The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Nixon's 1968 Law & Order Ads
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
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

– Cool use of jagged modernist style to convey unease.

– Amazing ending of 15 seconds of silence that forces you to look up to see if your TV is broken.

– There are virtually no blacks depicted in the ad. There might be two or three in the crowd scene behind the Independent Socialism banner, but more or less white males predominate in the imagery. Americans had invested heavily in colleges, only to be greeted with sit-ins halting education.

Here’s another one:

I remember in the 1970s being amazed to hear that during the 1940s my mother and my Aunt Kay would go to the movies downtown several times per week. The idea that women had once been free to walk and take public transit at night in the city was astonishing in the post-Great Society era.

More Nixon ads from 1968:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsmaZ0TNfrI&feature=youtu.be

And here’s one about poor Hubert Horatio Humphrey that looks like it was directed by Hunter S. Thompson during a massive LSD freakout:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxsH2xF6LBg&feature=youtu.be

(Actually, Hunter S. Thompson’s only role in the Nixon campaign was Nixon picked Thompson to talk football one time when he needed to relax while campaigning in New Hampshire.)

Here’s a post-Democratic Convention ad:

https://youtu.be/RtytMfA7kto

One interesting aspect is that these Hitchcockian ads were clearly aimed at fairly sophisticated grown-ups, people who had loved “North by Northwest” and felt obligated to see “Psycho” but didn’t like it. The ads look a lot in style like the following years “Midnight Cowboy.” You constantly hear about Nixon’s Southern Strategy, but these ads are about as Northern as you can get.

In reality, in 1968’s three-way race, George Wallace carried white Southerners who wanted to restore Jim Crow in their mixed race small towns; Humphrey carried white Southerners in the Appalachians who lived in all-white communities; and Nixon carried white Southern suburbanites who wanted to put Jim Crow behind them and join modern America.

 
Hide 84 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “Donald Trump is facing a child rape lawsuit. Why aren’t we talking about it?”

    http://www.dailylife.com.au/news-and-views/dl-opinion/the-presumption-of-innocence-isnt-a-free-pass-for-powerful-men-to-avoid-scrutiny-20160703-gpxp28.html

    A few weeks ago, a federal lawsuit was filed in the state of New York naming Donald Trump as one of two alleged rapists of a 13 year old girl. Despite the gravity of the allegations, the lawsuit seems to have been largely ignored by mainstream media, with the exception of a very comprehensive piece in the Huffington Post written by Lisa Bloom, an attorney and legal analyst for NBC News.

    For the record, Trump’s lawyer has dismissed the allegations as “categorically untrue, completely fabricated and politically motivated.” But as Bloom points out, there are compelling reasons for the mainstream media to at least consider them worthy of reporting. First, there’s the fact that Jeffrey Epstein is a convicted pedophile and Level 3 registered sex offender with a preference for underage girls. There is also the matter of his ongoing, documented friendship with Trump – just prior to Epstein’s conviction, Trump had this to say about the man he had known for 15 years: “Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it, Jeffrey enjoys his social life.”

    But more concerning even than that is the fact that ‘Jane Doe’ claims to have a witness. ‘Tiffany Doe’ (both women have, with the court’s approval, exercised their right to anonymity for fear of retaliation given the high profile nature of the case) worked for a number of years for Epstein, and says part of her job was to lure underage girls to these aforementioned parties. In documents filed to the court, ‘Tiffany Doe’ says, “I personally witnessed four sexual encounters that the Plaintiff was forced to have with Mr. Trump during this period, including the fourth of these encounters where Mr. Trump forcibly raped her despite her pleas to stop.” She says she continues to live in “mortal fear” of Trump.

  2. OT: Hillary ad attacks Trump for shady practices in building Trump National golf club.

    I’m seriously think that she doesn’t know Slick Willie is still a member.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Thanks.
  3. “free from domestic violence” with a clip of a dismembered female mannequin.

    Quite a naked appeal to the women’s vote there. Could Trump pull that off today without an ad highlighting Muslim mass sexual assaults?

    Personally, I think gendered politics is passing from the scene. Racial politics is – relatively speaking – more important than it was in 1968, despite what people might think about our “progress.”

    So many decry tribalism today, but it’s just about all people have left, and that’s why it’s coming back with a vengeance. We are not all 7 billion people living in harmony, because that’s impossible. It’s in defiance of God, if you’re a believer in religion, or human nature, if you’re honest about our species. Probably both I think. Better to hedge your bets about these matters.

    • Replies: @(((Owen)))
    In 1968, women still tended to vote Republican. But with the rise in barrenness, carousel riding, and spinsters the proportion of Democratic voting single women has been rising and Republican married women has been falling enough that women are now a Blue constituency.

    It's a hard case to make that more Moslems will mean the end of women's freedom. It just invokes too much cognitive dissonance. That's why Houellebecq wrote Submission: It's based on a true idea that both sides of our ideological divide hate.
    , @Bill

    So many decry tribalism today, but it’s just about all people have left, and that’s why it’s coming back with a vengeance.
     
    This is a key insight. The declining importance of religion means that people don't really identify that way. High geographical mobility means, first, that your neighborhood is more like a hotel room than your home---Paul Kersey memorably called modern suburbs "drifter colonies." But it also means that your contact with your family is dramatically curtailed. It also means that your contact with the people you grew up with is dramatically curtailed. The homogenizing influence of mass culture, imposed legal uniformity, and neighborhood disruption ensures that there is nothing for most to identify with at a sub-national level.

    Because of they way we are wired, we are going to take sides and fight each other. Our elites think they can keep that urge channeled into sports, loyalty to your job and co-workers, and ridiculous, abstract ideological conflicts over "muh freedumbs" and "social justice." The way to bet, however, is that they lose control and more normal genetic interests re-assert themselves. Or, maybe that's what they want. They seem to be happy with the Nazi freak show in the Ukraine.
  4. OT

    Off-duty NYPD cop who was caught on camera killing Delrawn Small in road rage row stripped of his badge and gun
    Delrawn Small, 37, was shot dead in Brooklyn on July 4, in road rage row
    Wayne Isaacs, an off-duty cop, shot Small in chest and head. The cop had been assigned to the 79th Precinct in Bedford-Stuyvesant and had three years of experience.

    Reverunt Al Sharptoon said the public’s outrage shouldn’t be any less because Isaacs and Small are both black. ‘We are not against black cops or white cops,’ he said. ‘We are against wrong cops.
    ‘This cop told a story that is wrong and someone lost their life. If he told a story that doesn’t stand up about his alibi, why should we believe anything else he says?’
    ‘He killed a man.’
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3685081/NYPD-cop-shot-man-road-rage-incident-stripped-badge-gun.html

    This took place after midnight. Don’t get into traffic disputes at night when the other driver who dissed you is probably high and/or had a few drinks.

  5. While there maybe a lot of validity to Strauss and Howe’s ‘Fourth Turning’ concept, we shouldn’t forget just how fractured America was in 1968. The events of that year were a lot more consequential than anything BLM has managed. There were riots all across the US after M.L King was shot that dwarf anything since. Demonstrations? The anti-war protests were huge. 500 KIA per week during the Tet Offensive in Vietnam. The assassination of Bobby Kennedy and the riots at the Democratic Convention in Chicago. It wasn’t just the US either. Students were gunned down in Mexico right before the Olympic Games. France was paralyzed by huge demonstrations by students and unions. It was a remarkable year that ended with US astronauts orbiting the Moon on Christmas Eve.

    Looking back we might remember Nixon more for how he restored order to America rather than Watergate. I have my doubts that Kennedy or Humphrey would have been able to do it.

    • Replies: @David In TN
    As I've mentioned before, an unnamed Nixon administration official was quoted in Time magazine on why the (black) riots had stopped.

    "You riot against your friends. Mitchell means business."
    , @e
    While there maybe a lot of validity to Strauss and Howe’s ‘Fourth Turning’ concept, we shouldn’t forget just how fractured America was in 1968. The events of that year were a lot more consequential than anything BLM has managed.

    True, yet the push to put as many 18 year olds in college today, where they are fed tripe, and social media instant communications have resulted in the "empowerment" of millions of more ill-informed voters who are easily manipulated by the latest fad. Obama is very good at appealing to the young. I fear that once again he'll get out the black and youth votes. Frankly, I think the voting age should be raised to 26.
  6. I believe that ad is an appeal to restoring the old order. And Trump does some of that. But there can’t be any return to the old order due to “demographic changes”.

    And I suspect a lot of Trump supporters know that. It’s not about law and order. It’s about a NEW direction. What it will be, we don’t yet know. But we are hungry for something new.

  7. “- There are virtually no blacks depicted in the ad. There might be two or three in the crowd scene behind the Independent Socialism banner, but more or less white males predominate in the imagery.”

    So it’s like an ADT home security commercial.

  8. Could Trump pull that off today without an ad highlighting Muslim mass sexual assaults?

    Or BLM. Don’t forget BLM. They’re handing Trump a freebie, if only he’s got the stones to use it. (Remarkably, there’s some question about that.) He wouldn’t even have to attack BLM, just relentlessly link Crooked Hillary to them.

    • Replies: @e
    While there maybe a lot of validity to Strauss and Howe’s ‘Fourth Turning’ concept, we shouldn’t forget just how fractured America was in 1968. The events of that year were a lot more consequential than anything BLM has managed.

    True, yet the push to put as many 18 year olds in college today, where they are fed tripe, and social media instant communications have resulted in the "empowerment" of millions of more ill-informed voters who are easily manipulated by the latest fad. Obama is very good at appealing to the young. I fear that once again he'll get out the black and youth votes. Frankly, I think the voting age should be raised to 26.
  9. @Trumpenproleteriat
    OT: Hillary ad attacks Trump for shady practices in building Trump National golf club.
    https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/751092479013695488

    I'm seriously think that she doesn't know Slick Willie is still a member.

    Thanks.

  10. @Bill P
    "free from domestic violence" with a clip of a dismembered female mannequin.

    Quite a naked appeal to the women's vote there. Could Trump pull that off today without an ad highlighting Muslim mass sexual assaults?

    Personally, I think gendered politics is passing from the scene. Racial politics is - relatively speaking - more important than it was in 1968, despite what people might think about our "progress."

    So many decry tribalism today, but it's just about all people have left, and that's why it's coming back with a vengeance. We are not all 7 billion people living in harmony, because that's impossible. It's in defiance of God, if you're a believer in religion, or human nature, if you're honest about our species. Probably both I think. Better to hedge your bets about these matters.

    In 1968, women still tended to vote Republican. But with the rise in barrenness, carousel riding, and spinsters the proportion of Democratic voting single women has been rising and Republican married women has been falling enough that women are now a Blue constituency.

    It’s a hard case to make that more Moslems will mean the end of women’s freedom. It just invokes too much cognitive dissonance. That’s why Houellebecq wrote Submission: It’s based on a true idea that both sides of our ideological divide hate.

  11. Was the real reason Watergate was a big scandal that brought down Nixon and not just a dark cloud because some people had an axe to grind against the “Law & Order” candidate?

    Watching that ad feels like watching “Death Wish” or “Dirty Harry“.

    • Replies: @Drawbacks
    Talking of classic 70s movies, The Parallax View seems to have drawn inspiration from the Nixon ad (NSFW):
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNMi8fXi5Os
    , @BB753
    Well basically, for that and for failing to acknowledge Jewish power.
    Democrats certainly didn't appreciate Nixon cracking down on their brownshirts: white radicals and blacks. Democrat ascendancy today is based on the permanent blackmail of releasing their violent brown and black hordes and some of their white antifascists on society to create mayhem if they dont get their way. This is basically what BLM is about.
  12. Here are some more Nixon ads from ’68:

    The man who made these commercials, Eugene Jones, was a documentary filmmaker best known for A Face of War (1967):

    • Replies: @Stebbing Heuer
    Thanks for posting these.

    That was quite a trip, watching them. Tremendously powerful.
    , @MC
    That second video of the woman walking in the dark is a great example of how some of the old constraints of propriety made better art. They couldn't easily show a woman getting mugged in an ad to be shown during a family TV hour, but that was easily the most suspenseful political ad I've ever seen.
    , @Prof. Woland
    "Freedom from Fear" is a basic right of every American. Sounds like a trigger warning but rather than some purse snatcher jumping out of the shadows, today it would be freedom from someone saying mean (truthful) things.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fahhDIm8Hys
  13. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1968

    I have been meaning to post the above link since the BLM violence started, as Nixon is perhaps the best evidence that the 2016 race rioting and murdering will assist Trump. Worth quoting:

    The United States presidential election of 1968 was the 46th quadrennial presidential election, held on Tuesday, November 5, 1968. The Republican nominee, former Vice President Richard Nixon, won the election over the Democratic nominee, incumbent Vice President Hubert Humphrey…

    The election year was tumultuous; it was marked by the assassination of civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr., subsequent race riots across the nation, the assassination of Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy and widespread opposition to the Vietnam War across university campuses. Incumbent President Lyndon B. Johnson, who had won a landslide victory for the Democratic Party four years earlier, declined to seek election amid growing discontent over the Vietnam War and his worse-than-expected showing in the New Hampshire primary. The 1968 Democratic National Convention was a scene of violent confrontations between police and anti-war protesters as the Democrats split into multiple factions.

    Richard Nixon ran on a campaign that promised to restore law and order to the nation’s cities and provide new leadership in the Vietnam War. He popularized the term “silent majority” to describe those he viewed as being his target voters. Nixon won the popular vote by a narrow margin of 0.7 percentage point, but won easily in the Electoral College, 301-191. The election also featured a strong third party effort by former Alabama Governor George Wallace, a vocal advocate for racial segregation in public schools. He carried several states in the Deep South and ran well in some ethnic enclave industrial districts in the North. This is the last election to date where at least one state was carried by a third-party candidate.

    I.e. if Wallace had not run, Nixon would likely have picked up a lot of those votes. So Nixon won very convincingly.

    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    Its worth noting that Nixon never drove the Republicans to a majority in Congress. Since 1932, a Republican President has only had a Republican Congress for six years.
    , @A Reader From Chicago
    I saw Nixon give an interview around 1990--I think it was with Ted Koppel--and Nixon said that if Wallace had not run in 1968, 2/3rds of the Wallace voters would have voted for him, Nixon.

    That estimate sounds about right to me. That would mean that in a two person race in 1968, Nixon would have gotten at least 53 percent of the vote.
  14. @Stan Adams
    Here are some more Nixon ads from '68:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsmaZ0TNfrI
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxsH2xF6LBg
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtytMfA7kto
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fahhDIm8Hys

    The man who made these commercials, Eugene Jones, was a documentary filmmaker best known for A Face of War (1967):
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yaSg0I7t4Q

    Thanks for posting these.

    That was quite a trip, watching them. Tremendously powerful.

  15. MC says:
    @Stan Adams
    Here are some more Nixon ads from '68:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsmaZ0TNfrI
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxsH2xF6LBg
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtytMfA7kto
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fahhDIm8Hys

    The man who made these commercials, Eugene Jones, was a documentary filmmaker best known for A Face of War (1967):
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yaSg0I7t4Q

    That second video of the woman walking in the dark is a great example of how some of the old constraints of propriety made better art. They couldn’t easily show a woman getting mugged in an ad to be shown during a family TV hour, but that was easily the most suspenseful political ad I’ve ever seen.

    • Replies: @ChaseBizzy
    Little old ladies couldn't go out at night for fear of being mugged by hippies.
  16. So hippies were making the streets unsafe?

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "So hippies were making the streets unsafe?"

    Woodstock was the rape and murder capital of the world in 1969. They made Jamaica look like Japan.
    , @IA
    Not hippies but SDS and especially the Weathermen with the now Establishment figures of Bill Ayers, Dorhn, et. al., riling college kids. The damage being done at that time was existential. But it's hard to make a visual impact that a new order is emerging by showing SDS inspired "protesters" demanding their "right" to shut down college campuses. You could see that on the nightly news programs.
  17. If only Nixon had made starter for his high-school football team. What a tool.

    • Replies: @The Only Catholic Unionist
    If you want to go down the alt-history road, what if Nixon hadn't been snubbed by "white shoe" law firms after graduating third in his class at Duke Law ... ? Or, if you want to go all out, what if he'd taken the scholarship to attend Harvard? Would his burning ambition have been channeled into politics?

    (What if Grant had been drinking at Appomattox? lulz)
  18. @MC
    That second video of the woman walking in the dark is a great example of how some of the old constraints of propriety made better art. They couldn't easily show a woman getting mugged in an ad to be shown during a family TV hour, but that was easily the most suspenseful political ad I've ever seen.

    Little old ladies couldn’t go out at night for fear of being mugged by hippies.

  19. @ChaseBizzy
    So hippies were making the streets unsafe?

    “So hippies were making the streets unsafe?”

    Woodstock was the rape and murder capital of the world in 1969. They made Jamaica look like Japan.

  20. I think Nixon was definitely effective in restoring law and order.

  21. Is it Ronald Reagan narrating the Nixon add Steve linked to?

  22. Leftist conservative [AKA "marketable shills (dork enlightenment)"] says: • Website

    political ads have lost most of their power. Fighting the last war, etc.

    I see very few such ads because I don’t watch tv from a tv set…and i have adblockers.

  23. “There are virtually no blacks depicted in the ad.”

    So by 1968, it had become politically incorrect to directly mention the fact that most of the spike in crime during the ’60’s, including the race riots of the same decade were being committed by blacks.

    Although, GHWBush’s ’88 infamous ad on crime did show various criminals, some of whom were blacks.

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    Correct. I recall that during the Nixon presidential campaign, liberals said that the phrase "law and order" was a racist code term. Nixon speechwriter Pat Buchanan responded that if "law and order" is a secret racist signal, tell him what term he should use when he means "law and order."
  24. Ed says:

    Nixon’s media campaign in 1968 was excellent. After the election, a book came out, “The Selling of the President”, came out arguing that it was too good, that basically it undermines democracy to use modern commercial advertising techniques to support a political candidate. This indicates how innocent those times were. Actually I think the book had a point, but its hard to see how that genie could have been kept in the bottle.

    However, Humphrey’s more amateurish efforts managed to close a twenty percentage points plus gap in the polls, so there was more to this story.

    One big difference between the late 1960s and now is that white Americans at least had really achieved a sort of paradise of affluence and safety in the 1950s and early 1960s. I put it this way because this really hadn’t been the case with the rest of American history. So the appearance of domestic violence in 1967-8 came as a huge shock which really affected people in a way that just wouldn’t be the case today. Also in terms of domestic violence, 2016 really doesn’t compare to 1968 no matter from which angle you look at it.

    • Replies: @Sam

    Also in terms of domestic violence, 2016 really doesn’t compare to 1968 no matter from which angle you look at it.
     
    This is exactly right and one reason the Pro-Trump meme of this year being a new 1968 might not hold. The shock of a bourgeois order breaking apart is not there and second nowadays it is simply not the case. We might be cusp of a new wave of violence but so far it is mostly in black cities.

    Trump's case then has to be that violence is returning, that it could spiral into a new crime wave. Then he has to push libarals to identify with being on the anti-law and order side. In this case this means pushing liberals into siding with BLM which is easy since they do that anyway but make it explicit. It has to be clear that the average person understands that liberals won't do anything to keep them safe.One advantage Trump does have is that this current violence is being symbolic with things like Dallas and the Ferguson riots so it might scare people. It is true that TV no longer has the communication monopoly power but likewise it is true that you can hit on multiple platforms and that videos/pictures that break the narrative float on the internet. Any campaign to inspire reasonable fear has to start with showing that the mainstream media will never tell you the truth. Trump should explicitly include the media as part of the problem on all fronts.
  25. not that I am opposed to a public fight. Even insurrection. Just that if Trump is president the Left will launch disorder attacks from multiple directions. A Trump presidency would markedly increase disorder in the US.

  26. @ChaseBizzy
    If only Nixon had made starter for his high-school football team. What a tool.

    If you want to go down the alt-history road, what if Nixon hadn’t been snubbed by “white shoe” law firms after graduating third in his class at Duke Law … ? Or, if you want to go all out, what if he’d taken the scholarship to attend Harvard? Would his burning ambition have been channeled into politics?

    (What if Grant had been drinking at Appomattox? lulz)

  27. @Anonym
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1968

    I have been meaning to post the above link since the BLM violence started, as Nixon is perhaps the best evidence that the 2016 race rioting and murdering will assist Trump. Worth quoting:


    The United States presidential election of 1968 was the 46th quadrennial presidential election, held on Tuesday, November 5, 1968. The Republican nominee, former Vice President Richard Nixon, won the election over the Democratic nominee, incumbent Vice President Hubert Humphrey...

    The election year was tumultuous; it was marked by the assassination of civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr., subsequent race riots across the nation, the assassination of Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy and widespread opposition to the Vietnam War across university campuses. Incumbent President Lyndon B. Johnson, who had won a landslide victory for the Democratic Party four years earlier, declined to seek election amid growing discontent over the Vietnam War and his worse-than-expected showing in the New Hampshire primary. The 1968 Democratic National Convention was a scene of violent confrontations between police and anti-war protesters as the Democrats split into multiple factions.

    Richard Nixon ran on a campaign that promised to restore law and order to the nation's cities and provide new leadership in the Vietnam War. He popularized the term "silent majority" to describe those he viewed as being his target voters. Nixon won the popular vote by a narrow margin of 0.7 percentage point, but won easily in the Electoral College, 301-191. The election also featured a strong third party effort by former Alabama Governor George Wallace, a vocal advocate for racial segregation in public schools. He carried several states in the Deep South and ran well in some ethnic enclave industrial districts in the North. This is the last election to date where at least one state was carried by a third-party candidate.
     
    I.e. if Wallace had not run, Nixon would likely have picked up a lot of those votes. So Nixon won very convincingly.

    Its worth noting that Nixon never drove the Republicans to a majority in Congress. Since 1932, a Republican President has only had a Republican Congress for six years.

    • Replies: @A Reader From Chicago
    I've done some reading about that political era, and it seems to me that there was greater ideological diversity _within_ the parties than there are today. Two political species existed then which hardly exists now: the "conservative Democrat" and the "liberal Republican."

    White working class and middle class voters voted for Democrats for Congress, but some of these Democrats were closer to the center than other Democrats. There were hawks on foreign policy such as Senator Henry Jackson. There were Democrats such as Gov. Wallace who did NOT take the liberal view on racial issues.

    So I'm not surprised that Nixon never had the Senate or the House of Representatives under Republican control. There were more centrist Democrats in those days.
  28. There’s a remarkable similarity to the end credits of Night of the Living Dead (1968).

    (3:49 – end)

    -Atonal, discordant, echo laden music
    -Exclusive use of still shots
    -Competent White men with guns
    -Bloody leftists/zombies
    -Edged weapons
    -People dragging bodies
    -Dead or unconscious bodies on the ground
    -Rubble
    -Fire

    Strange things were clearly afoot with the zeitgeist in 1968.

  29. @Ed
    Nixon's media campaign in 1968 was excellent. After the election, a book came out, "The Selling of the President", came out arguing that it was too good, that basically it undermines democracy to use modern commercial advertising techniques to support a political candidate. This indicates how innocent those times were. Actually I think the book had a point, but its hard to see how that genie could have been kept in the bottle.

    However, Humphrey's more amateurish efforts managed to close a twenty percentage points plus gap in the polls, so there was more to this story.

    One big difference between the late 1960s and now is that white Americans at least had really achieved a sort of paradise of affluence and safety in the 1950s and early 1960s. I put it this way because this really hadn't been the case with the rest of American history. So the appearance of domestic violence in 1967-8 came as a huge shock which really affected people in a way that just wouldn't be the case today. Also in terms of domestic violence, 2016 really doesn't compare to 1968 no matter from which angle you look at it.

    Also in terms of domestic violence, 2016 really doesn’t compare to 1968 no matter from which angle you look at it.

    This is exactly right and one reason the Pro-Trump meme of this year being a new 1968 might not hold. The shock of a bourgeois order breaking apart is not there and second nowadays it is simply not the case. We might be cusp of a new wave of violence but so far it is mostly in black cities.

    Trump’s case then has to be that violence is returning, that it could spiral into a new crime wave. Then he has to push libarals to identify with being on the anti-law and order side. In this case this means pushing liberals into siding with BLM which is easy since they do that anyway but make it explicit. It has to be clear that the average person understands that liberals won’t do anything to keep them safe.One advantage Trump does have is that this current violence is being symbolic with things like Dallas and the Ferguson riots so it might scare people. It is true that TV no longer has the communication monopoly power but likewise it is true that you can hit on multiple platforms and that videos/pictures that break the narrative float on the internet. Any campaign to inspire reasonable fear has to start with showing that the mainstream media will never tell you the truth. Trump should explicitly include the media as part of the problem on all fronts.

    • Replies: @Ed
    This is in response to Sam a few comments above.

    These are all good points. My impression is that you red staters (I am a sympathetic blue stater) want to re-run the 1968 and 1988 presidential campaigns that you are trying too hard and in danger of blowing it.

    Leaving aside the sheer shock to the established way of doing things in the late 1960s that can't be replicated, because it already happened, for whatever reason street crime and property crime are just much lower now than in the late 1960s through early 1990s. The rioting and assassinations in 1967-8 were just on a completely different scale. This reminds me of the endless neocon efforts to persuade people that the latest tin pot dictator of a marginal country being featured on CNN is the next Hitler.

    As it happens, Trump has plenty of other issues to run on. He may not be able to replicate Nixon's 1968 campaign, but he can replicate McKinley's 1896 effort pretty well. He has immigration and trade, going in a more restrictionist and protectionist direct, after decades of doing the opposite, will put more money in peoples' pocketbooks by curbing the expansion of the labor supply and curbing outsourcing/ offshoring.

    Not only that, Hillary Clinton is tied so deeply to the neo-cons that he can also imitate Wilson in 1916 and run a "he will keep us out of war" campaign. Then you have the integrity in government issue. Until very recently it would have been unthinkable for a party to nominate a candidate with the Clintons' demonstrated baggage on this, it would have just been assumed that if anyone dared to try this the would go down in flames in a landslide. I'm still not sure if the Democrats won't wind up making a last minute substitution. I can't even think of a good precedent for this, Al Smith and his Tammany Hall background comes the closest.

    Of course Trump has to keep the Republican base happy, but he can play up his business experience, promise capital gains tax cuts, make a few mild global-warming is a hoax claims, and there is probably something he can do with the culture struggle. If I were advising him, I would tell him to stay well away from the racial stuff, especially as driving up black and white liberal turnout, on the grounds that Trump is a racist, is the Hillary Clinton campaign playbook.

    By the way, I suspect getting Trump into the race in the first place was a Clinton maneuver to sabotage the Republican primary process by getting in there someone obviously ridiculous as a serious contender.
    , @Forbes

    We might be cusp of a new wave of violence but so far it is mostly in black cities.
     
    A distinction without a difference. The new wave of violence, e.g. Ferguson, Baltimore, Dallas, et al., are part of the national conversation. Trayvon Martin (2012) was a local crime story turned national, and there's been no looking back.

    The lapdog media needs eyeballs, so every insignificance is hyped to the moon. Comparability to 1968 hardly matters--one needs to be ~60 years old for it to resonate. Otherwise it's just another blathering talking point for some airhead to incorporate in a diatribe about racist and divisive America.

    Like PBS, it's always the 1960s (or the 1860s) in America.
  30. @franktremb
    Was the real reason Watergate was a big scandal that brought down Nixon and not just a dark cloud because some people had an axe to grind against the "Law & Order" candidate?

    Watching that ad feels like watching "Death Wish" or "Dirty Harry".

    Talking of classic 70s movies, The Parallax View seems to have drawn inspiration from the Nixon ad (NSFW):

  31. This ad wouldn’t be allowed today as it would be seen as too anti-Semitic.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Is one of the cops in the ad wearing a 6-pointed badge?
  32. Somewhat off-topic, Scott Adams is pushing the envelope more and more in his blog.

    http://blog.dilbert.com/post/147247313346/when-persuasion-turns-deadly

  33. No blacks depicted even though their violence was the major driving cause behind the lack of law and order at about that time. Though I’m presuming Nixon was dog whistling and hoping that enough people would have gotten the message; as it turns out, considering Wallace was in the race, enough people did. And speaking of Wallace, in and by 1968, he, too, had changed his tactics to focus on the kind of people Nixon’s ad portrayed, left wing white or (((white))) goons.

    The reason Nixon and Wallace didn’t or stopped (respectively) “punching down” at the black undertow by 1968 is easy. Three years earlier, the Voting Rights Act was enacted, and ’68 was the first Presidential election cycle where all the new black voters whom the Feds forced on the voting rolls could vote.

  34. @Canadian Observer_
    This ad wouldn't be allowed today as it would be seen as too anti-Semitic.

    Is one of the cops in the ad wearing a 6-pointed badge?

    • Replies: @Canadian Observer_
    The ad prominently displays many of the on-the-ground leaders of the SDS and other anti-war protest organizations.

    In essence, this ad is saying "these aren't real Americans. And they should be feared".
  35. Ed says:
    @Sam

    Also in terms of domestic violence, 2016 really doesn’t compare to 1968 no matter from which angle you look at it.
     
    This is exactly right and one reason the Pro-Trump meme of this year being a new 1968 might not hold. The shock of a bourgeois order breaking apart is not there and second nowadays it is simply not the case. We might be cusp of a new wave of violence but so far it is mostly in black cities.

    Trump's case then has to be that violence is returning, that it could spiral into a new crime wave. Then he has to push libarals to identify with being on the anti-law and order side. In this case this means pushing liberals into siding with BLM which is easy since they do that anyway but make it explicit. It has to be clear that the average person understands that liberals won't do anything to keep them safe.One advantage Trump does have is that this current violence is being symbolic with things like Dallas and the Ferguson riots so it might scare people. It is true that TV no longer has the communication monopoly power but likewise it is true that you can hit on multiple platforms and that videos/pictures that break the narrative float on the internet. Any campaign to inspire reasonable fear has to start with showing that the mainstream media will never tell you the truth. Trump should explicitly include the media as part of the problem on all fronts.

    This is in response to Sam a few comments above.

    These are all good points. My impression is that you red staters (I am a sympathetic blue stater) want to re-run the 1968 and 1988 presidential campaigns that you are trying too hard and in danger of blowing it.

    Leaving aside the sheer shock to the established way of doing things in the late 1960s that can’t be replicated, because it already happened, for whatever reason street crime and property crime are just much lower now than in the late 1960s through early 1990s. The rioting and assassinations in 1967-8 were just on a completely different scale. This reminds me of the endless neocon efforts to persuade people that the latest tin pot dictator of a marginal country being featured on CNN is the next Hitler.

    As it happens, Trump has plenty of other issues to run on. He may not be able to replicate Nixon’s 1968 campaign, but he can replicate McKinley’s 1896 effort pretty well. He has immigration and trade, going in a more restrictionist and protectionist direct, after decades of doing the opposite, will put more money in peoples’ pocketbooks by curbing the expansion of the labor supply and curbing outsourcing/ offshoring.

    Not only that, Hillary Clinton is tied so deeply to the neo-cons that he can also imitate Wilson in 1916 and run a “he will keep us out of war” campaign. Then you have the integrity in government issue. Until very recently it would have been unthinkable for a party to nominate a candidate with the Clintons’ demonstrated baggage on this, it would have just been assumed that if anyone dared to try this the would go down in flames in a landslide. I’m still not sure if the Democrats won’t wind up making a last minute substitution. I can’t even think of a good precedent for this, Al Smith and his Tammany Hall background comes the closest.

    Of course Trump has to keep the Republican base happy, but he can play up his business experience, promise capital gains tax cuts, make a few mild global-warming is a hoax claims, and there is probably something he can do with the culture struggle. If I were advising him, I would tell him to stay well away from the racial stuff, especially as driving up black and white liberal turnout, on the grounds that Trump is a racist, is the Hillary Clinton campaign playbook.

    By the way, I suspect getting Trump into the race in the first place was a Clinton maneuver to sabotage the Republican primary process by getting in there someone obviously ridiculous as a serious contender.

    • Replies: @IA

    By the way, I suspect getting Trump into the race in the first place was a Clinton maneuver to sabotage the Republican primary process by getting in there someone obviously ridiculous as a serious contender.
     
    If that's the case it has to be the most spectacular backfire or miscalculation since Robspierre.
  36. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    The threat of violence may have more pull with young voters today that might be expected. The young are a less secure generation than that in the 1960s. They grew up in one-parent families, and they often don’t have jobs or money. If they want to live outside Mommy’s basement, they have to live in a cheap area which is likely to be very near a black ghetto or other minority cesspit. They use public transportation more often and have to deal with blacks acting up on subways or buses because they don’t own cars. If they walk a lot they’re more like to have to run a gauntlet of loitering young black men assessing them for a mugging or a quick cell phone theft. Their situation in life is more precarious, and that makes them insecure, safe-space yearning, and easily triggered. Trump adds targeting crime may be effective with them ala Nixon.

    • Replies: @SteveRogers42
    That's a very good point.
  37. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    "There are virtually no blacks depicted in the ad."

    So by 1968, it had become politically incorrect to directly mention the fact that most of the spike in crime during the '60's, including the race riots of the same decade were being committed by blacks.

    Although, GHWBush's '88 infamous ad on crime did show various criminals, some of whom were blacks.

    Correct. I recall that during the Nixon presidential campaign, liberals said that the phrase “law and order” was a racist code term. Nixon speechwriter Pat Buchanan responded that if “law and order” is a secret racist signal, tell him what term he should use when he means “law and order.”

  38. @unit472
    While there maybe a lot of validity to Strauss and Howe's 'Fourth Turning' concept, we shouldn't forget just how fractured America was in 1968. The events of that year were a lot more consequential than anything BLM has managed. There were riots all across the US after M.L King was shot that dwarf anything since. Demonstrations? The anti-war protests were huge. 500 KIA per week during the Tet Offensive in Vietnam. The assassination of Bobby Kennedy and the riots at the Democratic Convention in Chicago. It wasn't just the US either. Students were gunned down in Mexico right before the Olympic Games. France was paralyzed by huge demonstrations by students and unions. It was a remarkable year that ended with US astronauts orbiting the Moon on Christmas Eve.

    Looking back we might remember Nixon more for how he restored order to America rather than Watergate. I have my doubts that Kennedy or Humphrey would have been able to do it.

    As I’ve mentioned before, an unnamed Nixon administration official was quoted in Time magazine on why the (black) riots had stopped.

    “You riot against your friends. Mitchell means business.”

  39. @Bill P
    "free from domestic violence" with a clip of a dismembered female mannequin.

    Quite a naked appeal to the women's vote there. Could Trump pull that off today without an ad highlighting Muslim mass sexual assaults?

    Personally, I think gendered politics is passing from the scene. Racial politics is - relatively speaking - more important than it was in 1968, despite what people might think about our "progress."

    So many decry tribalism today, but it's just about all people have left, and that's why it's coming back with a vengeance. We are not all 7 billion people living in harmony, because that's impossible. It's in defiance of God, if you're a believer in religion, or human nature, if you're honest about our species. Probably both I think. Better to hedge your bets about these matters.

    So many decry tribalism today, but it’s just about all people have left, and that’s why it’s coming back with a vengeance.

    This is a key insight. The declining importance of religion means that people don’t really identify that way. High geographical mobility means, first, that your neighborhood is more like a hotel room than your home—Paul Kersey memorably called modern suburbs “drifter colonies.” But it also means that your contact with your family is dramatically curtailed. It also means that your contact with the people you grew up with is dramatically curtailed. The homogenizing influence of mass culture, imposed legal uniformity, and neighborhood disruption ensures that there is nothing for most to identify with at a sub-national level.

    Because of they way we are wired, we are going to take sides and fight each other. Our elites think they can keep that urge channeled into sports, loyalty to your job and co-workers, and ridiculous, abstract ideological conflicts over “muh freedumbs” and “social justice.” The way to bet, however, is that they lose control and more normal genetic interests re-assert themselves. Or, maybe that’s what they want. They seem to be happy with the Nazi freak show in the Ukraine.

    • Replies: @Ed
    Bill @37 makes excellent points. I don't know how the "agree" thing works so I will highlight them here.

    The neighborhood I grew up in got hyper-gentrified into unrecognizability, and I can't afford to live there anyway, so I appreciate the point about living in a modern neighborhood being not much different than living in a hotel room somewhere.
  40. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:

    With the jobless rate for black male teens at 40%, it is going to be a long, hot summer of love:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-11/chart-barack-obama-does-not-want-youung-black-males-see?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+t

    When you have a (some would say ultra-)violent sub-class it is stupid to make it hard for them to find employment, although perhaps it is all following a plan.

  41. @Steve Sailer
    Is one of the cops in the ad wearing a 6-pointed badge?

    The ad prominently displays many of the on-the-ground leaders of the SDS and other anti-war protest organizations.

    In essence, this ad is saying “these aren’t real Americans. And they should be feared”.

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

    Claims[1] that Philando et al were the robbers at the gas station several days before he was shot:

    http://gotnews.com/breaking-mn-cops-newport-cigarette-tax-stamps-tie-gangbanger-philandocastile-to-convenience-store-robbery-falconheightsshootings/

    [1] Someone would likely use the word verbiage, I guess.

    The claims are that the tax stamps on the cartons/packs link them to the robbery.

    I will wait an see where this goes.

    • Replies: @The most deplorable one
    If the claims are correct, seems the police now have enough for search warrants.

    Just what will they find?
  43. Ed says:
    @Bill

    So many decry tribalism today, but it’s just about all people have left, and that’s why it’s coming back with a vengeance.
     
    This is a key insight. The declining importance of religion means that people don't really identify that way. High geographical mobility means, first, that your neighborhood is more like a hotel room than your home---Paul Kersey memorably called modern suburbs "drifter colonies." But it also means that your contact with your family is dramatically curtailed. It also means that your contact with the people you grew up with is dramatically curtailed. The homogenizing influence of mass culture, imposed legal uniformity, and neighborhood disruption ensures that there is nothing for most to identify with at a sub-national level.

    Because of they way we are wired, we are going to take sides and fight each other. Our elites think they can keep that urge channeled into sports, loyalty to your job and co-workers, and ridiculous, abstract ideological conflicts over "muh freedumbs" and "social justice." The way to bet, however, is that they lose control and more normal genetic interests re-assert themselves. Or, maybe that's what they want. They seem to be happy with the Nazi freak show in the Ukraine.

    Bill @37 makes excellent points. I don’t know how the “agree” thing works so I will highlight them here.

    The neighborhood I grew up in got hyper-gentrified into unrecognizability, and I can’t afford to live there anyway, so I appreciate the point about living in a modern neighborhood being not much different than living in a hotel room somewhere.

  44. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:
    @The most deplorable one
    Claims[1] that Philando et al were the robbers at the gas station several days before he was shot:

    http://gotnews.com/breaking-mn-cops-newport-cigarette-tax-stamps-tie-gangbanger-philandocastile-to-convenience-store-robbery-falconheightsshootings/

    [1] Someone would likely use the word verbiage, I guess.

    The claims are that the tax stamps on the cartons/packs link them to the robbery.

    I will wait an see where this goes.

    If the claims are correct, seems the police now have enough for search warrants.

    Just what will they find?

  45. Look, I’ve been saying this for a while now: the fact that R’s in 2010, 2012, and 2014 didn’t run any ads citing the unrest Obama had caused up to that point—Occutards, Trayvon, Ferguson, etc.—was proof they were in the tank and just fake opposition propped up by donors to keep people from uniting behind actual, real opposition. Just a giant party made to entrap opponents of the globalists.

    If Trump runs something similar to this, we know he’s not a globalist puppet for sure.

  46. Since I posted this video here last week, I’ve been thinking about the circumstances that produced the civil disorder portrayed in this ad.

    In 1968, millions of people were really frightened and concerned about what would happen to them. Eighteen year-olds were afraid of being drafted; twenty-two year-olds losing their college deferments were afraid of the same thing. Their parents, wives, girlfriends and relatives were all worried. Millions of people took to the streets. The concern: imminent danger of being sent to a war zone where they might be killed.

    In 2016, there are millions of people who are living (mostly) quietly (and illegally) here in Los Estados Unidos. If they really think that Donald Trump might become president, and that he will take his promises to deport the illegals seriously, they will become similarly frightened and concerned because they are in imminent danger of being sent to a war zone. Caracas, San Pedro Sula, San Salvador and Acapulco all averaged more than 100 murders per 100,000 last year, not to mention the bloody drug wars across the border towns in Mexico.

    If this analogy is right, the rioting we saw during the primaries will seem like nothing as millions of illegals who have nothing to lose take to the streets. We’ll see.

    • Replies: @Forbes

    In 2016, there are millions of people who are living (mostly) quietly (and illegally) here in Los Estados Unidos. ... If this analogy is right, the rioting we saw during the primaries will seem like nothing as millions of illegals who have nothing to lose take to the streets.
     
    And millions for whom 1968 is further away than World War II was in 1968. The analogy may have some resonance for those old enough to have been alive in 1968--hardly though, for those literally not present in America.
  47. @Stan Adams
    Here are some more Nixon ads from '68:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsmaZ0TNfrI
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxsH2xF6LBg
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtytMfA7kto
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fahhDIm8Hys

    The man who made these commercials, Eugene Jones, was a documentary filmmaker best known for A Face of War (1967):
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yaSg0I7t4Q

    “Freedom from Fear” is a basic right of every American. Sounds like a trigger warning but rather than some purse snatcher jumping out of the shadows, today it would be freedom from someone saying mean (truthful) things.

  48. IA says:
    @ChaseBizzy
    So hippies were making the streets unsafe?

    Not hippies but SDS and especially the Weathermen with the now Establishment figures of Bill Ayers, Dorhn, et. al., riling college kids. The damage being done at that time was existential. But it’s hard to make a visual impact that a new order is emerging by showing SDS inspired “protesters” demanding their “right” to shut down college campuses. You could see that on the nightly news programs.

  49. IA says:
    @Ed
    This is in response to Sam a few comments above.

    These are all good points. My impression is that you red staters (I am a sympathetic blue stater) want to re-run the 1968 and 1988 presidential campaigns that you are trying too hard and in danger of blowing it.

    Leaving aside the sheer shock to the established way of doing things in the late 1960s that can't be replicated, because it already happened, for whatever reason street crime and property crime are just much lower now than in the late 1960s through early 1990s. The rioting and assassinations in 1967-8 were just on a completely different scale. This reminds me of the endless neocon efforts to persuade people that the latest tin pot dictator of a marginal country being featured on CNN is the next Hitler.

    As it happens, Trump has plenty of other issues to run on. He may not be able to replicate Nixon's 1968 campaign, but he can replicate McKinley's 1896 effort pretty well. He has immigration and trade, going in a more restrictionist and protectionist direct, after decades of doing the opposite, will put more money in peoples' pocketbooks by curbing the expansion of the labor supply and curbing outsourcing/ offshoring.

    Not only that, Hillary Clinton is tied so deeply to the neo-cons that he can also imitate Wilson in 1916 and run a "he will keep us out of war" campaign. Then you have the integrity in government issue. Until very recently it would have been unthinkable for a party to nominate a candidate with the Clintons' demonstrated baggage on this, it would have just been assumed that if anyone dared to try this the would go down in flames in a landslide. I'm still not sure if the Democrats won't wind up making a last minute substitution. I can't even think of a good precedent for this, Al Smith and his Tammany Hall background comes the closest.

    Of course Trump has to keep the Republican base happy, but he can play up his business experience, promise capital gains tax cuts, make a few mild global-warming is a hoax claims, and there is probably something he can do with the culture struggle. If I were advising him, I would tell him to stay well away from the racial stuff, especially as driving up black and white liberal turnout, on the grounds that Trump is a racist, is the Hillary Clinton campaign playbook.

    By the way, I suspect getting Trump into the race in the first place was a Clinton maneuver to sabotage the Republican primary process by getting in there someone obviously ridiculous as a serious contender.

    By the way, I suspect getting Trump into the race in the first place was a Clinton maneuver to sabotage the Republican primary process by getting in there someone obviously ridiculous as a serious contender.

    If that’s the case it has to be the most spectacular backfire or miscalculation since Robspierre.

  50. Through the Orlando shootings and now Dallas, the published poll numbers have barely budged. Something doesn’t seem right here.

    • Replies: @SteveO

    Through the Orlando shootings and now Dallas, the published poll numbers have barely budged. Something doesn’t seem right here.
     
    One possibility is that people have already made up their mind about Trump. The Democrats and the SJW crowd in general have been very successful in promulgating the meme that Trump is a scary, racist, white supremacist neo-Nazi. Here in the Philadelphia area, it's startling how forcefully many people reject and fear Trump. The hatred for GWB was nothing compared to the genuine (if ridiculous) terror of Trump. The latter cuts wider and deeper. It has blossomed since the primary; I'm not sure he would win the PA primary if it were re-run today.

    Also, we live in a personal-is-political era. Most white Americans do not inhabit all-white worlds. They have friends and acquaintances, neighbors and colleagues who are non-white. The success of the anti-Trump forces in painting Trump as anti-everybody who isn't white - which is, again, ridiculous, but somehow they've sold it - makes it difficult for many to support him without feeling that they are personally attacking people they like. Furthermore, outside the alt-right bubble, most whites do not want to think of themselves as racists, much less be seen by others as such. The Dems won a huge propaganda victory when they succeeded in painting Trump as the candidate of racism.

    Being a Trump supporter has been stigmatized in a way that I have not seen in my adult life, even more than being a Bush supporter in '04 was. I suppose the same thing happened with George Wallace in '68 and '72, but I was a child and teenager in those years, so I can't say for sure. In any case, the destructive, pernicious effect of social media - the invention from hell - was obviously not present back then.

    So, this is my long-winded way of saying that the polls are not moving despite things that seemingly would help Trump perhaps because everyone who will ever support Trump already does. Sadly, I think the chance of any of the Sanders supporters crossing over has largely evaporated.

    Then again, I'm a "hope for the best but expect the worst" guy. Maybe I'm being too pessimistic.

    , @Jack Hanson
    lol whut

    Trump is leading in Florida, Iowa, and hell all over.

    Maybe we're still not getting the full story tho.

    But then there's a lot of people here who like standing on the edge of the ledge and proclaiming they're doomed as well.

    , @SteveRogers42
    The polls and the pundits have been spectacularly wrong about Trump every step of the way since he declared his candidacy. Why, one might almost say that they have an, an, an agenda or something. Ignore all that okie-doke, look at the numbers and the fervor present at Trump rallies, and observe a primary battlefield littered with the burnt-out shells of Establishment candidates. There are still enough RealAmericans left in this country to win this thing.

    But this IS our last chance to do it the easy way.
    , @Brutusale
    The polls have moved, but the pollsters are the lagging indicators as they whine 'WTF!".

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/swing-states-2016-election/2016/07/trump-has-edge-in-key-states-225442
  51. iSteveFan says:

    There are virtually no blacks depicted in the ad.

    Growing up I always heard through the media that blacks had been stereotyped as criminals by the movies and television. Is this really true? I know that in the past two decades, tv shows ignore reality and feature white criminals almost exclusively, e.g. CSINY, Law and Order, etc.

    Additionally it even came out that the producers of COPs manipulated the content to ensure blacks are not over overrepresented. And we know feature films have turned to the blond, English-accented guy as the villain of choice.

    I also know if you go back far enough in films, blacks are hardly in the movies at all. And if they were cast, it was usually as servants or maids. In fact blacks claimed that at a certain point in time, the media ignored them altogether and made it appear they didn’t even exist.

    I now have been watching some classic over-the-air tv channels with reruns of Perry Mason and other shows from the 1950s-1960s. And from what I can tell most do not show blacks at all, let alone stereotype them as criminals. Heck, I even saw an early 1960s Twilight Zone were a town was going to hang a man and the preacher was trying to convince them to not hate. The preacher WAS black and guy about to be hung WAS white.

    Of course the only exception I can think of is Birth of a Nation from 1915. But was that the lone exception?

    So my question is this. Did blacks ever get stereotyped in the media as criminals, and if so, when? I sure can’t find it. Is this whole media-stereotyping-blacks just another myth like the blacks-are-overrepresented-in-the-infantry or the Tuskeegee-Airman-never-lost-a-bomber-they-escorted memes that get repeated until people take them to be true?

    • Replies: @Ed
    "Growing up I always heard through the media that blacks had been stereotyped as criminals by the movies and television. Is this really true? "

    I will try to respond. I was a teenager in the 1980s, and the politically correct or cultural marxist or whatever you call it stuff just started coming in at the end of that decade. So I am mostly familiar with PC era output but got to see some of the pre-pc output as well.

    With movies and fictional TV series, no, blacks were not portrayed in a particularly negative light, at least since Woodrow Wilson left the White House.

    However, I do remember TV news featuring relentlessly what seemed like every black-on-white crime committed, always at the start of the news, often to the exclusion of other news. I grew up in New York, and I remember that when I met people from the suburbs, until well into the 1990s (and the late 1990s at that) people just assumed that I lived in the middle of some warzone, where I would be ambushed the moment I set foot outside of my house. So the point is valid as it pertains to the non-fiction TV news, though not to the fictional network shows.

    I actually suspect there was a propaganda effort with the objective of getting white people to leave the cities. Its not there there wasn't a problem with crime, its that there was a big gap between the public perception and the reality. I've been in actual war zones too, and even those are not as chaotic as suburbanites I met at the time thought I experienced.
    , @stillCARealist
    Blackboard Jungle, with Glenn Ford and Sidney Poitier. You think the black guy could be trouble, but turns out he's just misunderstood and a victim of discrimination. The real bad guys are white or Puerto Rican.

    Death Wish movies. The criminals are all colors of the rainbow. Even the gangs are like a Sesame Street troupe. Are there ANY mixed-race gangs these days? Race practically defines a gang.

    As to Trump, my friends working the CA State Fair tell me the sales of his stuff are brisk. They're selling more Trump crap than any other R pres in the past fairs.
    , @David In TN
    Blacks "stereotyped as criminals by movies and television?"

    Nothing could be further from the truth. In late 50's and early 60's cop shows, they rarely appeared at all, never as criminals. If they did it would be as a victim. In Westerns of that time, they would sometimes be victims of evil racists whom the (white) hero saved.

    It was the fall of 1968 when blacks started appearing on TV shows in large number.

    A 1985 TV movie, "Badge of the Assassin," based on Robert Tanenbaum's book, was a true story concerning black "radicals" shooting police officers. This film may be unique having black Bad Guys.

    James Woods, who doesn't look like Tanenbaum, gave his usual intense performance.

  52. Trump’s the “law and order” candidate? LMAO well he’s part of the special victims unit, that’s for sure.

  53. By: fox5dc.com staff
    Updated:Jul 12 2016 10:55AM EDT

    WASHINGTON – Authorities are investigating a police involved shooting that happened overnight in southeast D.C.

    Officers say they responded to reports of gunfire shortly after midnight Tuesday morning on the 3200 block of 6th Street near Martin Luther King Elementary School.

    When they arrived, investigators say five subjects in an SUV fired shots at officers. Officers returned fire and the subjects barricaded themselves in the vehicle.
    Police: Shots fired at officers in southeast; 5 arrested after barricade in SUV

    After about 30 minutes, police say they were able to talk the subjects out of the vehicle. Two men and three women were taken into custody.

    No injuries were reported in the incident.
    This incident follows several acts of violence against police following the killings of black men in Louisiana and Minnesota.

    **************Firing on the police used to be a big no no. You would be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Today, not so much.

  54. Ed says:
    @iSteveFan

    There are virtually no blacks depicted in the ad.
     
    Growing up I always heard through the media that blacks had been stereotyped as criminals by the movies and television. Is this really true? I know that in the past two decades, tv shows ignore reality and feature white criminals almost exclusively, e.g. CSINY, Law and Order, etc.

    Additionally it even came out that the producers of COPs manipulated the content to ensure blacks are not over overrepresented. And we know feature films have turned to the blond, English-accented guy as the villain of choice.

    I also know if you go back far enough in films, blacks are hardly in the movies at all. And if they were cast, it was usually as servants or maids. In fact blacks claimed that at a certain point in time, the media ignored them altogether and made it appear they didn't even exist.

    I now have been watching some classic over-the-air tv channels with reruns of Perry Mason and other shows from the 1950s-1960s. And from what I can tell most do not show blacks at all, let alone stereotype them as criminals. Heck, I even saw an early 1960s Twilight Zone were a town was going to hang a man and the preacher was trying to convince them to not hate. The preacher WAS black and guy about to be hung WAS white.

    Of course the only exception I can think of is Birth of a Nation from 1915. But was that the lone exception?

    So my question is this. Did blacks ever get stereotyped in the media as criminals, and if so, when? I sure can't find it. Is this whole media-stereotyping-blacks just another myth like the blacks-are-overrepresented-in-the-infantry or the Tuskeegee-Airman-never-lost-a-bomber-they-escorted memes that get repeated until people take them to be true?

    “Growing up I always heard through the media that blacks had been stereotyped as criminals by the movies and television. Is this really true? ”

    I will try to respond. I was a teenager in the 1980s, and the politically correct or cultural marxist or whatever you call it stuff just started coming in at the end of that decade. So I am mostly familiar with PC era output but got to see some of the pre-pc output as well.

    With movies and fictional TV series, no, blacks were not portrayed in a particularly negative light, at least since Woodrow Wilson left the White House.

    However, I do remember TV news featuring relentlessly what seemed like every black-on-white crime committed, always at the start of the news, often to the exclusion of other news. I grew up in New York, and I remember that when I met people from the suburbs, until well into the 1990s (and the late 1990s at that) people just assumed that I lived in the middle of some warzone, where I would be ambushed the moment I set foot outside of my house. So the point is valid as it pertains to the non-fiction TV news, though not to the fictional network shows.

    I actually suspect there was a propaganda effort with the objective of getting white people to leave the cities. Its not there there wasn’t a problem with crime, its that there was a big gap between the public perception and the reality. I’ve been in actual war zones too, and even those are not as chaotic as suburbanites I met at the time thought I experienced.

  55. e says:
    @unit472
    While there maybe a lot of validity to Strauss and Howe's 'Fourth Turning' concept, we shouldn't forget just how fractured America was in 1968. The events of that year were a lot more consequential than anything BLM has managed. There were riots all across the US after M.L King was shot that dwarf anything since. Demonstrations? The anti-war protests were huge. 500 KIA per week during the Tet Offensive in Vietnam. The assassination of Bobby Kennedy and the riots at the Democratic Convention in Chicago. It wasn't just the US either. Students were gunned down in Mexico right before the Olympic Games. France was paralyzed by huge demonstrations by students and unions. It was a remarkable year that ended with US astronauts orbiting the Moon on Christmas Eve.

    Looking back we might remember Nixon more for how he restored order to America rather than Watergate. I have my doubts that Kennedy or Humphrey would have been able to do it.

    While there maybe a lot of validity to Strauss and Howe’s ‘Fourth Turning’ concept, we shouldn’t forget just how fractured America was in 1968. The events of that year were a lot more consequential than anything BLM has managed.

    True, yet the push to put as many 18 year olds in college today, where they are fed tripe, and social media instant communications have resulted in the “empowerment” of millions of more ill-informed voters who are easily manipulated by the latest fad. Obama is very good at appealing to the young. I fear that once again he’ll get out the black and youth votes. Frankly, I think the voting age should be raised to 26.

  56. e says:
    @silviosilver

    Could Trump pull that off today without an ad highlighting Muslim mass sexual assaults?
     
    Or BLM. Don't forget BLM. They're handing Trump a freebie, if only he's got the stones to use it. (Remarkably, there's some question about that.) He wouldn't even have to attack BLM, just relentlessly link Crooked Hillary to them.

    While there maybe a lot of validity to Strauss and Howe’s ‘Fourth Turning’ concept, we shouldn’t forget just how fractured America was in 1968. The events of that year were a lot more consequential than anything BLM has managed.

    True, yet the push to put as many 18 year olds in college today, where they are fed tripe, and social media instant communications have resulted in the “empowerment” of millions of more ill-informed voters who are easily manipulated by the latest fad. Obama is very good at appealing to the young. I fear that once again he’ll get out the black and youth votes. Frankly, I think the voting age should be raised to 26.

  57. @iSteveFan

    There are virtually no blacks depicted in the ad.
     
    Growing up I always heard through the media that blacks had been stereotyped as criminals by the movies and television. Is this really true? I know that in the past two decades, tv shows ignore reality and feature white criminals almost exclusively, e.g. CSINY, Law and Order, etc.

    Additionally it even came out that the producers of COPs manipulated the content to ensure blacks are not over overrepresented. And we know feature films have turned to the blond, English-accented guy as the villain of choice.

    I also know if you go back far enough in films, blacks are hardly in the movies at all. And if they were cast, it was usually as servants or maids. In fact blacks claimed that at a certain point in time, the media ignored them altogether and made it appear they didn't even exist.

    I now have been watching some classic over-the-air tv channels with reruns of Perry Mason and other shows from the 1950s-1960s. And from what I can tell most do not show blacks at all, let alone stereotype them as criminals. Heck, I even saw an early 1960s Twilight Zone were a town was going to hang a man and the preacher was trying to convince them to not hate. The preacher WAS black and guy about to be hung WAS white.

    Of course the only exception I can think of is Birth of a Nation from 1915. But was that the lone exception?

    So my question is this. Did blacks ever get stereotyped in the media as criminals, and if so, when? I sure can't find it. Is this whole media-stereotyping-blacks just another myth like the blacks-are-overrepresented-in-the-infantry or the Tuskeegee-Airman-never-lost-a-bomber-they-escorted memes that get repeated until people take them to be true?

    Blackboard Jungle, with Glenn Ford and Sidney Poitier. You think the black guy could be trouble, but turns out he’s just misunderstood and a victim of discrimination. The real bad guys are white or Puerto Rican.

    Death Wish movies. The criminals are all colors of the rainbow. Even the gangs are like a Sesame Street troupe. Are there ANY mixed-race gangs these days? Race practically defines a gang.

    As to Trump, my friends working the CA State Fair tell me the sales of his stuff are brisk. They’re selling more Trump crap than any other R pres in the past fairs.

  58. There are obviously huge differences in both the electorate and the issues between 1968 and today.

    In 1968, the Democrats were still perceived by many as on the side of the working class — that is, the white working class. They had the large union vote on their side. There was the Vietnam War, of course. The violence and riots in the street were much larger. The Civil Rights battle was still in progress. And many more important differences were salient.

    Nixon’s success was multifactorial, and arose from how all these pieces fit together and how he responded to them.

    Trump’s optimal path will also be multifactorial, and will depend on the peculiar environment of today’s election.

    I do think that pressing hard on the law and order approach is an important part of that optimal response. This is in no small part because of the clear responsibility of Obama and Hillary and the Democrats for the current racial violence. It is remarkable that Hillary has done nothing to distance herself from BLM, and has indeed continued to embrace it, despite Dallas and the rest of the violence. I just don’t see how she can, because everybody on the left demands that she stick to it — the entire Coalition of the Fringes, and its “allies”. A Sister Souljah moment would destroy that coalition, given current expectations. The helplessness of Hillary in putting limits on BLM is a great weakness Trump can readily exploit: he can push her further and further into absurd, contorted, perverse positions. She will be exposed and defenseless; it is the flank she can never cover. And there is scarcely a doubt that there will be more violent riots, and at the highly publicized conventions in particular.

    And one of the best ways Trump can press this point is to say: it is Obama, Hillary, and the Democrats who have brought you this racial disharmony and violence. We didn’t see this eight years ago. We see it now, and it’s because they have done everything they could to encourage it, along with the lying media. Do you want four more years of it, and worse? That’s what a vote for Hillary means, make no mistake about it. Everybody knows that–even Obama, Hillary, and the lying media.

  59. @Jean Cocteausten
    Through the Orlando shootings and now Dallas, the published poll numbers have barely budged. Something doesn't seem right here.

    Through the Orlando shootings and now Dallas, the published poll numbers have barely budged. Something doesn’t seem right here.

    One possibility is that people have already made up their mind about Trump. The Democrats and the SJW crowd in general have been very successful in promulgating the meme that Trump is a scary, racist, white supremacist neo-Nazi. Here in the Philadelphia area, it’s startling how forcefully many people reject and fear Trump. The hatred for GWB was nothing compared to the genuine (if ridiculous) terror of Trump. The latter cuts wider and deeper. It has blossomed since the primary; I’m not sure he would win the PA primary if it were re-run today.

    Also, we live in a personal-is-political era. Most white Americans do not inhabit all-white worlds. They have friends and acquaintances, neighbors and colleagues who are non-white. The success of the anti-Trump forces in painting Trump as anti-everybody who isn’t white – which is, again, ridiculous, but somehow they’ve sold it – makes it difficult for many to support him without feeling that they are personally attacking people they like. Furthermore, outside the alt-right bubble, most whites do not want to think of themselves as racists, much less be seen by others as such. The Dems won a huge propaganda victory when they succeeded in painting Trump as the candidate of racism.

    Being a Trump supporter has been stigmatized in a way that I have not seen in my adult life, even more than being a Bush supporter in ’04 was. I suppose the same thing happened with George Wallace in ’68 and ’72, but I was a child and teenager in those years, so I can’t say for sure. In any case, the destructive, pernicious effect of social media – the invention from hell – was obviously not present back then.

    So, this is my long-winded way of saying that the polls are not moving despite things that seemingly would help Trump perhaps because everyone who will ever support Trump already does. Sadly, I think the chance of any of the Sanders supporters crossing over has largely evaporated.

    Then again, I’m a “hope for the best but expect the worst” guy. Maybe I’m being too pessimistic.

    • Replies: @BB753
    My take on this is that Trump supporters are afraid to come out as such openly as they used to do during the primaries. As you say, they've demonized the guy and his voters, and the atmosphere is quite tense right now, what with the rampaging antifas and BLMs. By supporting Trump these days you risk not only ostracism at work and socially but also physical violence on the streets, just by wearing a red cap or a Trump t-shirt or having a Trump bumper sticker. But fear not, closeted Trumpians will turn out in droves in November to vote for the great man. And the Great Witch of the East will melt live under the camera lights during the presidential debates.
  60. @iSteveFan

    There are virtually no blacks depicted in the ad.
     
    Growing up I always heard through the media that blacks had been stereotyped as criminals by the movies and television. Is this really true? I know that in the past two decades, tv shows ignore reality and feature white criminals almost exclusively, e.g. CSINY, Law and Order, etc.

    Additionally it even came out that the producers of COPs manipulated the content to ensure blacks are not over overrepresented. And we know feature films have turned to the blond, English-accented guy as the villain of choice.

    I also know if you go back far enough in films, blacks are hardly in the movies at all. And if they were cast, it was usually as servants or maids. In fact blacks claimed that at a certain point in time, the media ignored them altogether and made it appear they didn't even exist.

    I now have been watching some classic over-the-air tv channels with reruns of Perry Mason and other shows from the 1950s-1960s. And from what I can tell most do not show blacks at all, let alone stereotype them as criminals. Heck, I even saw an early 1960s Twilight Zone were a town was going to hang a man and the preacher was trying to convince them to not hate. The preacher WAS black and guy about to be hung WAS white.

    Of course the only exception I can think of is Birth of a Nation from 1915. But was that the lone exception?

    So my question is this. Did blacks ever get stereotyped in the media as criminals, and if so, when? I sure can't find it. Is this whole media-stereotyping-blacks just another myth like the blacks-are-overrepresented-in-the-infantry or the Tuskeegee-Airman-never-lost-a-bomber-they-escorted memes that get repeated until people take them to be true?

    Blacks “stereotyped as criminals by movies and television?”

    Nothing could be further from the truth. In late 50’s and early 60’s cop shows, they rarely appeared at all, never as criminals. If they did it would be as a victim. In Westerns of that time, they would sometimes be victims of evil racists whom the (white) hero saved.

    It was the fall of 1968 when blacks started appearing on TV shows in large number.

    A 1985 TV movie, “Badge of the Assassin,” based on Robert Tanenbaum’s book, was a true story concerning black “radicals” shooting police officers. This film may be unique having black Bad Guys.

    James Woods, who doesn’t look like Tanenbaum, gave his usual intense performance.

  61. I cannot recall ever seeing a black bad guy on TV or in the movies. When I was a Yout, they were always misunderstood like Sidney Poitier or wrongly accused like in the dreadful film To Kill a Mockingbird.

    You probably could not put The Jeffersons or Sanford and Son on TV today since all TV blacks are saintly rocket scientists who, along with the women and the poofters, save the cisgendered YTs from their own stupidity.

    • Replies: @SteveRogers42
    I don't know how we ever won two World Wars and put men on the moon without 'em.
  62. @Sam

    Also in terms of domestic violence, 2016 really doesn’t compare to 1968 no matter from which angle you look at it.
     
    This is exactly right and one reason the Pro-Trump meme of this year being a new 1968 might not hold. The shock of a bourgeois order breaking apart is not there and second nowadays it is simply not the case. We might be cusp of a new wave of violence but so far it is mostly in black cities.

    Trump's case then has to be that violence is returning, that it could spiral into a new crime wave. Then he has to push libarals to identify with being on the anti-law and order side. In this case this means pushing liberals into siding with BLM which is easy since they do that anyway but make it explicit. It has to be clear that the average person understands that liberals won't do anything to keep them safe.One advantage Trump does have is that this current violence is being symbolic with things like Dallas and the Ferguson riots so it might scare people. It is true that TV no longer has the communication monopoly power but likewise it is true that you can hit on multiple platforms and that videos/pictures that break the narrative float on the internet. Any campaign to inspire reasonable fear has to start with showing that the mainstream media will never tell you the truth. Trump should explicitly include the media as part of the problem on all fronts.

    We might be cusp of a new wave of violence but so far it is mostly in black cities.

    A distinction without a difference. The new wave of violence, e.g. Ferguson, Baltimore, Dallas, et al., are part of the national conversation. Trayvon Martin (2012) was a local crime story turned national, and there’s been no looking back.

    The lapdog media needs eyeballs, so every insignificance is hyped to the moon. Comparability to 1968 hardly matters–one needs to be ~60 years old for it to resonate. Otherwise it’s just another blathering talking point for some airhead to incorporate in a diatribe about racist and divisive America.

    Like PBS, it’s always the 1960s (or the 1860s) in America.

  63. @franktremb
    Was the real reason Watergate was a big scandal that brought down Nixon and not just a dark cloud because some people had an axe to grind against the "Law & Order" candidate?

    Watching that ad feels like watching "Death Wish" or "Dirty Harry".

    Well basically, for that and for failing to acknowledge Jewish power.
    Democrats certainly didn’t appreciate Nixon cracking down on their brownshirts: white radicals and blacks. Democrat ascendancy today is based on the permanent blackmail of releasing their violent brown and black hordes and some of their white antifascists on society to create mayhem if they dont get their way. This is basically what BLM is about.

  64. “In reality, in 1968′s three-way race, George Wallace carried white Southerners who wanted to restore Jim Crow in their mixed race small towns; Humphrey carried white Southerners in the Appalachians who lived in all-white communities; and Nixon carried white Southern suburbanites who wanted to put Jim Crow behind them and join modern America.”

    Untrue. Nixon carried the Appalachian parts of Tennessee, North Carolina, Virginia, and Kentucky. Humphrey won only in West Virginia.

    • Replies: @JimL
    Right. I believe after the Civil War there was a saying "vote the way you shot" and the pro-Union mountain areas have been heavily Republican ever since. Beginning in the 1930s unionization of coal miners peeled off a large part of this bloc in West Virginia. There are some parts of Appalachian Kentucky that also supported the Dems since the New Deal, but starting with Al Gore their support has been declining, reaching historically low levels in 2012.
  65. @Anon7
    Since I posted this video here last week, I've been thinking about the circumstances that produced the civil disorder portrayed in this ad.

    In 1968, millions of people were really frightened and concerned about what would happen to them. Eighteen year-olds were afraid of being drafted; twenty-two year-olds losing their college deferments were afraid of the same thing. Their parents, wives, girlfriends and relatives were all worried. Millions of people took to the streets. The concern: imminent danger of being sent to a war zone where they might be killed.

    In 2016, there are millions of people who are living (mostly) quietly (and illegally) here in Los Estados Unidos. If they really think that Donald Trump might become president, and that he will take his promises to deport the illegals seriously, they will become similarly frightened and concerned because they are in imminent danger of being sent to a war zone. Caracas, San Pedro Sula, San Salvador and Acapulco all averaged more than 100 murders per 100,000 last year, not to mention the bloody drug wars across the border towns in Mexico.

    If this analogy is right, the rioting we saw during the primaries will seem like nothing as millions of illegals who have nothing to lose take to the streets. We'll see.

    In 2016, there are millions of people who are living (mostly) quietly (and illegally) here in Los Estados Unidos. … If this analogy is right, the rioting we saw during the primaries will seem like nothing as millions of illegals who have nothing to lose take to the streets.

    And millions for whom 1968 is further away than World War II was in 1968. The analogy may have some resonance for those old enough to have been alive in 1968–hardly though, for those literally not present in America.

  66. 1488223

    Which is why all right -wing protests and popular boots- on- the- ground movements are ruthlessly crushed by the police and powers to be, and branded nazis by the MSM. They don’t want intruders in their turf. Because a great deal of the left’s near monopoly of political power comes from the streets. Of course, conservative cucks are unable to understand this simple fact.

  67. “People have completely forgotten that in 1972 we had over nineteen hundred domestic bombings in the United States,” notes a retired FBI agent, Max Noel.

    Burrough, Bryan. Days of Rage: America’s Radical Underground, the FBI, and the Forgotten Age of Revolutionary Violence . Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

  68. Those look like the PC ads we see today, white criminals and well meaning black woman. Dat Southern Strategy.

    I can’t think of an instance where liberals have recorded our history merely accurately.

  69. @Jean Cocteausten
    Through the Orlando shootings and now Dallas, the published poll numbers have barely budged. Something doesn't seem right here.

    lol whut

    Trump is leading in Florida, Iowa, and hell all over.

    Maybe we’re still not getting the full story tho.

    But then there’s a lot of people here who like standing on the edge of the ledge and proclaiming they’re doomed as well.

  70. @Anon
    The threat of violence may have more pull with young voters today that might be expected. The young are a less secure generation than that in the 1960s. They grew up in one-parent families, and they often don't have jobs or money. If they want to live outside Mommy's basement, they have to live in a cheap area which is likely to be very near a black ghetto or other minority cesspit. They use public transportation more often and have to deal with blacks acting up on subways or buses because they don't own cars. If they walk a lot they're more like to have to run a gauntlet of loitering young black men assessing them for a mugging or a quick cell phone theft. Their situation in life is more precarious, and that makes them insecure, safe-space yearning, and easily triggered. Trump adds targeting crime may be effective with them ala Nixon.

    That’s a very good point.

  71. @Jim Don Bob
    I cannot recall ever seeing a black bad guy on TV or in the movies. When I was a Yout, they were always misunderstood like Sidney Poitier or wrongly accused like in the dreadful film To Kill a Mockingbird.

    You probably could not put The Jeffersons or Sanford and Son on TV today since all TV blacks are saintly rocket scientists who, along with the women and the poofters, save the cisgendered YTs from their own stupidity.

    I don’t know how we ever won two World Wars and put men on the moon without ’em.

  72. @Jean Cocteausten
    Through the Orlando shootings and now Dallas, the published poll numbers have barely budged. Something doesn't seem right here.

    The polls and the pundits have been spectacularly wrong about Trump every step of the way since he declared his candidacy. Why, one might almost say that they have an, an, an agenda or something. Ignore all that okie-doke, look at the numbers and the fervor present at Trump rallies, and observe a primary battlefield littered with the burnt-out shells of Establishment candidates. There are still enough RealAmericans left in this country to win this thing.

    But this IS our last chance to do it the easy way.

  73. @SteveO

    Through the Orlando shootings and now Dallas, the published poll numbers have barely budged. Something doesn’t seem right here.
     
    One possibility is that people have already made up their mind about Trump. The Democrats and the SJW crowd in general have been very successful in promulgating the meme that Trump is a scary, racist, white supremacist neo-Nazi. Here in the Philadelphia area, it's startling how forcefully many people reject and fear Trump. The hatred for GWB was nothing compared to the genuine (if ridiculous) terror of Trump. The latter cuts wider and deeper. It has blossomed since the primary; I'm not sure he would win the PA primary if it were re-run today.

    Also, we live in a personal-is-political era. Most white Americans do not inhabit all-white worlds. They have friends and acquaintances, neighbors and colleagues who are non-white. The success of the anti-Trump forces in painting Trump as anti-everybody who isn't white - which is, again, ridiculous, but somehow they've sold it - makes it difficult for many to support him without feeling that they are personally attacking people they like. Furthermore, outside the alt-right bubble, most whites do not want to think of themselves as racists, much less be seen by others as such. The Dems won a huge propaganda victory when they succeeded in painting Trump as the candidate of racism.

    Being a Trump supporter has been stigmatized in a way that I have not seen in my adult life, even more than being a Bush supporter in '04 was. I suppose the same thing happened with George Wallace in '68 and '72, but I was a child and teenager in those years, so I can't say for sure. In any case, the destructive, pernicious effect of social media - the invention from hell - was obviously not present back then.

    So, this is my long-winded way of saying that the polls are not moving despite things that seemingly would help Trump perhaps because everyone who will ever support Trump already does. Sadly, I think the chance of any of the Sanders supporters crossing over has largely evaporated.

    Then again, I'm a "hope for the best but expect the worst" guy. Maybe I'm being too pessimistic.

    My take on this is that Trump supporters are afraid to come out as such openly as they used to do during the primaries. As you say, they’ve demonized the guy and his voters, and the atmosphere is quite tense right now, what with the rampaging antifas and BLMs. By supporting Trump these days you risk not only ostracism at work and socially but also physical violence on the streets, just by wearing a red cap or a Trump t-shirt or having a Trump bumper sticker. But fear not, closeted Trumpians will turn out in droves in November to vote for the great man. And the Great Witch of the East will melt live under the camera lights during the presidential debates.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    Absolutely. Scott Adams of Dilbert fame said on his blog that he has endorsed Hillary for his personal safety because he got death threats because of his Trump posts. He also said that his speaking engagements have dried up and his income is down 40%.

    My car would be vandalized by the local tolerant progressives if I put a Trump sticker on it. Add in the latest BLM craziness and no wonder people don't say anything.

    2) Someone said Ruth Bader Ginsburg is the intellect on the Supremes. Maybe. But only compared to Kennedy and the wise Latina.

  74. @BB753
    My take on this is that Trump supporters are afraid to come out as such openly as they used to do during the primaries. As you say, they've demonized the guy and his voters, and the atmosphere is quite tense right now, what with the rampaging antifas and BLMs. By supporting Trump these days you risk not only ostracism at work and socially but also physical violence on the streets, just by wearing a red cap or a Trump t-shirt or having a Trump bumper sticker. But fear not, closeted Trumpians will turn out in droves in November to vote for the great man. And the Great Witch of the East will melt live under the camera lights during the presidential debates.

    Absolutely. Scott Adams of Dilbert fame said on his blog that he has endorsed Hillary for his personal safety because he got death threats because of his Trump posts. He also said that his speaking engagements have dried up and his income is down 40%.

    My car would be vandalized by the local tolerant progressives if I put a Trump sticker on it. Add in the latest BLM craziness and no wonder people don’t say anything.

    2) Someone said Ruth Bader Ginsburg is the intellect on the Supremes. Maybe. But only compared to Kennedy and the wise Latina.

  75. @Anonym
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1968

    I have been meaning to post the above link since the BLM violence started, as Nixon is perhaps the best evidence that the 2016 race rioting and murdering will assist Trump. Worth quoting:


    The United States presidential election of 1968 was the 46th quadrennial presidential election, held on Tuesday, November 5, 1968. The Republican nominee, former Vice President Richard Nixon, won the election over the Democratic nominee, incumbent Vice President Hubert Humphrey...

    The election year was tumultuous; it was marked by the assassination of civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr., subsequent race riots across the nation, the assassination of Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy and widespread opposition to the Vietnam War across university campuses. Incumbent President Lyndon B. Johnson, who had won a landslide victory for the Democratic Party four years earlier, declined to seek election amid growing discontent over the Vietnam War and his worse-than-expected showing in the New Hampshire primary. The 1968 Democratic National Convention was a scene of violent confrontations between police and anti-war protesters as the Democrats split into multiple factions.

    Richard Nixon ran on a campaign that promised to restore law and order to the nation's cities and provide new leadership in the Vietnam War. He popularized the term "silent majority" to describe those he viewed as being his target voters. Nixon won the popular vote by a narrow margin of 0.7 percentage point, but won easily in the Electoral College, 301-191. The election also featured a strong third party effort by former Alabama Governor George Wallace, a vocal advocate for racial segregation in public schools. He carried several states in the Deep South and ran well in some ethnic enclave industrial districts in the North. This is the last election to date where at least one state was carried by a third-party candidate.
     
    I.e. if Wallace had not run, Nixon would likely have picked up a lot of those votes. So Nixon won very convincingly.

    I saw Nixon give an interview around 1990–I think it was with Ted Koppel–and Nixon said that if Wallace had not run in 1968, 2/3rds of the Wallace voters would have voted for him, Nixon.

    That estimate sounds about right to me. That would mean that in a two person race in 1968, Nixon would have gotten at least 53 percent of the vote.

  76. @Maj. Kong
    Its worth noting that Nixon never drove the Republicans to a majority in Congress. Since 1932, a Republican President has only had a Republican Congress for six years.

    I’ve done some reading about that political era, and it seems to me that there was greater ideological diversity _within_ the parties than there are today. Two political species existed then which hardly exists now: the “conservative Democrat” and the “liberal Republican.”

    White working class and middle class voters voted for Democrats for Congress, but some of these Democrats were closer to the center than other Democrats. There were hawks on foreign policy such as Senator Henry Jackson. There were Democrats such as Gov. Wallace who did NOT take the liberal view on racial issues.

    So I’m not surprised that Nixon never had the Senate or the House of Representatives under Republican control. There were more centrist Democrats in those days.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    A Reader From Chicago said, ".... There were more centrist Democrats in those days."

    True. But today, in many districts both R and D, the primary -is- the election so there is no reason for either side to run a centrist.
    , @Forbes
    Greater ideological diversity? Hmm, I wonder the cause or trigger for self-separating into more distinctly left and right parties? Or 'progressive' and 'conservative'? What was the likely cause for the term 'Reagan Democrats'?

    I'd suggest LBJ's Great Society social welfare programs, and 1973's Roe v Wade USSC decision. There are few topics more (emotionally) polarizing than the distinction between pro-life and pro-abortion, which the two parties morphed into. Reagan Democrats were essentially Catholic Democrats--Catholics having predominately voted Democrat from time immemorial.

    As social issues came to dominate national politics and spending (early '60s JFK budgets were ~50% defense spending--before Vietnam conflict escalation) post-Vietnam, foreign policy/national defense took a back seat. As deficit spending became the norm (LBJ's 'Guns and Butter'), social issues were the bifurcation. And fiscal conservatives were a response to 'tax and spend' Democrats.
  77. @A Reader From Chicago
    I've done some reading about that political era, and it seems to me that there was greater ideological diversity _within_ the parties than there are today. Two political species existed then which hardly exists now: the "conservative Democrat" and the "liberal Republican."

    White working class and middle class voters voted for Democrats for Congress, but some of these Democrats were closer to the center than other Democrats. There were hawks on foreign policy such as Senator Henry Jackson. There were Democrats such as Gov. Wallace who did NOT take the liberal view on racial issues.

    So I'm not surprised that Nixon never had the Senate or the House of Representatives under Republican control. There were more centrist Democrats in those days.

    A Reader From Chicago said, “…. There were more centrist Democrats in those days.”

    True. But today, in many districts both R and D, the primary -is- the election so there is no reason for either side to run a centrist.

  78. @Jean Cocteausten
    Through the Orlando shootings and now Dallas, the published poll numbers have barely budged. Something doesn't seem right here.

    The polls have moved, but the pollsters are the lagging indicators as they whine ‘WTF!”.

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/swing-states-2016-election/2016/07/trump-has-edge-in-key-states-225442

  79. @A Reader From Chicago
    I've done some reading about that political era, and it seems to me that there was greater ideological diversity _within_ the parties than there are today. Two political species existed then which hardly exists now: the "conservative Democrat" and the "liberal Republican."

    White working class and middle class voters voted for Democrats for Congress, but some of these Democrats were closer to the center than other Democrats. There were hawks on foreign policy such as Senator Henry Jackson. There were Democrats such as Gov. Wallace who did NOT take the liberal view on racial issues.

    So I'm not surprised that Nixon never had the Senate or the House of Representatives under Republican control. There were more centrist Democrats in those days.

    Greater ideological diversity? Hmm, I wonder the cause or trigger for self-separating into more distinctly left and right parties? Or ‘progressive’ and ‘conservative’? What was the likely cause for the term ‘Reagan Democrats’?

    I’d suggest LBJ’s Great Society social welfare programs, and 1973’s Roe v Wade USSC decision. There are few topics more (emotionally) polarizing than the distinction between pro-life and pro-abortion, which the two parties morphed into. Reagan Democrats were essentially Catholic Democrats–Catholics having predominately voted Democrat from time immemorial.

    As social issues came to dominate national politics and spending (early ’60s JFK budgets were ~50% defense spending–before Vietnam conflict escalation) post-Vietnam, foreign policy/national defense took a back seat. As deficit spending became the norm (LBJ’s ‘Guns and Butter’), social issues were the bifurcation. And fiscal conservatives were a response to ‘tax and spend’ Democrats.

  80. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Donald Trump is going to be the law & order candidate? lol. Is this the same Donald Trump who promised to pay the legal fees of anyone who commits violence in his name? Will he also be running as the family values guy?

    And what’s his plan to end the protests? Beat up the people protesting policy brutality?

  81. I appreciate the replies to my post.
    I was born in 1971, in a neighborhood that had white ethnics. People lived in bungalows, workers were employed in blue collar or middle class white collar jobs. Others were World War II veterans. One was a Vietnam veteran. It was like a scene from the movie The Deer Hunter.

    Here, people voted for Democrats in local elections, for the Republican Party was not a factor in local elections.

    However, they voted for Nixon, Reagan, and Bush I. One issue for these voters was anti-Communism. These voters were of Eastern European descent, and The Old Country was under Soviet domination.

    There were also cultural issues. McGovern democrats were called the party of “acid, amnesty, and abortion.” There were at least two Chicago politicians who explicitly stated that they did not support McGovern.

    A third is the Great Society. There is a dislike of people on the dole–rightly fully so. Even a socialist I know said to me, “An able bodied person should NOT be on welfare.” Another aspect of the Great Society was affirmative action and busing. Accepting nondiscrimination laws is one thing; but the state forcing results by affirmation action and busing is another thing. A third aspect of the Great Society was in criminal punishment. There was an increase in crime, which Nixon made a issue in his ads.

  82. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Good post, but on the comment on Appalachia, the numbers beg to differ. Southern Appalachia was split between Nixon and Wallace, with only a very small section of Kentucky voting for Humphrey. Look at the 1968 county results map if you don’t believe me.

    It is true Humphrey won most of West Virginia, but that state isn’t really part of the South now, is it?

  83. @Jason Bayz
    "In reality, in 1968′s three-way race, George Wallace carried white Southerners who wanted to restore Jim Crow in their mixed race small towns; Humphrey carried white Southerners in the Appalachians who lived in all-white communities; and Nixon carried white Southern suburbanites who wanted to put Jim Crow behind them and join modern America."

    Untrue. Nixon carried the Appalachian parts of Tennessee, North Carolina, Virginia, and Kentucky. Humphrey won only in West Virginia.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PresidentialCounty1968Colorbrewer.gif

    Right. I believe after the Civil War there was a saying “vote the way you shot” and the pro-Union mountain areas have been heavily Republican ever since. Beginning in the 1930s unionization of coal miners peeled off a large part of this bloc in West Virginia. There are some parts of Appalachian Kentucky that also supported the Dems since the New Deal, but starting with Al Gore their support has been declining, reaching historically low levels in 2012.

  84. In reality, in 1968′s three-way race, George Wallace carried white Southerners who wanted to restore Jim Crow in their mixed race small towns; Humphrey carried white Southerners in the Appalachians who lived in all-white communities; and Nixon carried white Southern suburbanites who wanted to put Jim Crow behind them and join modern America.

    That faction was already working behind the scenes looking ahead. A cousin of mine started lobbying in Republican circles for Reagan in 1967 after hearing him speak at an oilman’s convention he attended in California. Within weeks important men in Mississippi were getting an earful about the California governor who should be president.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
How a Young Syndicate Lawyer from Chicago Earned a Fortune Looting the Property of the Japanese-Americans, then Lived...
Becker update V1.3.2