the star tweet was an unintentional error, and the media is running its usual game and trying to inflate a nothing burger implicating Trump into a valid indictment with the voting public and/or the donor class.

    2. The interesting one - Trump did this on purpose to rile up the antisemite police.

    Let's ignore possibility 1 because it's boring. So, why might Trump intentionally put up a very subtle antisemitic dog whistle for a few hours only to replace it with a sanitized version a couple hours later (the red star image was replaced with a red circle)? Well, who the heck would even pick up on such a thing via monitoring Trump's twitter? Hypersensitive Jews! That's who.

    I don't think Trump is an antisemite in the makes-jokes-about-ovens sense of the word, but a WASP New York real estate billionaire sure as heck knows that Jews and Jewish influence are very different than middle America understands. Actually, what he knows is that Jews qua Jews exist at all, while middle America rarely gives them a second thought, other than liking Israel because "they're our only allies in the Middle East, and a western(ish) democracy!"

    Trump's main opposition as a founding-stock nationalist is paranoid, ethnocentric Jews ("international bankers" in the humorous Siskel and Ebert clip Steve put up a few days ago). There are a lot of them among the Jewish population. What pending moves he foresees in the chess game are only apparent at his elevated level of understanding and strategy, but the most likely reason that Trump has done this is that his adversaries are making a mountain out of a molehill regarding, for the first significant time, Jewish issues.

    Moving forward, he will be able to point to this episode as precedent that the antisemite police are just another group of idiots out to get him. They flipped out over a little fleck of BS before, and if they do it again in the future, they're just the same whiners. He's exposing them publicly on an issue that is insignificant, and thereby inoculating himself against accusations of antisemitism for the rest of his career.

    Except Trump isn’t really a WASP in the ordinary sense of the word.

    Read More
  13. Broski says:
    @Steve Sailer
    "What pending moves he foresees in the chess game are only apparent at his elevated level of understanding and strategy"

    Or then again, maybe Trump is justing winging it like everything else?

    Or then again, maybe Trump is justing winging it like everything else?

    Perhaps. On the other hand, Trump’s only serious error in the campaign thus far, as reflected by poll numbers, was the “Mexican judge” episode. Even that may have been test marketing–just how fervent is the anti-immigrant (i.e., mainly anti-Hispanic) sentiment in the country? Indeed, if he had focused on the judge’s membership in a group with “la raza” in its name during that 6 minute interview, rather than repeatedly calling the guy a “Mexican,” it may have come out much better for him.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    His error with that was backing down instead it of pointing to Sotomayor as a clear example of leftist hypocrisy. He should have said "I'll apologize for my comment as soon as the anti-white "wise Latina" Sotomayor resigns from the court whose reputation she has permanently destroyed."
  14. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    The guy who made the graphic has made other similar anti-Semitic graphics and tweets:

    https://lionoftheblogosphere.wordpress.com/2016/07/04/lion-was-right/

    In light of this, it doesn’t seem insane at all to think that the intent of the graphic was anti-Semitic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    If Trump wanted to take a DGAF route, he might have said something along these lines:

    I don't care about the intent of the person who created the image. My intent in sharing it was to highlight Hillary Clinton's corruption. [rattle off a few of the most glaring examples]. But since some were bothered by the star having six points, I swapped it out for a circle. That you're still dwelling on a red star instead of how Hillary Clinton was interrogated by the FBI for hours over the weekend illustrates how biased the media is.
     
    And that's it. Next time a reporter asks him about it, reframe:

    Sally, the Financial Times reported over the weekend that NATO is increasing its war games and adding tripwire troops opposite Russia in the Baltics. Given Hillary's disastrous decisions on Iraq and Libya, electing her President is literally risking World War III with Russia. Shouldn't you be more concerned about that than about a how many points a star had on a Twitter meme? Have some self-respect and focus on the real issues.
     
    , @NOTA
    The guy who made up the image may be antisemetic as hell; that doesn't really amount to any evidence that Trump is. Indeed, the rest of his life is pretty strong evidence that he's not. Retweeting one thing from a person doesn't imply agreeing with everything they've ever said or done.

    There's this whole sport of decoding and interpreting dog whistles from your opponents--it has no value for understanding anything, and doesn't convince anyone who starts out disagreeing with you, but it's pretty good for keeping your side convinced that the other side is evil incarnate and must be opposed. This is one example, the whole "didn't repudiate David Duke fast enough" but is another.

    This stuff works because of confirmation bias and the bandwagon effect--when lots of people on your side are yelling something you want to believe is true, it's easy to override your logic and believe it.
    , @anon
    Those two examples Lion Of The Blogosphere found are laughably weak. The Obama one seems to be mocking his "I, too, am a Jew." statement. And Ruth Marcus's nose was distorted, but so was the rest of her face.

    If those are the two worst examples of "anti-Semitism" this guy found out of the hundreds of images this Fishbonehead made, it's pretty weak.

    Lion Of The Blogosphere sometimes just needs to admit when he's wrong, and he should understand that he's nowhere near as clever as he thinks he is. He never was.
  15. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Bottom line is Trump said he’d act more presidential in the general and he said he cut way back on tweeting and blah, blah, blah …

    Trump is just a hardcore REAL ESTATE ANIMAL to the bone and everything he says is plastic, claymation.

    If you’ve ever met a hardcore real estate professional then none of what Trump says is surprising. They can’t tell the straight truth about anything. Ever.

    Read More
  16. Danindc says:
    @Steve Sailer
    "What pending moves he foresees in the chess game are only apparent at his elevated level of understanding and strategy"

    Or then again, maybe Trump is justing winging it like everything else?

    Steve, there’s a big difference between winging it and seeing what happens…..

    This is the funniest movie ever made btw. By far.

    Read More
    • Replies: @b.t.o
    Its hard to convince people to watch this movie because of the Saturday Night Live spinoff angle, but its great. Will Forte has quietly been our best comedic actor for most of the decade.
    , @Jenner Ickham Errican
    I didn’t laugh at all, not one bit.
    , @Andrew Jackson
    Agreed. Hilarious movie.
    , @Malcolm X-Lax
    You know, I never had an interest in seeing this movie before. But that clip cracked me up. Will have to check it out.
  17. Mr. Sailer is quite correct that DJT is only espousing common sense not-that- radical notions. It makes the reaction of the Kristols, Wills, Republicans, etc so absurd. Also the Left. It speaks to how bad off we are as a society. He has really struck a nerve.
    There have been many attempts at explanation, here and elsewhere, none entirely correct, all having elements of the truth. It is multifactorial, for sure. It is puzzling and fascinating. For instance, the Kochs hate him, but his talk of re-examining our commitments abroad should be right up their Cato alley. Some of it hysteria. He is unPC(but this is not uncommon in much of America). I don’t understand it completely. But I am sure it is a good thing for America and would be fantastic if he could win. The bigger question is whether he would be the beginning of a long term change or just a temporary lull in the decimation of the West.
    Steve also makes another great point about DJT. How aware is he of what he is doing? He is obviously a very smart man.
    Is he the Prince, though? I mostly think no, but sometimes I wonder.

    Read More
  18. Warner says:

    Yes, but maybe winging it with 40+ years of experience in long-term strategies to overpower multi-faceted opposition to the realization of his goals which he consistently overcame. I think Trump’s winging it IS “4-dimensional chess”. It just comes naturally now. Like a jazz improviser who vaguely knows how a note will become more than just a note revisited 20 minutes from now.

    Read More
  19. Maj. Kong says:
    @Thomas
    90% of American Jews, at minimum, would always be terrified of Trump or any similarly explicitly nationalist politician, for reasons that are well-known but never said aloud (tl; dr: because Hitler). Even Republicans pre-Trump weren't allowed to be explicitly nationalistic for any country other than Israel.

    Eh, its more the Tsar than the Fuhrer.

    Most of the Jews in the US originated in the 1880s-1914 immigration from the Russian Empire. Any Russian expression of nationalism to them meant a Cossack raid. More glaringly, it meant a government that induced pressure to convert to Orthodoxy. Much of what we call the “war on Christmas” is mostly Jewish angst that public display of Christian symbols will induce their children into converting.

    Read More
  20. WGG says:

    Mr. Sailer,

    You are the Emperor of HBD observations and hatefacts. You have had plenty of commenters point out that these hatefacts apply to Jewish supremacist globalists as much as any other group. How do you manage to disagree with the “extravagant haircuts?” The haircuts are following your hatefacts to their logical conclusion, as even leftists agree, hence their attempts to stifle any truthful conversation about group identities.

    The haircuts are almost all disillusioned Ron Paul libertarians who realized that on the current trajectory, libertarians and establishment Republicans will continue to lose ad infinitum. This eternal loss means white gentiles will all eventually end up like the white gentiles in Zimbabwe and South Africa.

    If you do not believe this to be the case, why? Who will stop the white-hating hordes and their elitist enablers around the globe? If you do believe this is the case, why is this okay with you?

    Sincerely,
    An extravagant haircut

    Read More
    • Replies: @Broski
    That Sailer is not himself an extravagant haircut doesn't mean he thinks they're all wrong. He seems to have a mellow lack of bloodthirstiness that probably comes with his long tenure as a crime thinker. The zeal of the convert, the driving force of many of the extravagant haircuts, attenuates with time.

    Who will stop the white-hating hordes and their elitist enablers around the globe? If you do believe this is the case, why is this okay with you?

     

    Another reason to be relax (very slightly) is that human peoples of moderate or higher IQ, such as global Europa, eventually wake up. This is particularly true with the Internet, which has broken elite control over public discourse. (Happened with the printing press to a lesser degree half a millennium ago.) Europa in the United States and Europe simultaneously awakens right now. Sure, some of us saw the writing on the wall 10 years ago, indeed some probably saw it during the Bell Curve wars (Murray obviously did), but it's catching on with the broader populace as time passes.
  21. Broski says:
    @WGG
    Mr. Sailer,

    You are the Emperor of HBD observations and hatefacts. You have had plenty of commenters point out that these hatefacts apply to Jewish supremacist globalists as much as any other group. How do you manage to disagree with the "extravagant haircuts?" The haircuts are following your hatefacts to their logical conclusion, as even leftists agree, hence their attempts to stifle any truthful conversation about group identities.

    The haircuts are almost all disillusioned Ron Paul libertarians who realized that on the current trajectory, libertarians and establishment Republicans will continue to lose ad infinitum. This eternal loss means white gentiles will all eventually end up like the white gentiles in Zimbabwe and South Africa.

    If you do not believe this to be the case, why? Who will stop the white-hating hordes and their elitist enablers around the globe? If you do believe this is the case, why is this okay with you?

    Sincerely,
    An extravagant haircut

    That Sailer is not himself an extravagant haircut doesn’t mean he thinks they’re all wrong. He seems to have a mellow lack of bloodthirstiness that probably comes with his long tenure as a crime thinker. The zeal of the convert, the driving force of many of the extravagant haircuts, attenuates with time.

    Who will stop the white-hating hordes and their elitist enablers around the globe? If you do believe this is the case, why is this okay with you?

    Another reason to be relax (very slightly) is that human peoples of moderate or higher IQ, such as global Europa, eventually wake up. This is particularly true with the Internet, which has broken elite control over public discourse. (Happened with the printing press to a lesser degree half a millennium ago.) Europa in the United States and Europe simultaneously awakens right now. Sure, some of us saw the writing on the wall 10 years ago, indeed some probably saw it during the Bell Curve wars (Murray obviously did), but it’s catching on with the broader populace as time passes.

    Read More
  22. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Anonymous
    The guy who made the graphic has made other similar anti-Semitic graphics and tweets:

    https://lionoftheblogosphere.wordpress.com/2016/07/04/lion-was-right/

    In light of this, it doesn't seem insane at all to think that the intent of the graphic was anti-Semitic.

    If Trump wanted to take a DGAF route, he might have said something along these lines:

    I don’t care about the intent of the person who created the image. My intent in sharing it was to highlight Hillary Clinton’s corruption. [rattle off a few of the most glaring examples]. But since some were bothered by the star having six points, I swapped it out for a circle. That you’re still dwelling on a red star instead of how Hillary Clinton was interrogated by the FBI for hours over the weekend illustrates how biased the media is.

    And that’s it. Next time a reporter asks him about it, reframe:

    Sally, the Financial Times reported over the weekend that NATO is increasing its war games and adding tripwire troops opposite Russia in the Baltics. Given Hillary’s disastrous decisions on Iraq and Libya, electing her President is literally risking World War III with Russia. Shouldn’t you be more concerned about that than about a how many points a star had on a Twitter meme? Have some self-respect and focus on the real issues.

    Read More
  23. Let’s get one thing straight: No other Republican candidate had a fart’s chance in the wind of winning the presidency in today’s United States. Trump and his methods, winged or not, are far more powerful than what the Republican party had planned.

    Let’s see how this thing plays out…

    Oh, and by the way, his position on foreign trade has been consistent for decades. Since that, with its attendant globalism, is the most important issue facing us, and since it would not even be an election topic if not for him, let’s stop pretending Mr. Trump doesn’t hold any beliefs.

    Respectfully,
    Buzz

    Read More
    • Agree: Clyde
    • Replies: @NOTA
    Trump has surprised me with his success so far, but I think he's got a hell of an uphill climb to become president, much more than a more conventional candidate would.

    From what has been reported, he has almost no organization in place to get out the vote, and his campaign appears not to be too well organized. He has little support from the party organization--which make sense, since he's an insurgent candidate trying to change the direction of the party--but that also costs him support and help from the one group of insider experts who would be helping almost any other candidate, even someone they all despised like Cruz. He is one of the few people with negatives (numbers of people who start out not being able to stand him) as high as Hillary's. He's got most of the media stacked against him, partly because of his message, but also heavily because of his style. (He's exerted a lot of control over them, because he reliably brings ratings and they'd sell their own mothers for ratings. But they still hate him.). He has a large fraction of the talking head/ideologue class opposing him--not surprising, given his positions and style, but another weapon just about any other candidate would have had, and that he lacks.

    Now, maybe Trump can overcome all this. He surprised me (and lots of experts whose opinions are worth much more than mine) in the primaries. But it looks to me like he has at least as steep an uphill climb from here to the White House. Against as weak a candidate as Hillary, I think a lot of candidates would have had a better chance.
  24. b.t.o says:
    @Danindc
    Steve, there's a big difference between winging it and seeing what happens.....

    https://youtu.be/4xdqgzNNHn0

    This is the funniest movie ever made btw. By far.

    Its hard to convince people to watch this movie because of the Saturday Night Live spinoff angle, but its great. Will Forte has quietly been our best comedic actor for most of the decade.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Danindc
    Forte is a genius although Last Man on Earth got bad fast. Season 3 was a disaster. I thought Macgruber would be awful because of recent history of SNL movies.
  25. whorefinder says: • Website
    @Steve Sailer
    "What pending moves he foresees in the chess game are only apparent at his elevated level of understanding and strategy"

    Or then again, maybe Trump is justing winging it like everything else?

    Thus far, he’s “winged” it to destroy 17 other candidates and put himself in a dead heat with the Dem nominee. I would trust the man’s political impulses right now, even if they’re just impulses.

    One thing Donald should know how to do is manage the optics of accusations of racism. He’s worked in real estate, he’s had to deal with HUD and the local NYC Leftist-religious fanatics heck-bent on housing equality. He made bank when it was practically communist Russia in his city. I think he can handle this.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    I'd have more confidence in Trump soberly winging something than anything planned by Clinton, irrespective of how long it takes her.
    , @Jack Hanson
    Personally, I'm curious if Steve thinks Romney's campaign (the candidate he loves so much) imploded because he winging it vs. Being a slick scripted creation of the Big Brain GOP.
    , @dahoit
    Actually Trump has been the best candidate since JFK to me,and hopefully he'll keep up the attack on globalization,russophobia and our stupid idiotic interventions everywhere.
  26. Anonym says:
    @whorefinder
    Thus far, he's "winged" it to destroy 17 other candidates and put himself in a dead heat with the Dem nominee. I would trust the man's political impulses right now, even if they're just impulses.

    One thing Donald should know how to do is manage the optics of accusations of racism. He's worked in real estate, he's had to deal with HUD and the local NYC Leftist-religious fanatics heck-bent on housing equality. He made bank when it was practically communist Russia in his city. I think he can handle this.

    I’d have more confidence in Trump soberly winging something than anything planned by Clinton, irrespective of how long it takes her.

    Read More
  27. @Thomas
    90% of American Jews, at minimum, would always be terrified of Trump or any similarly explicitly nationalist politician, for reasons that are well-known but never said aloud (tl; dr: because Hitler). Even Republicans pre-Trump weren't allowed to be explicitly nationalistic for any country other than Israel.

    No, it’s the opposite. The Hitler reason is said aloud often and loudly, while the real reasons (eg, peculiarly Jewish virtue signaling, etc) are never voiced.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    "The Hitler reason is said aloud often and loudly,"

    Fun article in The Federalist today, about how people don't feel free to scream about Hitler enough.

    http://thefederalist.com/2016/07/05/elie-wiesel-is-gone-but-his-message-is-forever/
  28. @Steve Sailer
    "What pending moves he foresees in the chess game are only apparent at his elevated level of understanding and strategy"

    Or then again, maybe Trump is justing winging it like everything else?

    There are many more persuasive and better-looking dumb-images on the subject of Hillary as crook. Why not pick those? This one was so weak as to be either intentional or stupifyingly densein its choice.

    Read More
  29. tbraton says:

    Last night I saw a clear example of Obama’s flapdoodle about black Americans. I was watching Fox News when they broke away to show Obama delivering his Fourth of July speech from the White House. He took the occasion to speak about our “heroes” in the armed forces, but standing behind him on the stage were five or six black men and women. Not one white person in sight. I guess the idea was to give the impression to America that the brave men and women in our armed forces supposedly protecting America are all black. I wonder what percentage of the military is black, especially the forces that do the actual fighting. I wonder what percentage of those who return in body bags are black. Probably a lot less than 100%. Even the blonde commentator on Fox who introduced the little segment gave a smile of support to our men and women in uniform. I thought the whole episode was rather strange. I take this as a sign that Obama is starting to do all he can to rally black Americans to vote for Hillary Clinton.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde

    I wonder what percentage of the military is black, especially the forces that do the actual fighting. I wonder what percentage of those who return in body bags are black. Probably a lot less than 100%.
     
    It is common knowledge that blacks serve in the supply lines not in the front lines. It is whites and Hispanics who engage the enemies and get injured or die. Lets give credit to these Hispanics for having a warrior instinct and patriotism. With blacks it is "I ain't got no quarrel with no Vietcong" plus the US military is into affirmative action promotions.
    , @dahoit
    Most blacks are already in the tank for the hell bitch.Haven't you noticed the obvious antisemitism expressed by them?Sanders could have been a contender,but for those knuckleheads.
  30. @Danindc
    Steve, there's a big difference between winging it and seeing what happens.....

    https://youtu.be/4xdqgzNNHn0

    This is the funniest movie ever made btw. By far.

    I didn’t laugh at all, not one bit.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Danindc
    You need to go to comedy camp. It's 4 weeks in August and run by Colin Quinn.
  31. Ed says:
    @iSteveFan

    Thus, Trump is well regarded by the more rough-hewn black and Jewish ethnocentrists, such as Ice Cube of N.W.A and Likudnik Sheldon Adelson.
     
    Has Adelson donated yet to any Trump related PAC? He said he was in for $100 million.

    Normally Americans meekly back down with apologies when confronted with that kind of corporate firepower.
     
    Well he just backed down on the star.

    Seems like a silly cross to die on when that wasn’t his intent. Let the media look stupid by obsessing over it even after he’s taken it down. The man’s grandkids are being raised Jewish. One of his most trusted advisors is his orthodox Jewish son-in-law, yet the pathetic media and GOPe shills wants us to believe he’s anti-Semetic, ok.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ye Antient Oliphant
    He's objectively anti-semitic. That's when you advocate policies harmful to Jews without necessarily wishing harm to Jews. For Jews - with people scattered across the world in a hundred different countries - freedom of movement is very, very important (not least because it allows them to flee persecution at short notice.) Any politican who advocates border control/immigration reduction will therefore face concerted Jewish opposition. He'll be called an anti-semite even if he has never breathed a word of hostility towards Jews, because, in a away, he is - he just doesn't realize it.
  32. Ed says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    If the alt-right edge lords want to help Trump, they ought to create kosher Twitter accounts for him to retweet. Trump doesn't have the staff to vet every account he retweets.
    https://twitter.com/sarahkendzior/status/750127115446562816

    The alt-right finally has a viable candidate that somewhat mirrors its views and they seem to be the ones harming him the most. These guys aren’t the sharpest knives in the kitchen that’s for sure.

    While I think this is muchado about nothing it doesn’t get him any more votes. It doesn’t make him any more presidential so to me it’s a negative.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Are you surprised? What's surprising is not that there was an alt-righter cooking up swastikas and Jewish stars but that the Trump campaign was dumb enough to take the bait. And then all the other Trump people had to play along and say , "it's a sheriff's badge" even though it wasn't meant that way by the original author at all. In a way it's a tribute to the fundamental non-antisemitism of Trump and many of his supporters but it's also a sign of naivete that they could get rolled in that way by some alt-righter.
  33. Clyde says:
    @tbraton
    Last night I saw a clear example of Obama's flapdoodle about black Americans. I was watching Fox News when they broke away to show Obama delivering his Fourth of July speech from the White House. He took the occasion to speak about our "heroes" in the armed forces, but standing behind him on the stage were five or six black men and women. Not one white person in sight. I guess the idea was to give the impression to America that the brave men and women in our armed forces supposedly protecting America are all black. I wonder what percentage of the military is black, especially the forces that do the actual fighting. I wonder what percentage of those who return in body bags are black. Probably a lot less than 100%. Even the blonde commentator on Fox who introduced the little segment gave a smile of support to our men and women in uniform. I thought the whole episode was rather strange. I take this as a sign that Obama is starting to do all he can to rally black Americans to vote for Hillary Clinton.

    I wonder what percentage of the military is black, especially the forces that do the actual fighting. I wonder what percentage of those who return in body bags are black. Probably a lot less than 100%.

    It is common knowledge that blacks serve in the supply lines not in the front lines. It is whites and Hispanics who engage the enemies and get injured or die. Lets give credit to these Hispanics for having a warrior instinct and patriotism. With blacks it is “I ain’t got no quarrel with no Vietcong” plus the US military is into affirmative action promotions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dahoit
    Lickspittle get your approval huh?Warrior instinct?How come we keep losing?
    The worst decision in American military history,giving citizenship to illegals for fighting bogus wars.What are we Rome?
    That and opening up the ranks to homos,trans and assorted weirdos.
    Yankee come home.
    , @William Badwhite
    "It is common knowledge that blacks serve in the supply lines not in the front lines."

    One of my business school classmates had just left the SEAL's before heading to graduate school. Once we were talking about what kind of guys end up in the SEAL's and the subjects of blacks came up. He said there are virtually no black SEAL's because "they can't deal". A lot of the training is just seeing how long you can go before you come unglued or otherwise collapse. For whatever reason, the blacks usually came unglued and DOR'd early (DOR = Drop on Request) in the training. They don't do prolonged stress very well.

    Yes, I realize that's SEAL's not your basic infantry unit.
  34. Glaivester says: • Website
    @Steve Sailer
    "What pending moves he foresees in the chess game are only apparent at his elevated level of understanding and strategy"

    Or then again, maybe Trump is justing winging it like everything else?

    On the other hand, Scott Adams has suggested that Trump’s seemingly random actions are actually pretty strategic if you understand persuasion techniques. Whether he is just really good at “winging it” or whether he is planning everything but making it look random, I don’t know.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Not on this tweet though: http://blog.dilbert.com/post/146945783646/the-crook-versus-the-racist
  35. Jack D says:
    @Ed
    The alt-right finally has a viable candidate that somewhat mirrors its views and they seem to be the ones harming him the most. These guys aren't the sharpest knives in the kitchen that's for sure.

    While I think this is muchado about nothing it doesn't get him any more votes. It doesn't make him any more presidential so to me it's a negative.

    Are you surprised? What’s surprising is not that there was an alt-righter cooking up swastikas and Jewish stars but that the Trump campaign was dumb enough to take the bait. And then all the other Trump people had to play along and say , “it’s a sheriff’s badge” even though it wasn’t meant that way by the original author at all. In a way it’s a tribute to the fundamental non-antisemitism of Trump and many of his supporters but it’s also a sign of naivete that they could get rolled in that way by some alt-righter.

    Read More
    • Replies: @IHTG
    https://twitter.com/hgfrog/status/749789926313558017
    , @dahoit
    He's so dumb that he's going to win in a landslide.
    Real dumb.
  36. Jack D says:
    @Broski
    Two possibilities:

    1. The boring one - the star tweet was an unintentional error, and the media is running its usual game and trying to inflate a nothing burger implicating Trump into a valid indictment with the voting public and/or the donor class.

    2. The interesting one - Trump did this on purpose to rile up the antisemite police.

    Let's ignore possibility 1 because it's boring. So, why might Trump intentionally put up a very subtle antisemitic dog whistle for a few hours only to replace it with a sanitized version a couple hours later (the red star image was replaced with a red circle)? Well, who the heck would even pick up on such a thing via monitoring Trump's twitter? Hypersensitive Jews! That's who.

    I don't think Trump is an antisemite in the makes-jokes-about-ovens sense of the word, but a WASP New York real estate billionaire sure as heck knows that Jews and Jewish influence are very different than middle America understands. Actually, what he knows is that Jews qua Jews exist at all, while middle America rarely gives them a second thought, other than liking Israel because "they're our only allies in the Middle East, and a western(ish) democracy!"

    Trump's main opposition as a founding-stock nationalist is paranoid, ethnocentric Jews ("international bankers" in the humorous Siskel and Ebert clip Steve put up a few days ago). There are a lot of them among the Jewish population. What pending moves he foresees in the chess game are only apparent at his elevated level of understanding and strategy, but the most likely reason that Trump has done this is that his adversaries are making a mountain out of a molehill regarding, for the first significant time, Jewish issues.

    Moving forward, he will be able to point to this episode as precedent that the antisemite police are just another group of idiots out to get him. They flipped out over a little fleck of BS before, and if they do it again in the future, they're just the same whiners. He's exposing them publicly on an issue that is insignificant, and thereby inoculating himself against accusations of antisemitism for the rest of his career.

    Yes Trump is a super-genius planning triple bank shots and not someone who just got rolled by an alt.righter who slipped in an antisemitic meme.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    As the other Jack on here, you're getting pretty hysterical about a damn logo.

    Why not sit a few plays out and relax before you see Heydrich under the bed.
  37. Jack D says:
    @iSteveFan

    90% of American Jews, at minimum, would always be terrified of Trump
     
    I think the big dust up over the 6 pointed start was meant more to keep those 90% frightened than to hurt Trump with other voters. Clearly most gentiles would have never seen the linkage with that solid colored star. I didn't given my experience with the 6th Infantry Division. But if it can keep Jews who are tempted to vote Trump from straying, then mission accomplished.

    So this was an own goal. Maybe it was caused by not having enough Jews around campaign HQ. Should have showed this to his son-in-law before retweeting – he would have seen the not-so-hidden message right way.

    Maybe he can use a noose next to appeal to the black vote. I’m going to “hang” Hillary out to dry! Nooses are associated with the hangman game, with the legal execution of war criminals, etc. and not just lynching, so no problem.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iSteveFan
    I guess I will have to tell my friend to take down all his awards from the 6th ID that he has that feature the division's 6-pointed red star. I should also tell him to destroy his old uniform too which features that prominent symbol on the left shoulder.
    , @William Badwhite
    "would have seen the not-so-hidden message right way"...."Nooses are associated with the hangman game, with the legal execution of war criminals, etc. and not just lynching, so no problem."

    I find his unwillingness to cede symbols to various shrill professional-complainer groups refreshing. If Jews grow hysterical over a star or blacks grow hysterical over a picture of a noose, well that's really their problem.
  38. IHTG says:
    @Jack D
    Are you surprised? What's surprising is not that there was an alt-righter cooking up swastikas and Jewish stars but that the Trump campaign was dumb enough to take the bait. And then all the other Trump people had to play along and say , "it's a sheriff's badge" even though it wasn't meant that way by the original author at all. In a way it's a tribute to the fundamental non-antisemitism of Trump and many of his supporters but it's also a sign of naivete that they could get rolled in that way by some alt-righter.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Was the standard Paint swastika also used in the other tweet?
  39. iSteveFan says:
    @Jack D
    So this was an own goal. Maybe it was caused by not having enough Jews around campaign HQ. Should have showed this to his son-in-law before retweeting - he would have seen the not-so-hidden message right way.

    Maybe he can use a noose next to appeal to the black vote. I'm going to "hang" Hillary out to dry! Nooses are associated with the hangman game, with the legal execution of war criminals, etc. and not just lynching, so no problem.

    I guess I will have to tell my friend to take down all his awards from the 6th ID that he has that feature the division’s 6-pointed red star. I should also tell him to destroy his old uniform too which features that prominent symbol on the left shoulder.

    Read More
  40. Danindc says:
    @Jenner Ickham Errican
    I didn’t laugh at all, not one bit.

    You need to go to comedy camp. It’s 4 weeks in August and run by Colin Quinn.

    Read More
  41. Danindc says:
    @b.t.o
    Its hard to convince people to watch this movie because of the Saturday Night Live spinoff angle, but its great. Will Forte has quietly been our best comedic actor for most of the decade.

    Forte is a genius although Last Man on Earth got bad fast. Season 3 was a disaster. I thought Macgruber would be awful because of recent history of SNL movies.

    Read More
  42. @whorefinder
    Thus far, he's "winged" it to destroy 17 other candidates and put himself in a dead heat with the Dem nominee. I would trust the man's political impulses right now, even if they're just impulses.

    One thing Donald should know how to do is manage the optics of accusations of racism. He's worked in real estate, he's had to deal with HUD and the local NYC Leftist-religious fanatics heck-bent on housing equality. He made bank when it was practically communist Russia in his city. I think he can handle this.

    Personally, I’m curious if Steve thinks Romney’s campaign (the candidate he loves so much) imploded because he winging it vs. Being a slick scripted creation of the Big Brain GOP.

    Read More
  43. @Jack D
    Yes Trump is a super-genius planning triple bank shots and not someone who just got rolled by an alt.righter who slipped in an antisemitic meme.

    As the other Jack on here, you’re getting pretty hysterical about a damn logo.

    Why not sit a few plays out and relax before you see Heydrich under the bed.

    Read More
  44. dahoit says:
    @iSteveFan

    Thus, Trump is well regarded by the more rough-hewn black and Jewish ethnocentrists, such as Ice Cube of N.W.A and Likudnik Sheldon Adelson.
     
    Has Adelson donated yet to any Trump related PAC? He said he was in for $100 million.

    Normally Americans meekly back down with apologies when confronted with that kind of corporate firepower.
     
    Well he just backed down on the star.

    Maybe he’s backed down,but as with a trial,evidence ruled not admissible is still heard by the jury.(US)
    Go Trump.

    Read More
  45. iffen says:
    @iSteveFan

    90% of American Jews, at minimum, would always be terrified of Trump
     
    I think the big dust up over the 6 pointed start was meant more to keep those 90% frightened than to hurt Trump with other voters. Clearly most gentiles would have never seen the linkage with that solid colored star. I didn't given my experience with the 6th Infantry Division. But if it can keep Jews who are tempted to vote Trump from straying, then mission accomplished.

    if it can keep Jews who are tempted to vote Trump

    The theme that Trump is a racist Nazi is not directed at Jews. It is directed at educated white women who are uncomfortable trying to sort through all sorts of racist and anti-Semitic babble and accusations.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnotherDad

    The theme that Trump is a racist Nazi is not directed at Jews. It is directed at educated white women who are uncomfortable trying to sort through all sorts of racist and anti-Semitic babble and accusations.
     
    Thank you iffen. I don't know why the obvious is difficult for folks to grasp.

    Jews are smarter and more political than American whites. They have more or less the same demographic skews (male\female, married\single, religious\not) as whites, just shifted to the left about 30 points--from ethnic resentments to simply being in more of the parasitic rent-seeking niches (finance, lawyering, government, academia) that the Democrats represent. (I'd guess if you looked at say married with children, private sector employed engineers, going to synagogue\church the skew might be say only 20 points, maybe less.) But the key point is ... they are more politically engaged and have made up their minds. Their true "undecideds" would be smaller percentage wise than whites and an absolutely minuscule piece of the electorate, making the difference in *no* state.

    The plain fact is this election will be decided middle class white women. Push comes to shove by middle class women in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida. And they are conformist and easily influenced by perceptions of someone not being respectable, being "rude" or God forbid being "racist".

    We made a mistake giving the vote to women. It probably seemed like "the right thing to do" at the time. And it probably didn't make any difference for quite a while. But our ancestors did not foresee the breakdown of sexual morality and marriage, and millions of young women essentially becoming brides of the super-state and voting against their male relatives. Nor how women's innate conformism and desire of "nice"--easily manipulable by Orewellian media--becomes a cancer when the state and media are seized by a hostile elite that hates the nation's people.

    The media are all in to strum white gentile women's conformity with the "Trump's not nice, not respectible, wild, radical, racist" refrain.

    Trump has to find a way to cut through this--on immigration basically--and make the case that he is the path of sanity and a better future for these women's children (and that it's Hillary and the Democrats who are actually radically altering America for the worse). Or ... he's dead.
  46. dahoit says:
    @Clyde

    I wonder what percentage of the military is black, especially the forces that do the actual fighting. I wonder what percentage of those who return in body bags are black. Probably a lot less than 100%.
     
    It is common knowledge that blacks serve in the supply lines not in the front lines. It is whites and Hispanics who engage the enemies and get injured or die. Lets give credit to these Hispanics for having a warrior instinct and patriotism. With blacks it is "I ain't got no quarrel with no Vietcong" plus the US military is into affirmative action promotions.

    Lickspittle get your approval huh?Warrior instinct?How come we keep losing?
    The worst decision in American military history,giving citizenship to illegals for fighting bogus wars.What are we Rome?
    That and opening up the ranks to homos,trans and assorted weirdos.
    Yankee come home.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterike

    Warrior instinct?How come we keep losing?

     

    Literally insane rules of engagement and cowardly leadership. We lose because we don't fight to win. It's really that simple.

    The worst decision in American military history,giving citizenship to illegals for fighting bogus wars.What are we Rome?

     

    Maybe not "the worst," but a pretty damned terrible decision.

    That and opening up the ranks to homos,trans and assorted weirdos.

     

    Yup.
  47. dahoit says:
    @tbraton
    Last night I saw a clear example of Obama's flapdoodle about black Americans. I was watching Fox News when they broke away to show Obama delivering his Fourth of July speech from the White House. He took the occasion to speak about our "heroes" in the armed forces, but standing behind him on the stage were five or six black men and women. Not one white person in sight. I guess the idea was to give the impression to America that the brave men and women in our armed forces supposedly protecting America are all black. I wonder what percentage of the military is black, especially the forces that do the actual fighting. I wonder what percentage of those who return in body bags are black. Probably a lot less than 100%. Even the blonde commentator on Fox who introduced the little segment gave a smile of support to our men and women in uniform. I thought the whole episode was rather strange. I take this as a sign that Obama is starting to do all he can to rally black Americans to vote for Hillary Clinton.

    Most blacks are already in the tank for the hell bitch.Haven’t you noticed the obvious antisemitism expressed by them?Sanders could have been a contender,but for those knuckleheads.

    Read More
    • Replies: @tbraton
    Well, those are blacks who actually voted in primaries. I still think, come November, the total number of blacks who vote will be down considerably from 2008 and 2012 because a black will not be on the ticket and the percentage voting Republican (for Trump) will be higher than in 2008 and 2012, largely for the same reason plus the special appeal of Trump.

    BTW most people, black or white, don't vote in primaries. In fact, I voted in the first primary in my life this past March when I voted for Trump in the Florida primary. When I moved to Florida 25+ years ago, I immediately registered as an Independent, which, under Florida law, does not permit you to vote in either party's closed primary. I changed my registration to Republican last fall just so I could vote for Trump in the Florida Republican primary and against Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush. Two things stood out for me this past primary season. Most people don't bother watching the televised debates, yet this past year the ratings for the Republican debates were shattered. Turnout in the Republican primaries were generally substantially higher than in prior years. That's why I still look forward to Trump winning the election in November.
  48. dahoit says:
    @whorefinder
    Thus far, he's "winged" it to destroy 17 other candidates and put himself in a dead heat with the Dem nominee. I would trust the man's political impulses right now, even if they're just impulses.

    One thing Donald should know how to do is manage the optics of accusations of racism. He's worked in real estate, he's had to deal with HUD and the local NYC Leftist-religious fanatics heck-bent on housing equality. He made bank when it was practically communist Russia in his city. I think he can handle this.

    Actually Trump has been the best candidate since JFK to me,and hopefully he’ll keep up the attack on globalization,russophobia and our stupid idiotic interventions everywhere.

    Read More
  49. dahoit says:
    @Broski
    Two possibilities:

    1. The boring one - the star tweet was an unintentional error, and the media is running its usual game and trying to inflate a nothing burger implicating Trump into a valid indictment with the voting public and/or the donor class.

    2. The interesting one - Trump did this on purpose to rile up the antisemite police.

    Let's ignore possibility 1 because it's boring. So, why might Trump intentionally put up a very subtle antisemitic dog whistle for a few hours only to replace it with a sanitized version a couple hours later (the red star image was replaced with a red circle)? Well, who the heck would even pick up on such a thing via monitoring Trump's twitter? Hypersensitive Jews! That's who.

    I don't think Trump is an antisemite in the makes-jokes-about-ovens sense of the word, but a WASP New York real estate billionaire sure as heck knows that Jews and Jewish influence are very different than middle America understands. Actually, what he knows is that Jews qua Jews exist at all, while middle America rarely gives them a second thought, other than liking Israel because "they're our only allies in the Middle East, and a western(ish) democracy!"

    Trump's main opposition as a founding-stock nationalist is paranoid, ethnocentric Jews ("international bankers" in the humorous Siskel and Ebert clip Steve put up a few days ago). There are a lot of them among the Jewish population. What pending moves he foresees in the chess game are only apparent at his elevated level of understanding and strategy, but the most likely reason that Trump has done this is that his adversaries are making a mountain out of a molehill regarding, for the first significant time, Jewish issues.

    Moving forward, he will be able to point to this episode as precedent that the antisemite police are just another group of idiots out to get him. They flipped out over a little fleck of BS before, and if they do it again in the future, they're just the same whiners. He's exposing them publicly on an issue that is insignificant, and thereby inoculating himself against accusations of antisemitism for the rest of his career.

    Exposure of those who control US and can’t be criticized is always a good thing.

    Read More
  50. dahoit says:
    @Jack D
    Are you surprised? What's surprising is not that there was an alt-righter cooking up swastikas and Jewish stars but that the Trump campaign was dumb enough to take the bait. And then all the other Trump people had to play along and say , "it's a sheriff's badge" even though it wasn't meant that way by the original author at all. In a way it's a tribute to the fundamental non-antisemitism of Trump and many of his supporters but it's also a sign of naivete that they could get rolled in that way by some alt-righter.

    He’s so dumb that he’s going to win in a landslide.
    Real dumb.

    Read More
  51. @Danindc
    Steve, there's a big difference between winging it and seeing what happens.....

    https://youtu.be/4xdqgzNNHn0

    This is the funniest movie ever made btw. By far.

    Agreed. Hilarious movie.

    Read More
  52. NOTA says:
    @Anonymous
    The guy who made the graphic has made other similar anti-Semitic graphics and tweets:

    https://lionoftheblogosphere.wordpress.com/2016/07/04/lion-was-right/

    In light of this, it doesn't seem insane at all to think that the intent of the graphic was anti-Semitic.

    The guy who made up the image may be antisemetic as hell; that doesn’t really amount to any evidence that Trump is. Indeed, the rest of his life is pretty strong evidence that he’s not. Retweeting one thing from a person doesn’t imply agreeing with everything they’ve ever said or done.

    There’s this whole sport of decoding and interpreting dog whistles from your opponents–it has no value for understanding anything, and doesn’t convince anyone who starts out disagreeing with you, but it’s pretty good for keeping your side convinced that the other side is evil incarnate and must be opposed. This is one example, the whole “didn’t repudiate David Duke fast enough” but is another.

    This stuff works because of confirmation bias and the bandwagon effect–when lots of people on your side are yelling something you want to believe is true, it’s easy to override your logic and believe it.

    Read More
  53. NOTA says:
    @Buzz Mohawk
    Let's get one thing straight: No other Republican candidate had a fart's chance in the wind of winning the presidency in today's United States. Trump and his methods, winged or not, are far more powerful than what the Republican party had planned.

    Let's see how this thing plays out...

    Oh, and by the way, his position on foreign trade has been consistent for decades. Since that, with its attendant globalism, is the most important issue facing us, and since it would not even be an election topic if not for him, let's stop pretending Mr. Trump doesn't hold any beliefs.

    Respectfully,
    Buzz

    Trump has surprised me with his success so far, but I think he’s got a hell of an uphill climb to become president, much more than a more conventional candidate would.

    From what has been reported, he has almost no organization in place to get out the vote, and his campaign appears not to be too well organized. He has little support from the party organization–which make sense, since he’s an insurgent candidate trying to change the direction of the party–but that also costs him support and help from the one group of insider experts who would be helping almost any other candidate, even someone they all despised like Cruz. He is one of the few people with negatives (numbers of people who start out not being able to stand him) as high as Hillary’s. He’s got most of the media stacked against him, partly because of his message, but also heavily because of his style. (He’s exerted a lot of control over them, because he reliably brings ratings and they’d sell their own mothers for ratings. But they still hate him.). He has a large fraction of the talking head/ideologue class opposing him–not surprising, given his positions and style, but another weapon just about any other candidate would have had, and that he lacks.

    Now, maybe Trump can overcome all this. He surprised me (and lots of experts whose opinions are worth much more than mine) in the primaries. But it looks to me like he has at least as steep an uphill climb from here to the White House. Against as weak a candidate as Hillary, I think a lot of candidates would have had a better chance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The most deplorable one

    Trump has surprised me with his success so far, but I think he’s got a hell of an uphill climb to become president, much more than a more conventional candidate would.
     
    There is your mistake right there.

    Hillary is the conventional, corrupt, candidate. I am glad you like her.
    , @tbraton
    "Against as weak a candidate as Hillary, I think a lot of candidates would have had a better chance."

    Well, I happen to think you are wrong. I can't think of another candidate who would even have a chance against Hillary, as weak as she is. There is a reason why they all did so miserably against Trump in the Republican primaries. The candidate who polled best against Hillary in the spring, John Kasich, did poorly in the primaries, winning only his home state of Ohio, where he is the sitting governor, by less than impressive margin against Trump, 46% to 37%, as I recall, and not coming close in the others. He was less than impressive in the debates, despite the fact that his father worked for the post office, as he repeatedly reminded us.
    , @Jasper Been
    Your points are salient. 4Th dumbass' comment below is moronic.
    , @Diversity Heretic
    I was with you until the last sentence. (I'm Trump supporter/contributor who loathes Hillary.) Trump has a lot of things going against him and you outline them very well. But who, realistically, would have been better than Donald Trump? There were seventeen Republican candidates who started, including senators, former governors, etc. Trump beat them all. I see no Magic Republican out there and Trump has shrugged off criticisms that would (admit it) make most of us give up and do something else, particularly if you're a 70-year old billionaire with a trophy wife.
  54. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Anonymous
    The guy who made the graphic has made other similar anti-Semitic graphics and tweets:

    https://lionoftheblogosphere.wordpress.com/2016/07/04/lion-was-right/

    In light of this, it doesn't seem insane at all to think that the intent of the graphic was anti-Semitic.

    Those two examples Lion Of The Blogosphere found are laughably weak. The Obama one seems to be mocking his “I, too, am a Jew.” statement. And Ruth Marcus’s nose was distorted, but so was the rest of her face.

    If those are the two worst examples of “anti-Semitism” this guy found out of the hundreds of images this Fishbonehead made, it’s pretty weak.

    Lion Of The Blogosphere sometimes just needs to admit when he’s wrong, and he should understand that he’s nowhere near as clever as he thinks he is. He never was.

    Read More
  55. tbraton says:
    @dahoit
    Most blacks are already in the tank for the hell bitch.Haven't you noticed the obvious antisemitism expressed by them?Sanders could have been a contender,but for those knuckleheads.

    Well, those are blacks who actually voted in primaries. I still think, come November, the total number of blacks who vote will be down considerably from 2008 and 2012 because a black will not be on the ticket and the percentage voting Republican (for Trump) will be higher than in 2008 and 2012, largely for the same reason plus the special appeal of Trump.

    BTW most people, black or white, don’t vote in primaries. In fact, I voted in the first primary in my life this past March when I voted for Trump in the Florida primary. When I moved to Florida 25+ years ago, I immediately registered as an Independent, which, under Florida law, does not permit you to vote in either party’s closed primary. I changed my registration to Republican last fall just so I could vote for Trump in the Florida Republican primary and against Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush. Two things stood out for me this past primary season. Most people don’t bother watching the televised debates, yet this past year the ratings for the Republican debates were shattered. Turnout in the Republican primaries were generally substantially higher than in prior years. That’s why I still look forward to Trump winning the election in November.

    Read More
    • Replies: @martin_2
    Usually , when there is a surge in the number of people voting and the general population begin to engage in the political process then this is regarded by the political establishment and the establishment media as a "good thing". It is supposed to be great when ordinary people start to be enthusiastic about politics.

    But because the man who has energised people is on the Right and he rejects the establishment assumptions about what politicians are allowed to say, and he gives voice to ordinary people's concerns about immigration and trade, then this revival of interest in politics by the general population is suddenly a "bad thing".
  56. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:
    @NOTA
    Trump has surprised me with his success so far, but I think he's got a hell of an uphill climb to become president, much more than a more conventional candidate would.

    From what has been reported, he has almost no organization in place to get out the vote, and his campaign appears not to be too well organized. He has little support from the party organization--which make sense, since he's an insurgent candidate trying to change the direction of the party--but that also costs him support and help from the one group of insider experts who would be helping almost any other candidate, even someone they all despised like Cruz. He is one of the few people with negatives (numbers of people who start out not being able to stand him) as high as Hillary's. He's got most of the media stacked against him, partly because of his message, but also heavily because of his style. (He's exerted a lot of control over them, because he reliably brings ratings and they'd sell their own mothers for ratings. But they still hate him.). He has a large fraction of the talking head/ideologue class opposing him--not surprising, given his positions and style, but another weapon just about any other candidate would have had, and that he lacks.

    Now, maybe Trump can overcome all this. He surprised me (and lots of experts whose opinions are worth much more than mine) in the primaries. But it looks to me like he has at least as steep an uphill climb from here to the White House. Against as weak a candidate as Hillary, I think a lot of candidates would have had a better chance.

    Trump has surprised me with his success so far, but I think he’s got a hell of an uphill climb to become president, much more than a more conventional candidate would.

    There is your mistake right there.

    Hillary is the conventional, corrupt, candidate. I am glad you like her.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NOTA
    It's a really big mistake to confuse what I predict will happen with what I want to happen. This is exactly the mental error that makes correct prediction of (say) how well the latest scheme to close the black/white achievement gap perilous--to predict that it won't work is somehow like saying you want the scheme to fail.

    This is a systematic way of blinding yourself.
  57. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Chrisnonymous
    No, it's the opposite. The Hitler reason is said aloud often and loudly, while the real reasons (eg, peculiarly Jewish virtue signaling, etc) are never voiced.

    “The Hitler reason is said aloud often and loudly,”

    Fun article in The Federalist today, about how people don’t feel free to scream about Hitler enough.

    http://thefederalist.com/2016/07/05/elie-wiesel-is-gone-but-his-message-is-forever/

    Read More
  58. @Anonymous
    It wasn't a Star of David (with the two interlocking triangles) but if it was then that would be fairly accurate in terms of donations to the Democrat Party being absolutely dominated by Jews.

    The hissy fit is about the star being overlaid on the campaign cash photo. But Democrat campaign cash is Jewish cash. That is reality. Deal with it.

    In Jeff Connaughton’s excellent “Why Wall Street Always Wins”, the author, who was a senior aide to Joe Biden for several decades, blithely explains that whenever Biden needed money, he would contact his network of Jewish lawyers for contributions. He explains this matter of factly because he is out of the game. I thought it was hilarious.

    http://amzn.to/29jbttq

    The book overall is a great read to contrast what happens when a senator is allowed to vote freely. Biden’s last two years were served by Ted Kaufman, who went hard after Wall Street after the housing debacle since he had no intention of running again in 2010. It stood in stark contrast to the wishy-washy Biden, who was always failed to balance the needs of the country with his own aims for higher office.

    Read More
  59. Leftist conservative [AKA "corporate slave wandering down fluorescent hallway"] says: • Website

    seeing as how the origin of the graphic (and not just the star, the entire graphic) lay in a site/forum known for extreme political incorrectness, it would seem that trump prolly has several ‘moles for pay’ in his org

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Well, either that, or someone on that site tweeted it to someone else, who tweeted it to someone else, who tweeted it it someone else, who tweeted it to Trump.
  60. Jack D says:
    @IHTG
    https://twitter.com/hgfrog/status/749789926313558017

    Was the standard Paint swastika also used in the other tweet?

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Aren't genuine anti-Semites typically PRO-swastika? Since he morphed Hillary Clinton's head into a swastika shape, and he apparently doesn't like Hillary Clinton, wouldn't that lead you to believe that he's actually ANTI-swastika, and thus, this whole thing is a load of BS?
    , @tomv
    You mean the swastika made up of Hillary's faces? Let's see

    Using a six-pointed star against "Crooked Hillary" (supposedly implying that she's a Jewish tool) = Antisemitism!
    Using a swastika against "Crooked Hillary" (overtly implying that she's a Nazi) = Antisemitism!

    But hold a draw Muhammed contest, and that's just free speech.
    , @candid_observer
    I don't even get how the swastika image is supposed to show how anti-Semitic its author must be.

    The swastika is filled with images of Hillary. The obvious inference is that the author thinks that Hillary is like a Nazi, and that, in his view, being a Nazi is a bad thing, as is Hillary.

    How this becomes "anti-Semitic" escapes me entirely. I thought the idea was that the rabidly anti-Semitic right admired the anti-Semitic Nazis. So why is he using a swastika to ridicule Hillary? Isn't his obvious contempt for the Nazis a sign that he disapproves of their attitudes, rather than buys into them?
  61. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Leftist conservative
    seeing as how the origin of the graphic (and not just the star, the entire graphic) lay in a site/forum known for extreme political incorrectness, it would seem that trump prolly has several 'moles for pay' in his org

    Well, either that, or someone on that site tweeted it to someone else, who tweeted it to someone else, who tweeted it it someone else, who tweeted it to Trump.

    Read More
  62. tbraton says:
    @NOTA
    Trump has surprised me with his success so far, but I think he's got a hell of an uphill climb to become president, much more than a more conventional candidate would.

    From what has been reported, he has almost no organization in place to get out the vote, and his campaign appears not to be too well organized. He has little support from the party organization--which make sense, since he's an insurgent candidate trying to change the direction of the party--but that also costs him support and help from the one group of insider experts who would be helping almost any other candidate, even someone they all despised like Cruz. He is one of the few people with negatives (numbers of people who start out not being able to stand him) as high as Hillary's. He's got most of the media stacked against him, partly because of his message, but also heavily because of his style. (He's exerted a lot of control over them, because he reliably brings ratings and they'd sell their own mothers for ratings. But they still hate him.). He has a large fraction of the talking head/ideologue class opposing him--not surprising, given his positions and style, but another weapon just about any other candidate would have had, and that he lacks.

    Now, maybe Trump can overcome all this. He surprised me (and lots of experts whose opinions are worth much more than mine) in the primaries. But it looks to me like he has at least as steep an uphill climb from here to the White House. Against as weak a candidate as Hillary, I think a lot of candidates would have had a better chance.

    “Against as weak a candidate as Hillary, I think a lot of candidates would have had a better chance.”

    Well, I happen to think you are wrong. I can’t think of another candidate who would even have a chance against Hillary, as weak as she is. There is a reason why they all did so miserably against Trump in the Republican primaries. The candidate who polled best against Hillary in the spring, John Kasich, did poorly in the primaries, winning only his home state of Ohio, where he is the sitting governor, by less than impressive margin against Trump, 46% to 37%, as I recall, and not coming close in the others. He was less than impressive in the debates, despite the fact that his father worked for the post office, as he repeatedly reminded us.

    Read More
  63. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Jack D
    Was the standard Paint swastika also used in the other tweet?

    Aren’t genuine anti-Semites typically PRO-swastika? Since he morphed Hillary Clinton’s head into a swastika shape, and he apparently doesn’t like Hillary Clinton, wouldn’t that lead you to believe that he’s actually ANTI-swastika, and thus, this whole thing is a load of BS?

    Read More
  64. Pericles says:

    Comparing the red six pointed star tweet with the violence in San Jose, it seems far more dangerous to be a Trump supporter today than a Jew.

    Read More
  65. BB753 says:

    Wanna bet Trump has topless pictures of Hillary cavorting with nude Huma? Perhaps he’s saving them for later.

    Read More
  66. tomv says:
    @Jack D
    Was the standard Paint swastika also used in the other tweet?

    You mean the swastika made up of Hillary’s faces? Let’s see

    Using a six-pointed star against “Crooked Hillary” (supposedly implying that she’s a Jewish tool) = Antisemitism!
    Using a swastika against “Crooked Hillary” (overtly implying that she’s a Nazi) = Antisemitism!

    But hold a draw Muhammed contest, and that’s just free speech.

    Read More
  67. AndrewR says:
    @Broski

    Or then again, maybe Trump is justing winging it like everything else?

     

    Perhaps. On the other hand, Trump's only serious error in the campaign thus far, as reflected by poll numbers, was the "Mexican judge" episode. Even that may have been test marketing--just how fervent is the anti-immigrant (i.e., mainly anti-Hispanic) sentiment in the country? Indeed, if he had focused on the judge's membership in a group with "la raza" in its name during that 6 minute interview, rather than repeatedly calling the guy a "Mexican," it may have come out much better for him.

    His error with that was backing down instead it of pointing to Sotomayor as a clear example of leftist hypocrisy. He should have said “I’ll apologize for my comment as soon as the anti-white “wise Latina” Sotomayor resigns from the court whose reputation she has permanently destroyed.”

    Read More
  68. @NOTA
    Trump has surprised me with his success so far, but I think he's got a hell of an uphill climb to become president, much more than a more conventional candidate would.

    From what has been reported, he has almost no organization in place to get out the vote, and his campaign appears not to be too well organized. He has little support from the party organization--which make sense, since he's an insurgent candidate trying to change the direction of the party--but that also costs him support and help from the one group of insider experts who would be helping almost any other candidate, even someone they all despised like Cruz. He is one of the few people with negatives (numbers of people who start out not being able to stand him) as high as Hillary's. He's got most of the media stacked against him, partly because of his message, but also heavily because of his style. (He's exerted a lot of control over them, because he reliably brings ratings and they'd sell their own mothers for ratings. But they still hate him.). He has a large fraction of the talking head/ideologue class opposing him--not surprising, given his positions and style, but another weapon just about any other candidate would have had, and that he lacks.

    Now, maybe Trump can overcome all this. He surprised me (and lots of experts whose opinions are worth much more than mine) in the primaries. But it looks to me like he has at least as steep an uphill climb from here to the White House. Against as weak a candidate as Hillary, I think a lot of candidates would have had a better chance.

    Your points are salient. 4Th dumbass’ comment below is moronic.

    Read More
  69. rod1963 says:

    For example, it appears to be widely assumed that Trump, like the little child in Hans Christian Andersen’s The Emperor’s New Clothes, could blurt out that, say, the reason blacks get in trouble with the police so much is because they murder people at seven to eight times the rate of whites. Or Trump could mention the highly relevant fact that Jews, despite being only one-fiftieth of the population, make up one-third or more of the Forbes 400.

    Why should he as there is no real gain, just lots of downside. It won’t change minds or opinions as the people who notice the ethnic and economic situation already are aware of them. The others who aren’t, are well, like Goofy they prefer not to be aware and talking to them about these things would only anger them.

    Read More
  70. @NOTA
    Trump has surprised me with his success so far, but I think he's got a hell of an uphill climb to become president, much more than a more conventional candidate would.

    From what has been reported, he has almost no organization in place to get out the vote, and his campaign appears not to be too well organized. He has little support from the party organization--which make sense, since he's an insurgent candidate trying to change the direction of the party--but that also costs him support and help from the one group of insider experts who would be helping almost any other candidate, even someone they all despised like Cruz. He is one of the few people with negatives (numbers of people who start out not being able to stand him) as high as Hillary's. He's got most of the media stacked against him, partly because of his message, but also heavily because of his style. (He's exerted a lot of control over them, because he reliably brings ratings and they'd sell their own mothers for ratings. But they still hate him.). He has a large fraction of the talking head/ideologue class opposing him--not surprising, given his positions and style, but another weapon just about any other candidate would have had, and that he lacks.

    Now, maybe Trump can overcome all this. He surprised me (and lots of experts whose opinions are worth much more than mine) in the primaries. But it looks to me like he has at least as steep an uphill climb from here to the White House. Against as weak a candidate as Hillary, I think a lot of candidates would have had a better chance.

    I was with you until the last sentence. (I’m Trump supporter/contributor who loathes Hillary.) Trump has a lot of things going against him and you outline them very well. But who, realistically, would have been better than Donald Trump? There were seventeen Republican candidates who started, including senators, former governors, etc. Trump beat them all. I see no Magic Republican out there and Trump has shrugged off criticisms that would (admit it) make most of us give up and do something else, particularly if you’re a 70-year old billionaire with a trophy wife.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NOTA
    Yeah, the field this year was pretty weak. Bush or Rubio would have had the wholehearted support of the party apparatchiks and think tank guys, and they'd have had a professional organization of consultants doing all the standard stuff. Cruz would have had less party support, but the ideologues would have loved him. But they'd also have had all their negatives--the taint of the Bush name, Jeb and Marco's intellectual lightness, Cruz's funny looks and legendary unlikeability.
  71. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Glaivester
    On the other hand, Scott Adams has suggested that Trump's seemingly random actions are actually pretty strategic if you understand persuasion techniques. Whether he is just really good at "winging it" or whether he is planning everything but making it look random, I don't know.
    Read More
  72. @Jack D
    Was the standard Paint swastika also used in the other tweet?

    I don’t even get how the swastika image is supposed to show how anti-Semitic its author must be.

    The swastika is filled with images of Hillary. The obvious inference is that the author thinks that Hillary is like a Nazi, and that, in his view, being a Nazi is a bad thing, as is Hillary.

    How this becomes “anti-Semitic” escapes me entirely. I thought the idea was that the rabidly anti-Semitic right admired the anti-Semitic Nazis. So why is he using a swastika to ridicule Hillary? Isn’t his obvious contempt for the Nazis a sign that he disapproves of their attitudes, rather than buys into them?

    Read More
  73. @Ed
    Seems like a silly cross to die on when that wasn't his intent. Let the media look stupid by obsessing over it even after he's taken it down. The man's grandkids are being raised Jewish. One of his most trusted advisors is his orthodox Jewish son-in-law, yet the pathetic media and GOPe shills wants us to believe he's anti-Semetic, ok.

    He’s objectively anti-semitic. That’s when you advocate policies harmful to Jews without necessarily wishing harm to Jews. For Jews – with people scattered across the world in a hundred different countries – freedom of movement is very, very important (not least because it allows them to flee persecution at short notice.) Any politican who advocates border control/immigration reduction will therefore face concerted Jewish opposition. He’ll be called an anti-semite even if he has never breathed a word of hostility towards Jews, because, in a away, he is - he just doesn’t realize it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    He’s objectively anti-semitic.

    There is no such thing. A policy that that harms Jews incidentally is not anti-Semitic. It has to be intentional and directed against Jews because they are Jews.
    , @iffen
    He’s objectively anti-semitic.

    There is no such thing. A policy that that harms Jews incidentally is not anti-Semitic. It has to be intentional and directed against Jews because they are Jews.
    , @Lot

    For Jews – with people scattered across the world in a hundred different countries – freedom of movement is very, very important
     
    A majority of British Jews voted for Brexit, which will soon restrict their ability to live/work/migrate within the EU.
    , @Jenner Ickham Errican

    He’s objectively anti-semitic. That’s when you advocate policies harmful to Jews without necessarily wishing harm to Jews.
     
    Of course, your formulation can go both ways:

    Pro-weak-borders diaspora Jews are objectively anti-(white)gentile. That’s when they advocate policies harmful to gentiles without necessarily wishing harm to gentiles.

    In the zero-sum game of immigration and invasion (do we have a land for our people or not), the formula is simple: who/whom?

    You were coy in your posts, technically only parsing semantics . . .

    Here’s what I want to know. On the topic of borders, who are you anti-?
    , @Anonymous
    'Families of Jewish refugees who fled the Nazis want to leave UK for Germany after Brexit'
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-german-citizenship-jewish-refugees-nazis-freedom-of-movement-a7119541.html
    , @ben tillman

    He’s objectively anti-semitic. That’s when you advocate policies harmful to Jews without necessarily wishing harm to Jews. For Jews – with people scattered across the world in a hundred different countries – freedom of movement is very, very important (not least because it allows them to flee persecution at short notice.) Any politican who advocates border control/immigration reduction will therefore face concerted Jewish opposition. He’ll be called an anti-semite even if he has never breathed a word of hostility towards Jews, because, in a away, he is - he just doesn’t realize it.
     
    I agree with you. "Anti-semitism", as the term is used by you and many other Jews, means rejection of the notion that, in all conflicts of interest between the Jewish community and others, one must always take the side of the Jews.
  74. iffen says:
    @Ye Antient Oliphant
    He's objectively anti-semitic. That's when you advocate policies harmful to Jews without necessarily wishing harm to Jews. For Jews - with people scattered across the world in a hundred different countries - freedom of movement is very, very important (not least because it allows them to flee persecution at short notice.) Any politican who advocates border control/immigration reduction will therefore face concerted Jewish opposition. He'll be called an anti-semite even if he has never breathed a word of hostility towards Jews, because, in a away, he is - he just doesn't realize it.

    He’s objectively anti-semitic.

    There is no such thing. A policy that that harms Jews incidentally is not anti-Semitic. It has to be intentional and directed against Jews because they are Jews.

    Read More
  75. @AndrewR
    His error with that was backing down instead it of pointing to Sotomayor as a clear example of leftist hypocrisy. He should have said "I'll apologize for my comment as soon as the anti-white "wise Latina" Sotomayor resigns from the court whose reputation she has permanently destroyed."

    Never apologize. Change the subject.

    Read More
  76. iffen says:
    @Ye Antient Oliphant
    He's objectively anti-semitic. That's when you advocate policies harmful to Jews without necessarily wishing harm to Jews. For Jews - with people scattered across the world in a hundred different countries - freedom of movement is very, very important (not least because it allows them to flee persecution at short notice.) Any politican who advocates border control/immigration reduction will therefore face concerted Jewish opposition. He'll be called an anti-semite even if he has never breathed a word of hostility towards Jews, because, in a away, he is - he just doesn't realize it.

    He’s objectively anti-semitic.

    There is no such thing. A policy that that harms Jews incidentally is not anti-Semitic. It has to be intentional and directed against Jews because they are Jews.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ye Antient Oliphant
    No, it's a real phenomenon. This is why everybody rolls their eyes when they hear "but some of my best friends are Jewish..." It's perfectly possible to like Jews as individuals while advocating policies that harm them as a community. Objective anti-semitism.
  77. @iffen
    He’s objectively anti-semitic.

    There is no such thing. A policy that that harms Jews incidentally is not anti-Semitic. It has to be intentional and directed against Jews because they are Jews.

    No, it’s a real phenomenon. This is why everybody rolls their eyes when they hear “but some of my best friends are Jewish…” It’s perfectly possible to like Jews as individuals while advocating policies that harm them as a community. Objective anti-semitism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson
    You must be a troll. If so, you ought to be congratulated.

    If not, your invidious musings demonstrate a profound stupidity. Your absurd position will create more genuine anti-Semitism than a thousand David Dukes.
    , @iffen
    No, it’s a real phenomenon.

    No, it’s something you made up. You are trying to create some sort of “disparate impact” principle for Jews. The action has to be consciously and willfully directed at Jews.

    Let’s say that after the Revolution, it is decided that all the criminal banksters and blood-sucking financiers are to be hung. This would hit the Jewish community harder than, say, the Mennonite community. All the 88s (like the ones here at UR) will be yelling, “Yes! Yes! Hang the bergs and steins twice!” The hangings would not be anti-Semitic.

    This is why everybody rolls their eyes when they hear “but some of my best friends are Jewish…”

    All this means is that the speaker is considering the person as an individual. It does not mean that the speaker is giving up any prejudices or stereotypes. The only people who roll their eyes are the ones who “think” that they are in “the know” and think they have heard some sort of major faux pas.
  78. anon says: • Disclaimer

    I hate to beat this into the ground any more than it already has been, but doesn’t anyone find it strange that there was an actual Jewish man running for president in this election, but apparently FishBoneHead, a supposedly raging anti-Semite, didn’t find that to be worthy of comment?

    Read More
  79. @Ye Antient Oliphant
    No, it's a real phenomenon. This is why everybody rolls their eyes when they hear "but some of my best friends are Jewish..." It's perfectly possible to like Jews as individuals while advocating policies that harm them as a community. Objective anti-semitism.

    You must be a troll. If so, you ought to be congratulated.

    If not, your invidious musings demonstrate a profound stupidity. Your absurd position will create more genuine anti-Semitism than a thousand David Dukes.

    Read More
  80. @tbraton
    "Against as weak a candidate as Hillary, I think a lot of candidates would have had a better chance."

    Well, I happen to think you are wrong. I can't think of another candidate who would even have a chance against Hillary, as weak as she is. There is a reason why they all did so miserably against Trump in the Republican primaries. The candidate who polled best against Hillary in the spring, John Kasich, did poorly in the primaries, winning only his home state of Ohio, where he is the sitting governor, by less than impressive margin against Trump, 46% to 37%, as I recall, and not coming close in the others. He was less than impressive in the debates, despite the fact that his father worked for the post office, as he repeatedly reminded us.

    Agree. (Damned token limit).

    Read More
  81. Lot says:
    @The most deplorable one

    Meanwhile, in the depths of Twitter, a small number of individuals with extravagant haircuts tweet agreement with the Times; only, they assert that it’s not deplorable, it’s awesome that Trump is really a secret Nazi.
     
    Are you referring to Milo Yiannopolous?

    http://yiannopoulos.net/

    No, the guy who runs DailyStormer and had a faux-hawk.

    Milo was raised Christian and claims to be partly ethnically Jewish.

    Read More
  82. Lot says:
    @Ye Antient Oliphant
    He's objectively anti-semitic. That's when you advocate policies harmful to Jews without necessarily wishing harm to Jews. For Jews - with people scattered across the world in a hundred different countries - freedom of movement is very, very important (not least because it allows them to flee persecution at short notice.) Any politican who advocates border control/immigration reduction will therefore face concerted Jewish opposition. He'll be called an anti-semite even if he has never breathed a word of hostility towards Jews, because, in a away, he is - he just doesn't realize it.

    For Jews – with people scattered across the world in a hundred different countries – freedom of movement is very, very important

    A majority of British Jews voted for Brexit, which will soon restrict their ability to live/work/migrate within the EU.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    "Brexit poll: Jews voted 2-1 to remain in EU
    Twice as many British Jews voted to remain in the European Union than those who backed the Brexit, according to a new survey."

    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/214511
  83. “In reality, though, Trump’s general worldview appears to be that of a typical New Yorker, only minus the ostentatious virtue signaling.”

    Candidates with “the worldview of a typical New Yorker” have been ballot box poison since Samuel Tilden.

    Read More
  84. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Diversity gets you more stars that cannot be drawn and names that cannot be spoken! What fun to live in a minefield!

    Read More
    • Replies: @tbraton
    "Diversity gets you more stars that cannot be drawn "

    You inadvertently touched on one way Trump could have avoided this very-serious anti-Semitism brouhaha. He should have simply added two more points to the six-pointed star, and we wouldn't have heard a word of protest. See https://www.allmodern.com/Safavieh-Dhurries-Black-Area-Rug-FV43534.html Unless an eight-pointed star has a significance in Judaism that I am not aware of, such as the symbol of an advanced class in Kabbalah.
  85. @Ye Antient Oliphant
    He's objectively anti-semitic. That's when you advocate policies harmful to Jews without necessarily wishing harm to Jews. For Jews - with people scattered across the world in a hundred different countries - freedom of movement is very, very important (not least because it allows them to flee persecution at short notice.) Any politican who advocates border control/immigration reduction will therefore face concerted Jewish opposition. He'll be called an anti-semite even if he has never breathed a word of hostility towards Jews, because, in a away, he is - he just doesn't realize it.

    He’s objectively anti-semitic. That’s when you advocate policies harmful to Jews without necessarily wishing harm to Jews.

    Of course, your formulation can go both ways:

    Pro-weak-borders diaspora Jews are objectively anti-(white)gentile. That’s when they advocate policies harmful to gentiles without necessarily wishing harm to gentiles.

    In the zero-sum game of immigration and invasion (do we have a land for our people or not), the formula is simple: who/whom?

    You were coy in your posts, technically only parsing semantics . . .

    Here’s what I want to know. On the topic of borders, who are you anti-?

    Read More
  86. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Lot

    For Jews – with people scattered across the world in a hundred different countries – freedom of movement is very, very important
     
    A majority of British Jews voted for Brexit, which will soon restrict their ability to live/work/migrate within the EU.

    “Brexit poll: Jews voted 2-1 to remain in EU
    Twice as many British Jews voted to remain in the European Union than those who backed the Brexit, according to a new survey.”

    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/214511

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome


    Twice as many British Jews voted to remain in the European Union than those who backed the Brexit

     

    Hmm...

    Haaretz.com:


    Trump, Brexit, ISIS and the Unmistakable Stench of the 1930s
    read more: http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/.premium-1.727474

    Though Karl Marx may have nailed it when he said that history comes first as tragedy and then as farce.
    read more: http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/.premium-1.727474

     

    Does thot mean that they're Nazis, or does it mean that Haaretz is anti-semitic?
  87. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Ye Antient Oliphant
    He's objectively anti-semitic. That's when you advocate policies harmful to Jews without necessarily wishing harm to Jews. For Jews - with people scattered across the world in a hundred different countries - freedom of movement is very, very important (not least because it allows them to flee persecution at short notice.) Any politican who advocates border control/immigration reduction will therefore face concerted Jewish opposition. He'll be called an anti-semite even if he has never breathed a word of hostility towards Jews, because, in a away, he is - he just doesn't realize it.

    ‘Families of Jewish refugees who fled the Nazis want to leave UK for Germany after Brexit’

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-german-citizenship-jewish-refugees-nazis-freedom-of-movement-a7119541.html

    Read More
  88. meh says:

    “This perspective helps explain much of the otherwise hallucinatory rhetoric about what Trump supposedly believes. We are constantly told by both the mainstream media and by a handful of showboating right-wing extremists that Trump must, deep in his heart, support fascism, anti-Semitism, and the Ku Klux Klan.”

    “Meanwhile, in the depths of Twitter, a small number of individuals with extravagant haircuts tweet agreement with the Times; only, they assert that it’s not deplorable, it’s awesome that Trump is really a secret Nazi.”

    The fashy haircuts on Twitter, /pol/, The Daily Stormer, TheRightStuff.biz, etc., don’t think that Trump is an anti-semite; they don’t think that Trump a secret white nationalist or in any sense “one of them”. They are engaged in gaslighting the left and the SJWs by “agreeing” with them and engaging in ironic memes that fly right over the heads of the MSM shitlibs. Surely you don’t think people referring to God Emperor Trump (from the Warhammer games) are being totally serious?

    They agree with you, Steve Sailer, that Trump is basically a “common sense” civic nationalist. They see this as an opportunity to use Trump to shift the Overton Window and to break out of our current free-speech-strangling cultural marxist straightjacket. If Trump loses, they still win. And if Trump wins, even better. The fact that the “nazi/racist/fascist/anti-semite/sexist” smears aren’t sticking to Trump is evidence the Overton Window is shifting. These words have been overused; so if the MSM keeps upping the ante, so much the better.

    This is pretty obvious if one listens to TRS (TheRightStuff.biz) podcasts like the Daily Shoah and Fash the Nation. They’ve been talking about this meme strategy since before Trump emerged as a front runner Presidential candidate last year. Indeed Trump has played right into their larger strategy which includes things like the cuckservative meme: Trump is the ideal tool to flush the anti-white, anti-nationalist cucks out of the false friend/judas goat “conservative” movement and replace them with something a bit more useful.

    You should know about all this Steve. Or are you just playing dumb and not getting into that level of granular detail in an article otherwise aimed at normies?

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    fact that the “nazi/racist/fascist/anti-semite/sexist” smears aren’t sticking to Trump

    Interesting and informative comment. You are flat out wrong, it is working and if the polls in FL, PA and OH tighten you will see that you ain't seen nothing yet.

  89. iffen says:
    @meh
    "This perspective helps explain much of the otherwise hallucinatory rhetoric about what Trump supposedly believes. We are constantly told by both the mainstream media and by a handful of showboating right-wing extremists that Trump must, deep in his heart, support fascism, anti-Semitism, and the Ku Klux Klan."

    "Meanwhile, in the depths of Twitter, a small number of individuals with extravagant haircuts tweet agreement with the Times; only, they assert that it’s not deplorable, it’s awesome that Trump is really a secret Nazi."

    The fashy haircuts on Twitter, /pol/, The Daily Stormer, TheRightStuff.biz, etc., don't think that Trump is an anti-semite; they don't think that Trump a secret white nationalist or in any sense "one of them". They are engaged in gaslighting the left and the SJWs by "agreeing" with them and engaging in ironic memes that fly right over the heads of the MSM shitlibs. Surely you don't think people referring to God Emperor Trump (from the Warhammer games) are being totally serious?

    They agree with you, Steve Sailer, that Trump is basically a "common sense" civic nationalist. They see this as an opportunity to use Trump to shift the Overton Window and to break out of our current free-speech-strangling cultural marxist straightjacket. If Trump loses, they still win. And if Trump wins, even better. The fact that the "nazi/racist/fascist/anti-semite/sexist" smears aren't sticking to Trump is evidence the Overton Window is shifting. These words have been overused; so if the MSM keeps upping the ante, so much the better.

    This is pretty obvious if one listens to TRS (TheRightStuff.biz) podcasts like the Daily Shoah and Fash the Nation. They've been talking about this meme strategy since before Trump emerged as a front runner Presidential candidate last year. Indeed Trump has played right into their larger strategy which includes things like the cuckservative meme: Trump is the ideal tool to flush the anti-white, anti-nationalist cucks out of the false friend/judas goat "conservative" movement and replace them with something a bit more useful.

    You should know about all this Steve. Or are you just playing dumb and not getting into that level of granular detail in an article otherwise aimed at normies?

    fact that the “nazi/racist/fascist/anti-semite/sexist” smears aren’t sticking to Trump

    Interesting and informative comment. You are flat out wrong, it is working and if the polls in FL, PA and OH tighten you will see that you ain’t seen nothing yet.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NOTA
    Even if the racist label sticks to Trump in the end, the over the top use of it (and similarly, the facist label) will probably weaken those labels' impact in the future, because they're being thrown around with such wild abandon now. There was a time when accusing an opponent of being a communist sympathizer had a lot fo impact. Later on, it became a kind of a joke, because it was such an effective hammer it got overused. One possible good outcome for the Trump candidacy, win or lose, is that the same thing starts happening wrt smearing your opponent as a racist--the smear gets overused so much that it loses its impact and starts becoming a joke. (What Republican candidate in the last several years hasn't been accused of being a racist?)
  90. iffen says:
    @Ye Antient Oliphant
    No, it's a real phenomenon. This is why everybody rolls their eyes when they hear "but some of my best friends are Jewish..." It's perfectly possible to like Jews as individuals while advocating policies that harm them as a community. Objective anti-semitism.

    No, it’s a real phenomenon.

    No, it’s something you made up. You are trying to create some sort of “disparate impact” principle for Jews. The action has to be consciously and willfully directed at Jews.

    Let’s say that after the Revolution, it is decided that all the criminal banksters and blood-sucking financiers are to be hung. This would hit the Jewish community harder than, say, the Mennonite community. All the 88s (like the ones here at UR) will be yelling, “Yes! Yes! Hang the bergs and steins twice!” The hangings would not be anti-Semitic.

    This is why everybody rolls their eyes when they hear “but some of my best friends are Jewish…”

    All this means is that the speaker is considering the person as an individual. It does not mean that the speaker is giving up any prejudices or stereotypes. The only people who roll their eyes are the ones who “think” that they are in “the know” and think they have heard some sort of major faux pas.

    Read More
  91. tbraton says:
    @anonymous
    Diversity gets you more stars that cannot be drawn and names that cannot be spoken! What fun to live in a minefield!

    “Diversity gets you more stars that cannot be drawn ”

    You inadvertently touched on one way Trump could have avoided this very-serious anti-Semitism brouhaha. He should have simply added two more points to the six-pointed star, and we wouldn’t have heard a word of protest. See https://www.allmodern.com/Safavieh-Dhurries-Black-Area-Rug-FV43534.html Unless an eight-pointed star has a significance in Judaism that I am not aware of, such as the symbol of an advanced class in Kabbalah.

    Read More
  92. NOTA says:
    @iffen
    fact that the “nazi/racist/fascist/anti-semite/sexist” smears aren’t sticking to Trump

    Interesting and informative comment. You are flat out wrong, it is working and if the polls in FL, PA and OH tighten you will see that you ain't seen nothing yet.

    Even if the racist label sticks to Trump in the end, the over the top use of it (and similarly, the facist label) will probably weaken those labels’ impact in the future, because they’re being thrown around with such wild abandon now. There was a time when accusing an opponent of being a communist sympathizer had a lot fo impact. Later on, it became a kind of a joke, because it was such an effective hammer it got overused. One possible good outcome for the Trump candidacy, win or lose, is that the same thing starts happening wrt smearing your opponent as a racist–the smear gets overused so much that it loses its impact and starts becoming a joke. (What Republican candidate in the last several years hasn’t been accused of being a racist?)

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    the over the top use of it (and similarly, the facist label) will probably weaken those labels’ impact in the future

    People keep saying this, but it hasn't happened yet. Maybe things will change and you will turn out to be right.
    , @Jim Don Bob
    I think racist has already passed its sell-by date. It has been thrown around so much, at everybody for the slightest thing, that none of its targets, me included, give a crap anymore. Not that I ever did. When everyone is a racist, then no one is.

    I know a couple of school teachers and they say the black kids pull out the racist card all the time; one said that a third grader did it to her. Both of them tell the kids to stick it. And they do.

    A good place to start in snuffing this crap out is for college presidents to tell the next group of whiners that they can either act like the adults they profess to be and follow the rules or they will be expelled. Then do it.
  93. iffen says:
    @NOTA
    Even if the racist label sticks to Trump in the end, the over the top use of it (and similarly, the facist label) will probably weaken those labels' impact in the future, because they're being thrown around with such wild abandon now. There was a time when accusing an opponent of being a communist sympathizer had a lot fo impact. Later on, it became a kind of a joke, because it was such an effective hammer it got overused. One possible good outcome for the Trump candidacy, win or lose, is that the same thing starts happening wrt smearing your opponent as a racist--the smear gets overused so much that it loses its impact and starts becoming a joke. (What Republican candidate in the last several years hasn't been accused of being a racist?)

    the over the top use of it (and similarly, the facist label) will probably weaken those labels’ impact in the future

    People keep saying this, but it hasn’t happened yet. Maybe things will change and you will turn out to be right.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ben tillman

    the over the top use of it (and similarly, the facist label) will probably weaken those labels’ impact in the future

    People keep saying this, but it hasn’t happened yet.
     
    Oh, it's happened, but the impact has been weakened by only, perhaps, 10-15%.
  94. @NOTA
    Even if the racist label sticks to Trump in the end, the over the top use of it (and similarly, the facist label) will probably weaken those labels' impact in the future, because they're being thrown around with such wild abandon now. There was a time when accusing an opponent of being a communist sympathizer had a lot fo impact. Later on, it became a kind of a joke, because it was such an effective hammer it got overused. One possible good outcome for the Trump candidacy, win or lose, is that the same thing starts happening wrt smearing your opponent as a racist--the smear gets overused so much that it loses its impact and starts becoming a joke. (What Republican candidate in the last several years hasn't been accused of being a racist?)

    I think racist has already passed its sell-by date. It has been thrown around so much, at everybody for the slightest thing, that none of its targets, me included, give a crap anymore. Not that I ever did. When everyone is a racist, then no one is.

    I know a couple of school teachers and they say the black kids pull out the racist card all the time; one said that a third grader did it to her. Both of them tell the kids to stick it. And they do.

    A good place to start in snuffing this crap out is for college presidents to tell the next group of whiners that they can either act like the adults they profess to be and follow the rules or they will be expelled. Then do it.

    Read More
  95. @Clyde

    I wonder what percentage of the military is black, especially the forces that do the actual fighting. I wonder what percentage of those who return in body bags are black. Probably a lot less than 100%.
     
    It is common knowledge that blacks serve in the supply lines not in the front lines. It is whites and Hispanics who engage the enemies and get injured or die. Lets give credit to these Hispanics for having a warrior instinct and patriotism. With blacks it is "I ain't got no quarrel with no Vietcong" plus the US military is into affirmative action promotions.

    “It is common knowledge that blacks serve in the supply lines not in the front lines.”

    One of my business school classmates had just left the SEAL’s before heading to graduate school. Once we were talking about what kind of guys end up in the SEAL’s and the subjects of blacks came up. He said there are virtually no black SEAL’s because “they can’t deal”. A lot of the training is just seeing how long you can go before you come unglued or otherwise collapse. For whatever reason, the blacks usually came unglued and DOR’d early (DOR = Drop on Request) in the training. They don’t do prolonged stress very well.

    Yes, I realize that’s SEAL’s not your basic infantry unit.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde
    Very useful and interesting insight into elite black psychology so.....thanks! I doubt many blacks even entered Navy Seal training. Macho elite Hispanics I can see doing it and succeeding.
  96. @Jack D
    So this was an own goal. Maybe it was caused by not having enough Jews around campaign HQ. Should have showed this to his son-in-law before retweeting - he would have seen the not-so-hidden message right way.

    Maybe he can use a noose next to appeal to the black vote. I'm going to "hang" Hillary out to dry! Nooses are associated with the hangman game, with the legal execution of war criminals, etc. and not just lynching, so no problem.

    “would have seen the not-so-hidden message right way”….”Nooses are associated with the hangman game, with the legal execution of war criminals, etc. and not just lynching, so no problem.”

    I find his unwillingness to cede symbols to various shrill professional-complainer groups refreshing. If Jews grow hysterical over a star or blacks grow hysterical over a picture of a noose, well that’s really their problem.

    Read More
  97. @Danindc
    Steve, there's a big difference between winging it and seeing what happens.....

    https://youtu.be/4xdqgzNNHn0

    This is the funniest movie ever made btw. By far.

    You know, I never had an interest in seeing this movie before. But that clip cracked me up. Will have to check it out.

    Read More
  98. @Anonymous
    "Brexit poll: Jews voted 2-1 to remain in EU
    Twice as many British Jews voted to remain in the European Union than those who backed the Brexit, according to a new survey."

    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/214511

    Twice as many British Jews voted to remain in the European Union than those who backed the Brexit

    Hmm…

    Haaretz.com:

    Trump, Brexit, ISIS and the Unmistakable Stench of the 1930s
    read more:
    http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/.premium-1.727474
    Though Karl Marx may have nailed it when he said that history comes first as tragedy and then as farce.
    read more: http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/.premium-1.727474

    Does thot mean that they’re Nazis, or does it mean that Haaretz is anti-semitic?

    Read More
  99. peterike says:
    @dahoit
    Lickspittle get your approval huh?Warrior instinct?How come we keep losing?
    The worst decision in American military history,giving citizenship to illegals for fighting bogus wars.What are we Rome?
    That and opening up the ranks to homos,trans and assorted weirdos.
    Yankee come home.

    Warrior instinct?How come we keep losing?

    Literally insane rules of engagement and cowardly leadership. We lose because we don’t fight to win. It’s really that simple.

    The worst decision in American military history,giving citizenship to illegals for fighting bogus wars.What are we Rome?

    Maybe not “the worst,” but a pretty damned terrible decision.

    That and opening up the ranks to homos,trans and assorted weirdos.

    Yup.

    Read More
  100. martin_2 says:
    @tbraton
    Well, those are blacks who actually voted in primaries. I still think, come November, the total number of blacks who vote will be down considerably from 2008 and 2012 because a black will not be on the ticket and the percentage voting Republican (for Trump) will be higher than in 2008 and 2012, largely for the same reason plus the special appeal of Trump.

    BTW most people, black or white, don't vote in primaries. In fact, I voted in the first primary in my life this past March when I voted for Trump in the Florida primary. When I moved to Florida 25+ years ago, I immediately registered as an Independent, which, under Florida law, does not permit you to vote in either party's closed primary. I changed my registration to Republican last fall just so I could vote for Trump in the Florida Republican primary and against Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush. Two things stood out for me this past primary season. Most people don't bother watching the televised debates, yet this past year the ratings for the Republican debates were shattered. Turnout in the Republican primaries were generally substantially higher than in prior years. That's why I still look forward to Trump winning the election in November.

    Usually , when there is a surge in the number of people voting and the general population begin to engage in the political process then this is regarded by the political establishment and the establishment media as a “good thing”. It is supposed to be great when ordinary people start to be enthusiastic about politics.

    But because the man who has energised people is on the Right and he rejects the establishment assumptions about what politicians are allowed to say, and he gives voice to ordinary people’s concerns about immigration and trade, then this revival of interest in politics by the general population is suddenly a “bad thing”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @tbraton
    "But because the man who has energised people is on the Right and he rejects the establishment assumptions about what politicians are allowed to say, and he gives voice to ordinary people’s concerns about immigration and trade, then this revival of interest in politics by the general population is suddenly a “bad thing”."

    Totally agree. I was listening to Trump tonight addressing a crowd in Ohio, and he made the point that Republican participation in the primaries was 60% more than in 2012 and the Democratic participation was down 20+%.
  101. NOTA says:
    @The most deplorable one

    Trump has surprised me with his success so far, but I think he’s got a hell of an uphill climb to become president, much more than a more conventional candidate would.
     
    There is your mistake right there.

    Hillary is the conventional, corrupt, candidate. I am glad you like her.

    It’s a really big mistake to confuse what I predict will happen with what I want to happen. This is exactly the mental error that makes correct prediction of (say) how well the latest scheme to close the black/white achievement gap perilous–to predict that it won’t work is somehow like saying you want the scheme to fail.

    This is a systematic way of blinding yourself.

    Read More
  102. NOTA says:
    @Diversity Heretic
    I was with you until the last sentence. (I'm Trump supporter/contributor who loathes Hillary.) Trump has a lot of things going against him and you outline them very well. But who, realistically, would have been better than Donald Trump? There were seventeen Republican candidates who started, including senators, former governors, etc. Trump beat them all. I see no Magic Republican out there and Trump has shrugged off criticisms that would (admit it) make most of us give up and do something else, particularly if you're a 70-year old billionaire with a trophy wife.

    Yeah, the field this year was pretty weak. Bush or Rubio would have had the wholehearted support of the party apparatchiks and think tank guys, and they’d have had a professional organization of consultants doing all the standard stuff. Cruz would have had less party support, but the ideologues would have loved him. But they’d also have had all their negatives–the taint of the Bush name, Jeb and Marco’s intellectual lightness, Cruz’s funny looks and legendary unlikeability.

    Read More
  103. tbraton says:
    @martin_2
    Usually , when there is a surge in the number of people voting and the general population begin to engage in the political process then this is regarded by the political establishment and the establishment media as a "good thing". It is supposed to be great when ordinary people start to be enthusiastic about politics.

    But because the man who has energised people is on the Right and he rejects the establishment assumptions about what politicians are allowed to say, and he gives voice to ordinary people's concerns about immigration and trade, then this revival of interest in politics by the general population is suddenly a "bad thing".

    “But because the man who has energised people is on the Right and he rejects the establishment assumptions about what politicians are allowed to say, and he gives voice to ordinary people’s concerns about immigration and trade, then this revival of interest in politics by the general population is suddenly a “bad thing”.”

    Totally agree. I was listening to Trump tonight addressing a crowd in Ohio, and he made the point that Republican participation in the primaries was 60% more than in 2012 and the Democratic participation was down 20+%.

    Read More
  104. @iffen
    the over the top use of it (and similarly, the facist label) will probably weaken those labels’ impact in the future

    People keep saying this, but it hasn't happened yet. Maybe things will change and you will turn out to be right.

    the over the top use of it (and similarly, the facist label) will probably weaken those labels’ impact in the future

    People keep saying this, but it hasn’t happened yet.

    Oh, it’s happened, but the impact has been weakened by only, perhaps, 10-15%.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    We can disagree; I don't see any evidence, in fact, it is becoming very clear that the presidential race will likely turn on the subject.

    Just in case you need to know, pitchfork, I am in favor of using racist and anti-Semitic where it is warranted, and just because it is used inappropriately as a political smear does not mean that there are no racists around.
  105. @Ye Antient Oliphant
    He's objectively anti-semitic. That's when you advocate policies harmful to Jews without necessarily wishing harm to Jews. For Jews - with people scattered across the world in a hundred different countries - freedom of movement is very, very important (not least because it allows them to flee persecution at short notice.) Any politican who advocates border control/immigration reduction will therefore face concerted Jewish opposition. He'll be called an anti-semite even if he has never breathed a word of hostility towards Jews, because, in a away, he is - he just doesn't realize it.

    He’s objectively anti-semitic. That’s when you advocate policies harmful to Jews without necessarily wishing harm to Jews. For Jews – with people scattered across the world in a hundred different countries – freedom of movement is very, very important (not least because it allows them to flee persecution at short notice.) Any politican who advocates border control/immigration reduction will therefore face concerted Jewish opposition. He’ll be called an anti-semite even if he has never breathed a word of hostility towards Jews, because, in a away, he is – he just doesn’t realize it.

    I agree with you. “Anti-semitism”, as the term is used by you and many other Jews, means rejection of the notion that, in all conflicts of interest between the Jewish community and others, one must always take the side of the Jews.

    Read More
  106. @iffen
    if it can keep Jews who are tempted to vote Trump

    The theme that Trump is a racist Nazi is not directed at Jews. It is directed at educated white women who are uncomfortable trying to sort through all sorts of racist and anti-Semitic babble and accusations.

    The theme that Trump is a racist Nazi is not directed at Jews. It is directed at educated white women who are uncomfortable trying to sort through all sorts of racist and anti-Semitic babble and accusations.

    Thank you iffen. I don’t know why the obvious is difficult for folks to grasp.

    Jews are smarter and more political than American whites. They have more or less the same demographic skews (male\female, married\single, religious\not) as whites, just shifted to the left about 30 points–from ethnic resentments to simply being in more of the parasitic rent-seeking niches (finance, lawyering, government, academia) that the Democrats represent. (I’d guess if you looked at say married with children, private sector employed engineers, going to synagogue\church the skew might be say only 20 points, maybe less.) But the key point is … they are more politically engaged and have made up their minds. Their true “undecideds” would be smaller percentage wise than whites and an absolutely minuscule piece of the electorate, making the difference in *no* state.

    The plain fact is this election will be decided middle class white women. Push comes to shove by middle class women in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida. And they are conformist and easily influenced by perceptions of someone not being respectable, being “rude” or God forbid being “racist”.

    We made a mistake giving the vote to women. It probably seemed like “the right thing to do” at the time. And it probably didn’t make any difference for quite a while. But our ancestors did not foresee the breakdown of sexual morality and marriage, and millions of young women essentially becoming brides of the super-state and voting against their male relatives. Nor how women’s innate conformism and desire of “nice”–easily manipulable by Orewellian media–becomes a cancer when the state and media are seized by a hostile elite that hates the nation’s people.

    The media are all in to strum white gentile women’s conformity with the “Trump’s not nice, not respectible, wild, radical, racist” refrain.

    Trump has to find a way to cut through this–on immigration basically–and make the case that he is the path of sanity and a better future for these women’s children (and that it’s Hillary and the Democrats who are actually radically altering America for the worse). Or … he’s dead.

    Read More
    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @BB753
    The cat is out of the bag. How do we take the vote back from women? Yet civilization hinges on keeping women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, where they belong.
  107. iffen says:
    @ben tillman

    the over the top use of it (and similarly, the facist label) will probably weaken those labels’ impact in the future

    People keep saying this, but it hasn’t happened yet.
     
    Oh, it's happened, but the impact has been weakened by only, perhaps, 10-15%.

    We can disagree; I don’t see any evidence, in fact, it is becoming very clear that the presidential race will likely turn on the subject.

    Just in case you need to know, pitchfork, I am in favor of using racist and anti-Semitic where it is warranted, and just because it is used inappropriately as a political smear does not mean that there are no racists around.

    Read More
  108. BB753 says:
    @AnotherDad

    The theme that Trump is a racist Nazi is not directed at Jews. It is directed at educated white women who are uncomfortable trying to sort through all sorts of racist and anti-Semitic babble and accusations.
     
    Thank you iffen. I don't know why the obvious is difficult for folks to grasp.

    Jews are smarter and more political than American whites. They have more or less the same demographic skews (male\female, married\single, religious\not) as whites, just shifted to the left about 30 points--from ethnic resentments to simply being in more of the parasitic rent-seeking niches (finance, lawyering, government, academia) that the Democrats represent. (I'd guess if you looked at say married with children, private sector employed engineers, going to synagogue\church the skew might be say only 20 points, maybe less.) But the key point is ... they are more politically engaged and have made up their minds. Their true "undecideds" would be smaller percentage wise than whites and an absolutely minuscule piece of the electorate, making the difference in *no* state.

    The plain fact is this election will be decided middle class white women. Push comes to shove by middle class women in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida. And they are conformist and easily influenced by perceptions of someone not being respectable, being "rude" or God forbid being "racist".

    We made a mistake giving the vote to women. It probably seemed like "the right thing to do" at the time. And it probably didn't make any difference for quite a while. But our ancestors did not foresee the breakdown of sexual morality and marriage, and millions of young women essentially becoming brides of the super-state and voting against their male relatives. Nor how women's innate conformism and desire of "nice"--easily manipulable by Orewellian media--becomes a cancer when the state and media are seized by a hostile elite that hates the nation's people.

    The media are all in to strum white gentile women's conformity with the "Trump's not nice, not respectible, wild, radical, racist" refrain.

    Trump has to find a way to cut through this--on immigration basically--and make the case that he is the path of sanity and a better future for these women's children (and that it's Hillary and the Democrats who are actually radically altering America for the worse). Or ... he's dead.

    The cat is out of the bag. How do we take the vote back from women? Yet civilization hinges on keeping women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, where they belong.

    Read More
  109. Clyde says:
    @William Badwhite
    "It is common knowledge that blacks serve in the supply lines not in the front lines."

    One of my business school classmates had just left the SEAL's before heading to graduate school. Once we were talking about what kind of guys end up in the SEAL's and the subjects of blacks came up. He said there are virtually no black SEAL's because "they can't deal". A lot of the training is just seeing how long you can go before you come unglued or otherwise collapse. For whatever reason, the blacks usually came unglued and DOR'd early (DOR = Drop on Request) in the training. They don't do prolonged stress very well.

    Yes, I realize that's SEAL's not your basic infantry unit.

    Very useful and interesting insight into elite black psychology so…..thanks! I doubt many blacks even entered Navy Seal training. Macho elite Hispanics I can see doing it and succeeding.

    Read More
    • Replies: @William Badwhite
    "I doubt many blacks even entered Navy Seal training"

    According to my classmate there were usually 4-5 blacks in each incoming class.
  110. @Clyde
    Very useful and interesting insight into elite black psychology so.....thanks! I doubt many blacks even entered Navy Seal training. Macho elite Hispanics I can see doing it and succeeding.

    “I doubt many blacks even entered Navy Seal training”

    According to my classmate there were usually 4-5 blacks in each incoming class.

    Read More

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation
Confederate Flag Day, State Capitol, Raleigh, N.C. -- March 3, 2007
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored