The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
The AP Calls It

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show 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

Screenshot 2016-11-08 23.35.12

From the NYTimes.com:

Screenshot 2016-11-09 00.15.11

By the way, perhaps Trump’s Treasury Secretary could announce that Andy Jackson is staying on the $20 and Harriet Tubman will replace Hamilton on the $10?

From Slate:

Screenshot 2016-11-09 00.20.38

 

And then there’s the Google doodle for today, November 9th.

Screenshot 2016-11-09 02.46.44

Google, apparently, is speechless.

 
Hide 301 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. This election cycle killed two birds with one stone.

    Clintons and Bushes.

    Unfortunately for Hillary, as Senator of NY, she had to appease the same people who are close to Neocons. So, she was for Wars and Wall Street. She was neoconned.

  2. TRUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUMP!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Who would have believed it? What can it mean? Is God with us or something?

    Now will he prosecute and jail Hillary? I hope he does – I hope he goes in the teeth of decorum as he has so far and cleans house like he said he would.

    • Disagree: Bill
    • Replies: @Olorin
    @the cruncher

    No sir.

    It is our ancestors--my ancestors, yours--who have dreamed the dream of evolution and fought through unthinkable challenges to create a place the best and brightest and most hard working could call their own.

    It is a victory for HBD.

    Mr. Sailer, sir, it has been a privilege to be welcomed here as a regular commenter. I must have been awfully good in a previous life to deserve such company in what seemed to be a time of such isolation and forgetting.

    I beg your indulgence as I offer up for youse-all's consideration this Inari Sami man jojking the bear:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAG-FkDqdb0

    , @PhysicistDave
    @the cruncher

    the cruncher asked:


    Now will he prosecute and jail Hillary? I hope he does
     
    No, Obama will pardon her. And, that will make life easier for Trump. (Personally, I would prefer to see her prosecuted.)

    And her health issues are not a joke: although she called Trump to concede, she could not make it to the venue to thank her supporters. I think soon we will be pitying her rather than hating her.

    Dave Miller in Sacramento

    Replies: @donut, @Kylie, @midtown, @Jim Don Bob, @anonguy, @boogerbently

    , @Stan Adams
    @the cruncher


    Now will he prosecute and jail Hillary?
     
    Nah. It's not nice to beat up on sick old ladies.

    It's 9 a.m. as I write this ... Hillary is due to speak in 90 minutes. Supposedly she was too distraught to leave her hotel room.

    God, I would have loved to have been a fly in that room. I'll bet she was cursing like a sailor.
  3. Some British books already paid off bets a few weeks ago based on Hillary winning.

    • Replies: @Unladen Swallow
    @countenance

    Oops! Good luck getting that money back.

  4. wow! Must hand it to him. He smashed through all the conventions and recieved wisdoms and got it done.

  5. Now is the time to start the Sailer Strategery fundraiser.

  6. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    This has to be the greatest David vs Goliath story in US history.

    I think only one newspaper endorsed Trump. All others were for Hillary or someone else.
    Even conservative papers rebuked Trump.

    Hillary raised over a billion dollars. Billionaires favored her by 20 to 1.

    All of MSM was openly biased in favor of her. Even Fox sat on the fence except for Hannity.

    The whole world, except for Russia, was for Hillary.

    Just about everyone that mattered in government, media, academia, and major institutions was for Hillary.

    So, how did this happen?

    Historians will write about this for many many yrs to come.

    It will be studied and re-studied endlessly.
    Not just Trump but how the whole system rigged everything against him and lost.

    Or, maybe historians and ‘social scientists’ will just be lazy and say ‘racists done it’.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Anon


    "Or, maybe historians and ‘social scientists’ will just be lazy and say ‘racists done it’."
     
    This.
  7. Well you did it, Steve. You effectively changed the course of world history with your internet blog.

    • Replies: @The preferred nomenclature is...
    @johnny memonic

    Very much agree. Please take a bow this evening Sir Sailer.

    , @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever...
    @johnny memonic

    "Well you did it, Steve. You effectively changed the course of world history with your internet blog."
    You're delusional mate.

    Replies: @Pericles

  8. And it’ll probably cost less than $225k.

  9. At last!

    I noticed that the NYT waited to change WI to Trump and put him up to 276 until a minute or two after Hillary called Donald to concede.

    Even in stinging defeat they still wait for permission.

    • Agree: Spmoore8, PiltdownMan
    • Replies: @utu
    @The Last Real Calvinist

    I think NYT did a splendid job in forecasting Trump win since before 9:30pm and having a very accurate adaptive forecast algorithm running in real time. They called Florida and Pennsylvania couple hours before FOX and CNN did.

    Not everybody did get the memo, the same memo that Comey did 12 days ago that Trump would win and the election won't be stolen. But certainly NYT did get the memo.

  10. I recall big shots at the Financial Times reporting chats in Davos (World Economic Forum): no worries over Trump, Hillary will win.

    I wish the Country Class, the Ruled, may take over for real now. Like Angelo Codevilla writes, it must be a process revolutionary in nature.

    I am a little appalled many have thanked Buchanan Sailer Coulter while none has thanked Unz.

    Well, thanks for offering such a platform to points of views and interests madly censored everywhere else, Mr. Unz.

    Thanks to Ron Paul, Petras, Shamir, Fred Reed, Ms. Mercer, Paul Gottfried and his group of scholars for America, Giraldy, and anybody else.

    I don’t feel I can thank Napolitano and Whitney, but perhaps I misunderstood their angry rants at FBI’s Comey for the 3 days in last year he acted fairly.
    Mr. Napolitano and Whitney, you should mind substance more than formality.
    Substance is Clinton had to be indicted, and the FBI worked for her by not doing that.

    The USA are still a democracy.
    For how long, it will be demographics to decide.

    • Agree: Opinionator, melendwyr
    • Replies: @Daniel H
    @people's republic

    I credit and thank Sailer, Unz, Vox Dei, Lion of the Blogosphere, Assange and others. They have done a magnificent job of challenging power that had resources of orders of magnitude greater than their own. Great job. And a hat tip to all of us nobody commentators who fed the embers these past two years.

    Replies: @Anonym, @Perplexed

  11. Tiny Duck said Trump couldn’t win the Republican nomination.

    Trump won.

    Tiny Duck said Trump couldn’t win the Presidency of the United States.

    Trump won.

    • Replies: @antipater_1
    @MEH 0910

    Tiny Duck said Trump would lose to Crooked Hillary in a "landslide" also.

    , @Harold
    @MEH 0910

    Tiny Duck doesn’t believe what he writes.

  12. I had about lost all faith in many of my fellow countrymen. This and knowing that Tiny Duck is now extinct…. A fine day indeed.

  13. Congratulations to Mr. Trump and his crew.

    I never thought I would see the day.

  14. Tiny duck…tiny duck…tiny duck. We hardly knew you.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Kyle a

    I'm guessing TD is gonna go curl up back under Huffpost for another 4 years.

  15. His victory speech is a little weird.

  16. Thank you Lord Jesus for President Trump.

  17. Sing now, ye people of the Tower of Anor,
    for the Realm of Sauron is ended for ever,
    and the Dark Tower is thrown down.

    Sing and rejoice, ye people of the Tower of Guard,
    for your watch hath not been in vain,
    and the Black Gate is broken,
    and your King hath passed through,
    and he is victorious.

    Sing and be glad, all ye children of the West,
    for your King shall come again,
    and he shall dwell among you
    all the days of your life.

    And the Tree that was withered shall be renewed,
    and he shall plant it in the high places,
    and the City shall be blessed.

    Sing all ye people!

    J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    @Manfred Arcane


    J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0S_MebzyzQ
  18. I heard fireworks echoing from afar and knew the Trumpening was at hand.

    God bless President Trump.

  19. Time for a fundraising drive, Sailer?

    • Replies: @antipater_1
    @Polearm

    Yes, Steve should strike while the iron is hot.

  20. Congratulations to all Trump supporters here! This victory means:
    – A resounding defeat for the Neocons.
    – A resounding rejection of identity politics.
    – A vote against neo-liberalism and in favor of development.
    Plenty of stuff for both “leftist” and “rightists” to be excited about.

    This guy may turn out to be a good president.

    Cheers.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @jimbojones

    "Congratulations to all Trump supporters here! This victory means:

    - A resounding rejection of identity politics."

    No. It is actually a tacit victory for white identity politics.

    Replies: @Anonym, @Bill, @Corvinus

  21. Congratulations on a Trump win, Americans. Let’s hope he picks a great cabinet and smart advisers – after all comes to power owing very little to anyone, esp in the GOP.

  22. ground game!

    Super PACs!

    Latinos!

    Gaffes!

    Screw off, media.

  23. MAGA! We all did this. Now time to get to work on the wall. Where’s Tiny Duck at?

    • Replies: @Tracy
    @GW

    He's prolly somewhere in NYC, keeping ice in Hillary's glass.

    Replies: @SFG

    , @Clyde
    @GW


    MAGA! We all did this. Now time to get to work on the wall. Where’s Tiny Duck at?
     
    Sent to the fois gras factory.
  24. Tonight Hillary is dining in . . . :

  25. Today is a great day as it marks the election of the savior of humanity.

  26. His speech was great, he’s such a schmoozer. Also thanked all the supporting cast, including the Secret Service. Very gracious and decent, from the heart. No phony.

    • Agree: Kylie
  27. He did it…the absolute madman actually did it…

  28. Was that Omarosa from the first Apprentice on stage with him?

  29. I have witnessed some of the most awful and amazing things in my life this year. Thanks DJT for everything.

  30. @jimbojones
    Congratulations to all Trump supporters here! This victory means:
    - A resounding defeat for the Neocons.
    - A resounding rejection of identity politics.
    - A vote against neo-liberalism and in favor of development.
    Plenty of stuff for both "leftist" and "rightists" to be excited about.

    This guy may turn out to be a good president.

    Cheers.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    “Congratulations to all Trump supporters here! This victory means:

    – A resounding rejection of identity politics.”

    No. It is actually a tacit victory for white identity politics.

    • Agree: NickG
    • Replies: @Anonym
    @Mr. Anon

    No. It is actually a tacit victory for white identity politics.

    I already used my "agree", but agree totally.

    First Brexit, now Trump. White people be like:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPN-_rlmrOI

    Who's next? Merkel?

    , @Bill
    @Mr. Anon

    Yes. Fox News drones were talking about this as the results came in. Britt Hume commented on the emergence of white racial consciousness (not in those terms). Some Democrat POS whined that whites were starting to act like minority groups vis a vis voting behavior. No Sher Shitlock --- WTF did these idiots think was going to happen when they made whites a minority? The graphics showing the Ohio River Valley and Wisconsin's rusty places changing from solid blue to solid red were awe-inspiring.

    Stupid Allegheny County, PA staying blue. Next time . . .

    , @Corvinus
    @Mr. Anon

    "No. It is actually a tacit victory for white identity politics."

    Um, no. Hillary underestimated the support of a key demographic in her base--the working class and the union class. These two groups had supported Bernie in the primaries. She thought they would support her come the general election. They chose the populist who is deemed the savior to their economic woes from elites, who ironically Trump is part of.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Mr. Anon

  31. I still can’t believe it. I just hope he doesn’t forget San Jose and what those people did to his supporters. Or any of the other arrogant cities, universities, corporations and other “progressive” institutions across the US. It’s time for some justice.

    • Replies: @Cletus Rothschild
    @Bill P

    Turning the country around in a positive way is much better vindication than going on a vicious vendetta.

    Replies: @reiner Tor

  32. Trump is Henry V:

  33. 5th dimensional chess, my friends.

    • Replies: @SFG
    @broski

    Honestly, I'd say the opposite. He flew by the seat of his pants and pulled out a victory. People are angry about PC and globalization, and he ran on that. Hillary doesn't have much charisma, so she wasn't able to stop him. He used his intuition to sense themes that were being ignored and ran with them.

    Replies: @Clyde, @Coemgen, @Perplexed

    , @Olorin
    @broski

    In our household we've been referring to it these past 20 or so weeks as the Kobiyashi Maru Scenario.

  34. GREAT NIGHT. Trump took the Sailer Strategy and ran with it.

  35. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    From the losers’ camp:

    Bloomberg

    And already the questions arise, with Bloomberg promptly asking “what might President-elect Trump do to calm the markets?” Because some still believe that’s the most important thing; some like Hillary Clinton, whose belief is what cost her the presidency.

    The Bloomberg comedy continues: “he could remove a lot of the uncertainty factor by saying he has complete faith in Fed Chair Janet Yellen. He could tamp down any talk of a rebellion against House Speaker Paul Ryan — and give Ryan a green light to move ahead with his agenda. He could even offer to work with Democratic leaders in Congress on a plan to address the grievances of disaffected blue-collar workers in Rust-Belt states.”

    Oh yeah.
    He could.
    But he also could not.

    • Replies: @utu
    @Anonymous

    Paul Ryan must be got rid off.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    , @Yowza
    @Anonymous


    The Bloomberg comedy continues: “he could remove a lot of the uncertainty factor by saying he has complete faith in Fed Chair Janet Yellen. He could tamp down any talk of a rebellion against House Speaker Paul Ryan — and give Ryan a green light to move ahead with his agenda.
     
    Uh... I think the liberal's twisted "don't make the black kids angry" logic is dead on arrival. I don't think the dems are yet picking up that most of the country has just indicated that they hates them, much less admitting to being on the wrong side of history. I hope relevant Dems grow a brain quickly.

    On another note, I can almost smell the bleachbit rising from the White House.

    Obama must be shitting. Can't wait to see his attitude change overnight. If I wee Obama, I'd see to it that Trump's transition into the White House is as pleasant as possible.
  36. I love the smell of napalm in the morning…
    Smells like …VICTORY!!!
    Sadly though won’t see that Hillary Huma wedding in the White House

  37. I could have sworn I saw William Shatner up there on the stage too, but I’d think someone would have mentioned it if it was him. I recall there was some speculation about his being a closet Trumpist when he failed to join George Takei and a boatload of other Trek players in signing a “Trek Against Trump” letter.

    • Replies: @Kyle
    @Manfred Arcane

    Shatner didn't really see the other star track cast as "being on his level." Supposedly he was a dominant personality around the set. He said something about not even really knowing George takie, and that George takie never said a word to him outside of filming.
    Maybe Shatner just isn't friends with any of them and thinks they are untalented geeks.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Bill

  38. @johnny memonic
    Well you did it, Steve. You effectively changed the course of world history with your internet blog.

    Replies: @The preferred nomenclature is..., @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever...

    Very much agree. Please take a bow this evening Sir Sailer.

  39. Would this victory have happened if Steve Sailer hadn’t got into journalism and blogging? I wonder. Maybe not.

    • Replies: @SFG
    @Economic Sophisms

    It's a close victory, so I think we can give Steve the credit. ;)

    , @Antonymous
    @Economic Sophisms

    Sailer influenced Coulter. Coulter wrote a book which influenced Trump on immigration. Trump tacked immigration concerns onto his longstanding concerns about trade and interventionism and voila, winning campaign. Two degrees from Sailer to Trump. Huge thanks from this reader.

  40. @Manfred Arcane
    Sing now, ye people of the Tower of Anor,
    for the Realm of Sauron is ended for ever,
    and the Dark Tower is thrown down.

    Sing and rejoice, ye people of the Tower of Guard,
    for your watch hath not been in vain,
    and the Black Gate is broken,
    and your King hath passed through,
    and he is victorious.

    Sing and be glad, all ye children of the West,
    for your King shall come again,
    and he shall dwell among you
    all the days of your life.

    And the Tree that was withered shall be renewed,
    and he shall plant it in the high places,
    and the City shall be blessed.

    Sing all ye people!

    J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King.

    Replies: @Desiderius

    J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King

  41. I can’t believe he did it. I’m fucking gobsmacked. I thought he was going to lose by a few points in all the battleground states, resulting an electoral college BTFO.

    Hail Kek!

    LOL: When I brought up the page it had 2 comments. By the time it finished loading it had 37.

  42. Steve was like:

    Good work, Sailer.

  43. @johnny memonic
    Well you did it, Steve. You effectively changed the course of world history with your internet blog.

    Replies: @The preferred nomenclature is..., @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever...

    “Well you did it, Steve. You effectively changed the course of world history with your internet blog.”
    You’re delusional mate.

    • Replies: @Pericles
    @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever...

    I hate to break it to you but ... Paul Walker is dead.

  44. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Double Trump’s security now!

    The New World Order is going to try to move Pence into the Oval Office asap. They put the hit on Reagan in the first month!

    Trump is a shark so we know he won’t be naive about this stuff. His enemies are only temporarily vanquished. They hate his guts!

    If Trump is smart he will spend some time visualizing just how many powerful people want Donald Trump dead after tonight.

  45. Congratulations! Make America Great Again!

  46. The Obama era is over.

    • Replies: @Je Suis Omar Mateen
    @Fun

    "The Obama era is over."

    Yes, especially when Lord God Emperor Trump repeals and replaces 0bamacare. Because, other than 0bamacare, what has President Powerbottom done the past eight years besides being black? Nada.

    God bless President Trump.

  47. First Brexit, now Trump.

    I’m hoping Marine Le Pen makes it the triple.

    Well done, America. Well done.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    @celt darnell

    I was hiking the other day and met a French couple in maybe their 60s or 70s. They described themselves as "political refugees" and are traveling the world to get out of France, which they said is a terrible place now. They were really, really angry. It will be interesting to see how things go in Europe in future elections.

    Replies: @celt darnell

  48. As I said before, it just didn’t make sense that Trump’s rallies were huge turn-away crowds, while Hillary’s were consistently small, and sparse.

    It’s kind of like the stock market. When other indicators are haywire, follow the real volume. You can fake pricing, for a while, but you can never fake volume.

    Good thing to remember.

    • Replies: @utu
    @Yowza

    "As I said before, it just didn’t make sense that Trump’s rallies were huge turn-away crowds, while Hillary’s were consistently small, and sparse."

    Exactly. All polls we were fed with until about 12 days ago were fake. When Comey announced the reopening of investigation it was a signal to everybody and media in particular that the reality must be restored. The TPTB made a decision that the election cannot be stolen from Trump. The difference was just too great. New pro-Trump registrations and results of early voting made it obvious. The polls having Hillary 14% ahead were false as all the others. Their purpose was to take the steam out of Trump locomotive. But it did not work. The distrust of media and polling did not affect Trump supporters as they hoped they would. The Deep State (TPTB) was doing a favor to MSM, the most important instrument of power, by giving them an exit strategy. Blame it on the emails. We were not wrong but emails did it. The October surprise did it. Yeah, that’s the ticket! And it goes w/o saying that Comey wanted to be on the good side of the next president. The purpose of Comey action was also to weaken Trump presidency. Trump did not need this help. He would win w/o Comey. TPTB always want to have a weak president.

    , @melendwyr
    @Yowza

    Trump lost the popular vote. What he has now is hardly a mandate. I'm hoping he'll try the things he said he wanted to, and that some of them will get through.

    But this is a minor victory in a very major war. Examine the disposition of forces. There's a lot of uphill pushing yet to be done.

    Replies: @Peripatetic commenter, @Almost Missouri, @MarkinPNW

  49. @GW
    MAGA! We all did this. Now time to get to work on the wall. Where's Tiny Duck at?

    Replies: @Tracy, @Clyde

    He’s prolly somewhere in NYC, keeping ice in Hillary’s glass.

    • Replies: @SFG
    @Tracy

    I did think it was kind of ironic they were both in NYC a mile from each other. Guess the place really is the center of the world.

  50. @the cruncher
    TRUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUMP!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Who would have believed it? What can it mean? Is God with us or something?

    Now will he prosecute and jail Hillary? I hope he does - I hope he goes in the teeth of decorum as he has so far and cleans house like he said he would.

    Replies: @Olorin, @PhysicistDave, @Stan Adams

    No sir.

    It is our ancestors–my ancestors, yours–who have dreamed the dream of evolution and fought through unthinkable challenges to create a place the best and brightest and most hard working could call their own.

    It is a victory for HBD.

    Mr. Sailer, sir, it has been a privilege to be welcomed here as a regular commenter. I must have been awfully good in a previous life to deserve such company in what seemed to be a time of such isolation and forgetting.

    I beg your indulgence as I offer up for youse-all’s consideration this Inari Sami man jojking the bear:

  51. Ah, the exhilaration of victory, how sweet it is.

    Take a bow, Mr. Sailer and the Unz crew. Savor The Night of the Long Faces.

    Bliss it is in these days to be alive, but to be a Trump supporter is very heaven itself!

    • Replies: @academic gossip
    @silviosilver


    Savor The Night of the Long Faces.
     
    Nice meme. These days in history:

    Nov. 9 --- Night of Broken Glass
    Nov. 8 --- Night of Unbroken Glass Ceiling
    Nov. 7 --- "Night on Broken Glass" libel damages award

    HRC conceded on the day the Berlin Wall was opened, with her supporters (at the Javits center) literally standing under a glass ceiling.
  52. I’d like to take this moment to thank Mr. Sailer. This blog has, if not shaped my political thought, it has certainly put the facts and numbers behind that political thought. Not only is this blog relevant on a national level, but it touches many on a grass roots level. I wish I could write something more profound, but I’m a little tipsy and there it is…. Thanks to all those that participate here. Much obliged!

  53. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Amazing speech by Trump.

    Democrats and Republicans are one people (and that’s why they hate you, Donald. Elitists who want to rule want to divide the ruled).
    I will work for the people (and that’s why they hate you, Donald)
    We’ll get along with everybody, and make our economy the best in the world (and that’s why they hate you, Donald)
    It is an honour for me, and I love this nation (and that’s why they hate you, Donald)

    Trumps leaves, while You can’t always get what you want by the Rolling Stones is playing.

    I really really wonder how much he will manage to accomplish.
    Maybe it depends not only on his will and capabilities, but also on us.
    Let’s all do our best.

    Good night people.

    • Replies: @utu
    @Anonymous

    "Maybe it depends not only on his will and capabilities, but also on us." - He/we must start the movement. W/o the movement he won't accomplish anything. American presidents rarely went against establishment and the Deep Sate by turning to people for support. Some of them missed great opportunities because of that. If G.H. Bush had balls to turn to people when he had a conflict with Izaak Shamir he would have gotten the 2nd term and we would have saved money by not funding Israel in perpetuity. He was getting lots of letters urging him to do it and he was tempted but in the end he chickened out.

    The people who were from the beginning with Trump and for Trump must keep pressure on him and should formulate a plan. What we really want? W/o this pressure Paul Ryans and his ilk will insulate Trump from us and he will be powerless. One has to keep a good eye on those now who will be flocking to Trump.

    A "Night of Long Knives" must be carried out to get rid GOP of Paul Ryans, McCains, and neocons.

    Replies: @Zach

    , @CK
    @Anonymous

    He has 8 years. The inertia inherent in the government will not be changed quickly. He can execute some fiat governance just as every president since Truman has. But he has only 8 years and he cannot by himself reverse the white decline in reproduction. He can halt the immigration from the south and from MENA easily and within his executive authority ... no need for the House or the Senate to get involved. Since it appears that the senate now requires 60 votes to agree to a piss break, he can not count on any help or much harm from them.

  54. For those who despise Trump, it coulda been worse.

    Camacho and ‘make america grow again’

  55. Where is (((Owen)))?

    Great predictions. You should definitely keep commenting.

    • Agree: Coemgen
    • LOL: Coemgen
  56. Golden age cometh

    I knew this day would come. Almost wish I wasn’t a US citizen so that I could have made a true killing in the markets

  57. The Deplorables trump the Hystericals!

    On a negative note, I hope this doesn’t mean liberal Hollywood actors are going to start fleeing to Canada and Australia.

  58. @GW
    MAGA! We all did this. Now time to get to work on the wall. Where's Tiny Duck at?

    Replies: @Tracy, @Clyde

    MAGA! We all did this. Now time to get to work on the wall. Where’s Tiny Duck at?

    Sent to the fois gras factory.

  59. The liberal tears are delicious. That Slate screenshot…

    • Replies: @Zach
    @Polynices

    It's Trump's victory, but how many people voted to spite Slate and the rest of Hillary's media fans? It reminded me of Alexander Cockburn back in the 1990s assessing the press after the Lewinsky Scandal.

    Did the pundits make fools of themselves? Yes, indeed. They made incredible, unforgivable misjudgments about public opinion. This is because most of the pundits clustered in the studios of the networks, MSNBC and PBS are stupid, largely right-wing people who talk only to each other, read only each other and in consequence have very little contact with external reality. They should all be fired.

    There is, these days, not much actual reporting in mainstream, corporate journalism. Within the circumference of the entire media-industrial complex, the space given over to unearthing of facts is minuscule in comparison to the opinion-mongering facilities, gigantic smokehouses of punditry the size of a thousand football fields.

    Most opinion formers these days are well-paid corporate serfs, promulgating boilerplate and sedulous to avoid the asking of any awkward questions. This is the politico-pundit class that screwed up this year. It's not a problem for "the press." It's a problem for them and for the people who pay their salaries.

  60. They said Trump was vastly inflating the value of his brand in estimating his own worth at ten billion. Time for a rethink?

    Trump brand is going through the roof. But a president can ruin their presidency. Look at the Bush brand.

  61. I took a screenshot of the New York Times’ web front page on Saturday, when it proclaimed that “Hillary Clinton has an 84% chance of winning.”

    Liars.

  62. I was wrong. He won. Congratulations, everyone.

    Just goes to show you can’t always be pessimistic. 😉

    Now let’s go make the country great again…

  63. I’m right a lot. People would do well to listen.

    Of course, need to work on being completely sober, active and energetic all the time. With that I could learn a lot from Trump. Truly a great man

  64. I love the ironic juxtaposition of the NYT’s ‘Trump Triumphs’ headline with the ‘Hamilton!’ ad right above it. Sweet, sweet, sweet.

    Steve, take a virtual bow, then get some sleep in the coming days. You’ve just completed a remarkable run of social analysis and commentary. Thanks!

  65. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    As Fun said above: Obama is over.

    Clintons & Bushes also.

    Can’t wait for Obamacare to be flushed down the memory hole.

    Can’t wait for Scalia type scotus appointees.

    Does Trump have the balls to push his agenda all the way? Reagan failed by trying to meet the radical donks halfway.

  66. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Absolutely right. And it goes to show that ideas, and intellectuals, really, really do matter. Even in this ‘back to blood’ era. Imagine if Steve had instead stuck with marketing research and were making very nice money now. That Steve would probably give some cash to his favorite campaigns and hope he was having impact. But THIS Steve changed everything.

    San Franciscan non-monk

  67. In the debates, they kept on pestering Trump about whether he would concede, but in the end it was Hillary who did not have the grace to come out and give a concession speech, even though she conceded to Trump on the phone. With leftists, it’s all about projection.

    She left all her supporters out on the floor without even a thank you for their efforts. WTF was that about? Was she having a seizure? Weeping uncontrollably?

    Now today was truly the worst day of Hillary’s life. Not only did she lose and take her party down with her and control of the Supreme Court to boot, but she is probably going to jail. The statute of limitations has not run and there is nothing that prevents the new AG (Chris Christie?) from taking a fresh look at her crimes.

    But still she should have been man enough to come out and congratulate the winner. I’m sure that they had some devious plan to come up with more votes in Detroit and contest the election Gore style when Podesta sent everyone home at 2:0o AM but at some point it became clear that Michigan alone wouldn’t do it and that she couldn’t steal the election in enough states to win. But at that point she should have come out as soon as she called Trump.

    • Agree: res
    • Replies: @donut
    @Jack D

    Chewing the carpet maybe ?

    Fill in your own words .

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7PmzdINGZk

    , @ChrisZ
    @Jack D

    Well said, Jack. Worst day of her life, and 100 percent deserved.

    For 18 months all we heard from the culture--the condescending left and lapdog right--was how bad a mistake it would be to nominate Trump. But now it's undeniable that the big mistake was on the left, rallying so obsequiously behind Clinton. She's truly hated. And now she's going to be hated by all those who sold their souls on her behalf, only to have her come out a loser against Trump.

    Watching the recriminations is going to be delicious.

    Nemesis is a powerful goddess, indeed.

    Replies: @Thea

    , @utu
    @Jack D

    I am pretty sure she knew she would not win or at least her handlers knew for at least 12 days.

    Replies: @Jack D

    , @utu
    @Jack D

    Weeping Hillary supporters for your Schadenfreude

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3918838/Dejected-Clinton-supporters-party-goes-flat-result-result-turns-against-cries-lock-louder-Trump-party.html

    Replies: @Seth Largo

    , @Anonym
    @Jack D

    Live by corruption, die by corruption. She should have just enjoyed her $200M ill gotten proceeds of treason and corruption, but it wasn't good enough.

  68. WTF? Did Sailer just get elected president or was it Trump ?

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @donut

    Trump got elected running on Sailer's brain.

  69. @MEH 0910
    Tiny Duck said Trump couldn't win the Republican nomination.

    Trump won.

    Tiny Duck said Trump couldn't win the Presidency of the United States.

    Trump won.

    Replies: @antipater_1, @Harold

    Tiny Duck said Trump would lose to Crooked Hillary in a “landslide” also.

  70. @Jack D
    In the debates, they kept on pestering Trump about whether he would concede, but in the end it was Hillary who did not have the grace to come out and give a concession speech, even though she conceded to Trump on the phone. With leftists, it's all about projection.

    She left all her supporters out on the floor without even a thank you for their efforts. WTF was that about? Was she having a seizure? Weeping uncontrollably?

    Now today was truly the worst day of Hillary's life. Not only did she lose and take her party down with her and control of the Supreme Court to boot, but she is probably going to jail. The statute of limitations has not run and there is nothing that prevents the new AG (Chris Christie?) from taking a fresh look at her crimes.

    But still she should have been man enough to come out and congratulate the winner. I'm sure that they had some devious plan to come up with more votes in Detroit and contest the election Gore style when Podesta sent everyone home at 2:0o AM but at some point it became clear that Michigan alone wouldn't do it and that she couldn't steal the election in enough states to win. But at that point she should have come out as soon as she called Trump.

    Replies: @donut, @ChrisZ, @utu, @utu, @Anonym

    Chewing the carpet maybe ?

    Fill in your own words .

  71. @Polearm
    Time for a fundraising drive, Sailer?

    Replies: @antipater_1

    Yes, Steve should strike while the iron is hot.

  72. “Where is (((Owen)))?”
    (((Owen))) was paid, his mission failed.

    • Replies: @(((Owen)))
    @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever...

    Where was I? Just like Hillary: Drunk.

    It was election night, after all.

    So it turns out my predictions were wrong, even though they were based on the best scientific polling. And I feel terrible about it.

    Just kidding! I feel great about it. #MAGA

  73. This could mean yuge things for this fair website, Roissy, Zero Hedge. The msm has been defeated.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Thea

    To adapt the old liberal saw:

    It will be a great day when Unz.com gets the all recognition it deserves, and the MSM has to hold a bake sale to buy a broadcast license.

  74. Yeah, it seems very strange that Hillary didn’t go out to talk to her people–either to concede or to say “hell no, we’re fighting this out to the last recounted ballot and dimpled chad.” It makes me wonder whether some of the speculation about her health problems were right after all.

    I guess we’ve resolved the question of whether Nate Silver was being dishonest in giving Trump a 1/3 chance of winning (As Sam Wang and Andrew Gellman implied he was doing to keep people interested). And perhaps also the question of whether Scott Adams was nuts for claiming such certainty that Trump would win.

    • Replies: @Gato de la Biblioteca
    @NOTA

    It makes me wonder whether some of the speculation about her health problems were right after all.

    Drunker than Hell is just as likely.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein

    , @Je Suis Omar Mateen
    @NOTA

    "Yeah, it seems very strange that Hillary didn’t go out to talk to her people–either to concede or to say “hell no, we’re fighting this out to the last recounted ballot and dimpled chad.” It makes me wonder whether some of the speculation about her health problems were right after all."

    Great observation. Yes, it's passing strange that illary did not concede in public and at a podium the way Republicucks Juan McLoser and Matt Fraudney did in years past. I think we can presume illary was at least halfway through a magnum of white wine and couldn't conjoin a coherent phrase in congratulations of The Glorious Trumpening.

    God bless President Donald Trump!

    Replies: @BB753

    , @Clyde
    @NOTA


    And perhaps also the question of whether Scott Adams was nuts for claiming such certainty that Trump would win.
     
    I held out hope and James Comey gave Trump a lasting boost when he said he had to examine new (Wiener) evidence. So I gave DJ Trump optimistic 50-50 odds on the basis that the pollsters were having a very difficult time getting accurate results. Big fake out on the Democrat/Media echo chamber, mutual back slapping society! That thinks they are better than the rest of America, we deplorables. Look at the shamelessly *Konformist* Hollywood actors and musicians who bleated non-stop for Hillary. Non-stop social signaling slobs and snobs! They intimidated any Trump supporting artists to come out and declare for Trump. A big eff you to them! Especially Bruce Springsteen, who I have not liked for 20 years anyway.

    Dems will be bitching about James Comey for years. Trump will keep him.

  75. Congratulations to Steve, Kevin MacDonald, Jared Taylor, and all the other great known and unknown internet warriors out there. For those ready for the next phase, and with strong stomachs, google ‘podesta pedophile’. It’s a cumulative case, but it looks to me like the Podesta Wikileaks emails are going to finally break wide open those elite pedophile rings that have been rumored for many years. Somehow I don’t see this getting swept under the carpet during a Trump Presidency.

  76. Steve – do you know if any of Trump’s inner circle are familiar with your work? Bannon maybe?

  77. @Mr. Anon
    @jimbojones

    "Congratulations to all Trump supporters here! This victory means:

    - A resounding rejection of identity politics."

    No. It is actually a tacit victory for white identity politics.

    Replies: @Anonym, @Bill, @Corvinus

    No. It is actually a tacit victory for white identity politics.

    I already used my “agree”, but agree totally.

    First Brexit, now Trump. White people be like:

    Who’s next? Merkel?

  78. I’m delighted that Trump won.

    I’m delighted that Hillary lost.

  79. @Economic Sophisms
    Would this victory have happened if Steve Sailer hadn't got into journalism and blogging? I wonder. Maybe not.

    Replies: @SFG, @Antonymous

    It’s a close victory, so I think we can give Steve the credit. 😉

  80. @Tracy
    @GW

    He's prolly somewhere in NYC, keeping ice in Hillary's glass.

    Replies: @SFG

    I did think it was kind of ironic they were both in NYC a mile from each other. Guess the place really is the center of the world.

  81. Thanks, Steve, for your intellectual leadership.

  82. Laughing my ass off as the press suddenly discovers that the Presidency has become insanely powerful and unchecked under President Obama! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Look, we should probably make an attempt to be conciliatory in tone to the average Hillary voter. Half of them won’t appreciate it, of course, but we should make the attempt. But to the professional class of politicians and media people? No fucking mercy. Rub their faces in it every chance you can. They deserve to be destroyed, permanently ruined. And one of the ways to do that is to rub their disgusting faces in it that they wanted an unchecked President when it was their creature in the office.

  83. He crushed the hag.

    Now let’s hope he crushes the rest of the left.

  84. Siberian Candidate won. Putin’s Puppet.

    Run and Hide!!!

    We are ruled by the Russkies!!!

    • Replies: @Olorin
    @Anon

    Is that why I have this sudden urge for vodka?

    Oh wait. It's Finlandia.

  85. “Yeah, it seems very strange that Hillary didn’t go out to talk to her people–either to concede or to say “hell ‘re fighting this out to the last recounted ballot and dimpled chad.” It makes me wonder whether some of the speculation about her health problems were right after all.”

    I found that odd too….. Podesta came out, gave the speech about how it’s not over yet, then later Clinton calls DT and concedes. What happened? She have a crying jag or apoplectic fit and couldn’t address the crowd? She wanted to fight on but her fixers said they couldn’t manufacture enough fake votes in Philly or Detroit?

  86. So Steve – what job do you want in the new administration? You should get your pick! At least Ambassador to Austria or Switzerland, I forget which is your ancestral homeland

  87. @Manfred Arcane
    I could have sworn I saw William Shatner up there on the stage too, but I'd think someone would have mentioned it if it was him. I recall there was some speculation about his being a closet Trumpist when he failed to join George Takei and a boatload of other Trek players in signing a "Trek Against Trump" letter.

    Replies: @Kyle

    Shatner didn’t really see the other star track cast as “being on his level.” Supposedly he was a dominant personality around the set. He said something about not even really knowing George takie, and that George takie never said a word to him outside of filming.
    Maybe Shatner just isn’t friends with any of them and thinks they are untalented geeks.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Kyle

    That's kind of how it's depicted in Galaxy Quest. Tim Allen / Captain Kirk lives on an ocean cliff top in Malibu while Alan Rickman / Mr. Spock has a dumpy apartment in North Hollywood.

    Replies: @Kyle

    , @Bill
    @Kyle

    Yeah. Shatner is famously delusional. Doohan is famously delusional in more interesting ways, though.

  88. @people's republic
    I recall big shots at the Financial Times reporting chats in Davos (World Economic Forum): no worries over Trump, Hillary will win.

    I wish the Country Class, the Ruled, may take over for real now. Like Angelo Codevilla writes, it must be a process revolutionary in nature.

    I am a little appalled many have thanked Buchanan Sailer Coulter while none has thanked Unz.

    Well, thanks for offering such a platform to points of views and interests madly censored everywhere else, Mr. Unz.

    Thanks to Ron Paul, Petras, Shamir, Fred Reed, Ms. Mercer, Paul Gottfried and his group of scholars for America, Giraldy, and anybody else.

    I don't feel I can thank Napolitano and Whitney, but perhaps I misunderstood their angry rants at FBI's Comey for the 3 days in last year he acted fairly.
    Mr. Napolitano and Whitney, you should mind substance more than formality.
    Substance is Clinton had to be indicted, and the FBI worked for her by not doing that.

    The USA are still a democracy.
    For how long, it will be demographics to decide.

    Replies: @Daniel H

    I credit and thank Sailer, Unz, Vox Dei, Lion of the Blogosphere, Assange and others. They have done a magnificent job of challenging power that had resources of orders of magnitude greater than their own. Great job. And a hat tip to all of us nobody commentators who fed the embers these past two years.

    • Replies: @Anonym
    @Daniel H

    That's a good list. Also Bannon and Breitbart, Coulter, Farage, Pat, Derb, Unz, Sessions, Miller, the commentariat here, and the reddit crew which is now so big it is an institution practically.

    It's pretty amazing. Everyone pitched in. We were our own ground game! I just can't believe it. Brexit, now Trump. We've bought ourselves some time. Love all of you genuine guys and gals (?) here. This has been a daily (hourly?) routine of my life, and it feels like I have made some small difference in a huge, stupendous result.

    I hope with this lead we can change some of the culture. Education. TV. Movies. Media. The Eurosphere.

    , @Perplexed
    @Daniel H

    A lot of credit is due to Sundance et al. at The Conservative Treehouse—superb analysis and forethought, and shoring up the troops—and to the centipedes at Reddit's The Donald for Pepe and for digging into the WikiLeaks email dumps. Also Bill Mitchell on Twitter for calming jitters about the polling, and admin at Hillaryis44 for being so damn smart and honest.

    Replies: @Thea

  89. @Kyle
    @Manfred Arcane

    Shatner didn't really see the other star track cast as "being on his level." Supposedly he was a dominant personality around the set. He said something about not even really knowing George takie, and that George takie never said a word to him outside of filming.
    Maybe Shatner just isn't friends with any of them and thinks they are untalented geeks.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Bill

    That’s kind of how it’s depicted in Galaxy Quest. Tim Allen / Captain Kirk lives on an ocean cliff top in Malibu while Alan Rickman / Mr. Spock has a dumpy apartment in North Hollywood.

    • Replies: @Kyle
    @Steve Sailer

    Galaxy quest, what a great movie I think it's on Netflix right now. It has a star studded cast, Sigourney weaver and the guy who played Monk were in it.

  90. I hoped he could run it so close she’d be in a mortal panic. I did not dare really hope, but he pulled it off.

    Taking nothing from his run, from start to finish, it is one for the history books… but part of what happened tonight was a reckoning. I used to be a Democrat and in my opinion, they massively overplayed their hand, and for years.

    Just one small piece. Shameless: http://thebostontribune.com/first-grandma-marian-robinson-receive-lifetime-160k-government-pension/

  91. Magnificent. As a European, I am overjoyed.

    Congratulations to all the folks here that kept it real even when things looked hopeless.

    A big thank you to Steve and Mr. Unz for this wonderful blog and site, respectively. Unz.com is my #1 stop when catching up on news.

    And congratulations to the 45th President of the United States, DONALD J. TRUMP!

    P.S. I would say the second biggest loser of tonight is Nate Cardboard (formerly Silver), wouldn’t you say?

    • Replies: @PenskeFile
    @European in America


    P.S. I would say the second biggest loser of tonight is Nate Cardboard (formerly Silver), wouldn’t you say?
     
    Hopefully, we'll stop hearing about that guy. He should be thoroughly discredited by now.
  92. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Libs say Trump and his supporters are dumb, but their over-emphasis on nonsense like Machado the Ho suggests they really look down on their side as a bunch of dummies who will be energized by trash news and gossip.

    As Hillary had no substance on issues, her side just went for too much trash.

    Someone like Romney would have been sunk by such revelations as he created this ‘father knows best’ image. But Trump became trash-resistant because his life became so immune to it.

    • Replies: @Coemgen
    @Anon

    Glibs are too quick to assume that inarticulates are stupid.

  93. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    “P.S. I would say the second biggest loser of tonight is Nate Cardboard (formerly Silver), wouldn’t you say?”

    Change his name to Nate Lead.

    I find it shocking myself. He was Boy Wonder of 2012. But he was so wrong about Brazil World Cup. But okay, that’s sports and there are too many variables.

    But how could he have been SO WRONG this time around?

    It’s like a Haven Monahan version of stats. All made-up and fake.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @Anon

    Just shows how long you can coast on one lucky prediction dressed up as Science. Like William Goldman said about Hollywood, "Nobody knows anything".

  94. Trump won utah, and Sausage McGriddle couldn’t even beat hillary.

  95. @The Last Real Calvinist
    At last!

    I noticed that the NYT waited to change WI to Trump and put him up to 276 until a minute or two after Hillary called Donald to concede.

    Even in stinging defeat they still wait for permission.

    Replies: @utu

    I think NYT did a splendid job in forecasting Trump win since before 9:30pm and having a very accurate adaptive forecast algorithm running in real time. They called Florida and Pennsylvania couple hours before FOX and CNN did.

    Not everybody did get the memo, the same memo that Comey did 12 days ago that Trump would win and the election won’t be stolen. But certainly NYT did get the memo.

  96. 2016.

    Cubs win.

    Trump wins.

    Landmark year.

    And neck and neck to the very end.

  97. From comments here I learned that Omarosa was part of the Trump campaign.
    Her Wikipedia entry quotes a prediction that she made back in September:

    “In a Frontline episode, ‘The Choice 2016’, Omarosa said that ‘every critic, every detractor, will have to bow down to President Trump. It’s everyone who’s ever doubted Donald, who ever disagreed, who ever challenged him. It is the ultimate revenge to become the most powerful man in the universe.’ ”

  98. @Anonymous
    From the losers' camp:

    Bloomberg

    And already the questions arise, with Bloomberg promptly asking "what might President-elect Trump do to calm the markets?" Because some still believe that's the most important thing; some like Hillary Clinton, whose belief is what cost her the presidency.

    The Bloomberg comedy continues: "he could remove a lot of the uncertainty factor by saying he has complete faith in Fed Chair Janet Yellen. He could tamp down any talk of a rebellion against House Speaker Paul Ryan --- and give Ryan a green light to move ahead with his agenda. He could even offer to work with Democratic leaders in Congress on a plan to address the grievances of disaffected blue-collar workers in Rust-Belt states."
     
    Oh yeah.
    He could.
    But he also could not.

    Replies: @utu, @Yowza

    Paul Ryan must be got rid off.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @utu

    If he's "got rid of", it just means he picks up an easy seven-figure job in the East Coast Axis of Evil.

    Better to keep him in Congress, put him on a leash and make him Trump's b*tch.

    Replies: @BB753

  99. As early as Wednesday morning, op-ed pieces will start to appear blaming Hillary’s loss on Obama. They’ll say Obama should have reined-in FBI director Comey, or that he should have prevented Obamacare premiums from rising before the election… One thing or another, but there will be plenty of claims that Hillary was perfect and Obama sabotaged her somehow, probably because he didn’t want to be eclipsed by a woman.

    • Replies: @jimbojones
    @Veracitor

    Obama, Comey, Putin, Berney... So many blameworthy people out there! When at the end of the day Hillary was a bad candidate (zero enthusiasm) who ran a bad campaign.

    I suspect the Democrats may have had a winner in Bernie. But no.

  100. Trump should appoint Steve Sailer as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to boost marriage and end Section 8 migration.

  101. @the cruncher
    TRUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUMP!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Who would have believed it? What can it mean? Is God with us or something?

    Now will he prosecute and jail Hillary? I hope he does - I hope he goes in the teeth of decorum as he has so far and cleans house like he said he would.

    Replies: @Olorin, @PhysicistDave, @Stan Adams

    the cruncher asked:

    Now will he prosecute and jail Hillary? I hope he does

    No, Obama will pardon her. And, that will make life easier for Trump. (Personally, I would prefer to see her prosecuted.)

    And her health issues are not a joke: although she called Trump to concede, she could not make it to the venue to thank her supporters. I think soon we will be pitying her rather than hating her.

    Dave Miller in Sacramento

    • Replies: @donut
    @PhysicistDave

    " I think soon we will be pitying her rather than hating her."

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktRb5qsvf_c

    , @Kylie
    @PhysicistDave

    "And her health issues are not a joke: although she called Trump to concede, she could not make it to the venue to thank her supporters."

    That was yet another display of ill-will, not ill health.

    "I think soon we will be pitying her rather than hating her."

    When hell freezes over is soon?

    Replies: @Bill Jones

    , @midtown
    @PhysicistDave

    Better that he pardon Hillary (or simply not prosecute) but go after the reams of corruption that exist within the federal bureaucracies.

    Replies: @Steven WIlson

    , @Jim Don Bob
    @PhysicistDave

    It is hard to feel pity for someone who has been avaricious, corrupt, mendacious, and incompetent for over 30 years. Truly an evil b***h.

    , @anonguy
    @PhysicistDave


    No, Obama will pardon her.
     
    That would appear too partisan and reopen too much division.

    If anyone is going to pardon Hillary, it would Trump. He's already starting to give her a soft pardon, being nice, talking reconciliation, etc. Maybe it comes down to nuisance prosecution, some fines, in the back pages for a while for dedicated Clinton-haters, but the rest of us will move on.

    I'm undecided whether he will give her a formal pardon. I tend to think not, that stamps a label on her by the victor, so probably just soft pardon. If anyone tries going after her too hard during Trump presidency, he can always pardon her at any time and just the threat of that alone can shut things down.
    , @boogerbently
    @PhysicistDave

    You can't "pardon" her if she's never been convicted.
    Let it lie (Until Trump takes office) , continue the "ongoing" investigation, jail her and Slick Willie.
    All those e-mails the DOJ is holding, and said it would take 5 years to study.
    Get rid of all the cabinet level black panthers, then do what should have been done years ago.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

  102. @Yowza
    As I said before, it just didn't make sense that Trump's rallies were huge turn-away crowds, while Hillary's were consistently small, and sparse.

    It's kind of like the stock market. When other indicators are haywire, follow the real volume. You can fake pricing, for a while, but you can never fake volume.

    Good thing to remember.

    Replies: @utu, @melendwyr

    “As I said before, it just didn’t make sense that Trump’s rallies were huge turn-away crowds, while Hillary’s were consistently small, and sparse.”

    Exactly. All polls we were fed with until about 12 days ago were fake. When Comey announced the reopening of investigation it was a signal to everybody and media in particular that the reality must be restored. The TPTB made a decision that the election cannot be stolen from Trump. The difference was just too great. New pro-Trump registrations and results of early voting made it obvious. The polls having Hillary 14% ahead were false as all the others. Their purpose was to take the steam out of Trump locomotive. But it did not work. The distrust of media and polling did not affect Trump supporters as they hoped they would. The Deep State (TPTB) was doing a favor to MSM, the most important instrument of power, by giving them an exit strategy. Blame it on the emails. We were not wrong but emails did it. The October surprise did it. Yeah, that’s the ticket! And it goes w/o saying that Comey wanted to be on the good side of the next president. The purpose of Comey action was also to weaken Trump presidency. Trump did not need this help. He would win w/o Comey. TPTB always want to have a weak president.

  103. Come on Sailer be generous on this night of “your” triumph. In your heart you know I’m right .

  104. @Polynices
    The liberal tears are delicious. That Slate screenshot...

    Replies: @Zach

    It’s Trump’s victory, but how many people voted to spite Slate and the rest of Hillary’s media fans? It reminded me of Alexander Cockburn back in the 1990s assessing the press after the Lewinsky Scandal.

    Did the pundits make fools of themselves? Yes, indeed. They made incredible, unforgivable misjudgments about public opinion. This is because most of the pundits clustered in the studios of the networks, MSNBC and PBS are stupid, largely right-wing people who talk only to each other, read only each other and in consequence have very little contact with external reality. They should all be fired.

    There is, these days, not much actual reporting in mainstream, corporate journalism. Within the circumference of the entire media-industrial complex, the space given over to unearthing of facts is minuscule in comparison to the opinion-mongering facilities, gigantic smokehouses of punditry the size of a thousand football fields.

    Most opinion formers these days are well-paid corporate serfs, promulgating boilerplate and sedulous to avoid the asking of any awkward questions. This is the politico-pundit class that screwed up this year. It’s not a problem for “the press.” It’s a problem for them and for the people who pay their salaries.

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
  105. Congratulations, Mr. Sailer. Your 2+ decades of effort have paid off today. Though my political preferences were (and are) very different from yours, I hope Trump turns over a new leaf and becomes a credit to your cause. We have an interesting (to say the least) 4 years ahead of us.

  106. Well done America. I didn’t think it would happen.

    Trying to dial down the gloating is going to be really tough.

  107. @European in America
    Magnificent. As a European, I am overjoyed.

    Congratulations to all the folks here that kept it real even when things looked hopeless.

    A big thank you to Steve and Mr. Unz for this wonderful blog and site, respectively. Unz.com is my #1 stop when catching up on news.

    And congratulations to the 45th President of the United States, DONALD J. TRUMP!



    P.S. I would say the second biggest loser of tonight is Nate Cardboard (formerly Silver), wouldn't you say?

    Replies: @PenskeFile

    P.S. I would say the second biggest loser of tonight is Nate Cardboard (formerly Silver), wouldn’t you say?

    Hopefully, we’ll stop hearing about that guy. He should be thoroughly discredited by now.

  108. @Fun
    The Obama era is over.

    Replies: @Je Suis Omar Mateen

    “The Obama era is over.”

    Yes, especially when Lord God Emperor Trump repeals and replaces 0bamacare. Because, other than 0bamacare, what has President Powerbottom done the past eight years besides being black? Nada.

    God bless President Trump.

  109. David vs. Goliath

  110. @NOTA
    Yeah, it seems very strange that Hillary didn't go out to talk to her people--either to concede or to say "hell no, we're fighting this out to the last recounted ballot and dimpled chad." It makes me wonder whether some of the speculation about her health problems were right after all.

    I guess we've resolved the question of whether Nate Silver was being dishonest in giving Trump a 1/3 chance of winning (As Sam Wang and Andrew Gellman implied he was doing to keep people interested). And perhaps also the question of whether Scott Adams was nuts for claiming such certainty that Trump would win.

    Replies: @Gato de la Biblioteca, @Je Suis Omar Mateen, @Clyde

    It makes me wonder whether some of the speculation about her health problems were right after all.

    Drunker than Hell is just as likely.

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
    @Gato de la Biblioteca

    Getting drunker than hell when you're a 70-year-old pneumoniac with neurological problems is a good way to put yourself in the casket.

    Replies: @black sea

  111. @Anon
    Siberian Candidate won. Putin's Puppet.

    Run and Hide!!!

    We are ruled by the Russkies!!!

    Replies: @Olorin

    Is that why I have this sudden urge for vodka?

    Oh wait. It’s Finlandia.

  112. @Anonymous
    Amazing speech by Trump.

    Democrats and Republicans are one people (and that's why they hate you, Donald. Elitists who want to rule want to divide the ruled).
    I will work for the people (and that's why they hate you, Donald)
    We'll get along with everybody, and make our economy the best in the world (and that's why they hate you, Donald)
    It is an honour for me, and I love this nation (and that's why they hate you, Donald)

    Trumps leaves, while You can't always get what you want by the Rolling Stones is playing.

    I really really wonder how much he will manage to accomplish.
    Maybe it depends not only on his will and capabilities, but also on us.
    Let's all do our best.

    Good night people.

    Replies: @utu, @CK

    “Maybe it depends not only on his will and capabilities, but also on us.” – He/we must start the movement. W/o the movement he won’t accomplish anything. American presidents rarely went against establishment and the Deep Sate by turning to people for support. Some of them missed great opportunities because of that. If G.H. Bush had balls to turn to people when he had a conflict with Izaak Shamir he would have gotten the 2nd term and we would have saved money by not funding Israel in perpetuity. He was getting lots of letters urging him to do it and he was tempted but in the end he chickened out.

    The people who were from the beginning with Trump and for Trump must keep pressure on him and should formulate a plan. What we really want? W/o this pressure Paul Ryans and his ilk will insulate Trump from us and he will be powerless. One has to keep a good eye on those now who will be flocking to Trump.

    A “Night of Long Knives” must be carried out to get rid GOP of Paul Ryans, McCains, and neocons.

    • Replies: @Zach
    @utu

    Um...calling it a "Night of the Long Knives" probably won't get anything done. Better to treat Ryan like Stalin treated Bukarin and call it a Soviet style purge. Nancy Pelosi and Co would accept that terminology.

  113. @Anonymous
    From the losers' camp:

    Bloomberg

    And already the questions arise, with Bloomberg promptly asking "what might President-elect Trump do to calm the markets?" Because some still believe that's the most important thing; some like Hillary Clinton, whose belief is what cost her the presidency.

    The Bloomberg comedy continues: "he could remove a lot of the uncertainty factor by saying he has complete faith in Fed Chair Janet Yellen. He could tamp down any talk of a rebellion against House Speaker Paul Ryan --- and give Ryan a green light to move ahead with his agenda. He could even offer to work with Democratic leaders in Congress on a plan to address the grievances of disaffected blue-collar workers in Rust-Belt states."
     
    Oh yeah.
    He could.
    But he also could not.

    Replies: @utu, @Yowza

    The Bloomberg comedy continues: “he could remove a lot of the uncertainty factor by saying he has complete faith in Fed Chair Janet Yellen. He could tamp down any talk of a rebellion against House Speaker Paul Ryan — and give Ryan a green light to move ahead with his agenda.

    Uh… I think the liberal’s twisted “don’t make the black kids angry” logic is dead on arrival. I don’t think the dems are yet picking up that most of the country has just indicated that they hates them, much less admitting to being on the wrong side of history. I hope relevant Dems grow a brain quickly.

    On another note, I can almost smell the bleachbit rising from the White House.

    Obama must be shitting. Can’t wait to see his attitude change overnight. If I wee Obama, I’d see to it that Trump’s transition into the White House is as pleasant as possible.

  114. @NOTA
    Yeah, it seems very strange that Hillary didn't go out to talk to her people--either to concede or to say "hell no, we're fighting this out to the last recounted ballot and dimpled chad." It makes me wonder whether some of the speculation about her health problems were right after all.

    I guess we've resolved the question of whether Nate Silver was being dishonest in giving Trump a 1/3 chance of winning (As Sam Wang and Andrew Gellman implied he was doing to keep people interested). And perhaps also the question of whether Scott Adams was nuts for claiming such certainty that Trump would win.

    Replies: @Gato de la Biblioteca, @Je Suis Omar Mateen, @Clyde

    “Yeah, it seems very strange that Hillary didn’t go out to talk to her people–either to concede or to say “hell no, we’re fighting this out to the last recounted ballot and dimpled chad.” It makes me wonder whether some of the speculation about her health problems were right after all.”

    Great observation. Yes, it’s passing strange that illary did not concede in public and at a podium the way Republicucks Juan McLoser and Matt Fraudney did in years past. I think we can presume illary was at least halfway through a magnum of white wine and couldn’t conjoin a coherent phrase in congratulations of The Glorious Trumpening.

    God bless President Donald Trump!

    • Replies: @BB753
    @Je Suis Omar Mateen

    She's very ill. Probably on one of those "down times" from her neurological disease.
    I not only predicted Trump would win, I also predicted Hillary would be dead within a year. Wanna bet?

  115. @PhysicistDave
    @the cruncher

    the cruncher asked:


    Now will he prosecute and jail Hillary? I hope he does
     
    No, Obama will pardon her. And, that will make life easier for Trump. (Personally, I would prefer to see her prosecuted.)

    And her health issues are not a joke: although she called Trump to concede, she could not make it to the venue to thank her supporters. I think soon we will be pitying her rather than hating her.

    Dave Miller in Sacramento

    Replies: @donut, @Kylie, @midtown, @Jim Don Bob, @anonguy, @boogerbently

    ” I think soon we will be pitying her rather than hating her.”

  116. @Anon
    Libs say Trump and his supporters are dumb, but their over-emphasis on nonsense like Machado the Ho suggests they really look down on their side as a bunch of dummies who will be energized by trash news and gossip.

    As Hillary had no substance on issues, her side just went for too much trash.

    Someone like Romney would have been sunk by such revelations as he created this 'father knows best' image. But Trump became trash-resistant because his life became so immune to it.

    Replies: @Coemgen

    Glibs are too quick to assume that inarticulates are stupid.

  117. @MEH 0910
    Tiny Duck said Trump couldn't win the Republican nomination.

    Trump won.

    Tiny Duck said Trump couldn't win the Presidency of the United States.

    Trump won.

    Replies: @antipater_1, @Harold

    Tiny Duck doesn’t believe what he writes.

  118. @PhysicistDave
    @the cruncher

    the cruncher asked:


    Now will he prosecute and jail Hillary? I hope he does
     
    No, Obama will pardon her. And, that will make life easier for Trump. (Personally, I would prefer to see her prosecuted.)

    And her health issues are not a joke: although she called Trump to concede, she could not make it to the venue to thank her supporters. I think soon we will be pitying her rather than hating her.

    Dave Miller in Sacramento

    Replies: @donut, @Kylie, @midtown, @Jim Don Bob, @anonguy, @boogerbently

    “And her health issues are not a joke: although she called Trump to concede, she could not make it to the venue to thank her supporters.”

    That was yet another display of ill-will, not ill health.

    “I think soon we will be pitying her rather than hating her.”

    When hell freezes over is soon?

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    @Kylie

    She'll be dead within a twelvemonth.

    The question is, How will we tell?

  119. Ordinance of no quarter to the Irish :

    “… no quarter shall be given hereafter to any Irishman, nor any Papist whatsoever born in Ireland, who shall be taken in hostility against the Parliament … every officer that shall be remiss or negligent in observing the tenor of this ordinance shall be reputed a favourer of that bloody rebellion in Ireland . ”

    For Irishman and Papist read Progressive and SJW and , oh well what the hell Papist too.

  120. Congrats to Trump, but on to a topic much dearer to me personally, can Le Pen win in France ? Which would be a much more significant event.

    • Replies: @for-the-record
    @neutral

    Le Pen will almost certainly win the 1st round in April 2017 with around 30% of the vote (perhaps a bit higher). It all depends on who comes in 2nd, as in May there will be a "play off" between the top two vote getters. Most likely it will be the the "conservative" UMP (the party of Sarkozy and Alain Juppé, who is probably the front-runner in next month's primary). In this case, as in 2002 when Le Pen's father made it into the 2nd round against the conservative Chirac, the socialists will hold their nose and vote overwhelmingly for the UMP candidate (Chirac won the 2nd round with 82%). However, if the Socialists were to come in 2nd in the 1st round, a large number of UMP voters would back (albeit not publicly) Le Pen in the 2nd round, probably enough for her to win.

    So realistically the only way for her to win is to conjure a scenario where the Socialists come in 2nd in the 1st round (strategic voting, perhaps, but this would probably be difficult to organize).

    Replies: @neutral

  121. I think Steve’s blog will be looked at by historians of US political trends in a hundred years. Assuming any historians are left by then.

    Wonderful result, enjoy today, but tomorrow the struggle begins. Bit like Brexit really.

    The globalists are calling it ‘The Death Of The West”, when really it’s the West trying to fight off infection. Long way yet from being a reconquista.

    Good piece in the Guardian by Thomas Frank.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/09/donald-trump-white-house-hillary-clinton-liberals

    “Democratic leaders made Hillary their candidate even though they knew about her closeness to the banks, her fondness for war, and her unique vulnerability on the trade issue – each of which Trump exploited to the fullest. They chose Hillary even though they knew about her private email server. They chose her even though some of those who studied the Clinton Foundation suspected it was a sketchy proposition.

    To try to put over such a nominee while screaming that the Republican is a rightwing monster is to court disbelief. If Trump is a fascist, as liberals often said, Democrats should have put in their strongest player to stop him, not a party hack they’d chosen because it was her turn. Choosing her indicated either that Democrats didn’t mean what they said about Trump’s riskiness, that their opportunism took precedence over the country’s well-being, or maybe both.

    Clinton’s supporters among the media didn’t help much, either. It always struck me as strange that such an unpopular candidate enjoyed such robust and unanimous endorsements from the editorial and opinion pages of the nation’s papers, but it was the quality of the media’s enthusiasm that really harmed her. With the same arguments repeated over and over, two or three times a day, with nuance and contrary views all deleted, the act of opening the newspaper started to feel like tuning in to a Cold War propaganda station…

    How did the journalists’ crusade fail? The fourth estate came together in an unprecedented professional consensus. They chose insulting the other side over trying to understand what motivated them. They transformed opinion writing into a vehicle for high moral boasting. What could possibly have gone wrong with such an approach? ”

    • Replies: @Thea
    @Anonymous Nephew

    He writes in the same spirit as the English pamphlet writers who ushered in Cromwell.

    There is still much affinity with Albion over here given the Brexit & Trumpening. The special relationship lives on.

    , @neutral
    @Anonymous Nephew


    The globalists are calling it ‘The Death Of The West”
     
    This is what genuinely gets to me, there are some that define the West as liberal democracy, when the fact is that for most its history there was certainly no democracy or liberalism. That is bad enough, but there are those that define it as literal world government, which should normally be seen as a ridiculous concept, but this is the definition that is used by the editors of The Economist, the Davos clique and mainstream politicians.

    Replies: @Anonymous Nephew

    , @Steve Sailer
    @Anonymous Nephew

    Maybe Biden just didn't want it enough?

    Replies: @Anonymous Nephew, @Anonymous

    , @Coemgen
    @Anonymous Nephew

    "How did the journalists’ propagandists' crusade fail?"It appears propaganda needs to be supported with physical force. There hasn't been enough firings and denunciations of deplorables and, there hasn't been enough violence towards them, to instill doublethink in the majority.

    , @whorefinder
    @Anonymous Nephew

    About half the media is going to be writing articles like this over the next few months---all in attempts to blame other media folks while claiming that they themselves never were so dismissive of the concerns of the Trumpers and never were hateful towards them, that was the other reporters.

    Lexis is going to be a very useful tool whenever one of these comes out.

  122. @Jack D
    In the debates, they kept on pestering Trump about whether he would concede, but in the end it was Hillary who did not have the grace to come out and give a concession speech, even though she conceded to Trump on the phone. With leftists, it's all about projection.

    She left all her supporters out on the floor without even a thank you for their efforts. WTF was that about? Was she having a seizure? Weeping uncontrollably?

    Now today was truly the worst day of Hillary's life. Not only did she lose and take her party down with her and control of the Supreme Court to boot, but she is probably going to jail. The statute of limitations has not run and there is nothing that prevents the new AG (Chris Christie?) from taking a fresh look at her crimes.

    But still she should have been man enough to come out and congratulate the winner. I'm sure that they had some devious plan to come up with more votes in Detroit and contest the election Gore style when Podesta sent everyone home at 2:0o AM but at some point it became clear that Michigan alone wouldn't do it and that she couldn't steal the election in enough states to win. But at that point she should have come out as soon as she called Trump.

    Replies: @donut, @ChrisZ, @utu, @utu, @Anonym

    Well said, Jack. Worst day of her life, and 100 percent deserved.

    For 18 months all we heard from the culture–the condescending left and lapdog right–was how bad a mistake it would be to nominate Trump. But now it’s undeniable that the big mistake was on the left, rallying so obsequiously behind Clinton. She’s truly hated. And now she’s going to be hated by all those who sold their souls on her behalf, only to have her come out a loser against Trump.

    Watching the recriminations is going to be delicious.

    Nemesis is a powerful goddess, indeed.

    • Replies: @Thea
    @ChrisZ

    A lot of her people will be slithering up to the Oval Office asking for pardons.

    Wonder if he is reconsidering the Georgetown property yet?

  123. Enjoy those Leftist tears:

  124. @Gato de la Biblioteca
    @NOTA

    It makes me wonder whether some of the speculation about her health problems were right after all.

    Drunker than Hell is just as likely.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein

    Getting drunker than hell when you’re a 70-year-old pneumoniac with neurological problems is a good way to put yourself in the casket.

    • Replies: @black sea
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Hillary is holed up in a hyperbaric chamber with a box of tissues, a case of Chardonnay, and a long, sharp sewing needle which she is slowly but unceasingly inserting into a certain appendage of her Anthoney Weiner voodoo doll.

  125. @Steve Sailer
    @Kyle

    That's kind of how it's depicted in Galaxy Quest. Tim Allen / Captain Kirk lives on an ocean cliff top in Malibu while Alan Rickman / Mr. Spock has a dumpy apartment in North Hollywood.

    Replies: @Kyle

    Galaxy quest, what a great movie I think it’s on Netflix right now. It has a star studded cast, Sigourney weaver and the guy who played Monk were in it.

  126. Not populism. Citizenism?

    Or just People-ism?

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @Anon

    This is an important point. Do not allow the enemy to label this "populism." Call it democracy. Call it Americanism. Call it citizenism.

    A new movement, "Americanism," sweeps the country.

    , @Corvinus
    @Anon

    "Not populism. Citizenism? Or just People-ism?"

    No, Americanism.

    Replies: @Opinionator, @Antonymous

  127. Globalists — they’re either at your throat or at your feet: https://twitter.com/JunckerEU/status/796277748935299072

    Looks like Comrade Jagger needs to be investigated for right-deviationist levity: https://twitter.com/MickJagger/status/796282071580864512

  128. We need Trump or (hapless) Congress to rename a federal prison as Canada immediately!

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @Yngvar

    http://jpupdates.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/610sign-jpg.jpg

  129. @Anonymous Nephew
    I think Steve's blog will be looked at by historians of US political trends in a hundred years. Assuming any historians are left by then.

    Wonderful result, enjoy today, but tomorrow the struggle begins. Bit like Brexit really.

    The globalists are calling it 'The Death Of The West", when really it's the West trying to fight off infection. Long way yet from being a reconquista.

    Good piece in the Guardian by Thomas Frank.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/09/donald-trump-white-house-hillary-clinton-liberals

    "Democratic leaders made Hillary their candidate even though they knew about her closeness to the banks, her fondness for war, and her unique vulnerability on the trade issue – each of which Trump exploited to the fullest. They chose Hillary even though they knew about her private email server. They chose her even though some of those who studied the Clinton Foundation suspected it was a sketchy proposition.

    To try to put over such a nominee while screaming that the Republican is a rightwing monster is to court disbelief. If Trump is a fascist, as liberals often said, Democrats should have put in their strongest player to stop him, not a party hack they’d chosen because it was her turn. Choosing her indicated either that Democrats didn’t mean what they said about Trump’s riskiness, that their opportunism took precedence over the country’s well-being, or maybe both.

    Clinton’s supporters among the media didn’t help much, either. It always struck me as strange that such an unpopular candidate enjoyed such robust and unanimous endorsements from the editorial and opinion pages of the nation’s papers, but it was the quality of the media’s enthusiasm that really harmed her. With the same arguments repeated over and over, two or three times a day, with nuance and contrary views all deleted, the act of opening the newspaper started to feel like tuning in to a Cold War propaganda station...

    How did the journalists’ crusade fail? The fourth estate came together in an unprecedented professional consensus. They chose insulting the other side over trying to understand what motivated them. They transformed opinion writing into a vehicle for high moral boasting. What could possibly have gone wrong with such an approach? "
     

    Replies: @Thea, @neutral, @Steve Sailer, @Coemgen, @whorefinder

    He writes in the same spirit as the English pamphlet writers who ushered in Cromwell.

    There is still much affinity with Albion over here given the Brexit & Trumpening. The special relationship lives on.

  130. @Anon
    Not populism. Citizenism?

    Or just People-ism?

    Replies: @Opinionator, @Corvinus

    This is an important point. Do not allow the enemy to label this “populism.” Call it democracy. Call it Americanism. Call it citizenism.

    A new movement, “Americanism,” sweeps the country.

  131. @ChrisZ
    @Jack D

    Well said, Jack. Worst day of her life, and 100 percent deserved.

    For 18 months all we heard from the culture--the condescending left and lapdog right--was how bad a mistake it would be to nominate Trump. But now it's undeniable that the big mistake was on the left, rallying so obsequiously behind Clinton. She's truly hated. And now she's going to be hated by all those who sold their souls on her behalf, only to have her come out a loser against Trump.

    Watching the recriminations is going to be delicious.

    Nemesis is a powerful goddess, indeed.

    Replies: @Thea

    A lot of her people will be slithering up to the Oval Office asking for pardons.

    Wonder if he is reconsidering the Georgetown property yet?

  132. @celt darnell
    First Brexit, now Trump.

    I'm hoping Marine Le Pen makes it the triple.

    Well done, America. Well done.

    Replies: @Chrisnonymous

    I was hiking the other day and met a French couple in maybe their 60s or 70s. They described themselves as “political refugees” and are traveling the world to get out of France, which they said is a terrible place now. They were really, really angry. It will be interesting to see how things go in Europe in future elections.

    • Replies: @celt darnell
    @Chrisnonymous

    I actually think things are far more likely to go our way thanks to Trump.

    Brexit was great, but the UK could be isolated (I expected a Clinton presidency to put real pressure on London to reverse the peoples' verdict -- that is now off the table).

    The US is too damn big to be isolated. If Brexit emboldened people somewhat, I think Trump's victory will embolden them by a factor of one hundred. His victory was far less expected, far more explicit and because of the size of the US, more consequential.

    There's still some truth in the claim that where France goes, so goes Europe (the British are regarded, not entirely unfairly, as cantankerous, isolationist islanders).

    And let's not forget, the French Revolution followed events in the US -- even if very differently...

    So, bon chance, Marine.

  133. @Anonymous Nephew
    I think Steve's blog will be looked at by historians of US political trends in a hundred years. Assuming any historians are left by then.

    Wonderful result, enjoy today, but tomorrow the struggle begins. Bit like Brexit really.

    The globalists are calling it 'The Death Of The West", when really it's the West trying to fight off infection. Long way yet from being a reconquista.

    Good piece in the Guardian by Thomas Frank.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/09/donald-trump-white-house-hillary-clinton-liberals

    "Democratic leaders made Hillary their candidate even though they knew about her closeness to the banks, her fondness for war, and her unique vulnerability on the trade issue – each of which Trump exploited to the fullest. They chose Hillary even though they knew about her private email server. They chose her even though some of those who studied the Clinton Foundation suspected it was a sketchy proposition.

    To try to put over such a nominee while screaming that the Republican is a rightwing monster is to court disbelief. If Trump is a fascist, as liberals often said, Democrats should have put in their strongest player to stop him, not a party hack they’d chosen because it was her turn. Choosing her indicated either that Democrats didn’t mean what they said about Trump’s riskiness, that their opportunism took precedence over the country’s well-being, or maybe both.

    Clinton’s supporters among the media didn’t help much, either. It always struck me as strange that such an unpopular candidate enjoyed such robust and unanimous endorsements from the editorial and opinion pages of the nation’s papers, but it was the quality of the media’s enthusiasm that really harmed her. With the same arguments repeated over and over, two or three times a day, with nuance and contrary views all deleted, the act of opening the newspaper started to feel like tuning in to a Cold War propaganda station...

    How did the journalists’ crusade fail? The fourth estate came together in an unprecedented professional consensus. They chose insulting the other side over trying to understand what motivated them. They transformed opinion writing into a vehicle for high moral boasting. What could possibly have gone wrong with such an approach? "
     

    Replies: @Thea, @neutral, @Steve Sailer, @Coemgen, @whorefinder

    The globalists are calling it ‘The Death Of The West”

    This is what genuinely gets to me, there are some that define the West as liberal democracy, when the fact is that for most its history there was certainly no democracy or liberalism. That is bad enough, but there are those that define it as literal world government, which should normally be seen as a ridiculous concept, but this is the definition that is used by the editors of The Economist, the Davos clique and mainstream politicians.

    • Replies: @Anonymous Nephew
    @neutral

    "This is what genuinely gets to me, there are some that define the West as liberal democracy, when the fact is that for most its history there was certainly no democracy or liberalism"

    Yup. According to the UK elites "British values" are gay rights and feminism - when for all but the last 50 years of British history the former was illegal and the latter was a very tiny minority interest.

    They're hysterical at the FT - Alphaville editor and ex-Guardianista Paul Murphy is throwing the 'fascist' word around like a good-un. I'll have to find the post-pussygate column where he says 'that's it - Trump's gone" in the style of the famous Onion piece.

    http://www.theonion.com/article/will-be-end-trumps-campaign-says-increasingly-nerv-52002

  134. Not the most important thing, but I am willing to bet a lot of money that not one of the celebrities that threatened to move to Canada will do so. The reason being that Trump does not threaten them in any real way, other than hurt their gut mensch feelings.

    • Replies: @CK
    @neutral

    Honourable people live up to their promises.
    Madonna promised to reward verifiable Hillary voters with some ... consensual adult behaviour. She has already reneged.
    Whoppi promised to immigrate. If she has any honour she will.
    Miley Cyrus, Amy Schumer, Chelsea Handler, Lena Dunham, Samuel L. Jackson is moving to South Africa, Chloe Sevigny , Babs Streisand, Ruth Bader Ginsburg ( who if she follows through and emigrates to New Zealand will give Trump another Supreme Court opening to fill), Cher, George Lopez, Bryan Cranston ( the results broke bad for him ) Jonathan Leibowitz, Barry Diller, Spike Lee, Amber Rose ( recently on Dancing with the Disturbed), Raven-Symone.
    By my math, this is a net positive for the USA if these people show that they are indeed people of their word. Imagine an evenings TV without Sam Jackson wanting to know what's in your pocket. Imagine a daytime without the ladies who chat.

    Replies: @BB753

    , @the cruncher
    @neutral

    The Canadian immigration website crashed last night:

    http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/canadian-immigration-website-crashes-as-donald-trump-surges-w449468

    Can I say I hope it was muslims?

  135. A telling sign of the magnitude of tonight’s victory, and how it’s stunned and deflated the cult of elite condescension:

    There’s no “Google Doodle” on the Google homepage. Just their spare, no-frills logo.

    They’re speechless!

    • Replies: @ChrisZ
    @ChrisZ

    Man! First, Trump wins the presidency!

    Then, Steve runs my observation about Google being "speechless" in a victory round-up post!!

    What a day! And it's only 9 o'clock!

    Thanks again for an amazing run this year on iSteve.

  136. CNNs top headline is “how do I teach my kids.”

  137. For last year going through ups and downs I sometimes wondered what would it mean if Trump get elected. Would “they” let him be elected? And if “they” did what would they have for us in store? And I had this feeling that something really big was coming and for this “they” needed Trump. Man of providence or doomsday?

  138. I have a very serious question:

    When Trump packs up his things and flies in his jet from New York City to Washington to move into the White House, can he put Romney on the roof in a dog carrier?

    • Replies: @CK
    @Chrisnonymous

    He could but first he would have to buy a dog carrier as Donald does not have a dog.

  139. @Jack D
    In the debates, they kept on pestering Trump about whether he would concede, but in the end it was Hillary who did not have the grace to come out and give a concession speech, even though she conceded to Trump on the phone. With leftists, it's all about projection.

    She left all her supporters out on the floor without even a thank you for their efforts. WTF was that about? Was she having a seizure? Weeping uncontrollably?

    Now today was truly the worst day of Hillary's life. Not only did she lose and take her party down with her and control of the Supreme Court to boot, but she is probably going to jail. The statute of limitations has not run and there is nothing that prevents the new AG (Chris Christie?) from taking a fresh look at her crimes.

    But still she should have been man enough to come out and congratulate the winner. I'm sure that they had some devious plan to come up with more votes in Detroit and contest the election Gore style when Podesta sent everyone home at 2:0o AM but at some point it became clear that Michigan alone wouldn't do it and that she couldn't steal the election in enough states to win. But at that point she should have come out as soon as she called Trump.

    Replies: @donut, @ChrisZ, @utu, @utu, @Anonym

    I am pretty sure she knew she would not win or at least her handlers knew for at least 12 days.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @utu

    I don't think so. Clinton people were so inside their bubble that they really thought that she was going to win. The polls were all wrong because voters didn't want to admit to Juanita and Abdul the pollsters on the phone that they were voting for Trump.

  140. @Veracitor
    As early as Wednesday morning, op-ed pieces will start to appear blaming Hillary's loss on Obama. They'll say Obama should have reined-in FBI director Comey, or that he should have prevented Obamacare premiums from rising before the election... One thing or another, but there will be plenty of claims that Hillary was perfect and Obama sabotaged her somehow, probably because he didn't want to be eclipsed by a woman.

    Replies: @jimbojones

    Obama, Comey, Putin, Berney… So many blameworthy people out there! When at the end of the day Hillary was a bad candidate (zero enthusiasm) who ran a bad campaign.

    I suspect the Democrats may have had a winner in Bernie. But no.

  141. @Jack D
    In the debates, they kept on pestering Trump about whether he would concede, but in the end it was Hillary who did not have the grace to come out and give a concession speech, even though she conceded to Trump on the phone. With leftists, it's all about projection.

    She left all her supporters out on the floor without even a thank you for their efforts. WTF was that about? Was she having a seizure? Weeping uncontrollably?

    Now today was truly the worst day of Hillary's life. Not only did she lose and take her party down with her and control of the Supreme Court to boot, but she is probably going to jail. The statute of limitations has not run and there is nothing that prevents the new AG (Chris Christie?) from taking a fresh look at her crimes.

    But still she should have been man enough to come out and congratulate the winner. I'm sure that they had some devious plan to come up with more votes in Detroit and contest the election Gore style when Podesta sent everyone home at 2:0o AM but at some point it became clear that Michigan alone wouldn't do it and that she couldn't steal the election in enough states to win. But at that point she should have come out as soon as she called Trump.

    Replies: @donut, @ChrisZ, @utu, @utu, @Anonym

    • Replies: @Seth Largo
    @utu

    Trump supporters are very good looking.

  142. @broski
    5th dimensional chess, my friends.

    Replies: @SFG, @Olorin

    Honestly, I’d say the opposite. He flew by the seat of his pants and pulled out a victory. People are angry about PC and globalization, and he ran on that. Hillary doesn’t have much charisma, so she wasn’t able to stop him. He used his intuition to sense themes that were being ignored and ran with them.

    • Agree: Opinionator
    • Replies: @Clyde
    @SFG


    Honestly, I’d say the opposite. He flew by the seat of his pants and pulled out a victory. People are angry about PC and globalization, and he ran on that. Hillary doesn’t have much charisma, so she wasn’t able to stop him. He used his intuition to sense themes that were being ignored and ran with them.
     
    Trump should gone about Hillary's character and that she is temperamentally unfit to be President in numerous ways. Such as Benghazi and setting at least three MidEast nations on fire. Backing the extremist Muslim brotherhood in Egypt. Such as her being low-energy, same as Jeb.
    Saying directly that (actually) it is Hillary who is temperamentally unfit to be President, such setting up secret email servers and not trying to rescue Ambassador Chris Stevens when the three AM phone call came. That she slept through it.

    Replies: @SFG

    , @Coemgen
    @SFG

    Charisma:

    Donald Trump is a charismatic person.
    That is, people who know him like him.

    On the other hand, Hillary Clinton is a charismatic leader.
    That is, people who know her fear her.

    , @Perplexed
    @SFG

    Intuition plus he paid a staffer to listen to what callers were saying on talk radio. Market research.

  143. As Nobel-prize winning Bob Dylan called it:

  144. @Anonymous Nephew
    I think Steve's blog will be looked at by historians of US political trends in a hundred years. Assuming any historians are left by then.

    Wonderful result, enjoy today, but tomorrow the struggle begins. Bit like Brexit really.

    The globalists are calling it 'The Death Of The West", when really it's the West trying to fight off infection. Long way yet from being a reconquista.

    Good piece in the Guardian by Thomas Frank.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/09/donald-trump-white-house-hillary-clinton-liberals

    "Democratic leaders made Hillary their candidate even though they knew about her closeness to the banks, her fondness for war, and her unique vulnerability on the trade issue – each of which Trump exploited to the fullest. They chose Hillary even though they knew about her private email server. They chose her even though some of those who studied the Clinton Foundation suspected it was a sketchy proposition.

    To try to put over such a nominee while screaming that the Republican is a rightwing monster is to court disbelief. If Trump is a fascist, as liberals often said, Democrats should have put in their strongest player to stop him, not a party hack they’d chosen because it was her turn. Choosing her indicated either that Democrats didn’t mean what they said about Trump’s riskiness, that their opportunism took precedence over the country’s well-being, or maybe both.

    Clinton’s supporters among the media didn’t help much, either. It always struck me as strange that such an unpopular candidate enjoyed such robust and unanimous endorsements from the editorial and opinion pages of the nation’s papers, but it was the quality of the media’s enthusiasm that really harmed her. With the same arguments repeated over and over, two or three times a day, with nuance and contrary views all deleted, the act of opening the newspaper started to feel like tuning in to a Cold War propaganda station...

    How did the journalists’ crusade fail? The fourth estate came together in an unprecedented professional consensus. They chose insulting the other side over trying to understand what motivated them. They transformed opinion writing into a vehicle for high moral boasting. What could possibly have gone wrong with such an approach? "
     

    Replies: @Thea, @neutral, @Steve Sailer, @Coemgen, @whorefinder

    Maybe Biden just didn’t want it enough?

    • Replies: @Anonymous Nephew
    @Steve Sailer

    "Maybe Biden just didn’t want it enough?"

    I guess he had to want it more than Hillary, which is pretty tough to do. I think Sanders could and probably would have beaten Trump, but the donor class who control the DNC weren't having it.

    , @Anonymous
    @Steve Sailer

    http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/12/email-suggests-biden-aide-sabotaged-his-presidential-aspirations-to-help-hillary/

  145. @neutral
    Congrats to Trump, but on to a topic much dearer to me personally, can Le Pen win in France ? Which would be a much more significant event.

    Replies: @for-the-record

    Le Pen will almost certainly win the 1st round in April 2017 with around 30% of the vote (perhaps a bit higher). It all depends on who comes in 2nd, as in May there will be a “play off” between the top two vote getters. Most likely it will be the the “conservative” UMP (the party of Sarkozy and Alain Juppé, who is probably the front-runner in next month’s primary). In this case, as in 2002 when Le Pen’s father made it into the 2nd round against the conservative Chirac, the socialists will hold their nose and vote overwhelmingly for the UMP candidate (Chirac won the 2nd round with 82%). However, if the Socialists were to come in 2nd in the 1st round, a large number of UMP voters would back (albeit not publicly) Le Pen in the 2nd round, probably enough for her to win.

    So realistically the only way for her to win is to conjure a scenario where the Socialists come in 2nd in the 1st round (strategic voting, perhaps, but this would probably be difficult to organize).

    • Replies: @neutral
    @for-the-record

    I am aware of the raw political calculations as they stood 7 November. I wondering if there could be a political shift of the mindset of the average voter. That is that they defy what the media tells them to do and think, or if it will be business as usual which would mean Len will not win.

  146. Slate wins for funniest headlines.

  147. @Kyle a
    Tiny duck...tiny duck...tiny duck. We hardly knew you.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    I’m guessing TD is gonna go curl up back under Huffpost for another 4 years.

  148. In view of Gov. Jerry Brown’s Canoe Theory of Politics,
    I think it’s healthy for the Office of President to alternate
    between the Democrats and the Republicans. Jerry said,
    “You paddle a little on the left and little on the right, and
    you paddle a straight course.” Jerry Brown was once a
    Jesuit novice, then majored in the classics, so I’m sure
    he knows his Aristotle. The canoe theory is basically
    Aristotle’s prescription for the good life – in all things
    adhere to a happy medium

    • Replies: @Captain Tripps
    @Anon 2

    "In all things, moderation." Basic wisdom our ancient forefathers knew since before recorded history, yet progressives seem so intent on denying or not Noticing. Other good pieces of advice from olde times (that I've passed on to my kids):

    1. The Ten Commandments
    2. Try to practice the Seven Cardinal Virtues
    3. Do what you can to avoid the Seven Deadly Sins
    4. Practice the Golden Rule

  149. @NOTA
    Yeah, it seems very strange that Hillary didn't go out to talk to her people--either to concede or to say "hell no, we're fighting this out to the last recounted ballot and dimpled chad." It makes me wonder whether some of the speculation about her health problems were right after all.

    I guess we've resolved the question of whether Nate Silver was being dishonest in giving Trump a 1/3 chance of winning (As Sam Wang and Andrew Gellman implied he was doing to keep people interested). And perhaps also the question of whether Scott Adams was nuts for claiming such certainty that Trump would win.

    Replies: @Gato de la Biblioteca, @Je Suis Omar Mateen, @Clyde

    And perhaps also the question of whether Scott Adams was nuts for claiming such certainty that Trump would win.

    I held out hope and James Comey gave Trump a lasting boost when he said he had to examine new (Wiener) evidence. So I gave DJ Trump optimistic 50-50 odds on the basis that the pollsters were having a very difficult time getting accurate results. Big fake out on the Democrat/Media echo chamber, mutual back slapping society! That thinks they are better than the rest of America, we deplorables. Look at the shamelessly *Konformist* Hollywood actors and musicians who bleated non-stop for Hillary. Non-stop social signaling slobs and snobs! They intimidated any Trump supporting artists to come out and declare for Trump. A big eff you to them! Especially Bruce Springsteen, who I have not liked for 20 years anyway.

    Dems will be bitching about James Comey for years. Trump will keep him.

  150. @for-the-record
    @neutral

    Le Pen will almost certainly win the 1st round in April 2017 with around 30% of the vote (perhaps a bit higher). It all depends on who comes in 2nd, as in May there will be a "play off" between the top two vote getters. Most likely it will be the the "conservative" UMP (the party of Sarkozy and Alain Juppé, who is probably the front-runner in next month's primary). In this case, as in 2002 when Le Pen's father made it into the 2nd round against the conservative Chirac, the socialists will hold their nose and vote overwhelmingly for the UMP candidate (Chirac won the 2nd round with 82%). However, if the Socialists were to come in 2nd in the 1st round, a large number of UMP voters would back (albeit not publicly) Le Pen in the 2nd round, probably enough for her to win.

    So realistically the only way for her to win is to conjure a scenario where the Socialists come in 2nd in the 1st round (strategic voting, perhaps, but this would probably be difficult to organize).

    Replies: @neutral

    I am aware of the raw political calculations as they stood 7 November. I wondering if there could be a political shift of the mindset of the average voter. That is that they defy what the media tells them to do and think, or if it will be business as usual which would mean Len will not win.

  151. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Sheesh. I thought Slate was bad. Check out Huffpost.

    Ridiculous nonsense like a graph showing a drop in the Dow from~ 18.3k to 18k, and calling it Markets fall off a cliff.

    ‘Experts’ predicting gloom and doom with no end.

    I’m sure about the only gloom and doom which actually does come about, will be the efforts of disgruntled Dems trying to make a Trump presidency look bad.

  152. Eye of Sauron is spinning in his iron lung bedding tonight…

    He wired more than $45.000.000, and all he got was a lousy, Pyrrhic victory over 84 year old Arpaio .

    The roots of Arpaio’s downfall go back to 2010 when Arizona, a GOP bastion, passed a state bill known as SB 1070 which introduced sweeping restrictions on those suspected of lacking documentation – a proto-Trumpism.

    Latinos responded by building a coalition of veteran protestors, devout Christians and media-savvy millennials. It registered voters and started eroding Arpaio’s traditional landslide victories.

    “We’ve been building and building,” said Petra Falcon, who founded Promise Arizona, part of a 14-member umbrella group, One Arizona, which registered more than 150,000 voters for this election.

    The group mounted a statue of the Virgin of Guadalupe on a truck bedecked with US flags and a speaker which traversed Phoenix on Tuesday booming exhortations: “Vamos a votar.”

    Outside money has also poured into Arpaio’s race for re-election, as his detractors have sensed a chance to finally unseat him. The philanthropist and financier George Soros invested $2m into the Super Pac Maricopa Strong to pay for a series of TV attack ads on the sheriff.

    And then,on top of that, your Instagram account instantly switches to auto-defacing setting;

    https://www.instagram.com/p/BMhRcHUhn8J/

    • LOL: BB753
  153. @SFG
    @broski

    Honestly, I'd say the opposite. He flew by the seat of his pants and pulled out a victory. People are angry about PC and globalization, and he ran on that. Hillary doesn't have much charisma, so she wasn't able to stop him. He used his intuition to sense themes that were being ignored and ran with them.

    Replies: @Clyde, @Coemgen, @Perplexed

    Honestly, I’d say the opposite. He flew by the seat of his pants and pulled out a victory. People are angry about PC and globalization, and he ran on that. Hillary doesn’t have much charisma, so she wasn’t able to stop him. He used his intuition to sense themes that were being ignored and ran with them.

    Trump should gone about Hillary’s character and that she is temperamentally unfit to be President in numerous ways. Such as Benghazi and setting at least three MidEast nations on fire. Backing the extremist Muslim brotherhood in Egypt. Such as her being low-energy, same as Jeb.
    Saying directly that (actually) it is Hillary who is temperamentally unfit to be President, such setting up secret email servers and not trying to rescue Ambassador Chris Stevens when the three AM phone call came. That she slept through it.

    • Replies: @SFG
    @Clyde

    Not necessarily bad advice...but he won anyway, right?

  154. @Bill P
    I still can't believe it. I just hope he doesn't forget San Jose and what those people did to his supporters. Or any of the other arrogant cities, universities, corporations and other "progressive" institutions across the US. It's time for some justice.

    Replies: @Cletus Rothschild

    Turning the country around in a positive way is much better vindication than going on a vicious vendetta.

    • Agree: anonguy
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    @Cletus Rothschild

    Why can't we have both? Those who paid money to beat up Trump supporters need to face justice.

  155. @Anonymous
    Amazing speech by Trump.

    Democrats and Republicans are one people (and that's why they hate you, Donald. Elitists who want to rule want to divide the ruled).
    I will work for the people (and that's why they hate you, Donald)
    We'll get along with everybody, and make our economy the best in the world (and that's why they hate you, Donald)
    It is an honour for me, and I love this nation (and that's why they hate you, Donald)

    Trumps leaves, while You can't always get what you want by the Rolling Stones is playing.

    I really really wonder how much he will manage to accomplish.
    Maybe it depends not only on his will and capabilities, but also on us.
    Let's all do our best.

    Good night people.

    Replies: @utu, @CK

    He has 8 years. The inertia inherent in the government will not be changed quickly. He can execute some fiat governance just as every president since Truman has. But he has only 8 years and he cannot by himself reverse the white decline in reproduction. He can halt the immigration from the south and from MENA easily and within his executive authority … no need for the House or the Senate to get involved. Since it appears that the senate now requires 60 votes to agree to a piss break, he can not count on any help or much harm from them.

  156. On a lighter note – I’ve read that women were already getting plastic
    surgery to look like Ivanka Trump. This is now gonna go through the
    roof!

  157. This was the best election day since 1994 when the R’s won the House for the first time in 40 years and Mario Cuomo got beat seeking his fourth term as Governor by a nobody.

  158. @Jack D
    In the debates, they kept on pestering Trump about whether he would concede, but in the end it was Hillary who did not have the grace to come out and give a concession speech, even though she conceded to Trump on the phone. With leftists, it's all about projection.

    She left all her supporters out on the floor without even a thank you for their efforts. WTF was that about? Was she having a seizure? Weeping uncontrollably?

    Now today was truly the worst day of Hillary's life. Not only did she lose and take her party down with her and control of the Supreme Court to boot, but she is probably going to jail. The statute of limitations has not run and there is nothing that prevents the new AG (Chris Christie?) from taking a fresh look at her crimes.

    But still she should have been man enough to come out and congratulate the winner. I'm sure that they had some devious plan to come up with more votes in Detroit and contest the election Gore style when Podesta sent everyone home at 2:0o AM but at some point it became clear that Michigan alone wouldn't do it and that she couldn't steal the election in enough states to win. But at that point she should have come out as soon as she called Trump.

    Replies: @donut, @ChrisZ, @utu, @utu, @Anonym

    Live by corruption, die by corruption. She should have just enjoyed her $200M ill gotten proceeds of treason and corruption, but it wasn’t good enough.

  159. @neutral
    @Anonymous Nephew


    The globalists are calling it ‘The Death Of The West”
     
    This is what genuinely gets to me, there are some that define the West as liberal democracy, when the fact is that for most its history there was certainly no democracy or liberalism. That is bad enough, but there are those that define it as literal world government, which should normally be seen as a ridiculous concept, but this is the definition that is used by the editors of The Economist, the Davos clique and mainstream politicians.

    Replies: @Anonymous Nephew

    “This is what genuinely gets to me, there are some that define the West as liberal democracy, when the fact is that for most its history there was certainly no democracy or liberalism”

    Yup. According to the UK elites “British values” are gay rights and feminism – when for all but the last 50 years of British history the former was illegal and the latter was a very tiny minority interest.

    They’re hysterical at the FT – Alphaville editor and ex-Guardianista Paul Murphy is throwing the ‘fascist’ word around like a good-un. I’ll have to find the post-pussygate column where he says ‘that’s it – Trump’s gone” in the style of the famous Onion piece.

    http://www.theonion.com/article/will-be-end-trumps-campaign-says-increasingly-nerv-52002

  160. @Steve Sailer
    @Anonymous Nephew

    Maybe Biden just didn't want it enough?

    Replies: @Anonymous Nephew, @Anonymous

    “Maybe Biden just didn’t want it enough?”

    I guess he had to want it more than Hillary, which is pretty tough to do. I think Sanders could and probably would have beaten Trump, but the donor class who control the DNC weren’t having it.

  161. @neutral
    Not the most important thing, but I am willing to bet a lot of money that not one of the celebrities that threatened to move to Canada will do so. The reason being that Trump does not threaten them in any real way, other than hurt their gut mensch feelings.

    Replies: @CK, @the cruncher

    Honourable people live up to their promises.
    Madonna promised to reward verifiable Hillary voters with some … consensual adult behaviour. She has already reneged.
    Whoppi promised to immigrate. If she has any honour she will.
    Miley Cyrus, Amy Schumer, Chelsea Handler, Lena Dunham, Samuel L. Jackson is moving to South Africa, Chloe Sevigny , Babs Streisand, Ruth Bader Ginsburg ( who if she follows through and emigrates to New Zealand will give Trump another Supreme Court opening to fill), Cher, George Lopez, Bryan Cranston ( the results broke bad for him ) Jonathan Leibowitz, Barry Diller, Spike Lee, Amber Rose ( recently on Dancing with the Disturbed), Raven-Symone.
    By my math, this is a net positive for the USA if these people show that they are indeed people of their word. Imagine an evenings TV without Sam Jackson wanting to know what’s in your pocket. Imagine a daytime without the ladies who chat.

    • Replies: @BB753
    @CK

    Madonna has been such a yuuge disappointment! She isn't leaving the country but she's not giving free blow jobs for the needy Democrats either! She's no lady. Not that I would touch her with Tiny Duck's appendage...

  162. @Daniel H
    @people's republic

    I credit and thank Sailer, Unz, Vox Dei, Lion of the Blogosphere, Assange and others. They have done a magnificent job of challenging power that had resources of orders of magnitude greater than their own. Great job. And a hat tip to all of us nobody commentators who fed the embers these past two years.

    Replies: @Anonym, @Perplexed

    That’s a good list. Also Bannon and Breitbart, Coulter, Farage, Pat, Derb, Unz, Sessions, Miller, the commentariat here, and the reddit crew which is now so big it is an institution practically.

    It’s pretty amazing. Everyone pitched in. We were our own ground game! I just can’t believe it. Brexit, now Trump. We’ve bought ourselves some time. Love all of you genuine guys and gals (?) here. This has been a daily (hourly?) routine of my life, and it feels like I have made some small difference in a huge, stupendous result.

    I hope with this lead we can change some of the culture. Education. TV. Movies. Media. The Eurosphere.

  163. @Chrisnonymous
    I have a very serious question:

    When Trump packs up his things and flies in his jet from New York City to Washington to move into the White House, can he put Romney on the roof in a dog carrier?

    Replies: @CK

    He could but first he would have to buy a dog carrier as Donald does not have a dog.

  164. @Anonymous Nephew
    I think Steve's blog will be looked at by historians of US political trends in a hundred years. Assuming any historians are left by then.

    Wonderful result, enjoy today, but tomorrow the struggle begins. Bit like Brexit really.

    The globalists are calling it 'The Death Of The West", when really it's the West trying to fight off infection. Long way yet from being a reconquista.

    Good piece in the Guardian by Thomas Frank.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/09/donald-trump-white-house-hillary-clinton-liberals

    "Democratic leaders made Hillary their candidate even though they knew about her closeness to the banks, her fondness for war, and her unique vulnerability on the trade issue – each of which Trump exploited to the fullest. They chose Hillary even though they knew about her private email server. They chose her even though some of those who studied the Clinton Foundation suspected it was a sketchy proposition.

    To try to put over such a nominee while screaming that the Republican is a rightwing monster is to court disbelief. If Trump is a fascist, as liberals often said, Democrats should have put in their strongest player to stop him, not a party hack they’d chosen because it was her turn. Choosing her indicated either that Democrats didn’t mean what they said about Trump’s riskiness, that their opportunism took precedence over the country’s well-being, or maybe both.

    Clinton’s supporters among the media didn’t help much, either. It always struck me as strange that such an unpopular candidate enjoyed such robust and unanimous endorsements from the editorial and opinion pages of the nation’s papers, but it was the quality of the media’s enthusiasm that really harmed her. With the same arguments repeated over and over, two or three times a day, with nuance and contrary views all deleted, the act of opening the newspaper started to feel like tuning in to a Cold War propaganda station...

    How did the journalists’ crusade fail? The fourth estate came together in an unprecedented professional consensus. They chose insulting the other side over trying to understand what motivated them. They transformed opinion writing into a vehicle for high moral boasting. What could possibly have gone wrong with such an approach? "
     

    Replies: @Thea, @neutral, @Steve Sailer, @Coemgen, @whorefinder

    “How did the journalists’ propagandists’ crusade fail?”It appears propaganda needs to be supported with physical force. There hasn’t been enough firings and denunciations of deplorables and, there hasn’t been enough violence towards them, to instill doublethink in the majority.

  165. @SFG
    @broski

    Honestly, I'd say the opposite. He flew by the seat of his pants and pulled out a victory. People are angry about PC and globalization, and he ran on that. Hillary doesn't have much charisma, so she wasn't able to stop him. He used his intuition to sense themes that were being ignored and ran with them.

    Replies: @Clyde, @Coemgen, @Perplexed

    Charisma:

    Donald Trump is a charismatic person.
    That is, people who know him like him.

    On the other hand, Hillary Clinton is a charismatic leader.
    That is, people who know her fear her.

  166. @PhysicistDave
    @the cruncher

    the cruncher asked:


    Now will he prosecute and jail Hillary? I hope he does
     
    No, Obama will pardon her. And, that will make life easier for Trump. (Personally, I would prefer to see her prosecuted.)

    And her health issues are not a joke: although she called Trump to concede, she could not make it to the venue to thank her supporters. I think soon we will be pitying her rather than hating her.

    Dave Miller in Sacramento

    Replies: @donut, @Kylie, @midtown, @Jim Don Bob, @anonguy, @boogerbently

    Better that he pardon Hillary (or simply not prosecute) but go after the reams of corruption that exist within the federal bureaucracies.

    • Replies: @Steven WIlson
    @midtown

    I said virtually the same thing to a friend in an IM not two hours ago. Of course, I descended to the cliche of calling the bureaucracy a "target rich environment." Especially the IRS. I think gutting and skinning also appeared in my remarks.

  167. @Anon
    "P.S. I would say the second biggest loser of tonight is Nate Cardboard (formerly Silver), wouldn’t you say?"

    Change his name to Nate Lead.

    I find it shocking myself. He was Boy Wonder of 2012. But he was so wrong about Brazil World Cup. But okay, that's sports and there are too many variables.

    But how could he have been SO WRONG this time around?

    It's like a Haven Monahan version of stats. All made-up and fake.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

    Just shows how long you can coast on one lucky prediction dressed up as Science. Like William Goldman said about Hollywood, “Nobody knows anything”.

  168. @Steve Sailer
    @Anonymous Nephew

    Maybe Biden just didn't want it enough?

    Replies: @Anonymous Nephew, @Anonymous

  169. @Mr. Anon
    @jimbojones

    "Congratulations to all Trump supporters here! This victory means:

    - A resounding rejection of identity politics."

    No. It is actually a tacit victory for white identity politics.

    Replies: @Anonym, @Bill, @Corvinus

    Yes. Fox News drones were talking about this as the results came in. Britt Hume commented on the emergence of white racial consciousness (not in those terms). Some Democrat POS whined that whites were starting to act like minority groups vis a vis voting behavior. No Sher Shitlock — WTF did these idiots think was going to happen when they made whites a minority? The graphics showing the Ohio River Valley and Wisconsin’s rusty places changing from solid blue to solid red were awe-inspiring.

    Stupid Allegheny County, PA staying blue. Next time . . .

  170. @PhysicistDave
    @the cruncher

    the cruncher asked:


    Now will he prosecute and jail Hillary? I hope he does
     
    No, Obama will pardon her. And, that will make life easier for Trump. (Personally, I would prefer to see her prosecuted.)

    And her health issues are not a joke: although she called Trump to concede, she could not make it to the venue to thank her supporters. I think soon we will be pitying her rather than hating her.

    Dave Miller in Sacramento

    Replies: @donut, @Kylie, @midtown, @Jim Don Bob, @anonguy, @boogerbently

    It is hard to feel pity for someone who has been avaricious, corrupt, mendacious, and incompetent for over 30 years. Truly an evil b***h.

  171. @Kyle
    @Manfred Arcane

    Shatner didn't really see the other star track cast as "being on his level." Supposedly he was a dominant personality around the set. He said something about not even really knowing George takie, and that George takie never said a word to him outside of filming.
    Maybe Shatner just isn't friends with any of them and thinks they are untalented geeks.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Bill

    Yeah. Shatner is famously delusional. Doohan is famously delusional in more interesting ways, though.

  172. @the cruncher
    TRUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUMP!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Who would have believed it? What can it mean? Is God with us or something?

    Now will he prosecute and jail Hillary? I hope he does - I hope he goes in the teeth of decorum as he has so far and cleans house like he said he would.

    Replies: @Olorin, @PhysicistDave, @Stan Adams

    Now will he prosecute and jail Hillary?

    Nah. It’s not nice to beat up on sick old ladies.

    It’s 9 a.m. as I write this … Hillary is due to speak in 90 minutes. Supposedly she was too distraught to leave her hotel room.

    God, I would have loved to have been a fly in that room. I’ll bet she was cursing like a sailor.

  173. @utu
    @Jack D

    I am pretty sure she knew she would not win or at least her handlers knew for at least 12 days.

    Replies: @Jack D

    I don’t think so. Clinton people were so inside their bubble that they really thought that she was going to win. The polls were all wrong because voters didn’t want to admit to Juanita and Abdul the pollsters on the phone that they were voting for Trump.

  174. @Yngvar
    We need Trump or (hapless) Congress to rename a federal prison as Canada immediately!

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

  175. I hope we don’t regret our choice.
    At any rate this deals a death blow to dynastic politics of the Bush/Clinton variety.
    The first law to be passed should forbid any family members of a President from coming anywhere near the Executive Branch.
    So we don’t see Trump Jr., or Michelle O., vying for the office.
    This is true republicanism.

  176. But, but, but, …………………… how could this be? How could she lose? Even Katy Perry supported her!

  177. The media had recreated reality in it’s own image, and it was a cruel joke to play on all of those crying Democrats.

  178. I’d like to understand why the polls were off. One possibility is the shy trump voter effect, but another is that the pollsters’ model of who would go to the polls was badly off. Still another possibility is that for some reason, Trump voters were less willing to answer surveys. You could imagine the explanation bing widespread vote fraud, though I think we’d have heard a lot about it if it had happened. What else?

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @NOTA

    Perhaps pollsters tend to favor Democrats (as journalists do), and consequently skew thier product accordingly (as journalists do).

    , @The most deplorable one
    @NOTA

    They were off because the MSM pollsters were simply lying to try to achieve their preferred outcome:

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/11/09/an-important-post-election-message-about-media-polling/#more-124342

    Dude, you need to read Unz's American Pravda series.

    , @Rumormonger
    @NOTA

    The simple explanation is that polling orgs are part of the MSM and employ the same kind of dishonest/delusional people that fill newsrooms and studios. Both are in the business of manufacturing facts rather than reporting them.

    Replies: @utu

    , @Perplexed
    @NOTA

    Primarily, cheating. Bill Mitchell on Twitter deconstructed their dishonesty all along, from small sample sizes to blatant reweighting of the categories. If you can see the composition of the poll sample, you can see how the trick was done. Thanks to him, I ignored all the polls.

    , @res
    @NOTA

    Evidence for the theory that the poll weighting was an important issue (see the Ernie Tedeschi link): http://election.princeton.edu/2016/10/19/the-virtues-of-the-l-a-times-poll/

    I also think the shy Trump voter effect mattered.

    But overall, I think the biggest contributor was the pollsters attempting to influence reality. I think the best evidence for that was the vehemence of the attacks on Nate Silver when he gave Trump a 35% chance close to the election. From this POV the poll weighting was just a justification for their desired conclusion.

    I'm really curious if this election will change polling practices in the future. Was this the biggest presidential poll miss since Dewey beat Truman?

    , @Nick
    @NOTA

    A woman I met last week used to own a polling company. Her theory (before the election): while a poll of "likely voters" is usually more useful than a poll of "registered voters," this year would be the exception. Disaffected white people who were non-voters in 2008 and 2012 would vote for Trump this year (she said) and they by definition were categorized as not being likely voters - and so were not counted by the pollsters.

    Replies: @Bill Jones

  179. Finally I can delete everyone in my “Commenters to Ignore” cookie!
    Sorry guys, it just got too leedle much of you this last month.

  180. @Je Suis Omar Mateen
    @NOTA

    "Yeah, it seems very strange that Hillary didn’t go out to talk to her people–either to concede or to say “hell no, we’re fighting this out to the last recounted ballot and dimpled chad.” It makes me wonder whether some of the speculation about her health problems were right after all."

    Great observation. Yes, it's passing strange that illary did not concede in public and at a podium the way Republicucks Juan McLoser and Matt Fraudney did in years past. I think we can presume illary was at least halfway through a magnum of white wine and couldn't conjoin a coherent phrase in congratulations of The Glorious Trumpening.

    God bless President Donald Trump!

    Replies: @BB753

    She’s very ill. Probably on one of those “down times” from her neurological disease.
    I not only predicted Trump would win, I also predicted Hillary would be dead within a year. Wanna bet?

  181. Of course the markets react badly, The Banksters bought and paid for political whore just got beaten.

  182. I’d love to see what Google had prepared for the Hillary victory.

  183. @ChrisZ
    A telling sign of the magnitude of tonight's victory, and how it's stunned and deflated the cult of elite condescension:

    There's no "Google Doodle" on the Google homepage. Just their spare, no-frills logo.

    They're speechless!

    Replies: @ChrisZ

    Man! First, Trump wins the presidency!

    Then, Steve runs my observation about Google being “speechless” in a victory round-up post!!

    What a day! And it’s only 9 o’clock!

    Thanks again for an amazing run this year on iSteve.

  184. @Anonymous Nephew
    I think Steve's blog will be looked at by historians of US political trends in a hundred years. Assuming any historians are left by then.

    Wonderful result, enjoy today, but tomorrow the struggle begins. Bit like Brexit really.

    The globalists are calling it 'The Death Of The West", when really it's the West trying to fight off infection. Long way yet from being a reconquista.

    Good piece in the Guardian by Thomas Frank.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/09/donald-trump-white-house-hillary-clinton-liberals

    "Democratic leaders made Hillary their candidate even though they knew about her closeness to the banks, her fondness for war, and her unique vulnerability on the trade issue – each of which Trump exploited to the fullest. They chose Hillary even though they knew about her private email server. They chose her even though some of those who studied the Clinton Foundation suspected it was a sketchy proposition.

    To try to put over such a nominee while screaming that the Republican is a rightwing monster is to court disbelief. If Trump is a fascist, as liberals often said, Democrats should have put in their strongest player to stop him, not a party hack they’d chosen because it was her turn. Choosing her indicated either that Democrats didn’t mean what they said about Trump’s riskiness, that their opportunism took precedence over the country’s well-being, or maybe both.

    Clinton’s supporters among the media didn’t help much, either. It always struck me as strange that such an unpopular candidate enjoyed such robust and unanimous endorsements from the editorial and opinion pages of the nation’s papers, but it was the quality of the media’s enthusiasm that really harmed her. With the same arguments repeated over and over, two or three times a day, with nuance and contrary views all deleted, the act of opening the newspaper started to feel like tuning in to a Cold War propaganda station...

    How did the journalists’ crusade fail? The fourth estate came together in an unprecedented professional consensus. They chose insulting the other side over trying to understand what motivated them. They transformed opinion writing into a vehicle for high moral boasting. What could possibly have gone wrong with such an approach? "
     

    Replies: @Thea, @neutral, @Steve Sailer, @Coemgen, @whorefinder

    About half the media is going to be writing articles like this over the next few months—all in attempts to blame other media folks while claiming that they themselves never were so dismissive of the concerns of the Trumpers and never were hateful towards them, that was the other reporters.

    Lexis is going to be a very useful tool whenever one of these comes out.

  185. @NOTA
    I'd like to understand why the polls were off. One possibility is the shy trump voter effect, but another is that the pollsters' model of who would go to the polls was badly off. Still another possibility is that for some reason, Trump voters were less willing to answer surveys. You could imagine the explanation bing widespread vote fraud, though I think we'd have heard a lot about it if it had happened. What else?

    Replies: @Mr. Anon, @The most deplorable one, @Rumormonger, @Perplexed, @res, @Nick

    Perhaps pollsters tend to favor Democrats (as journalists do), and consequently skew thier product accordingly (as journalists do).

  186. @Chrisnonymous
    @celt darnell

    I was hiking the other day and met a French couple in maybe their 60s or 70s. They described themselves as "political refugees" and are traveling the world to get out of France, which they said is a terrible place now. They were really, really angry. It will be interesting to see how things go in Europe in future elections.

    Replies: @celt darnell

    I actually think things are far more likely to go our way thanks to Trump.

    Brexit was great, but the UK could be isolated (I expected a Clinton presidency to put real pressure on London to reverse the peoples’ verdict — that is now off the table).

    The US is too damn big to be isolated. If Brexit emboldened people somewhat, I think Trump’s victory will embolden them by a factor of one hundred. His victory was far less expected, far more explicit and because of the size of the US, more consequential.

    There’s still some truth in the claim that where France goes, so goes Europe (the British are regarded, not entirely unfairly, as cantankerous, isolationist islanders).

    And let’s not forget, the French Revolution followed events in the US — even if very differently…

    So, bon chance, Marine.

  187. @Daniel H
    @people's republic

    I credit and thank Sailer, Unz, Vox Dei, Lion of the Blogosphere, Assange and others. They have done a magnificent job of challenging power that had resources of orders of magnitude greater than their own. Great job. And a hat tip to all of us nobody commentators who fed the embers these past two years.

    Replies: @Anonym, @Perplexed

    A lot of credit is due to Sundance et al. at The Conservative Treehouse—superb analysis and forethought, and shoring up the troops—and to the centipedes at Reddit’s The Donald for Pepe and for digging into the WikiLeaks email dumps. Also Bill Mitchell on Twitter for calming jitters about the polling, and admin at Hillaryis44 for being so damn smart and honest.

    • Replies: @Thea
    @Perplexed

    And Drudge. He was a big help too

  188. @NOTA
    I'd like to understand why the polls were off. One possibility is the shy trump voter effect, but another is that the pollsters' model of who would go to the polls was badly off. Still another possibility is that for some reason, Trump voters were less willing to answer surveys. You could imagine the explanation bing widespread vote fraud, though I think we'd have heard a lot about it if it had happened. What else?

    Replies: @Mr. Anon, @The most deplorable one, @Rumormonger, @Perplexed, @res, @Nick

    They were off because the MSM pollsters were simply lying to try to achieve their preferred outcome:

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/11/09/an-important-post-election-message-about-media-polling/#more-124342

    Dude, you need to read Unz’s American Pravda series.

  189. @countenance
    Some British books already paid off bets a few weeks ago based on Hillary winning.

    Replies: @Unladen Swallow

    Oops! Good luck getting that money back.

  190. @SFG
    @broski

    Honestly, I'd say the opposite. He flew by the seat of his pants and pulled out a victory. People are angry about PC and globalization, and he ran on that. Hillary doesn't have much charisma, so she wasn't able to stop him. He used his intuition to sense themes that were being ignored and ran with them.

    Replies: @Clyde, @Coemgen, @Perplexed

    Intuition plus he paid a staffer to listen to what callers were saying on talk radio. Market research.

  191. @NOTA
    I'd like to understand why the polls were off. One possibility is the shy trump voter effect, but another is that the pollsters' model of who would go to the polls was badly off. Still another possibility is that for some reason, Trump voters were less willing to answer surveys. You could imagine the explanation bing widespread vote fraud, though I think we'd have heard a lot about it if it had happened. What else?

    Replies: @Mr. Anon, @The most deplorable one, @Rumormonger, @Perplexed, @res, @Nick

    The simple explanation is that polling orgs are part of the MSM and employ the same kind of dishonest/delusional people that fill newsrooms and studios. Both are in the business of manufacturing facts rather than reporting them.

    • Replies: @utu
    @Rumormonger

    " Both are in the business of manufacturing facts rather than reporting them." - Exactly!

  192. @NOTA
    I'd like to understand why the polls were off. One possibility is the shy trump voter effect, but another is that the pollsters' model of who would go to the polls was badly off. Still another possibility is that for some reason, Trump voters were less willing to answer surveys. You could imagine the explanation bing widespread vote fraud, though I think we'd have heard a lot about it if it had happened. What else?

    Replies: @Mr. Anon, @The most deplorable one, @Rumormonger, @Perplexed, @res, @Nick

    Primarily, cheating. Bill Mitchell on Twitter deconstructed their dishonesty all along, from small sample sizes to blatant reweighting of the categories. If you can see the composition of the poll sample, you can see how the trick was done. Thanks to him, I ignored all the polls.

  193. Paul Ryan must be got rid off.

    This. It’s so delicious that Trump won after Ryan refused to help. Perfect. Now Trump can organize to get this open-borders fanatic replaced as Speaker.

    Trump just spiked the severed heads of his enemies in the end zone. Big Media, the globalists, the Democrat Party, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, the RCP Average and its constituency, Nate Silver, Republicans Against Trump, the neocons, Paul Ryan and John McCain, etc.

    He could tamp down any talk of a rebellion against House Speaker Paul Ryan — and give Ryan a green light to move ahead with his agenda.

    Why would he do that? Ryan picked the wrong team. Now he can either come to Jesus, or fall under the Trump Train.

    It was really great to watch Trump lay bare the limitations of Big Media, the Democrat Machine, globalist money, and the GOPe.

    Thank you for that, president Trump.

    In view of Gov. Jerry Brown’s Canoe Theory of Politics,
    I think it’s healthy for the Office of President to alternate
    between the Democrats and the Republicans. Jerry said,
    “You paddle a little on the left and little on the right, and
    you paddle a straight course.” Jerry Brown was once a
    Jesuit novice, then majored in the classics, so I’m sure
    he knows his Aristotle. The canoe theory is basically
    Aristotle’s prescription for the good life – in all things
    adhere to a happy medium

    But when the previous jackass breaks with tradition and paddles a lot to the left, instead of a little, then balance dictates it’s time to paddle a lot to the right.

    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    @Svigor

    Svigor,

    At about 3 AM this morning, a couple of NPR commentators observed/predicted that Paul Ryan's future was "toast"!

    This was one of the few times in my life that I ever agreed with any NPR comments/predictions!!!!

  194. @NOTA
    I'd like to understand why the polls were off. One possibility is the shy trump voter effect, but another is that the pollsters' model of who would go to the polls was badly off. Still another possibility is that for some reason, Trump voters were less willing to answer surveys. You could imagine the explanation bing widespread vote fraud, though I think we'd have heard a lot about it if it had happened. What else?

    Replies: @Mr. Anon, @The most deplorable one, @Rumormonger, @Perplexed, @res, @Nick

    Evidence for the theory that the poll weighting was an important issue (see the Ernie Tedeschi link): http://election.princeton.edu/2016/10/19/the-virtues-of-the-l-a-times-poll/

    I also think the shy Trump voter effect mattered.

    But overall, I think the biggest contributor was the pollsters attempting to influence reality. I think the best evidence for that was the vehemence of the attacks on Nate Silver when he gave Trump a 35% chance close to the election. From this POV the poll weighting was just a justification for their desired conclusion.

    I’m really curious if this election will change polling practices in the future. Was this the biggest presidential poll miss since Dewey beat Truman?

  195. @Mr. Anon
    @jimbojones

    "Congratulations to all Trump supporters here! This victory means:

    - A resounding rejection of identity politics."

    No. It is actually a tacit victory for white identity politics.

    Replies: @Anonym, @Bill, @Corvinus

    “No. It is actually a tacit victory for white identity politics.”

    Um, no. Hillary underestimated the support of a key demographic in her base–the working class and the union class. These two groups had supported Bernie in the primaries. She thought they would support her come the general election. They chose the populist who is deemed the savior to their economic woes from elites, who ironically Trump is part of.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Corvinus


    "Hillary underestimated the support of a key demographic in her base–the working class and the union class."
     
    Those aren't her demographic. She repudiated them when she embraced Black Lives Matter, police murderers' families, the War on (White) Men, etc.

    She did not "underestimate", she betrayed and murdered that demographic. They just returned the favor. Hillary is now History.

    A more intelligent elite would draw a lesson from this. Contrary to what you've been told, our elite is remarkably stupid. They will probably have to be put down. For their own safety.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    , @Mr. Anon
    @Corvinus

    "Um, no. Hillary underestimated the support of a key demographic in her base–the working class and the union class. These two groups had supported Bernie in the primaries. She thought they would support her come the general election. They chose the populist who is deemed the savior to their economic woes from elites, who ironically Trump is part of.

    You are - unsurprisingly - completely wrong. The subtext of whites finally beginning to stick up for thier own interests was not hard to detect in the last 20 months, even if it went largely unsaid. As to Trump being an elite. So what? Everybody in government is an elite, or becomes one. The revelant question is whether that elite has a sense of noblesse oblige, which Trump does, and Hillary does not.

    Replies: @Corvinus

  196. @Intelligent Dasein
    @Gato de la Biblioteca

    Getting drunker than hell when you're a 70-year-old pneumoniac with neurological problems is a good way to put yourself in the casket.

    Replies: @black sea

    Hillary is holed up in a hyperbaric chamber with a box of tissues, a case of Chardonnay, and a long, sharp sewing needle which she is slowly but unceasingly inserting into a certain appendage of her Anthoney Weiner voodoo doll.

  197. This has also been a repudiation of GOPe/Bush Republican Party. Not only did Trump whup them all (Bush included of course) in the primaries, he also racked up far more electoral votes than Bush did.

  198. @Anon
    Not populism. Citizenism?

    Or just People-ism?

    Replies: @Opinionator, @Corvinus

    “Not populism. Citizenism? Or just People-ism?”

    No, Americanism.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @Corvinus

    See my earlier post.

    , @Antonymous
    @Corvinus

    "Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo." --DJT

    And thank God for that.

    Replies: @Corvinus

  199. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “By the way, perhaps Trump’s Treasury Secretary could announce that Andy Jackson is staying on the $20 and Harriet Tubman will replace Hamilton on the $10?”

    Yes!

    Google speechless. Ha! If only Trump were some person of color no one’s ever heard of.

    Maybe Trump can undo Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing. That’s a total thorn in my side and makes me despair for my neighborhood and community.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Anonymous


    "Maybe Trump can undo Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing."
     
    Orrrrr ... use it against the Left. Give them some of that diversity they claim to love. AFFH in Chappaqua, Palo Alto, Austin, Madison WI, Marin County, every deep blue lily white county needs AFFH.

    Government-sponsored red pilling FTW! Yes, Podesta, let us make demographics be destiny! Bwahahahahha!
    , @Mr. Anon
    @Anonymous

    "“By the way, perhaps Trump’s Treasury Secretary could announce that Andy Jackson is staying on the $20 and Harriet Tubman will replace Hamilton on the $10?”"

    Instead of Harriet Tubman, make it Booker T. Washington.

  200. Um, no. Hillary underestimated the support of a key demographic in her base–the working class and the union class. These two groups had supported Bernie in the primaries. She thought they would support her come the general election. They chose the populist who is deemed the savior to their economic woes from elites, who ironically Trump is part of.

    And whose interests Trump “ironically” steamrolled to win the presidency. You’d think leftists could get behind the idea that a man isn’t in control of the circumstances of his birth, but only his behavior.

  201. @Kylie
    @PhysicistDave

    "And her health issues are not a joke: although she called Trump to concede, she could not make it to the venue to thank her supporters."

    That was yet another display of ill-will, not ill health.

    "I think soon we will be pitying her rather than hating her."

    When hell freezes over is soon?

    Replies: @Bill Jones

    She’ll be dead within a twelvemonth.

    The question is, How will we tell?

  202. @Anon 2
    In view of Gov. Jerry Brown's Canoe Theory of Politics,
    I think it's healthy for the Office of President to alternate
    between the Democrats and the Republicans. Jerry said,
    "You paddle a little on the left and little on the right, and
    you paddle a straight course." Jerry Brown was once a
    Jesuit novice, then majored in the classics, so I'm sure
    he knows his Aristotle. The canoe theory is basically
    Aristotle's prescription for the good life - in all things
    adhere to a happy medium

    Replies: @Captain Tripps

    “In all things, moderation.” Basic wisdom our ancient forefathers knew since before recorded history, yet progressives seem so intent on denying or not Noticing. Other good pieces of advice from olde times (that I’ve passed on to my kids):

    1. The Ten Commandments
    2. Try to practice the Seven Cardinal Virtues
    3. Do what you can to avoid the Seven Deadly Sins
    4. Practice the Golden Rule

  203. @NOTA
    I'd like to understand why the polls were off. One possibility is the shy trump voter effect, but another is that the pollsters' model of who would go to the polls was badly off. Still another possibility is that for some reason, Trump voters were less willing to answer surveys. You could imagine the explanation bing widespread vote fraud, though I think we'd have heard a lot about it if it had happened. What else?

    Replies: @Mr. Anon, @The most deplorable one, @Rumormonger, @Perplexed, @res, @Nick

    A woman I met last week used to own a polling company. Her theory (before the election): while a poll of “likely voters” is usually more useful than a poll of “registered voters,” this year would be the exception. Disaffected white people who were non-voters in 2008 and 2012 would vote for Trump this year (she said) and they by definition were categorized as not being likely voters – and so were not counted by the pollsters.

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    @Nick

    Perhaps the banks could recoup some of their losses by taking out a dead peasant life insurance policy on Clinton. One years premium should do it.

  204. @neutral
    Not the most important thing, but I am willing to bet a lot of money that not one of the celebrities that threatened to move to Canada will do so. The reason being that Trump does not threaten them in any real way, other than hurt their gut mensch feelings.

    Replies: @CK, @the cruncher

    The Canadian immigration website crashed last night:

    http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/canadian-immigration-website-crashes-as-donald-trump-surges-w449468

    Can I say I hope it was muslims?

  205. “Not populism. Citizenism? Or just People-ism?”

    No, Americanism.

    No, Nationalism. A very clear victory for Nationalism over globalism.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @Svigor

    Americanism is nationalism for Americans

    Replies: @Corvinus

  206. We could even say it was a victory for (White) Nationalism. Yellows (65%), browns (65%), blacks (88%), and “other” (56%) all chose Hillary Clinton.

  207. @Anon
    This has to be the greatest David vs Goliath story in US history.

    I think only one newspaper endorsed Trump. All others were for Hillary or someone else.
    Even conservative papers rebuked Trump.

    Hillary raised over a billion dollars. Billionaires favored her by 20 to 1.

    All of MSM was openly biased in favor of her. Even Fox sat on the fence except for Hannity.

    The whole world, except for Russia, was for Hillary.

    Just about everyone that mattered in government, media, academia, and major institutions was for Hillary.

    So, how did this happen?

    Historians will write about this for many many yrs to come.

    It will be studied and re-studied endlessly.
    Not just Trump but how the whole system rigged everything against him and lost.

    Or, maybe historians and 'social scientists' will just be lazy and say 'racists done it'.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    “Or, maybe historians and ‘social scientists’ will just be lazy and say ‘racists done it’.”

    This.

  208. If Google had a sense of humor, they could’ve at least had their logo adorned in an orange wig.

  209. @silviosilver
    Ah, the exhilaration of victory, how sweet it is.

    Take a bow, Mr. Sailer and the Unz crew. Savor The Night of the Long Faces.

    Bliss it is in these days to be alive, but to be a Trump supporter is very heaven itself!

    Replies: @academic gossip

    Savor The Night of the Long Faces.

    Nice meme. These days in history:

    Nov. 9 — Night of Broken Glass
    Nov. 8 — Night of Unbroken Glass Ceiling
    Nov. 7 — “Night on Broken Glass” libel damages award

    HRC conceded on the day the Berlin Wall was opened, with her supporters (at the Javits center) literally standing under a glass ceiling.

    • Agree: SPMoore8
  210. It was a bizarre sight for me last night in San Mateo, across the street from the headquarters of a famous mutual fund operation, in a diner-style “American” restaurant full of white customers, no blacks, no asians. Election returns on the big screens and long, anguished faces all around.

  211. Hopefully he will stick to his rhetoric and have a more Buchananite foreign policy, renegotiate trade deals, and end the contempt that has been shown for decades to the working class in this country.

  212. I’m pretty sure that Bill Clinton voted for DJT in the privacy of his voting booth.

    Golf beats marriage.

  213. No war with Russia for the next 4 years; the Neo-cons will be crushed….The Orange One and Putin can negotiate what needs to be done in Syria.

  214. @Yowza
    As I said before, it just didn't make sense that Trump's rallies were huge turn-away crowds, while Hillary's were consistently small, and sparse.

    It's kind of like the stock market. When other indicators are haywire, follow the real volume. You can fake pricing, for a while, but you can never fake volume.

    Good thing to remember.

    Replies: @utu, @melendwyr

    Trump lost the popular vote. What he has now is hardly a mandate. I’m hoping he’ll try the things he said he wanted to, and that some of them will get through.

    But this is a minor victory in a very major war. Examine the disposition of forces. There’s a lot of uphill pushing yet to be done.

    • Replies: @Peripatetic commenter
    @melendwyr

    No doubt we will here lots of whining again about the electoral college from the poor losers.

    Perhaps they will be willing to get rid of winner-takes-all states around EC votes and move to a district-based approach for all states, but I doubt it.

    , @Almost Missouri
    @melendwyr

    Actually, last night Trump was up slightly in pop vote, but over the coming days the blue machines will manufacture a few hundred thousand "found" votes so that they can make exactly the claim you are making: "no mandate".

    Of course, Bill Clinton never managed to get even to Trump's percentage of the popular vote and we all remember the media constantly said he had "no mandate".

    ... oh wait, that didn't happen!

    Replies: @melendwyr

    , @MarkinPNW
    @melendwyr

    As I posted in the other thread, he especially lost the votes of veterans; you know, the WW1 vets, the Spanish-American War vets, the Civil War vets, etc.

  215. @Rumormonger
    @NOTA

    The simple explanation is that polling orgs are part of the MSM and employ the same kind of dishonest/delusional people that fill newsrooms and studios. Both are in the business of manufacturing facts rather than reporting them.

    Replies: @utu

    ” Both are in the business of manufacturing facts rather than reporting them.” – Exactly!

  216. I suppose Clinton has the goods on Hussein, so he’ll probably pardon her. But it would be great if she didn’t, and he doesn’t.

    Thing is, Clinton’s corruption is so widespread, it’ll be hard, if not impossible, for Hussein to immunize her via pardon.

    Trump lost the popular vote. What he has now is hardly a mandate. I’m hoping he’ll try the things he said he wanted to, and that some of them will get through.

    But this is a minor victory in a very major war. Examine the disposition of forces. There’s a lot of uphill pushing yet to be done.

    Please, like the Dems didn’t cheat to get the PV win. Their cheating was easily more than her margin.

    Trump won the popular vote, too.

    Not that it really matters. We use the electoral system for good reason, precisely to limit the effect of vote fraud.

  217. @utu
    @Anonymous

    "Maybe it depends not only on his will and capabilities, but also on us." - He/we must start the movement. W/o the movement he won't accomplish anything. American presidents rarely went against establishment and the Deep Sate by turning to people for support. Some of them missed great opportunities because of that. If G.H. Bush had balls to turn to people when he had a conflict with Izaak Shamir he would have gotten the 2nd term and we would have saved money by not funding Israel in perpetuity. He was getting lots of letters urging him to do it and he was tempted but in the end he chickened out.

    The people who were from the beginning with Trump and for Trump must keep pressure on him and should formulate a plan. What we really want? W/o this pressure Paul Ryans and his ilk will insulate Trump from us and he will be powerless. One has to keep a good eye on those now who will be flocking to Trump.

    A "Night of Long Knives" must be carried out to get rid GOP of Paul Ryans, McCains, and neocons.

    Replies: @Zach

    Um…calling it a “Night of the Long Knives” probably won’t get anything done. Better to treat Ryan like Stalin treated Bukarin and call it a Soviet style purge. Nancy Pelosi and Co would accept that terminology.

  218. If anyone here has a line to Trump, or any of his advisors, I have a very serious suggestion for him. It looks like Joe Arpaio lost his election last night. I think he’d make an excellent choice for the head of ICE, or maybe even Attorney General.

    A less serious suggestion, but one that would be much more fun:
    Sarah Palin for Press Secretary. It comes with no real power, but I think she’d have a blast doing it. And the reaction of the press would bring tears to my eyes.

    • Replies: @mobi
    @SIMPLE Pseudonymic Handle


    It looks like Joe Arpaio lost his election last night. I think he’d make an excellent choice for the head of ICE, or maybe even Attorney General.
     
    At 84, those two might be a bit of a leap from career sheriff, though.

    How about a 'Southern Wall Task Force', with Joe Arpaio as honorary Southern Wall Czar?

    Might be nearer to his heart in fact, and more satisfying than wrestling with a monster like ICE.
  219. I guess the Hitler comparisons weren’t entirely wrong: Big Media = Maginot Line.

    Like others, I hope Trump does Joe Arpaio a solid.

    Turning the country around in a positive way is much better vindication than going on a vicious vendetta.

    We can’t have both? 🙁

    Personally, I think draining the swamp will look like both. He’s going to have to play hardball (e.g., refusing to sign paychecks) to clean up some of these federal institutions.

    Perhaps pollsters tend to favor Democrats (as journalists do), and consequently skew thier product accordingly (as journalists do).

    I think their thinking went something like this:

    1. This is the age of Democrat inevitability. Demography is destiny. Big Media, oligarch class, political establishment (i.e., our customers) want to help Hillary more than they want honest augury.
    2. Sure, we should probably re-evaluate our models, that have cankles performing like Hussein.
    3. But I’ll be damned if I’m gonna do that for Trump.
    4. The media will cover us if Trump wins.
    5. EVERYBODY is getting it wrong, so the blame will be spread around (hence the foaming-at-the-mouth at Nate “least wrong in 2016” Silver).

    A woman I met last week used to own a polling company. Her theory (before the election): while a poll of “likely voters” is usually more useful than a poll of “registered voters,” this year would be the exception. Disaffected white people who were non-voters in 2008 and 2012 would vote for Trump this year (she said) and they by definition were categorized as not being likely voters – and so were not counted by the pollsters.

    Yeah, #2. They weren’t motivated to fix their math, question their assumptions. Much better to let America be shocked on election day, than give aid and comfort to the Trumpehfuhrer.

  220. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    One thing to keep in mind is that the way this election played out, Trump’s support is far more solid than the numbers would normally show. Each and every voter who went out there and pulled the lever for Trump is a solid Trump voter who figured he’d rather lose with his guy, than win with cankles.

  221. Whoops, that was me Steve, forgot to sign.

    The people who predicted (relatively) large black male swing for Trump were right. In fact, aside from the particulars of the EV, the Trumpers here were pretty much right about everything.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Svigor

    I think more black men voted 3rd party than usual, too.

    Replies: @silviosilver

  222. @utu
    @Jack D

    Weeping Hillary supporters for your Schadenfreude

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3918838/Dejected-Clinton-supporters-party-goes-flat-result-result-turns-against-cries-lock-louder-Trump-party.html

    Replies: @Seth Largo

    Trump supporters are very good looking.

  223. @Svigor

    Paul Ryan must be got rid off.
     
    This. It's so delicious that Trump won after Ryan refused to help. Perfect. Now Trump can organize to get this open-borders fanatic replaced as Speaker.

    Trump just spiked the severed heads of his enemies in the end zone. Big Media, the globalists, the Democrat Party, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, the RCP Average and its constituency, Nate Silver, Republicans Against Trump, the neocons, Paul Ryan and John McCain, etc.

    He could tamp down any talk of a rebellion against House Speaker Paul Ryan — and give Ryan a green light to move ahead with his agenda.
     
    Why would he do that? Ryan picked the wrong team. Now he can either come to Jesus, or fall under the Trump Train.

    It was really great to watch Trump lay bare the limitations of Big Media, the Democrat Machine, globalist money, and the GOPe.

    Thank you for that, president Trump.

    In view of Gov. Jerry Brown’s Canoe Theory of Politics,
    I think it’s healthy for the Office of President to alternate
    between the Democrats and the Republicans. Jerry said,
    “You paddle a little on the left and little on the right, and
    you paddle a straight course.” Jerry Brown was once a
    Jesuit novice, then majored in the classics, so I’m sure
    he knows his Aristotle. The canoe theory is basically
    Aristotle’s prescription for the good life – in all things
    adhere to a happy medium
     
    But when the previous jackass breaks with tradition and paddles a lot to the left, instead of a little, then balance dictates it's time to paddle a lot to the right.

    Replies: @Dan Hayes

    Svigor,

    At about 3 AM this morning, a couple of NPR commentators observed/predicted that Paul Ryan’s future was “toast”!

    This was one of the few times in my life that I ever agreed with any NPR comments/predictions!!!!

  224. @melendwyr
    @Yowza

    Trump lost the popular vote. What he has now is hardly a mandate. I'm hoping he'll try the things he said he wanted to, and that some of them will get through.

    But this is a minor victory in a very major war. Examine the disposition of forces. There's a lot of uphill pushing yet to be done.

    Replies: @Peripatetic commenter, @Almost Missouri, @MarkinPNW

    No doubt we will here lots of whining again about the electoral college from the poor losers.

    Perhaps they will be willing to get rid of winner-takes-all states around EC votes and move to a district-based approach for all states, but I doubt it.

  225. If no one else has said it…

    I, for one, welcome our new amphibian overlords!

    • LOL: BenKenobi
    • Replies: @Olorin
    @Almost Missouri

    This was the annunciation:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBkWhkAZ9ds

  226. @Almost Missouri
    If no one else has said it...

    I, for one, welcome our new amphibian overlords!

    Replies: @Olorin

    This was the annunciation:

  227. @broski
    5th dimensional chess, my friends.

    Replies: @SFG, @Olorin

    In our household we’ve been referring to it these past 20 or so weeks as the Kobiyashi Maru Scenario.

  228. @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever...
    "Where is (((Owen)))?"
    (((Owen))) was paid, his mission failed.

    Replies: @(((Owen)))

    Where was I? Just like Hillary: Drunk.

    It was election night, after all.

    So it turns out my predictions were wrong, even though they were based on the best scientific polling. And I feel terrible about it.

    Just kidding! I feel great about it. #MAGA

  229. @Anonymous
    "By the way, perhaps Trump’s Treasury Secretary could announce that Andy Jackson is staying on the $20 and Harriet Tubman will replace Hamilton on the $10?"

    Yes!

    Google speechless. Ha! If only Trump were some person of color no one's ever heard of.

    Maybe Trump can undo Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing. That's a total thorn in my side and makes me despair for my neighborhood and community.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Mr. Anon

    “Maybe Trump can undo Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing.”

    Orrrrr … use it against the Left. Give them some of that diversity they claim to love. AFFH in Chappaqua, Palo Alto, Austin, Madison WI, Marin County, every deep blue lily white county needs AFFH.

    Government-sponsored red pilling FTW! Yes, Podesta, let us make demographics be destiny! Bwahahahahha!

  230. @melendwyr
    @Yowza

    Trump lost the popular vote. What he has now is hardly a mandate. I'm hoping he'll try the things he said he wanted to, and that some of them will get through.

    But this is a minor victory in a very major war. Examine the disposition of forces. There's a lot of uphill pushing yet to be done.

    Replies: @Peripatetic commenter, @Almost Missouri, @MarkinPNW

    Actually, last night Trump was up slightly in pop vote, but over the coming days the blue machines will manufacture a few hundred thousand “found” votes so that they can make exactly the claim you are making: “no mandate”.

    Of course, Bill Clinton never managed to get even to Trump’s percentage of the popular vote and we all remember the media constantly said he had “no mandate”.

    … oh wait, that didn’t happen!

    • Replies: @melendwyr
    @Almost Missouri

    Let's say that's true. A slight popular majority still isn't the same thing as 'mandate'.

    Perhaps I heard incorrectly, but I was told that lots and lots of Republicans were either retained or voted into office yesterday. The Republican machine hasn't been interested in supporting Trump, and has been trying to undercut him at every available opportunity.

    Trump's biggest obstacles aren't going to be coming from the Democrats, but from what's nominally his own side.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

  231. @Corvinus
    @Mr. Anon

    "No. It is actually a tacit victory for white identity politics."

    Um, no. Hillary underestimated the support of a key demographic in her base--the working class and the union class. These two groups had supported Bernie in the primaries. She thought they would support her come the general election. They chose the populist who is deemed the savior to their economic woes from elites, who ironically Trump is part of.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Mr. Anon

    “Hillary underestimated the support of a key demographic in her base–the working class and the union class.”

    Those aren’t her demographic. She repudiated them when she embraced Black Lives Matter, police murderers’ families, the War on (White) Men, etc.

    She did not “underestimate”, she betrayed and murdered that demographic. They just returned the favor. Hillary is now History.

    A more intelligent elite would draw a lesson from this. Contrary to what you’ve been told, our elite is remarkably stupid. They will probably have to be put down. For their own safety.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Almost Missouri

    "Those aren’t her demographic. She repudiated them when she embraced Black Lives Matter, police murderers’ families, the War on (White) Men, etc."

    But they were Sanders demographic. And, no, there is no "war on white men".

    "She did not “underestimate”, she betrayed and murdered that demographic. They just returned the favor. Hillary is now History."

    Remember, this group supported Obama for 8 years. Again, its the message.

    "A more intelligent elite would draw a lesson from this. Contrary to what you’ve been told, our elite is remarkably stupid. They will probably have to be put down. For their own safety."

    Don't be silly, you're not going to get anyone to "put down the elite", considering that Trump is an elitist.

    Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome, @Almost Missouri

  232. @Thea
    This could mean yuge things for this fair website, Roissy, Zero Hedge. The msm has been defeated.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    To adapt the old liberal saw:

    It will be a great day when Unz.com gets the all recognition it deserves, and the MSM has to hold a bake sale to buy a broadcast license.

  233. @utu
    @Anonymous

    Paul Ryan must be got rid off.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    If he’s “got rid of”, it just means he picks up an easy seven-figure job in the East Coast Axis of Evil.

    Better to keep him in Congress, put him on a leash and make him Trump’s b*tch.

    • Replies: @BB753
    @Almost Missouri

    What about Romney and Lindsey Graham?

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

  234. @melendwyr
    @Yowza

    Trump lost the popular vote. What he has now is hardly a mandate. I'm hoping he'll try the things he said he wanted to, and that some of them will get through.

    But this is a minor victory in a very major war. Examine the disposition of forces. There's a lot of uphill pushing yet to be done.

    Replies: @Peripatetic commenter, @Almost Missouri, @MarkinPNW

    As I posted in the other thread, he especially lost the votes of veterans; you know, the WW1 vets, the Spanish-American War vets, the Civil War vets, etc.

  235. The shocker is Google. What? SOME kind of animation is called for. No crying Mexican babies and suffering lesbians in hairshirt shifts, loading cotton bales on them riverboats? How about Mel Gibson pinning on a Nazi armband and winking. Slate is telling us what Trump will do to the planet – the PLANET! – after all. Even cliche’ of an octopoid Deplorable spreading tenacles of fascism around a withered globe. HAVE THEY GOBBLED THE SKITTLES, TOO?!!!!

  236. @Almost Missouri
    @melendwyr

    Actually, last night Trump was up slightly in pop vote, but over the coming days the blue machines will manufacture a few hundred thousand "found" votes so that they can make exactly the claim you are making: "no mandate".

    Of course, Bill Clinton never managed to get even to Trump's percentage of the popular vote and we all remember the media constantly said he had "no mandate".

    ... oh wait, that didn't happen!

    Replies: @melendwyr

    Let’s say that’s true. A slight popular majority still isn’t the same thing as ‘mandate’.

    Perhaps I heard incorrectly, but I was told that lots and lots of Republicans were either retained or voted into office yesterday. The Republican machine hasn’t been interested in supporting Trump, and has been trying to undercut him at every available opportunity.

    Trump’s biggest obstacles aren’t going to be coming from the Democrats, but from what’s nominally his own side.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @melendwyr

    The Republicans don't have much of a machine, which has been one of their perennial problems as a party.

    Some Recucks have indeed tried to undercut Trump, but today even Ryan admitted that the down ticket R performance beat expectations only due to the Trump effect.

    No doubt Recucks persist. And as Cicero noted, the traitor is more dangerous than the enemy at the gates. But last night vindicated Trump and discredited Recucks, the big media and the Dems. The game is now Trump's to lose.

    The losers will try to obscure their failure by chanting "no mandate". But they didn't do it 1992-2000, and we shouldn't let them get away with it now.

  237. @Nick
    @NOTA

    A woman I met last week used to own a polling company. Her theory (before the election): while a poll of "likely voters" is usually more useful than a poll of "registered voters," this year would be the exception. Disaffected white people who were non-voters in 2008 and 2012 would vote for Trump this year (she said) and they by definition were categorized as not being likely voters - and so were not counted by the pollsters.

    Replies: @Bill Jones

    Perhaps the banks could recoup some of their losses by taking out a dead peasant life insurance policy on Clinton. One years premium should do it.

  238. @PhysicistDave
    @the cruncher

    the cruncher asked:


    Now will he prosecute and jail Hillary? I hope he does
     
    No, Obama will pardon her. And, that will make life easier for Trump. (Personally, I would prefer to see her prosecuted.)

    And her health issues are not a joke: although she called Trump to concede, she could not make it to the venue to thank her supporters. I think soon we will be pitying her rather than hating her.

    Dave Miller in Sacramento

    Replies: @donut, @Kylie, @midtown, @Jim Don Bob, @anonguy, @boogerbently

    No, Obama will pardon her.

    That would appear too partisan and reopen too much division.

    If anyone is going to pardon Hillary, it would Trump. He’s already starting to give her a soft pardon, being nice, talking reconciliation, etc. Maybe it comes down to nuisance prosecution, some fines, in the back pages for a while for dedicated Clinton-haters, but the rest of us will move on.

    I’m undecided whether he will give her a formal pardon. I tend to think not, that stamps a label on her by the victor, so probably just soft pardon. If anyone tries going after her too hard during Trump presidency, he can always pardon her at any time and just the threat of that alone can shut things down.

  239. @donut
    WTF? Did Sailer just get elected president or was it Trump ?

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    Trump got elected running on Sailer’s brain.

  240. @midtown
    @PhysicistDave

    Better that he pardon Hillary (or simply not prosecute) but go after the reams of corruption that exist within the federal bureaucracies.

    Replies: @Steven WIlson

    I said virtually the same thing to a friend in an IM not two hours ago. Of course, I descended to the cliche of calling the bureaucracy a “target rich environment.” Especially the IRS. I think gutting and skinning also appeared in my remarks.

  241. @melendwyr
    @Almost Missouri

    Let's say that's true. A slight popular majority still isn't the same thing as 'mandate'.

    Perhaps I heard incorrectly, but I was told that lots and lots of Republicans were either retained or voted into office yesterday. The Republican machine hasn't been interested in supporting Trump, and has been trying to undercut him at every available opportunity.

    Trump's biggest obstacles aren't going to be coming from the Democrats, but from what's nominally his own side.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    The Republicans don’t have much of a machine, which has been one of their perennial problems as a party.

    Some Recucks have indeed tried to undercut Trump, but today even Ryan admitted that the down ticket R performance beat expectations only due to the Trump effect.

    No doubt Recucks persist. And as Cicero noted, the traitor is more dangerous than the enemy at the gates. But last night vindicated Trump and discredited Recucks, the big media and the Dems. The game is now Trump’s to lose.

    The losers will try to obscure their failure by chanting “no mandate”. But they didn’t do it 1992-2000, and we shouldn’t let them get away with it now.

  242. @CK
    @neutral

    Honourable people live up to their promises.
    Madonna promised to reward verifiable Hillary voters with some ... consensual adult behaviour. She has already reneged.
    Whoppi promised to immigrate. If she has any honour she will.
    Miley Cyrus, Amy Schumer, Chelsea Handler, Lena Dunham, Samuel L. Jackson is moving to South Africa, Chloe Sevigny , Babs Streisand, Ruth Bader Ginsburg ( who if she follows through and emigrates to New Zealand will give Trump another Supreme Court opening to fill), Cher, George Lopez, Bryan Cranston ( the results broke bad for him ) Jonathan Leibowitz, Barry Diller, Spike Lee, Amber Rose ( recently on Dancing with the Disturbed), Raven-Symone.
    By my math, this is a net positive for the USA if these people show that they are indeed people of their word. Imagine an evenings TV without Sam Jackson wanting to know what's in your pocket. Imagine a daytime without the ladies who chat.

    Replies: @BB753

    Madonna has been such a yuuge disappointment! She isn’t leaving the country but she’s not giving free blow jobs for the needy Democrats either! She’s no lady. Not that I would touch her with Tiny Duck’s appendage…

  243. @Almost Missouri
    @utu

    If he's "got rid of", it just means he picks up an easy seven-figure job in the East Coast Axis of Evil.

    Better to keep him in Congress, put him on a leash and make him Trump's b*tch.

    Replies: @BB753

    What about Romney and Lindsey Graham?

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @BB753

    Romney is retired. Let him stay thus.

    Lindsey Graham … hmmm … how about outing him from the closet?

  244. @Svigor
    Whoops, that was me Steve, forgot to sign.

    The people who predicted (relatively) large black male swing for Trump were right. In fact, aside from the particulars of the EV, the Trumpers here were pretty much right about everything.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    I think more black men voted 3rd party than usual, too.

    • Replies: @silviosilver
    @Steve Sailer

    Do you have any insights to share into what was by far the Libertarian Party's best ever performance?

    Replies: @Mr. Anon, @Antonymous

  245. @Corvinus
    @Anon

    "Not populism. Citizenism? Or just People-ism?"

    No, Americanism.

    Replies: @Opinionator, @Antonymous

    See my earlier post.

  246. @Svigor

    “Not populism. Citizenism? Or just People-ism?”

    No, Americanism.
     
    No, Nationalism. A very clear victory for Nationalism over globalism.

    Replies: @Opinionator

    Americanism is nationalism for Americans

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Opinionator

    "Americanism is nationalism for Americans."

    Which are whites, blacks, Asians, and Native Americans, from a wide swath of ethnic groups and countries, who have been citizens or are becoming citizens. It's always worked that way.

    Replies: @celt darnell, @Hippopotamusdrome

  247. @Clyde
    @SFG


    Honestly, I’d say the opposite. He flew by the seat of his pants and pulled out a victory. People are angry about PC and globalization, and he ran on that. Hillary doesn’t have much charisma, so she wasn’t able to stop him. He used his intuition to sense themes that were being ignored and ran with them.
     
    Trump should gone about Hillary's character and that she is temperamentally unfit to be President in numerous ways. Such as Benghazi and setting at least three MidEast nations on fire. Backing the extremist Muslim brotherhood in Egypt. Such as her being low-energy, same as Jeb.
    Saying directly that (actually) it is Hillary who is temperamentally unfit to be President, such setting up secret email servers and not trying to rescue Ambassador Chris Stevens when the three AM phone call came. That she slept through it.

    Replies: @SFG

    Not necessarily bad advice…but he won anyway, right?

  248. @PhysicistDave
    @the cruncher

    the cruncher asked:


    Now will he prosecute and jail Hillary? I hope he does
     
    No, Obama will pardon her. And, that will make life easier for Trump. (Personally, I would prefer to see her prosecuted.)

    And her health issues are not a joke: although she called Trump to concede, she could not make it to the venue to thank her supporters. I think soon we will be pitying her rather than hating her.

    Dave Miller in Sacramento

    Replies: @donut, @Kylie, @midtown, @Jim Don Bob, @anonguy, @boogerbently

    You can’t “pardon” her if she’s never been convicted.
    Let it lie (Until Trump takes office) , continue the “ongoing” investigation, jail her and Slick Willie.
    All those e-mails the DOJ is holding, and said it would take 5 years to study.
    Get rid of all the cabinet level black panthers, then do what should have been done years ago.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @boogerbently


    "You can’t 'pardon' her if she’s never been convicted."
     
    That's what I thought too, but remember Ford pardoned Nixon, though Nixon was not convicted of anything and steadfastly denied any wrongdoing. OTOH, that was at the beginning of Ford's term of office, so maybe it was more of a "prosecution pre-emption" than a true pardon, i.e., Ford was indicating that he would pardon any conviction, so there was no point in prosecuting. Because Ford still had a couple of years left in office, this deterrent was credible.
  249. @Steve Sailer
    @Svigor

    I think more black men voted 3rd party than usual, too.

    Replies: @silviosilver

    Do you have any insights to share into what was by far the Libertarian Party’s best ever performance?

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @silviosilver

    "Do you have any insights to share into what was by far the Libertarian Party’s best ever performance?"

    Weed, Dude! Weed! They are finally delivering on something.

    , @Antonymous
    @silviosilver

    A majority of Johnson's votes were Never-Trumpers, with some Bernouts thrown in. The Republican party has room to grow when the holdouts realize Trump is not Buffoon Hitler.

  250. @SIMPLE Pseudonymic Handle
    If anyone here has a line to Trump, or any of his advisors, I have a very serious suggestion for him. It looks like Joe Arpaio lost his election last night. I think he'd make an excellent choice for the head of ICE, or maybe even Attorney General.

    A less serious suggestion, but one that would be much more fun:
    Sarah Palin for Press Secretary. It comes with no real power, but I think she'd have a blast doing it. And the reaction of the press would bring tears to my eyes.

    Replies: @mobi

    It looks like Joe Arpaio lost his election last night. I think he’d make an excellent choice for the head of ICE, or maybe even Attorney General.

    At 84, those two might be a bit of a leap from career sheriff, though.

    How about a ‘Southern Wall Task Force’, with Joe Arpaio as honorary Southern Wall Czar?

    Might be nearer to his heart in fact, and more satisfying than wrestling with a monster like ICE.

  251. @Perplexed
    @Daniel H

    A lot of credit is due to Sundance et al. at The Conservative Treehouse—superb analysis and forethought, and shoring up the troops—and to the centipedes at Reddit's The Donald for Pepe and for digging into the WikiLeaks email dumps. Also Bill Mitchell on Twitter for calming jitters about the polling, and admin at Hillaryis44 for being so damn smart and honest.

    Replies: @Thea

    And Drudge. He was a big help too

  252. @Corvinus
    @Mr. Anon

    "No. It is actually a tacit victory for white identity politics."

    Um, no. Hillary underestimated the support of a key demographic in her base--the working class and the union class. These two groups had supported Bernie in the primaries. She thought they would support her come the general election. They chose the populist who is deemed the savior to their economic woes from elites, who ironically Trump is part of.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Mr. Anon

    “Um, no. Hillary underestimated the support of a key demographic in her base–the working class and the union class. These two groups had supported Bernie in the primaries. She thought they would support her come the general election. They chose the populist who is deemed the savior to their economic woes from elites, who ironically Trump is part of.

    You are – unsurprisingly – completely wrong. The subtext of whites finally beginning to stick up for thier own interests was not hard to detect in the last 20 months, even if it went largely unsaid. As to Trump being an elite. So what? Everybody in government is an elite, or becomes one. The revelant question is whether that elite has a sense of noblesse oblige, which Trump does, and Hillary does not.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Mr. Anon

    "The subtext of whites finally beginning to stick up for thier own interests was not hard to detect in the last 20 months, even if it went largely unsaid."

    Working class whites stuck up for their own financial interests, as evident by their support for Sanders in the primaries and Obama during his term. It was not about their "whiteness".

    "As to Trump being an elite. So what? Everybody in government is an elite, or becomes one."

    No, not everyone in government becomes an elite. You're being obtuse, per usual.

    "The revelant question is whether that elite has a sense of noblesse oblige, which Trump does, and Hillary does not."

    Trump does for now. Will he follow through with offering white working families their fair share of gimmedats.

  253. @silviosilver
    @Steve Sailer

    Do you have any insights to share into what was by far the Libertarian Party's best ever performance?

    Replies: @Mr. Anon, @Antonymous

    “Do you have any insights to share into what was by far the Libertarian Party’s best ever performance?”

    Weed, Dude! Weed! They are finally delivering on something.

  254. @Anonymous
    "By the way, perhaps Trump’s Treasury Secretary could announce that Andy Jackson is staying on the $20 and Harriet Tubman will replace Hamilton on the $10?"

    Yes!

    Google speechless. Ha! If only Trump were some person of color no one's ever heard of.

    Maybe Trump can undo Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing. That's a total thorn in my side and makes me despair for my neighborhood and community.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Mr. Anon

    ““By the way, perhaps Trump’s Treasury Secretary could announce that Andy Jackson is staying on the $20 and Harriet Tubman will replace Hamilton on the $10?””

    Instead of Harriet Tubman, make it Booker T. Washington.

  255. @Economic Sophisms
    Would this victory have happened if Steve Sailer hadn't got into journalism and blogging? I wonder. Maybe not.

    Replies: @SFG, @Antonymous

    Sailer influenced Coulter. Coulter wrote a book which influenced Trump on immigration. Trump tacked immigration concerns onto his longstanding concerns about trade and interventionism and voila, winning campaign. Two degrees from Sailer to Trump. Huge thanks from this reader.

  256. @BB753
    @Almost Missouri

    What about Romney and Lindsey Graham?

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    Romney is retired. Let him stay thus.

    Lindsey Graham … hmmm … how about outing him from the closet?

  257. @boogerbently
    @PhysicistDave

    You can't "pardon" her if she's never been convicted.
    Let it lie (Until Trump takes office) , continue the "ongoing" investigation, jail her and Slick Willie.
    All those e-mails the DOJ is holding, and said it would take 5 years to study.
    Get rid of all the cabinet level black panthers, then do what should have been done years ago.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    “You can’t ‘pardon’ her if she’s never been convicted.”

    That’s what I thought too, but remember Ford pardoned Nixon, though Nixon was not convicted of anything and steadfastly denied any wrongdoing. OTOH, that was at the beginning of Ford’s term of office, so maybe it was more of a “prosecution pre-emption” than a true pardon, i.e., Ford was indicating that he would pardon any conviction, so there was no point in prosecuting. Because Ford still had a couple of years left in office, this deterrent was credible.

  258. @Cletus Rothschild
    @Bill P

    Turning the country around in a positive way is much better vindication than going on a vicious vendetta.

    Replies: @reiner Tor

    Why can’t we have both? Those who paid money to beat up Trump supporters need to face justice.

  259. Why should Tubman replace anyone? Why shouldn’t that hare-brained idea die with the rest of Obama’s failed legacy?

  260. @Opinionator
    @Svigor

    Americanism is nationalism for Americans

    Replies: @Corvinus

    “Americanism is nationalism for Americans.”

    Which are whites, blacks, Asians, and Native Americans, from a wide swath of ethnic groups and countries, who have been citizens or are becoming citizens. It’s always worked that way.

    • Replies: @celt darnell
    @Corvinus

    It's always worked that way?

    Nope. Wrong. Just wrong.

    , @Hippopotamusdrome
    @Corvinus

    Not always worked that way...

    Naturalization Act of 1790
    ... any alien, being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof, ... and making proof to the satisfaction of such court, that he is a person of good character

     

    ------------------------------------

    Oregon state constitution
    ... No free negro, or mulatto, not residing in this State at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall come, reside, or be within this State

     

    Replies: @Corvinus

  261. @Almost Missouri
    @Corvinus


    "Hillary underestimated the support of a key demographic in her base–the working class and the union class."
     
    Those aren't her demographic. She repudiated them when she embraced Black Lives Matter, police murderers' families, the War on (White) Men, etc.

    She did not "underestimate", she betrayed and murdered that demographic. They just returned the favor. Hillary is now History.

    A more intelligent elite would draw a lesson from this. Contrary to what you've been told, our elite is remarkably stupid. They will probably have to be put down. For their own safety.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    “Those aren’t her demographic. She repudiated them when she embraced Black Lives Matter, police murderers’ families, the War on (White) Men, etc.”

    But they were Sanders demographic. And, no, there is no “war on white men”.

    “She did not “underestimate”, she betrayed and murdered that demographic. They just returned the favor. Hillary is now History.”

    Remember, this group supported Obama for 8 years. Again, its the message.

    “A more intelligent elite would draw a lesson from this. Contrary to what you’ve been told, our elite is remarkably stupid. They will probably have to be put down. For their own safety.”

    Don’t be silly, you’re not going to get anyone to “put down the elite”, considering that Trump is an elitist.

    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome, @Almost Missouri
    @Corvinus


    "But they were Sanders demographic. ...
    this group supported Obama for 8 years."
     
    Relevance?

    Mostly these people haven't been voting. In the past they voted for Reagan and Nixon.

    Anyway, none of these people is Hillary, so what's your point?


    "Don’t be silly, you’re not going to get anyone to 'put down the elite'"
     
    They just got put down from the White House.

    "And, no, there is no 'war on white men'"
     
    Live your own dream, dude.
  262. @Mr. Anon
    @Corvinus

    "Um, no. Hillary underestimated the support of a key demographic in her base–the working class and the union class. These two groups had supported Bernie in the primaries. She thought they would support her come the general election. They chose the populist who is deemed the savior to their economic woes from elites, who ironically Trump is part of.

    You are - unsurprisingly - completely wrong. The subtext of whites finally beginning to stick up for thier own interests was not hard to detect in the last 20 months, even if it went largely unsaid. As to Trump being an elite. So what? Everybody in government is an elite, or becomes one. The revelant question is whether that elite has a sense of noblesse oblige, which Trump does, and Hillary does not.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    “The subtext of whites finally beginning to stick up for thier own interests was not hard to detect in the last 20 months, even if it went largely unsaid.”

    Working class whites stuck up for their own financial interests, as evident by their support for Sanders in the primaries and Obama during his term. It was not about their “whiteness”.

    “As to Trump being an elite. So what? Everybody in government is an elite, or becomes one.”

    No, not everyone in government becomes an elite. You’re being obtuse, per usual.

    “The revelant question is whether that elite has a sense of noblesse oblige, which Trump does, and Hillary does not.”

    Trump does for now. Will he follow through with offering white working families their fair share of gimmedats.

  263. @Corvinus
    @Anon

    "Not populism. Citizenism? Or just People-ism?"

    No, Americanism.

    Replies: @Opinionator, @Antonymous

    “Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo.” –DJT

    And thank God for that.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Antonymous

    “Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo.” –DJT

    Which includes citizens who are whites and non-white.

    Replies: @Antonymous

  264. @silviosilver
    @Steve Sailer

    Do you have any insights to share into what was by far the Libertarian Party's best ever performance?

    Replies: @Mr. Anon, @Antonymous

    A majority of Johnson’s votes were Never-Trumpers, with some Bernouts thrown in. The Republican party has room to grow when the holdouts realize Trump is not Buffoon Hitler.

  265. @Corvinus
    @Almost Missouri

    "Those aren’t her demographic. She repudiated them when she embraced Black Lives Matter, police murderers’ families, the War on (White) Men, etc."

    But they were Sanders demographic. And, no, there is no "war on white men".

    "She did not “underestimate”, she betrayed and murdered that demographic. They just returned the favor. Hillary is now History."

    Remember, this group supported Obama for 8 years. Again, its the message.

    "A more intelligent elite would draw a lesson from this. Contrary to what you’ve been told, our elite is remarkably stupid. They will probably have to be put down. For their own safety."

    Don't be silly, you're not going to get anyone to "put down the elite", considering that Trump is an elitist.

    Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome, @Almost Missouri

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    Your articles demonstrate anger and hostility among white men by Coalition of the Left Fringe groups, stoked by Coalition of the Right Fringe elitists. It's a power play by extremists.

    Replies: @Antonymous

  266. @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever...
    @johnny memonic

    "Well you did it, Steve. You effectively changed the course of world history with your internet blog."
    You're delusional mate.

    Replies: @Pericles

    I hate to break it to you but … Paul Walker is dead.

  267. @Corvinus
    @Opinionator

    "Americanism is nationalism for Americans."

    Which are whites, blacks, Asians, and Native Americans, from a wide swath of ethnic groups and countries, who have been citizens or are becoming citizens. It's always worked that way.

    Replies: @celt darnell, @Hippopotamusdrome

    It’s always worked that way?

    Nope. Wrong. Just wrong.

  268. Americanism is nationalism for Americans

    Don’t like it. Could just as easily be a term for Ellis-Island crap, invade-the-world/invite-the-world, kumbayah PC BS.

    Nationalism, that gives ’em shivers.

  269. “Americanism is nationalism for Americans.”

    Which are whites, blacks, Asians, and Native Americans, from a wide swath of ethnic groups and countries, who have been citizens or are becoming citizens. It’s always worked that way.

    See what I mean? Shitbird Corvinus loves it.

  270. Let’s face it, America will always be contested territory, insofar as it isn’t white. It would be like multicult-izing Japan; the Japanese would always be a threat to take back what was theirs. Obviously strife and war are leftist goals, but everyone else should know better.

    Whites conquered and tamed this land, and created this country (really a union of countries, but, I digress).

    The world for the world, and the west for the world, it’s obscene on its face, and eventually doomed to failure.

    Make peace, not war; avoid diversity.

  271. @Hippopotamusdrome

    Your articles demonstrate anger and hostility among white men by Coalition of the Left Fringe groups, stoked by Coalition of the Right Fringe elitists. It’s a power play by extremists.

    • Replies: @Antonymous
    @Corvinus


    Your articles demonstrate anger and hostility among white men by Coalition of the Left Fringe groups, stoked by Coalition of the Right Fringe elitists. It’s a power play by extremists.

     

    Those extremists, like Soros, happen to be among the wealthiest on the planet. Doesn't that indicate a valid threat? That there is in fact a war on white men being stoked at the upper reaches of political power?
  272. “It’s always worked that way? Nope. Wrong. Just wrong.”

    You must have been asleep in American history class. Read your de Crèvecœur and de Tocqueville.

    • Replies: @celt darnell
    @Corvinus

    The only one sleeping in history class was you.

    Look up the first naturalization act, the Chinese Exclusion Act and so on.

    Citizenship was restricted to whites.

    Again, you're just wrong.

    Replies: @SPMoore8, @Corvinus

  273. @Corvinus
    "It’s always worked that way? Nope. Wrong. Just wrong."

    You must have been asleep in American history class. Read your de Crèvecœur and de Tocqueville.

    Replies: @celt darnell

    The only one sleeping in history class was you.

    Look up the first naturalization act, the Chinese Exclusion Act and so on.

    Citizenship was restricted to whites.

    Again, you’re just wrong.

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    @celt darnell

    Dred Scott and associated cases are also relevant as to whether non-whites could be, or were, citizens. But the limits of things like the Exclusion Act are spot on.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    , @Corvinus
    @celt darnell

    "Look up the first naturalization act, the Chinese Exclusion Act and so on. Citizenship was restricted to whites. Again, you’re just wrong."

    Citizenship HAD BEEN restricted to ethnic groups who were white. The two acts you listed were NOT the end all and be all when it came to setting criteria for citizenship. Are you aware that federal legislation also limited Germans, the Irish, the Italians, and the Greeks--you know, whites--because they were deemed undesirable? Legislation reflects the times. You do realize laws are able to be changed, correct?

    Moreover, you definitely were dozing off in American history. Otherwise, you would be aware of United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898). The Supreme Court ruled that a child born in the United States of Chinese citizens, who had at the time a permanent domicile and residence in the United States and who were carrying on business there other than for the Chinese government, automatically became a U.S. citizen. This decision established an important precedent in its interpretation of the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

    Replies: @celt darnell

  274. @celt darnell
    @Corvinus

    The only one sleeping in history class was you.

    Look up the first naturalization act, the Chinese Exclusion Act and so on.

    Citizenship was restricted to whites.

    Again, you're just wrong.

    Replies: @SPMoore8, @Corvinus

    Dred Scott and associated cases are also relevant as to whether non-whites could be, or were, citizens. But the limits of things like the Exclusion Act are spot on.

    • Agree: celt darnell
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @SPMoore8

    Dred Scott was superseded by the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

    Are you that historically illiterate?

  275. @Corvinus
    @Almost Missouri

    "Those aren’t her demographic. She repudiated them when she embraced Black Lives Matter, police murderers’ families, the War on (White) Men, etc."

    But they were Sanders demographic. And, no, there is no "war on white men".

    "She did not “underestimate”, she betrayed and murdered that demographic. They just returned the favor. Hillary is now History."

    Remember, this group supported Obama for 8 years. Again, its the message.

    "A more intelligent elite would draw a lesson from this. Contrary to what you’ve been told, our elite is remarkably stupid. They will probably have to be put down. For their own safety."

    Don't be silly, you're not going to get anyone to "put down the elite", considering that Trump is an elitist.

    Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome, @Almost Missouri

    “But they were Sanders demographic. …
    this group supported Obama for 8 years.”

    Relevance?

    Mostly these people haven’t been voting. In the past they voted for Reagan and Nixon.

    Anyway, none of these people is Hillary, so what’s your point?

    “Don’t be silly, you’re not going to get anyone to ‘put down the elite’”

    They just got put down from the White House.

    “And, no, there is no ‘war on white men’”

    Live your own dream, dude.

  276. @Corvinus
    @Opinionator

    "Americanism is nationalism for Americans."

    Which are whites, blacks, Asians, and Native Americans, from a wide swath of ethnic groups and countries, who have been citizens or are becoming citizens. It's always worked that way.

    Replies: @celt darnell, @Hippopotamusdrome

    Not always worked that way…

    Naturalization Act of 1790
    … any alien, being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof, … and making proof to the satisfaction of such court, that he is a person of good character

    ————————————

    Oregon state constitution
    No free negro, or mulatto, not residing in this State at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall come, reside, or be within this State

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    Laws reflected the attitudes and times of a society. What you listed are relics. They are not relevant today given that legislation and amendments have obliterated them.

    Are you that historically illiterate?

    Replies: @The most deplorable one

  277. @celt darnell
    @Corvinus

    The only one sleeping in history class was you.

    Look up the first naturalization act, the Chinese Exclusion Act and so on.

    Citizenship was restricted to whites.

    Again, you're just wrong.

    Replies: @SPMoore8, @Corvinus

    “Look up the first naturalization act, the Chinese Exclusion Act and so on. Citizenship was restricted to whites. Again, you’re just wrong.”

    Citizenship HAD BEEN restricted to ethnic groups who were white. The two acts you listed were NOT the end all and be all when it came to setting criteria for citizenship. Are you aware that federal legislation also limited Germans, the Irish, the Italians, and the Greeks–you know, whites–because they were deemed undesirable? Legislation reflects the times. You do realize laws are able to be changed, correct?

    Moreover, you definitely were dozing off in American history. Otherwise, you would be aware of United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898). The Supreme Court ruled that a child born in the United States of Chinese citizens, who had at the time a permanent domicile and residence in the United States and who were carrying on business there other than for the Chinese government, automatically became a U.S. citizen. This decision established an important precedent in its interpretation of the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

    • Replies: @celt darnell
    @Corvinus

    Clearly you dozed off in English class, too, as the term you used was "always."

    Your words: "It’s always worked that way."

    Now kindly cease and desist bothering us with your historical illiteracy and poor command of the English language.

    Thank you.

    Replies: @Corvinus

  278. @SPMoore8
    @celt darnell

    Dred Scott and associated cases are also relevant as to whether non-whites could be, or were, citizens. But the limits of things like the Exclusion Act are spot on.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    Dred Scott was superseded by the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

    Are you that historically illiterate?

  279. @Hippopotamusdrome
    @Corvinus

    Not always worked that way...

    Naturalization Act of 1790
    ... any alien, being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof, ... and making proof to the satisfaction of such court, that he is a person of good character

     

    ------------------------------------

    Oregon state constitution
    ... No free negro, or mulatto, not residing in this State at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall come, reside, or be within this State

     

    Replies: @Corvinus

    Laws reflected the attitudes and times of a society. What you listed are relics. They are not relevant today given that legislation and amendments have obliterated them.

    Are you that historically illiterate?

    • Replies: @The most deplorable one
    @Corvinus

    I think we can safely conclude that Corvinus is a moron.

    Replies: @Corvinus, @SPMoore8

  280. @Corvinus
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    Laws reflected the attitudes and times of a society. What you listed are relics. They are not relevant today given that legislation and amendments have obliterated them.

    Are you that historically illiterate?

    Replies: @The most deplorable one

    I think we can safely conclude that Corvinus is a moron.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @The most deplorable one

    "I think we can safely conclude that Corvinus is a moron."

    Right, I'm a moron for pointing out how citizenship criteria has changed over the course of American history, that originally (and not surprisingly given the attitudes of the times) European whites were eligible for citizenship. Yet, the Founding Fathers enabled future generations via Congress to modify those standards as they saw fit.

    Replies: @SPMoore8

    , @SPMoore8
    @The most deplorable one

    Not only a moron, but a troll.

    Dred Scott (1857) was the main, if not the only, case where the issue of whether or not non-whites were citizens in a normal sense was argued before the Supreme Court, and it is clear from the proceedings as well as the dissents that it was not a matter of settled law.

    The 14th Amendment came 11 years later, and the Exclusion Act of 1882 came a mere 14 years after that, and was in force until World War Two (in one shape or another) and the immigration restrictions that came later also prevented others, including the older Issei generation of Japanese, from becoming citizens, no matter how long they had lived here.

    So the idea that citizenship has been somehow wide open in American history is simply false, until at least World War Two.

  281. @Corvinus
    @celt darnell

    "Look up the first naturalization act, the Chinese Exclusion Act and so on. Citizenship was restricted to whites. Again, you’re just wrong."

    Citizenship HAD BEEN restricted to ethnic groups who were white. The two acts you listed were NOT the end all and be all when it came to setting criteria for citizenship. Are you aware that federal legislation also limited Germans, the Irish, the Italians, and the Greeks--you know, whites--because they were deemed undesirable? Legislation reflects the times. You do realize laws are able to be changed, correct?

    Moreover, you definitely were dozing off in American history. Otherwise, you would be aware of United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898). The Supreme Court ruled that a child born in the United States of Chinese citizens, who had at the time a permanent domicile and residence in the United States and who were carrying on business there other than for the Chinese government, automatically became a U.S. citizen. This decision established an important precedent in its interpretation of the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

    Replies: @celt darnell

    Clearly you dozed off in English class, too, as the term you used was “always.”

    Your words: “It’s always worked that way.”

    Now kindly cease and desist bothering us with your historical illiteracy and poor command of the English language.

    Thank you.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @celt darnell

    Context escapes you.

    Opinionator made this comment “Americanism is nationalism for Americans.”

    I responded ""Which are whites, blacks, Asians, and Native Americans, from a wide swath of ethnic groups and countries, who have been citizens or are becoming citizens. It’s always worked that way."

    You and others proceeded to wrongly state that whites are the only people who were conferred citizenship and thus are "Americans", with other racial and ethnic groups other than being an America. Clearly Congress, by way of citizen demands, made changes in that criteria. It's always worked that way. Thus, whites, blacks, Asians, and Native Americans have been citizens or became citizens.

  282. @celt darnell
    @Corvinus

    Clearly you dozed off in English class, too, as the term you used was "always."

    Your words: "It’s always worked that way."

    Now kindly cease and desist bothering us with your historical illiteracy and poor command of the English language.

    Thank you.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    Context escapes you.

    Opinionator made this comment “Americanism is nationalism for Americans.”

    I responded “”Which are whites, blacks, Asians, and Native Americans, from a wide swath of ethnic groups and countries, who have been citizens or are becoming citizens. It’s always worked that way.”

    You and others proceeded to wrongly state that whites are the only people who were conferred citizenship and thus are “Americans”, with other racial and ethnic groups other than being an America. Clearly Congress, by way of citizen demands, made changes in that criteria. It’s always worked that way. Thus, whites, blacks, Asians, and Native Americans have been citizens or became citizens.

  283. @The most deplorable one
    @Corvinus

    I think we can safely conclude that Corvinus is a moron.

    Replies: @Corvinus, @SPMoore8

    “I think we can safely conclude that Corvinus is a moron.”

    Right, I’m a moron for pointing out how citizenship criteria has changed over the course of American history, that originally (and not surprisingly given the attitudes of the times) European whites were eligible for citizenship. Yet, the Founding Fathers enabled future generations via Congress to modify those standards as they saw fit.

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    @Corvinus

    This is what you wrote:

    “Americanism is nationalism for Americans" = "which are [all groups] who have been citizens or are becoming citizens. It's always worked that way."

    And that statement is simply false.

    It didn't "work that way" for the first 80 years of US history for African Americans, and it didn't work for Chinese living in America, explicitly so, from 1882 to 1943 (that's 61 years). Nor did it work for other classes of aliens living in the United States.

    It's simply ludicrous to pretend that "becoming citizens" has always "worked that way" for two classes of humans living in America that covered two lifetimes.

    It also ignores the long history of nativism and attempts to define who is and who is not "American" in terms of citizenship rights.

    Replies: @Corvinus

  284. @The most deplorable one
    @Corvinus

    I think we can safely conclude that Corvinus is a moron.

    Replies: @Corvinus, @SPMoore8

    Not only a moron, but a troll.

    Dred Scott (1857) was the main, if not the only, case where the issue of whether or not non-whites were citizens in a normal sense was argued before the Supreme Court, and it is clear from the proceedings as well as the dissents that it was not a matter of settled law.

    The 14th Amendment came 11 years later, and the Exclusion Act of 1882 came a mere 14 years after that, and was in force until World War Two (in one shape or another) and the immigration restrictions that came later also prevented others, including the older Issei generation of Japanese, from becoming citizens, no matter how long they had lived here.

    So the idea that citizenship has been somehow wide open in American history is simply false, until at least World War Two.

  285. @Corvinus
    @The most deplorable one

    "I think we can safely conclude that Corvinus is a moron."

    Right, I'm a moron for pointing out how citizenship criteria has changed over the course of American history, that originally (and not surprisingly given the attitudes of the times) European whites were eligible for citizenship. Yet, the Founding Fathers enabled future generations via Congress to modify those standards as they saw fit.

    Replies: @SPMoore8

    This is what you wrote:

    “Americanism is nationalism for Americans” = “which are [all groups] who have been citizens or are becoming citizens. It’s always worked that way.”

    And that statement is simply false.

    It didn’t “work that way” for the first 80 years of US history for African Americans, and it didn’t work for Chinese living in America, explicitly so, from 1882 to 1943 (that’s 61 years). Nor did it work for other classes of aliens living in the United States.

    It’s simply ludicrous to pretend that “becoming citizens” has always “worked that way” for two classes of humans living in America that covered two lifetimes.

    It also ignores the long history of nativism and attempts to define who is and who is not “American” in terms of citizenship rights.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @SPMoore8

    “Not only a moron, but a troll.”

    Hardly. I have been commenting steadily on this wonderful site for quite some time.

    “Dred Scott (1857) was the main, if not the only, case where the issue of whether or not non-whites were citizens in a normal sense was argued before the Supreme Court, and it is clear from the proceedings as well as the dissents that it was not a matter of settled law.”

    The case dealt with the status of free blacks and slaves brought to the North from the South. The Missouri Compromise (1820) had made it clear that slavery was illegal in the North. The decision of the court, with several of the Justices being born and raised in the South, made it clear slaveowners could take their property where ever they wanted, in effect nullifying that Compromise. However, the Justices acknowledged that amendments to the Constitutional would in effect neuter their decision.

    “The 14th Amendment came 11 years later, and the Exclusion Act of 1882 came a mere 14 years after that, and was in force until World War Two (in one shape or another) and the immigration restrictions that came later also prevented others, including the older Issei generation of Japanese, from becoming citizens, no matter how long they had lived here.”


    “So the idea that citizenship has been somehow wide open in American history is simply false, until at least World War Two.”

I never made that direct claim, nor inferred it. But, to this point, immigration in American history was “wide open” as the Irish and Germans came to our country in the 1840’s and 1850’s in record numbers; the Chinese came to our country in the 1860’s by the tens of thousands; and Southern and Eastern Europeans in the late 1800’s flooded our cities in search of employment, compliments of our industrial giants seeking a large labor pool.


    This is what you wrote:

    “Americanism is nationalism for Americans” = “which are [all groups] who have been citizens or are becoming citizens. It’s always worked that way.” And that statement is simply false.”

    My statement is entirely accurate. When an Irish man became an American citizen in 1844, for example, he is an American of Irish descent. The U.S. is now “his” homeland. He, as an American, displayed that nationalism through a variety of ways. Now, multiple this process for any immigrant, white or non-white who came here legally and became a citizen. Americanism does NOT equal nationalism for only white Americans.

    “It also ignores the long history of nativism and attempts to define who is and who is not “American” in terms of citizenship rights.”

    So, were nativists wrong to define the Irish, Germans, and Italians as being other than white and unworthy of citizenship merely because they had “alien cultures”?

    Replies: @SPMoore8

  286. @SPMoore8
    @Corvinus

    This is what you wrote:

    “Americanism is nationalism for Americans" = "which are [all groups] who have been citizens or are becoming citizens. It's always worked that way."

    And that statement is simply false.

    It didn't "work that way" for the first 80 years of US history for African Americans, and it didn't work for Chinese living in America, explicitly so, from 1882 to 1943 (that's 61 years). Nor did it work for other classes of aliens living in the United States.

    It's simply ludicrous to pretend that "becoming citizens" has always "worked that way" for two classes of humans living in America that covered two lifetimes.

    It also ignores the long history of nativism and attempts to define who is and who is not "American" in terms of citizenship rights.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    “Not only a moron, but a troll.”

    Hardly. I have been commenting steadily on this wonderful site for quite some time.

    “Dred Scott (1857) was the main, if not the only, case where the issue of whether or not non-whites were citizens in a normal sense was argued before the Supreme Court, and it is clear from the proceedings as well as the dissents that it was not a matter of settled law.”

    The case dealt with the status of free blacks and slaves brought to the North from the South. The Missouri Compromise (1820) had made it clear that slavery was illegal in the North. The decision of the court, with several of the Justices being born and raised in the South, made it clear slaveowners could take their property where ever they wanted, in effect nullifying that Compromise. However, the Justices acknowledged that amendments to the Constitutional would in effect neuter their decision.

    “The 14th Amendment came 11 years later, and the Exclusion Act of 1882 came a mere 14 years after that, and was in force until World War Two (in one shape or another) and the immigration restrictions that came later also prevented others, including the older Issei generation of Japanese, from becoming citizens, no matter how long they had lived here.”

    “So the idea that citizenship has been somehow wide open in American history is simply false, until at least World War Two.”

I never made that direct claim, nor inferred it. But, to this point, immigration in American history was “wide open” as the Irish and Germans came to our country in the 1840’s and 1850’s in record numbers; the Chinese came to our country in the 1860’s by the tens of thousands; and Southern and Eastern Europeans in the late 1800’s flooded our cities in search of employment, compliments of our industrial giants seeking a large labor pool.

    This is what you wrote:

    “Americanism is nationalism for Americans” = “which are [all groups] who have been citizens or are becoming citizens. It’s always worked that way.” And that statement is simply false.”

    My statement is entirely accurate. When an Irish man became an American citizen in 1844, for example, he is an American of Irish descent. The U.S. is now “his” homeland. He, as an American, displayed that nationalism through a variety of ways. Now, multiple this process for any immigrant, white or non-white who came here legally and became a citizen. Americanism does NOT equal nationalism for only white Americans.

    “It also ignores the long history of nativism and attempts to define who is and who is not “American” in terms of citizenship rights.”

    So, were nativists wrong to define the Irish, Germans, and Italians as being other than white and unworthy of citizenship merely because they had “alien cultures”?

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    @Corvinus

    Once more: You were taken to task (not by me) for writing --



    [Americans:] “which are [all groups] who have been citizens or are becoming citizens. It’s always worked that way.”
     
    Which is precisely what your OP took exception to, and I agreed with him.

    The above clearly implies that "all groups" have been citizens or were in the process of becoming citizens. I challenge any other construction of your sentence.

    The simple historical facts however make it clear that Africans who were American by birth were not uniformly considered citizens in any jurisdiction so much so that it was the frame of extensive argument in Dred Scott which came to the conclusion that Africans of American birth were not citizens. Therefore, they do not meet the criterion of "having been", "becoming" or even "being" citizens at time of that decision, 1857.

    The Exclusion Act of 1882 made it clear that immigrants of Chinese extraction were not citizens and could not become citizens and over time this act was extended to other Asians, such during the time that that Act was in operation, until 1943, these individuals "had not been", "were not becoming", and "were not" citizens of the US.

    (That Nisei, i.e., Japanese born to non-citizen Japanese immigrants by birth were citizens by birth in the US is an important distinction, and you correctly noted the Wong Kim Ark case of 1898, but that heavily litigated case which went all the way to SCOTUS did not confer citizenship on Chinese (or other Asians) in the US, but only clarified birth right citizenship which has a highly contentious history of its own.)

    Since these two legal cases make it clear that it was not normative to confer citizenship on non-white immigrants, either on arrival, or after any fixed term, and therefore not prospectively by any means, and, finally, not even finally established by birth until 1898 (Native Americans and others had to wait until 1924), it follows that characterizing the statement


    [Americans:] “which are [all groups] who have been citizens or are becoming citizens. It’s always worked that way.”
     
    as false is a complete fair reading of your sentence.

    Now you can contend that that's "not what you meant" but it's not like either I, or the OP, were trying to start a fight. You did that all by yourself. And that's why I characterized you as a troll.

    Now then your followup post holds that "Americanism" ="includes citizens who are whites and non-white."

    I would like to agree with you that that is true today, and, in terms of a just appraisal of the past, true throughout the history of our republic. But in terms of the actual operative legal doctrines in the history of our country, it was not true for much, or even most, of our history.

    I believe it was that point your OP was trying to make. At any rate, that's the point I was in agreement with. If you choose to construe that to mean we are attempting to defend the proposition that "Americanism" = "white", you are definitely misreading me, and probably OP as well.

    Replies: @Corvinus

  287. @Antonymous
    @Corvinus

    "Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo." --DJT

    And thank God for that.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    “Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo.” –DJT

    Which includes citizens who are whites and non-white.

    • Replies: @Antonymous
    @Corvinus


    Which includes citizens who are whites and non-white.
     
    This goes without saying. Please stop believing that opposition to illegal immigration and foreign intervention means ethnic hostility. Most of the globe would prefer mild isolationism to the Clinton destabilization machine. Four of those in four years as SOS (Egypt, Libya, Ukraine, Syria)? Come on, who's really a friend to "POC"?

    Replies: @Corvinus

  288. @Corvinus
    @SPMoore8

    “Not only a moron, but a troll.”

    Hardly. I have been commenting steadily on this wonderful site for quite some time.

    “Dred Scott (1857) was the main, if not the only, case where the issue of whether or not non-whites were citizens in a normal sense was argued before the Supreme Court, and it is clear from the proceedings as well as the dissents that it was not a matter of settled law.”

    The case dealt with the status of free blacks and slaves brought to the North from the South. The Missouri Compromise (1820) had made it clear that slavery was illegal in the North. The decision of the court, with several of the Justices being born and raised in the South, made it clear slaveowners could take their property where ever they wanted, in effect nullifying that Compromise. However, the Justices acknowledged that amendments to the Constitutional would in effect neuter their decision.

    “The 14th Amendment came 11 years later, and the Exclusion Act of 1882 came a mere 14 years after that, and was in force until World War Two (in one shape or another) and the immigration restrictions that came later also prevented others, including the older Issei generation of Japanese, from becoming citizens, no matter how long they had lived here.”


    “So the idea that citizenship has been somehow wide open in American history is simply false, until at least World War Two.”

I never made that direct claim, nor inferred it. But, to this point, immigration in American history was “wide open” as the Irish and Germans came to our country in the 1840’s and 1850’s in record numbers; the Chinese came to our country in the 1860’s by the tens of thousands; and Southern and Eastern Europeans in the late 1800’s flooded our cities in search of employment, compliments of our industrial giants seeking a large labor pool.


    This is what you wrote:

    “Americanism is nationalism for Americans” = “which are [all groups] who have been citizens or are becoming citizens. It’s always worked that way.” And that statement is simply false.”

    My statement is entirely accurate. When an Irish man became an American citizen in 1844, for example, he is an American of Irish descent. The U.S. is now “his” homeland. He, as an American, displayed that nationalism through a variety of ways. Now, multiple this process for any immigrant, white or non-white who came here legally and became a citizen. Americanism does NOT equal nationalism for only white Americans.

    “It also ignores the long history of nativism and attempts to define who is and who is not “American” in terms of citizenship rights.”

    So, were nativists wrong to define the Irish, Germans, and Italians as being other than white and unworthy of citizenship merely because they had “alien cultures”?

    Replies: @SPMoore8

    Once more: You were taken to task (not by me) for writing —

    [Americans:] “which are [all groups] who have been citizens or are becoming citizens. It’s always worked that way.”

    Which is precisely what your OP took exception to, and I agreed with him.

    The above clearly implies that “all groups” have been citizens or were in the process of becoming citizens. I challenge any other construction of your sentence.

    The simple historical facts however make it clear that Africans who were American by birth were not uniformly considered citizens in any jurisdiction so much so that it was the frame of extensive argument in Dred Scott which came to the conclusion that Africans of American birth were not citizens. Therefore, they do not meet the criterion of “having been”, “becoming” or even “being” citizens at time of that decision, 1857.

    The Exclusion Act of 1882 made it clear that immigrants of Chinese extraction were not citizens and could not become citizens and over time this act was extended to other Asians, such during the time that that Act was in operation, until 1943, these individuals “had not been”, “were not becoming”, and “were not” citizens of the US.

    (That Nisei, i.e., Japanese born to non-citizen Japanese immigrants by birth were citizens by birth in the US is an important distinction, and you correctly noted the Wong Kim Ark case of 1898, but that heavily litigated case which went all the way to SCOTUS did not confer citizenship on Chinese (or other Asians) in the US, but only clarified birth right citizenship which has a highly contentious history of its own.)

    Since these two legal cases make it clear that it was not normative to confer citizenship on non-white immigrants, either on arrival, or after any fixed term, and therefore not prospectively by any means, and, finally, not even finally established by birth until 1898 (Native Americans and others had to wait until 1924), it follows that characterizing the statement

    [Americans:] “which are [all groups] who have been citizens or are becoming citizens. It’s always worked that way.”

    as false is a complete fair reading of your sentence.

    Now you can contend that that’s “not what you meant” but it’s not like either I, or the OP, were trying to start a fight. You did that all by yourself. And that’s why I characterized you as a troll.

    Now then your followup post holds that “Americanism” =”includes citizens who are whites and non-white.”

    I would like to agree with you that that is true today, and, in terms of a just appraisal of the past, true throughout the history of our republic. But in terms of the actual operative legal doctrines in the history of our country, it was not true for much, or even most, of our history.

    I believe it was that point your OP was trying to make. At any rate, that’s the point I was in agreement with. If you choose to construe that to mean we are attempting to defend the proposition that “Americanism” = “white”, you are definitely misreading me, and probably OP as well.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @SPMoore8

    The above clearly implies that “all groups” have been citizens or were in the process of becoming citizens. I challenge any other construction of your sentence.

    "The simple historical facts however make it clear that Africans who were American by birth were not uniformly considered citizens in any jurisdiction so much so that it was the frame of extensive argument in Dred Scott which came to the conclusion that Africans of American birth were not citizens. Therefore, they do not meet the criterion of “having been”, “becoming” or even “being” citizens at time of that decision, 1857. The Exclusion Act of 1882 made it clear that immigrants of Chinese extraction were not citizens and could not become citizens and over time this act was extended to other Asians, such during the time that that Act was in operation, until 1943, these individuals “had not been”, “were not becoming”, and “were not” citizens of the US.

    Exactly, at that time of the decision. Which I never argued to the contrary. Simply put, when they became citizens or have been citizens, then they fit this description “Americanism is nationalism for Americans”. As it always has been when conferred this status.

    "Since these two legal cases make it clear that it was not normative to confer citizenship on non-white immigrants, either on arrival, or after any fixed term, and therefore not prospectively by any means, and, finally, not even finally established by birth until 1898 (Native Americans and others had to wait until 1924), it follows that characterizing the statement."

    No, these two legal cases made it clear that it was an exception to conferring citizenship. It was other than ideal for blacks and non-white immigrants to gain citizenship primarily because of pre-conceived notions of inferiority, which was normative of the time period.

    Now, you stated “It also ignores the long history of nativism and attempts to define who is and who is not “American” in terms of citizenship rights.”

    So, were nativists wrong to define the Irish, Germans, and Italians as being other than white and unworthy of citizenship merely because they had “alien cultures”?

  289. @Corvinus
    @Antonymous

    “Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo.” –DJT

    Which includes citizens who are whites and non-white.

    Replies: @Antonymous

    Which includes citizens who are whites and non-white.

    This goes without saying. Please stop believing that opposition to illegal immigration and foreign intervention means ethnic hostility. Most of the globe would prefer mild isolationism to the Clinton destabilization machine. Four of those in four years as SOS (Egypt, Libya, Ukraine, Syria)? Come on, who’s really a friend to “POC”?

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Antonymous

    "This goes without saying."

    Tell that to the Alt Right.

    "Please stop believing that opposition to illegal immigration and foreign intervention means ethnic hostility."

    What I believe is that Americans have the liberty to oppose illegal immigration, like myself.

    What I believe is that foreign intervention by our country is on a case by case basis.

    Ethnic hostility may be a vehicle by which some people are against illegal immigration and foreign intervention.

    "Those extremists, like Soros, happen to be among the wealthiest on the planet. Doesn’t that indicate a valid threat? That there is in fact a war on white men being stoked at the upper reaches of political power?"

    The war on white men is a creation of Alt-Right elitists who label all liberals, white and non-white, as hostile toward this particular group.

  290. @Corvinus
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    Your articles demonstrate anger and hostility among white men by Coalition of the Left Fringe groups, stoked by Coalition of the Right Fringe elitists. It's a power play by extremists.

    Replies: @Antonymous

    Your articles demonstrate anger and hostility among white men by Coalition of the Left Fringe groups, stoked by Coalition of the Right Fringe elitists. It’s a power play by extremists.

    Those extremists, like Soros, happen to be among the wealthiest on the planet. Doesn’t that indicate a valid threat? That there is in fact a war on white men being stoked at the upper reaches of political power?

  291. @Antonymous
    @Corvinus


    Which includes citizens who are whites and non-white.
     
    This goes without saying. Please stop believing that opposition to illegal immigration and foreign intervention means ethnic hostility. Most of the globe would prefer mild isolationism to the Clinton destabilization machine. Four of those in four years as SOS (Egypt, Libya, Ukraine, Syria)? Come on, who's really a friend to "POC"?

    Replies: @Corvinus

    “This goes without saying.”

    Tell that to the Alt Right.

    “Please stop believing that opposition to illegal immigration and foreign intervention means ethnic hostility.”

    What I believe is that Americans have the liberty to oppose illegal immigration, like myself.

    What I believe is that foreign intervention by our country is on a case by case basis.

    Ethnic hostility may be a vehicle by which some people are against illegal immigration and foreign intervention.

    “Those extremists, like Soros, happen to be among the wealthiest on the planet. Doesn’t that indicate a valid threat? That there is in fact a war on white men being stoked at the upper reaches of political power?”

    The war on white men is a creation of Alt-Right elitists who label all liberals, white and non-white, as hostile toward this particular group.

  292. @SPMoore8
    @Corvinus

    Once more: You were taken to task (not by me) for writing --



    [Americans:] “which are [all groups] who have been citizens or are becoming citizens. It’s always worked that way.”
     
    Which is precisely what your OP took exception to, and I agreed with him.

    The above clearly implies that "all groups" have been citizens or were in the process of becoming citizens. I challenge any other construction of your sentence.

    The simple historical facts however make it clear that Africans who were American by birth were not uniformly considered citizens in any jurisdiction so much so that it was the frame of extensive argument in Dred Scott which came to the conclusion that Africans of American birth were not citizens. Therefore, they do not meet the criterion of "having been", "becoming" or even "being" citizens at time of that decision, 1857.

    The Exclusion Act of 1882 made it clear that immigrants of Chinese extraction were not citizens and could not become citizens and over time this act was extended to other Asians, such during the time that that Act was in operation, until 1943, these individuals "had not been", "were not becoming", and "were not" citizens of the US.

    (That Nisei, i.e., Japanese born to non-citizen Japanese immigrants by birth were citizens by birth in the US is an important distinction, and you correctly noted the Wong Kim Ark case of 1898, but that heavily litigated case which went all the way to SCOTUS did not confer citizenship on Chinese (or other Asians) in the US, but only clarified birth right citizenship which has a highly contentious history of its own.)

    Since these two legal cases make it clear that it was not normative to confer citizenship on non-white immigrants, either on arrival, or after any fixed term, and therefore not prospectively by any means, and, finally, not even finally established by birth until 1898 (Native Americans and others had to wait until 1924), it follows that characterizing the statement


    [Americans:] “which are [all groups] who have been citizens or are becoming citizens. It’s always worked that way.”
     
    as false is a complete fair reading of your sentence.

    Now you can contend that that's "not what you meant" but it's not like either I, or the OP, were trying to start a fight. You did that all by yourself. And that's why I characterized you as a troll.

    Now then your followup post holds that "Americanism" ="includes citizens who are whites and non-white."

    I would like to agree with you that that is true today, and, in terms of a just appraisal of the past, true throughout the history of our republic. But in terms of the actual operative legal doctrines in the history of our country, it was not true for much, or even most, of our history.

    I believe it was that point your OP was trying to make. At any rate, that's the point I was in agreement with. If you choose to construe that to mean we are attempting to defend the proposition that "Americanism" = "white", you are definitely misreading me, and probably OP as well.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    The above clearly implies that “all groups” have been citizens or were in the process of becoming citizens. I challenge any other construction of your sentence.

    “The simple historical facts however make it clear that Africans who were American by birth were not uniformly considered citizens in any jurisdiction so much so that it was the frame of extensive argument in Dred Scott which came to the conclusion that Africans of American birth were not citizens. Therefore, they do not meet the criterion of “having been”, “becoming” or even “being” citizens at time of that decision, 1857. The Exclusion Act of 1882 made it clear that immigrants of Chinese extraction were not citizens and could not become citizens and over time this act was extended to other Asians, such during the time that that Act was in operation, until 1943, these individuals “had not been”, “were not becoming”, and “were not” citizens of the US.

    Exactly, at that time of the decision. Which I never argued to the contrary. Simply put, when they became citizens or have been citizens, then they fit this description “Americanism is nationalism for Americans”. As it always has been when conferred this status.

    “Since these two legal cases make it clear that it was not normative to confer citizenship on non-white immigrants, either on arrival, or after any fixed term, and therefore not prospectively by any means, and, finally, not even finally established by birth until 1898 (Native Americans and others had to wait until 1924), it follows that characterizing the statement.”

    No, these two legal cases made it clear that it was an exception to conferring citizenship. It was other than ideal for blacks and non-white immigrants to gain citizenship primarily because of pre-conceived notions of inferiority, which was normative of the time period.

    Now, you stated “It also ignores the long history of nativism and attempts to define who is and who is not “American” in terms of citizenship rights.”

    So, were nativists wrong to define the Irish, Germans, and Italians as being other than white and unworthy of citizenship merely because they had “alien cultures”?

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS