The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Hillary's Agenda for the American People: Disarm and Dilute
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the AP/Washington Post:

Clinton’s top priorities: Gun control and immigration reform. Could she deliver on either?
Anne Gearan and Paul Kane Article Last Updated: Monday, May 02, 2016 3:35am
Associated Press,

(c) 2016, The Washington Post.

With Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton’s campaign turning fully toward the general election, the candidate is speaking in increasingly strong terms about immediately tackling one of her party’s most challenging domestic policy goals: gun control.

Clinton says just as forcefully that immigration reform will be her top priority upon entering the White House.

Without a dramatic Democratic sweep of Congress, few Democrats or Republicans believe either of these giant promises has a chance in January. That puts Clinton in the somewhat tricky position of making promises that many doubt she could meet.

But the Clinton campaign believes that public opinion has shifted on these two nationally divisive issues, making them winners for her to talk about in the general election. There is even hope among some Democrats that if Donald Trump is the Republican nominee they could win enough seats in the House and Senate to put gun and immigration reform back on the table.

Privately, Clinton aides and allies are more circumspect, quietly prioritizing what is actually possible at the outset of a Clinton presidency – and which promises she would put on hold.

The campaign says there is no trade-off between immigration and gun control, and that she has not overpromised on either. There is plenty of time to decide what comes when, campaign chairman John Podesta said.

“That’s what the transition is for,” Podesta said, referring to the period between the election and the inauguration.

Clinton is campaigning as the candidate of continuity – preserving what Democrats generally see as President Obama’s gains and making changes on his domestic agenda only at the margins. She is also promising to fix and finish what he has left undone, and suggesting to different audiences that she could do so immediately.

Immigration reform, though anathema in the Republican presidential race, is still a better legislative bet than gun control, both Republicans and Democrats said. …

As a result, Clinton and her allies in and out of Congress are gradually building a legislative agenda that would focus on immigration issues in Congress while mostly relying on the executive power of the presidency to further gun restrictions that would have little chance of becoming law. …

She has been more specific about an overhaul of the immigration system at the outset of a Clinton presidency, promising to advance comprehensive reform that offers a path to full citizenship for illegal immigrants within her first 100 days.

“If Congress won’t act, I’ll defend President Obama’s executive actions and I’ll go even further to keep families together,” Clinton promised in January. “I’ll end family detention, close private immigrant detention centers and help more eligible people become naturalized.”

Clinton also has been mildly critical of Obama’s deportation program, promising to stop deportations of almost everyone, aside from violent criminals or terrorists. ….

Immigration and gun control are the issues she points to most frequently, and often with emotional stories and examples. …

Gun control and immigration met with interlocking fates early in Obama’s second term, when he and Vice President Joe Biden made a pitch for legislation strengthening background checks on gun purchases – and when the bipartisan “Gang of Eight” senators began work on a sweeping rewrite of immigration and border-security laws. …

Democrats ditched the gun legislation and pivoted to immigration reform. Two months later, the Senate approved the immigration overhaul on a bipartisan vote of 68 to 32. The legislation included a path to citizenship for some undocumented immigrants. It never went anywhere in the House. …

Clinton’s allies agree that immigration is more ripe for change, particularly if Republicans lose seats. But opposition remains fierce among the House’s more-conservative Republicans. Hopes for approving some version of that legislation in the House cratered two years ago when the sitting majority leader, Eric Cantor, R-Va., lost his primary contest to an underfunded, little-known professor whose main issue was Cantor’s support of legalizing undocumented children who were brought into the country illegally by their parents or relatives.

Ever since then, conservatives have vowed to thwart any effort by Clinton to move a sweeping immigration bill through a Republican-controlled House next year.

“The American people would have an absolute cow,” said Rep. Dave Brat, R-Va., who defeated Cantor, openly laughing at the idea, because in most Republican districts immigration is a “70 to 80 percent issue” toward opposing any leniency. “I mean, it’s not even in the ballpark.”

 
Hide 189 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. As a real conservative who is horrified by “America First” (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would’ve preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @AG Conservative

    Ehhh, perdon moi, but would you happen to have any Grey Poupon

    , @Jefferson
    @AG Conservative

    " In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice."

    What makes Hildabeast a Centrist and not a Left Winger? Hildabeast is not unpopular in Left Wing enclaves like Manhattan and Berkeley.

    , @TWS
    @AG Conservative

    Tiny sick duck,

    You should really stick with one moniker. Your writing style is too distinct to do anything else. You have reliably identifiable phrasing. Sock puppeting is a step backwards.

    You should work on humor for your larping. Try and find something funny about the situation or the people involved. Right now you come off as a disingenuous liar because you keep switching handles and pretending to be someone else. Also lying about who and what you are is just silly. Playing pretend on the internet is fun on reddit go do it there.

    Replies: @Jack Hanson

    , @Clyde
    @AG Conservative



    She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.
     
    You are a phony baloney liberal who never posted here before and will never post here again. At least under this handle. Good bye!
    , @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    @AG Conservative

    A real conservative but not necessarily a genuine American who puts the interests of Americans first before undocumenteds. Yes, populism or the will of what the majority of voters want and specifically have voted is definitely not a legitimate form of representative democracy.

    Oh drat, I can't tell if this post is legit or satire. Its echoing too many of the one dimensional talking points. For all their alleged incompetence, even the one percent donorist global class aren't this idiotic, imbecilic and half baked in public. They do tend to frame their arguments a wee bit more sophisticated than this drivel. Not by much, but they are a bit more sophisticated.

    You won't see Karl Rove or Jeb! making these blatant kinds of mistakes in public. Romney, of course, but then, he's desperate and past it.

    "47%" indeed.

    , @E. Harding
    @AG Conservative

    Nice trolling.

    , @Jack Hanson
    @AG Conservative

    Nice to see you here. Your work on Twitter is brilliant.

    , @Charles Erwin Wilson
    @AG Conservative

    Until about 6 months ago the trolls here were modestly intelligent and occasionally engaging. Those trolls have been replaced by drone trolls like this troll.

    Soros hasn't stopped throwing good money after bad, but if this troll is indicative of current trolldom and its payola you can understand the Soros-robber-baron's Scrooge-like miserliness.

    Trolls of Soros unite! All you have to lose is your pathetic allegiance to Soros the Nazi collaborator, Soros the greedy robber-baron, Soros the hater. Stop slaving away so that Soros can have his next billion $.

    , @Daniel H
    @AG Conservative

    >>She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    It is not her choice to make. She is if, for whatever reason, the ADL decides to hate her.

    Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky

    , @(((Owen)))
    @AG Conservative

    "She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite."

    You know what it says about you when you feel you need to go around defending your candidate against accusations of anti-Semitism? That's right.

    Hillary has called for bringing in even more Moslems than ever. They already outnumber Jews and breed at increasing rates. We all know where that leads. Hillary is just as anti-Israel and anti-Semitic as George Bush was.

    , @Realist
    @AG Conservative

    What a crock of bullshit.

    , @Ed
    @AG Conservative

    Lol I see what you are doing. For those that don't know "AG Conservative" is the handle of a prolific anti-Trump Twitter user.

    I think this poster is mocking him.

    Replies: @Bert

    , @The Alarmist
    @AG Conservative


    "As a real conservative who is horrified by “America First” (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general."
     
    So you prefer you war criminals to be experieced?
    , @Big Bill
    @AG Conservative

    AG, I respect your honesty, integrity and forthrightness. The time approaches when every white American will have to answer the question "Which Side Are You On?".

    Countless Americans faced the same moral choice in 1861. How hard it is for a man of honor to weigh competing loyalties when they compel him in opposing directions. What does he owe to his family, his clan, his race, his nation, his country? You have chosen your course. I wish you well.

    , @pyrrhus
    @AG Conservative

    Trolling, right?

    , @Divine Right
    @AG Conservative

    "As a real conservative who is horrified by “America First” (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general. I would’ve preferred Rubio."

    That perfectly encapsulates the idiocy of the #NeverTrump crowd. They might as well change their slogan to "tax cuts for billionaires and wars for everyone" because that pretty much sums up these vapid buffoons - and their candidate Hilary Clinton.

    , @Mr. Anon
    @AG Conservative

    "....Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite."

    Yeah, that's why she addressed Paul Fray, one of Bill's political advisors, as "you f**king jew bastard!".

    , @duncsbaby
    @AG Conservative

    I'm no fan of Trump, he is distasteful to the extreme as a person but gun against my head or not I will vote for him over Hillary.

    Replies: @duncsbaby

    , @The most deplorable one
    @AG Conservative

    The train is fine.

    Just tell me Trump will make the trains run on time!

    , @James Kabala
    @AG Conservative

    Sorry, everybody, but if you didn't figure out that this was fake, I don't know what to say (that is polite). Rarely can anyone write a parody perfect enough not to contain giveaways of the truth, and this one did not even come close to believability. ("Nazi slogan" and "dumb whites" were the most egregious giveaways here, but not the only ones.)

    Replies: @Glaivester

    , @Nico
    @AG Conservative

    FUD-spreading concern troll, Ted Cruz Conservatism, Inc. shill or parody of either of the above?

    Really, I can't tell, either...

    , @SFG
    @AG Conservative

    Troll.

    'America First' = 'Nazi slogan'--not exactly, it was by a guy who *kind of* supported them if you squint real hard, he probably didn't feel like going to war with them. I happen to think he was wrong in that particular case, and it may be a bit of a dogwhistle, but I think the basic concept of putting your own country first is sound.

    'Not an anti-Semite'? Yeah, Trump hates Jews so much he let his daughter marry one. If he's prejudiced against anyone it's Muslims, and I think he's faking that too.

  2. “Disarm and Dilute”

    Brilliant distillation. As someone who has been reading you at least a decade I feel you’re getting more seditious by the minute.

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @BenKenobi

    From one of my recent comments:

    People are Noticing, and they don’t like it. Trump is a sign of that. The record-breaking volume of gun buying is a sign of that. The progress curve of postwar mass immigration to the West has been described by the aphorism “gradually, then suddenly.” The same can describe the likely upcoming (violent) backlash. When the temple comes tumbling down, and all the ‘best people’ are wailing to the heavens, at least Steve can say: You were warned.

  3. So, we know now that her pollster, Joel Benenson, believes it will be a base election — women and Latinos.

    All indications are that Trump will be attempting to expand the map and win over independents. It will be interesting to see whose theory of the election is correct.

    • Replies: @Andrew
    @Nathan Hale

    "All indications are that Trump will be attempting to expand the map and win over independents. It will be interesting to see whose theory of the election is correct."

    Its interesting to consider the ISideWith map of Trump vs. Clinton to examine areas of relative strength.

    Trump shows up with a unique map. He shows disappointing but perhaps understandable weakness in CO, VA, MN, IL, ME, and WI, but he shows surprising strength in MI, OH, PA, NJ, DE and NH. In between these groupings are CT and IA.

    His weakest states are DC, WA, OR, CA, HI, MA, MD, and NY, while his strongest are not surprisingly LA, MS, AL, WY, SC, WV, ID, ND, TN, OK.

    http://www.isidewith.com/map/JNty/2016-presidential-election-donald-trump-vs-hillary-clinton#z4

    If you line the states up by the percentages shown for Trump vs. Clinton, the state projected to put Trump over the top is interestingly Utah, and it puts him over the top because of relative strength in MI, OH and ME Distrct 2.

    Following this map, I could see Trump losing VA, CO, WI, and MN but winning outright with 335 electoral votes by carrying much of the northeast and Michigan while holding most of the south and west.

    If the survey percentages were to actually turn out to be accurate (farfetched, I admit), Hilllary would suffer a 1980 style wipeout, carrying only CA, WA, MA and DC and losing 457 to 81.

    Replies: @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @Mike Sylwester, @LondonBob

  4. JimB says:

    The American people have already been diluted. More than half of school children in America now are non-white, and our high tax, job free, high cost of living economy guarantees whites will throttle back their reproduction even more. Gun control is clearly intended to disarm whites so they can never choose rebellion or separation. Progressives want miscegenation to finish off what is left of European people and Western Civilization. This will be accelerated by making sure section 8 housing is built in every remaining white community, and no white high school cheerleader goes uninseminated by a black football player.

    • Replies: @take me to funkytown
    @JimB

    Miscegenation also finishes off otherwise meaningful, masterful Black Lives... So that plan may have a hitch somewhere. In related news Eddie Murphy has really got on the wrong side of black-nationalist Zeitgeist:

    http://www.salon.com/2016/04/29/failing_the_duvernay_test_6_signs_your_on_screen_black_character_is_a_tired_trope/

    ^p.s. Good to see Nico back in the fray, I enjoyed that album she did w/ the Velvet Underground

    , @take me to funkytown
    @JimB

    Nico being too white a name for black seaworthiness, I'd buy Niquan or even Nicodemus though

    , @take me to funkytown
    @JimB

    "Masterful" typo for Matter-ful (mattering?), and also, what u said doesn't apply to Idaho, still

    , @Clyde
    @JimB


    The American people have already been diluted. More than half of school children in America now are non-white, and our high tax, job free, high cost of living economy guarantees whites will throttle back their reproduction even more. Gun control is clearly intended to disarm whites so they can never choose rebellion or separation. Progressives want miscegenation to finish off what is left of European people and Western Civilization. This will be accelerated by making sure section 8 housing is built in every remaining white community, and no white high school cheerleader goes uninseminated by a black football player.
     
    Some hyperbole but all true. Sad but true. Best case scenario is Trump gets elected and we go into a holding pattern with some reversals for the left such as building that damn wall! And how about mandated enforced E-verify and strict enforcement of no welfare for illegals. This will incentivize many to go back home. Enhanced roundups of illegal alien criminals with verified deportation. Active deportation of the one million illegals who have court ordered deportations but refused to comply. Refused to self-deport.

    If Trump gets the ball rolling with well publicized enforcements and deportations we might see millions of illegal aliens get (out) while the getting is good

    Replies: @JimB

  5. Why should she need to worry about who runs the House and Senate if she becomes President? She would have the pen and phone. All she needs to do is keep on doing what most Presidents have done. Just not enforce immigration law.

  6. @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    Ehhh, perdon moi, but would you happen to have any Grey Poupon

  7. Gosh this is terrible. Good thing she has such high negatives-and the GOP would never be so stupid as to choose an opponent for her with even higher negatives.

    • Replies: @Jonah
    @anony-mouse

    Ask yourself: from whence did the fetish of a candidates "negatives" come from?

    Is it a phrase you were enamored of 4 years ago? How about 16 years ago?

    You're being sold a bill of goods by a the lumpenpress. The imbecile factory that gave Trump no shot in the Republican primary season.

    Stop drinking New Coke. It sucks.

    People show up and vote for candidates they support and only show up to vote against candidates they loathe with the flaming intensity of a thousand suns.

    You aren't seeing polls that speak to that latter scenario. "Eh, I don't like the guy" doesn't mean the same thing as "I will show up to vote against that guy."

    Replies: @LondonBob, @Holden McGroin

  8. The Washington Post keeps using the term immigration reform to refer to a bill that doesn’t build a wall and deport all the illegal aliens. How odd.

  9. @JimB
    The American people have already been diluted. More than half of school children in America now are non-white, and our high tax, job free, high cost of living economy guarantees whites will throttle back their reproduction even more. Gun control is clearly intended to disarm whites so they can never choose rebellion or separation. Progressives want miscegenation to finish off what is left of European people and Western Civilization. This will be accelerated by making sure section 8 housing is built in every remaining white community, and no white high school cheerleader goes uninseminated by a black football player.

    Replies: @take me to funkytown, @take me to funkytown, @take me to funkytown, @Clyde

    Miscegenation also finishes off otherwise meaningful, masterful Black Lives… So that plan may have a hitch somewhere. In related news Eddie Murphy has really got on the wrong side of black-nationalist Zeitgeist:

    http://www.salon.com/2016/04/29/failing_the_duvernay_test_6_signs_your_on_screen_black_character_is_a_tired_trope/

    ^p.s. Good to see Nico back in the fray, I enjoyed that album she did w/ the Velvet Underground

  10. @JimB
    The American people have already been diluted. More than half of school children in America now are non-white, and our high tax, job free, high cost of living economy guarantees whites will throttle back their reproduction even more. Gun control is clearly intended to disarm whites so they can never choose rebellion or separation. Progressives want miscegenation to finish off what is left of European people and Western Civilization. This will be accelerated by making sure section 8 housing is built in every remaining white community, and no white high school cheerleader goes uninseminated by a black football player.

    Replies: @take me to funkytown, @take me to funkytown, @take me to funkytown, @Clyde

    Nico being too white a name for black seaworthiness, I’d buy Niquan or even Nicodemus though

  11. @JimB
    The American people have already been diluted. More than half of school children in America now are non-white, and our high tax, job free, high cost of living economy guarantees whites will throttle back their reproduction even more. Gun control is clearly intended to disarm whites so they can never choose rebellion or separation. Progressives want miscegenation to finish off what is left of European people and Western Civilization. This will be accelerated by making sure section 8 housing is built in every remaining white community, and no white high school cheerleader goes uninseminated by a black football player.

    Replies: @take me to funkytown, @take me to funkytown, @take me to funkytown, @Clyde

    “Masterful” typo for Matter-ful (mattering?), and also, what u said doesn’t apply to Idaho, still

  12. @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    ” In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice.”

    What makes Hildabeast a Centrist and not a Left Winger? Hildabeast is not unpopular in Left Wing enclaves like Manhattan and Berkeley.

  13. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    What happens if Trump doesn’t win Ind.? Cons United for Cruz-Kasich didn’t even last one day so could it end in a South American split? Will give media something new to talk about for the next month… A pathetically funny thing I saw was a “tweet” by feared guerilla warlord Pete Wehner denouncing Gov. Mike Pence over his endorsement that wasn’t really a fervent endorsement. Orwell would have really enjoyed this primary.

  14. TWS says:
    @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    Tiny sick duck,

    You should really stick with one moniker. Your writing style is too distinct to do anything else. You have reliably identifiable phrasing. Sock puppeting is a step backwards.

    You should work on humor for your larping. Try and find something funny about the situation or the people involved. Right now you come off as a disingenuous liar because you keep switching handles and pretending to be someone else. Also lying about who and what you are is just silly. Playing pretend on the internet is fun on reddit go do it there.

    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    @TWS

    No, this is @DemsRRealRacists from Twitter.

    He is a master at this sort of thing.

  15. @BenKenobi
    "Disarm and Dilute"

    Brilliant distillation. As someone who has been reading you at least a decade I feel you're getting more seditious by the minute.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

    From one of my recent comments:

    People are Noticing, and they don’t like it. Trump is a sign of that. The record-breaking volume of gun buying is a sign of that. The progress curve of postwar mass immigration to the West has been described by the aphorism “gradually, then suddenly.” The same can describe the likely upcoming (violent) backlash. When the temple comes tumbling down, and all the ‘best people’ are wailing to the heavens, at least Steve can say: You were warned.

    • Agree: BenKenobi
  16. Its telling that the Rodhamster, if this is her agenda, is essentially admitting that the US is broke. No new programs that involve federal spending. Immigration ‘reform’ costs nothing up front and may actually generate revenue by requiring illegals to pay processing fees, outstanding court fines, tax bills etc. Gun control measures too are either revenue neutral or will generate revenue through fines, licenses and taxes on the sale of guns and ammo.

    From here on out, government can no longer ‘give’ to the public but will, under the Democrats, simply become a more intrusive and regulating force in our lives.

    • Replies: @415 reasons
    @unit472

    I can assure you letting in millions of uneducated people whose children will attend public school, who will take earned income tax credits, and who will use state subsidized health insurance is not a net positive to the federal budget

    Replies: @Unit472, @Economic Sophisms, @Lurker

  17. Is gun control really a winning issue in a presidential race?

    • Replies: @Clyde
    @EriK


    Is gun control really a winning issue in a presidential race?
     
    In front of all female or mostly female audiences she will make innuendoes about gun control. And after a notable_in_the_news shooting she will be overt. So as far as narrow casting to select audiences on this, yes.

    Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...

    , @Busby
    @EriK

    No, it's mostly a dog whistle.

    , @Desiderius
    @EriK

    Depends whose guns you're talking about.

    , @Desiderius
    @EriK

    Any policy that promises to control black behavior without having to talk about black behavior is popular (not necessarily with the populace, but with the increasingly unanimous class of opinion leaders).

    See: abortion, affirmative consent, etc...

    Gun control is marketed to that class in that manner.

    , @kaganovitch
    @EriK

    It is very foolish tack for her. It has almost no chance of swinging a Romney state her way and has decent chance of swinging marginal Obama states Trump's way. It would also have disastrous effect on down ticket dems' chances.

    , @Boomstick
    @EriK

    I think the calculation is that the pro-gun people will despise her no matter what, given her history. She and Bill have been anti-gun for decades and there is no plausible way for her to straddle the issue.

    So, YOLO, and might as well be hung for a sheep as for a lamb.

    I'm not sure it's a good strategy. Anti-gun gains her just about zero votes. People who are anti-gun vote Democratic for other reasons. There are many people who don't like the idea of gun control, but who don't live and breathe the issue, and her harping on it reminds them that she's anti-gun.

    Maybe it's an attempt to energize the base, even if it gains zero votes.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    , @Dr. X
    @EriK


    Is gun control really a winning issue in a presidential race?
     
    I don't know, but it sure as hell is a good strategy to start a war -- which is exactly what happened in 1775 when Gen. Gage ordered troops to confiscate guns are Lexington and Concord.

    A LOT of people are getting ready to rock... just TRY it, Hillary
    , @Jim Don Bob
    @EriK

    Ask President Al Gore how it worked for him. He lost West f**king Virginia -and- his home state of Tennessee probably because of his support for gun control. Winning either one would have won him the election.

    , @ben tillman
    @EriK


    Is gun control really a winning issue in a presidential race?
     
    A winning issue? It's not even an issue at all. No one on the Left has ever proposed gun control. What is proposed is discrimination between the powerless and the powerful, with the powerless to be disarmed while the powerful remain armed. There is no opposition to guns on the Left, just an opposition to decentralized power.
  18. @Nathan Hale
    So, we know now that her pollster, Joel Benenson, believes it will be a base election -- women and Latinos.

    All indications are that Trump will be attempting to expand the map and win over independents. It will be interesting to see whose theory of the election is correct.

    Replies: @Andrew

    “All indications are that Trump will be attempting to expand the map and win over independents. It will be interesting to see whose theory of the election is correct.”

    Its interesting to consider the ISideWith map of Trump vs. Clinton to examine areas of relative strength.

    Trump shows up with a unique map. He shows disappointing but perhaps understandable weakness in CO, VA, MN, IL, ME, and WI, but he shows surprising strength in MI, OH, PA, NJ, DE and NH. In between these groupings are CT and IA.

    His weakest states are DC, WA, OR, CA, HI, MA, MD, and NY, while his strongest are not surprisingly LA, MS, AL, WY, SC, WV, ID, ND, TN, OK.

    http://www.isidewith.com/map/JNty/2016-presidential-election-donald-trump-vs-hillary-clinton#z4

    If you line the states up by the percentages shown for Trump vs. Clinton, the state projected to put Trump over the top is interestingly Utah, and it puts him over the top because of relative strength in MI, OH and ME Distrct 2.

    Following this map, I could see Trump losing VA, CO, WI, and MN but winning outright with 335 electoral votes by carrying much of the northeast and Michigan while holding most of the south and west.

    If the survey percentages were to actually turn out to be accurate (farfetched, I admit), Hilllary would suffer a 1980 style wipeout, carrying only CA, WA, MA and DC and losing 457 to 81.

    • Replies: @Clyde
    @Andrew

    Hillary will carry Hawaii.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    , @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    @Andrew

    Hold on. There's an easier path to 270. Most if not all the states that you've mentioned that Trump hands down wins and also his weakest states are the exact ones that Romney either carried or lost in '12. Let's start with Mitt. He won 206 electoral votes.

    At 206, if Trump can say, win:

    FL =(29) which would bump his total up to 235.

    PA = (20) which would bump his total to 255.

    MI = (16) which would bring his total to 271 and we would have a Trump presidency. Anything over this total, like say, OH, are merely icing on the cake. Unlike Romney, Trump didn't shoot himself in the foot with the assinine auto bailout op ed. If anything, Trump's knowledge and support of public works from his yrs of experience in real estate tends to suggest he would help improve both the US's national infrastructure (long overdue to be updated) and also eminent domain, which, contrary to conservatives who espouse the free market, goes fairly well among ordinary folks at the local level. It needs to bear repeating. The few things during the debate that Trump did specifically emphasize, were things such as eminent domain and improving US's infrastructure. He referenced Eisenhower doing the same as well as made mention of Operation Wetback. I don't think that Trump threw these specific issues/policies out there a la Mr. "let's dispense dispel the fiction/he knows exactly what he's doing, etc" Rubio to show "looky looky how smarty smarty I am, boy from Queens up here on big stage with all these career politicians!" Trump stated these specific issues for a specific reason and it seemed real to him or rather that he has personal knowledge of them (being in the real estate business he would have to be familiar with eminent domain and improving infrastructure on the local level). Those types of issues resonate pretty well at the local level.

    With Steve's recent posting about Hillary deciding to make Immigration as well as Gun Control the main emphasis of her campaign, I am more than confident especially on the later issue, gun control, that with that information now public, Donald Trump will carry the entire South, including those border states that William Jennings Bryan Cruz carried (TX; OK; KS). There's no doubt about it now with Hillary strongly coming out vs. the 2nd Amendment.

    One thing. You mentioned VA. It is possible that Trump could carry it. The recent Rasmussen polls suggest that Trump is now polling at about 15% with blacks, and that is an amazingly high total for GOP presidential candidates (may have to go back at least 40-50yrs to see comparable poll numbers that high) the point isn't that Trump's doing somewhat better with blacks, but which states he receives those votes. If he were to say, do better than expected in a state like VA, that would help balance out the wealthy majority white DC suburbs that voted for Rubio and were all in a huff vs Trump. It would balance out this deficit, making VA in play once again.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @ben tillman

    , @Mike Sylwester
    @Andrew


    Its interesting to consider the ISideWith map of Trump vs. Clinton to examine areas of relative strength.
     
    It's an on-line poll.

    However, it is fun to look at it.

    Replies: @Andrew

    , @LondonBob
    @Andrew

    Interesting how much that goes with what common sense tells you. CT and NJ should be competitive to a NY Republican, they don't have NY City that makes NY out of reach for Trump. MI, PA and OH have always been the Rust Belt states most likely to flip. VI is too much of an establishment colonised area now, however Trump is strong in the Mid Atlantic so not surprised to see DE as up for grabs, Paul Manafort and Rick Wiley had it as a target in his presentation to the RNC. NV and FL are Trump home states, NM more likely to flip than too nice IA, surprised by CO.

    Replies: @Andrew, @Jack D

  19. @unit472
    Its telling that the Rodhamster, if this is her agenda, is essentially admitting that the US is broke. No new programs that involve federal spending. Immigration 'reform' costs nothing up front and may actually generate revenue by requiring illegals to pay processing fees, outstanding court fines, tax bills etc. Gun control measures too are either revenue neutral or will generate revenue through fines, licenses and taxes on the sale of guns and ammo.

    From here on out, government can no longer 'give' to the public but will, under the Democrats, simply become a more intrusive and regulating force in our lives.

    Replies: @415 reasons

    I can assure you letting in millions of uneducated people whose children will attend public school, who will take earned income tax credits, and who will use state subsidized health insurance is not a net positive to the federal budget

    • Replies: @Unit472
    @415 reasons

    Yes, there is some budget impact but it is hidden in existing programs or primarily falls on state and local budgets.

    Schools and teachers,eg, are already in place and the children of illegals already enrolled.

    Replies: @ben tillman

    , @Economic Sophisms
    @415 reasons

    Exactly, there's just no way legalization of the illegal infiltrators is anything but a net loss on the fiscal side. As a rough approximation, anyone with an IQ below 105 or so is expected to cost the government more than they bring in.

    Replies: @Jack Hanson

    , @Lurker
    @415 reasons

    He did say "cost nothing up front".

    The downstream costs must have been obvious for years, the fact that this is acceptable only shows that its not about the money. Its all about the nation destroying.

  20. It makes a lot of sense to the elite class to disarm and dilute Americans if you read Andrew Sullivan’s recent febrile post on the dangers of Trump:

    It may be that demographics will save us. America is no longer an overwhelmingly white country, and Trump’s signature issue — illegal immigration — is the source of his strength but also of his weakness.

    Seems this was the idea all along. Divide and conquer to keep the oligarchy alive. Sad to see Charles Murray so stridently taking his class’s side in this matter. I didn’t know he was that loyal to the people who’ve screwed over the the white working class for which he feigns some sympathy, but in retrospect it’s kind of clear he felt that way all along.

    I have to admit it’s a little sad to me that Trump’s all we’ve got, but then again the other side doesn’t have all that much to boast about either. Race to the bottom indeed. We’re in for some rough times.

    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    @Bill P

    And there's the rub. Charles Murray, while he may or may not technically be a part of the one percent class, he certainly does appear to side with them more often than not. Yes, yes, yes, the Bell Curve was an amazing book in its time and still very much is. But you know, that's yesterday's glory. What's he done since? Did he actually read thru his own data regarding the state of white America (1960-2010)? Or was it all just a clever title to fool the yokels? How many of Fishtown whites does Charles Murray personally associate with nowadays? That's a fair question. Because Trump being from Queens has a legitimate chance of carrying Fishtown in the GE. And, while he waxes lyrical about Iowa the state of his birth, Murray may indeed have been born and raised in Newton, but he sure didn't make a point of staying there. At least Russell Kirk stayed in Grand Rapids, MI. Perhaps that is what unites the likes of neocons, Buckleyites, etc. Their snobbish elitist attitude that they don't give a damn about ordinary folks. For them, class trumps race, national identity, and the interests of ordinary everyday Americans.

    But then the ironic thing is, Trump is a legitimate member of the one percent and yet has spent virtually little next to nothing by fundraising to secure the nomination. He's winning the nomination virtually on free media. If anything, Trump should receive some praise and credit that he didn't simply waste people's money and it helps strengthen his case that he isn't bound to any one donor much less the entire class at large.

    Replies: @rod1963, @Henry Bowman

    , @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @Bill P


    Andrew Sullivan’s recent febrile post on the dangers of Trump
     
    Sullivan writes:

    He is usually of the elite but has a nature in tune with the time — given over to random pleasures and whims, feasting on plenty of food and sex, and reveling in the nonjudgment that is democracy’s civil religion.
     
    A bitchy take on Trump, or has Sullivan been struck with an uncharacteristic flash of self-awareness? Why do I even ask.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    , @Thea
    @Bill P

    I would think working class whites are the buffer against lower class whites or NAMs. But they really don't see it that way.

    Replies: @Bill P

    , @White Guy In Japan
    @Bill P

    Huh. I thought Murray had a better analysis of Trumpism.
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trumps-america-1455290458

    , @Mr. Anon
    @Bill P

    "I have to admit it’s a little sad to me that Trump’s all we’ve got,"

    As Richard Spencer recently said (in so many words): America has become a coarse and vulgar country. A coarse and vulgar candidate is probably the best we can expect.

  21. @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    You are a phony baloney liberal who never posted here before and will never post here again. At least under this handle. Good bye!

  22. @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    A real conservative but not necessarily a genuine American who puts the interests of Americans first before undocumenteds. Yes, populism or the will of what the majority of voters want and specifically have voted is definitely not a legitimate form of representative democracy.

    Oh drat, I can’t tell if this post is legit or satire. Its echoing too many of the one dimensional talking points. For all their alleged incompetence, even the one percent donorist global class aren’t this idiotic, imbecilic and half baked in public. They do tend to frame their arguments a wee bit more sophisticated than this drivel. Not by much, but they are a bit more sophisticated.

    You won’t see Karl Rove or Jeb! making these blatant kinds of mistakes in public. Romney, of course, but then, he’s desperate and past it.

    “47%” indeed.

  23. @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    Nice trolling.

  24. @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    Nice to see you here. Your work on Twitter is brilliant.

  25. vinny says:

    So out of touch it could only have come from Hilary herself.

    Trump and Sanders are winning passionate supporters on economic issues and Hilary plans a general election campaign based on…. Gun Control! That’ll do it. It’s like she wants to actively repel white dudes and leave young adults to forget completely that there is an election going on.

  26. Diluting Traditional America. Humpty Dumpty Hillary is a stupider and more obvious version of Angela Merkel. God help us if she somehow beats Trump. (the presumptive nominee) The world would be better off if these deranged old female sociopaths would stay home and far away from politics.

    • Agree: BB753
  27. @TWS
    @AG Conservative

    Tiny sick duck,

    You should really stick with one moniker. Your writing style is too distinct to do anything else. You have reliably identifiable phrasing. Sock puppeting is a step backwards.

    You should work on humor for your larping. Try and find something funny about the situation or the people involved. Right now you come off as a disingenuous liar because you keep switching handles and pretending to be someone else. Also lying about who and what you are is just silly. Playing pretend on the internet is fun on reddit go do it there.

    Replies: @Jack Hanson

    No, this is @DemsRRealRacists from Twitter.

    He is a master at this sort of thing.

    • Agree: Vendetta
  28. I just wonder what Hillary’s strategists are thinking.

    She’s out there debating Trump over illegal immigration, and suddenly another bunch of Muslims in Europe (or far worse, America) massacre dozens of civilians, or another illegal immigrant in the US commits some horrible crime of violence on a very sympathetic innocent in the US.

    What’s her answer? Who’s going to be persuaded instead of repulsed by it?

    This woman is leading by her chin.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @candid_observer

    "This woman is leading by her chin."

    Hillary Clinton has never shown any indication that she is remotely competent at anything, or even very smart at all. She has screwed up everything she has ever touched. She is a rather dull-witted woman who only has a national political career thanks to her husband.

  29. @Bill P
    It makes a lot of sense to the elite class to disarm and dilute Americans if you read Andrew Sullivan's recent febrile post on the dangers of Trump:

    It may be that demographics will save us. America is no longer an overwhelmingly white country, and Trump’s signature issue — illegal immigration — is the source of his strength but also of his weakness.
     
    Seems this was the idea all along. Divide and conquer to keep the oligarchy alive. Sad to see Charles Murray so stridently taking his class's side in this matter. I didn't know he was that loyal to the people who've screwed over the the white working class for which he feigns some sympathy, but in retrospect it's kind of clear he felt that way all along.

    I have to admit it's a little sad to me that Trump's all we've got, but then again the other side doesn't have all that much to boast about either. Race to the bottom indeed. We're in for some rough times.

    Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Thea, @White Guy In Japan, @Mr. Anon

    And there’s the rub. Charles Murray, while he may or may not technically be a part of the one percent class, he certainly does appear to side with them more often than not. Yes, yes, yes, the Bell Curve was an amazing book in its time and still very much is. But you know, that’s yesterday’s glory. What’s he done since? Did he actually read thru his own data regarding the state of white America (1960-2010)? Or was it all just a clever title to fool the yokels? How many of Fishtown whites does Charles Murray personally associate with nowadays? That’s a fair question. Because Trump being from Queens has a legitimate chance of carrying Fishtown in the GE. And, while he waxes lyrical about Iowa the state of his birth, Murray may indeed have been born and raised in Newton, but he sure didn’t make a point of staying there. At least Russell Kirk stayed in Grand Rapids, MI. Perhaps that is what unites the likes of neocons, Buckleyites, etc. Their snobbish elitist attitude that they don’t give a damn about ordinary folks. For them, class trumps race, national identity, and the interests of ordinary everyday Americans.

    But then the ironic thing is, Trump is a legitimate member of the one percent and yet has spent virtually little next to nothing by fundraising to secure the nomination. He’s winning the nomination virtually on free media. If anything, Trump should receive some praise and credit that he didn’t simply waste people’s money and it helps strengthen his case that he isn’t bound to any one donor much less the entire class at large.

    • Replies: @rod1963
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    How many of Fishtown whites does Charles Murray personally associate with nowadays?

    Probably none, I think he despises them after reading his WSJ article. He's pretty much a globalist/Davos kind of guy. He does however have lots of admiration for the exports from Bombay and Lahore and hates the white blue collar worker.

    Though to Murray's credit he admits his class has nothing but utter contempt for lower class whites.

    Make no mistake Murray is a establishment hack with deep ties to the GOP/Neo-Con boss class that goes back decades. He's no friend of blue collar or middle-class whites.

    Perhaps that is what unites the likes of neocons, Buckleyites, etc. Their snobbish elitist attitude that they don’t give a damn about ordinary folks. For them, class trumps race, national identity, and the interests of ordinary everyday Americans.


    I can agree with that, class is everything for them and explains why as a group they are almost in lock step with supporting the fundamental remaking of the U.S. and demonizing Trump.

    , @Henry Bowman
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi


    Buckleyites, etc. Their snobbish elitist attitude that they don’t give a damn about ordinary folks. For them, class trumps race, national identity, and the interests of ordinary everyday Americans.
     
    Its sick how they would sell out everything just be snobs, do they not understand how in the end they lose everything if they keep up mass immigration?
  30. @Andrew
    @Nathan Hale

    "All indications are that Trump will be attempting to expand the map and win over independents. It will be interesting to see whose theory of the election is correct."

    Its interesting to consider the ISideWith map of Trump vs. Clinton to examine areas of relative strength.

    Trump shows up with a unique map. He shows disappointing but perhaps understandable weakness in CO, VA, MN, IL, ME, and WI, but he shows surprising strength in MI, OH, PA, NJ, DE and NH. In between these groupings are CT and IA.

    His weakest states are DC, WA, OR, CA, HI, MA, MD, and NY, while his strongest are not surprisingly LA, MS, AL, WY, SC, WV, ID, ND, TN, OK.

    http://www.isidewith.com/map/JNty/2016-presidential-election-donald-trump-vs-hillary-clinton#z4

    If you line the states up by the percentages shown for Trump vs. Clinton, the state projected to put Trump over the top is interestingly Utah, and it puts him over the top because of relative strength in MI, OH and ME Distrct 2.

    Following this map, I could see Trump losing VA, CO, WI, and MN but winning outright with 335 electoral votes by carrying much of the northeast and Michigan while holding most of the south and west.

    If the survey percentages were to actually turn out to be accurate (farfetched, I admit), Hilllary would suffer a 1980 style wipeout, carrying only CA, WA, MA and DC and losing 457 to 81.

    Replies: @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @Mike Sylwester, @LondonBob

    Hillary will carry Hawaii.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Clyde


    Hillary will carry Hawaii.
     
    They don't want any more mainlanders, and Mexicans are mainlanders, aren't they? I see a big opening for Trump here.

    Replies: @Clyde

  31. @EriK
    Is gun control really a winning issue in a presidential race?

    Replies: @Clyde, @Busby, @Desiderius, @Desiderius, @kaganovitch, @Boomstick, @Dr. X, @Jim Don Bob, @ben tillman

    Is gun control really a winning issue in a presidential race?

    In front of all female or mostly female audiences she will make innuendoes about gun control. And after a notable_in_the_news shooting she will be overt. So as far as narrow casting to select audiences on this, yes.

    • Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...
    @Clyde

    A high proportion of the current wave of first-time gun buyers are women. A lot of White, middle-class women in this country aren't stupid. They read the news, see how things are trending, and want to have back-up protection if things get much worse.

    A lot of women I know personally are beginning to realize that immigration is bad for them and their male kin. Bill must really be out of the picture because only a bill-less Hillary could come up with an electoral strategy this stupid.

  32. Clyde says:
    @JimB
    The American people have already been diluted. More than half of school children in America now are non-white, and our high tax, job free, high cost of living economy guarantees whites will throttle back their reproduction even more. Gun control is clearly intended to disarm whites so they can never choose rebellion or separation. Progressives want miscegenation to finish off what is left of European people and Western Civilization. This will be accelerated by making sure section 8 housing is built in every remaining white community, and no white high school cheerleader goes uninseminated by a black football player.

    Replies: @take me to funkytown, @take me to funkytown, @take me to funkytown, @Clyde

    The American people have already been diluted. More than half of school children in America now are non-white, and our high tax, job free, high cost of living economy guarantees whites will throttle back their reproduction even more. Gun control is clearly intended to disarm whites so they can never choose rebellion or separation. Progressives want miscegenation to finish off what is left of European people and Western Civilization. This will be accelerated by making sure section 8 housing is built in every remaining white community, and no white high school cheerleader goes uninseminated by a black football player.

    Some hyperbole but all true. Sad but true. Best case scenario is Trump gets elected and we go into a holding pattern with some reversals for the left such as building that damn wall! And how about mandated enforced E-verify and strict enforcement of no welfare for illegals. This will incentivize many to go back home. Enhanced roundups of illegal alien criminals with verified deportation. Active deportation of the one million illegals who have court ordered deportations but refused to comply. Refused to self-deport.

    If Trump gets the ball rolling with well publicized enforcements and deportations we might see millions of illegal aliens get (out) while the getting is good

    • Replies: @JimB
    @Clyde

    The most important thing for Trump to do after building the wall is to rescind the dumbest trade agreements, repatriate our manufacturing base with tariffs, and make sure only US citizens get the jobs. This means throttling immigration way back to pre-1965 levels. With increased native employment will come increased Historic American birthrates.

    Replies: @Clyde

  33. @EriK
    Is gun control really a winning issue in a presidential race?

    Replies: @Clyde, @Busby, @Desiderius, @Desiderius, @kaganovitch, @Boomstick, @Dr. X, @Jim Don Bob, @ben tillman

    No, it’s mostly a dog whistle.

  34. The legislation included a path to citizenship for *some* undocumented immigrants.

    Yes, only 285% of illegal immigrants then in the United States would have been eligible for amnesty. In other words, “some” of them.

  35. Has she lost her mind? Why on earth would she run on this platform? I guess she must be hoping on getting the Latino vote in historic numbers?

    The Jill Filipovic article today on the Donna Edwards issue was stunning as well. She explicitly argued for discriminating against white men as a matter of policy.

    This approach seems like a big mistake. Running as a Republican lite would have been smarter, but perhaps she is worried about defections from the Bernie supporting left?

    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    @RamonaQ

    Excellent observation. The other Clinton, never made those kinds of mistakes, which is why he was elected twice to the presidency. Bill Clinton always showed a willingness to work with GOP on several issues. There were very few issues he actually went to the matt on vs GOP when push came to shove, and gun control certainly wasn't one of them.

    With that information now public, Hillary has just lost the entire south and its 150-180 electoral votes. More than ever Trump can at least carry Romney's 206.

  36. @Andrew
    @Nathan Hale

    "All indications are that Trump will be attempting to expand the map and win over independents. It will be interesting to see whose theory of the election is correct."

    Its interesting to consider the ISideWith map of Trump vs. Clinton to examine areas of relative strength.

    Trump shows up with a unique map. He shows disappointing but perhaps understandable weakness in CO, VA, MN, IL, ME, and WI, but he shows surprising strength in MI, OH, PA, NJ, DE and NH. In between these groupings are CT and IA.

    His weakest states are DC, WA, OR, CA, HI, MA, MD, and NY, while his strongest are not surprisingly LA, MS, AL, WY, SC, WV, ID, ND, TN, OK.

    http://www.isidewith.com/map/JNty/2016-presidential-election-donald-trump-vs-hillary-clinton#z4

    If you line the states up by the percentages shown for Trump vs. Clinton, the state projected to put Trump over the top is interestingly Utah, and it puts him over the top because of relative strength in MI, OH and ME Distrct 2.

    Following this map, I could see Trump losing VA, CO, WI, and MN but winning outright with 335 electoral votes by carrying much of the northeast and Michigan while holding most of the south and west.

    If the survey percentages were to actually turn out to be accurate (farfetched, I admit), Hilllary would suffer a 1980 style wipeout, carrying only CA, WA, MA and DC and losing 457 to 81.

    Replies: @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @Mike Sylwester, @LondonBob

    Hold on. There’s an easier path to 270. Most if not all the states that you’ve mentioned that Trump hands down wins and also his weakest states are the exact ones that Romney either carried or lost in ’12. Let’s start with Mitt. He won 206 electoral votes.

    At 206, if Trump can say, win:

    FL =(29) which would bump his total up to 235.

    PA = (20) which would bump his total to 255.

    MI = (16) which would bring his total to 271 and we would have a Trump presidency. Anything over this total, like say, OH, are merely icing on the cake. Unlike Romney, Trump didn’t shoot himself in the foot with the assinine auto bailout op ed. If anything, Trump’s knowledge and support of public works from his yrs of experience in real estate tends to suggest he would help improve both the US’s national infrastructure (long overdue to be updated) and also eminent domain, which, contrary to conservatives who espouse the free market, goes fairly well among ordinary folks at the local level. It needs to bear repeating. The few things during the debate that Trump did specifically emphasize, were things such as eminent domain and improving US’s infrastructure. He referenced Eisenhower doing the same as well as made mention of Operation Wetback. I don’t think that Trump threw these specific issues/policies out there a la Mr. “let’s dispense dispel the fiction/he knows exactly what he’s doing, etc” Rubio to show “looky looky how smarty smarty I am, boy from Queens up here on big stage with all these career politicians!” Trump stated these specific issues for a specific reason and it seemed real to him or rather that he has personal knowledge of them (being in the real estate business he would have to be familiar with eminent domain and improving infrastructure on the local level). Those types of issues resonate pretty well at the local level.

    With Steve’s recent posting about Hillary deciding to make Immigration as well as Gun Control the main emphasis of her campaign, I am more than confident especially on the later issue, gun control, that with that information now public, Donald Trump will carry the entire South, including those border states that William Jennings Bryan Cruz carried (TX; OK; KS). There’s no doubt about it now with Hillary strongly coming out vs. the 2nd Amendment.

    One thing. You mentioned VA. It is possible that Trump could carry it. The recent Rasmussen polls suggest that Trump is now polling at about 15% with blacks, and that is an amazingly high total for GOP presidential candidates (may have to go back at least 40-50yrs to see comparable poll numbers that high) the point isn’t that Trump’s doing somewhat better with blacks, but which states he receives those votes. If he were to say, do better than expected in a state like VA, that would help balance out the wealthy majority white DC suburbs that voted for Rubio and were all in a huff vs Trump. It would balance out this deficit, making VA in play once again.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi


    ...and also eminent domain, which, contrary to conservatives who espouse the free market, goes fairly well among ordinary folks at the local level.
     
    Unlike those powdered morons who wrote the Fifth Amendment?

    If eminent domain is so popular at the local level, why do so many of those whose property is targeted fight the decision? The actual piece of land is as local as you can get!

    ...Trump didn’t shoot himself in the foot with the assinine auto bailout op ed.
     
    Holding to principles is asinine? How come the Swedes can say say no to automakers holding a tin cup, but Americans can't? Opposing bailouts didn't seem to hurt Ronald Reagan.

    But bailouts seem suspiciously popular with those decrying "corporate welfare" and "crony capitalism".

    Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @Bill Jones

    , @ben tillman
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi


    Unlike Romney, Trump didn’t shoot himself in the foot with the assinine auto bailout op ed.
     
    And unlike Trump, Romney didn't shoot himself in the foot with a series of unbelievably asinine comments guaranteed to piss off women. Trump has a huge problem that, inexplicably, no one here (or in the Trump campaign) seems to apprehend.
  37. @RamonaQ
    Has she lost her mind? Why on earth would she run on this platform? I guess she must be hoping on getting the Latino vote in historic numbers?

    The Jill Filipovic article today on the Donna Edwards issue was stunning as well. She explicitly argued for discriminating against white men as a matter of policy.

    This approach seems like a big mistake. Running as a Republican lite would have been smarter, but perhaps she is worried about defections from the Bernie supporting left?

    Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    Excellent observation. The other Clinton, never made those kinds of mistakes, which is why he was elected twice to the presidency. Bill Clinton always showed a willingness to work with GOP on several issues. There were very few issues he actually went to the matt on vs GOP when push came to shove, and gun control certainly wasn’t one of them.

    With that information now public, Hillary has just lost the entire south and its 150-180 electoral votes. More than ever Trump can at least carry Romney’s 206.

  38. Lot says:

    Speaking of guns…

    http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2016/05/three_indicted_in_matt_shlonsk.html

    The grand jury in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia on April 27 returned charges on 64 counts in the case, including second-degree murder for Andre Dudley, 20; Marcus King, 20, and Christopher Proctor, 26. All are from Washington, D.C….

    Witness and attorneys’ accounts of the gun battle’s motives have varied, from a feud between participants to confusion over responsibility for a shooting the week before. The wild gunfire erupted where Shlonsky just happened to be — a street in an increasingly trendy, if gritty, neighborhood, next to a subway station.

    Witnesses told police that Dudley brandished a gun from the sunroof of a stolen red Chrysler 300 he was driving near the corner of 7th and S Street in Northwest Washington.

    Authorities say he traded shots with King. After the shooting erupted, police say Dudley threatened several witnesses with a gun as he sped away from the crime.

    Witnesses told police that a third man, believed to be Proctor, was outside the liquor store and pulled a gun from his waistband. They said he fired several times before getting into a gray car that drove away.

  39. @Bill P
    It makes a lot of sense to the elite class to disarm and dilute Americans if you read Andrew Sullivan's recent febrile post on the dangers of Trump:

    It may be that demographics will save us. America is no longer an overwhelmingly white country, and Trump’s signature issue — illegal immigration — is the source of his strength but also of his weakness.
     
    Seems this was the idea all along. Divide and conquer to keep the oligarchy alive. Sad to see Charles Murray so stridently taking his class's side in this matter. I didn't know he was that loyal to the people who've screwed over the the white working class for which he feigns some sympathy, but in retrospect it's kind of clear he felt that way all along.

    I have to admit it's a little sad to me that Trump's all we've got, but then again the other side doesn't have all that much to boast about either. Race to the bottom indeed. We're in for some rough times.

    Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Thea, @White Guy In Japan, @Mr. Anon

    Andrew Sullivan’s recent febrile post on the dangers of Trump

    Sullivan writes:

    He is usually of the elite but has a nature in tune with the time — given over to random pleasures and whims, feasting on plenty of food and sex, and reveling in the nonjudgment that is democracy’s civil religion.

    A bitchy take on Trump, or has Sullivan been struck with an uncharacteristic flash of self-awareness? Why do I even ask.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Sullivan is hardly the right guy to be giving stern lectures about wanton self-indulgence, I should think.

  40. @EriK
    Is gun control really a winning issue in a presidential race?

    Replies: @Clyde, @Busby, @Desiderius, @Desiderius, @kaganovitch, @Boomstick, @Dr. X, @Jim Don Bob, @ben tillman

    Depends whose guns you’re talking about.

  41. Only 20 years ago, Bill Clinton used his State of the Union Address to condemn illegal immigration, in language that would not be out of line at a Trump Rally. Amazing how complete the victory of the Left has been on immigration rhetoric, that basic common sense is now considered radicalism.

    Why isn’t this clip more well known? Because the Democrats no longer need the White working class vote to hold power, that’s why. Republican elites want the cheap labor.

    When you are bored, watch the Al Gore NAFTA debate with Ross Perot, a truly idiosyncratic American voice and a Texas maverick. Who was right? Perot, at heart, is an American patriot. He partnered with Steve Jobs after Jobs was ousted from Apple to develop NEXT. Old Perot, his lineage is likely Cajun, would not be offended by the phrase “America First”.

    TURNER BROADCASTING!

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Clifford Brown


    Only 20 years ago, Bill Clinton used his State of the Union Address to condemn illegal immigration...
     
    ...lying through his teeth in doing so.
  42. @Clyde
    @EriK


    Is gun control really a winning issue in a presidential race?
     
    In front of all female or mostly female audiences she will make innuendoes about gun control. And after a notable_in_the_news shooting she will be overt. So as far as narrow casting to select audiences on this, yes.

    Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...

    A high proportion of the current wave of first-time gun buyers are women. A lot of White, middle-class women in this country aren’t stupid. They read the news, see how things are trending, and want to have back-up protection if things get much worse.

    A lot of women I know personally are beginning to realize that immigration is bad for them and their male kin. Bill must really be out of the picture because only a bill-less Hillary could come up with an electoral strategy this stupid.

  43. @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    Until about 6 months ago the trolls here were modestly intelligent and occasionally engaging. Those trolls have been replaced by drone trolls like this troll.

    Soros hasn’t stopped throwing good money after bad, but if this troll is indicative of current trolldom and its payola you can understand the Soros-robber-baron’s Scrooge-like miserliness.

    Trolls of Soros unite! All you have to lose is your pathetic allegiance to Soros the Nazi collaborator, Soros the greedy robber-baron, Soros the hater. Stop slaving away so that Soros can have his next billion $.

  44. @EriK
    Is gun control really a winning issue in a presidential race?

    Replies: @Clyde, @Busby, @Desiderius, @Desiderius, @kaganovitch, @Boomstick, @Dr. X, @Jim Don Bob, @ben tillman

    Any policy that promises to control black behavior without having to talk about black behavior is popular (not necessarily with the populace, but with the increasingly unanimous class of opinion leaders).

    See: abortion, affirmative consent, etc…

    Gun control is marketed to that class in that manner.

  45. @EriK
    Is gun control really a winning issue in a presidential race?

    Replies: @Clyde, @Busby, @Desiderius, @Desiderius, @kaganovitch, @Boomstick, @Dr. X, @Jim Don Bob, @ben tillman

    It is very foolish tack for her. It has almost no chance of swinging a Romney state her way and has decent chance of swinging marginal Obama states Trump’s way. It would also have disastrous effect on down ticket dems’ chances.

  46. @Clyde
    @Andrew

    Hillary will carry Hawaii.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Hillary will carry Hawaii.

    They don’t want any more mainlanders, and Mexicans are mainlanders, aren’t they? I see a big opening for Trump here.

    • Replies: @Clyde
    @Reg Cæsar

    Hillary just has to promise Federale approval of Indian casinos for the Hawaii natives and she carries it by minimum 63%. Hawaii has been the most multiculti state for years since Obama, and before Obama when it was a US territory.

  47. @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    >>She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    It is not her choice to make. She is if, for whatever reason, the ADL decides to hate her.

    • Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky
    @Daniel H

    >>She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    "It is not her choice to make. She is if, for whatever reason, the ADL decides to hate her."

    Excellent point and one which brings to mind the late, great Joe Sobran's observation that nowadays an anti-semite is not a man who hates Jews, but one who is hated by Jews.

  48. Gun control at this point is hardly a pressing national issue, at least compared to several others that I’m sure any ISteve reader can come up with. But it is an issue that motivates a very large proportion of voters from all parties to vote against candidates who espouse it. As such it’s essentially the third rail — and for some obscure reason a very enticing one — for dimocrat politicians and apparatchiks of Hillary’s type. A stupid issue for Hillary to choose.

    The promise of real immigration reform is what draws people to Trump. Firm border control and strict standards for controlling immigration and naturalization resonate with the majority of American voters. So do issues regarding disastrous trade agreements that have many times over decimated domestic US industries and the middle-class workers they once employed.

    Videos and news about Soros’s et al.’s well-funded, brown-skinned brown shirts rioting, assaulting police, causing hundreds of thousands of dollars of damages that responsible citizens will ultimately pay for, blocking traffic, and generally attacking and disrespecting ordinary American citizens only increases most Americans’ angst about this issue. Everyone already knows where Hillary stands on this vis-a-vis Trump’s positions. Emphasizing instead of eliding over these policy differences is a really big mistake on Hillary’s part. A second stupid issue for Hillary to choose.

    Because Hillary appears to be planning to carry the heavy water for Trump on these issues, Trump can afford to focus his efforts elsewhere, e.g., on Hillary’s long and well-documented history of incompetence and corruption. He can probably afford to garnish this with some juicy tidbits from Bill and Hill’s extremely pathological sexual histories. The November election is looking more and more like it is Trump’s to lose. It’s also looking more and more like red meat entertainment for political junkies.

    • Replies: @Unladen Swallow
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    More proof as if any more was needed that Hilary is not some master political thinker that so many pols make her out be, gun control will be a winner? what year does Hilary think this is? 1978? Immigration "reform"? Apparently she thinks, fooled them 5 times on this, I will fool them again, despite the other party's candidate pointing it out. Also throwing Bill under the bus over the Dems right turn on crime in the 90's is really going to the well one time too many, she already has the black vote overwhelmingly, does she need 96% instead of 91% in order to win? She might as well write off the South altogether as well as most of the West with this strategy.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Jack D

  49. @Andrew
    @Nathan Hale

    "All indications are that Trump will be attempting to expand the map and win over independents. It will be interesting to see whose theory of the election is correct."

    Its interesting to consider the ISideWith map of Trump vs. Clinton to examine areas of relative strength.

    Trump shows up with a unique map. He shows disappointing but perhaps understandable weakness in CO, VA, MN, IL, ME, and WI, but he shows surprising strength in MI, OH, PA, NJ, DE and NH. In between these groupings are CT and IA.

    His weakest states are DC, WA, OR, CA, HI, MA, MD, and NY, while his strongest are not surprisingly LA, MS, AL, WY, SC, WV, ID, ND, TN, OK.

    http://www.isidewith.com/map/JNty/2016-presidential-election-donald-trump-vs-hillary-clinton#z4

    If you line the states up by the percentages shown for Trump vs. Clinton, the state projected to put Trump over the top is interestingly Utah, and it puts him over the top because of relative strength in MI, OH and ME Distrct 2.

    Following this map, I could see Trump losing VA, CO, WI, and MN but winning outright with 335 electoral votes by carrying much of the northeast and Michigan while holding most of the south and west.

    If the survey percentages were to actually turn out to be accurate (farfetched, I admit), Hilllary would suffer a 1980 style wipeout, carrying only CA, WA, MA and DC and losing 457 to 81.

    Replies: @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @Mike Sylwester, @LondonBob

    Its interesting to consider the ISideWith map of Trump vs. Clinton to examine areas of relative strength.

    It’s an on-line poll.

    However, it is fun to look at it.

    • Replies: @Andrew
    @Mike Sylwester

    "It’s an on-line poll."

    I'm going to keep trying to make this point.

    Don't use it as a poll where you are expecting it to provide you precise percentages of support. Use it as a tool to measure relative strength of candidates. Let it show you where support is strong or weak for one candidate vs. another.

    Used in this way, it has been highly accurate and predictive regarding where Trump would do best vs. where Cruz would do best and showing where Kasich would find the most support.

  50. Disarm, Dilute, Denigrate, Deprecate, Disparage.

  51. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    @Andrew

    Hold on. There's an easier path to 270. Most if not all the states that you've mentioned that Trump hands down wins and also his weakest states are the exact ones that Romney either carried or lost in '12. Let's start with Mitt. He won 206 electoral votes.

    At 206, if Trump can say, win:

    FL =(29) which would bump his total up to 235.

    PA = (20) which would bump his total to 255.

    MI = (16) which would bring his total to 271 and we would have a Trump presidency. Anything over this total, like say, OH, are merely icing on the cake. Unlike Romney, Trump didn't shoot himself in the foot with the assinine auto bailout op ed. If anything, Trump's knowledge and support of public works from his yrs of experience in real estate tends to suggest he would help improve both the US's national infrastructure (long overdue to be updated) and also eminent domain, which, contrary to conservatives who espouse the free market, goes fairly well among ordinary folks at the local level. It needs to bear repeating. The few things during the debate that Trump did specifically emphasize, were things such as eminent domain and improving US's infrastructure. He referenced Eisenhower doing the same as well as made mention of Operation Wetback. I don't think that Trump threw these specific issues/policies out there a la Mr. "let's dispense dispel the fiction/he knows exactly what he's doing, etc" Rubio to show "looky looky how smarty smarty I am, boy from Queens up here on big stage with all these career politicians!" Trump stated these specific issues for a specific reason and it seemed real to him or rather that he has personal knowledge of them (being in the real estate business he would have to be familiar with eminent domain and improving infrastructure on the local level). Those types of issues resonate pretty well at the local level.

    With Steve's recent posting about Hillary deciding to make Immigration as well as Gun Control the main emphasis of her campaign, I am more than confident especially on the later issue, gun control, that with that information now public, Donald Trump will carry the entire South, including those border states that William Jennings Bryan Cruz carried (TX; OK; KS). There's no doubt about it now with Hillary strongly coming out vs. the 2nd Amendment.

    One thing. You mentioned VA. It is possible that Trump could carry it. The recent Rasmussen polls suggest that Trump is now polling at about 15% with blacks, and that is an amazingly high total for GOP presidential candidates (may have to go back at least 40-50yrs to see comparable poll numbers that high) the point isn't that Trump's doing somewhat better with blacks, but which states he receives those votes. If he were to say, do better than expected in a state like VA, that would help balance out the wealthy majority white DC suburbs that voted for Rubio and were all in a huff vs Trump. It would balance out this deficit, making VA in play once again.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @ben tillman

    …and also eminent domain, which, contrary to conservatives who espouse the free market, goes fairly well among ordinary folks at the local level.

    Unlike those powdered morons who wrote the Fifth Amendment?

    If eminent domain is so popular at the local level, why do so many of those whose property is targeted fight the decision? The actual piece of land is as local as you can get!

    …Trump didn’t shoot himself in the foot with the assinine auto bailout op ed.

    Holding to principles is asinine? How come the Swedes can say say no to automakers holding a tin cup, but Americans can’t? Opposing bailouts didn’t seem to hurt Ronald Reagan.

    But bailouts seem suspiciously popular with those decrying “corporate welfare” and “crony capitalism”.

    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    @Reg Cæsar

    Reagan opposed letting Harey Davidson going bankrupt. He also supported Chrysler's bailout. Also, since WHEN have the words "principles" ever applied to the likes of Mitt Romney? Now come on. Again, I daresay that at least 85% or around thereabouts of ordinary GOP voters cannot name 2-3 policies that Romney ran on. However, most adults who voted in the '12 election do actually recall the "47" gaffe as well as the auto bailout which more or less cost him MI and hurt his chances in OH.

    Also, let's not so quickly forget that Romney boasted of his ability to raise money as a proof of ability to win the election. Uh, pray tell which class (top 1% or ordinary folks) heavily donated to his campaign? And how much of his own personal fortune did Willard actually spend during his campaign.

    Romney is a donorist and globalist tool, or pawn to their interests.

    It depends which bailouts, of course. Those that tend to save US workers' jobs and helps somewhat prevent jobs being shipped overseas in massive numbers, they will support.

    , @Bill Jones
    @Reg Cæsar

    Is that why Reagan bailed out these guys?

    http://www.nytimes.com/1983/04/02/business/us-raises-tariff-for-motorcycles.html

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  52. Jonah says:
    @anony-mouse
    Gosh this is terrible. Good thing she has such high negatives-and the GOP would never be so stupid as to choose an opponent for her with even higher negatives.

    Replies: @Jonah

    Ask yourself: from whence did the fetish of a candidates “negatives” come from?

    Is it a phrase you were enamored of 4 years ago? How about 16 years ago?

    You’re being sold a bill of goods by a the lumpenpress. The imbecile factory that gave Trump no shot in the Republican primary season.

    Stop drinking New Coke. It sucks.

    People show up and vote for candidates they support and only show up to vote against candidates they loathe with the flaming intensity of a thousand suns.

    You aren’t seeing polls that speak to that latter scenario. “Eh, I don’t like the guy” doesn’t mean the same thing as “I will show up to vote against that guy.”

    • Replies: @LondonBob
    @Jonah

    Thatcher was never liked as a person, she was respected though, and she won three landslide election victories.

    , @Holden McGroin
    @Jonah

    That's a good point. In the last few years I've seen lots of references to "optics". Not sure what they are, but bad ones seem to involve people noticing the outcomes of policy decisions don't match the intentions. I expect that bad optics are also racist

  53. @Clifford Brown
    Only 20 years ago, Bill Clinton used his State of the Union Address to condemn illegal immigration, in language that would not be out of line at a Trump Rally. Amazing how complete the victory of the Left has been on immigration rhetoric, that basic common sense is now considered radicalism.

    Why isn't this clip more well known? Because the Democrats no longer need the White working class vote to hold power, that's why. Republican elites want the cheap labor.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNy4ixHFrdI

    When you are bored, watch the Al Gore NAFTA debate with Ross Perot, a truly idiosyncratic American voice and a Texas maverick. Who was right? Perot, at heart, is an American patriot. He partnered with Steve Jobs after Jobs was ousted from Apple to develop NEXT. Old Perot, his lineage is likely Cajun, would not be offended by the phrase "America First".

    TURNER BROADCASTING!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XEziSYRqhU

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Only 20 years ago, Bill Clinton used his State of the Union Address to condemn illegal immigration…

    …lying through his teeth in doing so.

  54. OT: I got a chuckle out of how this blame-the-(other)-media piece can’t help but point out Theranos’ unbearable whiteness: http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/05/theranos-silicon-valley-media

    There are a lot of directions in which to point fingers. There is Holmes, of course, who seemed to have repeatedly misrepresented her company. There are also the people who funded her, those who praised her, and the largely older, all-white, and entirely male board of directors, few of whom have any real experience in the medical field, that supposedly oversaw her.

    See, people were so easily fooled by the stereotype that blonde women are brilliant that they failed to look past the company’s public face and notice the obvious red flag of the board’s white maleness (which white males in particular is not so interesting).

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @WowJustWow

    "There are also the people who funded her, those who praised her, and the largely older, all-white, and entirely male board of directors, few of whom have any real experience in the medical field, that supposedly oversaw her."

    Right, because if those old white men had been black or latino or women instead, they would have been able to properly oversee Holmes. Ms. Holmes, by the way, also has no real experience in the medical field, but for some reason Vanity Fair doesn't see fit to mention that.

  55. See, people were so easily fooled by the stereotype that blonde women are brilliant that they failed to look past the company’s public face…

    What does Sara Blakely’s board look like?

  56. @Bill P
    It makes a lot of sense to the elite class to disarm and dilute Americans if you read Andrew Sullivan's recent febrile post on the dangers of Trump:

    It may be that demographics will save us. America is no longer an overwhelmingly white country, and Trump’s signature issue — illegal immigration — is the source of his strength but also of his weakness.
     
    Seems this was the idea all along. Divide and conquer to keep the oligarchy alive. Sad to see Charles Murray so stridently taking his class's side in this matter. I didn't know he was that loyal to the people who've screwed over the the white working class for which he feigns some sympathy, but in retrospect it's kind of clear he felt that way all along.

    I have to admit it's a little sad to me that Trump's all we've got, but then again the other side doesn't have all that much to boast about either. Race to the bottom indeed. We're in for some rough times.

    Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Thea, @White Guy In Japan, @Mr. Anon

    I would think working class whites are the buffer against lower class whites or NAMs. But they really don’t see it that way.

    • Replies: @Bill P
    @Thea


    I would think working class whites are the buffer against lower class whites or NAMs. But they really don’t see it that way.
     
    Where I live solid, working class whites make good money. There's a hierarchy of labor. If you're smart, competent, strong and can haul your ass out of bed in the morning you can make a better living than your typical degreed office worker.

    Elites instinctively don't like that. There's been a long-term assault against the white working class because it just isn't fair (sarc.) that these guys are making more money than people with degrees (not that blue collar workers don't ever have degrees -- a fair number of them do; they just don't need them).

    However, the truth is that, all else being equal, these guys are more productive than most chair-pilots, and they are worth the money, so they aren't going to be easily shoved aside by hapless Mexican laborers or Indian call centers. The managerial elite fight against labor and white working men may go on, but neither side will achieve total victory. Frankly, both sides need each other. Is Warren Buffett going to replace his BNSF crews with Mexican migrants and entrust 10,000 ton trains to people who can't speak English and are incapable of following procedure? Yeah, right... Just like the tech nerds are going to replace truckers with robots next year, just you wait! Speaking of Mexicans, I'd like to see what happens to a robot truck when it goes through Mexican customs. Oh Lord, lighten my load why don't you?

    The people who are really feeling the pain aren't usually these kinds of working class guys. They are more marginal workers who have few skills and aren't so fit. They're the kind of people who could use light-industrial factory jobs. A whole lot of them are women. In fact, I'd be willing to say that the loss of industry has been worse for women workers in general than it has for men. A woman who can spend eight hours a day five days a week sewing sneakers together for enough money to pay her rent, decorate her apartment and go out once a week is doing a lot better than one who has to eke out a living in some dismal retail job.

    Seeing the desperation of so many middle-aged women out in flyover country has opened my eyes and humbled me. It's very sad. These are really harmless, vulnerable people, and they've been roughed up by this free movement of capital and labor something awful. Charles Murray likes to blame this on the guys who supposedly won't support them, but in my circles the women totally depend on the men and have little to offer in return. If anything really separates the white working class from the upper middle class it's the incomes (and, unfortunately, the behavior) of the women in the respective positions. Blue collar working men are no slouches, they make decent money and in person they're generally more impressive than their office-dwelling counterparts (this is probably a hidden aspect of Trump's support -- he has these guys behind him, and if he can get a few thousand of them to show up in one place, it's going to seriously intimidate rivals). The women, well, they screw up a lot and have to be rescued over and over. They get a good job and are about ten times as likely to ditch it and try to file a lawsuit. The guys are always pulling them up and out of ditches they run into. The white death, IMO, is a measure of the disposable income of the men in any given community (if you check the census data I can all but guarantee that there's a strong correlation there). The less they have, the less they can afford to help out the women around them, who somehow always seem to need help.

    Replies: @Threecranes, @Jack D

  57. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “Trolls of Soros unite! All you have to lose is your pathetic allegiance to Soros the Nazi collaborator, Soros the greedy robber-baron, Soros the hater. Stop slaving away so that Soros can have his next billion $.”

    She’s probably a young Russian girl with good English skills being paid by the post and working out of the middle of nowhere in Russia somewhere around St. Petersburg. It’s probably very sad how little she’s making.

  58. Easiest election to predict in decades: Hillary loses badly.

    The last candidate with her level of general campaign loserdom was Dukakis in 1988.

    The Establishment Cucks in the GOP have been running a gas lighting program that Hillary is invinceable. Dumbest attempt at manufacturing consent ever!

    • Replies: @Ed
    @Anonymous

    There's no doubt in my mind she is going to lose badly. I'm just hoping that the polls show her winning up until Election Day though. That way the whole of political punditry will be embarrassed & humiliated.

  59. @EriK
    Is gun control really a winning issue in a presidential race?

    Replies: @Clyde, @Busby, @Desiderius, @Desiderius, @kaganovitch, @Boomstick, @Dr. X, @Jim Don Bob, @ben tillman

    I think the calculation is that the pro-gun people will despise her no matter what, given her history. She and Bill have been anti-gun for decades and there is no plausible way for her to straddle the issue.

    So, YOLO, and might as well be hung for a sheep as for a lamb.

    I’m not sure it’s a good strategy. Anti-gun gains her just about zero votes. People who are anti-gun vote Democratic for other reasons. There are many people who don’t like the idea of gun control, but who don’t live and breathe the issue, and her harping on it reminds them that she’s anti-gun.

    Maybe it’s an attempt to energize the base, even if it gains zero votes.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @Boomstick

    "Maybe it’s an attempt to energize the base, even if it gains zero votes."

    Maybe. Democratic party turnout is low, and she's gotten fewer votes than she did in 2008.

  60. Disarm

    Maybe she read The Color of Crime and plans to concentrate on disarming Blacks and Hispanics first — let’s wait and see…

  61. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    @Bill P

    And there's the rub. Charles Murray, while he may or may not technically be a part of the one percent class, he certainly does appear to side with them more often than not. Yes, yes, yes, the Bell Curve was an amazing book in its time and still very much is. But you know, that's yesterday's glory. What's he done since? Did he actually read thru his own data regarding the state of white America (1960-2010)? Or was it all just a clever title to fool the yokels? How many of Fishtown whites does Charles Murray personally associate with nowadays? That's a fair question. Because Trump being from Queens has a legitimate chance of carrying Fishtown in the GE. And, while he waxes lyrical about Iowa the state of his birth, Murray may indeed have been born and raised in Newton, but he sure didn't make a point of staying there. At least Russell Kirk stayed in Grand Rapids, MI. Perhaps that is what unites the likes of neocons, Buckleyites, etc. Their snobbish elitist attitude that they don't give a damn about ordinary folks. For them, class trumps race, national identity, and the interests of ordinary everyday Americans.

    But then the ironic thing is, Trump is a legitimate member of the one percent and yet has spent virtually little next to nothing by fundraising to secure the nomination. He's winning the nomination virtually on free media. If anything, Trump should receive some praise and credit that he didn't simply waste people's money and it helps strengthen his case that he isn't bound to any one donor much less the entire class at large.

    Replies: @rod1963, @Henry Bowman

    How many of Fishtown whites does Charles Murray personally associate with nowadays?

    Probably none, I think he despises them after reading his WSJ article. He’s pretty much a globalist/Davos kind of guy. He does however have lots of admiration for the exports from Bombay and Lahore and hates the white blue collar worker.

    Though to Murray’s credit he admits his class has nothing but utter contempt for lower class whites.

    Make no mistake Murray is a establishment hack with deep ties to the GOP/Neo-Con boss class that goes back decades. He’s no friend of blue collar or middle-class whites.

    Perhaps that is what unites the likes of neocons, Buckleyites, etc. Their snobbish elitist attitude that they don’t give a damn about ordinary folks. For them, class trumps race, national identity, and the interests of ordinary everyday Americans.

    I can agree with that, class is everything for them and explains why as a group they are almost in lock step with supporting the fundamental remaking of the U.S. and demonizing Trump.

  62. Speaking of Hillary, Ed Luce of the FT dings her in this column about how critics of Trump’s foreign policy are throwing rocks from glass houses: https://t.co/iFe2x3OvGf

  63. @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    “She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.”

    You know what it says about you when you feel you need to go around defending your candidate against accusations of anti-Semitism? That’s right.

    Hillary has called for bringing in even more Moslems than ever. They already outnumber Jews and breed at increasing rates. We all know where that leads. Hillary is just as anti-Israel and anti-Semitic as George Bush was.

  64. How many seats in Congress could the gop lose in November?

  65. JimB says:
    @Clyde
    @JimB


    The American people have already been diluted. More than half of school children in America now are non-white, and our high tax, job free, high cost of living economy guarantees whites will throttle back their reproduction even more. Gun control is clearly intended to disarm whites so they can never choose rebellion or separation. Progressives want miscegenation to finish off what is left of European people and Western Civilization. This will be accelerated by making sure section 8 housing is built in every remaining white community, and no white high school cheerleader goes uninseminated by a black football player.
     
    Some hyperbole but all true. Sad but true. Best case scenario is Trump gets elected and we go into a holding pattern with some reversals for the left such as building that damn wall! And how about mandated enforced E-verify and strict enforcement of no welfare for illegals. This will incentivize many to go back home. Enhanced roundups of illegal alien criminals with verified deportation. Active deportation of the one million illegals who have court ordered deportations but refused to comply. Refused to self-deport.

    If Trump gets the ball rolling with well publicized enforcements and deportations we might see millions of illegal aliens get (out) while the getting is good

    Replies: @JimB

    The most important thing for Trump to do after building the wall is to rescind the dumbest trade agreements, repatriate our manufacturing base with tariffs, and make sure only US citizens get the jobs. This means throttling immigration way back to pre-1965 levels. With increased native employment will come increased Historic American birthrates.

    • Replies: @Clyde
    @JimB

    You are singing my song. Fair trade, rebuild American mfg. and reversing the immigration invasion have been my top concerns for years. As you say, more real world jobs makes for better American family formation. So limit internal and external competition for these jobs via smart Trumpian trade and immigration measures. Get third world foreigners out of the driver's seat!

  66. @Thea
    @Bill P

    I would think working class whites are the buffer against lower class whites or NAMs. But they really don't see it that way.

    Replies: @Bill P

    I would think working class whites are the buffer against lower class whites or NAMs. But they really don’t see it that way.

    Where I live solid, working class whites make good money. There’s a hierarchy of labor. If you’re smart, competent, strong and can haul your ass out of bed in the morning you can make a better living than your typical degreed office worker.

    Elites instinctively don’t like that. There’s been a long-term assault against the white working class because it just isn’t fair (sarc.) that these guys are making more money than people with degrees (not that blue collar workers don’t ever have degrees — a fair number of them do; they just don’t need them).

    However, the truth is that, all else being equal, these guys are more productive than most chair-pilots, and they are worth the money, so they aren’t going to be easily shoved aside by hapless Mexican laborers or Indian call centers. The managerial elite fight against labor and white working men may go on, but neither side will achieve total victory. Frankly, both sides need each other. Is Warren Buffett going to replace his BNSF crews with Mexican migrants and entrust 10,000 ton trains to people who can’t speak English and are incapable of following procedure? Yeah, right… Just like the tech nerds are going to replace truckers with robots next year, just you wait! Speaking of Mexicans, I’d like to see what happens to a robot truck when it goes through Mexican customs. Oh Lord, lighten my load why don’t you?

    The people who are really feeling the pain aren’t usually these kinds of working class guys. They are more marginal workers who have few skills and aren’t so fit. They’re the kind of people who could use light-industrial factory jobs. A whole lot of them are women. In fact, I’d be willing to say that the loss of industry has been worse for women workers in general than it has for men. A woman who can spend eight hours a day five days a week sewing sneakers together for enough money to pay her rent, decorate her apartment and go out once a week is doing a lot better than one who has to eke out a living in some dismal retail job.

    Seeing the desperation of so many middle-aged women out in flyover country has opened my eyes and humbled me. It’s very sad. These are really harmless, vulnerable people, and they’ve been roughed up by this free movement of capital and labor something awful. Charles Murray likes to blame this on the guys who supposedly won’t support them, but in my circles the women totally depend on the men and have little to offer in return. If anything really separates the white working class from the upper middle class it’s the incomes (and, unfortunately, the behavior) of the women in the respective positions. Blue collar working men are no slouches, they make decent money and in person they’re generally more impressive than their office-dwelling counterparts (this is probably a hidden aspect of Trump’s support — he has these guys behind him, and if he can get a few thousand of them to show up in one place, it’s going to seriously intimidate rivals). The women, well, they screw up a lot and have to be rescued over and over. They get a good job and are about ten times as likely to ditch it and try to file a lawsuit. The guys are always pulling them up and out of ditches they run into. The white death, IMO, is a measure of the disposable income of the men in any given community (if you check the census data I can all but guarantee that there’s a strong correlation there). The less they have, the less they can afford to help out the women around them, who somehow always seem to need help.

    • Agree: Clyde, RamonaQ
    • Replies: @Threecranes
    @Bill P

    This, particularly the part about current trade's effect on women working in light-industrial jobs, is a perspicacious comment.

    , @Jack D
    @Bill P


    A woman who can spend eight hours a day five days a week sewing sneakers together
     
    Last time I looked, there was one US manufacturer of sneakers left (New Balance) that makes a few million pairs in the US out of the hundreds of millions that are sold. Those jobs have been gone for decades now and aren't coming back. Even when those jobs existed, most of the women doing them were immigrants anyway. Operating a sewing machine was never a job American born women aspired to. It never paid well.

    You are right about skilled blue collar jobs paying well. There are blue collar guys pulling in well north of $100K per year with overtime in (non-computer) service technician type jobs while college grad engineers make $60K. But these kind of jobs are not easy to get (and being skilled, not just anyone can do them).

    Replies: @Anonymous, @anonymous-antimarxist

  67. Priss Factor [AKA "Polly Perkins"] says:

    Cathy Young vs Charles Cookie

    • Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist
    @Priss Factor

    Charles C. Johnson is pretty hit and miss. I never take him seriously until cross verified.

    Around the 7:30 mark Charles C. Johnson suggests that Steve Sailer is genetically Jewish and he apparently implies this based on personal knowledge through either conversations with Sailer himself or those close to him.

    But then again RAMZPAUL claims his 23 & Me tells us him he too is slightly Jewish.

    Could Sailer really be an example of the flipside of an Andrew Breitbart? A Jewish kid adopted by the Goyim.

    Oy Vey, What a Shonda!!! /s

    Replies: @Priss Factor, @Jack D

  68. @Jonah
    @anony-mouse

    Ask yourself: from whence did the fetish of a candidates "negatives" come from?

    Is it a phrase you were enamored of 4 years ago? How about 16 years ago?

    You're being sold a bill of goods by a the lumpenpress. The imbecile factory that gave Trump no shot in the Republican primary season.

    Stop drinking New Coke. It sucks.

    People show up and vote for candidates they support and only show up to vote against candidates they loathe with the flaming intensity of a thousand suns.

    You aren't seeing polls that speak to that latter scenario. "Eh, I don't like the guy" doesn't mean the same thing as "I will show up to vote against that guy."

    Replies: @LondonBob, @Holden McGroin

    Thatcher was never liked as a person, she was respected though, and she won three landslide election victories.

  69. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Feminist hero Clinton rode her husband’s coattails into her current prominence. Without him she’d just be a local corporate lawyer. Her marriage was a joke, a mutually beneficial business deal; their only child is probably not even her husband’s. She has very little appeal and was trounced by an unknown in ’08. She’ll preserve ‘Obama’s gains’? What gains are those? Clinton is a mediocrity who has been elevated far beyond her natural capability. To think that in this country of 330M this is considered to be a legitimate potential president has to make a person ponder how and why this is so. Both she and her husband have so many skeletons in their closets that she would be very controllable which is perhaps why the so-called establishment prefers her.

    • Agree: Kylie
  70. Gun control and immigration are, of course, the two issues where Sanders is to the right of most Democratic voters. Maybe this is Hillary’s attempt to cut off Bernie’s balls once and for all before the convention. I am sure she wants a coronation, not a fight.

  71. @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    What a crock of bullshit.

  72. Clyde says:
    @JimB
    @Clyde

    The most important thing for Trump to do after building the wall is to rescind the dumbest trade agreements, repatriate our manufacturing base with tariffs, and make sure only US citizens get the jobs. This means throttling immigration way back to pre-1965 levels. With increased native employment will come increased Historic American birthrates.

    Replies: @Clyde

    You are singing my song. Fair trade, rebuild American mfg. and reversing the immigration invasion have been my top concerns for years. As you say, more real world jobs makes for better American family formation. So limit internal and external competition for these jobs via smart Trumpian trade and immigration measures. Get third world foreigners out of the driver’s seat!

  73. @Reg Cæsar
    @Clyde


    Hillary will carry Hawaii.
     
    They don't want any more mainlanders, and Mexicans are mainlanders, aren't they? I see a big opening for Trump here.

    Replies: @Clyde

    Hillary just has to promise Federale approval of Indian casinos for the Hawaii natives and she carries it by minimum 63%. Hawaii has been the most multiculti state for years since Obama, and before Obama when it was a US territory.

  74. @Bill P
    It makes a lot of sense to the elite class to disarm and dilute Americans if you read Andrew Sullivan's recent febrile post on the dangers of Trump:

    It may be that demographics will save us. America is no longer an overwhelmingly white country, and Trump’s signature issue — illegal immigration — is the source of his strength but also of his weakness.
     
    Seems this was the idea all along. Divide and conquer to keep the oligarchy alive. Sad to see Charles Murray so stridently taking his class's side in this matter. I didn't know he was that loyal to the people who've screwed over the the white working class for which he feigns some sympathy, but in retrospect it's kind of clear he felt that way all along.

    I have to admit it's a little sad to me that Trump's all we've got, but then again the other side doesn't have all that much to boast about either. Race to the bottom indeed. We're in for some rough times.

    Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Thea, @White Guy In Japan, @Mr. Anon

    Huh. I thought Murray had a better analysis of Trumpism.
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trumps-america-1455290458

  75. Do liberals really think that *all* American gun owners will meekly hand over their guns? Do the math. If only 10% resist, the gun grabbers will have a big problem.

  76. @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    Lol I see what you are doing. For those that don’t know “AG Conservative” is the handle of a prolific anti-Trump Twitter user.

    I think this poster is mocking him.

    • Replies: @Bert
    @Ed

    That's what I got as well. Sadly, most of the iSteve crowd is so autistic and stupid they'll assume it legit.

    Replies: @anon, @Glaivester, @Big Bill

  77. @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    “As a real conservative who is horrified by “America First” (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.”

    So you prefer you war criminals to be experieced?

  78. @Anonymous
    Easiest election to predict in decades: Hillary loses badly.

    The last candidate with her level of general campaign loserdom was Dukakis in 1988.

    The Establishment Cucks in the GOP have been running a gas lighting program that Hillary is invinceable. Dumbest attempt at manufacturing consent ever!

    Replies: @Ed

    There’s no doubt in my mind she is going to lose badly. I’m just hoping that the polls show her winning up until Election Day though. That way the whole of political punditry will be embarrassed & humiliated.

  79. @Ed
    @AG Conservative

    Lol I see what you are doing. For those that don't know "AG Conservative" is the handle of a prolific anti-Trump Twitter user.

    I think this poster is mocking him.

    Replies: @Bert

    That’s what I got as well. Sadly, most of the iSteve crowd is so autistic and stupid they’ll assume it legit.

    • Replies: @anon
    @Bert

    We're not full-bore autistic. We're just aspergery.

    , @Glaivester
    @Bert

    Actually, if this is "Conservative Pundit" (aka DemsRRealRacist) the assumption that this is legit is simply an example of Poe's Law. I assure you, the real AG_Conservative has said essentially this.

    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/726055342136791040
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/726055735113732096
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/725312024004145152
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/711982920404115456
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/711372842374279168
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/710885951594037249

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @Perplexed, @Bill

    , @Big Bill
    @Bert

    "Autistic" because they don't Twit with Twitterers?

  80. @Andrew
    @Nathan Hale

    "All indications are that Trump will be attempting to expand the map and win over independents. It will be interesting to see whose theory of the election is correct."

    Its interesting to consider the ISideWith map of Trump vs. Clinton to examine areas of relative strength.

    Trump shows up with a unique map. He shows disappointing but perhaps understandable weakness in CO, VA, MN, IL, ME, and WI, but he shows surprising strength in MI, OH, PA, NJ, DE and NH. In between these groupings are CT and IA.

    His weakest states are DC, WA, OR, CA, HI, MA, MD, and NY, while his strongest are not surprisingly LA, MS, AL, WY, SC, WV, ID, ND, TN, OK.

    http://www.isidewith.com/map/JNty/2016-presidential-election-donald-trump-vs-hillary-clinton#z4

    If you line the states up by the percentages shown for Trump vs. Clinton, the state projected to put Trump over the top is interestingly Utah, and it puts him over the top because of relative strength in MI, OH and ME Distrct 2.

    Following this map, I could see Trump losing VA, CO, WI, and MN but winning outright with 335 electoral votes by carrying much of the northeast and Michigan while holding most of the south and west.

    If the survey percentages were to actually turn out to be accurate (farfetched, I admit), Hilllary would suffer a 1980 style wipeout, carrying only CA, WA, MA and DC and losing 457 to 81.

    Replies: @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @Mike Sylwester, @LondonBob

    Interesting how much that goes with what common sense tells you. CT and NJ should be competitive to a NY Republican, they don’t have NY City that makes NY out of reach for Trump. MI, PA and OH have always been the Rust Belt states most likely to flip. VI is too much of an establishment colonised area now, however Trump is strong in the Mid Atlantic so not surprised to see DE as up for grabs, Paul Manafort and Rick Wiley had it as a target in his presentation to the RNC. NV and FL are Trump home states, NM more likely to flip than too nice IA, surprised by CO.

    • Replies: @Andrew
    @LondonBob

    Interesting how much that goes with what common sense tells you.

    Yep. That has been my point all along.

    CT and NJ should be competitive to a NY Republican, they don’t have NY City that makes NY out of reach for Trump.

    Yep, and you'd expect NJ to be competitive before CT, and that is what it shows.

    Even the granular detail by congressional district is strikingly common sense. In NY, for example, it shows Trump doing best in Staten Island, Southern Nassau County, suburban Buffalo, and Suffolk County. His worst districts? Harlmen/Washington Heights, Upper West Side, Upper East Side.

    In Pennsylvania it shows Trump's three best congressional districts are 9, 10, and 11 (Shuster, Marino, and Barletta). Not surprisingly, these three men have endorsed Trump.

    In NJ, is anyone surprised Trump's three best districts are 3 (Burlington County), 2 (Gloucester/Atlantic City), and 4 (Ocean/Monmouth).

    MI, PA and OH have always been the Rust Belt states most likely to flip.

    The three of them are much more alike than are Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota.

    VA is too much of an establishment colonised area now

    Trump's weakness in VA is entirely in the three northern VA districts in Arlington/Alexandria, Fairfax, and Loudon (8, 10, 11) and district 3 (black majority part of Richmond/Norfolk).


    however Trump is strong in the Mid Atlantic so not surprised to see DE as up for grabs, Paul Manafort and Rick Wiley had it as a target in his presentation to the RNC.

    DE went with the winner every year until 2000. It was surprising to most when it did not go with Bush. It is very much like south Jersey and Chester County.

    NV and FL are Trump home states

    He has amazing relative strength in Las Vegas for a Republican.

    NM more likely to flip than too nice IA, surprised by CO.

    Both NM and IA exhibit their typical partisan breakdown in Trump vs. Hillary. It just seems like Trump gets a bit more support in NM than he gets in blue parts of Iowa.

    The real surprise in WI, where Trump does poorly as expected in Milwaukee and Madison, but also continues to show poorly in the WOW Counties where Cruz killed him - Waukesha/Ozaukee/Washington.

    CO is becoming a SJW SWPL Whitopia like Oregon/Washington, with a side of Northern Virginia-like FedJobs dependency + academia in metro Denver-Boulder. Not a good combination for Trump. The SWPL/SJW liberal white college kids are the type of Sanders voters who will NOT be voting for Trump in the fall.

    In fact if you could get a breakdown of Sanders voters between working class folks and SJW/SWPL's, it would tell you where Trump will and will not pick up Sanders votes in a way that would matter. My gut tells me the midwest and PA is where they will be helping him, and not CO and the Pacific Northwest.

    , @Jack D
    @LondonBob

    Neither NJ nor CT nor MI nor PA have voted Republican in a Presidential race since 1988. I think that they are all demographically out of reach now barring something close to a miracle. If they were winnable for the Republicans, then one of the Republican candidates in one of the last six elections in one of these states would have won at least once but these states went 24 for 24 D. The only one that is realistically flippable is Ohio.

    Replies: @Jack Hanson, @DWB

  81. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is…in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control.

    • Replies: @International Jew
    @Anonymous

    Great insight that, but you forgot to attribute it to Theodore Dalrymple.

    Replies: @The most deplorable one, @Reg Cæsar

  82. There is a way to get illegal immigrants to leave. Pass a law that confiscates assets of illegal immigrants that do not self deport when given a deportation order.

    They will sell their stuff and get out of the US as fast as possible if they thought they will loose their home, bank account and car.

    Yes they will.

  83. Our Battlecry: “Make attaining citizenship as hard as getting a permit to own a gun!”

  84. @Bill P
    @Thea


    I would think working class whites are the buffer against lower class whites or NAMs. But they really don’t see it that way.
     
    Where I live solid, working class whites make good money. There's a hierarchy of labor. If you're smart, competent, strong and can haul your ass out of bed in the morning you can make a better living than your typical degreed office worker.

    Elites instinctively don't like that. There's been a long-term assault against the white working class because it just isn't fair (sarc.) that these guys are making more money than people with degrees (not that blue collar workers don't ever have degrees -- a fair number of them do; they just don't need them).

    However, the truth is that, all else being equal, these guys are more productive than most chair-pilots, and they are worth the money, so they aren't going to be easily shoved aside by hapless Mexican laborers or Indian call centers. The managerial elite fight against labor and white working men may go on, but neither side will achieve total victory. Frankly, both sides need each other. Is Warren Buffett going to replace his BNSF crews with Mexican migrants and entrust 10,000 ton trains to people who can't speak English and are incapable of following procedure? Yeah, right... Just like the tech nerds are going to replace truckers with robots next year, just you wait! Speaking of Mexicans, I'd like to see what happens to a robot truck when it goes through Mexican customs. Oh Lord, lighten my load why don't you?

    The people who are really feeling the pain aren't usually these kinds of working class guys. They are more marginal workers who have few skills and aren't so fit. They're the kind of people who could use light-industrial factory jobs. A whole lot of them are women. In fact, I'd be willing to say that the loss of industry has been worse for women workers in general than it has for men. A woman who can spend eight hours a day five days a week sewing sneakers together for enough money to pay her rent, decorate her apartment and go out once a week is doing a lot better than one who has to eke out a living in some dismal retail job.

    Seeing the desperation of so many middle-aged women out in flyover country has opened my eyes and humbled me. It's very sad. These are really harmless, vulnerable people, and they've been roughed up by this free movement of capital and labor something awful. Charles Murray likes to blame this on the guys who supposedly won't support them, but in my circles the women totally depend on the men and have little to offer in return. If anything really separates the white working class from the upper middle class it's the incomes (and, unfortunately, the behavior) of the women in the respective positions. Blue collar working men are no slouches, they make decent money and in person they're generally more impressive than their office-dwelling counterparts (this is probably a hidden aspect of Trump's support -- he has these guys behind him, and if he can get a few thousand of them to show up in one place, it's going to seriously intimidate rivals). The women, well, they screw up a lot and have to be rescued over and over. They get a good job and are about ten times as likely to ditch it and try to file a lawsuit. The guys are always pulling them up and out of ditches they run into. The white death, IMO, is a measure of the disposable income of the men in any given community (if you check the census data I can all but guarantee that there's a strong correlation there). The less they have, the less they can afford to help out the women around them, who somehow always seem to need help.

    Replies: @Threecranes, @Jack D

    This, particularly the part about current trade’s effect on women working in light-industrial jobs, is a perspicacious comment.

  85. @Bert
    @Ed

    That's what I got as well. Sadly, most of the iSteve crowd is so autistic and stupid they'll assume it legit.

    Replies: @anon, @Glaivester, @Big Bill

    We’re not full-bore autistic. We’re just aspergery.

  86. @Jonah
    @anony-mouse

    Ask yourself: from whence did the fetish of a candidates "negatives" come from?

    Is it a phrase you were enamored of 4 years ago? How about 16 years ago?

    You're being sold a bill of goods by a the lumpenpress. The imbecile factory that gave Trump no shot in the Republican primary season.

    Stop drinking New Coke. It sucks.

    People show up and vote for candidates they support and only show up to vote against candidates they loathe with the flaming intensity of a thousand suns.

    You aren't seeing polls that speak to that latter scenario. "Eh, I don't like the guy" doesn't mean the same thing as "I will show up to vote against that guy."

    Replies: @LondonBob, @Holden McGroin

    That’s a good point. In the last few years I’ve seen lots of references to “optics”. Not sure what they are, but bad ones seem to involve people noticing the outcomes of policy decisions don’t match the intentions. I expect that bad optics are also racist

  87. @Bert
    @Ed

    That's what I got as well. Sadly, most of the iSteve crowd is so autistic and stupid they'll assume it legit.

    Replies: @anon, @Glaivester, @Big Bill

    Actually, if this is “Conservative Pundit” (aka DemsRRealRacist) the assumption that this is legit is simply an example of Poe’s Law. I assure you, the real AG_Conservative has said essentially this.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    @Glaivester

    It doesn't look like a parody account. But I'm not sure.

    Replies: @Glaivester

    , @Perplexed
    @Glaivester

    Conservative Pundit is witty. This guy just sounds deranged from Trump-phobia. Heavy-handed.

    , @Bill
    @Glaivester

    The responses to the first one! LOL!

    #WriteInRubio

    LOL!!!

  88. @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    AG, I respect your honesty, integrity and forthrightness. The time approaches when every white American will have to answer the question “Which Side Are You On?”.

    Countless Americans faced the same moral choice in 1861. How hard it is for a man of honor to weigh competing loyalties when they compel him in opposing directions. What does he owe to his family, his clan, his race, his nation, his country? You have chosen your course. I wish you well.

  89. Guys, can we please institute a policy of NOT responding to the first comment to Steve’s post? It has been the same multi-monikered village idiot for a couple months now.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    @Brutusale

    Sick/Tiny Duck seems to be a parody account, this AG Conservative is probably parody, too, but parodies something else.

    Replies: @BenKenobi

  90. I just bumped into this piece by Krugman. According to him, the benefits of staying inside the EU for the UK are…

    1) to keep Boris Johnson from power
    2) to raise British GDP by 2% for perpetuity

    Setting aside the Boris Johnson part, is this 2% argument a self-parody?

  91. @Bert
    @Ed

    That's what I got as well. Sadly, most of the iSteve crowd is so autistic and stupid they'll assume it legit.

    Replies: @anon, @Glaivester, @Big Bill

    “Autistic” because they don’t Twit with Twitterers?

  92. @Glaivester
    @Bert

    Actually, if this is "Conservative Pundit" (aka DemsRRealRacist) the assumption that this is legit is simply an example of Poe's Law. I assure you, the real AG_Conservative has said essentially this.

    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/726055342136791040
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/726055735113732096
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/725312024004145152
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/711982920404115456
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/711372842374279168
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/710885951594037249

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @Perplexed, @Bill

    It doesn’t look like a parody account. But I’m not sure.

    • Replies: @Glaivester
    @reiner Tor

    DemsRRealRacist is a parody account. AG Conservative, who has blocked me for pointing out how ridiculous the idea that a Rubio presidency would get us border security is, is definitely for real.

  93. @Reg Cæsar
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi


    ...and also eminent domain, which, contrary to conservatives who espouse the free market, goes fairly well among ordinary folks at the local level.
     
    Unlike those powdered morons who wrote the Fifth Amendment?

    If eminent domain is so popular at the local level, why do so many of those whose property is targeted fight the decision? The actual piece of land is as local as you can get!

    ...Trump didn’t shoot himself in the foot with the assinine auto bailout op ed.
     
    Holding to principles is asinine? How come the Swedes can say say no to automakers holding a tin cup, but Americans can't? Opposing bailouts didn't seem to hurt Ronald Reagan.

    But bailouts seem suspiciously popular with those decrying "corporate welfare" and "crony capitalism".

    Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @Bill Jones

    Reagan opposed letting Harey Davidson going bankrupt. He also supported Chrysler’s bailout. Also, since WHEN have the words “principles” ever applied to the likes of Mitt Romney? Now come on. Again, I daresay that at least 85% or around thereabouts of ordinary GOP voters cannot name 2-3 policies that Romney ran on. However, most adults who voted in the ’12 election do actually recall the “47” gaffe as well as the auto bailout which more or less cost him MI and hurt his chances in OH.

    Also, let’s not so quickly forget that Romney boasted of his ability to raise money as a proof of ability to win the election. Uh, pray tell which class (top 1% or ordinary folks) heavily donated to his campaign? And how much of his own personal fortune did Willard actually spend during his campaign.

    Romney is a donorist and globalist tool, or pawn to their interests.

    It depends which bailouts, of course. Those that tend to save US workers’ jobs and helps somewhat prevent jobs being shipped overseas in massive numbers, they will support.

  94. @Brutusale
    Guys, can we please institute a policy of NOT responding to the first comment to Steve's post? It has been the same multi-monikered village idiot for a couple months now.

    Replies: @reiner Tor

    Sick/Tiny Duck seems to be a parody account, this AG Conservative is probably parody, too, but parodies something else.

    • Replies: @BenKenobi
    @reiner Tor

    I can see why Steve lets these posts through -- they certainly generate replies.

  95. Dr. X says:
    @EriK
    Is gun control really a winning issue in a presidential race?

    Replies: @Clyde, @Busby, @Desiderius, @Desiderius, @kaganovitch, @Boomstick, @Dr. X, @Jim Don Bob, @ben tillman

    Is gun control really a winning issue in a presidential race?

    I don’t know, but it sure as hell is a good strategy to start a war — which is exactly what happened in 1775 when Gen. Gage ordered troops to confiscate guns are Lexington and Concord.

    A LOT of people are getting ready to rock… just TRY it, Hillary

  96. @Mike Sylwester
    @Andrew


    Its interesting to consider the ISideWith map of Trump vs. Clinton to examine areas of relative strength.
     
    It's an on-line poll.

    However, it is fun to look at it.

    Replies: @Andrew

    “It’s an on-line poll.”

    I’m going to keep trying to make this point.

    Don’t use it as a poll where you are expecting it to provide you precise percentages of support. Use it as a tool to measure relative strength of candidates. Let it show you where support is strong or weak for one candidate vs. another.

    Used in this way, it has been highly accurate and predictive regarding where Trump would do best vs. where Cruz would do best and showing where Kasich would find the most support.

  97. Meh, these aren’t fights she expects to win, at least legislatively (executive actions might be a different matter), they’re fights she wants to wage, because they keep suburban white professionals and middle-income Hispanics on the D side of the line.

    The policy that the Dems actually expect to get through are probably Chetty’s inclusionary zoning/Moving to Opportunity-style programs, police reform/drug decriminalization/sentence lightening, and mandatory maternity leaves and child benefits. Making suburbs poorer so the cities can keep getting richer, emptying the jails and reenfranchising the parolees, and making sure the gender wage gap is still big enough to run on in 2020 and beyond (maternity leave has its benefits, but it pretty much assures slower career advancement for those who take it.)

  98. As I quipped on Facebook I’m very torn between my base Tory instincts (Zac G-Brexit-Trump) and my “enlightened” liberal outlook (Sadiq-Bremain-Clinton).

    The latter is more of the same whereas the former is something new.

    I have to say though that if gun control and immigration are the most pressing issues of the American polity (the world’s hyper-power) then that’s a bit disappointing.

    I thought Clinton was the pragmatic choice but to be fair I’m increasingly seeing Trump as more and more presidential (even if he’s prone to ridiculous quotes). What could he do with a Republican Congress and SC (without neocon hacks – I read this ridiculous piece by Stratfor justifying the ME forays)?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Zachary Latif


    I have to say though that if gun control and immigration are the most pressing issues of the American polity (the world’s hyper-power) then that’s a bit disappointing.
     
    They're not "pressing issues", they're metaissues.

    The first is about whom we can trust, the second, about who we even are. The rest of the world can wait until those are sorted out.

    Britain's gun laws are as wacky as our Prohibition ever was. Besides being unnecessary, they're everything that Englishmen are not-- emotional, extreme, and dismissive of tradition. (Our Second Amendment was cribbed from the Petition of Rights, which drew from common law.) That doesn't speak well of the modern Englishman, does it?

    But then, Brixton and Bradford don't look that English anymore, do they?
    , @Marcus
    @Zachary Latif

    They're pretty minor issues compared to bathrooms for trannies.

    Replies: @SPMoore8

  99. @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    Trolling, right?

  100. @LondonBob
    @Andrew

    Interesting how much that goes with what common sense tells you. CT and NJ should be competitive to a NY Republican, they don't have NY City that makes NY out of reach for Trump. MI, PA and OH have always been the Rust Belt states most likely to flip. VI is too much of an establishment colonised area now, however Trump is strong in the Mid Atlantic so not surprised to see DE as up for grabs, Paul Manafort and Rick Wiley had it as a target in his presentation to the RNC. NV and FL are Trump home states, NM more likely to flip than too nice IA, surprised by CO.

    Replies: @Andrew, @Jack D

    Interesting how much that goes with what common sense tells you.

    Yep. That has been my point all along.

    CT and NJ should be competitive to a NY Republican, they don’t have NY City that makes NY out of reach for Trump.

    Yep, and you’d expect NJ to be competitive before CT, and that is what it shows.

    Even the granular detail by congressional district is strikingly common sense. In NY, for example, it shows Trump doing best in Staten Island, Southern Nassau County, suburban Buffalo, and Suffolk County. His worst districts? Harlmen/Washington Heights, Upper West Side, Upper East Side.

    In Pennsylvania it shows Trump’s three best congressional districts are 9, 10, and 11 (Shuster, Marino, and Barletta). Not surprisingly, these three men have endorsed Trump.

    In NJ, is anyone surprised Trump’s three best districts are 3 (Burlington County), 2 (Gloucester/Atlantic City), and 4 (Ocean/Monmouth).

    MI, PA and OH have always been the Rust Belt states most likely to flip.

    The three of them are much more alike than are Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota.

    VA is too much of an establishment colonised area now

    Trump’s weakness in VA is entirely in the three northern VA districts in Arlington/Alexandria, Fairfax, and Loudon (8, 10, 11) and district 3 (black majority part of Richmond/Norfolk).

    however Trump is strong in the Mid Atlantic so not surprised to see DE as up for grabs, Paul Manafort and Rick Wiley had it as a target in his presentation to the RNC.

    DE went with the winner every year until 2000. It was surprising to most when it did not go with Bush. It is very much like south Jersey and Chester County.

    NV and FL are Trump home states

    He has amazing relative strength in Las Vegas for a Republican.

    NM more likely to flip than too nice IA, surprised by CO.

    Both NM and IA exhibit their typical partisan breakdown in Trump vs. Hillary. It just seems like Trump gets a bit more support in NM than he gets in blue parts of Iowa.

    The real surprise in WI, where Trump does poorly as expected in Milwaukee and Madison, but also continues to show poorly in the WOW Counties where Cruz killed him – Waukesha/Ozaukee/Washington.

    CO is becoming a SJW SWPL Whitopia like Oregon/Washington, with a side of Northern Virginia-like FedJobs dependency + academia in metro Denver-Boulder. Not a good combination for Trump. The SWPL/SJW liberal white college kids are the type of Sanders voters who will NOT be voting for Trump in the fall.

    In fact if you could get a breakdown of Sanders voters between working class folks and SJW/SWPL’s, it would tell you where Trump will and will not pick up Sanders votes in a way that would matter. My gut tells me the midwest and PA is where they will be helping him, and not CO and the Pacific Northwest.

  101. @WowJustWow
    OT: I got a chuckle out of how this blame-the-(other)-media piece can't help but point out Theranos' unbearable whiteness: http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/05/theranos-silicon-valley-media

    There are a lot of directions in which to point fingers. There is Holmes, of course, who seemed to have repeatedly misrepresented her company. There are also the people who funded her, those who praised her, and the largely older, all-white, and entirely male board of directors, few of whom have any real experience in the medical field, that supposedly oversaw her.
     
    See, people were so easily fooled by the stereotype that blonde women are brilliant that they failed to look past the company's public face and notice the obvious red flag of the board's white maleness (which white males in particular is not so interesting).

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    “There are also the people who funded her, those who praised her, and the largely older, all-white, and entirely male board of directors, few of whom have any real experience in the medical field, that supposedly oversaw her.”

    Right, because if those old white men had been black or latino or women instead, they would have been able to properly oversee Holmes. Ms. Holmes, by the way, also has no real experience in the medical field, but for some reason Vanity Fair doesn’t see fit to mention that.

  102. @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    “As a real conservative who is horrified by “America First” (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general. I would’ve preferred Rubio.”

    That perfectly encapsulates the idiocy of the #NeverTrump crowd. They might as well change their slogan to “tax cuts for billionaires and wars for everyone” because that pretty much sums up these vapid buffoons – and their candidate Hilary Clinton.

  103. @Boomstick
    @EriK

    I think the calculation is that the pro-gun people will despise her no matter what, given her history. She and Bill have been anti-gun for decades and there is no plausible way for her to straddle the issue.

    So, YOLO, and might as well be hung for a sheep as for a lamb.

    I'm not sure it's a good strategy. Anti-gun gains her just about zero votes. People who are anti-gun vote Democratic for other reasons. There are many people who don't like the idea of gun control, but who don't live and breathe the issue, and her harping on it reminds them that she's anti-gun.

    Maybe it's an attempt to energize the base, even if it gains zero votes.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    “Maybe it’s an attempt to energize the base, even if it gains zero votes.”

    Maybe. Democratic party turnout is low, and she’s gotten fewer votes than she did in 2008.

  104. As a real conservative who is horrified by “America First” (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I know this is probably meant to be funny (“As a real conservative”?), but this is actually the neoconservatives’ tack now. Odious McCain was using this schtick last night on her show, wrapping herself in the “conservative” flag and decrying Trump as “too liberal.” She also condemned his “white identity politics” (too much of a threat to her daddy’s oligarch/coalition of the fringes identity politics, I suppose).

    Let’s sum up the McCain clan’s “conservatism”:

    As many wars for Israel as possible, as much destructive “nation-building” abroad as possible
    Open borders for the cheap labor lobby to keep working Americans’ wages low and dilute the population share of those pesky, uppity whites and those shiftless American blacks.
    Unfair trade deals to keep costs low for the donor class, and further erode working Americans’ wages.
    Self-abnegation for whites, identity politics for blacks, yellows, browns, Jews, etc.

    Your basic “nation-building for foreign countries, nation-wrecking for the United States and Europe” platform.

    Yes, I can smell the conservative politics from here!

    On the other hand, let’s sum up Trump’s “liberalism”:

    No more unnecessary wars, no more “nation-building” abroad
    Close the borders and stop importing cheap labor for the oligarchs, so wages can start rising for all Americans
    Fair trade deals that advance the interests of America as a whole, instead of just the donor class
    Representation not just for black, yellow, brown, and Jewish identity politics, but for all Americans – even the majority!

    America First, in other words.

    If scuzzy Invade the World, Invite the World, In Hock to the World politics are now “conservatism,” then I want no part of conservatism, and I am not a conservative. I want representatives who will close the borders, remove criminal aliens, create trade deals that favor the American people, and represent the interests of all Americans, not just the oligarchs and the coalition of the fringes.

    Since the McCain clan agenda is far closer to the first, “neoconservative” (apparently a euphemism for “nonconservative”) list, I can see why they oppose Trump.

    It was really, really, really interesting to hear McCain froth at the mouth about Trump, then sleepwalk through the subsequent, short interview about Obama’s “new” gun control initiative (with someone not from the NRA, but from some shooting sports foundation), then come slightly awake again to tell her audience how offensive she found some black comedian’s use of the “n-word” at a White House press dinner. It was flecks of foam, 1k words a minute, and “never never never never” when the subject was Trump, then it was soft tones and reason when the subject was Obama and gun control.

    Really laid out which side the McCain clan is on. It ain’t America’s. It’s the McCain clan’s.

    Is gun control really a winning issue in a presidential race?

    Gun control is a huge loser. The Republicans have abortion, and the Democrats have guns. Democrats actually make an effort to die on their Hamburger Hill, though, and keep losing and losing and losing. God bless ’em.

    You’re being sold a bill of goods by a the lumpenpress. The imbecile factory that gave Trump no shot in the Republican primary season.

    Stop drinking New Coke. It sucks.

    I gather that Anony-mouse is opposed to most of the politics espoused by most of the commenters here. He can always correct me if I’m wrong.

  105. @candid_observer
    I just wonder what Hillary's strategists are thinking.

    She's out there debating Trump over illegal immigration, and suddenly another bunch of Muslims in Europe (or far worse, America) massacre dozens of civilians, or another illegal immigrant in the US commits some horrible crime of violence on a very sympathetic innocent in the US.

    What's her answer? Who's going to be persuaded instead of repulsed by it?

    This woman is leading by her chin.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    “This woman is leading by her chin.”

    Hillary Clinton has never shown any indication that she is remotely competent at anything, or even very smart at all. She has screwed up everything she has ever touched. She is a rather dull-witted woman who only has a national political career thanks to her husband.

  106. @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    “….Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.”

    Yeah, that’s why she addressed Paul Fray, one of Bill’s political advisors, as “you f**king jew bastard!”.

  107. There is a way to get illegal immigrants to leave. Pass a law that confiscates assets of illegal immigrants that do not self deport when given a deportation order.

    They will sell their stuff and get out of the US as fast as possible if they thought they will loose their home, bank account and car.

    Yes they will.

    It would work, but I prefer going after employers. Frog-marching (in a figurative sense – realistically, we’re talking huge fines) fat cat employers has infinitely better optics. That, and denying public services of any kind to criminal aliens. It’s one thing to seize their assets, it’s quite another to say “not on my dime.”

    They’d leave just as quickly, and the left would have to resort to playing the world’s smallest violin for the greedy exploitative employers, or arguing that criminal border-jumpers have a right to taxpayer monies.

    • Replies: @Brutusale
    @Svigor

    That method would have the added bonus of decimating hundreds of Chinese restaurants staffed almost exclusively with illegals.

  108. @Bill P
    It makes a lot of sense to the elite class to disarm and dilute Americans if you read Andrew Sullivan's recent febrile post on the dangers of Trump:

    It may be that demographics will save us. America is no longer an overwhelmingly white country, and Trump’s signature issue — illegal immigration — is the source of his strength but also of his weakness.
     
    Seems this was the idea all along. Divide and conquer to keep the oligarchy alive. Sad to see Charles Murray so stridently taking his class's side in this matter. I didn't know he was that loyal to the people who've screwed over the the white working class for which he feigns some sympathy, but in retrospect it's kind of clear he felt that way all along.

    I have to admit it's a little sad to me that Trump's all we've got, but then again the other side doesn't have all that much to boast about either. Race to the bottom indeed. We're in for some rough times.

    Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Thea, @White Guy In Japan, @Mr. Anon

    “I have to admit it’s a little sad to me that Trump’s all we’ve got,”

    As Richard Spencer recently said (in so many words): America has become a coarse and vulgar country. A coarse and vulgar candidate is probably the best we can expect.

  109. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @Bill P


    Andrew Sullivan’s recent febrile post on the dangers of Trump
     
    Sullivan writes:

    He is usually of the elite but has a nature in tune with the time — given over to random pleasures and whims, feasting on plenty of food and sex, and reveling in the nonjudgment that is democracy’s civil religion.
     
    A bitchy take on Trump, or has Sullivan been struck with an uncharacteristic flash of self-awareness? Why do I even ask.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    Sullivan is hardly the right guy to be giving stern lectures about wanton self-indulgence, I should think.

  110. @Glaivester
    @Bert

    Actually, if this is "Conservative Pundit" (aka DemsRRealRacist) the assumption that this is legit is simply an example of Poe's Law. I assure you, the real AG_Conservative has said essentially this.

    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/726055342136791040
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/726055735113732096
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/725312024004145152
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/711982920404115456
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/711372842374279168
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/710885951594037249

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @Perplexed, @Bill

    Conservative Pundit is witty. This guy just sounds deranged from Trump-phobia. Heavy-handed.

  111. @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    I’m no fan of Trump, he is distasteful to the extreme as a person but gun against my head or not I will vote for him over Hillary.

    • Replies: @duncsbaby
    @duncsbaby

    I call bullshit on any 'conservative' that says they'll vote for Hillary. Trump will be a wild roller coaster ride through the unknown, perhaps, but Hillary & her poisonous identity politics are a KNOWN quantity.

  112. At his second Indiana rally yesterday, Trump did a brilliant five-minute precis of the TPP and what he will do instead. I hope someone makes it a stand-alone commercial. Man, I hate early voting.

    I suspect Hillary doesn’t want to be President. Her whole post-Secretary of State project has been to collect the big bucks from current and prospective rent-seekers. And failed candidates get to keep unspent campaign funds. It’s like “The Producers.” She may drop out before or after the convention. That decision probably is up to the party pooh-bahs.

  113. @415 reasons
    @unit472

    I can assure you letting in millions of uneducated people whose children will attend public school, who will take earned income tax credits, and who will use state subsidized health insurance is not a net positive to the federal budget

    Replies: @Unit472, @Economic Sophisms, @Lurker

    Yes, there is some budget impact but it is hidden in existing programs or primarily falls on state and local budgets.

    Schools and teachers,eg, are already in place and the children of illegals already enrolled.

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    @Unit472


    Yes, there is some budget impact but it is hidden in existing programs or primarily falls on state and local budgets.

    Schools and teachers,eg, are already in place and the children of illegals already enrolled.
     
    No, they are not. Many of the children are not yet school age, and many times more -- millions upon millions in this generation and future ones -- are not even born.
  114. @duncsbaby
    @AG Conservative

    I'm no fan of Trump, he is distasteful to the extreme as a person but gun against my head or not I will vote for him over Hillary.

    Replies: @duncsbaby

    I call bullshit on any ‘conservative’ that says they’ll vote for Hillary. Trump will be a wild roller coaster ride through the unknown, perhaps, but Hillary & her poisonous identity politics are a KNOWN quantity.

  115. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:
    @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    The train is fine.

    Just tell me Trump will make the trains run on time!

  116. I have never been a “lesser of two evils” voter- didn’t pull the lever for either major-party Presidential candidate in the past few elections- but Mrs. Clinton’s avowed platform of “disarm law-abiding Americans, and refuse to lift a finger to defend the country from foreign invasion” may prove sufficiently awful to break my streak. As lousy as the likely GOP nominee will be in many respects, at least he won’t explicitly include “de facto conquest and subjugation of the American people” as a key platform plank.

    The state is an instrument first and foremost for defeating other states in war, thereby protecting its territorial integrity and rendering secure the lives and property of its inhabitants. It’s hard to countenance the reins of state falling into the hands of someone sworn to frustrate the only purposes which justify its continued existence. In Mrs. Clinton’s warped conception, the state exists not to defend society, but to forcibly transform it. This same principle is just as evident in her foreign policy, which uses martial violence not to defend American security, but to ideologically transform foreign nations. Of course, if Americans are so corrupt as to willingly elect such a woman, then perhaps we deserve four years of whatever she can throw at us.

  117. @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    Sorry, everybody, but if you didn’t figure out that this was fake, I don’t know what to say (that is polite). Rarely can anyone write a parody perfect enough not to contain giveaways of the truth, and this one did not even come close to believability. (“Nazi slogan” and “dumb whites” were the most egregious giveaways here, but not the only ones.)

    • Replies: @Glaivester
    @James Kabala


    Sorry, everybody, but if you didn’t figure out that this was fake, I don’t know what to say (that is polite).
     
    How about, "Oh, you've actually read the real AG_Conservative's Twitter account."

    AG Conservative is real, and what he says is not that far removed from what the poster said. Read his Twitter account some time (I linked to some tweets above). And no, he isn't a parody, his Twitter account didn't have anything in it that seemed too unreasonable until after Rubio dropped out.
  118. @Bill P
    @Thea


    I would think working class whites are the buffer against lower class whites or NAMs. But they really don’t see it that way.
     
    Where I live solid, working class whites make good money. There's a hierarchy of labor. If you're smart, competent, strong and can haul your ass out of bed in the morning you can make a better living than your typical degreed office worker.

    Elites instinctively don't like that. There's been a long-term assault against the white working class because it just isn't fair (sarc.) that these guys are making more money than people with degrees (not that blue collar workers don't ever have degrees -- a fair number of them do; they just don't need them).

    However, the truth is that, all else being equal, these guys are more productive than most chair-pilots, and they are worth the money, so they aren't going to be easily shoved aside by hapless Mexican laborers or Indian call centers. The managerial elite fight against labor and white working men may go on, but neither side will achieve total victory. Frankly, both sides need each other. Is Warren Buffett going to replace his BNSF crews with Mexican migrants and entrust 10,000 ton trains to people who can't speak English and are incapable of following procedure? Yeah, right... Just like the tech nerds are going to replace truckers with robots next year, just you wait! Speaking of Mexicans, I'd like to see what happens to a robot truck when it goes through Mexican customs. Oh Lord, lighten my load why don't you?

    The people who are really feeling the pain aren't usually these kinds of working class guys. They are more marginal workers who have few skills and aren't so fit. They're the kind of people who could use light-industrial factory jobs. A whole lot of them are women. In fact, I'd be willing to say that the loss of industry has been worse for women workers in general than it has for men. A woman who can spend eight hours a day five days a week sewing sneakers together for enough money to pay her rent, decorate her apartment and go out once a week is doing a lot better than one who has to eke out a living in some dismal retail job.

    Seeing the desperation of so many middle-aged women out in flyover country has opened my eyes and humbled me. It's very sad. These are really harmless, vulnerable people, and they've been roughed up by this free movement of capital and labor something awful. Charles Murray likes to blame this on the guys who supposedly won't support them, but in my circles the women totally depend on the men and have little to offer in return. If anything really separates the white working class from the upper middle class it's the incomes (and, unfortunately, the behavior) of the women in the respective positions. Blue collar working men are no slouches, they make decent money and in person they're generally more impressive than their office-dwelling counterparts (this is probably a hidden aspect of Trump's support -- he has these guys behind him, and if he can get a few thousand of them to show up in one place, it's going to seriously intimidate rivals). The women, well, they screw up a lot and have to be rescued over and over. They get a good job and are about ten times as likely to ditch it and try to file a lawsuit. The guys are always pulling them up and out of ditches they run into. The white death, IMO, is a measure of the disposable income of the men in any given community (if you check the census data I can all but guarantee that there's a strong correlation there). The less they have, the less they can afford to help out the women around them, who somehow always seem to need help.

    Replies: @Threecranes, @Jack D

    A woman who can spend eight hours a day five days a week sewing sneakers together

    Last time I looked, there was one US manufacturer of sneakers left (New Balance) that makes a few million pairs in the US out of the hundreds of millions that are sold. Those jobs have been gone for decades now and aren’t coming back. Even when those jobs existed, most of the women doing them were immigrants anyway. Operating a sewing machine was never a job American born women aspired to. It never paid well.

    You are right about skilled blue collar jobs paying well. There are blue collar guys pulling in well north of $100K per year with overtime in (non-computer) service technician type jobs while college grad engineers make $60K. But these kind of jobs are not easy to get (and being skilled, not just anyone can do them).

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Jack D

    Are you sure those blue collar jobs paying over 100k aren't all in places with commodity booms? And also require you put in 80 hours so with 40 hours of overtime.

    Replies: @Bill P

    , @anonymous-antimarxist
    @Jack D


    You are right about skilled blue collar jobs paying well. There are blue collar guys pulling in well north of $100K per year with overtime in (non-computer) service technician type jobs while college grad engineers make $60K. But these kind of jobs are not easy to get (and being skilled, not just anyone can do them).
     
    Yes and they also often working outside in all sorts of weather and or often involve some degree of of risk of injury. Skill and fitness are required.
  119. @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    FUD-spreading concern troll, Ted Cruz Conservatism, Inc. shill or parody of either of the above?

    Really, I can’t tell, either…

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

    OT: More affirmative action awards:

    http://www.breitbart.com/news/hip-hop-musical-hamilton-nets-record-16-tony-nominations/

    Meanwhile, the nomination of Space Raptor Butt Invasion for a Hugo Award has been decried by the usual diversity mongers …

  121. @reiner Tor
    @Brutusale

    Sick/Tiny Duck seems to be a parody account, this AG Conservative is probably parody, too, but parodies something else.

    Replies: @BenKenobi

    I can see why Steve lets these posts through — they certainly generate replies.

  122. @Zachary Latif
    As I quipped on Facebook I'm very torn between my base Tory instincts (Zac G-Brexit-Trump) and my "enlightened" liberal outlook (Sadiq-Bremain-Clinton).

    The latter is more of the same whereas the former is something new.

    I have to say though that if gun control and immigration are the most pressing issues of the American polity (the world's hyper-power) then that's a bit disappointing.

    I thought Clinton was the pragmatic choice but to be fair I'm increasingly seeing Trump as more and more presidential (even if he's prone to ridiculous quotes). What could he do with a Republican Congress and SC (without neocon hacks - I read this ridiculous piece by Stratfor justifying the ME forays)?

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Marcus

    I have to say though that if gun control and immigration are the most pressing issues of the American polity (the world’s hyper-power) then that’s a bit disappointing.

    They’re not “pressing issues”, they’re metaissues.

    The first is about whom we can trust, the second, about who we even are. The rest of the world can wait until those are sorted out.

    Britain’s gun laws are as wacky as our Prohibition ever was. Besides being unnecessary, they’re everything that Englishmen are not– emotional, extreme, and dismissive of tradition. (Our Second Amendment was cribbed from the Petition of Rights, which drew from common law.) That doesn’t speak well of the modern Englishman, does it?

    But then, Brixton and Bradford don’t look that English anymore, do they?

  123. @Anonymous
    In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is...in some small way to become evil oneself. One's standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control.

    Replies: @International Jew

    Great insight that, but you forgot to attribute it to Theodore Dalrymple.

    • Replies: @The most deplorable one
    @International Jew

    Dalrymple's failure was to attribute it exclusively to Communist regimes.

    Perhaps there is some other common factor at work.

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @International Jew


    Great insight that, but you forgot to attribute it to Theodore Dalrymple.
     
    Mario Pei made a related point years before Dalrymple: everything that sounds attractive (on the surface) about communism was taken from Christianity. Inferior knock-offs, if you will.

    The humiliation is there in Christianity, but in the form of penitence before one's Creator.

    The Marxist, like the Christian, believes there is only one God. They just disagree on the identity of that deity. Thus, the difference in direction of prostration.
  124. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:
    @International Jew
    @Anonymous

    Great insight that, but you forgot to attribute it to Theodore Dalrymple.

    Replies: @The most deplorable one, @Reg Cæsar

    Dalrymple’s failure was to attribute it exclusively to Communist regimes.

    Perhaps there is some other common factor at work.

  125. @Jus' Sayin'...
    Gun control at this point is hardly a pressing national issue, at least compared to several others that I'm sure any ISteve reader can come up with. But it is an issue that motivates a very large proportion of voters from all parties to vote against candidates who espouse it. As such it's essentially the third rail -- and for some obscure reason a very enticing one -- for dimocrat politicians and apparatchiks of Hillary's type. A stupid issue for Hillary to choose.

    The promise of real immigration reform is what draws people to Trump. Firm border control and strict standards for controlling immigration and naturalization resonate with the majority of American voters. So do issues regarding disastrous trade agreements that have many times over decimated domestic US industries and the middle-class workers they once employed.

    Videos and news about Soros's et al.'s well-funded, brown-skinned brown shirts rioting, assaulting police, causing hundreds of thousands of dollars of damages that responsible citizens will ultimately pay for, blocking traffic, and generally attacking and disrespecting ordinary American citizens only increases most Americans' angst about this issue. Everyone already knows where Hillary stands on this vis-a-vis Trump's positions. Emphasizing instead of eliding over these policy differences is a really big mistake on Hillary's part. A second stupid issue for Hillary to choose.

    Because Hillary appears to be planning to carry the heavy water for Trump on these issues, Trump can afford to focus his efforts elsewhere, e.g., on Hillary's long and well-documented history of incompetence and corruption. He can probably afford to garnish this with some juicy tidbits from Bill and Hill's extremely pathological sexual histories. The November election is looking more and more like it is Trump's to lose. It's also looking more and more like red meat entertainment for political junkies.

    Replies: @Unladen Swallow

    More proof as if any more was needed that Hilary is not some master political thinker that so many pols make her out be, gun control will be a winner? what year does Hilary think this is? 1978? Immigration “reform”? Apparently she thinks, fooled them 5 times on this, I will fool them again, despite the other party’s candidate pointing it out. Also throwing Bill under the bus over the Dems right turn on crime in the 90’s is really going to the well one time too many, she already has the black vote overwhelmingly, does she need 96% instead of 91% in order to win? She might as well write off the South altogether as well as most of the West with this strategy.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Unladen Swallow


    More proof as if any more was needed that Hilary is not some master political thinker that so many pols make her out be, gun control will be a winner?
     
    Gun control would be a winner, a resounding one, were (sane) whites exempted. We once had laws that worked that way, and they were very popular.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @jesse helms think-alike

    , @Jack D
    @Unladen Swallow

    I would not misunderestimate Hillary and her advisers on this. Hillary does not utter 3 syllables together that have not been poll tested and focus group approved. Now this is a bad year for political pros, but is it THAT bad? Hillary's people have done the math and they see a path to the White House with 9x% of the black vote and 7x% of the Hispanic vote and 5x% of the women's vote and X% of college graduates and Y% of those in the top 20% income bracket, etc. Gun control, immigration reform - these are all issues that resonate with key Hillary voting groups (and not just blacks) Just as she is not going to lose in DC, she is NOT going to win in Utah even if she promised to build a wall TWICE as high as Trump's so no worries about alienating blue collar white Christian men. Maybe this is the year when the magic formula that put Obama in the White House twice no longer works, but I wouldn't count on it just yet. It may not work in the end because she is so personally unappealing, people are fed up, etc. but it's not a foolish strategy compared to the opposite.

  126. Whiskey says: • Website

    I think people are missing the big picture, I hope Trump has not.

    DEMOCRATS ARE OUT OF MONEY. There are no gibs for Dem voters in Hillary!s platform. Its just more micromanaging of (White) people’s lives by Nice White Ladies who live for running (White men’s) lives.

    Now, Trump can argue, deport each and every illegal, AND THEIR KIDS AND SEVERAL GENERATIONS … and there’s all the free stuff with the money.

    FREE COLLEGE and forgiveness of ALL STUDENT DEBT. Bingo! Bernie Bros switch their vote. A guaranteed income of say, $1500 a month for everyone not working. Increase in wages due to labor shortages and protective tariffs of at least 20%.

    THATS GIBS!

    This is the key that everyone has missed. The coalition of the fringes depends on gibs. Would Bernie Bros, Hood rats, and downscale White ladies all vote enthusiastically to deport every last illegal and descendants of illegals — if it meant a whole lot more money in their pocket?

    YES!

    And that is the potential genius of Trump. To BE the WWE Bad guy, the heel, and get the crowd on his side for cold hard cash. No one has ever done the math on how much more gibs there are if there is addition by subtraction.

    Border enforcement plus deportation = lots more gibs for Americans remaining.

  127. @International Jew
    @Anonymous

    Great insight that, but you forgot to attribute it to Theodore Dalrymple.

    Replies: @The most deplorable one, @Reg Cæsar

    Great insight that, but you forgot to attribute it to Theodore Dalrymple.

    Mario Pei made a related point years before Dalrymple: everything that sounds attractive (on the surface) about communism was taken from Christianity. Inferior knock-offs, if you will.

    The humiliation is there in Christianity, but in the form of penitence before one’s Creator.

    The Marxist, like the Christian, believes there is only one God. They just disagree on the identity of that deity. Thus, the difference in direction of prostration.

  128. @Unladen Swallow
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    More proof as if any more was needed that Hilary is not some master political thinker that so many pols make her out be, gun control will be a winner? what year does Hilary think this is? 1978? Immigration "reform"? Apparently she thinks, fooled them 5 times on this, I will fool them again, despite the other party's candidate pointing it out. Also throwing Bill under the bus over the Dems right turn on crime in the 90's is really going to the well one time too many, she already has the black vote overwhelmingly, does she need 96% instead of 91% in order to win? She might as well write off the South altogether as well as most of the West with this strategy.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Jack D

    More proof as if any more was needed that Hilary is not some master political thinker that so many pols make her out be, gun control will be a winner?

    Gun control would be a winner, a resounding one, were (sane) whites exempted. We once had laws that worked that way, and they were very popular.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @Reg Cæsar

    Edgy.

    , @jesse helms think-alike
    @Reg Cæsar

    There is an argument made that the Left wants gun control in part to protect urban whites from NAM violence. Even Larry Gilmore alluded to this in his White House Correspondent's speech when he noted that Bernie wants gun control everywhere but in Vermont because it is full of white people. They are wrong of course both for the fact that guns would be obtained illegally if banned and for the fact that violent types have no problem substituting fists, feet and clubs when necessary. There was a medical study published twenty years ago that argued that strong urban gun control had led to severe injuries from aluminium baseball attacks in major Northeast slums. The authors postulated that the victims might have sustained lesser injuries if they had been merely popped once or twice with a cheap saturday night special.

    Another strong incentive for gun control appealing to a would be strong man like Hillary is that there are so many things the organs of state security can accomplish when they don't fear armed violent resistance. When the time comes to liquidate the kulaks it will be so much easier and safer if all their AR15s have been confiscated.

    Replies: @Jack D

  129. @Jack D
    @Bill P


    A woman who can spend eight hours a day five days a week sewing sneakers together
     
    Last time I looked, there was one US manufacturer of sneakers left (New Balance) that makes a few million pairs in the US out of the hundreds of millions that are sold. Those jobs have been gone for decades now and aren't coming back. Even when those jobs existed, most of the women doing them were immigrants anyway. Operating a sewing machine was never a job American born women aspired to. It never paid well.

    You are right about skilled blue collar jobs paying well. There are blue collar guys pulling in well north of $100K per year with overtime in (non-computer) service technician type jobs while college grad engineers make $60K. But these kind of jobs are not easy to get (and being skilled, not just anyone can do them).

    Replies: @Anonymous, @anonymous-antimarxist

    Are you sure those blue collar jobs paying over 100k aren’t all in places with commodity booms? And also require you put in 80 hours so with 40 hours of overtime.

    • Replies: @Bill P
    @Anonymous


    Are you sure those blue collar jobs paying over 100k aren’t all in places with commodity booms? And also require you put in 80 hours so with 40 hours of overtime.
     
    No, he's right. A UPS driver can make six figures by working an average of 50 hours a week (and that doesn't even include benefits and pension). A longshoreman can easily top 100k, a BNSF conductor can make around 90k/year, team truckers can make 70+k driving only four days a week, tugboat pilots make a lot of money, Boeing machinists around 70k, the list goes on.

    Over 100k is on the high end, but it isn't all that rare or limited to commodity booms. Guys who live to work do it regularly. More relaxed types who like to spend time fishing and hunting whenever they can still pull down around 50-60k per year with these kinds of jobs. Not a bad deal overall, especially if you live in the exurbs as most of them do.

    Also, we shouldn't forget the independent contractors, whose income is limited mainly by their work ethic, skill and the market they serve. Some of these guys get genuinely rich. No Ivy League credentials required.

    Replies: @Brutusale

  130. @EriK
    Is gun control really a winning issue in a presidential race?

    Replies: @Clyde, @Busby, @Desiderius, @Desiderius, @kaganovitch, @Boomstick, @Dr. X, @Jim Don Bob, @ben tillman

    Ask President Al Gore how it worked for him. He lost West f**king Virginia -and- his home state of Tennessee probably because of his support for gun control. Winning either one would have won him the election.

  131. Pity Hillwhorey could never control Bill’s gun.

  132. okie says:

    Since this thread has turned into a referendum on Hilary vs Trump. the Wackyness of trump, that he believes that ted Cruz’s dad was involved with Oswald, the birther stuff, every crazy thing he might have said on a Howard Stern type show. will be run 24-7 on all the news channels starting in about a month, as soon as he reaches 1237., Gotta wait till then cuz u cant let the stupid party pick the less crazy option.

    That is HRC’s, sole claim , that she is the less crazy of the two options available in the Dem side, not that her positions resonate with more than ten % of the nation, With he general, the same othering of DT will work quite effectively, due to the words straight from his mouth

  133. @Priss Factor
    Cathy Young vs Charles Cookie

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdEcJfUTIGg

    Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist

    Charles C. Johnson is pretty hit and miss. I never take him seriously until cross verified.

    Around the 7:30 mark Charles C. Johnson suggests that Steve Sailer is genetically Jewish and he apparently implies this based on personal knowledge through either conversations with Sailer himself or those close to him.

    But then again RAMZPAUL claims his 23 & Me tells us him he too is slightly Jewish.

    Could Sailer really be an example of the flipside of an Andrew Breitbart? A Jewish kid adopted by the Goyim.

    Oy Vey, What a Shonda!!! /s

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    @anonymous-antimarxist

    If Sailer is Jewish, I'm a Two-Ton Gorilla in a Purple Dress.

    I grew up with Jews, and there is the Jewish look, however slight it may be. There isn't the slightest thing Jewishy about Sailer.
    Also, there is the Jewish personality traits, none of which show up in Sailer who's too easy-going and lacking in neurotic urgency. It's like a vanilla version of Let the Good Times Roll. Jews are more like Will Kristol and John Podheadritz: Let the Bad Heads Roll.

    Suspecting someone is Jewish is like the gaydar stuff. Everyone falls into the dragnet.

    , @Jack D
    @anonymous-antimarxist

    I know of a few Jewish kids around Steve's age who were given up for adoption but they were given to Jewish families. In those pre legal abortion days, a knocked up (Jewish) high school or college girl would visit her (Jewish) family doctor and he would quietly arrange for another (Jewish) family to take the kid. Or else there were Jewish social service organizations who would do the same in big cities. (If the girl was from a wealthy family, there were always ways to get an abortion.) In the days before fertility treatments, there were always infertile Jewish couples looking to adopt. It would have been exceedingly rare for a Jewish child to be adopted by non-Jews. There was a strong tradition of having these things handled within the community in the days before all pervasive government. You took care of your own needy and did not foist them on the government or on some other community (not that others were necessarily forthcoming anyway). I'm sure the same was true among Catholics, Mormons, etc.

  134. @Jack D
    @Bill P


    A woman who can spend eight hours a day five days a week sewing sneakers together
     
    Last time I looked, there was one US manufacturer of sneakers left (New Balance) that makes a few million pairs in the US out of the hundreds of millions that are sold. Those jobs have been gone for decades now and aren't coming back. Even when those jobs existed, most of the women doing them were immigrants anyway. Operating a sewing machine was never a job American born women aspired to. It never paid well.

    You are right about skilled blue collar jobs paying well. There are blue collar guys pulling in well north of $100K per year with overtime in (non-computer) service technician type jobs while college grad engineers make $60K. But these kind of jobs are not easy to get (and being skilled, not just anyone can do them).

    Replies: @Anonymous, @anonymous-antimarxist

    You are right about skilled blue collar jobs paying well. There are blue collar guys pulling in well north of $100K per year with overtime in (non-computer) service technician type jobs while college grad engineers make $60K. But these kind of jobs are not easy to get (and being skilled, not just anyone can do them).

    Yes and they also often working outside in all sorts of weather and or often involve some degree of of risk of injury. Skill and fitness are required.

  135. I am not sure what is compelling this Democratic freak-out over guns but there is something more beyond politics that is driving it. It is almost as if this will be the one issue that forces white liberals to finally acknowledge cultural differences in this country are more than skin deep. White Second Amendment types telling liberals that they are the ones who need to stop being violent will not work because as we now fully understand, they are incapable of changing. Telling African Americans they need to stop being violent is like telling them they need to do better in school. They can’t. So for liberals, the only way out is to disarm the entire population, something which won’t happen in the next 100 years. This issue is not static. Once whites start acting like a minority, the first thing they will grasp politically is how much AA violence is aimed at them v. the other way around further causing them to dig in their heels over the issue.

    • Replies: @DWB
    @Prof. Woland

    It seems pretty clear to me.

    It's all about differentiation of brand.

    The Democrats in 08 and 12 had quite sophisticated polling information, and they knew exactly WHOM to get to the polls and in WHICH states. Much, much better information than McCain (not that it mattered) or Romney, and much stronger ground game.

    Here, as others have pointed out, with the possibility that Trump is going to be able to exploit working-class fears in states like Pennsylvania and Ohio, which I suspect is Hillary's only real threat frame.

    She really has zero answer, having attached to and/or pushed a globalist economic agenda for 20 years. She is known to be in bed with the banks. She is on friendly terms with the people whose snouts show at the Davos trough every year. How can she plausibly refute such an attack?

    She can't refute it, but she can change the field of play, which is what this guns issue is all about. Is gun violence *really* an issue for 98% of the country? Not to be too solipsistic, but I don't know anyone who has ever been shot, and aside from a brother in a police uniform and some friends who served in the army, I don't know anyone who has ever shot at anyone else. No one who has been involved in any kind of shoot-out in a remotely 'civilian' sense.

    The gun issue is completely academic for most, but it is on of those issues - and sorry to be so frank - that play to emotions; and by that, it is very appealing to women.

    The politics of the immigration "reform" is just naked identity politics.

    So her team have identified that she can blunt any sort of Trump advantage by stirring up large numbers of Latino and female voters. And by making an argument about immigration and guns, she can avoid *any* talk about Libya, Syria, or Goldman-Sachs.

    THAT is why this is such a big deal to the leaders of the DNC.

    Replies: @27 year old

  136. @Zachary Latif
    As I quipped on Facebook I'm very torn between my base Tory instincts (Zac G-Brexit-Trump) and my "enlightened" liberal outlook (Sadiq-Bremain-Clinton).

    The latter is more of the same whereas the former is something new.

    I have to say though that if gun control and immigration are the most pressing issues of the American polity (the world's hyper-power) then that's a bit disappointing.

    I thought Clinton was the pragmatic choice but to be fair I'm increasingly seeing Trump as more and more presidential (even if he's prone to ridiculous quotes). What could he do with a Republican Congress and SC (without neocon hacks - I read this ridiculous piece by Stratfor justifying the ME forays)?

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Marcus

    They’re pretty minor issues compared to bathrooms for trannies.

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    @Marcus

    I read an article today that Bruce Springsteen's band cancelled an appearance in North Carolina, because that state is still segregating bathrooms. On the other hand, that band was taken to task for being willing to perform in Israel despite the West Bank occupation, etc. So, clearly, #transfreedom in bathrooms is way more important than any dimension of the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

    This concept could go in a couple of directions. For example, you could have male Palestinians declaring they are transjewish women. What happens then?

    Or, you could have sit ins in North Carolina bathrooms ("Baby, we were born with the runs"). Or maybe just have freedom users who will inundate North Carolina washrooms. Or maybe just #OccupyBathrooms will do it.

    The article also suggested that, by appearing in Israel, Springsteen and Co. could be a positive force for changing Israeli politics (the article was in Haaretz so, leftwing). But if the author of the article actually believes that, why isn't he telling Springsteen to perform in North Carolina and be an advocate for open washrooms?

    Replies: @Marcus, @The Last Real Calvinist

  137. @Reg Cæsar
    @Unladen Swallow


    More proof as if any more was needed that Hilary is not some master political thinker that so many pols make her out be, gun control will be a winner?
     
    Gun control would be a winner, a resounding one, were (sane) whites exempted. We once had laws that worked that way, and they were very popular.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @jesse helms think-alike

    Edgy.

  138. http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/books/201308/was-the-french-resistance-jewish

    WAS THE FRENCH RESISTANCE JEWISH?

    Jewish Communists made the bulk of the French Resistance.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Chiron

    French Christians made up the bulk of Nazi Collaborators.

    What is your point?

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    , @Ivy
    @Chiron

    I met some Resistance guys and they were not communist or Jewish, just French.

  139. @Unladen Swallow
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    More proof as if any more was needed that Hilary is not some master political thinker that so many pols make her out be, gun control will be a winner? what year does Hilary think this is? 1978? Immigration "reform"? Apparently she thinks, fooled them 5 times on this, I will fool them again, despite the other party's candidate pointing it out. Also throwing Bill under the bus over the Dems right turn on crime in the 90's is really going to the well one time too many, she already has the black vote overwhelmingly, does she need 96% instead of 91% in order to win? She might as well write off the South altogether as well as most of the West with this strategy.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Jack D

    I would not misunderestimate Hillary and her advisers on this. Hillary does not utter 3 syllables together that have not been poll tested and focus group approved. Now this is a bad year for political pros, but is it THAT bad? Hillary’s people have done the math and they see a path to the White House with 9x% of the black vote and 7x% of the Hispanic vote and 5x% of the women’s vote and X% of college graduates and Y% of those in the top 20% income bracket, etc. Gun control, immigration reform – these are all issues that resonate with key Hillary voting groups (and not just blacks) Just as she is not going to lose in DC, she is NOT going to win in Utah even if she promised to build a wall TWICE as high as Trump’s so no worries about alienating blue collar white Christian men. Maybe this is the year when the magic formula that put Obama in the White House twice no longer works, but I wouldn’t count on it just yet. It may not work in the end because she is so personally unappealing, people are fed up, etc. but it’s not a foolish strategy compared to the opposite.

  140. @Chiron
    http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/books/201308/was-the-french-resistance-jewish

    WAS THE FRENCH RESISTANCE JEWISH?

    Jewish Communists made the bulk of the French Resistance.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Ivy

    French Christians made up the bulk of Nazi Collaborators.

    What is your point?

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @Jack D

    "French Christians made up the bulk of Nazi Collaborators.

    What is your point?"

    And far more anti-semites (by your reckoning) than Jews were maimed and killed fighting Nazi Germany.

  141. @Reg Cæsar
    @Unladen Swallow


    More proof as if any more was needed that Hilary is not some master political thinker that so many pols make her out be, gun control will be a winner?
     
    Gun control would be a winner, a resounding one, were (sane) whites exempted. We once had laws that worked that way, and they were very popular.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @jesse helms think-alike

    There is an argument made that the Left wants gun control in part to protect urban whites from NAM violence. Even Larry Gilmore alluded to this in his White House Correspondent’s speech when he noted that Bernie wants gun control everywhere but in Vermont because it is full of white people. They are wrong of course both for the fact that guns would be obtained illegally if banned and for the fact that violent types have no problem substituting fists, feet and clubs when necessary. There was a medical study published twenty years ago that argued that strong urban gun control had led to severe injuries from aluminium baseball attacks in major Northeast slums. The authors postulated that the victims might have sustained lesser injuries if they had been merely popped once or twice with a cheap saturday night special.

    Another strong incentive for gun control appealing to a would be strong man like Hillary is that there are so many things the organs of state security can accomplish when they don’t fear armed violent resistance. When the time comes to liquidate the kulaks it will be so much easier and safer if all their AR15s have been confiscated.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @jesse helms think-alike

    Not to mention knives. That being said, I think if you could magically get rid of all guns (and you can't) the net result would be fewer murders by ghetto blacks. Guns make it significantly easier to kill people than other methods.

    Hillary is not my favorite person but I really don't think she has a plan to disarm whites in order to liquidate the kulak class. Just as Trump is not Hitler, Hillary is not Stalin. Leave hyperbole and paranoia to the Left.

    The AR-15 is a popular target for banning because of its association with school shooters and other mass shootings, but these, while spectacular, are also very rare and don't add up to significant numbers vs. handgun shootings which happen every day in every big city. And when the time comes, the kulaks will do just fine with their hunting rifles and have no need of "assault weapons" which are just about cosmetics.

    Replies: @Psmith

  142. @LondonBob
    @Andrew

    Interesting how much that goes with what common sense tells you. CT and NJ should be competitive to a NY Republican, they don't have NY City that makes NY out of reach for Trump. MI, PA and OH have always been the Rust Belt states most likely to flip. VI is too much of an establishment colonised area now, however Trump is strong in the Mid Atlantic so not surprised to see DE as up for grabs, Paul Manafort and Rick Wiley had it as a target in his presentation to the RNC. NV and FL are Trump home states, NM more likely to flip than too nice IA, surprised by CO.

    Replies: @Andrew, @Jack D

    Neither NJ nor CT nor MI nor PA have voted Republican in a Presidential race since 1988. I think that they are all demographically out of reach now barring something close to a miracle. If they were winnable for the Republicans, then one of the Republican candidates in one of the last six elections in one of these states would have won at least once but these states went 24 for 24 D. The only one that is realistically flippable is Ohio.

    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    @Jack D

    Maybe it's not demographics but the fact that the Republicans haven't run a candidate who's message isn't "tax cuts for our buddies, social welfare cuts, more wars, and oh yeah we are going to pander to illegal aliens and blacks."

    Does the DOOOOOOOM mental masturbation ever stop around here?

    Replies: @Jack D

    , @DWB
    @Jack D

    Jack, I suspect you are right WRT Connecticut; I think you could be very wrong about PA.

    Trump, despite his patrician background, could be a lot more appealing in a state that has depended on coal mining and manufacturing. Especially against such a Wall Street sycophant like Hillary Clinton.

    I'm not saying Trump will win in Pennsylvania. But I like his chances for an upset a lot more than, say, Mitt Romney's were.

    Replies: @Jack D

  143. DWB says: • Website
    @Prof. Woland
    I am not sure what is compelling this Democratic freak-out over guns but there is something more beyond politics that is driving it. It is almost as if this will be the one issue that forces white liberals to finally acknowledge cultural differences in this country are more than skin deep. White Second Amendment types telling liberals that they are the ones who need to stop being violent will not work because as we now fully understand, they are incapable of changing. Telling African Americans they need to stop being violent is like telling them they need to do better in school. They can't. So for liberals, the only way out is to disarm the entire population, something which won't happen in the next 100 years. This issue is not static. Once whites start acting like a minority, the first thing they will grasp politically is how much AA violence is aimed at them v. the other way around further causing them to dig in their heels over the issue.

    Replies: @DWB

    It seems pretty clear to me.

    It’s all about differentiation of brand.

    The Democrats in 08 and 12 had quite sophisticated polling information, and they knew exactly WHOM to get to the polls and in WHICH states. Much, much better information than McCain (not that it mattered) or Romney, and much stronger ground game.

    Here, as others have pointed out, with the possibility that Trump is going to be able to exploit working-class fears in states like Pennsylvania and Ohio, which I suspect is Hillary’s only real threat frame.

    She really has zero answer, having attached to and/or pushed a globalist economic agenda for 20 years. She is known to be in bed with the banks. She is on friendly terms with the people whose snouts show at the Davos trough every year. How can she plausibly refute such an attack?

    She can’t refute it, but she can change the field of play, which is what this guns issue is all about. Is gun violence *really* an issue for 98% of the country? Not to be too solipsistic, but I don’t know anyone who has ever been shot, and aside from a brother in a police uniform and some friends who served in the army, I don’t know anyone who has ever shot at anyone else. No one who has been involved in any kind of shoot-out in a remotely ‘civilian’ sense.

    The gun issue is completely academic for most, but it is on of those issues – and sorry to be so frank – that play to emotions; and by that, it is very appealing to women.

    The politics of the immigration “reform” is just naked identity politics.

    So her team have identified that she can blunt any sort of Trump advantage by stirring up large numbers of Latino and female voters. And by making an argument about immigration and guns, she can avoid *any* talk about Libya, Syria, or Goldman-Sachs.

    THAT is why this is such a big deal to the leaders of the DNC.

    • Replies: @27 year old
    @DWB

    >And by making an argument about immigration and guns, she can avoid *any* talk about Libya, Syria, or Goldman-Sachs.

    Good point. They figure that if the conversation is about guns and mexicans, she might lose, but they do have a lot of people on their side with those issues. If the conversation is about Libya/Syria/GS, theres really nobody except the ((neocons)) on her side there, and she definitely loses.

  144. @Jack D
    @LondonBob

    Neither NJ nor CT nor MI nor PA have voted Republican in a Presidential race since 1988. I think that they are all demographically out of reach now barring something close to a miracle. If they were winnable for the Republicans, then one of the Republican candidates in one of the last six elections in one of these states would have won at least once but these states went 24 for 24 D. The only one that is realistically flippable is Ohio.

    Replies: @Jack Hanson, @DWB

    Maybe it’s not demographics but the fact that the Republicans haven’t run a candidate who’s message isn’t “tax cuts for our buddies, social welfare cuts, more wars, and oh yeah we are going to pander to illegal aliens and blacks.”

    Does the DOOOOOOOM mental masturbation ever stop around here?

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Jack Hanson

    This is why I mentioned SIX consecutive elections. I realize Trump doesn't fit the mainstream Republican mold (to say the least) but if there was SOME Republican who was electable at the Presidential level in those states you would think that somewhere in the past 24 years he would have won once. This does not mean that Trump is doomed but if I were he I would be putting together a plan that doesn't depend on winning those states (note that Bush II won office despite losing them all both times.)

    Replies: @Jack Hanson

  145. DWB says: • Website
    @Jack D
    @LondonBob

    Neither NJ nor CT nor MI nor PA have voted Republican in a Presidential race since 1988. I think that they are all demographically out of reach now barring something close to a miracle. If they were winnable for the Republicans, then one of the Republican candidates in one of the last six elections in one of these states would have won at least once but these states went 24 for 24 D. The only one that is realistically flippable is Ohio.

    Replies: @Jack Hanson, @DWB

    Jack, I suspect you are right WRT Connecticut; I think you could be very wrong about PA.

    Trump, despite his patrician background, could be a lot more appealing in a state that has depended on coal mining and manufacturing. Especially against such a Wall Street sycophant like Hillary Clinton.

    I’m not saying Trump will win in Pennsylvania. But I like his chances for an upset a lot more than, say, Mitt Romney’s were.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @DWB

    I think you are imagining a place from the past. Most of the coal mines closed in the 1950s and the Pittsburgh steel mills in the early 80s. Like the rest of the US, PA has a post industrial economy - the big employers are government, the health care sector, education, retail, the postal service, the dept. of corrections, etc. Now it seems impossible (to me at least) that you can sustain an economy in the long run without actually producing anything but that's the way it is.

  146. Priss Factor [AKA "Polly Perkins"] says:
    @anonymous-antimarxist
    @Priss Factor

    Charles C. Johnson is pretty hit and miss. I never take him seriously until cross verified.

    Around the 7:30 mark Charles C. Johnson suggests that Steve Sailer is genetically Jewish and he apparently implies this based on personal knowledge through either conversations with Sailer himself or those close to him.

    But then again RAMZPAUL claims his 23 & Me tells us him he too is slightly Jewish.

    Could Sailer really be an example of the flipside of an Andrew Breitbart? A Jewish kid adopted by the Goyim.

    Oy Vey, What a Shonda!!! /s

    Replies: @Priss Factor, @Jack D

    If Sailer is Jewish, I’m a Two-Ton Gorilla in a Purple Dress.

    I grew up with Jews, and there is the Jewish look, however slight it may be. There isn’t the slightest thing Jewishy about Sailer.
    Also, there is the Jewish personality traits, none of which show up in Sailer who’s too easy-going and lacking in neurotic urgency. It’s like a vanilla version of Let the Good Times Roll. Jews are more like Will Kristol and John Podheadritz: Let the Bad Heads Roll.

    Suspecting someone is Jewish is like the gaydar stuff. Everyone falls into the dragnet.

  147. @jesse helms think-alike
    @Reg Cæsar

    There is an argument made that the Left wants gun control in part to protect urban whites from NAM violence. Even Larry Gilmore alluded to this in his White House Correspondent's speech when he noted that Bernie wants gun control everywhere but in Vermont because it is full of white people. They are wrong of course both for the fact that guns would be obtained illegally if banned and for the fact that violent types have no problem substituting fists, feet and clubs when necessary. There was a medical study published twenty years ago that argued that strong urban gun control had led to severe injuries from aluminium baseball attacks in major Northeast slums. The authors postulated that the victims might have sustained lesser injuries if they had been merely popped once or twice with a cheap saturday night special.

    Another strong incentive for gun control appealing to a would be strong man like Hillary is that there are so many things the organs of state security can accomplish when they don't fear armed violent resistance. When the time comes to liquidate the kulaks it will be so much easier and safer if all their AR15s have been confiscated.

    Replies: @Jack D

    Not to mention knives. That being said, I think if you could magically get rid of all guns (and you can’t) the net result would be fewer murders by ghetto blacks. Guns make it significantly easier to kill people than other methods.

    Hillary is not my favorite person but I really don’t think she has a plan to disarm whites in order to liquidate the kulak class. Just as Trump is not Hitler, Hillary is not Stalin. Leave hyperbole and paranoia to the Left.

    The AR-15 is a popular target for banning because of its association with school shooters and other mass shootings, but these, while spectacular, are also very rare and don’t add up to significant numbers vs. handgun shootings which happen every day in every big city. And when the time comes, the kulaks will do just fine with their hunting rifles and have no need of “assault weapons” which are just about cosmetics.

    • Replies: @Psmith
    @Jack D


    I think if you could magically get rid of all guns (and you can’t) the net result would be fewer murders by ghetto blacks.
     
    I've been thinking about this lately, and I don't know that I agree. It seems to me that the net effect of gun control on the ghetto homicide rate, at least in a US context (which, granted, is subject to the criticism of guns being smuggled across state lines, etc.) is pretty near zero if you compare cities with high % black in states with lax gun laws to cities with high % black in states with strict gun laws. Eyeball adjustment for % black and general non-gun-related crappiness suggests that, to the extent that there is a difference, it's probably not the guns.

    Replies: @Jack D

  148. @Marcus
    @Zachary Latif

    They're pretty minor issues compared to bathrooms for trannies.

    Replies: @SPMoore8

    I read an article today that Bruce Springsteen’s band cancelled an appearance in North Carolina, because that state is still segregating bathrooms. On the other hand, that band was taken to task for being willing to perform in Israel despite the West Bank occupation, etc. So, clearly, #transfreedom in bathrooms is way more important than any dimension of the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

    This concept could go in a couple of directions. For example, you could have male Palestinians declaring they are transjewish women. What happens then?

    Or, you could have sit ins in North Carolina bathrooms (“Baby, we were born with the runs”). Or maybe just have freedom users who will inundate North Carolina washrooms. Or maybe just #OccupyBathrooms will do it.

    The article also suggested that, by appearing in Israel, Springsteen and Co. could be a positive force for changing Israeli politics (the article was in Haaretz so, leftwing). But if the author of the article actually believes that, why isn’t he telling Springsteen to perform in North Carolina and be an advocate for open washrooms?

    • Replies: @Marcus
    @SPMoore8

    Maybe they are taking the bigoted Palestinians to task for not accepting Transjordan as a homeland?

    Replies: @Spmoore8

    , @The Last Real Calvinist
    @SPMoore8


    (“Baby, we were born with the runs”).
     
    Nice.
  149. @anonymous-antimarxist
    @Priss Factor

    Charles C. Johnson is pretty hit and miss. I never take him seriously until cross verified.

    Around the 7:30 mark Charles C. Johnson suggests that Steve Sailer is genetically Jewish and he apparently implies this based on personal knowledge through either conversations with Sailer himself or those close to him.

    But then again RAMZPAUL claims his 23 & Me tells us him he too is slightly Jewish.

    Could Sailer really be an example of the flipside of an Andrew Breitbart? A Jewish kid adopted by the Goyim.

    Oy Vey, What a Shonda!!! /s

    Replies: @Priss Factor, @Jack D

    I know of a few Jewish kids around Steve’s age who were given up for adoption but they were given to Jewish families. In those pre legal abortion days, a knocked up (Jewish) high school or college girl would visit her (Jewish) family doctor and he would quietly arrange for another (Jewish) family to take the kid. Or else there were Jewish social service organizations who would do the same in big cities. (If the girl was from a wealthy family, there were always ways to get an abortion.) In the days before fertility treatments, there were always infertile Jewish couples looking to adopt. It would have been exceedingly rare for a Jewish child to be adopted by non-Jews. There was a strong tradition of having these things handled within the community in the days before all pervasive government. You took care of your own needy and did not foist them on the government or on some other community (not that others were necessarily forthcoming anyway). I’m sure the same was true among Catholics, Mormons, etc.

  150. @SPMoore8
    @Marcus

    I read an article today that Bruce Springsteen's band cancelled an appearance in North Carolina, because that state is still segregating bathrooms. On the other hand, that band was taken to task for being willing to perform in Israel despite the West Bank occupation, etc. So, clearly, #transfreedom in bathrooms is way more important than any dimension of the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

    This concept could go in a couple of directions. For example, you could have male Palestinians declaring they are transjewish women. What happens then?

    Or, you could have sit ins in North Carolina bathrooms ("Baby, we were born with the runs"). Or maybe just have freedom users who will inundate North Carolina washrooms. Or maybe just #OccupyBathrooms will do it.

    The article also suggested that, by appearing in Israel, Springsteen and Co. could be a positive force for changing Israeli politics (the article was in Haaretz so, leftwing). But if the author of the article actually believes that, why isn't he telling Springsteen to perform in North Carolina and be an advocate for open washrooms?

    Replies: @Marcus, @The Last Real Calvinist

    Maybe they are taking the bigoted Palestinians to task for not accepting Transjordan as a homeland?

    • Agree: Spmoore8
    • Replies: @Spmoore8
    @Marcus

    Can't wait to see the jazz hands on that at the next #occupywestbank rally.

  151. @DWB
    @Jack D

    Jack, I suspect you are right WRT Connecticut; I think you could be very wrong about PA.

    Trump, despite his patrician background, could be a lot more appealing in a state that has depended on coal mining and manufacturing. Especially against such a Wall Street sycophant like Hillary Clinton.

    I'm not saying Trump will win in Pennsylvania. But I like his chances for an upset a lot more than, say, Mitt Romney's were.

    Replies: @Jack D

    I think you are imagining a place from the past. Most of the coal mines closed in the 1950s and the Pittsburgh steel mills in the early 80s. Like the rest of the US, PA has a post industrial economy – the big employers are government, the health care sector, education, retail, the postal service, the dept. of corrections, etc. Now it seems impossible (to me at least) that you can sustain an economy in the long run without actually producing anything but that’s the way it is.

  152. As I think a bit more about it, it sorta makes sense that Hillary would pursue the issues of gun control and “immigration reform”, given that she’s running against Trump — and it is a testament to the dilemma Trump poses for her.

    As I’ve pointed out a number of times, one of the important things that Trump has going for him in the general is that he is far more centrist on many issues than is the standard Republican. He makes no bones about his support for entitlements. He seems genuinely on the side of the working class when it comes to jobs, in opposing excessive immigration, in opposing globalism, and in opposing corporatism. He is opposed to the sorts of ME wars Clinton has had her hands in over many years. On all of these issues, Hillary is at most on a par with (entitlements), and mostly at a disadvantage to, Trump.

    So how does she differentiate herself?

    It may be that the issues of gun control and “immigration reform” are her best bets — these are certainly issues on which they clash. That these issues seem at best to pull her to a draw and at worst still work against her, shows how vulnerable she seems to be on issues alone.

    If she’s to win the Presidency, it will probably have to be because she — and her friends all across the media — will be able to define Trump as The Unworthy Demon of Coarseness.

    • Replies: @candid_observer
    @candid_observer

    I think that, in the end, both Hillary's supporters and Trump's will be rallying around the same motto:

    Trump Actually Says It!

  153. @Anonymous
    @Jack D

    Are you sure those blue collar jobs paying over 100k aren't all in places with commodity booms? And also require you put in 80 hours so with 40 hours of overtime.

    Replies: @Bill P

    Are you sure those blue collar jobs paying over 100k aren’t all in places with commodity booms? And also require you put in 80 hours so with 40 hours of overtime.

    No, he’s right. A UPS driver can make six figures by working an average of 50 hours a week (and that doesn’t even include benefits and pension). A longshoreman can easily top 100k, a BNSF conductor can make around 90k/year, team truckers can make 70+k driving only four days a week, tugboat pilots make a lot of money, Boeing machinists around 70k, the list goes on.

    Over 100k is on the high end, but it isn’t all that rare or limited to commodity booms. Guys who live to work do it regularly. More relaxed types who like to spend time fishing and hunting whenever they can still pull down around 50-60k per year with these kinds of jobs. Not a bad deal overall, especially if you live in the exurbs as most of them do.

    Also, we shouldn’t forget the independent contractors, whose income is limited mainly by their work ethic, skill and the market they serve. Some of these guys get genuinely rich. No Ivy League credentials required.

    • Replies: @Brutusale
    @Bill P

    To say nothing of the fact that your toilet can't be plumbed or your roof reshingled from Bangalore.

    As Norman Spinrad wrote in his prescient 1987 novel Little Heroes, the problem isn't that you lost your job, it's that the entire class of jobs you do has been put on a chip and mechanized.

  154. Priss Factor [AKA "Polly Perkins"] says:

    Hillary’s worldview might be called the Two-Faced Solution. One way for Israel, another way for the rest of the world, especially white world.

    Most politicians seem to be for the Two-Faced Solution.

    But there are two other positions that are more consistent.

    (1) “If Israel can have majority unity, pride, and rule, then that should be the ideal for gentile nations. So, we want what Israel has.”

    This is the favored position of the Alt Right types.

    “If Israel survives with nationalism, we also to survive with nationalism.”

    Or “you live, so we live.”

    (2) “If Jews push diversity and multi-culturalism on the world, we accept those things as a universal good. So, it must be pushed on Israel as well.”

    This seems to be the favored position among the hardline ‘progressives’.

    “If white identity and privilege must dissolve in diversity and multi-culturalism, then Jews and Israel must also be dissolved in the global stew.”

    Or “we die, so you die.”

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Priss Factor

    Stop with the two-faced Jew thing. It's not true and even if it was, most people don't care. All this does is out you as an anti-Semite and make you repugnant to most normal non-Jew obsessed people. We are seeing this on the other side with Labourites in the UK. The same thing that resonates with the hard core also makes you unelectable among the wider public.

    You are not going to win friends and influence people (other than those who are already true believers) with this line of argument. The worst thing that could happen to Donald Trump would be to be publicly associated with this garbage - it's poison. All he has to do is let the words "white identity" or "gentile nation" pass his lips and he can kiss his Presidential hopes goodbye. For every white nationalist vote he would win, he would alienate ten other people.

    Replies: @Lurker

    , @Lurker
    @Priss Factor

    But in practice white nations are not allowed to emulate Israel and no one is forcing the multicult hell upon Israel.

  155. @Jack D
    @jesse helms think-alike

    Not to mention knives. That being said, I think if you could magically get rid of all guns (and you can't) the net result would be fewer murders by ghetto blacks. Guns make it significantly easier to kill people than other methods.

    Hillary is not my favorite person but I really don't think she has a plan to disarm whites in order to liquidate the kulak class. Just as Trump is not Hitler, Hillary is not Stalin. Leave hyperbole and paranoia to the Left.

    The AR-15 is a popular target for banning because of its association with school shooters and other mass shootings, but these, while spectacular, are also very rare and don't add up to significant numbers vs. handgun shootings which happen every day in every big city. And when the time comes, the kulaks will do just fine with their hunting rifles and have no need of "assault weapons" which are just about cosmetics.

    Replies: @Psmith

    I think if you could magically get rid of all guns (and you can’t) the net result would be fewer murders by ghetto blacks.

    I’ve been thinking about this lately, and I don’t know that I agree. It seems to me that the net effect of gun control on the ghetto homicide rate, at least in a US context (which, granted, is subject to the criticism of guns being smuggled across state lines, etc.) is pretty near zero if you compare cities with high % black in states with lax gun laws to cities with high % black in states with strict gun laws. Eyeball adjustment for % black and general non-gun-related crappiness suggests that, to the extent that there is a difference, it’s probably not the guns.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Psmith

    No, I think that's proof that gun laws are totally ineffective because ghetto blacks are getting shot regardless of whether the gun laws are strict or not. No ghetto dweller (especially of the type who is likely to use it - drug dealers, etc.) who wants a gun really has any problem in getting one regardless of what the local (US) gun laws are like so the actual prevalence of guns (and the rate of shootings) bears little relation to whether the local gun laws are strict or not. In fact, the correlation is inverse in that in big cities (DC) where concealed permits are almost impossible to get, there are lots of shooting and in rural areas where gun laws are lax there are very few (not because an armed society is a polite society but because white people don't tend to shoot each other as much as blacks).

    Replies: @Psmith

  156. @Jack Hanson
    @Jack D

    Maybe it's not demographics but the fact that the Republicans haven't run a candidate who's message isn't "tax cuts for our buddies, social welfare cuts, more wars, and oh yeah we are going to pander to illegal aliens and blacks."

    Does the DOOOOOOOM mental masturbation ever stop around here?

    Replies: @Jack D

    This is why I mentioned SIX consecutive elections. I realize Trump doesn’t fit the mainstream Republican mold (to say the least) but if there was SOME Republican who was electable at the Presidential level in those states you would think that somewhere in the past 24 years he would have won once. This does not mean that Trump is doomed but if I were he I would be putting together a plan that doesn’t depend on winning those states (note that Bush II won office despite losing them all both times.)

    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    @Jack D

    GHWB was all about new world orders and raising taxes. Bob Dole was an insipid candidate against a popular incumbent. I think I've already mentioned the failures of GWB, McCain, and Romney.

    Stop trying to moneyball this election by handwaving away facts that don't fit into a myopia of doom.

  157. @Psmith
    @Jack D


    I think if you could magically get rid of all guns (and you can’t) the net result would be fewer murders by ghetto blacks.
     
    I've been thinking about this lately, and I don't know that I agree. It seems to me that the net effect of gun control on the ghetto homicide rate, at least in a US context (which, granted, is subject to the criticism of guns being smuggled across state lines, etc.) is pretty near zero if you compare cities with high % black in states with lax gun laws to cities with high % black in states with strict gun laws. Eyeball adjustment for % black and general non-gun-related crappiness suggests that, to the extent that there is a difference, it's probably not the guns.

    Replies: @Jack D

    No, I think that’s proof that gun laws are totally ineffective because ghetto blacks are getting shot regardless of whether the gun laws are strict or not. No ghetto dweller (especially of the type who is likely to use it – drug dealers, etc.) who wants a gun really has any problem in getting one regardless of what the local (US) gun laws are like so the actual prevalence of guns (and the rate of shootings) bears little relation to whether the local gun laws are strict or not. In fact, the correlation is inverse in that in big cities (DC) where concealed permits are almost impossible to get, there are lots of shooting and in rural areas where gun laws are lax there are very few (not because an armed society is a polite society but because white people don’t tend to shoot each other as much as blacks).

    • Replies: @Psmith
    @Jack D

    Well, yes, the comparison of interest is not Baltimore and St. Louis to Wyoming and Idaho but rather Baltimore and Newark to St. Louis and Detroit. As long as the gun laws are doing something, even if they're not fully effective, the comparison (controlled for % black and BLM incidence and so on) is relevant. And my contention is that it's harder to obtain a gun in Baltimore and Newark than it is in St. Louis and Detroit, so criminals partially substitute knives and blunt instruments for guns (making murder slightly more difficult) whereas law-abiding citizens are less able to defend themselves effectively (making murder slightly less difficult.). Net effect, no change. This might result in fewer shooting deaths and more stabbings/bludgeonings, but then again in equilibrium it might not (if criminals are more willing to shoot--but not more willing to bludgeon, etc.--in the knowledge that their targets won't shoot back). So I don't know.

    Caribbean countries have stricter gun laws than the US (and easier to enforce by virtue of being islands) and higher homicide rates than most US cities, but this is complicated somewhat by HBD issues.

  158. @candid_observer
    As I think a bit more about it, it sorta makes sense that Hillary would pursue the issues of gun control and "immigration reform", given that she's running against Trump -- and it is a testament to the dilemma Trump poses for her.

    As I've pointed out a number of times, one of the important things that Trump has going for him in the general is that he is far more centrist on many issues than is the standard Republican. He makes no bones about his support for entitlements. He seems genuinely on the side of the working class when it comes to jobs, in opposing excessive immigration, in opposing globalism, and in opposing corporatism. He is opposed to the sorts of ME wars Clinton has had her hands in over many years. On all of these issues, Hillary is at most on a par with (entitlements), and mostly at a disadvantage to, Trump.

    So how does she differentiate herself?

    It may be that the issues of gun control and "immigration reform" are her best bets -- these are certainly issues on which they clash. That these issues seem at best to pull her to a draw and at worst still work against her, shows how vulnerable she seems to be on issues alone.

    If she's to win the Presidency, it will probably have to be because she -- and her friends all across the media -- will be able to define Trump as The Unworthy Demon of Coarseness.

    Replies: @candid_observer

    I think that, in the end, both Hillary’s supporters and Trump’s will be rallying around the same motto:

    Trump Actually Says It!

  159. Jack Hanson says:
    @Jack D
    @Jack Hanson

    This is why I mentioned SIX consecutive elections. I realize Trump doesn't fit the mainstream Republican mold (to say the least) but if there was SOME Republican who was electable at the Presidential level in those states you would think that somewhere in the past 24 years he would have won once. This does not mean that Trump is doomed but if I were he I would be putting together a plan that doesn't depend on winning those states (note that Bush II won office despite losing them all both times.)

    Replies: @Jack Hanson

    GHWB was all about new world orders and raising taxes. Bob Dole was an insipid candidate against a popular incumbent. I think I’ve already mentioned the failures of GWB, McCain, and Romney.

    Stop trying to moneyball this election by handwaving away facts that don’t fit into a myopia of doom.

  160. @Priss Factor
    Hillary's worldview might be called the Two-Faced Solution. One way for Israel, another way for the rest of the world, especially white world.

    Most politicians seem to be for the Two-Faced Solution.

    But there are two other positions that are more consistent.

    (1) "If Israel can have majority unity, pride, and rule, then that should be the ideal for gentile nations. So, we want what Israel has."

    This is the favored position of the Alt Right types.

    "If Israel survives with nationalism, we also to survive with nationalism."

    Or "you live, so we live."

    (2) "If Jews push diversity and multi-culturalism on the world, we accept those things as a universal good. So, it must be pushed on Israel as well."

    This seems to be the favored position among the hardline 'progressives'.

    "If white identity and privilege must dissolve in diversity and multi-culturalism, then Jews and Israel must also be dissolved in the global stew."

    Or "we die, so you die."

    Replies: @Jack D, @Lurker

    Stop with the two-faced Jew thing. It’s not true and even if it was, most people don’t care. All this does is out you as an anti-Semite and make you repugnant to most normal non-Jew obsessed people. We are seeing this on the other side with Labourites in the UK. The same thing that resonates with the hard core also makes you unelectable among the wider public.

    You are not going to win friends and influence people (other than those who are already true believers) with this line of argument. The worst thing that could happen to Donald Trump would be to be publicly associated with this garbage – it’s poison. All he has to do is let the words “white identity” or “gentile nation” pass his lips and he can kiss his Presidential hopes goodbye. For every white nationalist vote he would win, he would alienate ten other people.

    • Replies: @Lurker
    @Jack D


    For every white nationalist vote he would win, he would alienate ten other people.
     
    I doubt it would be as many as ten. Most of them wouldnt be too aware of the implications of those phrases. Until the media carefully explained it.

    Who dominates that media?

    People who are willing to tell white folks that they must have no ethnic interests.
  161. @Marcus
    @SPMoore8

    Maybe they are taking the bigoted Palestinians to task for not accepting Transjordan as a homeland?

    Replies: @Spmoore8

    Can’t wait to see the jazz hands on that at the next #occupywestbank rally.

  162. @Jack D
    @Psmith

    No, I think that's proof that gun laws are totally ineffective because ghetto blacks are getting shot regardless of whether the gun laws are strict or not. No ghetto dweller (especially of the type who is likely to use it - drug dealers, etc.) who wants a gun really has any problem in getting one regardless of what the local (US) gun laws are like so the actual prevalence of guns (and the rate of shootings) bears little relation to whether the local gun laws are strict or not. In fact, the correlation is inverse in that in big cities (DC) where concealed permits are almost impossible to get, there are lots of shooting and in rural areas where gun laws are lax there are very few (not because an armed society is a polite society but because white people don't tend to shoot each other as much as blacks).

    Replies: @Psmith

    Well, yes, the comparison of interest is not Baltimore and St. Louis to Wyoming and Idaho but rather Baltimore and Newark to St. Louis and Detroit. As long as the gun laws are doing something, even if they’re not fully effective, the comparison (controlled for % black and BLM incidence and so on) is relevant. And my contention is that it’s harder to obtain a gun in Baltimore and Newark than it is in St. Louis and Detroit, so criminals partially substitute knives and blunt instruments for guns (making murder slightly more difficult) whereas law-abiding citizens are less able to defend themselves effectively (making murder slightly less difficult.). Net effect, no change. This might result in fewer shooting deaths and more stabbings/bludgeonings, but then again in equilibrium it might not (if criminals are more willing to shoot–but not more willing to bludgeon, etc.–in the knowledge that their targets won’t shoot back). So I don’t know.

    Caribbean countries have stricter gun laws than the US (and easier to enforce by virtue of being islands) and higher homicide rates than most US cities, but this is complicated somewhat by HBD issues.

  163. @Daniel H
    @AG Conservative

    >>She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    It is not her choice to make. She is if, for whatever reason, the ADL decides to hate her.

    Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky

    >>She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    “It is not her choice to make. She is if, for whatever reason, the ADL decides to hate her.”

    Excellent point and one which brings to mind the late, great Joe Sobran’s observation that nowadays an anti-semite is not a man who hates Jews, but one who is hated by Jews.

  164. @DWB
    @Prof. Woland

    It seems pretty clear to me.

    It's all about differentiation of brand.

    The Democrats in 08 and 12 had quite sophisticated polling information, and they knew exactly WHOM to get to the polls and in WHICH states. Much, much better information than McCain (not that it mattered) or Romney, and much stronger ground game.

    Here, as others have pointed out, with the possibility that Trump is going to be able to exploit working-class fears in states like Pennsylvania and Ohio, which I suspect is Hillary's only real threat frame.

    She really has zero answer, having attached to and/or pushed a globalist economic agenda for 20 years. She is known to be in bed with the banks. She is on friendly terms with the people whose snouts show at the Davos trough every year. How can she plausibly refute such an attack?

    She can't refute it, but she can change the field of play, which is what this guns issue is all about. Is gun violence *really* an issue for 98% of the country? Not to be too solipsistic, but I don't know anyone who has ever been shot, and aside from a brother in a police uniform and some friends who served in the army, I don't know anyone who has ever shot at anyone else. No one who has been involved in any kind of shoot-out in a remotely 'civilian' sense.

    The gun issue is completely academic for most, but it is on of those issues - and sorry to be so frank - that play to emotions; and by that, it is very appealing to women.

    The politics of the immigration "reform" is just naked identity politics.

    So her team have identified that she can blunt any sort of Trump advantage by stirring up large numbers of Latino and female voters. And by making an argument about immigration and guns, she can avoid *any* talk about Libya, Syria, or Goldman-Sachs.

    THAT is why this is such a big deal to the leaders of the DNC.

    Replies: @27 year old

    >And by making an argument about immigration and guns, she can avoid *any* talk about Libya, Syria, or Goldman-Sachs.

    Good point. They figure that if the conversation is about guns and mexicans, she might lose, but they do have a lot of people on their side with those issues. If the conversation is about Libya/Syria/GS, theres really nobody except the ((neocons)) on her side there, and she definitely loses.

  165. @415 reasons
    @unit472

    I can assure you letting in millions of uneducated people whose children will attend public school, who will take earned income tax credits, and who will use state subsidized health insurance is not a net positive to the federal budget

    Replies: @Unit472, @Economic Sophisms, @Lurker

    Exactly, there’s just no way legalization of the illegal infiltrators is anything but a net loss on the fiscal side. As a rough approximation, anyone with an IQ below 105 or so is expected to cost the government more than they bring in.

    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    @Economic Sophisms

    Yeah cause Trump has been so terrible at controlling the narrative.

  166. @Economic Sophisms
    @415 reasons

    Exactly, there's just no way legalization of the illegal infiltrators is anything but a net loss on the fiscal side. As a rough approximation, anyone with an IQ below 105 or so is expected to cost the government more than they bring in.

    Replies: @Jack Hanson

    Yeah cause Trump has been so terrible at controlling the narrative.

  167. @Reg Cæsar
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi


    ...and also eminent domain, which, contrary to conservatives who espouse the free market, goes fairly well among ordinary folks at the local level.
     
    Unlike those powdered morons who wrote the Fifth Amendment?

    If eminent domain is so popular at the local level, why do so many of those whose property is targeted fight the decision? The actual piece of land is as local as you can get!

    ...Trump didn’t shoot himself in the foot with the assinine auto bailout op ed.
     
    Holding to principles is asinine? How come the Swedes can say say no to automakers holding a tin cup, but Americans can't? Opposing bailouts didn't seem to hurt Ronald Reagan.

    But bailouts seem suspiciously popular with those decrying "corporate welfare" and "crony capitalism".

    Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @Bill Jones

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Bill Jones


    Is that why Reagan bailed out these guys?
     
    If you think a tariff is the same as a bailout, well, you're going to have to explain that one to a lot of folks here.

    That article noted how Honda and Kawasaki already made 50,000 motorcycles annually in the US by 1983. They were effectively American manufacturers as well, and were thus "bailed out" just as much as Harley was.

    Replies: @Bill Jones

  168. SFG says:
    @AG Conservative
    As a real conservative who is horrified by "America First" (a nazi slogan!) and dangerously populist Trumpism, I will reluctantly support Hillary in the general.

    I would've preferred Rubio. I would have tolerated Cruz. But the dumb whites are deciding to cast their lot with Clown Hitler. In comparison, Hillary is more centrist and the least-evil choice. She is certainly NOT an anti-Semite.

    #NeverTrump

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jefferson, @TWS, @Clyde, @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @E. Harding, @Jack Hanson, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Daniel H, @(((Owen))), @Realist, @Ed, @The Alarmist, @Big Bill, @pyrrhus, @Divine Right, @Mr. Anon, @duncsbaby, @The most deplorable one, @James Kabala, @Nico, @SFG

    Troll.

    ‘America First’ = ‘Nazi slogan’–not exactly, it was by a guy who *kind of* supported them if you squint real hard, he probably didn’t feel like going to war with them. I happen to think he was wrong in that particular case, and it may be a bit of a dogwhistle, but I think the basic concept of putting your own country first is sound.

    ‘Not an anti-Semite’? Yeah, Trump hates Jews so much he let his daughter marry one. If he’s prejudiced against anyone it’s Muslims, and I think he’s faking that too.

  169. @Glaivester
    @Bert

    Actually, if this is "Conservative Pundit" (aka DemsRRealRacist) the assumption that this is legit is simply an example of Poe's Law. I assure you, the real AG_Conservative has said essentially this.

    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/726055342136791040
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/726055735113732096
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/725312024004145152
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/711982920404115456
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/711372842374279168
    https://twitter.com/AG_Conservative/status/710885951594037249

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @Perplexed, @Bill

    The responses to the first one! LOL!

    #WriteInRubio

    LOL!!!

  170. @Bill P
    @Anonymous


    Are you sure those blue collar jobs paying over 100k aren’t all in places with commodity booms? And also require you put in 80 hours so with 40 hours of overtime.
     
    No, he's right. A UPS driver can make six figures by working an average of 50 hours a week (and that doesn't even include benefits and pension). A longshoreman can easily top 100k, a BNSF conductor can make around 90k/year, team truckers can make 70+k driving only four days a week, tugboat pilots make a lot of money, Boeing machinists around 70k, the list goes on.

    Over 100k is on the high end, but it isn't all that rare or limited to commodity booms. Guys who live to work do it regularly. More relaxed types who like to spend time fishing and hunting whenever they can still pull down around 50-60k per year with these kinds of jobs. Not a bad deal overall, especially if you live in the exurbs as most of them do.

    Also, we shouldn't forget the independent contractors, whose income is limited mainly by their work ethic, skill and the market they serve. Some of these guys get genuinely rich. No Ivy League credentials required.

    Replies: @Brutusale

    To say nothing of the fact that your toilet can’t be plumbed or your roof reshingled from Bangalore.

    As Norman Spinrad wrote in his prescient 1987 novel Little Heroes, the problem isn’t that you lost your job, it’s that the entire class of jobs you do has been put on a chip and mechanized.

  171. @Bill Jones
    @Reg Cæsar

    Is that why Reagan bailed out these guys?

    http://www.nytimes.com/1983/04/02/business/us-raises-tariff-for-motorcycles.html

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Is that why Reagan bailed out these guys?

    If you think a tariff is the same as a bailout, well, you’re going to have to explain that one to a lot of folks here.

    That article noted how Honda and Kawasaki already made 50,000 motorcycles annually in the US by 1983. They were effectively American manufacturers as well, and were thus “bailed out” just as much as Harley was.

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    @Reg Cæsar

    It was the transfer of resources from one group to another by government force.
    No different from the Bank or Auto or Pharma or insurance bailout

  172. @SPMoore8
    @Marcus

    I read an article today that Bruce Springsteen's band cancelled an appearance in North Carolina, because that state is still segregating bathrooms. On the other hand, that band was taken to task for being willing to perform in Israel despite the West Bank occupation, etc. So, clearly, #transfreedom in bathrooms is way more important than any dimension of the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

    This concept could go in a couple of directions. For example, you could have male Palestinians declaring they are transjewish women. What happens then?

    Or, you could have sit ins in North Carolina bathrooms ("Baby, we were born with the runs"). Or maybe just have freedom users who will inundate North Carolina washrooms. Or maybe just #OccupyBathrooms will do it.

    The article also suggested that, by appearing in Israel, Springsteen and Co. could be a positive force for changing Israeli politics (the article was in Haaretz so, leftwing). But if the author of the article actually believes that, why isn't he telling Springsteen to perform in North Carolina and be an advocate for open washrooms?

    Replies: @Marcus, @The Last Real Calvinist

    (“Baby, we were born with the runs”).

    Nice.

  173. @reiner Tor
    @Glaivester

    It doesn't look like a parody account. But I'm not sure.

    Replies: @Glaivester

    DemsRRealRacist is a parody account. AG Conservative, who has blocked me for pointing out how ridiculous the idea that a Rubio presidency would get us border security is, is definitely for real.

  174. @James Kabala
    @AG Conservative

    Sorry, everybody, but if you didn't figure out that this was fake, I don't know what to say (that is polite). Rarely can anyone write a parody perfect enough not to contain giveaways of the truth, and this one did not even come close to believability. ("Nazi slogan" and "dumb whites" were the most egregious giveaways here, but not the only ones.)

    Replies: @Glaivester

    Sorry, everybody, but if you didn’t figure out that this was fake, I don’t know what to say (that is polite).

    How about, “Oh, you’ve actually read the real AG_Conservative‘s Twitter account.”

    AG Conservative is real, and what he says is not that far removed from what the poster said. Read his Twitter account some time (I linked to some tweets above). And no, he isn’t a parody, his Twitter account didn’t have anything in it that seemed too unreasonable until after Rubio dropped out.

  175. Sadly, at least in the short term, gun manufacturers may actually want Hillary to win, as that certainly would keep guns sales soaring.

  176. @Reg Cæsar
    @Bill Jones


    Is that why Reagan bailed out these guys?
     
    If you think a tariff is the same as a bailout, well, you're going to have to explain that one to a lot of folks here.

    That article noted how Honda and Kawasaki already made 50,000 motorcycles annually in the US by 1983. They were effectively American manufacturers as well, and were thus "bailed out" just as much as Harley was.

    Replies: @Bill Jones

    It was the transfer of resources from one group to another by government force.
    No different from the Bank or Auto or Pharma or insurance bailout

  177. @Chiron
    http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/books/201308/was-the-french-resistance-jewish

    WAS THE FRENCH RESISTANCE JEWISH?

    Jewish Communists made the bulk of the French Resistance.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Ivy

    I met some Resistance guys and they were not communist or Jewish, just French.

  178. Democrats ditched the gun legislation and pivoted to immigration reform. Two months later, the Senate approved the immigration overhaul on a bipartisan vote of 68 to 32. The legislation included a path to citizenship for some undocumented immigrants.

    No, they didn’t. There’s no such thing as an undocumented immigrant, and there was no “path to citizenship”. There was — as always — a path to super-citizenship affording them privileges and immunities that White citizens don’t have.

  179. @EriK
    Is gun control really a winning issue in a presidential race?

    Replies: @Clyde, @Busby, @Desiderius, @Desiderius, @kaganovitch, @Boomstick, @Dr. X, @Jim Don Bob, @ben tillman

    Is gun control really a winning issue in a presidential race?

    A winning issue? It’s not even an issue at all. No one on the Left has ever proposed gun control. What is proposed is discrimination between the powerless and the powerful, with the powerless to be disarmed while the powerful remain armed. There is no opposition to guns on the Left, just an opposition to decentralized power.

  180. @Unit472
    @415 reasons

    Yes, there is some budget impact but it is hidden in existing programs or primarily falls on state and local budgets.

    Schools and teachers,eg, are already in place and the children of illegals already enrolled.

    Replies: @ben tillman

    Yes, there is some budget impact but it is hidden in existing programs or primarily falls on state and local budgets.

    Schools and teachers,eg, are already in place and the children of illegals already enrolled.

    No, they are not. Many of the children are not yet school age, and many times more — millions upon millions in this generation and future ones — are not even born.

  181. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    @Andrew

    Hold on. There's an easier path to 270. Most if not all the states that you've mentioned that Trump hands down wins and also his weakest states are the exact ones that Romney either carried or lost in '12. Let's start with Mitt. He won 206 electoral votes.

    At 206, if Trump can say, win:

    FL =(29) which would bump his total up to 235.

    PA = (20) which would bump his total to 255.

    MI = (16) which would bring his total to 271 and we would have a Trump presidency. Anything over this total, like say, OH, are merely icing on the cake. Unlike Romney, Trump didn't shoot himself in the foot with the assinine auto bailout op ed. If anything, Trump's knowledge and support of public works from his yrs of experience in real estate tends to suggest he would help improve both the US's national infrastructure (long overdue to be updated) and also eminent domain, which, contrary to conservatives who espouse the free market, goes fairly well among ordinary folks at the local level. It needs to bear repeating. The few things during the debate that Trump did specifically emphasize, were things such as eminent domain and improving US's infrastructure. He referenced Eisenhower doing the same as well as made mention of Operation Wetback. I don't think that Trump threw these specific issues/policies out there a la Mr. "let's dispense dispel the fiction/he knows exactly what he's doing, etc" Rubio to show "looky looky how smarty smarty I am, boy from Queens up here on big stage with all these career politicians!" Trump stated these specific issues for a specific reason and it seemed real to him or rather that he has personal knowledge of them (being in the real estate business he would have to be familiar with eminent domain and improving infrastructure on the local level). Those types of issues resonate pretty well at the local level.

    With Steve's recent posting about Hillary deciding to make Immigration as well as Gun Control the main emphasis of her campaign, I am more than confident especially on the later issue, gun control, that with that information now public, Donald Trump will carry the entire South, including those border states that William Jennings Bryan Cruz carried (TX; OK; KS). There's no doubt about it now with Hillary strongly coming out vs. the 2nd Amendment.

    One thing. You mentioned VA. It is possible that Trump could carry it. The recent Rasmussen polls suggest that Trump is now polling at about 15% with blacks, and that is an amazingly high total for GOP presidential candidates (may have to go back at least 40-50yrs to see comparable poll numbers that high) the point isn't that Trump's doing somewhat better with blacks, but which states he receives those votes. If he were to say, do better than expected in a state like VA, that would help balance out the wealthy majority white DC suburbs that voted for Rubio and were all in a huff vs Trump. It would balance out this deficit, making VA in play once again.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @ben tillman

    Unlike Romney, Trump didn’t shoot himself in the foot with the assinine auto bailout op ed.

    And unlike Trump, Romney didn’t shoot himself in the foot with a series of unbelievably asinine comments guaranteed to piss off women. Trump has a huge problem that, inexplicably, no one here (or in the Trump campaign) seems to apprehend.

  182. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    @Bill P

    And there's the rub. Charles Murray, while he may or may not technically be a part of the one percent class, he certainly does appear to side with them more often than not. Yes, yes, yes, the Bell Curve was an amazing book in its time and still very much is. But you know, that's yesterday's glory. What's he done since? Did he actually read thru his own data regarding the state of white America (1960-2010)? Or was it all just a clever title to fool the yokels? How many of Fishtown whites does Charles Murray personally associate with nowadays? That's a fair question. Because Trump being from Queens has a legitimate chance of carrying Fishtown in the GE. And, while he waxes lyrical about Iowa the state of his birth, Murray may indeed have been born and raised in Newton, but he sure didn't make a point of staying there. At least Russell Kirk stayed in Grand Rapids, MI. Perhaps that is what unites the likes of neocons, Buckleyites, etc. Their snobbish elitist attitude that they don't give a damn about ordinary folks. For them, class trumps race, national identity, and the interests of ordinary everyday Americans.

    But then the ironic thing is, Trump is a legitimate member of the one percent and yet has spent virtually little next to nothing by fundraising to secure the nomination. He's winning the nomination virtually on free media. If anything, Trump should receive some praise and credit that he didn't simply waste people's money and it helps strengthen his case that he isn't bound to any one donor much less the entire class at large.

    Replies: @rod1963, @Henry Bowman

    Buckleyites, etc. Their snobbish elitist attitude that they don’t give a damn about ordinary folks. For them, class trumps race, national identity, and the interests of ordinary everyday Americans.

    Its sick how they would sell out everything just be snobs, do they not understand how in the end they lose everything if they keep up mass immigration?

  183. @Svigor

    There is a way to get illegal immigrants to leave. Pass a law that confiscates assets of illegal immigrants that do not self deport when given a deportation order.

    They will sell their stuff and get out of the US as fast as possible if they thought they will loose their home, bank account and car.

    Yes they will.
     
    It would work, but I prefer going after employers. Frog-marching (in a figurative sense - realistically, we're talking huge fines) fat cat employers has infinitely better optics. That, and denying public services of any kind to criminal aliens. It's one thing to seize their assets, it's quite another to say "not on my dime."

    They'd leave just as quickly, and the left would have to resort to playing the world's smallest violin for the greedy exploitative employers, or arguing that criminal border-jumpers have a right to taxpayer monies.

    Replies: @Brutusale

    That method would have the added bonus of decimating hundreds of Chinese restaurants staffed almost exclusively with illegals.

  184. @Jack D
    @Chiron

    French Christians made up the bulk of Nazi Collaborators.

    What is your point?

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    “French Christians made up the bulk of Nazi Collaborators.

    What is your point?”

    And far more anti-semites (by your reckoning) than Jews were maimed and killed fighting Nazi Germany.

  185. @415 reasons
    @unit472

    I can assure you letting in millions of uneducated people whose children will attend public school, who will take earned income tax credits, and who will use state subsidized health insurance is not a net positive to the federal budget

    Replies: @Unit472, @Economic Sophisms, @Lurker

    He did say “cost nothing up front”.

    The downstream costs must have been obvious for years, the fact that this is acceptable only shows that its not about the money. Its all about the nation destroying.

  186. @Jack D
    @Priss Factor

    Stop with the two-faced Jew thing. It's not true and even if it was, most people don't care. All this does is out you as an anti-Semite and make you repugnant to most normal non-Jew obsessed people. We are seeing this on the other side with Labourites in the UK. The same thing that resonates with the hard core also makes you unelectable among the wider public.

    You are not going to win friends and influence people (other than those who are already true believers) with this line of argument. The worst thing that could happen to Donald Trump would be to be publicly associated with this garbage - it's poison. All he has to do is let the words "white identity" or "gentile nation" pass his lips and he can kiss his Presidential hopes goodbye. For every white nationalist vote he would win, he would alienate ten other people.

    Replies: @Lurker

    For every white nationalist vote he would win, he would alienate ten other people.

    I doubt it would be as many as ten. Most of them wouldnt be too aware of the implications of those phrases. Until the media carefully explained it.

    Who dominates that media?

    People who are willing to tell white folks that they must have no ethnic interests.

  187. @Priss Factor
    Hillary's worldview might be called the Two-Faced Solution. One way for Israel, another way for the rest of the world, especially white world.

    Most politicians seem to be for the Two-Faced Solution.

    But there are two other positions that are more consistent.

    (1) "If Israel can have majority unity, pride, and rule, then that should be the ideal for gentile nations. So, we want what Israel has."

    This is the favored position of the Alt Right types.

    "If Israel survives with nationalism, we also to survive with nationalism."

    Or "you live, so we live."

    (2) "If Jews push diversity and multi-culturalism on the world, we accept those things as a universal good. So, it must be pushed on Israel as well."

    This seems to be the favored position among the hardline 'progressives'.

    "If white identity and privilege must dissolve in diversity and multi-culturalism, then Jews and Israel must also be dissolved in the global stew."

    Or "we die, so you die."

    Replies: @Jack D, @Lurker

    But in practice white nations are not allowed to emulate Israel and no one is forcing the multicult hell upon Israel.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS