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 Hillary Brain Trust's Single Most Brilliant Stratagem
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Ever since the election, Democrats have been demanding that the Electoral College step in and deny Donald Trump his victory and that the Electoral College be abolished because it’s obviously permanently biased in favor of Republicans.

But now we learn that the Hillary Brain Trust was worried just before the election that Trump would lose in the Electoral College but win the popular vote, so the HRC campaign took money out of swing states at the last moment to run up the score in Chicago.

Popular vote victory here we come!

How Clinton lost Michigan — and blew the election
Across battlegrounds, Democrats blame HQ’s stubborn commitment to a one-size-fits-all strategy.
By EDWARD-ISAAC DOVERE 12/14/16 05:08 AM EST

Everybody could see Hillary Clinton was cooked in Iowa. So when, a week-and-a-half out, the Service Employees International Union started hearing anxiety out of Michigan, union officials decided to reroute their volunteers, giving a desperate team on the ground around Detroit some hope.

They started prepping meals and organizing hotel rooms.

SEIU — which had wanted to go to Michigan from the beginning, but been ordered not to — dialed Clinton’s top campaign aides to tell them about the new plan. According to several people familiar with the call, Brooklyn was furious.

Turn that bus around, the Clinton team ordered SEIU. Those volunteers needed to stay in Iowa to fool Donald Trump into competing there, not drive to Michigan, where the Democrat’s models projected a 5-point win through the morning of Election Day.

Michigan organizers were shocked. It was the latest case of Brooklyn ignoring on-the-ground intel and pleas for help in a race that they felt slipping away at the end.

“They believed they were more experienced, which they were. They believed they were smarter, which they weren’t,” said Donnie Fowler, who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee during the final months of the campaign. “They believed they had better information, which they didn’t.”

Flip Michigan and leave the rest of the map, and Trump is still president-elect. But to people who worked in that state and others, how Clinton won the popular vote by 2.8 million votes and lost by 100,000 in states that could have made her president has everything to do with what happened in Michigan. Trump won the state despite getting 30,000 fewer votes than George W. Bush did when he lost it in 2004.

Politico spoke to a dozen officials working on or with Clinton’s Michigan campaign, and more than a dozen scattered among other battleground states, her Brooklyn headquarters and in Washington who describe an ongoing fight about campaign tactics, an inability to get top leadership to change course.

Then again, according to senior people in Brooklyn, Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook never heard any of those complaints directly from anyone on his state teams before Election Day. …

Clinton never even stopped by a United Auto Workers union hall in Michigan, though a person involved with the campaign noted bitterly that the UAW flaked on GOTV commitments in the final days, and that AFSCME never even made any, despite months of appeals.

The anecdotes are different but the narrative is the same across battlegrounds …

Michigan operatives relay stories like one about an older woman in Flint who showed up at a Clinton campaign office, asking for a lawn sign and offering to canvass, being told these were not “scientifically” significant ways of increasing the vote, and leaving, never to return. A crew of building trade workers showed up at another office looking to canvass, but, confused after being told there was no literature to hand out like in most campaigns, also left and never looked back.

… Operatives watched packets of real-time voter information piled up in bins at the coordinated campaign headquarters. The sheets were updated only when they got ripped, or soaked with coffee. Existing packets with notes from the volunteers, including highlighting how much Trump inclination there was among some of the white male union members the Clinton campaign was sure would be with her, were tossed in the garbage.

Why would anybody in Brooklyn worry about the wavering loyalty of white male union members in Michigan? Everybody knows they’d mindlessly vote for Hillary, those racist, sexist deplorables.

The Brooklyn command believed that television and limited direct mail and digital efforts were the only way to win over voters, people familiar with the thinking at headquarters said.

It’s harder to take a commission on volunteers than on advertisements.

Most importantly, multiple operatives said, the Clinton campaign dismissed what’s known as in-person “persuasion” — no one was knocking on doors trying to drum up support for the Democratic nominee, which also meant no one was hearing directly from voters aside from voters they’d already assumed were likely Clinton voters, no one tracking how feelings about the race and the candidates were evolving. This left no information to check the polling models against — which might have, for example, showed the campaign that some of the white male union members they had expected to be likely Clinton voters actually veering toward Trump — and no early warning system that the race was turning against them in ways that their daily tracking polls weren’t picking up.

Perhaps Brooklyn simply felt disgust at the very idea of conversing with white male union members in the Rust Belt? It’s much more hygenic just to send ads at them. If you knock on their doors, then you’d have to listen to them talk back, and they would probably saying something intolerably intolerant, those hateful, hopefully soon dead white men.

… Brooklyn’s theory from the start was that 2016 was going to be a purely base turnout election. Efforts were focused on voter registration and then, in the final weeks, turning out voters identified as Clinton’s, without confirmation that they were.

Marshall, at Mook’s direction, had designed a plan that until the final weeks was built around holding Pennsylvania and winning just one more state — electoral math that would have denied Trump the presidency on the reasonable assumption Michigan and Wisconsin were Clinton’s.

After all, why would those deer-hunting hillbilly redneck gunlovers in Michigan and Nazi Germans in Wisconsin not vote for Hillary?

… Waving off complaints during a visit to Michigan a few weeks out, Marshall explained to the room that Clinton was going to clobber Trump in the final debate and they were talking about moving money into Senate seats.

After all, Hillary had a Trump card (heh-heh-heh) to play in the third debate: She brought up Alicia Machado again!

And by the time they arrived in Las Vegas for that third debate, Clinton’s top aides were boasting about how they were about to expand the lead and pull marginal Senate candidates over the line to give her a governing majority.

Here’s the best one of all:

But there also were millions approved for transfer from Clinton’s campaign for use by the DNC — which, under a plan devised by Brazile to drum up urban turnout out of fear that Trump would win the popular vote while losing the electoral vote, got dumped into Chicago and New Orleans, far from anywhere that would have made a difference in the election.

Nor did Brooklyn ask for help from some people who’d been expecting the call. Sanders threw himself into campaign appearances for Clinton throughout the fall, but familiar sources say the campaign never asked the Vermont senator’s campaign aides for help thinking through Michigan, Wisconsin or anywhere else where he had run strong.

You can’t have Bernie mansplaining to Hillary about how to win in Michigan just because he beat her there.

It was already November when the campaign finally reached out to the White House to get President Barack Obama into Michigan, a state that he’d worked hard and won by large margins in 2008 and 2012. On the Monday before Election Day, Obama added a stop in Ann Arbor, but that final weekend, the president had played golf on Saturday and made one stop in Orlando on Sunday, not having been asked to do anything else.

Hey it was November and Obama was running out of days to play golf before winter.

People who asked for Vice President Joe Biden to come in were told that top Clinton aides weren’t clearing those trips.

Biden’s okay … for a white male. But he’s a white male. Aren’t they going extinct soon?

… When top aides to the Trump campaign mapped out the best-case scenarios for election night, they always fell short of 270, and Michigan was always the state that they couldn’t see a way through.

Trump’s last stop of the election was a massive rally in Michigan that went on past midnight, his campaign homing in on Trump’s chances there largely from nervousness it sensed coming out of Brooklyn.

Walking out at the end, Trump turned to his running mate, Mike Pence, almost confused: “This doesn’t feel like second place,” he said, according to a person familiar with the conversation.

 
Hide 170 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. “After all, Hillary had a Trump card (heh-heh-heh)”

    I actually saw Hillary’s cackling visage in my mind’s eye when I read this. I think I may need a nap now.

    • LOL: ATX Hipster
  2. The weird thing is how Trump managed to win Michigan while losing New Hampshire (albeit, by a narrow margin). Low Black turnout was really important in this election. Trump apparently lost New Hampshire due to weaknesses in Belknap, Rockingham, Grafton and Carroll counties (relative to the primary vote earlier this year).

    Free trade was viewed as a top cause of economic problems in MI (whether rightly or wrongly) long before Trump came along:

    http://www.democracycorps.com/wp-content/files/backtomacomb082208v11-final.pdf

    The primary results portended that Trump would do better than Romney in Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, and New Hampshire. However, they curiously overestimated Trump’s vote in New Hampshire. Perhaps this was due to that state having party registration, which MI and WI don’t have.

    https://marginalcounterrevolution.wordpress.com/2016/11/10/wisconsin-michigan-and-ohio-primary-and-general/

  3. Pat Casey says:

    Btw, re Old White Men, Steve recently wondered when the mainstream began naming that demographic like a derogation.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-wiener/rich-old-white-men—-sti_b_137987.html

    Several things about that 2008 article make me think its about as best as we can do to pinpoint when and where the meme began. Most conspicuously in that respect is this interesting tidbit. Published late November 2008, this very brief and easy opinion reportage of a NY Times poll that found McCain’s base of support were Rich Old White Men was in some way updated in may 2011. Now who can say why that’s not strange? Would that pretty inexplicable update be when the guy realized he was who named what had caught on, and wanted his baby’s birth certificate as it were bumped up on google search lists by a little sleight of being new all over again—- because somebody’s gotta be wondering, as much as the guy would have liked them to know, where this awesome new rebel epithet came from, right? Methinks UC Irvine Professor of History Jon—wait for it—Weiner has for five years wanted someone like Steve to wonder whence his baby was born.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/18/fox-news-don-lemon-dunn_n_4807791.html

    I suspect that was also something of a red letter day, because it was right around that time when I heard Don Lemon close a segment by saying “these old white men need to go away.”

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Pat Casey

    http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/185731/what-is-the-origin-of-pale-male-and-stale

    The eldest reference that I could find was from a book about American Women and Flight Since 1940, saying

    In 1992 NASA administrator Daniel Goldin declared that the agency was too "pale, male and stale."

     


     

    Replies: @Barnard, @Pat Casey, @Opinionator, @Expletive Deleted

  4. Field and real-time data is the least prestigious, least lucrative of the various components of a campaign. It’s what I do.

    I don’t count paid polling, because those guys are vendors and get paid plenty to poll people from three states away. Of all the consultants freaking out, these guys should be most freaked out, because they are all over the place and increasingly unreliable.

    Canvassing, in-house phone banks, etc, on the other hand, can be very useful. The notes on walksheets Isaac is talking about are highly informative. For instance, we had prime Dems in Nassau county,NY, white women even, saying they were going straight ticket EXCEPT for HRC. I noticed this on the re-ID the weekend of GOTV, and it made me think she might be in some trouble ( I was believing the CW mostly until then).

    A very experienced guy I know, doing Hillary’s New Hampshire field, went to BK HQ once and said it was a bunch of college kids sitting on the floor ‘microtargeting’ on their laptops, which is what the old heads call it when the kids sit around the office IMing each other.

    • Replies: @Sam Haysom
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    It's amazing how much in person GOTV efforts have been marginalized over the past decade. I remember when I was an undergraduate less than a decade ago in person GOTV was gospel. The Donald Green book on GOTV which was the gold standard touted in person GOTV as the only really effective method. I guess facebook revolution has completely obliterated that CW.

    Replies: @Barnard

    , @Dr. X
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    By the end of the summer it was clear to me that HRC was running an inauthentic, orders-from-on-high, astroturf campaign largely propped up by the media (who did their damndest to put her into office based on propaganda alone).

    But I know a bunch of gun totin' white guys from Michigan, and I'm not surprised at all that the state went for Trump. I figured he had Ohio in the bag easily, too, and that turned out to be right.

    When you consider that Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin all have Republican governors and Republican legislatures (and Michigan, of all places, even went right-to-work!!!) the fact that Hillary thought all those states were guaranteed to vote Democratic shows an unbelievable arrogance, hubris, and misperception of reality on her part.

    Had she won, that's exactly how she would have governed... and this country would have been FUBAR.

    , @Opinionator
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    A very experienced guy I know, doing Hillary’s New Hampshire field, went to BK HQ once and said it was a bunch of college kids sitting on the floor

    And these kids despise White Americans.

    What is "re-ID"?

    Replies: @Ghost of Bull Moose

    , @Eric Novak
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    What's BK HQ? Burger King corporate?

    Replies: @Bob Arctor, @Mark Eugenikos, @Jack D

    , @charlie
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    Agree with you, but if you read between the lines on the article is the same complaining the every losing field team -- regardless of party --- always makes. I think Mook was a field guy as well.

    We didn't enough surrogates, voter ID was mishandled, no persuasions, etc.

    Way too centralized a campaign, and bad judgement. And a bad candidate.

    , @Forbes
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    Number one mistake of Hillary's campaign was putting the campaign HQ in Brooklyn. Brooklyn is an insulated hipster haven (heaven?). The Brooklyn-resident workers and volunteers aren't natives, they're transplants that, for the most part, hate where they're from. They moved to NYC-Brooklyn to escape where they grew up. They've come to The City as if moving to Mecca. In other words, they're the opposite of the core Democrat demographic in 'flyover country.'

    And if you looked at their CVs, I doubt Penn State, Ohio State, or Michigan State made an appearance. You can't target a market about which you're totally ignorant.

    Replies: @Connecticut Famer, @black sea

  5. The book I’m most looking forward to the book that delves into the relationship between Pence and Trump. I’d really like to know more about that dynamic- Pence was certainly a loyal soldier and gave the first impetus to the Trump comeback by crushing kaine in the debate.

  6. @Ghost of Bull Moose
    Field and real-time data is the least prestigious, least lucrative of the various components of a campaign. It's what I do.

    I don't count paid polling, because those guys are vendors and get paid plenty to poll people from three states away. Of all the consultants freaking out, these guys should be most freaked out, because they are all over the place and increasingly unreliable.

    Canvassing, in-house phone banks, etc, on the other hand, can be very useful. The notes on walksheets Isaac is talking about are highly informative. For instance, we had prime Dems in Nassau county,NY, white women even, saying they were going straight ticket EXCEPT for HRC. I noticed this on the re-ID the weekend of GOTV, and it made me think she might be in some trouble ( I was believing the CW mostly until then).

    A very experienced guy I know, doing Hillary's New Hampshire field, went to BK HQ once and said it was a bunch of college kids sitting on the floor 'microtargeting' on their laptops, which is what the old heads call it when the kids sit around the office IMing each other.

    Replies: @Sam Haysom, @Dr. X, @Opinionator, @Eric Novak, @charlie, @Forbes

    It’s amazing how much in person GOTV efforts have been marginalized over the past decade. I remember when I was an undergraduate less than a decade ago in person GOTV was gospel. The Donald Green book on GOTV which was the gold standard touted in person GOTV as the only really effective method. I guess facebook revolution has completely obliterated that CW.

    • Replies: @Barnard
    @Sam Haysom

    Hillary was viewed so negatively, I'm not sure how much it would have helped. Obviously they shouldn't have turned away people looking for yard signs or trying to persuade others in the neighborhoods, but I'm not convinced it would have made a difference for Hillary because of how negatively she and her staff view working class whites. I don't think there is anything that could have been said that would have swayed over 95% of them.

    Replies: @Pericles, @Wanda

  7. At the risk of sucking up, this is a great post.

  8. Speaking of Alicia Machado, what’s she been up to? I wouldn’t be surprised if there will be an INTERPOL arrest warrant coming forth soon. Trump will be very happy to oblige.

    • Replies: @Ivy
    @Daniel H

    Weight Watchers or Lean Cuisine pitch gal? She may need the cash after the high living, and it worked for the reintroduction of Princess Fergie some years ago.

    Replies: @Jefferson

  9. @Pat Casey
    Btw, re Old White Men, Steve recently wondered when the mainstream began naming that demographic like a derogation.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-wiener/rich-old-white-men----sti_b_137987.html

    Several things about that 2008 article make me think its about as best as we can do to pinpoint when and where the meme began. Most conspicuously in that respect is this interesting tidbit. Published late November 2008, this very brief and easy opinion reportage of a NY Times poll that found McCain's base of support were Rich Old White Men was in some way updated in may 2011. Now who can say why that's not strange? Would that pretty inexplicable update be when the guy realized he was who named what had caught on, and wanted his baby's birth certificate as it were bumped up on google search lists by a little sleight of being new all over again---- because somebody's gotta be wondering, as much as the guy would have liked them to know, where this awesome new rebel epithet came from, right? Methinks UC Irvine Professor of History Jon---wait for it---Weiner has for five years wanted someone like Steve to wonder whence his baby was born.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/18/fox-news-don-lemon-dunn_n_4807791.html

    I suspect that was also something of a red letter day, because it was right around that time when I heard Don Lemon close a segment by saying "these old white men need to go away."

    Replies: @Anonymous

    http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/185731/what-is-the-origin-of-pale-male-and-stale

    The eldest reference that I could find was from a book about American Women and Flight Since 1940, saying

    In 1992 NASA administrator Daniel Goldin declared that the agency was too “pale, male and stale.”

    • Replies: @Barnard
    @Anonymous

    It isn't a top priority, but Trump needs to reverse the Obama policy that NASAs top mission is making the Muslim world feel good about it's accomplishments in math and science.

    , @Pat Casey
    @Anonymous

    lol nice find.

    I will say this about "Old White Men." When it is deployed, by the ones who know what they're doing with it, like CNN's black anchor Don Lemon, there is a measure of being clever: because he's talking about ghosts; demons rather, rather actually talking to demon ghosts---- since we know you ward off demons best by naming them. And its not clear to me that anyone around here appreciates that. (If pressed Lemon just says he's talking about "old attitudes," but I appreciate the poetics I'm certain he recognizes.)

    Or maybe I just think it's clever because I deeply believe in ghosts myself.

    But all of the current liberal insanity makes a lot of sense when you realize the hysteria has all the trappings of an apocalyptic religious phenomenon. That's why Tim Wise scribbles dark prophecy, why hate hoaxes are committed and then believed in, why any symbol of a dead slave owner must not stand (since symbols that express can actually invoke) and why the living enemy must be demonized ad nauseum.

    In that sense there is almost all the difference in the world between making fun of stale pale males and gravely incising the words Old White Men---the zealots aint jokin around.

    Replies: @guest, @Wanda

    , @Opinionator
    @Anonymous


    In 1992 NASA administrator (((Daniel Goldin))) declared that the agency was too “pale, male and stale.”
     
    Hello fellow White people.
    , @Expletive Deleted
    @Anonymous

    Right that does it. "Sully : Miracle on the Hudson" is on over the holidays and I'll make a special effort to take the family to see it. Old white guys are the only people anyone, anywhere wants to see in charge in life-or-death situations. Just because. Well, go see the movie to find out.

  10. How long has it been since a cop murdered a black guy. What ever happened to BLM? Was all that just part of the Dem campaign?

    • Replies: @Yep
    @WorkingClass

    Media aren't talking about because they know it's part of the reason Hillary lost.

    , @guest
    @WorkingClass

    It's cold outside.

  11. @Daniel H
    Speaking of Alicia Machado, what's she been up to? I wouldn't be surprised if there will be an INTERPOL arrest warrant coming forth soon. Trump will be very happy to oblige.

    Replies: @Ivy

    Weight Watchers or Lean Cuisine pitch gal? She may need the cash after the high living, and it worked for the reintroduction of Princess Fergie some years ago.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    @Ivy

    "Weight Watchers or Lean Cuisine pitch gal? She may need the cash after the high living, and it worked for the reintroduction of Princess Fergie some years ago."

    I am surprised she got so fat when she only dates cocaine dealers. Female cokeheads tend to be coat hanger skinny bitches.

  12. @Ghost of Bull Moose
    Field and real-time data is the least prestigious, least lucrative of the various components of a campaign. It's what I do.

    I don't count paid polling, because those guys are vendors and get paid plenty to poll people from three states away. Of all the consultants freaking out, these guys should be most freaked out, because they are all over the place and increasingly unreliable.

    Canvassing, in-house phone banks, etc, on the other hand, can be very useful. The notes on walksheets Isaac is talking about are highly informative. For instance, we had prime Dems in Nassau county,NY, white women even, saying they were going straight ticket EXCEPT for HRC. I noticed this on the re-ID the weekend of GOTV, and it made me think she might be in some trouble ( I was believing the CW mostly until then).

    A very experienced guy I know, doing Hillary's New Hampshire field, went to BK HQ once and said it was a bunch of college kids sitting on the floor 'microtargeting' on their laptops, which is what the old heads call it when the kids sit around the office IMing each other.

    Replies: @Sam Haysom, @Dr. X, @Opinionator, @Eric Novak, @charlie, @Forbes

    By the end of the summer it was clear to me that HRC was running an inauthentic, orders-from-on-high, astroturf campaign largely propped up by the media (who did their damndest to put her into office based on propaganda alone).

    But I know a bunch of gun totin’ white guys from Michigan, and I’m not surprised at all that the state went for Trump. I figured he had Ohio in the bag easily, too, and that turned out to be right.

    When you consider that Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin all have Republican governors and Republican legislatures (and Michigan, of all places, even went right-to-work!!!) the fact that Hillary thought all those states were guaranteed to vote Democratic shows an unbelievable arrogance, hubris, and misperception of reality on her part.

    Had she won, that’s exactly how she would have governed… and this country would have been FUBAR.

  13. @Sam Haysom
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    It's amazing how much in person GOTV efforts have been marginalized over the past decade. I remember when I was an undergraduate less than a decade ago in person GOTV was gospel. The Donald Green book on GOTV which was the gold standard touted in person GOTV as the only really effective method. I guess facebook revolution has completely obliterated that CW.

    Replies: @Barnard

    Hillary was viewed so negatively, I’m not sure how much it would have helped. Obviously they shouldn’t have turned away people looking for yard signs or trying to persuade others in the neighborhoods, but I’m not convinced it would have made a difference for Hillary because of how negatively she and her staff view working class whites. I don’t think there is anything that could have been said that would have swayed over 95% of them.

    • Replies: @Pericles
    @Barnard

    Apocryphal campaign slogan by David Axelrod: "Hillary. Get used to it!"

    , @Wanda
    @Barnard

    You can bet that those people whose offers of help were rejected went back home and told other people about it. "Did you hear how they treated _______ when she went there to ask for a sign? And she's been a Democrat for 50 years!" That back-of-the-hand treatment can be very shocking to people who've never questioned their loyalties.

    Remember when Gordon Brown, the British PM and Labour Party leader, was caught on a live mic calling a 65-year old woman a bigot? She asked him some sharp questions about immigrants living on welfare. As soon as he thought she was out of hearing, he insulted her.


    Duffy has lived in Rochdale all her life, working for the council with disabled children up until her retirement five years ago. She is a widow and has a daughter and two grandchildren. Her husband, a painter and decorator, died of cancer four years ago.

    Before being told of Brown's comments, Duffy had said she would still be voting Labour. She told Sky News she confronted him over the national debt and immigration and that the prime minister had seemed "understanding" and responded "pretty well".

    But after hearing of his reported comments she said she was "very annoyed" and would not be voting for Labour. "I haven't had a chance to listen to it yet but if that's what he said I'm very upset," she said.
     

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/apr/28/gordon-brown-bigoted-woman

    This sort of thing has an effect on people, and can cause them to rethink a lot of things they've just taken for granted to years.

    Replies: @Desiderius

  14. I guess they didn’t have the rights to whatever entrance music they actually used in Michigan? That would explain the weird noodling guitar overdub in the video.

    • Replies: @slumber_j
    @Gilbert Ratchet

    That was a regular and baffling feature of all Trump-rally audio feeds. You're probably right.

    Replies: @Jack D

    , @Clyde
    @Gilbert Ratchet


    I guess they didn’t have the rights to whatever entrance music they actually used in Michigan? That would explain the weird noodling guitar overdub in the video.
     
    At rallies Trumps people played the Rolling Stones "You Can't Always Get What You Want" all the time despite The Stones objections. Trump et al. bought the rights to play this (and many other rock and country tunes, a bulk purchase) so The Stones could object all they wanted and were ignored.
    Trump's campaign did not have the rights to, was not allowed (illegal!) to broadcast this tune over youtube as part of the rally. Thus the rally audience heard the Stones tune while those tuning in over youtube got some generic music substituted.

    Replies: @Eustace Tilley (not)

  15. @Anonymous
    @Pat Casey

    http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/185731/what-is-the-origin-of-pale-male-and-stale

    The eldest reference that I could find was from a book about American Women and Flight Since 1940, saying

    In 1992 NASA administrator Daniel Goldin declared that the agency was too "pale, male and stale."

     


     

    Replies: @Barnard, @Pat Casey, @Opinionator, @Expletive Deleted

    It isn’t a top priority, but Trump needs to reverse the Obama policy that NASAs top mission is making the Muslim world feel good about it’s accomplishments in math and science.

  16. Pat Casey says:
    @Anonymous
    @Pat Casey

    http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/185731/what-is-the-origin-of-pale-male-and-stale

    The eldest reference that I could find was from a book about American Women and Flight Since 1940, saying

    In 1992 NASA administrator Daniel Goldin declared that the agency was too "pale, male and stale."

     


     

    Replies: @Barnard, @Pat Casey, @Opinionator, @Expletive Deleted

    lol nice find.

    I will say this about “Old White Men.” When it is deployed, by the ones who know what they’re doing with it, like CNN’s black anchor Don Lemon, there is a measure of being clever: because he’s talking about ghosts; demons rather, rather actually talking to demon ghosts—- since we know you ward off demons best by naming them. And its not clear to me that anyone around here appreciates that. (If pressed Lemon just says he’s talking about “old attitudes,” but I appreciate the poetics I’m certain he recognizes.)

    Or maybe I just think it’s clever because I deeply believe in ghosts myself.

    But all of the current liberal insanity makes a lot of sense when you realize the hysteria has all the trappings of an apocalyptic religious phenomenon. That’s why Tim Wise scribbles dark prophecy, why hate hoaxes are committed and then believed in, why any symbol of a dead slave owner must not stand (since symbols that express can actually invoke) and why the living enemy must be demonized ad nauseum.

    In that sense there is almost all the difference in the world between making fun of stale pale males and gravely incising the words Old White Men—the zealots aint jokin around.

    • Replies: @guest
    @Pat Casey

    I think a large part of it has nothing to do with the old demons at all, and everything to do with future old demons, if you catch my drift. The past always is the enemy, and there will always be a new past. Watch out, or you'll be left behind!

    , @Wanda
    @Pat Casey

    I always thought that naming ghosts was dangerous because it might RAISE them, not quell them. The Romans said "De mortuis nil nisi bonum", and now we think that means that it's sort of unsporting to say bad things about the dead, because they're not here to answer and can't fight back, etc. But the Romans were very superstitious, and feared ghosts. Saying something bad about the dead could anger a spirit and cause it to come back and haunt you. So their policy was to say NOTHING - "nil" - but if you HAD to say something, make sure it was nice, or you could end up with an angry ghost after you.

    That does seem to be the attitude of the Left too, in their quest to silence bad-think through political correctness. If the words can't be spoken, the thing itself can't exist, i.e. if we ban hate speech, there can be no hate. They really do seem to have a superstitious belief in the power of words to bring something into being.

  17. Two points:

    1. It’s interest how the Monday morning quarterbacking of campaigns is like that of wars: suddenly, everyone’s writing about how it was inevitable that the loser was going to lose, because of all the disorganization the loser was in that nobody reported on —but everyone noticed, mind you, they just were too classy to talk about it before it was over.

    That said, Hillary’s behavior as described is exactly how I pictured her. I’ve said since 2008 that this woman is a terrible campaigner who thinks that she’s a great campaigner by virtue of transference-by-marriage of Bill’s campaign skills and her self-delusional aura of being chosen by fate to be the first female president. But she doesn’t like meeting people on the ground, holding rallies, or doing the baby-kissing-hand-shaking nonsense, and when she does it comes off so fake it’s painful. Bill, Obama, Romney, Bush 43, Trump—say what you will, but those guys were decent to very good at shaking a commoner’s hand and coming off like they were listening to them.

    But Hillary never learned those skills, having come in solely on her husband’s coattails. And she never bothered to pull a Margaret Thatcher and just let the cold bizznich in her out—at least then she wouldn’t come off as fake. (Trump never bothered to learn the baby-kissing-hand-shaking, but he never pretended he was into it, so, again, he came off as way more authentic than her—whatever you say about Trump, you know people believe he is exactly the person you’re seeing before you.)

    As I’ve said, in 2008 Obama expected Hillary to take the crown and was just himself running to get larger national name recognition, planning a more serious run in 2012 or 2016 —-and additionally, hoping for a long-shot VP slot or an also-ran lower-tier cabinet position. Then about two weeks into it, he realized that Hillary was absolutely awful at running, and he could actually beat her. And that’s when the wheels started to come off Hillary’s bus—she’d actually never expected someone to run against her trying to win.

    2.

    But there also were millions approved for transfer from Clinton’s campaign for use by the DNC — which, under a plan devised by Brazile to drum up urban turnout out of fear that Trump would win the popular vote while losing the electoral vote, got dumped into Chicago and New Orleans, far from anywhere that would have made a difference in the election.

    Given what we know about Brazile being a thief and all, it sounds to me like she was just using the campaign to (legally?) embezzle funds and have it sent to fellow black cronies in the heavily black areas of New Orleans and Chicago, even during crunch time when it was important to insure a win and a misstep could cost her the election and power and more lucrative kickbacks later.

    In fact, you might say that Brazile, when push came to shove, was more loyal to her race than to her gender/party/party ideals. That’s a pretty bad omen for the Democrats—they’ve filled their party leadership with black racialists who are loyal only to their fellow blacks and getting paid. That’s not a recipe for a political party that’s going to come back from it’s current losses. That’s a recipe for a party that’s going to disintegrate or else become a permanent minority party beset with corruption.

    • Replies: @Forbes
    @whorefinder


    out of fear that Trump would win the popular vote while losing the electoral vote
     
    I call BS on this reporting. This is not the first time I've seen this "fear" trotted out, but I think it is pure invention. Under what scenario, given polls in CA, NY, NJ, IL, MA, was Trump going to win the popular vote and lose the electoral college? As it was Trump beat Hillary in a 49 state race--but the EC wasn't close. Had Trump won the popular vote, it might have been an EC landslide.

    And why, pray tell, would Hillary winning the election ("Trump...losing the electoral vote") prompt fear in the Clinton camp? It implies other assumptions are suspect. Completely dysfunctional.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @whorefinder

    , @Buffalo Joe
    @whorefinder

    Whorefinder, Hillary was not only a terrible campaigner, she was a terrible candidate. Bernie Sanders, with almost no national name recognition, actually gave Hillary a decent run for the nomination. The verified collusion of the DNC and the clout of the Super Delegates sealed Bernie's fate. The thing is, who else did the Dems have to nominate?

    Replies: @Jack D, @Anon

  18. @Ghost of Bull Moose
    Field and real-time data is the least prestigious, least lucrative of the various components of a campaign. It's what I do.

    I don't count paid polling, because those guys are vendors and get paid plenty to poll people from three states away. Of all the consultants freaking out, these guys should be most freaked out, because they are all over the place and increasingly unreliable.

    Canvassing, in-house phone banks, etc, on the other hand, can be very useful. The notes on walksheets Isaac is talking about are highly informative. For instance, we had prime Dems in Nassau county,NY, white women even, saying they were going straight ticket EXCEPT for HRC. I noticed this on the re-ID the weekend of GOTV, and it made me think she might be in some trouble ( I was believing the CW mostly until then).

    A very experienced guy I know, doing Hillary's New Hampshire field, went to BK HQ once and said it was a bunch of college kids sitting on the floor 'microtargeting' on their laptops, which is what the old heads call it when the kids sit around the office IMing each other.

    Replies: @Sam Haysom, @Dr. X, @Opinionator, @Eric Novak, @charlie, @Forbes

    A very experienced guy I know, doing Hillary’s New Hampshire field, went to BK HQ once and said it was a bunch of college kids sitting on the floor

    And these kids despise White Americans.

    What is “re-ID”?

    • Replies: @Ghost of Bull Moose
    @Opinionator

    Confirming your IDs. GOTV usually doesn't have much persuasion, prime voters are not being flipped by a day worker the day before an election.

  19. Great annotations, Steve. Your are doing amazing work.

  20. How cool, hip and happening is it to have your National Campaign Headquarters in Brooklyn! All the youngsters working (or semblance thereof) there were really able to oneup their friends. “I’m commuting each day to Brooklyn to work for Hillary to defeat racist, homophobic TrumpEvil!”
    How can you lose with a gay Commandante named Mook? What a lucky name! Someone was commenting how emaciated and weird Hapless Hacked Podesta looks. He runs a lot and was interviewed by Runner’s World. Cooks spaghetti carbo-loading dinners for his fellow runners

    The Podesta brothers are ready to cook for Hillary 10/01/15 http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/kgb-podestas-cook-214286

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @Clyde

    When "pizzagate" became a thing, I looked up John and Tony Podesta's wikipedia pages. One thing that struck me was the number of losing campaigns they had worked on - going back to the 60s in the case of Tony. I'm not sure either of them have ever worked on a winning campaign (Podesta worked in the Clinton White House, but I don't remember him having a prominent role in the 92 campaign).

    Replies: @Jefferson

  21. @Anonymous
    @Pat Casey

    http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/185731/what-is-the-origin-of-pale-male-and-stale

    The eldest reference that I could find was from a book about American Women and Flight Since 1940, saying

    In 1992 NASA administrator Daniel Goldin declared that the agency was too "pale, male and stale."

     


     

    Replies: @Barnard, @Pat Casey, @Opinionator, @Expletive Deleted

    In 1992 NASA administrator (((Daniel Goldin))) declared that the agency was too “pale, male and stale.”

    Hello fellow White people.

  22. Obama basically did nothing for the Flint water crisis. So keeping out of there might have been on purpose, campaigning in well off Florida made sense. So I am wondering if Trump is the one who screwed up in Michigan, even though he won by 10, 000 votes. Trump was filling stafiums there, why no postmortem on his amateurish eletion?

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    @George

    George, When Buster Douglas destroyed the champion, Mike Tyson, more of the analysts focused on why Tyson lost, not why Douglas won. Same thing here, why did HRC lose?

    Replies: @Jefferson

  23. I see your point, but this strategem pales in comparison to the fundamental strategem of promoting Trump as a ‘Pied Piper’ Republican candidate who would beclown and marginalise the Republican party, and thus ease the Hilbot’s path to the White House:

    http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/WikiLeaks-Clinton-Promote-Carson/2016/10/11/id/752705/

  24. Of course the Hillary campaign couldn’t be bothered to canvas for votes. Why would all those gay guys and cat-girls-with-problem-glasses want to talk to icky racist white men anyway?

    And it’s not like anyone would tell the Dear Leader there was a problem; it would only provoke a drunken, shrill, lamp-throwing tantrum. Her campaign was her whole adult life redux: arrogance and incompetence.

    • Replies: @Anon
    @Mr. Anon

    Upper-middle-class introverted intellectuals don't like meeting strangers (it takes them out of their comfort zone and safe space), and they don't do front porch sales very well. They try to avoid actual canvassing because they find it a psychological strain. They'd rather peruse data on their computers.

    None of these privately schooled, sheltered kids hugging their safe spaces around them had the guts to walk into a ghetto to attempt to turn out the black vote for Hillary, and thus her share of the black vote for her declined. These kids knew they'd be raped, mugged, or killed if they tried it. They also believed their own propaganda about the working class white being a bunch of evil racist Trump supporters, and the kids didn't have the stomach for the mockery they'd have to endure from some working class Trump voter (who they looked down on) laughing in their faces. That too would have taken them out of their safe space and violated the certitude and righteousness-of-their-cause self-satisfaction they like to wallow in.

    Replies: @Desiderius, @Bill

    , @Laugh Track
    @Mr. Anon


    all those gay guys and cat-girls-with-problem-glasses
     
    Love it!

    Replies: @Kylie

  25. Good post, Steve. Very well done.

  26. @Clyde
    How cool, hip and happening is it to have your National Campaign Headquarters in Brooklyn! All the youngsters working (or semblance thereof) there were really able to oneup their friends. "I'm commuting each day to Brooklyn to work for Hillary to defeat racist, homophobic TrumpEvil!"
    How can you lose with a gay Commandante named Mook? What a lucky name! Someone was commenting how emaciated and weird Hapless Hacked Podesta looks. He runs a lot and was interviewed by Runner's World. Cooks spaghetti carbo-loading dinners for his fellow runners

    The Podesta brothers are ready to cook for Hillary 10/01/15 http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/kgb-podestas-cook-214286

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    When “pizzagate” became a thing, I looked up John and Tony Podesta’s wikipedia pages. One thing that struck me was the number of losing campaigns they had worked on – going back to the 60s in the case of Tony. I’m not sure either of them have ever worked on a winning campaign (Podesta worked in the Clinton White House, but I don’t remember him having a prominent role in the 92 campaign).

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    @Mr. Anon

    "When “pizzagate” became a thing, I looked up John and Tony Podesta’s wikipedia pages."

    The vast majority pedophiles in Washington DC are Democrats, which gives new meaning to the term Coalition Of The Fringes.

    Replies: @CK, @Jack D

  27. @WorkingClass
    How long has it been since a cop murdered a black guy. What ever happened to BLM? Was all that just part of the Dem campaign?

    Replies: @Yep, @guest

    Media aren’t talking about because they know it’s part of the reason Hillary lost.

  28. @WorkingClass
    How long has it been since a cop murdered a black guy. What ever happened to BLM? Was all that just part of the Dem campaign?

    Replies: @Yep, @guest

    It’s cold outside.

  29. The Trump rallies were something hiding in plain sight that I think still haven’t been properly credited. Most political rallies seem to be rather spiritless affairs, with the candidate giving the same stump speech. The Trump rallies were happenings. People wanted to be there, they generated excitement, and the campaign tried out ideas there to see what worked. It was an old school approach, and I don’t know that other candidates could have pulled that off.

    Glenn Thrush has some good reporting (mixed in, as usual, with some petulant water-carrying for Hillary) below. Trump comes across as someone who looks for and can recognize unconventional opportunities in real time, and then capitalize on them.

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/2016-presidential-election-10-moments-trump-clinton-214508

    For all his deficiencies as a campaign manager, it became clear that Lewandowski mind-melded with his new boss. And he saw something the more jaded professionals who viewed Trump as an orange-coiffed clown couldn’t: The monster rallies he was proving so good at putting together weren’t just a part of Trump’s campaign, they were his campaign, the source of his power, a showcase for the candidate’s rambling genius, not to mention arena-size focus groups for his messaging and a test run for his vintage Trump insults.

    From that point on, Trump’s rallies became the centerpiece of the campaign. Trump told Lewandowski to book as many of them as he could. And they served to obscure the campaign’s glaring shortcomings, while letting an improvising candidate—Trump’s decision to call out Mexican “rapists” at his kickoff, for example, was inspired, in part, by a random chat he had with two Border Patrol agents at one of his golf resorts, two of his friends told me—road-test his talking points. Trump picked up insights and policies like a stand-up comedian collecting material for a show. The subject he kept coming back to, increasingly, was anger, and Trump’s promise to build a wall on the Mexican border became a staple, simply because it got the greatest applause lines.

    “He lives for the energy. There’s no one better at taking the temperature of the crowd,” Lewandowski told me during the campaign. “You can get instant feedback. … We’d test out all of our best lines, some would work, some wouldn’t. … That’s how we got ‘Little Marco’ and ‘Lyin’ Ted.’” How precise a focus group were the rallies? Trump started with Little Marco—then switched to “’Lil” because it got more laughs.

    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    @Boomstick

    I felt this way too after my first Trump rally.

    Its why whenever the Doom Brigade went on about "muh Nate Silver" I knew they were full of it and had no clue what was actually going on.

    , @Jefferson
    @Boomstick

    "Trump rallies were happenings. People wanted to be there, they generated excitement, and the campaign tried out ideas there to see what worked. It was an old school approach, and I don’t know that other candidates could have pulled that off."

    Crooked Hildabeast rallies were quite dead when Beyonce, Jay-Z, Bon Jovi, Bruce Springsteen, LeBron James, etc were not there to add star power. Any politician who relies way too much on Hollywood celebrities to get people to come to their rallies does not have an ounce of charisma. If people are more excited to see Katy Perry than you, than you suck as a political campaigner.

    Democrat JFK didn't get elected POTUS in 1960 by having Rod Serling from The Twilight Zone and Alfred Hitchcock show up at his rallies. JFK didn't need them because he was a vastly superior politician than Crooked Hildabeast in the charisma department.

    Replies: @guest

    , @e
    @Boomstick

    Trump’s decision to call out Mexican “rapists” at his kickoff, for example, was inspired, in part, by a random chat he had with two Border Patrol agents at one of his golf resorts, two of his friends told me—road-test his talking points.

    Trump comes across as someone who looks for and can recognize unconventional opportunities in real time, and then capitalize on them.


    He has said to his audiences many times that he didn't even know how much of an issue illegal immigration was until he heard it from people in the crowds. He added that the wall was an idea he got from listening to them.

    Imagine that! Imagine a guy running for office admitting he got an idea of what was bothering people by listening to them and yes, parroting what they said. That's not the definition of "leader" according to media and other pols. However, it IS the idea most have in mind when they say they wish someone to represent them.

    Replies: @Light Roast, @slumber_j

    , @guest
    @Boomstick

    They were appreciated at the time, which is why vibrant thugs were dispatched to stir things up and make them look bad. This may have been forgotten over the period when Clinton was trouncing Trump in the polls and the MSM was calling for Trump to get out before he embarrasses himself. I don't know.

    Certainly last spring Trump events were widely recognized as "happenings."

    , @Buffalo Joe
    @Boomstick

    Boomstick, They recognized the enthusiasm and messaging at the Bernie rallies, but they had the nomination in the bag. They then thought they had the election in the bag but they thought wrong.

  30. I get the feeling that the Clinton campaign liked “big data” and “data-driven” campaigning because it was comfortable, indoor work that didn’t have as much face-to-face contact with actual voters.

    • Agree: antipater_1
    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
    @Boomstick


    I get the feeling that the Clinton campaign liked “big data” and “data-driven” campaigning because it was comfortable, indoor work that didn’t have as much face-to-face contact with actual voters.
     
    Every institution is seduced by The Spreadsheet. Life is sooooooo orderly when you can make a pretty graph with just a few clicks of the mouse.

    On a level we simply can't grasp, this deluded obsession with turning the subjective into numbers and then analyzing what the algorithms produce is leading us to a cliff of unprecedented proportions. It's like producing a map from how people feel about the territory...plugging it into a GPS navigator and then driving with an opaque windshield.

    Replies: @Desiderius, @Jack D

  31. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Mr. Anon
    Of course the Hillary campaign couldn't be bothered to canvas for votes. Why would all those gay guys and cat-girls-with-problem-glasses want to talk to icky racist white men anyway?

    And it's not like anyone would tell the Dear Leader there was a problem; it would only provoke a drunken, shrill, lamp-throwing tantrum. Her campaign was her whole adult life redux: arrogance and incompetence.

    Replies: @Anon, @Laugh Track

    Upper-middle-class introverted intellectuals don’t like meeting strangers (it takes them out of their comfort zone and safe space), and they don’t do front porch sales very well. They try to avoid actual canvassing because they find it a psychological strain. They’d rather peruse data on their computers.

    None of these privately schooled, sheltered kids hugging their safe spaces around them had the guts to walk into a ghetto to attempt to turn out the black vote for Hillary, and thus her share of the black vote for her declined. These kids knew they’d be raped, mugged, or killed if they tried it. They also believed their own propaganda about the working class white being a bunch of evil racist Trump supporters, and the kids didn’t have the stomach for the mockery they’d have to endure from some working class Trump voter (who they looked down on) laughing in their faces. That too would have taken them out of their safe space and violated the certitude and righteousness-of-their-cause self-satisfaction they like to wallow in.

    • Agree: Fredrik, Kylie
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    @Anon


    Upper-middle-class introverted intellectuals don’t like meeting strangers (it takes them out of their comfort zone and safe space), and they don’t do front porch sales very well.
     
    This is what happened to mainline Protestant evangelism.

    Replies: @stillCARealist

    , @Bill
    @Anon


    None of these privately schooled, sheltered kids hugging their safe spaces around them had the guts to walk into a ghetto to attempt to turn out the black vote for Hillary
     
    Not sure the black vote would have turned out for such people. The social worker wants me to go vote . . .
  32. @Boomstick
    The Trump rallies were something hiding in plain sight that I think still haven't been properly credited. Most political rallies seem to be rather spiritless affairs, with the candidate giving the same stump speech. The Trump rallies were happenings. People wanted to be there, they generated excitement, and the campaign tried out ideas there to see what worked. It was an old school approach, and I don't know that other candidates could have pulled that off.

    Glenn Thrush has some good reporting (mixed in, as usual, with some petulant water-carrying for Hillary) below. Trump comes across as someone who looks for and can recognize unconventional opportunities in real time, and then capitalize on them.

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/2016-presidential-election-10-moments-trump-clinton-214508

    For all his deficiencies as a campaign manager, it became clear that Lewandowski mind-melded with his new boss. And he saw something the more jaded professionals who viewed Trump as an orange-coiffed clown couldn’t: The monster rallies he was proving so good at putting together weren’t just a part of Trump’s campaign, they were his campaign, the source of his power, a showcase for the candidate’s rambling genius, not to mention arena-size focus groups for his messaging and a test run for his vintage Trump insults.
    ...
    From that point on, Trump’s rallies became the centerpiece of the campaign. Trump told Lewandowski to book as many of them as he could. And they served to obscure the campaign’s glaring shortcomings, while letting an improvising candidate—Trump’s decision to call out Mexican “rapists” at his kickoff, for example, was inspired, in part, by a random chat he had with two Border Patrol agents at one of his golf resorts, two of his friends told me—road-test his talking points. Trump picked up insights and policies like a stand-up comedian collecting material for a show. The subject he kept coming back to, increasingly, was anger, and Trump’s promise to build a wall on the Mexican border became a staple, simply because it got the greatest applause lines.

    “He lives for the energy. There’s no one better at taking the temperature of the crowd,” Lewandowski told me during the campaign. “You can get instant feedback. … We’d test out all of our best lines, some would work, some wouldn’t. … That’s how we got ‘Little Marco’ and ‘Lyin’ Ted.’” How precise a focus group were the rallies? Trump started with Little Marco—then switched to “’Lil” because it got more laughs.

     

    Replies: @Jack Hanson, @Jefferson, @e, @guest, @Buffalo Joe

    I felt this way too after my first Trump rally.

    Its why whenever the Doom Brigade went on about “muh Nate Silver” I knew they were full of it and had no clue what was actually going on.

  33. @Opinionator
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    A very experienced guy I know, doing Hillary’s New Hampshire field, went to BK HQ once and said it was a bunch of college kids sitting on the floor

    And these kids despise White Americans.

    What is "re-ID"?

    Replies: @Ghost of Bull Moose

    Confirming your IDs. GOTV usually doesn’t have much persuasion, prime voters are not being flipped by a day worker the day before an election.

  34. So Trump didn’t have the money, staff or professional campaign organization of the Rodhamster yet he beat her in the battleground states from Florida to Wisconsin! As a result we won’t have a gang of incompetent sexual predators roaming the White House and ‘Fruity’ Mook and ‘Pizzagate Podesta’ can go look for ‘shovel ready’ work.

    • Replies: @David In TN
    @unit472

    At the start of the primary season, the cucks, Conservatism Inc, Neocons, etc., said Trump couldn't win (the primaries) because he lacked a ground game.

  35. @Ivy
    @Daniel H

    Weight Watchers or Lean Cuisine pitch gal? She may need the cash after the high living, and it worked for the reintroduction of Princess Fergie some years ago.

    Replies: @Jefferson

    “Weight Watchers or Lean Cuisine pitch gal? She may need the cash after the high living, and it worked for the reintroduction of Princess Fergie some years ago.”

    I am surprised she got so fat when she only dates cocaine dealers. Female cokeheads tend to be coat hanger skinny bitches.

  36. @Mr. Anon
    @Clyde

    When "pizzagate" became a thing, I looked up John and Tony Podesta's wikipedia pages. One thing that struck me was the number of losing campaigns they had worked on - going back to the 60s in the case of Tony. I'm not sure either of them have ever worked on a winning campaign (Podesta worked in the Clinton White House, but I don't remember him having a prominent role in the 92 campaign).

    Replies: @Jefferson

    “When “pizzagate” became a thing, I looked up John and Tony Podesta’s wikipedia pages.”

    The vast majority pedophiles in Washington DC are Democrats, which gives new meaning to the term Coalition Of The Fringes.

    • Replies: @CK
    @Jefferson

    The vast majority of DC residents are dems. 90 to 4 for Hillary.

    Replies: @Jefferson

    , @Jack D
    @Jefferson

    The vast majority of EVERYBODY in Washington are Democrats (Hillary got 91% of the vote, Trump got 4%), so this is not saying much. Has there ever been a national capital in an unoccupied country that was so out of step with the rest of the country? Even the Chinese Communists were very concerned that their rulers would be drawn from the people.

    Replies: @Desiderius

  37. My wife attends a monthly knitting circle of about 15 elderly “white” ladies in rural Pennsylvania. A few are in their 60s. Most are in their late late 70s.

    They went out for a Christmas lunch together last Tuesday. The discussion moved to politics. They were all strong Trump supporters with the exception of a divorcee who had hateful things to say about her ex.

    I wonder how Hillary played this demographic in her election bid. Finding out that elderly “white” ladies who knit and vote were strong Trump supports would not have boded well for Hillary’s anti-White Male, identity-based rhetoric.

  38. @Boomstick
    The Trump rallies were something hiding in plain sight that I think still haven't been properly credited. Most political rallies seem to be rather spiritless affairs, with the candidate giving the same stump speech. The Trump rallies were happenings. People wanted to be there, they generated excitement, and the campaign tried out ideas there to see what worked. It was an old school approach, and I don't know that other candidates could have pulled that off.

    Glenn Thrush has some good reporting (mixed in, as usual, with some petulant water-carrying for Hillary) below. Trump comes across as someone who looks for and can recognize unconventional opportunities in real time, and then capitalize on them.

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/2016-presidential-election-10-moments-trump-clinton-214508

    For all his deficiencies as a campaign manager, it became clear that Lewandowski mind-melded with his new boss. And he saw something the more jaded professionals who viewed Trump as an orange-coiffed clown couldn’t: The monster rallies he was proving so good at putting together weren’t just a part of Trump’s campaign, they were his campaign, the source of his power, a showcase for the candidate’s rambling genius, not to mention arena-size focus groups for his messaging and a test run for his vintage Trump insults.
    ...
    From that point on, Trump’s rallies became the centerpiece of the campaign. Trump told Lewandowski to book as many of them as he could. And they served to obscure the campaign’s glaring shortcomings, while letting an improvising candidate—Trump’s decision to call out Mexican “rapists” at his kickoff, for example, was inspired, in part, by a random chat he had with two Border Patrol agents at one of his golf resorts, two of his friends told me—road-test his talking points. Trump picked up insights and policies like a stand-up comedian collecting material for a show. The subject he kept coming back to, increasingly, was anger, and Trump’s promise to build a wall on the Mexican border became a staple, simply because it got the greatest applause lines.

    “He lives for the energy. There’s no one better at taking the temperature of the crowd,” Lewandowski told me during the campaign. “You can get instant feedback. … We’d test out all of our best lines, some would work, some wouldn’t. … That’s how we got ‘Little Marco’ and ‘Lyin’ Ted.’” How precise a focus group were the rallies? Trump started with Little Marco—then switched to “’Lil” because it got more laughs.

     

    Replies: @Jack Hanson, @Jefferson, @e, @guest, @Buffalo Joe

    “Trump rallies were happenings. People wanted to be there, they generated excitement, and the campaign tried out ideas there to see what worked. It was an old school approach, and I don’t know that other candidates could have pulled that off.”

    Crooked Hildabeast rallies were quite dead when Beyonce, Jay-Z, Bon Jovi, Bruce Springsteen, LeBron James, etc were not there to add star power. Any politician who relies way too much on Hollywood celebrities to get people to come to their rallies does not have an ounce of charisma. If people are more excited to see Katy Perry than you, than you suck as a political campaigner.

    Democrat JFK didn’t get elected POTUS in 1960 by having Rod Serling from The Twilight Zone and Alfred Hitchcock show up at his rallies. JFK didn’t need them because he was a vastly superior politician than Crooked Hildabeast in the charisma department.

    • Replies: @guest
    @Jefferson

    He had Sinatra.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @Buffalo Joe

  39. Putin hacked Robbie Mook’s brain.

    • Replies: @Forbes
    @jimmyriddle

    As Putin was the only one who located it...

  40. Word is out that dumbass Donna Brazile directed this dumbass strategy.
    ________
    DNC Poured Millions Into Chicago To Win Popular Vote
    The Daily Caller 20 hours ago
    Dec 14, 2016 · DNC Poured Millions Into Chicago Fearing Hillary Might Win Election But Lose … Donna Brazile, … rather than focus on swings states like Michigan …

  41. Donna Brazile’s crazy actions sounds like a typical affirmative action disaster. So does the DNC cybersecurity team. The inept IT guy ignored FBI calls: “Mr. Tamene’s initial scan of the D.N.C. system — using his less-than-optimal tools and incomplete targeting information from the F.B.I. — found nothing. So when Special Agent Hawkins called repeatedly in October, leaving voice mail messages for Mr. Tamene, urging him to call back, “I did not return his calls, as I had nothing to report,” Mr. Tamene explained in his memo.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/13/us/politics/russia-hack-election-dnc.html?_r=0

    • Replies: @candid_observer
    @midtown

    It's pretty shocking to see the excuses this IT guy gave for not following up with obviously urgent calls by the FBI no less. Who else but an AA hire would think he could get away with this?

    I really do wonder how much of the Democratic operation in general is damaged by the Coalition of the Fringes--which is mostly the Coalition of the Incompetent.

    There is a big price to be paid for putting underqualified and undersmart people in key positions. And it's everywhere with the Democrats. Even at the Supreme Court, with its most recent appointment, it wasn't enough that of the previous three Democratic appointments, two were women, and one of those was a wise Latina: no, they had to appoint still another woman. But it's obvious that in the law in particular the very upper end in ability is greatly dominated by men -- and at the very tippy top, probably it's exclusively men, much as in the sciences. So not a single one of the three women Democratic appointees is going to display any intellectual heft in such an exalted setting as the SC. All they represent, and know how to represent, is their own partisan agenda.

    The Republicans don't limit themselves like this, even though they do make some AA appointments for PR purposes. They aren't committed to incompetence.

    Replies: @BenKenobi, @Jack D, @guest

    , @Dahlia
    @midtown

    Hillary Clinton's campaign just released the worst Venn diagram of all time

    http://www.vox.com/2016/5/20/11721368/hillary-clinton-guns-venn-diagram
    ------


    But a review of Democrats' advertising decisions at the end of the race suggests Clinton and her allies weren't playing to win a close one. They were playing for a blowout. And it cost them.
     

    In the closing weeks of the presidential race, Hillary Clinton's campaign — and the outside groups that supported it — aired more television advertisements in Omaha than in the states of Michigan and Wisconsin combined. The Omaha ads were in pursuit of a *single* electoral vote in a Nebraska congressional district, which Clinton did not ultimately win, and also bled into households in Iowa, which also she did not win. *Michigan and Wisconsin add up to 26 electoral votes*; she appears not to have won them, either.
     
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/12/the-advertising-decisions-that-helped-doom-hillary-clinton/
    ---------------
    Serious question: is there any known instance in US history of a presidential campaign deciding to focus on the popular vote?

    This isn't Monday morning quarterbacking. We watched the collapse of a major party's campaign owing to low intelligence and lack of basic competence, not to mention also having witnessed its candidate's physical collapse on a New York sidewalk.

    Replies: @Anon, @Anon, @Jack D

  42. @Ghost of Bull Moose
    Field and real-time data is the least prestigious, least lucrative of the various components of a campaign. It's what I do.

    I don't count paid polling, because those guys are vendors and get paid plenty to poll people from three states away. Of all the consultants freaking out, these guys should be most freaked out, because they are all over the place and increasingly unreliable.

    Canvassing, in-house phone banks, etc, on the other hand, can be very useful. The notes on walksheets Isaac is talking about are highly informative. For instance, we had prime Dems in Nassau county,NY, white women even, saying they were going straight ticket EXCEPT for HRC. I noticed this on the re-ID the weekend of GOTV, and it made me think she might be in some trouble ( I was believing the CW mostly until then).

    A very experienced guy I know, doing Hillary's New Hampshire field, went to BK HQ once and said it was a bunch of college kids sitting on the floor 'microtargeting' on their laptops, which is what the old heads call it when the kids sit around the office IMing each other.

    Replies: @Sam Haysom, @Dr. X, @Opinionator, @Eric Novak, @charlie, @Forbes

    What’s BK HQ? Burger King corporate?

    • Replies: @Bob Arctor
    @Eric Novak


    What’s BK HQ? Burger King corporate?
     
    Hillary Clinton's Brooklyn Headquarters.
    , @Mark Eugenikos
    @Eric Novak

    Brooklyn headquarters.

    , @Jack D
    @Eric Novak

    I assume he means Hillary's Brooklyn HQ.

  43. If you knock on their doors, then you’d have to listen to them talk back, and they would probably saying something intolerably intolerant, those hateful, hopefully soon dead white men.

    The entire theme of the 2016 election cycle was the supposed “political center” openly declaring political warfare on whites.

    Post-election, they’ve actually doubled down on this open declaration of war in what must be the mistaken belief that they’re actually the “political center.”

    It’s surreal, watching the Left Cultists on TeeVee spike the ball…oblivious that they’re nowhere near the end zone. They think Trump is one-and-done?

    I sincerely hope they keep it up. I don’t think they can do otherwise, so deeply immerse are they in the bubble of their own making.

    • Replies: @Forbes
    @dc.sunsets


    I sincerely hope they keep it up. I don’t think they can do otherwise, so deeply immerse are they in the bubble of their own making.
     
    By all available evidence--this is what they are doing.
  44. @Boomstick
    I get the feeling that the Clinton campaign liked "big data" and "data-driven" campaigning because it was comfortable, indoor work that didn't have as much face-to-face contact with actual voters.

    Replies: @dc.sunsets

    I get the feeling that the Clinton campaign liked “big data” and “data-driven” campaigning because it was comfortable, indoor work that didn’t have as much face-to-face contact with actual voters.

    Every institution is seduced by The Spreadsheet. Life is sooooooo orderly when you can make a pretty graph with just a few clicks of the mouse.

    On a level we simply can’t grasp, this deluded obsession with turning the subjective into numbers and then analyzing what the algorithms produce is leading us to a cliff of unprecedented proportions. It’s like producing a map from how people feel about the territory…plugging it into a GPS navigator and then driving with an opaque windshield.

    • Agree: Abe, Forbes
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    @dc.sunsets


    On a level we simply can’t grasp, this deluded obsession with turning the subjective into numbers and then analyzing what the algorithms produce is leading us to a cliff of unprecedented proportions. It’s like producing a map from how people feel about the territory…plugging it into a GPS navigator and then driving with an opaque windshield.
     
    Good analogies.

    Our elites (sic) are so bad because they're selected and promoted purely on their capacity for/inclination toward abstract thought rather than the ability to effectively integrate and apply the abstract and concrete. The former is more readily identifiable at an early age, while the latter is often found in those whose brains take longer to mature, so the current selection process also skews female.

    We're systematically selecting hares over tortoises then wondering why we're losing the race.

    Replies: @Opinionator

    , @Jack D
    @dc.sunsets

    You don't understand. Brooklyn didn't just have a spreadsheet, they had ADA, their super secret death star supercomputer forecasting tool that was going to be triumphantly revealed the day after the election (the stories were already pre-written). Each night they would feed it all the pertinent variables and it would run 500,000 simulated elections and tell HQ where to spend the $. When the program trading algorithm that the quants use to game Wall Street tells them to sell X shares of this and buy Y shares of that or European forecasting model says that you are going to get 12 inches of snow in Syracuse on Tuesday, you don't question it because it's operating on a plane far higher than mere human comprehension. So when ADA told Brooklyn to put all the ad money in Omaha and none in Wisconsin, they weren't going to question it either - ADA had her reasons and some union guy in Milwaukee didn't have the big picture.

  45. “They believed they were more experienced, which they were. They believed they were smarter, which they weren’t,” said Donnie Fowler, who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee during the final months of the campaign. “They believed they had better information, which they didn’t.”

    After all, they were only taking their cue from Maximum Leader. There’s an old saying: “S**t rolls downhill.” I keep thinking back to the Arkansas days, when then-Governor Bill Clinton and the Wife Of Record were attending a U. of Arkansas football game. While Bill was cheering on the Razorbacks and schmoozing with the fans and making nice-nice, Hillary was sitting next to him—reading a book, oblivious to (in the words of Mr. Darcy in Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice) “the masses at play.”

  46. Team Hillary! sent a lot of people knocking on doors in our PA neighborhood. Most of them seemed to be from out of state. Our local paper confirmed this with a glowing article about the dedicated (((volunteers from New York City))) who were making the trip out here to work for Her. They came to our house many times since mrs 25 year old registered dem to vote for Bernie (and against Hillary, who she despises). Most of the time they asked for my wife by name and when I said she wasn’t home, they just left and gave me a flier.

    The weekend before the election, the canvassers also asked whether I would be voting for Hillary. I politely said no, I was voting for her opponent, and told them good luck because they had a really hard sell being as Hillary was such a terrible candidate. They then proceeded to try to talk me into switching my vote to Hillary, and did not want to accept my polite statements that there was no point in trying to change my mind. I said look, guys, these two candidates have radically different and in fact, literally opposing plans for the nation. They have opposing philosophies on what it even means to have a nation. I’m on one side and your candidate is on the other side. This difference can’t be reconciled, period. At this point the male volunteer appeared to get it and made facial signs like he was going to give up but his partner changed tactics. She said, look, for me, it’s about the hateful rhetoric. Donald Trump, she said, has hate in his heart for whole classes of people. I said there’s just as much hate coming from your side. Hillary called trump voters deplorable, irredeemable. That’s half the electorate, 50-60 million people.

    Their response was as follows: “she didn’t say that, she said half of half, so like a quarter of the electorate. And she apologized”.

    I laughed a lot and said look I have to get on with my day now, goodbye.

    Thinking back, I should have taken one for the team and argued with them all day, thus preventing them from reaching any other possible voters. Luckily that turned out not to matter. But anyway, even the people who were motivated to get off their ass for Her had no clue what was really going on in this election.

  47. @Anon
    @Mr. Anon

    Upper-middle-class introverted intellectuals don't like meeting strangers (it takes them out of their comfort zone and safe space), and they don't do front porch sales very well. They try to avoid actual canvassing because they find it a psychological strain. They'd rather peruse data on their computers.

    None of these privately schooled, sheltered kids hugging their safe spaces around them had the guts to walk into a ghetto to attempt to turn out the black vote for Hillary, and thus her share of the black vote for her declined. These kids knew they'd be raped, mugged, or killed if they tried it. They also believed their own propaganda about the working class white being a bunch of evil racist Trump supporters, and the kids didn't have the stomach for the mockery they'd have to endure from some working class Trump voter (who they looked down on) laughing in their faces. That too would have taken them out of their safe space and violated the certitude and righteousness-of-their-cause self-satisfaction they like to wallow in.

    Replies: @Desiderius, @Bill

    Upper-middle-class introverted intellectuals don’t like meeting strangers (it takes them out of their comfort zone and safe space), and they don’t do front porch sales very well.

    This is what happened to mainline Protestant evangelism.

    • Replies: @stillCARealist
    @Desiderius

    This is what happened to mainline Protestant evangelism.

    Remember, different parts of the body have different jobs. My bro's Presbyterian church is booming because they don't try to restrain their Latino evangelists.

    Diffident white people, work on not getting embarrassed so easily!

  48. @dc.sunsets
    @Boomstick


    I get the feeling that the Clinton campaign liked “big data” and “data-driven” campaigning because it was comfortable, indoor work that didn’t have as much face-to-face contact with actual voters.
     
    Every institution is seduced by The Spreadsheet. Life is sooooooo orderly when you can make a pretty graph with just a few clicks of the mouse.

    On a level we simply can't grasp, this deluded obsession with turning the subjective into numbers and then analyzing what the algorithms produce is leading us to a cliff of unprecedented proportions. It's like producing a map from how people feel about the territory...plugging it into a GPS navigator and then driving with an opaque windshield.

    Replies: @Desiderius, @Jack D

    On a level we simply can’t grasp, this deluded obsession with turning the subjective into numbers and then analyzing what the algorithms produce is leading us to a cliff of unprecedented proportions. It’s like producing a map from how people feel about the territory…plugging it into a GPS navigator and then driving with an opaque windshield.

    Good analogies.

    Our elites (sic) are so bad because they’re selected and promoted purely on their capacity for/inclination toward abstract thought rather than the ability to effectively integrate and apply the abstract and concrete. The former is more readily identifiable at an early age, while the latter is often found in those whose brains take longer to mature, so the current selection process also skews female.

    We’re systematically selecting hares over tortoises then wondering why we’re losing the race.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @Desiderius


    Our elites (sic) are so bad because they’re selected and promoted purely on their capacity for/inclination toward abstract thought rather than the ability to effectively integrate and apply the abstract and concrete. The former is more readily identifiable at an early age, while the latter is often found in those whose brains take longer to mature, so the current selection process also skews female.

     

    The problem with the "elites" isn't their means. It is their ends.
  49. @Jefferson
    @Mr. Anon

    "When “pizzagate” became a thing, I looked up John and Tony Podesta’s wikipedia pages."

    The vast majority pedophiles in Washington DC are Democrats, which gives new meaning to the term Coalition Of The Fringes.

    Replies: @CK, @Jack D

    The vast majority of DC residents are dems. 90 to 4 for Hillary.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    @CK

    "The vast majority of DC residents are dems. 90 to 4 for Hillary."

    Dems are more likely to disproportionately be pedophiles than Republicans because the DNC attracts so many Homosexual men and Heterosexual men in general who have no moral values like Anthony Weiner for example.

  50. @unit472
    So Trump didn't have the money, staff or professional campaign organization of the Rodhamster yet he beat her in the battleground states from Florida to Wisconsin! As a result we won't have a gang of incompetent sexual predators roaming the White House and 'Fruity' Mook and 'Pizzagate Podesta' can go look for 'shovel ready' work.

    Replies: @David In TN

    At the start of the primary season, the cucks, Conservatism Inc, Neocons, etc., said Trump couldn’t win (the primaries) because he lacked a ground game.

  51. @Gilbert Ratchet
    I guess they didn't have the rights to whatever entrance music they actually used in Michigan? That would explain the weird noodling guitar overdub in the video.

    Replies: @slumber_j, @Clyde

    That was a regular and baffling feature of all Trump-rally audio feeds. You’re probably right.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @slumber_j

    There are byzantine rules for the licensing of music rights for live performance, broadcast, internet and recording. It's not uncommon for the DVD/VCR version of a TV show to have completely different music than the broadcast show had - they sometimes replace all the recognizable songs and artists with "royalty free music" , which is some hack diddling away at a synth.

    Replies: @slumber_j, @whorefinder

  52. @Eric Novak
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    What's BK HQ? Burger King corporate?

    Replies: @Bob Arctor, @Mark Eugenikos, @Jack D

    What’s BK HQ? Burger King corporate?

    Hillary Clinton’s Brooklyn Headquarters.

  53. @Desiderius
    @dc.sunsets


    On a level we simply can’t grasp, this deluded obsession with turning the subjective into numbers and then analyzing what the algorithms produce is leading us to a cliff of unprecedented proportions. It’s like producing a map from how people feel about the territory…plugging it into a GPS navigator and then driving with an opaque windshield.
     
    Good analogies.

    Our elites (sic) are so bad because they're selected and promoted purely on their capacity for/inclination toward abstract thought rather than the ability to effectively integrate and apply the abstract and concrete. The former is more readily identifiable at an early age, while the latter is often found in those whose brains take longer to mature, so the current selection process also skews female.

    We're systematically selecting hares over tortoises then wondering why we're losing the race.

    Replies: @Opinionator

    Our elites (sic) are so bad because they’re selected and promoted purely on their capacity for/inclination toward abstract thought rather than the ability to effectively integrate and apply the abstract and concrete. The former is more readily identifiable at an early age, while the latter is often found in those whose brains take longer to mature, so the current selection process also skews female.

    The problem with the “elites” isn’t their means. It is their ends.

  54. Hillary ran as foolish a campaign as was possible, endangered national security through her use of her own home server, was proven to be personally corrupt, had what appeared to be a creepy clown without make-up as her vice-presidential candidate, had nothing original to say on any topic and said nothing indicating she would change our current trajectory which has produced flat median wages and a declining average life span (unheard of in a developed country) and yet she won a majority of the popular vote. Now her supporters in the media and chattering classes are busy trying to pull off a coup by lobbying Trump electors to vote against Trump. And this effort, publicized in the NY Times through multiple op-eds, is applauded by a great many of those Hillary voters, despite the fact that, if successful, it would lead to an actual armed insurrection. Of course I am overjoyed Trump won but all of the above speak to a very unhealthy country.

  55. @Mr. Anon
    Of course the Hillary campaign couldn't be bothered to canvas for votes. Why would all those gay guys and cat-girls-with-problem-glasses want to talk to icky racist white men anyway?

    And it's not like anyone would tell the Dear Leader there was a problem; it would only provoke a drunken, shrill, lamp-throwing tantrum. Her campaign was her whole adult life redux: arrogance and incompetence.

    Replies: @Anon, @Laugh Track

    all those gay guys and cat-girls-with-problem-glasses

    Love it!

    • Replies: @Kylie
    @Laugh Track

    Mr. Anon never disappoints.

  56. @Eric Novak
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    What's BK HQ? Burger King corporate?

    Replies: @Bob Arctor, @Mark Eugenikos, @Jack D

    Brooklyn headquarters.

  57. @midtown
    Donna Brazile's crazy actions sounds like a typical affirmative action disaster. So does the DNC cybersecurity team. The inept IT guy ignored FBI calls: "Mr. Tamene’s initial scan of the D.N.C. system — using his less-than-optimal tools and incomplete targeting information from the F.B.I. — found nothing. So when Special Agent Hawkins called repeatedly in October, leaving voice mail messages for Mr. Tamene, urging him to call back, “I did not return his calls, as I had nothing to report,” Mr. Tamene explained in his memo."

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/13/us/politics/russia-hack-election-dnc.html?_r=0

    Replies: @candid_observer, @Dahlia

    It’s pretty shocking to see the excuses this IT guy gave for not following up with obviously urgent calls by the FBI no less. Who else but an AA hire would think he could get away with this?

    I really do wonder how much of the Democratic operation in general is damaged by the Coalition of the Fringes–which is mostly the Coalition of the Incompetent.

    There is a big price to be paid for putting underqualified and undersmart people in key positions. And it’s everywhere with the Democrats. Even at the Supreme Court, with its most recent appointment, it wasn’t enough that of the previous three Democratic appointments, two were women, and one of those was a wise Latina: no, they had to appoint still another woman. But it’s obvious that in the law in particular the very upper end in ability is greatly dominated by men — and at the very tippy top, probably it’s exclusively men, much as in the sciences. So not a single one of the three women Democratic appointees is going to display any intellectual heft in such an exalted setting as the SC. All they represent, and know how to represent, is their own partisan agenda.

    The Republicans don’t limit themselves like this, even though they do make some AA appointments for PR purposes. They aren’t committed to incompetence.

    • Replies: @BenKenobi
    @candid_observer

    I've said it before -- Affirmative Action is one of our fifth columns.

    , @Jack D
    @candid_observer

    I have mentioned Kunta Kinte (or whatever his name is) the Ethiopian"IT specialist" several times now but it doesn't seem to have resonated with the commentariat, even here let alone in the wider world where noticing this would be a thought crime. If the US sent a bunch of Asian and Jewish guys to the Olympics as their marathon runners or their basketball team, they would be a laughing stock but we don't think twice about putting an Ethiopian up against top notch Russian hackers .

    Sotomayor is an affirmative action baby but both Ginsburg and Kagan have real intellectual chops. They (especially Kagan) may be committed leftists but they are no dummies. There have been plenty of Republican S. Court justices who were not as bright as these two.

    Replies: @Barnard

    , @guest
    @candid_observer

    Why do you think that proficiency in the Law is an actual goal of SCOTUS nominations? That's like imagining party leadership chooses presidential candidates based on who would be best at being president. We're so far past that, nobody even knows what being a good president or what law is anymore.

    Justices are politicians. Their job is to put through what their gang likes and block what it doesn't, plus look good doing it. A superficial familiarity with actual law might help them look good, but that doesn't much matter when you control the MSM and the schools and write the books.

  58. Dahlia says:
    @midtown
    Donna Brazile's crazy actions sounds like a typical affirmative action disaster. So does the DNC cybersecurity team. The inept IT guy ignored FBI calls: "Mr. Tamene’s initial scan of the D.N.C. system — using his less-than-optimal tools and incomplete targeting information from the F.B.I. — found nothing. So when Special Agent Hawkins called repeatedly in October, leaving voice mail messages for Mr. Tamene, urging him to call back, “I did not return his calls, as I had nothing to report,” Mr. Tamene explained in his memo."

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/13/us/politics/russia-hack-election-dnc.html?_r=0

    Replies: @candid_observer, @Dahlia

    Hillary Clinton’s campaign just released the worst Venn diagram of all time

    http://www.vox.com/2016/5/20/11721368/hillary-clinton-guns-venn-diagram
    ——

    But a review of Democrats’ advertising decisions at the end of the race suggests Clinton and her allies weren’t playing to win a close one. They were playing for a blowout. And it cost them.

    In the closing weeks of the presidential race, Hillary Clinton’s campaign — and the outside groups that supported it — aired more television advertisements in Omaha than in the states of Michigan and Wisconsin combined. The Omaha ads were in pursuit of a *single* electoral vote in a Nebraska congressional district, which Clinton did not ultimately win, and also bled into households in Iowa, which also she did not win. *Michigan and Wisconsin add up to 26 electoral votes*; she appears not to have won them, either.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/12/the-advertising-decisions-that-helped-doom-hillary-clinton/
    —————
    Serious question: is there any known instance in US history of a presidential campaign deciding to focus on the popular vote?

    This isn’t Monday morning quarterbacking. We watched the collapse of a major party’s campaign owing to low intelligence and lack of basic competence, not to mention also having witnessed its candidate’s physical collapse on a New York sidewalk.

    • Replies: @Anon
    @Dahlia

    You focus on the popular vote (if you think you're going to win the electoral vote) if you want bragging rights. Hillary wanted to be the candidate who could brag about winning both. She wanted a mandate for her antics in office and a sharp reply to her critics who kept saying she was a crook.

    , @Anon
    @Dahlia

    Hey, all that ballot box stuffing and cheating is expensive. Its costs are higher than mere honest campaigning. I wouldn't be surprised if all those black precinct captains were saying to the Dems, "You got to pay us a bit more for our trouble, white lady. After all, you ain't brother Obama."

    , @Jack D
    @Dahlia

    The" Venn diagram" wasn't a Venn diagram at all , just sort of an art major's idea of what a Venn diagram should look like (a bunch of overlapping circles) but most of the people looking at it wouldn't know any better either - in other words, Idiocracy, we are here!

    Hillary has a sort of reverse Midas touch, probably owing to her personality flaws (paranoid style, hunger for power, complete lack of human touch, etc.) - every major endeavor she has ever been at the head of has turned to crap. The ultimate low intelligence move was putting this shrill cow at the head of a national ticket. Almost ANYBODY they could have run would have done better.

  59. @Anon
    @Mr. Anon

    Upper-middle-class introverted intellectuals don't like meeting strangers (it takes them out of their comfort zone and safe space), and they don't do front porch sales very well. They try to avoid actual canvassing because they find it a psychological strain. They'd rather peruse data on their computers.

    None of these privately schooled, sheltered kids hugging their safe spaces around them had the guts to walk into a ghetto to attempt to turn out the black vote for Hillary, and thus her share of the black vote for her declined. These kids knew they'd be raped, mugged, or killed if they tried it. They also believed their own propaganda about the working class white being a bunch of evil racist Trump supporters, and the kids didn't have the stomach for the mockery they'd have to endure from some working class Trump voter (who they looked down on) laughing in their faces. That too would have taken them out of their safe space and violated the certitude and righteousness-of-their-cause self-satisfaction they like to wallow in.

    Replies: @Desiderius, @Bill

    None of these privately schooled, sheltered kids hugging their safe spaces around them had the guts to walk into a ghetto to attempt to turn out the black vote for Hillary

    Not sure the black vote would have turned out for such people. The social worker wants me to go vote . . .

  60. And yet, all we heard was how Hillary’s ground game and data game were so superior to Trump’s.

    The two ways we can take this is that either they were and therefore ground/data don’t much matter, or they weren’t that much better if they were better at all.

    • Replies: @Forbes
    @countenance

    So, more fake news apparently...

    It bears repeating--if you view news reporting as performed by Democratic operatives with by-lines you be wrong.

    Trump's data operation was run out of San Antonio. What are the chances anyone in the lapdog media knew this, or reported on it substantively? In other words, you're taking Dem operatives word for the judgement of superiority (which, of course, is opinion not news).

    Replies: @Forbes, @countenance

  61. @Barnard
    @Sam Haysom

    Hillary was viewed so negatively, I'm not sure how much it would have helped. Obviously they shouldn't have turned away people looking for yard signs or trying to persuade others in the neighborhoods, but I'm not convinced it would have made a difference for Hillary because of how negatively she and her staff view working class whites. I don't think there is anything that could have been said that would have swayed over 95% of them.

    Replies: @Pericles, @Wanda

    Apocryphal campaign slogan by David Axelrod: “Hillary. Get used to it!”

  62. anon • Disclaimer says:

    Trump still won the white college vote as well. Its a myth that all trumpsters were blue collar. Most of them were probably high income around 80,000 in places like Suffolk county New York. The downtrodden were mainly in Kentucky and West Virginia but Trump outperfrom Clinton in even in incomes above 200,000 since many of those folks didn’t finished college and started their own business both the left and right like the working class myth stuff since it fits into their ideas of Trump supporters which were just as likely to be white collar as blue collar.

  63. If the Dems were to ask me, I’d encourage them to hire a more diverse campaign staff. In particular, more black computer geniuses for the analytics effort.

    Get some of those black female “mathematicians” too that, according to a new movie, were the brains behind NASA’s space program.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @International Jew

    I want them to get the computer genius from the Ocean's 11 movies and all the other black computer geniuses from Hollywood movies. If they could get Denzel Washington and Morgan Freeman and a few more guys like that, we'd beat those Rooski hackers in the time it takes to play a fast forward musical interlude.

    , @Hibernian
    @International Jew

    The people who had that kind of job during WWII were not Einsteins, but also far from being dummies. They had strong academic backgrounds at least at the undergraduate level. I hink Admiral Grace Hooper started out doing this type of work.

  64. Why ignore working class whites anytime you do not damn them as the evil that makes blacks and other non-whites fail in so many ways?

    Most Liberals want to make most white Gentiles into a new serf class.

    Most of the true anti-Semites want to blame that all on Jews. Well, the English have always acted to make and keep the Irish and other Celts serfs or as close to it as possible. Continental Germans long have seen Slavs as a natural serf class for them – the Nazis were not original in that. Germans and Anglo-Saxons also have a long history of seeing Iberians and Italians as definitely inferior white people.

  65. Brooklyn’s theory from the start was that 2016 was going to be a purely base turnout election.

    Sigh, and going forward too. Or as Lee Kwan Yew put it, “In multiracial societies, you don’t vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion.”

  66. @Ghost of Bull Moose
    Field and real-time data is the least prestigious, least lucrative of the various components of a campaign. It's what I do.

    I don't count paid polling, because those guys are vendors and get paid plenty to poll people from three states away. Of all the consultants freaking out, these guys should be most freaked out, because they are all over the place and increasingly unreliable.

    Canvassing, in-house phone banks, etc, on the other hand, can be very useful. The notes on walksheets Isaac is talking about are highly informative. For instance, we had prime Dems in Nassau county,NY, white women even, saying they were going straight ticket EXCEPT for HRC. I noticed this on the re-ID the weekend of GOTV, and it made me think she might be in some trouble ( I was believing the CW mostly until then).

    A very experienced guy I know, doing Hillary's New Hampshire field, went to BK HQ once and said it was a bunch of college kids sitting on the floor 'microtargeting' on their laptops, which is what the old heads call it when the kids sit around the office IMing each other.

    Replies: @Sam Haysom, @Dr. X, @Opinionator, @Eric Novak, @charlie, @Forbes

    Agree with you, but if you read between the lines on the article is the same complaining the every losing field team — regardless of party — always makes. I think Mook was a field guy as well.

    We didn’t enough surrogates, voter ID was mishandled, no persuasions, etc.

    Way too centralized a campaign, and bad judgement. And a bad candidate.

  67. I was in a Dunkin Donuts in Chicago a couple days before the election. They were blaring local black radio station WGCI. To my surprise, Hillary Clinton came on the air to talk to the DJs in what sounded like an honest to god live conversation. It was the standard stuff from the campaign, of course… the regular scripted things you heard everywhere with a bit more about education and minorities from Hillary than usual.

    Looking back now… yeah… that was odd… why would she waste time with Illinois voters, a state she had well in the bag, days before the election? Sure, FM radio in Chicago spills into the edges of Wisconsin, but why not do that same interview for a black radio station in Wisconsin?

  68. @Desiderius
    @Anon


    Upper-middle-class introverted intellectuals don’t like meeting strangers (it takes them out of their comfort zone and safe space), and they don’t do front porch sales very well.
     
    This is what happened to mainline Protestant evangelism.

    Replies: @stillCARealist

    This is what happened to mainline Protestant evangelism.

    Remember, different parts of the body have different jobs. My bro’s Presbyterian church is booming because they don’t try to restrain their Latino evangelists.

    Diffident white people, work on not getting embarrassed so easily!

  69. @candid_observer
    @midtown

    It's pretty shocking to see the excuses this IT guy gave for not following up with obviously urgent calls by the FBI no less. Who else but an AA hire would think he could get away with this?

    I really do wonder how much of the Democratic operation in general is damaged by the Coalition of the Fringes--which is mostly the Coalition of the Incompetent.

    There is a big price to be paid for putting underqualified and undersmart people in key positions. And it's everywhere with the Democrats. Even at the Supreme Court, with its most recent appointment, it wasn't enough that of the previous three Democratic appointments, two were women, and one of those was a wise Latina: no, they had to appoint still another woman. But it's obvious that in the law in particular the very upper end in ability is greatly dominated by men -- and at the very tippy top, probably it's exclusively men, much as in the sciences. So not a single one of the three women Democratic appointees is going to display any intellectual heft in such an exalted setting as the SC. All they represent, and know how to represent, is their own partisan agenda.

    The Republicans don't limit themselves like this, even though they do make some AA appointments for PR purposes. They aren't committed to incompetence.

    Replies: @BenKenobi, @Jack D, @guest

    I’ve said it before — Affirmative Action is one of our fifth columns.

  70. Is the Dem obsession with the popular vote because the Dems are “morans”? Just about everybody with an IQ number above a warm day in Miami knows it’s electoral college and NOT popular vote total.

    But here they are again wasting resources trying to run up the worthless score, and lose the one that counts. Seems they think their supporters are too stupid to understand anything more complicated than ‘who got the most votes’. So they constantly push that angle to their sheeple.

    Even ALGORE back in 2000 wrote an op-ed when he was afraid Bush was going to win the popular vote and ALGORE the electoral college, reminding the Dem sheeple that it wasn’t the popular vote that determined the winner.

    Trump really should get a literacy test before you can vote enacted, too many “morans” voting….

  71. @Gilbert Ratchet
    I guess they didn't have the rights to whatever entrance music they actually used in Michigan? That would explain the weird noodling guitar overdub in the video.

    Replies: @slumber_j, @Clyde

    I guess they didn’t have the rights to whatever entrance music they actually used in Michigan? That would explain the weird noodling guitar overdub in the video.

    At rallies Trumps people played the Rolling Stones “You Can’t Always Get What You Want” all the time despite The Stones objections. Trump et al. bought the rights to play this (and many other rock and country tunes, a bulk purchase) so The Stones could object all they wanted and were ignored.
    Trump’s campaign did not have the rights to, was not allowed (illegal!) to broadcast this tune over youtube as part of the rally. Thus the rally audience heard the Stones tune while those tuning in over youtube got some generic music substituted.

    • Replies: @Eustace Tilley (not)
    @Clyde

    Thank you so much for this comment; a layman such as I could never have delved into this question in such detail without such "inside" commentary.

    (I'm guessing you are a patent attorney or a person otherwise knowledgeable in patent law.)

    Replies: @Clyde

  72. “Pale, stale males are the last group it’s OK to vilify”

    Half the commenters explain why this is an impolitic (note – not immoral) thing to do, and the other half explain why they deserve it.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/15/pale-stale-males-blamed-brexit-trump

  73. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Dahlia
    @midtown

    Hillary Clinton's campaign just released the worst Venn diagram of all time

    http://www.vox.com/2016/5/20/11721368/hillary-clinton-guns-venn-diagram
    ------


    But a review of Democrats' advertising decisions at the end of the race suggests Clinton and her allies weren't playing to win a close one. They were playing for a blowout. And it cost them.
     

    In the closing weeks of the presidential race, Hillary Clinton's campaign — and the outside groups that supported it — aired more television advertisements in Omaha than in the states of Michigan and Wisconsin combined. The Omaha ads were in pursuit of a *single* electoral vote in a Nebraska congressional district, which Clinton did not ultimately win, and also bled into households in Iowa, which also she did not win. *Michigan and Wisconsin add up to 26 electoral votes*; she appears not to have won them, either.
     
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/12/the-advertising-decisions-that-helped-doom-hillary-clinton/
    ---------------
    Serious question: is there any known instance in US history of a presidential campaign deciding to focus on the popular vote?

    This isn't Monday morning quarterbacking. We watched the collapse of a major party's campaign owing to low intelligence and lack of basic competence, not to mention also having witnessed its candidate's physical collapse on a New York sidewalk.

    Replies: @Anon, @Anon, @Jack D

    You focus on the popular vote (if you think you’re going to win the electoral vote) if you want bragging rights. Hillary wanted to be the candidate who could brag about winning both. She wanted a mandate for her antics in office and a sharp reply to her critics who kept saying she was a crook.

  74. @Boomstick
    The Trump rallies were something hiding in plain sight that I think still haven't been properly credited. Most political rallies seem to be rather spiritless affairs, with the candidate giving the same stump speech. The Trump rallies were happenings. People wanted to be there, they generated excitement, and the campaign tried out ideas there to see what worked. It was an old school approach, and I don't know that other candidates could have pulled that off.

    Glenn Thrush has some good reporting (mixed in, as usual, with some petulant water-carrying for Hillary) below. Trump comes across as someone who looks for and can recognize unconventional opportunities in real time, and then capitalize on them.

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/2016-presidential-election-10-moments-trump-clinton-214508

    For all his deficiencies as a campaign manager, it became clear that Lewandowski mind-melded with his new boss. And he saw something the more jaded professionals who viewed Trump as an orange-coiffed clown couldn’t: The monster rallies he was proving so good at putting together weren’t just a part of Trump’s campaign, they were his campaign, the source of his power, a showcase for the candidate’s rambling genius, not to mention arena-size focus groups for his messaging and a test run for his vintage Trump insults.
    ...
    From that point on, Trump’s rallies became the centerpiece of the campaign. Trump told Lewandowski to book as many of them as he could. And they served to obscure the campaign’s glaring shortcomings, while letting an improvising candidate—Trump’s decision to call out Mexican “rapists” at his kickoff, for example, was inspired, in part, by a random chat he had with two Border Patrol agents at one of his golf resorts, two of his friends told me—road-test his talking points. Trump picked up insights and policies like a stand-up comedian collecting material for a show. The subject he kept coming back to, increasingly, was anger, and Trump’s promise to build a wall on the Mexican border became a staple, simply because it got the greatest applause lines.

    “He lives for the energy. There’s no one better at taking the temperature of the crowd,” Lewandowski told me during the campaign. “You can get instant feedback. … We’d test out all of our best lines, some would work, some wouldn’t. … That’s how we got ‘Little Marco’ and ‘Lyin’ Ted.’” How precise a focus group were the rallies? Trump started with Little Marco—then switched to “’Lil” because it got more laughs.

     

    Replies: @Jack Hanson, @Jefferson, @e, @guest, @Buffalo Joe

    Trump’s decision to call out Mexican “rapists” at his kickoff, for example, was inspired, in part, by a random chat he had with two Border Patrol agents at one of his golf resorts, two of his friends told me—road-test his talking points.

    Trump comes across as someone who looks for and can recognize unconventional opportunities in real time, and then capitalize on them.

    He has said to his audiences many times that he didn’t even know how much of an issue illegal immigration was until he heard it from people in the crowds. He added that the wall was an idea he got from listening to them.

    Imagine that! Imagine a guy running for office admitting he got an idea of what was bothering people by listening to them and yes, parroting what they said. That’s not the definition of “leader” according to media and other pols. However, it IS the idea most have in mind when they say they wish someone to represent them.

    • Agree: Kylie
    • Replies: @Light Roast
    @e


    He has said to his audiences many times that he didn’t even know how much of an issue illegal immigration was until he heard it from people in the crowds.
     
    I didn't know he said that, but that's exactly in line with what I always figured about his campaign.

    I'm sure I'm not the only one to think this, but I figured that Trump thought his immigration stance would get him as far as his Birther stance did. About 20% support and some publicity, but nothing more. Trump, after all, is just as elite as any other elite, and lived in the same bubble.

    I think he was floored by how much immigration was not a "fringe" issue, but rather a "core" one. I think that, at first, he didn't fully realize why so many people were against mass immigration; he just knew that they were. That's why in the primaries he occasionally made pro-immigrant and conciliatory comments, as if he wasn't sure what his own immigration policy was. It took a while for Miller and Bannon et al to impress on him what the popular views were on immigration, and why. Eventually Trump got there.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @whorefinder

    , @slumber_j
    @e

    He said that about heroin too. As I recall, he would recount with a sort of retrospective dumbfoundedness that he'd talked to people in rural New England who said over and over that their number-one concern was heroin addiction. And he made that part of his spiel.

  75. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    I think one reason why Hillary and her aides are so upset (along with the elites) is that they didn’t just lose the election; they lost it to an amateur who’s never held any sort of political office before and whom they’re contemptuous of. No American politician running for the presidency has ever been wiped out by an amateur. And Trump won with half her money, which has never happened before either. She’s utterly humiliated. Their hubris ought to be going before a fall, but they refuse to accept the drop.

    When you reflect on the collective political office tenure of both Obama and Trump before they beat her, it’s really something to behold.

  76. @Dahlia
    @midtown

    Hillary Clinton's campaign just released the worst Venn diagram of all time

    http://www.vox.com/2016/5/20/11721368/hillary-clinton-guns-venn-diagram
    ------


    But a review of Democrats' advertising decisions at the end of the race suggests Clinton and her allies weren't playing to win a close one. They were playing for a blowout. And it cost them.
     

    In the closing weeks of the presidential race, Hillary Clinton's campaign — and the outside groups that supported it — aired more television advertisements in Omaha than in the states of Michigan and Wisconsin combined. The Omaha ads were in pursuit of a *single* electoral vote in a Nebraska congressional district, which Clinton did not ultimately win, and also bled into households in Iowa, which also she did not win. *Michigan and Wisconsin add up to 26 electoral votes*; she appears not to have won them, either.
     
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/12/the-advertising-decisions-that-helped-doom-hillary-clinton/
    ---------------
    Serious question: is there any known instance in US history of a presidential campaign deciding to focus on the popular vote?

    This isn't Monday morning quarterbacking. We watched the collapse of a major party's campaign owing to low intelligence and lack of basic competence, not to mention also having witnessed its candidate's physical collapse on a New York sidewalk.

    Replies: @Anon, @Anon, @Jack D

    Hey, all that ballot box stuffing and cheating is expensive. Its costs are higher than mere honest campaigning. I wouldn’t be surprised if all those black precinct captains were saying to the Dems, “You got to pay us a bit more for our trouble, white lady. After all, you ain’t brother Obama.”

  77. @candid_observer
    @midtown

    It's pretty shocking to see the excuses this IT guy gave for not following up with obviously urgent calls by the FBI no less. Who else but an AA hire would think he could get away with this?

    I really do wonder how much of the Democratic operation in general is damaged by the Coalition of the Fringes--which is mostly the Coalition of the Incompetent.

    There is a big price to be paid for putting underqualified and undersmart people in key positions. And it's everywhere with the Democrats. Even at the Supreme Court, with its most recent appointment, it wasn't enough that of the previous three Democratic appointments, two were women, and one of those was a wise Latina: no, they had to appoint still another woman. But it's obvious that in the law in particular the very upper end in ability is greatly dominated by men -- and at the very tippy top, probably it's exclusively men, much as in the sciences. So not a single one of the three women Democratic appointees is going to display any intellectual heft in such an exalted setting as the SC. All they represent, and know how to represent, is their own partisan agenda.

    The Republicans don't limit themselves like this, even though they do make some AA appointments for PR purposes. They aren't committed to incompetence.

    Replies: @BenKenobi, @Jack D, @guest

    I have mentioned Kunta Kinte (or whatever his name is) the Ethiopian”IT specialist” several times now but it doesn’t seem to have resonated with the commentariat, even here let alone in the wider world where noticing this would be a thought crime. If the US sent a bunch of Asian and Jewish guys to the Olympics as their marathon runners or their basketball team, they would be a laughing stock but we don’t think twice about putting an Ethiopian up against top notch Russian hackers .

    Sotomayor is an affirmative action baby but both Ginsburg and Kagan have real intellectual chops. They (especially Kagan) may be committed leftists but they are no dummies. There have been plenty of Republican S. Court justices who were not as bright as these two.

    • Replies: @Barnard
    @Jack D


    Sotomayor is an affirmative action baby but both Ginsburg and Kagan have real intellectual chops. They (especially Kagan) may be committed leftists but they are no dummies. There have been plenty of Republican S. Court justices who were not as bright as these two.
     
    Do you mean Republican appointed Justices or conservative Justices? Also, which ones in particular don't measure up to Ginsburg and Kagan intellectually? I have never read or heard anything from Ginsburg in particular that makes me think she has "real intellectual chops." I don't even think she has a coherent judicial philosophy outside of the Constitution says whatever the left wants it to say at any given moment.

    Replies: @Anon, @Jack D, @Johann Ricke

  78. I watched several rallies in full but none offered more dramatic an entrance than this one in Pittsburgh, PA the last night before the election, at midnight, I believe. Ground reports from some people I knew in PA led me to believe he’d take PA or be mighty close. This rally was the capper for me. It epitomized how Trump had elevated campaigning to a good time, a happening and this one showed how he capped it all off with a dramatic entrance. Even watching on a tiny computer screen was exciting.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/11/07/trumps-penchant-for-grand-entrances-strikes-again/?utm_term=.2bdbb7c180d3

    • Replies: @Kylie
    @e

    "This rally was the capper for me. It epitomized how Trump had elevated campaigning to a good time, a happening and this one showed how he capped it all off with a dramatic entrance. Even watching on a tiny computer screen was exciting."

    Human beings respond to spectacle on a visceral level. Trump seems to understand this instinctively.

    Replies: @e

  79. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I had lunch w a friend who works in Peña Nieto’s natl sec staff. Said he was told, earlier in the year, to do some prepping for Peña’s trip to US. Was curious, since it wasn’t in agenda last time he looked. Was told a call came from Obama requesting a meeting. Peña went, along with Ruiz Massieu. Was told by Obama that their numbers indicated very close race, tipping towards Trump. Obama suggested Peña to contact Trump. Staff bitterly divided. Those in favor suggested a border town meeting (Texas), neutral venue, photos released afterwards, tied up with a similar meeting in California with Hillary. How Trump came to Mexico City, my friend didn’t know.

    That would confirm why towards the end Obama and Michelle were furiously campaigning. Irregardless of his comments. Somebody should compare comments/actions.

  80. @dc.sunsets
    @Boomstick


    I get the feeling that the Clinton campaign liked “big data” and “data-driven” campaigning because it was comfortable, indoor work that didn’t have as much face-to-face contact with actual voters.
     
    Every institution is seduced by The Spreadsheet. Life is sooooooo orderly when you can make a pretty graph with just a few clicks of the mouse.

    On a level we simply can't grasp, this deluded obsession with turning the subjective into numbers and then analyzing what the algorithms produce is leading us to a cliff of unprecedented proportions. It's like producing a map from how people feel about the territory...plugging it into a GPS navigator and then driving with an opaque windshield.

    Replies: @Desiderius, @Jack D

    You don’t understand. Brooklyn didn’t just have a spreadsheet, they had ADA, their super secret death star supercomputer forecasting tool that was going to be triumphantly revealed the day after the election (the stories were already pre-written). Each night they would feed it all the pertinent variables and it would run 500,000 simulated elections and tell HQ where to spend the $. When the program trading algorithm that the quants use to game Wall Street tells them to sell X shares of this and buy Y shares of that or European forecasting model says that you are going to get 12 inches of snow in Syracuse on Tuesday, you don’t question it because it’s operating on a plane far higher than mere human comprehension. So when ADA told Brooklyn to put all the ad money in Omaha and none in Wisconsin, they weren’t going to question it either – ADA had her reasons and some union guy in Milwaukee didn’t have the big picture.

  81. @Pat Casey
    @Anonymous

    lol nice find.

    I will say this about "Old White Men." When it is deployed, by the ones who know what they're doing with it, like CNN's black anchor Don Lemon, there is a measure of being clever: because he's talking about ghosts; demons rather, rather actually talking to demon ghosts---- since we know you ward off demons best by naming them. And its not clear to me that anyone around here appreciates that. (If pressed Lemon just says he's talking about "old attitudes," but I appreciate the poetics I'm certain he recognizes.)

    Or maybe I just think it's clever because I deeply believe in ghosts myself.

    But all of the current liberal insanity makes a lot of sense when you realize the hysteria has all the trappings of an apocalyptic religious phenomenon. That's why Tim Wise scribbles dark prophecy, why hate hoaxes are committed and then believed in, why any symbol of a dead slave owner must not stand (since symbols that express can actually invoke) and why the living enemy must be demonized ad nauseum.

    In that sense there is almost all the difference in the world between making fun of stale pale males and gravely incising the words Old White Men---the zealots aint jokin around.

    Replies: @guest, @Wanda

    I think a large part of it has nothing to do with the old demons at all, and everything to do with future old demons, if you catch my drift. The past always is the enemy, and there will always be a new past. Watch out, or you’ll be left behind!

  82. @Jack D
    @candid_observer

    I have mentioned Kunta Kinte (or whatever his name is) the Ethiopian"IT specialist" several times now but it doesn't seem to have resonated with the commentariat, even here let alone in the wider world where noticing this would be a thought crime. If the US sent a bunch of Asian and Jewish guys to the Olympics as their marathon runners or their basketball team, they would be a laughing stock but we don't think twice about putting an Ethiopian up against top notch Russian hackers .

    Sotomayor is an affirmative action baby but both Ginsburg and Kagan have real intellectual chops. They (especially Kagan) may be committed leftists but they are no dummies. There have been plenty of Republican S. Court justices who were not as bright as these two.

    Replies: @Barnard

    Sotomayor is an affirmative action baby but both Ginsburg and Kagan have real intellectual chops. They (especially Kagan) may be committed leftists but they are no dummies. There have been plenty of Republican S. Court justices who were not as bright as these two.

    Do you mean Republican appointed Justices or conservative Justices? Also, which ones in particular don’t measure up to Ginsburg and Kagan intellectually? I have never read or heard anything from Ginsburg in particular that makes me think she has “real intellectual chops.” I don’t even think she has a coherent judicial philosophy outside of the Constitution says whatever the left wants it to say at any given moment.

    • Replies: @Anon
    @Barnard

    I've looked at a few recent opinions by Ginsberg, and frankly, she shows signs of not being on the ball. She seems unable to grasp the most important points of the cases, and it looks like she's slipping due to her age. If she'd delegate most of her reasoning to her clerks, they could cover up for her, but she's too much of an elderly, whiny, opinionated, female Jewish fussbudget to do that. Her recent dumb public remarks (for example, the ones about Trump) also show signs that her ability to self-regulate is deteriorating, and that's a sign of the impaired mental function that elderly people often undergo because of brain shrinkage.

    Replies: @Alfa158

    , @Jack D
    @Barnard

    Charles Whittaker. He is obscure today for good reason.

    , @Johann Ricke
    @Barnard


    Do you mean Republican appointed Justices or conservative Justices? Also, which ones in particular don’t measure up to Ginsburg and Kagan intellectually?
     
    I think he's generalizing from the fact that Jewish judges tend to be fairly on the ball. Unfortunately, he may have zeroed in on the two exceptions to the rule. I haven't seen any indication that either justice is anything more than an empty suit.
  83. @Boomstick
    The Trump rallies were something hiding in plain sight that I think still haven't been properly credited. Most political rallies seem to be rather spiritless affairs, with the candidate giving the same stump speech. The Trump rallies were happenings. People wanted to be there, they generated excitement, and the campaign tried out ideas there to see what worked. It was an old school approach, and I don't know that other candidates could have pulled that off.

    Glenn Thrush has some good reporting (mixed in, as usual, with some petulant water-carrying for Hillary) below. Trump comes across as someone who looks for and can recognize unconventional opportunities in real time, and then capitalize on them.

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/2016-presidential-election-10-moments-trump-clinton-214508

    For all his deficiencies as a campaign manager, it became clear that Lewandowski mind-melded with his new boss. And he saw something the more jaded professionals who viewed Trump as an orange-coiffed clown couldn’t: The monster rallies he was proving so good at putting together weren’t just a part of Trump’s campaign, they were his campaign, the source of his power, a showcase for the candidate’s rambling genius, not to mention arena-size focus groups for his messaging and a test run for his vintage Trump insults.
    ...
    From that point on, Trump’s rallies became the centerpiece of the campaign. Trump told Lewandowski to book as many of them as he could. And they served to obscure the campaign’s glaring shortcomings, while letting an improvising candidate—Trump’s decision to call out Mexican “rapists” at his kickoff, for example, was inspired, in part, by a random chat he had with two Border Patrol agents at one of his golf resorts, two of his friends told me—road-test his talking points. Trump picked up insights and policies like a stand-up comedian collecting material for a show. The subject he kept coming back to, increasingly, was anger, and Trump’s promise to build a wall on the Mexican border became a staple, simply because it got the greatest applause lines.

    “He lives for the energy. There’s no one better at taking the temperature of the crowd,” Lewandowski told me during the campaign. “You can get instant feedback. … We’d test out all of our best lines, some would work, some wouldn’t. … That’s how we got ‘Little Marco’ and ‘Lyin’ Ted.’” How precise a focus group were the rallies? Trump started with Little Marco—then switched to “’Lil” because it got more laughs.

     

    Replies: @Jack Hanson, @Jefferson, @e, @guest, @Buffalo Joe

    They were appreciated at the time, which is why vibrant thugs were dispatched to stir things up and make them look bad. This may have been forgotten over the period when Clinton was trouncing Trump in the polls and the MSM was calling for Trump to get out before he embarrasses himself. I don’t know.

    Certainly last spring Trump events were widely recognized as “happenings.”

  84. @Jefferson
    @Boomstick

    "Trump rallies were happenings. People wanted to be there, they generated excitement, and the campaign tried out ideas there to see what worked. It was an old school approach, and I don’t know that other candidates could have pulled that off."

    Crooked Hildabeast rallies were quite dead when Beyonce, Jay-Z, Bon Jovi, Bruce Springsteen, LeBron James, etc were not there to add star power. Any politician who relies way too much on Hollywood celebrities to get people to come to their rallies does not have an ounce of charisma. If people are more excited to see Katy Perry than you, than you suck as a political campaigner.

    Democrat JFK didn't get elected POTUS in 1960 by having Rod Serling from The Twilight Zone and Alfred Hitchcock show up at his rallies. JFK didn't need them because he was a vastly superior politician than Crooked Hildabeast in the charisma department.

    Replies: @guest

    He had Sinatra.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    @guest

    "He had Sinatra."

    JFK didn't have Frank Sinatra show up his rallies to sing Fly Me To The Moon. JFK was the main course at his rallies. Crooked Hildabeast was the appetizer at her rallies, while the Hollywood celebrities were the main course. If you are running for the most powerful job in the world you should never be the appetizer, you should never play second fiddle to Hollywood celebrities because it's not them that are running for POTUS.

    , @Buffalo Joe
    @guest

    Guest, Yes, and he and Sinatra had Marilyn.

  85. @International Jew
    If the Dems were to ask me, I'd encourage them to hire a more diverse campaign staff. In particular, more black computer geniuses for the analytics effort.

    Get some of those black female "mathematicians" too that, according to a new movie, were the brains behind NASA's space program.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Hibernian

    I want them to get the computer genius from the Ocean’s 11 movies and all the other black computer geniuses from Hollywood movies. If they could get Denzel Washington and Morgan Freeman and a few more guys like that, we’d beat those Rooski hackers in the time it takes to play a fast forward musical interlude.

  86. @Ghost of Bull Moose
    Field and real-time data is the least prestigious, least lucrative of the various components of a campaign. It's what I do.

    I don't count paid polling, because those guys are vendors and get paid plenty to poll people from three states away. Of all the consultants freaking out, these guys should be most freaked out, because they are all over the place and increasingly unreliable.

    Canvassing, in-house phone banks, etc, on the other hand, can be very useful. The notes on walksheets Isaac is talking about are highly informative. For instance, we had prime Dems in Nassau county,NY, white women even, saying they were going straight ticket EXCEPT for HRC. I noticed this on the re-ID the weekend of GOTV, and it made me think she might be in some trouble ( I was believing the CW mostly until then).

    A very experienced guy I know, doing Hillary's New Hampshire field, went to BK HQ once and said it was a bunch of college kids sitting on the floor 'microtargeting' on their laptops, which is what the old heads call it when the kids sit around the office IMing each other.

    Replies: @Sam Haysom, @Dr. X, @Opinionator, @Eric Novak, @charlie, @Forbes

    Number one mistake of Hillary’s campaign was putting the campaign HQ in Brooklyn. Brooklyn is an insulated hipster haven (heaven?). The Brooklyn-resident workers and volunteers aren’t natives, they’re transplants that, for the most part, hate where they’re from. They moved to NYC-Brooklyn to escape where they grew up. They’ve come to The City as if moving to Mecca. In other words, they’re the opposite of the core Democrat demographic in ‘flyover country.’

    And if you looked at their CVs, I doubt Penn State, Ohio State, or Michigan State made an appearance. You can’t target a market about which you’re totally ignorant.

    • Replies: @Connecticut Famer
    @Forbes

    Manhattan is priced out of their range, which is why they've moved into Brooklyn and have driven up the cost of housing in the process. Madame's Brooklyn headquarters was decidedly NOT within the Brooklyn of the traditional (if stereotypical)"deez, dems and doze" crowd (Perish the thought!). The latter have moved on to places like Breezy Point where half the NYPD and NYFD live, definitely terra incognita to the members of Team Clinton. And you're probably right about the CVs (to which you could add Fordham or St. Johns to the list).

    , @black sea
    @Forbes

    People who can't look back with some fondness at the place and people of their upbringing are generally emotionally troubled or socially disconnected figures. I don't mean ever single such person, but as a trend. I once worked with a women who spoke with great rancor about her parents and her brother. She was an emotional dumpster fire, and her own inner-turmoil probably created this sense that home and family were to be escaped from and left behind.

  87. @candid_observer
    @midtown

    It's pretty shocking to see the excuses this IT guy gave for not following up with obviously urgent calls by the FBI no less. Who else but an AA hire would think he could get away with this?

    I really do wonder how much of the Democratic operation in general is damaged by the Coalition of the Fringes--which is mostly the Coalition of the Incompetent.

    There is a big price to be paid for putting underqualified and undersmart people in key positions. And it's everywhere with the Democrats. Even at the Supreme Court, with its most recent appointment, it wasn't enough that of the previous three Democratic appointments, two were women, and one of those was a wise Latina: no, they had to appoint still another woman. But it's obvious that in the law in particular the very upper end in ability is greatly dominated by men -- and at the very tippy top, probably it's exclusively men, much as in the sciences. So not a single one of the three women Democratic appointees is going to display any intellectual heft in such an exalted setting as the SC. All they represent, and know how to represent, is their own partisan agenda.

    The Republicans don't limit themselves like this, even though they do make some AA appointments for PR purposes. They aren't committed to incompetence.

    Replies: @BenKenobi, @Jack D, @guest

    Why do you think that proficiency in the Law is an actual goal of SCOTUS nominations? That’s like imagining party leadership chooses presidential candidates based on who would be best at being president. We’re so far past that, nobody even knows what being a good president or what law is anymore.

    Justices are politicians. Their job is to put through what their gang likes and block what it doesn’t, plus look good doing it. A superficial familiarity with actual law might help them look good, but that doesn’t much matter when you control the MSM and the schools and write the books.

  88. @Dahlia
    @midtown

    Hillary Clinton's campaign just released the worst Venn diagram of all time

    http://www.vox.com/2016/5/20/11721368/hillary-clinton-guns-venn-diagram
    ------


    But a review of Democrats' advertising decisions at the end of the race suggests Clinton and her allies weren't playing to win a close one. They were playing for a blowout. And it cost them.
     

    In the closing weeks of the presidential race, Hillary Clinton's campaign — and the outside groups that supported it — aired more television advertisements in Omaha than in the states of Michigan and Wisconsin combined. The Omaha ads were in pursuit of a *single* electoral vote in a Nebraska congressional district, which Clinton did not ultimately win, and also bled into households in Iowa, which also she did not win. *Michigan and Wisconsin add up to 26 electoral votes*; she appears not to have won them, either.
     
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/12/the-advertising-decisions-that-helped-doom-hillary-clinton/
    ---------------
    Serious question: is there any known instance in US history of a presidential campaign deciding to focus on the popular vote?

    This isn't Monday morning quarterbacking. We watched the collapse of a major party's campaign owing to low intelligence and lack of basic competence, not to mention also having witnessed its candidate's physical collapse on a New York sidewalk.

    Replies: @Anon, @Anon, @Jack D

    The” Venn diagram” wasn’t a Venn diagram at all , just sort of an art major’s idea of what a Venn diagram should look like (a bunch of overlapping circles) but most of the people looking at it wouldn’t know any better either – in other words, Idiocracy, we are here!

    Hillary has a sort of reverse Midas touch, probably owing to her personality flaws (paranoid style, hunger for power, complete lack of human touch, etc.) – every major endeavor she has ever been at the head of has turned to crap. The ultimate low intelligence move was putting this shrill cow at the head of a national ticket. Almost ANYBODY they could have run would have done better.

  89. @slumber_j
    @Gilbert Ratchet

    That was a regular and baffling feature of all Trump-rally audio feeds. You're probably right.

    Replies: @Jack D

    There are byzantine rules for the licensing of music rights for live performance, broadcast, internet and recording. It’s not uncommon for the DVD/VCR version of a TV show to have completely different music than the broadcast show had – they sometimes replace all the recognizable songs and artists with “royalty free music” , which is some hack diddling away at a synth.

    • Replies: @slumber_j
    @Jack D

    Right. And I further supposed that the guitar-noodly thing they overdubbed was generated by Dee Snyder and some version of Twisted Sister: Going out on a limb here.

    , @whorefinder
    @Jack D

    I remember people complaining about Quantum Leap DVDs having that problem.

    Since Quantum Leap was about someone jumping through time during the Baby Boomer era, the soundtrack was useful in instantly setting the time/place where the main character had just time traveled to, while also allowing the watching Boomers a healthy dose of nostalgia.

    Then on the DVDs they removed a bunch of the old tunes due to copyright stuff and people whined about it on Amazon. One episode had the main character as a rock DJ in the 1950s where, on the DVDs, not a single 1950s rock n' roll song is heard (according to someone, I didn't see it). On Hulu when they played the show, Hulu completely removed an entire episode from the first season which was a heavy disco-themed episode, probably because they didn't have the rights to the music or the inclination to replace the soundtrack of the gay revolution.

    It is amazing how much music can set a mood, btw, as Hitchcock demonstrated in Psycho and countless horror movie directors have done since. Taking out those old tunes from Quantum Leap, and the show loses a lot of nostalgia appeal, though I think the show still rocks regardless.

    Replies: @Abe

  90. @Eric Novak
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    What's BK HQ? Burger King corporate?

    Replies: @Bob Arctor, @Mark Eugenikos, @Jack D

    I assume he means Hillary’s Brooklyn HQ.

  91. @Jefferson
    @Mr. Anon

    "When “pizzagate” became a thing, I looked up John and Tony Podesta’s wikipedia pages."

    The vast majority pedophiles in Washington DC are Democrats, which gives new meaning to the term Coalition Of The Fringes.

    Replies: @CK, @Jack D

    The vast majority of EVERYBODY in Washington are Democrats (Hillary got 91% of the vote, Trump got 4%), so this is not saying much. Has there ever been a national capital in an unoccupied country that was so out of step with the rest of the country? Even the Chinese Communists were very concerned that their rulers would be drawn from the people.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    @Jack D


    an unoccupied country
     
    cite needed
  92. @whorefinder
    Two points:

    1. It's interest how the Monday morning quarterbacking of campaigns is like that of wars: suddenly, everyone's writing about how it was inevitable that the loser was going to lose, because of all the disorganization the loser was in that nobody reported on ---but everyone noticed, mind you, they just were too classy to talk about it before it was over.

    That said, Hillary's behavior as described is exactly how I pictured her. I've said since 2008 that this woman is a terrible campaigner who thinks that she's a great campaigner by virtue of transference-by-marriage of Bill's campaign skills and her self-delusional aura of being chosen by fate to be the first female president. But she doesn't like meeting people on the ground, holding rallies, or doing the baby-kissing-hand-shaking nonsense, and when she does it comes off so fake it's painful. Bill, Obama, Romney, Bush 43, Trump---say what you will, but those guys were decent to very good at shaking a commoner's hand and coming off like they were listening to them.

    But Hillary never learned those skills, having come in solely on her husband's coattails. And she never bothered to pull a Margaret Thatcher and just let the cold bizznich in her out---at least then she wouldn't come off as fake. (Trump never bothered to learn the baby-kissing-hand-shaking, but he never pretended he was into it, so, again, he came off as way more authentic than her---whatever you say about Trump, you know people believe he is exactly the person you're seeing before you.)

    As I've said, in 2008 Obama expected Hillary to take the crown and was just himself running to get larger national name recognition, planning a more serious run in 2012 or 2016 ----and additionally, hoping for a long-shot VP slot or an also-ran lower-tier cabinet position. Then about two weeks into it, he realized that Hillary was absolutely awful at running, and he could actually beat her. And that's when the wheels started to come off Hillary's bus---she'd actually never expected someone to run against her trying to win.

    2.

    But there also were millions approved for transfer from Clinton’s campaign for use by the DNC — which, under a plan devised by Brazile to drum up urban turnout out of fear that Trump would win the popular vote while losing the electoral vote, got dumped into Chicago and New Orleans, far from anywhere that would have made a difference in the election.
     
    Given what we know about Brazile being a thief and all, it sounds to me like she was just using the campaign to (legally?) embezzle funds and have it sent to fellow black cronies in the heavily black areas of New Orleans and Chicago, even during crunch time when it was important to insure a win and a misstep could cost her the election and power and more lucrative kickbacks later.

    In fact, you might say that Brazile, when push came to shove, was more loyal to her race than to her gender/party/party ideals. That's a pretty bad omen for the Democrats---they've filled their party leadership with black racialists who are loyal only to their fellow blacks and getting paid. That's not a recipe for a political party that's going to come back from it's current losses. That's a recipe for a party that's going to disintegrate or else become a permanent minority party beset with corruption.

    Replies: @Forbes, @Buffalo Joe

    out of fear that Trump would win the popular vote while losing the electoral vote

    I call BS on this reporting. This is not the first time I’ve seen this “fear” trotted out, but I think it is pure invention. Under what scenario, given polls in CA, NY, NJ, IL, MA, was Trump going to win the popular vote and lose the electoral college? As it was Trump beat Hillary in a 49 state race–but the EC wasn’t close. Had Trump won the popular vote, it might have been an EC landslide.

    And why, pray tell, would Hillary winning the election (“Trump…losing the electoral vote”) prompt fear in the Clinton camp? It implies other assumptions are suspect. Completely dysfunctional.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    @Forbes

    "I call BS on this reporting. This is not the first time I’ve seen this “fear” trotted out, but I think it is pure invention. Under what scenario, given polls in CA, NY, NJ, IL, MA, was Trump going to win the popular vote"

    Donald J. Trump could have won the popular vote if he had won blue states that voted for George W. Bush in 2004 like Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico.

    Replies: @Forbes, @Anon

    , @whorefinder
    @Forbes


    I call BS on this reporting. This is not the first time I’ve seen this “fear” trotted out, but I think it is pure invention. Under what scenario, given polls in CA, NY, NJ, IL, MA, was Trump going to win the popular vote and lose the electoral college? As it was Trump beat Hillary in a 49 state race–but the EC wasn’t close. Had Trump won the popular vote, it might have been an EC landslide.

    And why, pray tell, would Hillary winning the election (“Trump…losing the electoral vote”) prompt fear in the Clinton camp? It implies other assumptions are suspect. Completely dysfunctional.
     

    Exactly.

    As I stated, I think Brazile (and probably a few others) ginned up this fear. They used to hoodwink Hillary into letting them embezzle funds to hand out to cronies instead of concentrating on white blue collar voters in close states.

    It worked because Hillary is such a bad campaigner that, in her shallow political mind, she bought it. Bill didn't buy it, but for some reason, Hillary, who'd assumed she'd gained Bill's political skills, exiled Bill and didn't listen when he was the lone voice asking why they weren't trying for white blue collar workers in close states.

    Brazile and co. threw in something about "civil unrest" and "delegitimize her win" if Trump took the popular vote, and Hillary panicked as she saw millions of militia men marching fully armed down Pennsylvania Avenue, coming to hang her for her crimes.

    It all comes back to Hillary's horrible campaign skills, her arrogance at assuming she was destined to be coronated as the First Female President, and her absolute fear and loathing of white working people. Brazile knew exactly what buttons to push on her to siphon off funds to enrich herself and her cronies.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Reg Cæsar, @Ivy, @Forbes, @Abe

  93. @jimmyriddle
    Putin hacked Robbie Mook's brain.

    Replies: @Forbes

    As Putin was the only one who located it…

  94. Clinton’s campaign staff, many or most of whom, had no national stature, were featured night after night on the liberal talk shows. They actually belief themselves, while tens of thousands of voters did not.

    • Replies: @Forbes
    @Buffalo Joe


    Clinton’s campaign staff... were featured night after night on the liberal talk shows.
     
    Brings joy to my life knowing I've managed to do without such programming features by abstaining from evening cable TV.
  95. @dc.sunsets

    If you knock on their doors, then you’d have to listen to them talk back, and they would probably saying something intolerably intolerant, those hateful, hopefully soon dead white men.
     
    The entire theme of the 2016 election cycle was the supposed "political center" openly declaring political warfare on whites.

    Post-election, they've actually doubled down on this open declaration of war in what must be the mistaken belief that they're actually the "political center."

    It's surreal, watching the Left Cultists on TeeVee spike the ball...oblivious that they're nowhere near the end zone. They think Trump is one-and-done?

    I sincerely hope they keep it up. I don't think they can do otherwise, so deeply immerse are they in the bubble of their own making.

    Replies: @Forbes

    I sincerely hope they keep it up. I don’t think they can do otherwise, so deeply immerse are they in the bubble of their own making.

    By all available evidence–this is what they are doing.

  96. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Barnard
    @Jack D


    Sotomayor is an affirmative action baby but both Ginsburg and Kagan have real intellectual chops. They (especially Kagan) may be committed leftists but they are no dummies. There have been plenty of Republican S. Court justices who were not as bright as these two.
     
    Do you mean Republican appointed Justices or conservative Justices? Also, which ones in particular don't measure up to Ginsburg and Kagan intellectually? I have never read or heard anything from Ginsburg in particular that makes me think she has "real intellectual chops." I don't even think she has a coherent judicial philosophy outside of the Constitution says whatever the left wants it to say at any given moment.

    Replies: @Anon, @Jack D, @Johann Ricke

    I’ve looked at a few recent opinions by Ginsberg, and frankly, she shows signs of not being on the ball. She seems unable to grasp the most important points of the cases, and it looks like she’s slipping due to her age. If she’d delegate most of her reasoning to her clerks, they could cover up for her, but she’s too much of an elderly, whiny, opinionated, female Jewish fussbudget to do that. Her recent dumb public remarks (for example, the ones about Trump) also show signs that her ability to self-regulate is deteriorating, and that’s a sign of the impaired mental function that elderly people often undergo because of brain shrinkage.

    • Replies: @Alfa158
    @Anon

    She has had both colon and pancreatic cancer, plus cardiac problems, so, likely is impaired. I expect that her replacement will be Trump's second Supreme Court appointment.

  97. @guest
    @Jefferson

    He had Sinatra.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @Buffalo Joe

    “He had Sinatra.”

    JFK didn’t have Frank Sinatra show up his rallies to sing Fly Me To The Moon. JFK was the main course at his rallies. Crooked Hildabeast was the appetizer at her rallies, while the Hollywood celebrities were the main course. If you are running for the most powerful job in the world you should never be the appetizer, you should never play second fiddle to Hollywood celebrities because it’s not them that are running for POTUS.

  98. @Barnard
    @Jack D


    Sotomayor is an affirmative action baby but both Ginsburg and Kagan have real intellectual chops. They (especially Kagan) may be committed leftists but they are no dummies. There have been plenty of Republican S. Court justices who were not as bright as these two.
     
    Do you mean Republican appointed Justices or conservative Justices? Also, which ones in particular don't measure up to Ginsburg and Kagan intellectually? I have never read or heard anything from Ginsburg in particular that makes me think she has "real intellectual chops." I don't even think she has a coherent judicial philosophy outside of the Constitution says whatever the left wants it to say at any given moment.

    Replies: @Anon, @Jack D, @Johann Ricke

    Charles Whittaker. He is obscure today for good reason.

  99. @countenance
    And yet, all we heard was how Hillary's ground game and data game were so superior to Trump's.

    The two ways we can take this is that either they were and therefore ground/data don't much matter, or they weren't that much better if they were better at all.

    Replies: @Forbes

    So, more fake news apparently…

    It bears repeating–if you view news reporting as performed by Democratic operatives with by-lines you be wrong.

    Trump’s data operation was run out of San Antonio. What are the chances anyone in the lapdog media knew this, or reported on it substantively? In other words, you’re taking Dem operatives word for the judgement of superiority (which, of course, is opinion not news).

    • Replies: @Forbes
    @Forbes

    Ack--you **wouldn't** be wrong.

    , @countenance
    @Forbes

    We have found out after the election that Kushner led Trump's data efforts and while they weren't as grandiose or expensive as HRC's, they were carried out in an effective and clever manner.

    My opinion about the data game, the ground game and the debate game is that they are pass/fail propositions, not "mine is bigger than yours" propositions. You just need to do each of those things well enough, not necessarily better than the other candidate(s).

  100. @Forbes
    @whorefinder


    out of fear that Trump would win the popular vote while losing the electoral vote
     
    I call BS on this reporting. This is not the first time I've seen this "fear" trotted out, but I think it is pure invention. Under what scenario, given polls in CA, NY, NJ, IL, MA, was Trump going to win the popular vote and lose the electoral college? As it was Trump beat Hillary in a 49 state race--but the EC wasn't close. Had Trump won the popular vote, it might have been an EC landslide.

    And why, pray tell, would Hillary winning the election ("Trump...losing the electoral vote") prompt fear in the Clinton camp? It implies other assumptions are suspect. Completely dysfunctional.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @whorefinder

    “I call BS on this reporting. This is not the first time I’ve seen this “fear” trotted out, but I think it is pure invention. Under what scenario, given polls in CA, NY, NJ, IL, MA, was Trump going to win the popular vote”

    Donald J. Trump could have won the popular vote if he had won blue states that voted for George W. Bush in 2004 like Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico.

    • Replies: @Forbes
    @Jefferson


    Donald J. Trump could have won the popular vote if he had won blue states that voted for George W. Bush in 2004 like Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico.
     
    I appreciate the effort--but there nowhere near 2.5 million vote differential (to overcome) among those four states had Trump won them--and still lose the EC.

    Reading comprehension, my boy, reading comprehension...

    Replies: @Abe, @Jefferson

    , @Anon
    @Jefferson

    I think if you took away the usual big city fraud that the Democrats commit, then Trump may very well have won the popular vote honestly. The problem is that no one is spending the time or money to recount all the big cities to see what the untampered vote totals were.

  101. @Buffalo Joe
    Clinton's campaign staff, many or most of whom, had no national stature, were featured night after night on the liberal talk shows. They actually belief themselves, while tens of thousands of voters did not.

    Replies: @Forbes

    Clinton’s campaign staff… were featured night after night on the liberal talk shows.

    Brings joy to my life knowing I’ve managed to do without such programming features by abstaining from evening cable TV.

  102. @Jack D
    @Jefferson

    The vast majority of EVERYBODY in Washington are Democrats (Hillary got 91% of the vote, Trump got 4%), so this is not saying much. Has there ever been a national capital in an unoccupied country that was so out of step with the rest of the country? Even the Chinese Communists were very concerned that their rulers would be drawn from the people.

    Replies: @Desiderius

    an unoccupied country

    cite needed

  103. @Forbes
    @countenance

    So, more fake news apparently...

    It bears repeating--if you view news reporting as performed by Democratic operatives with by-lines you be wrong.

    Trump's data operation was run out of San Antonio. What are the chances anyone in the lapdog media knew this, or reported on it substantively? In other words, you're taking Dem operatives word for the judgement of superiority (which, of course, is opinion not news).

    Replies: @Forbes, @countenance

    Ack–you **wouldn’t** be wrong.

  104. @Jefferson
    @Forbes

    "I call BS on this reporting. This is not the first time I’ve seen this “fear” trotted out, but I think it is pure invention. Under what scenario, given polls in CA, NY, NJ, IL, MA, was Trump going to win the popular vote"

    Donald J. Trump could have won the popular vote if he had won blue states that voted for George W. Bush in 2004 like Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico.

    Replies: @Forbes, @Anon

    Donald J. Trump could have won the popular vote if he had won blue states that voted for George W. Bush in 2004 like Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico.

    I appreciate the effort–but there nowhere near 2.5 million vote differential (to overcome) among those four states had Trump won them–and still lose the EC.

    Reading comprehension, my boy, reading comprehension…

    • Replies: @Abe
    @Forbes


    I appreciate the effort–but there nowhere near 2.5 million vote differential (to overcome) among those four states had Trump won them–and still lose the EC.

    Reading comprehension, my boy, reading comprehension…
     
    Hey, lay off my boy, Jeff'! As I've mentioned on another thread, Cuck McMullin got 700K votes BY HIMSELF. Stein got 1M votes more than typical for a Green party candidate, given the awfulness of the Donkey Party one, but Johnson got a whopping 3M more than last time, and more like 4M more than is typical for the Libertarian candidate (strange that libertarian-type voters did not glom on more to super-capitalist Mitt and his boy wonder, Objectivist Ryan, as compared to Bush the Dumber or McCain, but maybe that just represents Johnson's superior strengths as a candidate). But in any case, the right won the popular vote, and very arguably Trump would have as well since there was one certified spoiler candidate, and another implicit one who way overperformed through media collusion to paint Trump as unacceptable.

    Replies: @Andrew

    , @Jefferson
    @Forbes

    "I appreciate the effort–but there nowhere near 2.5 million vote differential (to overcome) among those four states had Trump won them–and still lose the EC.

    Reading comprehension, my boy, reading comprehension…"

    You combine those 4 states that Bush won (Nevada, New Mexico, Virginia, and Colorado) with the 3 states that George W. Bush lost in 2004 (Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, but Donald J. Trump won in 2016, and The Donald could have easily won the popular vote.

    Replies: @Forbes, @Jack D

  105. @Anon
    @Barnard

    I've looked at a few recent opinions by Ginsberg, and frankly, she shows signs of not being on the ball. She seems unable to grasp the most important points of the cases, and it looks like she's slipping due to her age. If she'd delegate most of her reasoning to her clerks, they could cover up for her, but she's too much of an elderly, whiny, opinionated, female Jewish fussbudget to do that. Her recent dumb public remarks (for example, the ones about Trump) also show signs that her ability to self-regulate is deteriorating, and that's a sign of the impaired mental function that elderly people often undergo because of brain shrinkage.

    Replies: @Alfa158

    She has had both colon and pancreatic cancer, plus cardiac problems, so, likely is impaired. I expect that her replacement will be Trump’s second Supreme Court appointment.

  106. @Forbes
    @whorefinder


    out of fear that Trump would win the popular vote while losing the electoral vote
     
    I call BS on this reporting. This is not the first time I've seen this "fear" trotted out, but I think it is pure invention. Under what scenario, given polls in CA, NY, NJ, IL, MA, was Trump going to win the popular vote and lose the electoral college? As it was Trump beat Hillary in a 49 state race--but the EC wasn't close. Had Trump won the popular vote, it might have been an EC landslide.

    And why, pray tell, would Hillary winning the election ("Trump...losing the electoral vote") prompt fear in the Clinton camp? It implies other assumptions are suspect. Completely dysfunctional.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @whorefinder

    I call BS on this reporting. This is not the first time I’ve seen this “fear” trotted out, but I think it is pure invention. Under what scenario, given polls in CA, NY, NJ, IL, MA, was Trump going to win the popular vote and lose the electoral college? As it was Trump beat Hillary in a 49 state race–but the EC wasn’t close. Had Trump won the popular vote, it might have been an EC landslide.

    And why, pray tell, would Hillary winning the election (“Trump…losing the electoral vote”) prompt fear in the Clinton camp? It implies other assumptions are suspect. Completely dysfunctional.

    Exactly.

    As I stated, I think Brazile (and probably a few others) ginned up this fear. They used to hoodwink Hillary into letting them embezzle funds to hand out to cronies instead of concentrating on white blue collar voters in close states.

    It worked because Hillary is such a bad campaigner that, in her shallow political mind, she bought it. Bill didn’t buy it, but for some reason, Hillary, who’d assumed she’d gained Bill’s political skills, exiled Bill and didn’t listen when he was the lone voice asking why they weren’t trying for white blue collar workers in close states.

    Brazile and co. threw in something about “civil unrest” and “delegitimize her win” if Trump took the popular vote, and Hillary panicked as she saw millions of militia men marching fully armed down Pennsylvania Avenue, coming to hang her for her crimes.

    It all comes back to Hillary’s horrible campaign skills, her arrogance at assuming she was destined to be coronated as the First Female President, and her absolute fear and loathing of white working people. Brazile knew exactly what buttons to push on her to siphon off funds to enrich herself and her cronies.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @whorefinder


    Hillary... exiled Bill and didn’t listen when he was the lone voice asking why they weren’t trying for white blue collar workers in close states.
     
    I've heard this said, but only AFTER the election was over. I wonder how much of this is true and how much is retconning by Bill and his fans?

    Replies: @whorefinder

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @whorefinder


    Hillary, who’d assumed she’d gained Bill’s political skills, exiled Bill
     
    The real hero of this election is the guy who exiled Trump's Twitter account.
    , @Ivy
    @whorefinder

    But Brazile was that soft-spoken purplish-haired lady on those Sunday shows, so genteel you could just imagine her sharing her mamma's biscuit recipe.
    Who woulda thought she was a plottin' and a hatchin' to loot poor little Hills.

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

    , @Forbes
    @whorefinder

    The less nefarious explanation is the Clinton camp was so confident of their victory that details about some late campaign spending (walking around money) in Nawlins and ChiTown, or TV ads aired in Omaha were about executing the game plan.

    It's not as if Democrats make regular use of cost/benefit analysis or decision theory trade-offs.

    BK HQ: "Are we still sending money to Chicago and New Orleans?"

    Donna Brazile: My peeps still need a check. Ya know those voters ain't gonna show up on their own!

    Campaign expenditures are all about special interest group spending--favorite vendors, concessionaires, consultants--gimedats lined up at the trough.

    Replies: @whorefinder

    , @Abe
    @whorefinder


    As I stated, I think Brazile (and probably a few others) ginned up this fear. They used to hoodwink Hillary into letting them embezzle funds to hand out to cronies instead of concentrating on white blue collar voters in close states.
     
    Actually, I tip my hat to you and say chances are 95% you are right (tip-of-the-hat-rape! if you're the same whorefinder as on HEARTISTE :-). But I'll raise you a little and say there was no hoodwinking going on. Hillary is the living embodiment of the Mary McCarthy quip about every word coming out of someone's mouth being a lie, including the words "and" and "the" (on election night the Clinton camp kept spinning till the end, telling CNN a batch of diehard union districts were still to be counted in Michigan, and dozens of urban ones in Wisconsin; both claims turned out to be false, and yet were still made even when it was too late for the lies to do Her Majesty any good). So my take is that being certain she was cruising to victory, greedy ol' Hillary decided to do a little Clinton Foundation-style graft and disburse the surplus in her warchest for favors-to-be-named-later instead of returning any of it to her donors. As I pointed out to my wife once, even if there was no skimming going on at the Clinton Foundation, just the fact that it had an operational budget to play with and could give cushy jobs to bright young things who could be molded and later ensconced in influential jobs in the media or academia was powerful enough.
  107. @whorefinder
    @Forbes


    I call BS on this reporting. This is not the first time I’ve seen this “fear” trotted out, but I think it is pure invention. Under what scenario, given polls in CA, NY, NJ, IL, MA, was Trump going to win the popular vote and lose the electoral college? As it was Trump beat Hillary in a 49 state race–but the EC wasn’t close. Had Trump won the popular vote, it might have been an EC landslide.

    And why, pray tell, would Hillary winning the election (“Trump…losing the electoral vote”) prompt fear in the Clinton camp? It implies other assumptions are suspect. Completely dysfunctional.
     

    Exactly.

    As I stated, I think Brazile (and probably a few others) ginned up this fear. They used to hoodwink Hillary into letting them embezzle funds to hand out to cronies instead of concentrating on white blue collar voters in close states.

    It worked because Hillary is such a bad campaigner that, in her shallow political mind, she bought it. Bill didn't buy it, but for some reason, Hillary, who'd assumed she'd gained Bill's political skills, exiled Bill and didn't listen when he was the lone voice asking why they weren't trying for white blue collar workers in close states.

    Brazile and co. threw in something about "civil unrest" and "delegitimize her win" if Trump took the popular vote, and Hillary panicked as she saw millions of militia men marching fully armed down Pennsylvania Avenue, coming to hang her for her crimes.

    It all comes back to Hillary's horrible campaign skills, her arrogance at assuming she was destined to be coronated as the First Female President, and her absolute fear and loathing of white working people. Brazile knew exactly what buttons to push on her to siphon off funds to enrich herself and her cronies.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Reg Cæsar, @Ivy, @Forbes, @Abe

    Hillary… exiled Bill and didn’t listen when he was the lone voice asking why they weren’t trying for white blue collar workers in close states.

    I’ve heard this said, but only AFTER the election was over. I wonder how much of this is true and how much is retconning by Bill and his fans?

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    @Jack D

    It's a fair cop. It's hard to see if Bill was active on the campaign trail or was sidelined. But Bill definitely wasn't on TV a lot, especially in relation to how much he was on TV during the Obamacare coup, given that he literally took over a presidential press conference at one point, and was giving speeches on it and rallying Congress and such. Obama used Bill's natural love of the camera to sell his coup.

    I think exiling Bill from visibility was a calculated move by Hillary to quell statements that she was merely riding on Bill's coattails. Unfortunately, she never had his skills. And then when Hillary went low on Trump's sex life, Trump went hard on Bill's sexual assaults, thus negating Hillary bringing Bill out as a last resort. In fact, that might have been Trump's goal all along in getting sexual indiscretions into the campaign---he suspected Bill would be a last-minute ringer brought in at the end of the campaign, so he short-circuited it by making Bill's sex assaults part of the campaign early enough to destroy Bill as a ringer.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Jack D

  108. @Forbes
    @Jefferson


    Donald J. Trump could have won the popular vote if he had won blue states that voted for George W. Bush in 2004 like Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico.
     
    I appreciate the effort--but there nowhere near 2.5 million vote differential (to overcome) among those four states had Trump won them--and still lose the EC.

    Reading comprehension, my boy, reading comprehension...

    Replies: @Abe, @Jefferson

    I appreciate the effort–but there nowhere near 2.5 million vote differential (to overcome) among those four states had Trump won them–and still lose the EC.

    Reading comprehension, my boy, reading comprehension…

    Hey, lay off my boy, Jeff’! As I’ve mentioned on another thread, Cuck McMullin got 700K votes BY HIMSELF. Stein got 1M votes more than typical for a Green party candidate, given the awfulness of the Donkey Party one, but Johnson got a whopping 3M more than last time, and more like 4M more than is typical for the Libertarian candidate (strange that libertarian-type voters did not glom on more to super-capitalist Mitt and his boy wonder, Objectivist Ryan, as compared to Bush the Dumber or McCain, but maybe that just represents Johnson’s superior strengths as a candidate). But in any case, the right won the popular vote, and very arguably Trump would have as well since there was one certified spoiler candidate, and another implicit one who way overperformed through media collusion to paint Trump as unacceptable.

    • Replies: @Andrew
    @Abe

    Trump won 2.2 million less votes than Bush in 2004 in non-swing blue states - CA, CT, DC, HI, IL, MD, MN, NJ, NM, NY, OR, VT, WA - and in several deep red states - SD, NE, KS, OK, UT

    That is most of the popular vote difference.

  109. Hey it was November and Obama was running out of days to play golf before winter.

    In Hawaii?

    OK, the courses fill up with the Pacific version of snowbirds, but he’s the President.

    There was a little piece in the Reader’s Digest ages ago, true story or joke I don’t remember. A guy arrived at his hotel to find out it was all booked up. He asked the clerk what they would do if Pres. Johnson (that’s how old the story is) showed up at the last minute and needed some rooms. The clerk said, I’m sure we could find something in that case.

    The spurned guest answered, Well, I know for a fact he won’t be here tonight, so how about giving me the room you’re saving for him?

  110. @whorefinder
    @Forbes


    I call BS on this reporting. This is not the first time I’ve seen this “fear” trotted out, but I think it is pure invention. Under what scenario, given polls in CA, NY, NJ, IL, MA, was Trump going to win the popular vote and lose the electoral college? As it was Trump beat Hillary in a 49 state race–but the EC wasn’t close. Had Trump won the popular vote, it might have been an EC landslide.

    And why, pray tell, would Hillary winning the election (“Trump…losing the electoral vote”) prompt fear in the Clinton camp? It implies other assumptions are suspect. Completely dysfunctional.
     

    Exactly.

    As I stated, I think Brazile (and probably a few others) ginned up this fear. They used to hoodwink Hillary into letting them embezzle funds to hand out to cronies instead of concentrating on white blue collar voters in close states.

    It worked because Hillary is such a bad campaigner that, in her shallow political mind, she bought it. Bill didn't buy it, but for some reason, Hillary, who'd assumed she'd gained Bill's political skills, exiled Bill and didn't listen when he was the lone voice asking why they weren't trying for white blue collar workers in close states.

    Brazile and co. threw in something about "civil unrest" and "delegitimize her win" if Trump took the popular vote, and Hillary panicked as she saw millions of militia men marching fully armed down Pennsylvania Avenue, coming to hang her for her crimes.

    It all comes back to Hillary's horrible campaign skills, her arrogance at assuming she was destined to be coronated as the First Female President, and her absolute fear and loathing of white working people. Brazile knew exactly what buttons to push on her to siphon off funds to enrich herself and her cronies.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Reg Cæsar, @Ivy, @Forbes, @Abe

    Hillary, who’d assumed she’d gained Bill’s political skills, exiled Bill

    The real hero of this election is the guy who exiled Trump’s Twitter account.

  111. @Forbes
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    Number one mistake of Hillary's campaign was putting the campaign HQ in Brooklyn. Brooklyn is an insulated hipster haven (heaven?). The Brooklyn-resident workers and volunteers aren't natives, they're transplants that, for the most part, hate where they're from. They moved to NYC-Brooklyn to escape where they grew up. They've come to The City as if moving to Mecca. In other words, they're the opposite of the core Democrat demographic in 'flyover country.'

    And if you looked at their CVs, I doubt Penn State, Ohio State, or Michigan State made an appearance. You can't target a market about which you're totally ignorant.

    Replies: @Connecticut Famer, @black sea

    Manhattan is priced out of their range, which is why they’ve moved into Brooklyn and have driven up the cost of housing in the process. Madame’s Brooklyn headquarters was decidedly NOT within the Brooklyn of the traditional (if stereotypical)”deez, dems and doze” crowd (Perish the thought!). The latter have moved on to places like Breezy Point where half the NYPD and NYFD live, definitely terra incognita to the members of Team Clinton. And you’re probably right about the CVs (to which you could add Fordham or St. Johns to the list).

  112. @whorefinder
    @Forbes


    I call BS on this reporting. This is not the first time I’ve seen this “fear” trotted out, but I think it is pure invention. Under what scenario, given polls in CA, NY, NJ, IL, MA, was Trump going to win the popular vote and lose the electoral college? As it was Trump beat Hillary in a 49 state race–but the EC wasn’t close. Had Trump won the popular vote, it might have been an EC landslide.

    And why, pray tell, would Hillary winning the election (“Trump…losing the electoral vote”) prompt fear in the Clinton camp? It implies other assumptions are suspect. Completely dysfunctional.
     

    Exactly.

    As I stated, I think Brazile (and probably a few others) ginned up this fear. They used to hoodwink Hillary into letting them embezzle funds to hand out to cronies instead of concentrating on white blue collar voters in close states.

    It worked because Hillary is such a bad campaigner that, in her shallow political mind, she bought it. Bill didn't buy it, but for some reason, Hillary, who'd assumed she'd gained Bill's political skills, exiled Bill and didn't listen when he was the lone voice asking why they weren't trying for white blue collar workers in close states.

    Brazile and co. threw in something about "civil unrest" and "delegitimize her win" if Trump took the popular vote, and Hillary panicked as she saw millions of militia men marching fully armed down Pennsylvania Avenue, coming to hang her for her crimes.

    It all comes back to Hillary's horrible campaign skills, her arrogance at assuming she was destined to be coronated as the First Female President, and her absolute fear and loathing of white working people. Brazile knew exactly what buttons to push on her to siphon off funds to enrich herself and her cronies.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Reg Cæsar, @Ivy, @Forbes, @Abe

    But Brazile was that soft-spoken purplish-haired lady on those Sunday shows, so genteel you could just imagine her sharing her mamma’s biscuit recipe.
    Who woulda thought she was a plottin’ and a hatchin’ to loot poor little Hills.

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    @Ivy

    Ivy, Probably baked her a shit pie like in the movie "The Help." Dars you go Miss Hillary, eat dat shit.

  113. “had what appeared to be a creepy clown without make-up as her vice-presidential candidate,”

    That’s freakin’ awesome. Love the humor here at iSteve.

  114. @Forbes
    @Jefferson


    Donald J. Trump could have won the popular vote if he had won blue states that voted for George W. Bush in 2004 like Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico.
     
    I appreciate the effort--but there nowhere near 2.5 million vote differential (to overcome) among those four states had Trump won them--and still lose the EC.

    Reading comprehension, my boy, reading comprehension...

    Replies: @Abe, @Jefferson

    “I appreciate the effort–but there nowhere near 2.5 million vote differential (to overcome) among those four states had Trump won them–and still lose the EC.

    Reading comprehension, my boy, reading comprehension…”

    You combine those 4 states that Bush won (Nevada, New Mexico, Virginia, and Colorado) with the 3 states that George W. Bush lost in 2004 (Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, but Donald J. Trump won in 2016, and The Donald could have easily won the popular vote.

    • Replies: @Forbes
    @Jefferson

    You've completely missed my criticism about the initial reporting of the "fear." The fear was that Trump would win the popular vote, yet lose the EC.

    You propose a scenario that I already said lead to a Trump EC landslide--not a vote win and EC loss.

    , @Jack D
    @Jefferson

    All the talk about the popular votes is just an attempt to pull some sort of symbolic victory from the jaws of defeat. All the candidate knew going in that whoever wins the EC becomes the President. If there was no EC and the election was based purely on the popular vote, Trump might have pursued another strategy and the vote totals wouldn't be what they are now. Trump let Hillary run up a huge lead in California because he knew it didn't matter. Losing California by 1 vote and losing it by 3 million votes is the same in the game as it is played under the current rules. Under different rules Trump would have pushed back in California - more advertising, more legal challenges to the millions of permanent resident aliens who are registered to vote. Etc.

    BTW, one of the first things that Trump and the Republican Congress should do is pass a law that any non-citizen who is caught voting is no longer eligible for citizenship and will be deported. It should be possible to cross check voting records with citizenship applications and green card records. Aliens vote now because they have no fear of consequences. Voting when you are not eligible to vote indicates a total disrespect for American legal and political institutions but of course in places like California it has been wink wink nod nod by the local authorities.

    Replies: @res

  115. @whorefinder
    Two points:

    1. It's interest how the Monday morning quarterbacking of campaigns is like that of wars: suddenly, everyone's writing about how it was inevitable that the loser was going to lose, because of all the disorganization the loser was in that nobody reported on ---but everyone noticed, mind you, they just were too classy to talk about it before it was over.

    That said, Hillary's behavior as described is exactly how I pictured her. I've said since 2008 that this woman is a terrible campaigner who thinks that she's a great campaigner by virtue of transference-by-marriage of Bill's campaign skills and her self-delusional aura of being chosen by fate to be the first female president. But she doesn't like meeting people on the ground, holding rallies, or doing the baby-kissing-hand-shaking nonsense, and when she does it comes off so fake it's painful. Bill, Obama, Romney, Bush 43, Trump---say what you will, but those guys were decent to very good at shaking a commoner's hand and coming off like they were listening to them.

    But Hillary never learned those skills, having come in solely on her husband's coattails. And she never bothered to pull a Margaret Thatcher and just let the cold bizznich in her out---at least then she wouldn't come off as fake. (Trump never bothered to learn the baby-kissing-hand-shaking, but he never pretended he was into it, so, again, he came off as way more authentic than her---whatever you say about Trump, you know people believe he is exactly the person you're seeing before you.)

    As I've said, in 2008 Obama expected Hillary to take the crown and was just himself running to get larger national name recognition, planning a more serious run in 2012 or 2016 ----and additionally, hoping for a long-shot VP slot or an also-ran lower-tier cabinet position. Then about two weeks into it, he realized that Hillary was absolutely awful at running, and he could actually beat her. And that's when the wheels started to come off Hillary's bus---she'd actually never expected someone to run against her trying to win.

    2.

    But there also were millions approved for transfer from Clinton’s campaign for use by the DNC — which, under a plan devised by Brazile to drum up urban turnout out of fear that Trump would win the popular vote while losing the electoral vote, got dumped into Chicago and New Orleans, far from anywhere that would have made a difference in the election.
     
    Given what we know about Brazile being a thief and all, it sounds to me like she was just using the campaign to (legally?) embezzle funds and have it sent to fellow black cronies in the heavily black areas of New Orleans and Chicago, even during crunch time when it was important to insure a win and a misstep could cost her the election and power and more lucrative kickbacks later.

    In fact, you might say that Brazile, when push came to shove, was more loyal to her race than to her gender/party/party ideals. That's a pretty bad omen for the Democrats---they've filled their party leadership with black racialists who are loyal only to their fellow blacks and getting paid. That's not a recipe for a political party that's going to come back from it's current losses. That's a recipe for a party that's going to disintegrate or else become a permanent minority party beset with corruption.

    Replies: @Forbes, @Buffalo Joe

    Whorefinder, Hillary was not only a terrible campaigner, she was a terrible candidate. Bernie Sanders, with almost no national name recognition, actually gave Hillary a decent run for the nomination. The verified collusion of the DNC and the clout of the Super Delegates sealed Bernie’s fate. The thing is, who else did the Dems have to nominate?

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Buffalo Joe

    Not only did sanders not have name recognition, he wasn't even a Democrat. He was a friggin' Socialist. And still he came close to beating her.

    As for who else, if Hillary hadn't sucked up all the oxygen, there were others. Joe Biden to start with. Cory Booker. Kamala Harris. Elizabeth Warren.

    , @Anon
    @Buffalo Joe

    Republicans have been eating away at the Democrats' down ticket slots since 2010. That's why the Dems were stuck with running Hillary. Without her, their ticket would have been one crazy old socialist with no other viable candidate in sight.

  116. @Laugh Track
    @Mr. Anon


    all those gay guys and cat-girls-with-problem-glasses
     
    Love it!

    Replies: @Kylie

    Mr. Anon never disappoints.

  117. @Barnard
    @Sam Haysom

    Hillary was viewed so negatively, I'm not sure how much it would have helped. Obviously they shouldn't have turned away people looking for yard signs or trying to persuade others in the neighborhoods, but I'm not convinced it would have made a difference for Hillary because of how negatively she and her staff view working class whites. I don't think there is anything that could have been said that would have swayed over 95% of them.

    Replies: @Pericles, @Wanda

    You can bet that those people whose offers of help were rejected went back home and told other people about it. “Did you hear how they treated _______ when she went there to ask for a sign? And she’s been a Democrat for 50 years!” That back-of-the-hand treatment can be very shocking to people who’ve never questioned their loyalties.

    Remember when Gordon Brown, the British PM and Labour Party leader, was caught on a live mic calling a 65-year old woman a bigot? She asked him some sharp questions about immigrants living on welfare. As soon as he thought she was out of hearing, he insulted her.

    Duffy has lived in Rochdale all her life, working for the council with disabled children up until her retirement five years ago. She is a widow and has a daughter and two grandchildren. Her husband, a painter and decorator, died of cancer four years ago.

    Before being told of Brown’s comments, Duffy had said she would still be voting Labour. She told Sky News she confronted him over the national debt and immigration and that the prime minister had seemed “understanding” and responded “pretty well”.

    But after hearing of his reported comments she said she was “very annoyed” and would not be voting for Labour. “I haven’t had a chance to listen to it yet but if that’s what he said I’m very upset,” she said.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/apr/28/gordon-brown-bigoted-woman

    This sort of thing has an effect on people, and can cause them to rethink a lot of things they’ve just taken for granted to years.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    @Wanda


    This sort of thing has an effect on people, and can cause them to rethink a lot of things they’ve just taken for granted to years.
     
    Wouldn't be surprised if this were the exact sort of thing that happened to Trump himself.

    This is the dawning of the age of the post-progressive.
  118. @Clyde
    @Gilbert Ratchet


    I guess they didn’t have the rights to whatever entrance music they actually used in Michigan? That would explain the weird noodling guitar overdub in the video.
     
    At rallies Trumps people played the Rolling Stones "You Can't Always Get What You Want" all the time despite The Stones objections. Trump et al. bought the rights to play this (and many other rock and country tunes, a bulk purchase) so The Stones could object all they wanted and were ignored.
    Trump's campaign did not have the rights to, was not allowed (illegal!) to broadcast this tune over youtube as part of the rally. Thus the rally audience heard the Stones tune while those tuning in over youtube got some generic music substituted.

    Replies: @Eustace Tilley (not)

    Thank you so much for this comment; a layman such as I could never have delved into this question in such detail without such “inside” commentary.

    (I’m guessing you are a patent attorney or a person otherwise knowledgeable in patent law.)

    • Replies: @Clyde
    @Eustace Tilley (not)

    No I am not an attorney but I have had the problem explained to me

  119. @Jack D
    @whorefinder


    Hillary... exiled Bill and didn’t listen when he was the lone voice asking why they weren’t trying for white blue collar workers in close states.
     
    I've heard this said, but only AFTER the election was over. I wonder how much of this is true and how much is retconning by Bill and his fans?

    Replies: @whorefinder

    It’s a fair cop. It’s hard to see if Bill was active on the campaign trail or was sidelined. But Bill definitely wasn’t on TV a lot, especially in relation to how much he was on TV during the Obamacare coup, given that he literally took over a presidential press conference at one point, and was giving speeches on it and rallying Congress and such. Obama used Bill’s natural love of the camera to sell his coup.

    I think exiling Bill from visibility was a calculated move by Hillary to quell statements that she was merely riding on Bill’s coattails. Unfortunately, she never had his skills. And then when Hillary went low on Trump’s sex life, Trump went hard on Bill’s sexual assaults, thus negating Hillary bringing Bill out as a last resort. In fact, that might have been Trump’s goal all along in getting sexual indiscretions into the campaign—he suspected Bill would be a last-minute ringer brought in at the end of the campaign, so he short-circuited it by making Bill’s sex assaults part of the campaign early enough to destroy Bill as a ringer.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @whorefinder

    How much did Hillary use Biden in Rust Belt states?

    Replies: @whorefinder

    , @Jack D
    @whorefinder

    Trump is a clever strategist but I doubt he was playing 4 dimensional chess on this level.

    The problem, according to Bill's buddies, is not so much that they didn't use him on the trail but that he was exiled to his love nest atop the library in Little Rock (which oddly enough bears a resemblance to a trailer) and when he called Brooklyn to tell them what to do, they would take his advice the way you might indulge your senile old grandpa instead of the most gifted Democrat politician since JFK. They would just ignore him and do whatever ADA the supercomputer told them to do.

    Replies: @whorefinder

  120. @e
    @Boomstick

    Trump’s decision to call out Mexican “rapists” at his kickoff, for example, was inspired, in part, by a random chat he had with two Border Patrol agents at one of his golf resorts, two of his friends told me—road-test his talking points.

    Trump comes across as someone who looks for and can recognize unconventional opportunities in real time, and then capitalize on them.


    He has said to his audiences many times that he didn't even know how much of an issue illegal immigration was until he heard it from people in the crowds. He added that the wall was an idea he got from listening to them.

    Imagine that! Imagine a guy running for office admitting he got an idea of what was bothering people by listening to them and yes, parroting what they said. That's not the definition of "leader" according to media and other pols. However, it IS the idea most have in mind when they say they wish someone to represent them.

    Replies: @Light Roast, @slumber_j

    He has said to his audiences many times that he didn’t even know how much of an issue illegal immigration was until he heard it from people in the crowds.

    I didn’t know he said that, but that’s exactly in line with what I always figured about his campaign.

    I’m sure I’m not the only one to think this, but I figured that Trump thought his immigration stance would get him as far as his Birther stance did. About 20% support and some publicity, but nothing more. Trump, after all, is just as elite as any other elite, and lived in the same bubble.

    I think he was floored by how much immigration was not a “fringe” issue, but rather a “core” one. I think that, at first, he didn’t fully realize why so many people were against mass immigration; he just knew that they were. That’s why in the primaries he occasionally made pro-immigrant and conciliatory comments, as if he wasn’t sure what his own immigration policy was. It took a while for Miller and Bannon et al to impress on him what the popular views were on immigration, and why. Eventually Trump got there.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Light Roast

    The August 2016 debate among Trump supporters that culminated with the triumphant trip to Mexico and strong speech really was American democracy in action at its best.

    , @whorefinder
    @Light Roast

    Mostly agree. However, I think Trump realized he could wed the immigration issue to his most cherished belief---that NAFTA was a con job, and needs to be blown up and renegotiated. He's said since NAFTA first came out that he's hated it.

    Trump's probably miffed a bit NAFTA hasn't been a bigger issue, but realizes immigration is the way to push it through, especially since a stronger, tariff-based trade deal will cause a lot of self-deportation as unions strengthen and start "encouraging" non-citizens to leave. And the Wall is a great big ego trip for him, allowing him to entertain his edifice complex and literally stamp his name on something tangible and historic, like Eisenhower got the interstate system.

  121. @Pat Casey
    @Anonymous

    lol nice find.

    I will say this about "Old White Men." When it is deployed, by the ones who know what they're doing with it, like CNN's black anchor Don Lemon, there is a measure of being clever: because he's talking about ghosts; demons rather, rather actually talking to demon ghosts---- since we know you ward off demons best by naming them. And its not clear to me that anyone around here appreciates that. (If pressed Lemon just says he's talking about "old attitudes," but I appreciate the poetics I'm certain he recognizes.)

    Or maybe I just think it's clever because I deeply believe in ghosts myself.

    But all of the current liberal insanity makes a lot of sense when you realize the hysteria has all the trappings of an apocalyptic religious phenomenon. That's why Tim Wise scribbles dark prophecy, why hate hoaxes are committed and then believed in, why any symbol of a dead slave owner must not stand (since symbols that express can actually invoke) and why the living enemy must be demonized ad nauseum.

    In that sense there is almost all the difference in the world between making fun of stale pale males and gravely incising the words Old White Men---the zealots aint jokin around.

    Replies: @guest, @Wanda

    I always thought that naming ghosts was dangerous because it might RAISE them, not quell them. The Romans said “De mortuis nil nisi bonum”, and now we think that means that it’s sort of unsporting to say bad things about the dead, because they’re not here to answer and can’t fight back, etc. But the Romans were very superstitious, and feared ghosts. Saying something bad about the dead could anger a spirit and cause it to come back and haunt you. So their policy was to say NOTHING – “nil” – but if you HAD to say something, make sure it was nice, or you could end up with an angry ghost after you.

    That does seem to be the attitude of the Left too, in their quest to silence bad-think through political correctness. If the words can’t be spoken, the thing itself can’t exist, i.e. if we ban hate speech, there can be no hate. They really do seem to have a superstitious belief in the power of words to bring something into being.

  122. @Jefferson
    @Forbes

    "I appreciate the effort–but there nowhere near 2.5 million vote differential (to overcome) among those four states had Trump won them–and still lose the EC.

    Reading comprehension, my boy, reading comprehension…"

    You combine those 4 states that Bush won (Nevada, New Mexico, Virginia, and Colorado) with the 3 states that George W. Bush lost in 2004 (Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, but Donald J. Trump won in 2016, and The Donald could have easily won the popular vote.

    Replies: @Forbes, @Jack D

    You’ve completely missed my criticism about the initial reporting of the “fear.” The fear was that Trump would win the popular vote, yet lose the EC.

    You propose a scenario that I already said lead to a Trump EC landslide–not a vote win and EC loss.

  123. @George
    Obama basically did nothing for the Flint water crisis. So keeping out of there might have been on purpose, campaigning in well off Florida made sense. So I am wondering if Trump is the one who screwed up in Michigan, even though he won by 10, 000 votes. Trump was filling stafiums there, why no postmortem on his amateurish eletion?

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

    George, When Buster Douglas destroyed the champion, Mike Tyson, more of the analysts focused on why Tyson lost, not why Douglas won. Same thing here, why did HRC lose?

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    @Buffalo Joe

    "George, When Buster Douglas destroyed the champion, Mike Tyson, more of the analysts focused on why Tyson lost, not why Douglas won. Same thing here, why did HRC lose?"

    I compare the Trump victory to the Cubbies winning The World Series.


    https://youtu.be/G-qyoKE_Qwc

  124. @Boomstick
    The Trump rallies were something hiding in plain sight that I think still haven't been properly credited. Most political rallies seem to be rather spiritless affairs, with the candidate giving the same stump speech. The Trump rallies were happenings. People wanted to be there, they generated excitement, and the campaign tried out ideas there to see what worked. It was an old school approach, and I don't know that other candidates could have pulled that off.

    Glenn Thrush has some good reporting (mixed in, as usual, with some petulant water-carrying for Hillary) below. Trump comes across as someone who looks for and can recognize unconventional opportunities in real time, and then capitalize on them.

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/2016-presidential-election-10-moments-trump-clinton-214508

    For all his deficiencies as a campaign manager, it became clear that Lewandowski mind-melded with his new boss. And he saw something the more jaded professionals who viewed Trump as an orange-coiffed clown couldn’t: The monster rallies he was proving so good at putting together weren’t just a part of Trump’s campaign, they were his campaign, the source of his power, a showcase for the candidate’s rambling genius, not to mention arena-size focus groups for his messaging and a test run for his vintage Trump insults.
    ...
    From that point on, Trump’s rallies became the centerpiece of the campaign. Trump told Lewandowski to book as many of them as he could. And they served to obscure the campaign’s glaring shortcomings, while letting an improvising candidate—Trump’s decision to call out Mexican “rapists” at his kickoff, for example, was inspired, in part, by a random chat he had with two Border Patrol agents at one of his golf resorts, two of his friends told me—road-test his talking points. Trump picked up insights and policies like a stand-up comedian collecting material for a show. The subject he kept coming back to, increasingly, was anger, and Trump’s promise to build a wall on the Mexican border became a staple, simply because it got the greatest applause lines.

    “He lives for the energy. There’s no one better at taking the temperature of the crowd,” Lewandowski told me during the campaign. “You can get instant feedback. … We’d test out all of our best lines, some would work, some wouldn’t. … That’s how we got ‘Little Marco’ and ‘Lyin’ Ted.’” How precise a focus group were the rallies? Trump started with Little Marco—then switched to “’Lil” because it got more laughs.

     

    Replies: @Jack Hanson, @Jefferson, @e, @guest, @Buffalo Joe

    Boomstick, They recognized the enthusiasm and messaging at the Bernie rallies, but they had the nomination in the bag. They then thought they had the election in the bag but they thought wrong.

  125. @guest
    @Jefferson

    He had Sinatra.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @Buffalo Joe

    Guest, Yes, and he and Sinatra had Marilyn.

  126. @Ivy
    @whorefinder

    But Brazile was that soft-spoken purplish-haired lady on those Sunday shows, so genteel you could just imagine her sharing her mamma's biscuit recipe.
    Who woulda thought she was a plottin' and a hatchin' to loot poor little Hills.

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

    Ivy, Probably baked her a shit pie like in the movie “The Help.” Dars you go Miss Hillary, eat dat shit.

  127. @whorefinder
    @Forbes


    I call BS on this reporting. This is not the first time I’ve seen this “fear” trotted out, but I think it is pure invention. Under what scenario, given polls in CA, NY, NJ, IL, MA, was Trump going to win the popular vote and lose the electoral college? As it was Trump beat Hillary in a 49 state race–but the EC wasn’t close. Had Trump won the popular vote, it might have been an EC landslide.

    And why, pray tell, would Hillary winning the election (“Trump…losing the electoral vote”) prompt fear in the Clinton camp? It implies other assumptions are suspect. Completely dysfunctional.
     

    Exactly.

    As I stated, I think Brazile (and probably a few others) ginned up this fear. They used to hoodwink Hillary into letting them embezzle funds to hand out to cronies instead of concentrating on white blue collar voters in close states.

    It worked because Hillary is such a bad campaigner that, in her shallow political mind, she bought it. Bill didn't buy it, but for some reason, Hillary, who'd assumed she'd gained Bill's political skills, exiled Bill and didn't listen when he was the lone voice asking why they weren't trying for white blue collar workers in close states.

    Brazile and co. threw in something about "civil unrest" and "delegitimize her win" if Trump took the popular vote, and Hillary panicked as she saw millions of militia men marching fully armed down Pennsylvania Avenue, coming to hang her for her crimes.

    It all comes back to Hillary's horrible campaign skills, her arrogance at assuming she was destined to be coronated as the First Female President, and her absolute fear and loathing of white working people. Brazile knew exactly what buttons to push on her to siphon off funds to enrich herself and her cronies.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Reg Cæsar, @Ivy, @Forbes, @Abe

    The less nefarious explanation is the Clinton camp was so confident of their victory that details about some late campaign spending (walking around money) in Nawlins and ChiTown, or TV ads aired in Omaha were about executing the game plan.

    It’s not as if Democrats make regular use of cost/benefit analysis or decision theory trade-offs.

    BK HQ: “Are we still sending money to Chicago and New Orleans?”

    Donna Brazile: My peeps still need a check. Ya know those voters ain’t gonna show up on their own!

    Campaign expenditures are all about special interest group spending–favorite vendors, concessionaires, consultants–gimedats lined up at the trough.

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    @Forbes


    The less nefarious explanation is the Clinton camp was so confident of their victory that details about some late campaign spending (walking around money) in Nawlins and ChiTown, or TV ads aired in Omaha were about executing the game plan.
     
    Yeah, I think it's both. Brazile believed they were going to win, and even if it got close still wanted to pay off her homies rather than solidify.

    Honestly, the DNC should fire her if they want a corruption-free organization. I, of course, am hoping she's elected to the full-time DNC chair position.

    Replies: @Jack D

  128. @e
    I watched several rallies in full but none offered more dramatic an entrance than this one in Pittsburgh, PA the last night before the election, at midnight, I believe. Ground reports from some people I knew in PA led me to believe he'd take PA or be mighty close. This rally was the capper for me. It epitomized how Trump had elevated campaigning to a good time, a happening and this one showed how he capped it all off with a dramatic entrance. Even watching on a tiny computer screen was exciting.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/11/07/trumps-penchant-for-grand-entrances-strikes-again/?utm_term=.2bdbb7c180d3

    Replies: @Kylie

    “This rally was the capper for me. It epitomized how Trump had elevated campaigning to a good time, a happening and this one showed how he capped it all off with a dramatic entrance. Even watching on a tiny computer screen was exciting.”

    Human beings respond to spectacle on a visceral level. Trump seems to understand this instinctively.

    • Replies: @e
    @Kylie

    Human beings respond to spectacle on a visceral level. Trump seems to understand this instinctively.

    Absolutely, he understands persuasion as well as Aristotle.

    After all, Trump has explained that what he was interested in as a career as a young man was in making films. He obviously knows the value of a good narrative and a charismatic leading man.

  129. @Buffalo Joe
    @George

    George, When Buster Douglas destroyed the champion, Mike Tyson, more of the analysts focused on why Tyson lost, not why Douglas won. Same thing here, why did HRC lose?

    Replies: @Jefferson

    “George, When Buster Douglas destroyed the champion, Mike Tyson, more of the analysts focused on why Tyson lost, not why Douglas won. Same thing here, why did HRC lose?”

    I compare the Trump victory to the Cubbies winning The World Series.

  130. @whorefinder
    @Jack D

    It's a fair cop. It's hard to see if Bill was active on the campaign trail or was sidelined. But Bill definitely wasn't on TV a lot, especially in relation to how much he was on TV during the Obamacare coup, given that he literally took over a presidential press conference at one point, and was giving speeches on it and rallying Congress and such. Obama used Bill's natural love of the camera to sell his coup.

    I think exiling Bill from visibility was a calculated move by Hillary to quell statements that she was merely riding on Bill's coattails. Unfortunately, she never had his skills. And then when Hillary went low on Trump's sex life, Trump went hard on Bill's sexual assaults, thus negating Hillary bringing Bill out as a last resort. In fact, that might have been Trump's goal all along in getting sexual indiscretions into the campaign---he suspected Bill would be a last-minute ringer brought in at the end of the campaign, so he short-circuited it by making Bill's sex assaults part of the campaign early enough to destroy Bill as a ringer.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Jack D

    How much did Hillary use Biden in Rust Belt states?

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    @Steve Sailer

    Fair point as well.

    However, Creepy Joe was not tied at the hip, marriage-wise and image wise, as Bill was to Hillary.

    Plus Creepy Joe has never had anywhere near the political skills of Bill---Creepy Joe's main ability was to get elected by the corporations in Delaware, he failed to make any dents nationally. And Creepy Joe was far more likely to execute a gaffe nationally (remember calling Obama "clean and articulate"?), which Hillary couldn't afford. And let's not forget how Creepy Joe claimed he was offered Sec of State first and chose VP; that kind of nonsensical chutzpah probably didn't make Hillary too keen on him.

    Hillary had no problem calling for help from Obama, who did some work for her. But Creepy Joe? Too many liabilities. Bill? I think Trump's act sunk him as a liability as well.

  131. @Anonymous
    @Pat Casey

    http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/185731/what-is-the-origin-of-pale-male-and-stale

    The eldest reference that I could find was from a book about American Women and Flight Since 1940, saying

    In 1992 NASA administrator Daniel Goldin declared that the agency was too "pale, male and stale."

     


     

    Replies: @Barnard, @Pat Casey, @Opinionator, @Expletive Deleted

    Right that does it. “Sully : Miracle on the Hudson” is on over the holidays and I’ll make a special effort to take the family to see it. Old white guys are the only people anyone, anywhere wants to see in charge in life-or-death situations. Just because. Well, go see the movie to find out.

  132. @Buffalo Joe
    @whorefinder

    Whorefinder, Hillary was not only a terrible campaigner, she was a terrible candidate. Bernie Sanders, with almost no national name recognition, actually gave Hillary a decent run for the nomination. The verified collusion of the DNC and the clout of the Super Delegates sealed Bernie's fate. The thing is, who else did the Dems have to nominate?

    Replies: @Jack D, @Anon

    Not only did sanders not have name recognition, he wasn’t even a Democrat. He was a friggin’ Socialist. And still he came close to beating her.

    As for who else, if Hillary hadn’t sucked up all the oxygen, there were others. Joe Biden to start with. Cory Booker. Kamala Harris. Elizabeth Warren.

  133. @Light Roast
    @e


    He has said to his audiences many times that he didn’t even know how much of an issue illegal immigration was until he heard it from people in the crowds.
     
    I didn't know he said that, but that's exactly in line with what I always figured about his campaign.

    I'm sure I'm not the only one to think this, but I figured that Trump thought his immigration stance would get him as far as his Birther stance did. About 20% support and some publicity, but nothing more. Trump, after all, is just as elite as any other elite, and lived in the same bubble.

    I think he was floored by how much immigration was not a "fringe" issue, but rather a "core" one. I think that, at first, he didn't fully realize why so many people were against mass immigration; he just knew that they were. That's why in the primaries he occasionally made pro-immigrant and conciliatory comments, as if he wasn't sure what his own immigration policy was. It took a while for Miller and Bannon et al to impress on him what the popular views were on immigration, and why. Eventually Trump got there.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @whorefinder

    The August 2016 debate among Trump supporters that culminated with the triumphant trip to Mexico and strong speech really was American democracy in action at its best.

  134. @Steve Sailer
    @whorefinder

    How much did Hillary use Biden in Rust Belt states?

    Replies: @whorefinder

    Fair point as well.

    However, Creepy Joe was not tied at the hip, marriage-wise and image wise, as Bill was to Hillary.

    Plus Creepy Joe has never had anywhere near the political skills of Bill—Creepy Joe’s main ability was to get elected by the corporations in Delaware, he failed to make any dents nationally. And Creepy Joe was far more likely to execute a gaffe nationally (remember calling Obama “clean and articulate”?), which Hillary couldn’t afford. And let’s not forget how Creepy Joe claimed he was offered Sec of State first and chose VP; that kind of nonsensical chutzpah probably didn’t make Hillary too keen on him.

    Hillary had no problem calling for help from Obama, who did some work for her. But Creepy Joe? Too many liabilities. Bill? I think Trump’s act sunk him as a liability as well.

  135. @Forbes
    @whorefinder

    The less nefarious explanation is the Clinton camp was so confident of their victory that details about some late campaign spending (walking around money) in Nawlins and ChiTown, or TV ads aired in Omaha were about executing the game plan.

    It's not as if Democrats make regular use of cost/benefit analysis or decision theory trade-offs.

    BK HQ: "Are we still sending money to Chicago and New Orleans?"

    Donna Brazile: My peeps still need a check. Ya know those voters ain't gonna show up on their own!

    Campaign expenditures are all about special interest group spending--favorite vendors, concessionaires, consultants--gimedats lined up at the trough.

    Replies: @whorefinder

    The less nefarious explanation is the Clinton camp was so confident of their victory that details about some late campaign spending (walking around money) in Nawlins and ChiTown, or TV ads aired in Omaha were about executing the game plan.

    Yeah, I think it’s both. Brazile believed they were going to win, and even if it got close still wanted to pay off her homies rather than solidify.

    Honestly, the DNC should fire her if they want a corruption-free organization. I, of course, am hoping she’s elected to the full-time DNC chair position.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @whorefinder

    No, it will be Ellison who is even worse. Compare to Ellison, Donna Brazile is MLK.

    Replies: @whorefinder

  136. @Light Roast
    @e


    He has said to his audiences many times that he didn’t even know how much of an issue illegal immigration was until he heard it from people in the crowds.
     
    I didn't know he said that, but that's exactly in line with what I always figured about his campaign.

    I'm sure I'm not the only one to think this, but I figured that Trump thought his immigration stance would get him as far as his Birther stance did. About 20% support and some publicity, but nothing more. Trump, after all, is just as elite as any other elite, and lived in the same bubble.

    I think he was floored by how much immigration was not a "fringe" issue, but rather a "core" one. I think that, at first, he didn't fully realize why so many people were against mass immigration; he just knew that they were. That's why in the primaries he occasionally made pro-immigrant and conciliatory comments, as if he wasn't sure what his own immigration policy was. It took a while for Miller and Bannon et al to impress on him what the popular views were on immigration, and why. Eventually Trump got there.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @whorefinder

    Mostly agree. However, I think Trump realized he could wed the immigration issue to his most cherished belief—that NAFTA was a con job, and needs to be blown up and renegotiated. He’s said since NAFTA first came out that he’s hated it.

    Trump’s probably miffed a bit NAFTA hasn’t been a bigger issue, but realizes immigration is the way to push it through, especially since a stronger, tariff-based trade deal will cause a lot of self-deportation as unions strengthen and start “encouraging” non-citizens to leave. And the Wall is a great big ego trip for him, allowing him to entertain his edifice complex and literally stamp his name on something tangible and historic, like Eisenhower got the interstate system.

  137. @Jefferson
    @Forbes

    "I appreciate the effort–but there nowhere near 2.5 million vote differential (to overcome) among those four states had Trump won them–and still lose the EC.

    Reading comprehension, my boy, reading comprehension…"

    You combine those 4 states that Bush won (Nevada, New Mexico, Virginia, and Colorado) with the 3 states that George W. Bush lost in 2004 (Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, but Donald J. Trump won in 2016, and The Donald could have easily won the popular vote.

    Replies: @Forbes, @Jack D

    All the talk about the popular votes is just an attempt to pull some sort of symbolic victory from the jaws of defeat. All the candidate knew going in that whoever wins the EC becomes the President. If there was no EC and the election was based purely on the popular vote, Trump might have pursued another strategy and the vote totals wouldn’t be what they are now. Trump let Hillary run up a huge lead in California because he knew it didn’t matter. Losing California by 1 vote and losing it by 3 million votes is the same in the game as it is played under the current rules. Under different rules Trump would have pushed back in California – more advertising, more legal challenges to the millions of permanent resident aliens who are registered to vote. Etc.

    BTW, one of the first things that Trump and the Republican Congress should do is pass a law that any non-citizen who is caught voting is no longer eligible for citizenship and will be deported. It should be possible to cross check voting records with citizenship applications and green card records. Aliens vote now because they have no fear of consequences. Voting when you are not eligible to vote indicates a total disrespect for American legal and political institutions but of course in places like California it has been wink wink nod nod by the local authorities.

    • Replies: @res
    @Jack D


    pass a law that any non-citizen who is caught voting is no longer eligible for citizenship and will be deported
     
    I wonder if it would be enough to have a meme that this is possible and might be retroactive.

    I wish we could know how prevalent voting by non-citizens really is. The more I think about it the more I think the "3 million illegal immigrants voting" meme and fact check were intentional exaggerations to discredit questioning of non-citizen voting in general.

    Here's a 2014 paper discussing this topic:
    Do non-citizens vote in U.S. elections?

    This was particularly interesting:

    By contrast, North Carolina is a plausible case. If more than 5.1 percent of non-citizens residing in North Carolina turned out to vote in 2008, then the vote margin they gave Obama would have been sufficient to provide Obama with the entirety of his victory margin in the state. Since our best estimate is that 6.4 percent of non-citizens actually voted, it is likely though by no means certain that John McCain would have won North Carolina were it not for the votes for Obama cast by non-citizens.
     
  138. @Jack D
    @slumber_j

    There are byzantine rules for the licensing of music rights for live performance, broadcast, internet and recording. It's not uncommon for the DVD/VCR version of a TV show to have completely different music than the broadcast show had - they sometimes replace all the recognizable songs and artists with "royalty free music" , which is some hack diddling away at a synth.

    Replies: @slumber_j, @whorefinder

    Right. And I further supposed that the guitar-noodly thing they overdubbed was generated by Dee Snyder and some version of Twisted Sister: Going out on a limb here.

  139. @whorefinder
    @Forbes


    The less nefarious explanation is the Clinton camp was so confident of their victory that details about some late campaign spending (walking around money) in Nawlins and ChiTown, or TV ads aired in Omaha were about executing the game plan.
     
    Yeah, I think it's both. Brazile believed they were going to win, and even if it got close still wanted to pay off her homies rather than solidify.

    Honestly, the DNC should fire her if they want a corruption-free organization. I, of course, am hoping she's elected to the full-time DNC chair position.

    Replies: @Jack D

    No, it will be Ellison who is even worse. Compare to Ellison, Donna Brazile is MLK.

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    @Jack D


    Compare to Ellison, Donna Brazile is MLK.
     
    She's a plagiarizing, hypocritical frontman directed by her commie handlers who completely lied about black criminality and caused the burning of half the cities in America?

    Replies: @Abe

  140. @whorefinder
    @Forbes


    I call BS on this reporting. This is not the first time I’ve seen this “fear” trotted out, but I think it is pure invention. Under what scenario, given polls in CA, NY, NJ, IL, MA, was Trump going to win the popular vote and lose the electoral college? As it was Trump beat Hillary in a 49 state race–but the EC wasn’t close. Had Trump won the popular vote, it might have been an EC landslide.

    And why, pray tell, would Hillary winning the election (“Trump…losing the electoral vote”) prompt fear in the Clinton camp? It implies other assumptions are suspect. Completely dysfunctional.
     

    Exactly.

    As I stated, I think Brazile (and probably a few others) ginned up this fear. They used to hoodwink Hillary into letting them embezzle funds to hand out to cronies instead of concentrating on white blue collar voters in close states.

    It worked because Hillary is such a bad campaigner that, in her shallow political mind, she bought it. Bill didn't buy it, but for some reason, Hillary, who'd assumed she'd gained Bill's political skills, exiled Bill and didn't listen when he was the lone voice asking why they weren't trying for white blue collar workers in close states.

    Brazile and co. threw in something about "civil unrest" and "delegitimize her win" if Trump took the popular vote, and Hillary panicked as she saw millions of militia men marching fully armed down Pennsylvania Avenue, coming to hang her for her crimes.

    It all comes back to Hillary's horrible campaign skills, her arrogance at assuming she was destined to be coronated as the First Female President, and her absolute fear and loathing of white working people. Brazile knew exactly what buttons to push on her to siphon off funds to enrich herself and her cronies.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Reg Cæsar, @Ivy, @Forbes, @Abe

    As I stated, I think Brazile (and probably a few others) ginned up this fear. They used to hoodwink Hillary into letting them embezzle funds to hand out to cronies instead of concentrating on white blue collar voters in close states.

    Actually, I tip my hat to you and say chances are 95% you are right (tip-of-the-hat-rape! if you’re the same whorefinder as on HEARTISTE :-). But I’ll raise you a little and say there was no hoodwinking going on. Hillary is the living embodiment of the Mary McCarthy quip about every word coming out of someone’s mouth being a lie, including the words “and” and “the” (on election night the Clinton camp kept spinning till the end, telling CNN a batch of diehard union districts were still to be counted in Michigan, and dozens of urban ones in Wisconsin; both claims turned out to be false, and yet were still made even when it was too late for the lies to do Her Majesty any good). So my take is that being certain she was cruising to victory, greedy ol’ Hillary decided to do a little Clinton Foundation-style graft and disburse the surplus in her warchest for favors-to-be-named-later instead of returning any of it to her donors. As I pointed out to my wife once, even if there was no skimming going on at the Clinton Foundation, just the fact that it had an operational budget to play with and could give cushy jobs to bright young things who could be molded and later ensconced in influential jobs in the media or academia was powerful enough.

  141. @Jack D
    @slumber_j

    There are byzantine rules for the licensing of music rights for live performance, broadcast, internet and recording. It's not uncommon for the DVD/VCR version of a TV show to have completely different music than the broadcast show had - they sometimes replace all the recognizable songs and artists with "royalty free music" , which is some hack diddling away at a synth.

    Replies: @slumber_j, @whorefinder

    I remember people complaining about Quantum Leap DVDs having that problem.

    Since Quantum Leap was about someone jumping through time during the Baby Boomer era, the soundtrack was useful in instantly setting the time/place where the main character had just time traveled to, while also allowing the watching Boomers a healthy dose of nostalgia.

    Then on the DVDs they removed a bunch of the old tunes due to copyright stuff and people whined about it on Amazon. One episode had the main character as a rock DJ in the 1950s where, on the DVDs, not a single 1950s rock n’ roll song is heard (according to someone, I didn’t see it). On Hulu when they played the show, Hulu completely removed an entire episode from the first season which was a heavy disco-themed episode, probably because they didn’t have the rights to the music or the inclination to replace the soundtrack of the gay revolution.

    It is amazing how much music can set a mood, btw, as Hitchcock demonstrated in Psycho and countless horror movie directors have done since. Taking out those old tunes from Quantum Leap, and the show loses a lot of nostalgia appeal, though I think the show still rocks regardless.

    • Replies: @Abe
    @whorefinder


    I remember people complaining about Quantum Leap DVDs having that problem... on the DVDs they removed a bunch of the old tunes due to copyright stuff and people whined about it on Amazon.
     
    My wife was a big fan of NORTHERN EXPOSURE in the day so I bought her the compleat series giftset (in faux deerskin satchel) as a Christmas present. We watched it together later, and when she noticed I was a bit underwhelmed, commented that it seemed like they had taken out the original soundtrack in place of generic MUSAQ. And, yes, it did have a big effect, as there was one episode in the set which ended on a pop tune I actually recognized, and it was much more memorable to me than any of the preceding shows.

    Luckily they were very cognizant of consumer complaints when it came time to release the MIAMI VICE dvds, and did not skimp on securing original music rights. In terms of combining music, image, movement and storyline (Crockett and Tubbs are off to root-out and then smoke the drug lord who murdered Tubbs's brother and almost iced Crockett's ex-wife and young son) has to be- sorry for the WAYNE'S WORLD-level of exuberance, but this one really deserves it- one of the most BAAAAAAADAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSS in TV history:

    http://youtu.be/wLf4C1UIpws

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

  142. @Jack D
    @whorefinder

    No, it will be Ellison who is even worse. Compare to Ellison, Donna Brazile is MLK.

    Replies: @whorefinder

    Compare to Ellison, Donna Brazile is MLK.

    She’s a plagiarizing, hypocritical frontman directed by her commie handlers who completely lied about black criminality and caused the burning of half the cities in America?

    • Replies: @Abe
    @whorefinder


    Compare to Ellison, Donna Brazile is MLK.

    She’s a plagiarizing, hypocritical frontman directed by her commie handlers who completely lied about black criminality and caused the burning of half the cities in America?

     

    Brazile once gloated (about 10? years ago) that America would never elect another white male President. And, oh yeah, besides being a crypto-lebsian, was also quite the racial incendiary as a teenager, starting race riots at her high school:

    There's going to be a fight tonight
    Black-White, Black-White
    Man, there's going to be a fight tonight
    Black blood, oh so precious
    White blood, oh so bad
    Fight, fight, Black-White
    Man, you're going to see some killing tonight*

    *one bit of Brazile's poetry juvenilia. Interestingly while the book it appears in is on Google Books and otherwise indexed and searchable, Brazile's name (even Donna) brought up no results when I searched on it, so I had to go get an old scanned copy. Hmm....

    Replies: @Anonymous

  143. @Kylie
    @e

    "This rally was the capper for me. It epitomized how Trump had elevated campaigning to a good time, a happening and this one showed how he capped it all off with a dramatic entrance. Even watching on a tiny computer screen was exciting."

    Human beings respond to spectacle on a visceral level. Trump seems to understand this instinctively.

    Replies: @e

    Human beings respond to spectacle on a visceral level. Trump seems to understand this instinctively.

    Absolutely, he understands persuasion as well as Aristotle.

    After all, Trump has explained that what he was interested in as a career as a young man was in making films. He obviously knows the value of a good narrative and a charismatic leading man.

    • Agree: Kylie
  144. @Eustace Tilley (not)
    @Clyde

    Thank you so much for this comment; a layman such as I could never have delved into this question in such detail without such "inside" commentary.

    (I'm guessing you are a patent attorney or a person otherwise knowledgeable in patent law.)

    Replies: @Clyde

    No I am not an attorney but I have had the problem explained to me

  145. @CK
    @Jefferson

    The vast majority of DC residents are dems. 90 to 4 for Hillary.

    Replies: @Jefferson

    “The vast majority of DC residents are dems. 90 to 4 for Hillary.”

    Dems are more likely to disproportionately be pedophiles than Republicans because the DNC attracts so many Homosexual men and Heterosexual men in general who have no moral values like Anthony Weiner for example.

  146. @e
    @Boomstick

    Trump’s decision to call out Mexican “rapists” at his kickoff, for example, was inspired, in part, by a random chat he had with two Border Patrol agents at one of his golf resorts, two of his friends told me—road-test his talking points.

    Trump comes across as someone who looks for and can recognize unconventional opportunities in real time, and then capitalize on them.


    He has said to his audiences many times that he didn't even know how much of an issue illegal immigration was until he heard it from people in the crowds. He added that the wall was an idea he got from listening to them.

    Imagine that! Imagine a guy running for office admitting he got an idea of what was bothering people by listening to them and yes, parroting what they said. That's not the definition of "leader" according to media and other pols. However, it IS the idea most have in mind when they say they wish someone to represent them.

    Replies: @Light Roast, @slumber_j

    He said that about heroin too. As I recall, he would recount with a sort of retrospective dumbfoundedness that he’d talked to people in rural New England who said over and over that their number-one concern was heroin addiction. And he made that part of his spiel.

  147. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Jefferson
    @Forbes

    "I call BS on this reporting. This is not the first time I’ve seen this “fear” trotted out, but I think it is pure invention. Under what scenario, given polls in CA, NY, NJ, IL, MA, was Trump going to win the popular vote"

    Donald J. Trump could have won the popular vote if he had won blue states that voted for George W. Bush in 2004 like Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico.

    Replies: @Forbes, @Anon

    I think if you took away the usual big city fraud that the Democrats commit, then Trump may very well have won the popular vote honestly. The problem is that no one is spending the time or money to recount all the big cities to see what the untampered vote totals were.

  148. @Buffalo Joe
    @whorefinder

    Whorefinder, Hillary was not only a terrible campaigner, she was a terrible candidate. Bernie Sanders, with almost no national name recognition, actually gave Hillary a decent run for the nomination. The verified collusion of the DNC and the clout of the Super Delegates sealed Bernie's fate. The thing is, who else did the Dems have to nominate?

    Replies: @Jack D, @Anon

    Republicans have been eating away at the Democrats’ down ticket slots since 2010. That’s why the Dems were stuck with running Hillary. Without her, their ticket would have been one crazy old socialist with no other viable candidate in sight.

  149. @Wanda
    @Barnard

    You can bet that those people whose offers of help were rejected went back home and told other people about it. "Did you hear how they treated _______ when she went there to ask for a sign? And she's been a Democrat for 50 years!" That back-of-the-hand treatment can be very shocking to people who've never questioned their loyalties.

    Remember when Gordon Brown, the British PM and Labour Party leader, was caught on a live mic calling a 65-year old woman a bigot? She asked him some sharp questions about immigrants living on welfare. As soon as he thought she was out of hearing, he insulted her.


    Duffy has lived in Rochdale all her life, working for the council with disabled children up until her retirement five years ago. She is a widow and has a daughter and two grandchildren. Her husband, a painter and decorator, died of cancer four years ago.

    Before being told of Brown's comments, Duffy had said she would still be voting Labour. She told Sky News she confronted him over the national debt and immigration and that the prime minister had seemed "understanding" and responded "pretty well".

    But after hearing of his reported comments she said she was "very annoyed" and would not be voting for Labour. "I haven't had a chance to listen to it yet but if that's what he said I'm very upset," she said.
     

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/apr/28/gordon-brown-bigoted-woman

    This sort of thing has an effect on people, and can cause them to rethink a lot of things they've just taken for granted to years.

    Replies: @Desiderius

    This sort of thing has an effect on people, and can cause them to rethink a lot of things they’ve just taken for granted to years.

    Wouldn’t be surprised if this were the exact sort of thing that happened to Trump himself.

    This is the dawning of the age of the post-progressive.

  150. @Abe
    @Forbes


    I appreciate the effort–but there nowhere near 2.5 million vote differential (to overcome) among those four states had Trump won them–and still lose the EC.

    Reading comprehension, my boy, reading comprehension…
     
    Hey, lay off my boy, Jeff'! As I've mentioned on another thread, Cuck McMullin got 700K votes BY HIMSELF. Stein got 1M votes more than typical for a Green party candidate, given the awfulness of the Donkey Party one, but Johnson got a whopping 3M more than last time, and more like 4M more than is typical for the Libertarian candidate (strange that libertarian-type voters did not glom on more to super-capitalist Mitt and his boy wonder, Objectivist Ryan, as compared to Bush the Dumber or McCain, but maybe that just represents Johnson's superior strengths as a candidate). But in any case, the right won the popular vote, and very arguably Trump would have as well since there was one certified spoiler candidate, and another implicit one who way overperformed through media collusion to paint Trump as unacceptable.

    Replies: @Andrew

    Trump won 2.2 million less votes than Bush in 2004 in non-swing blue states – CA, CT, DC, HI, IL, MD, MN, NJ, NM, NY, OR, VT, WA – and in several deep red states – SD, NE, KS, OK, UT

    That is most of the popular vote difference.

  151. @whorefinder
    @Jack D

    I remember people complaining about Quantum Leap DVDs having that problem.

    Since Quantum Leap was about someone jumping through time during the Baby Boomer era, the soundtrack was useful in instantly setting the time/place where the main character had just time traveled to, while also allowing the watching Boomers a healthy dose of nostalgia.

    Then on the DVDs they removed a bunch of the old tunes due to copyright stuff and people whined about it on Amazon. One episode had the main character as a rock DJ in the 1950s where, on the DVDs, not a single 1950s rock n' roll song is heard (according to someone, I didn't see it). On Hulu when they played the show, Hulu completely removed an entire episode from the first season which was a heavy disco-themed episode, probably because they didn't have the rights to the music or the inclination to replace the soundtrack of the gay revolution.

    It is amazing how much music can set a mood, btw, as Hitchcock demonstrated in Psycho and countless horror movie directors have done since. Taking out those old tunes from Quantum Leap, and the show loses a lot of nostalgia appeal, though I think the show still rocks regardless.

    Replies: @Abe

    I remember people complaining about Quantum Leap DVDs having that problem… on the DVDs they removed a bunch of the old tunes due to copyright stuff and people whined about it on Amazon.

    My wife was a big fan of NORTHERN EXPOSURE in the day so I bought her the compleat series giftset (in faux deerskin satchel) as a Christmas present. We watched it together later, and when she noticed I was a bit underwhelmed, commented that it seemed like they had taken out the original soundtrack in place of generic MUSAQ. And, yes, it did have a big effect, as there was one episode in the set which ended on a pop tune I actually recognized, and it was much more memorable to me than any of the preceding shows.

    Luckily they were very cognizant of consumer complaints when it came time to release the MIAMI VICE dvds, and did not skimp on securing original music rights. In terms of combining music, image, movement and storyline (Crockett and Tubbs are off to root-out and then smoke the drug lord who murdered Tubbs’s brother and almost iced Crockett’s ex-wife and young son) has to be- sorry for the WAYNE’S WORLD-level of exuberance, but this one really deserves it- one of the most BAAAAAAADAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSS in TV history:

    http://youtu.be/wLf4C1UIpws

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Abe

    thirtysomething, an important show in its time in the 1980s, disappeared for about 20 years until they figured out all the complicated music rights.

    Replies: @whorefinder, @whorefinder, @Kylie, @Boomstick

  152. @whorefinder
    @Jack D

    It's a fair cop. It's hard to see if Bill was active on the campaign trail or was sidelined. But Bill definitely wasn't on TV a lot, especially in relation to how much he was on TV during the Obamacare coup, given that he literally took over a presidential press conference at one point, and was giving speeches on it and rallying Congress and such. Obama used Bill's natural love of the camera to sell his coup.

    I think exiling Bill from visibility was a calculated move by Hillary to quell statements that she was merely riding on Bill's coattails. Unfortunately, she never had his skills. And then when Hillary went low on Trump's sex life, Trump went hard on Bill's sexual assaults, thus negating Hillary bringing Bill out as a last resort. In fact, that might have been Trump's goal all along in getting sexual indiscretions into the campaign---he suspected Bill would be a last-minute ringer brought in at the end of the campaign, so he short-circuited it by making Bill's sex assaults part of the campaign early enough to destroy Bill as a ringer.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Jack D

    Trump is a clever strategist but I doubt he was playing 4 dimensional chess on this level.

    The problem, according to Bill’s buddies, is not so much that they didn’t use him on the trail but that he was exiled to his love nest atop the library in Little Rock (which oddly enough bears a resemblance to a trailer) and when he called Brooklyn to tell them what to do, they would take his advice the way you might indulge your senile old grandpa instead of the most gifted Democrat politician since JFK. They would just ignore him and do whatever ADA the supercomputer told them to do.

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    @Jack D

    ... so then Sea Hag and her cronies considered Jupiter too old to be useful?

  153. @whorefinder
    @Jack D


    Compare to Ellison, Donna Brazile is MLK.
     
    She's a plagiarizing, hypocritical frontman directed by her commie handlers who completely lied about black criminality and caused the burning of half the cities in America?

    Replies: @Abe

    Compare to Ellison, Donna Brazile is MLK.

    She’s a plagiarizing, hypocritical frontman directed by her commie handlers who completely lied about black criminality and caused the burning of half the cities in America?

    Brazile once gloated (about 10? years ago) that America would never elect another white male President. And, oh yeah, besides being a crypto-lebsian, was also quite the racial incendiary as a teenager, starting race riots at her high school:

    There’s going to be a fight tonight
    Black-White, Black-White
    Man, there’s going to be a fight tonight
    Black blood, oh so precious
    White blood, oh so bad
    Fight, fight, Black-White
    Man, you’re going to see some killing tonight*

    *one bit of Brazile’s poetry juvenilia. Interestingly while the book it appears in is on Google Books and otherwise indexed and searchable, Brazile’s name (even Donna) brought up no results when I searched on it, so I had to go get an old scanned copy. Hmm….

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Abe

    What's the book?

    Replies: @Abe

  154. @Abe
    @whorefinder


    I remember people complaining about Quantum Leap DVDs having that problem... on the DVDs they removed a bunch of the old tunes due to copyright stuff and people whined about it on Amazon.
     
    My wife was a big fan of NORTHERN EXPOSURE in the day so I bought her the compleat series giftset (in faux deerskin satchel) as a Christmas present. We watched it together later, and when she noticed I was a bit underwhelmed, commented that it seemed like they had taken out the original soundtrack in place of generic MUSAQ. And, yes, it did have a big effect, as there was one episode in the set which ended on a pop tune I actually recognized, and it was much more memorable to me than any of the preceding shows.

    Luckily they were very cognizant of consumer complaints when it came time to release the MIAMI VICE dvds, and did not skimp on securing original music rights. In terms of combining music, image, movement and storyline (Crockett and Tubbs are off to root-out and then smoke the drug lord who murdered Tubbs's brother and almost iced Crockett's ex-wife and young son) has to be- sorry for the WAYNE'S WORLD-level of exuberance, but this one really deserves it- one of the most BAAAAAAADAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSS in TV history:

    http://youtu.be/wLf4C1UIpws

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    thirtysomething, an important show in its time in the 1980s, disappeared for about 20 years until they figured out all the complicated music rights.

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    @Steve Sailer

    thirtysomething was also famous for casting a bunch of actors who would later be better director, producers, and writers than actors.

    , @whorefinder
    @Steve Sailer

    repeat comment, please delete Mr. Unz.

    , @Kylie
    @Steve Sailer

    The "Wiseguy" series is available on DVD but the climactic last episode is missing from the first story arc because it uses "Nights in White Satin". The entire story arc involving the record industry, "Dead Dog Records" is missing, too, because of the many songs used in it.

    , @Boomstick
    @Steve Sailer

    "WKRP in Cincinnati" was one of the first TV shows that integrated popular music into the storytelling, and for years the rebroadcasts and aftermarket sales had the same music rights problem.


    Music licensing deals cut at the time of production were for a limited number of years. Hugh Wilson commented that WKRP was videotaped instead of filmed because when the show was originally produced, a loophole in music licensing deals reduced fees for using songs in videotaped programs. The loophole was intended to accommodate variety shows. When the show initially went in syndication shortly after its 1982 cancellation, the original music remained intact because the licensing deals were still active at the time. Once the licenses expired, later syndicated versions of the show did not feature the music as first broadcast, but rather generic "sound-alikes" by studio musicians to avoid paying additional royalties. In some cases (when the music was playing in the background of a dialogue scene), some of the characters' lines had to be redubbed by sound-alike actors. This was evident in all prints of the show issued since the early 1990s, which included its late-1990s run on Nick at Nite.

    The expense of procuring licenses for the original music in the series delayed any release of a DVD set for years. When it finally was released, much of the music was replaced by generic substitutes. Some scenes were shortened or cut entirely, and voiceovers were used to avoid using unlicensed musical content. However, some scenes that were originally edited out for television (and therefore never seen before) were added back into the episodes to give viewers the back story which further explained a later scene.
     
  155. Maybe the dawn of the post-pogressive. Or not. Hillary is not changing her tune. If he wanted to, Obama could during his Press Conference tomorrow announce that because of Russian hacking and Putin, he’s suspending the EC vote and election, and will rule on for the next four years until another election is re-run.

    I mean, what would stop him? The Supremes would rule 5-3 in favor, Obama would then stack it, with approval from cucks like Romney and McCain and McConnell and Lindsay “Light in his loafers” Grahamnesty. “We’re gonna tell the bigots to shut upthhhhhh!”

    The media is 100% women with problem glasses and gay dudes, plus various non-Whites with varying degrees of showing outright hatred for White dudes. Publishing is if anything even worse. Even places like ESPN are run by SJW, even it it is disastrous for the bottom line and it is. Same with the NFL.

    The one advantage the Alt-Right has is noticing that gravity exists, even if SJW say it doesn’t. Blofeld and Hydra are hard to out-think, Donna Brazile not so much, Keith Ellison X even less.

    And part of that is recognizing reality. There is a reason that Hillary stacked her operation with low T men and Affirmative Action deadweights from Brazile to her IT dude. THAT is all that women like Hillary who make up most of the Upper and Upper Middle Class White professional female will tolerate. The reason for the Pale, Stale, Male stuff is the rage, no less real for that it is profoundly stupid, that most women of her class have for the men in and around her life.

    Last time I checked Hillary does not spend more than five seconds with Bill and basically has lived with Huma Abedin for the past eight years or so. While Bill spends time with various bimbos. Moreover Hillary is neither very smart nor skilled, and that fits most Professional White women, who are just barely above AA incompetency levels. Any on-target White male is a personal threat as well as obnoxious to entitled women who think because their dads spoiled them that they deserve the Alpha male (and resent attention from beta males).

    The GOP bench is as loathsome as the Democrats. For every Keith Ellison, and Kamala Harris, and Creepy Joe, I give you: Lindsay Graham the extra fabulous, John McCain the Ancient Mariner, !Jeb!, Mitt Magic Underwear Romney, Egg McMuffin, and along with Jake, the Fatman … Chris Christie. Who made the hard call to eat that fifteenth donut.

    What do we have after Trump? Who has their own money, a predefined persona as “funny” and non-threatening for decades, able to neutralize MSM demonizing to some degree?

    We can’t get cocky. We need to start developing our farm team and players. Outside a female dominated environment that produces either a Hillary! campaign team or people like Dancing With the Stars Lindsay Grahamnesty. Trump was a one in a lifetime opportunity, like Napoleon or Churchill or Ike. We will never see his like again and have to prepare. Understanding our enemies and moving faster and within their decision loop while avoiding their demographic strength and convincing them to squander their resource edge.

  156. @Abe
    @whorefinder


    Compare to Ellison, Donna Brazile is MLK.

    She’s a plagiarizing, hypocritical frontman directed by her commie handlers who completely lied about black criminality and caused the burning of half the cities in America?

     

    Brazile once gloated (about 10? years ago) that America would never elect another white male President. And, oh yeah, besides being a crypto-lebsian, was also quite the racial incendiary as a teenager, starting race riots at her high school:

    There's going to be a fight tonight
    Black-White, Black-White
    Man, there's going to be a fight tonight
    Black blood, oh so precious
    White blood, oh so bad
    Fight, fight, Black-White
    Man, you're going to see some killing tonight*

    *one bit of Brazile's poetry juvenilia. Interestingly while the book it appears in is on Google Books and otherwise indexed and searchable, Brazile's name (even Donna) brought up no results when I searched on it, so I had to go get an old scanned copy. Hmm....

    Replies: @Anonymous

    What’s the book?

    • Replies: @Abe
    @Anonymous


    What's the book?
     
    BROKEN ALLIANCE by Jonathan Kaufman.

    Sorry, the glitches with the book search turned out to be my fault and not Google's. You can read the chapter about Donna Brazile's early life and background there.
  157. @Jack D
    @whorefinder

    Trump is a clever strategist but I doubt he was playing 4 dimensional chess on this level.

    The problem, according to Bill's buddies, is not so much that they didn't use him on the trail but that he was exiled to his love nest atop the library in Little Rock (which oddly enough bears a resemblance to a trailer) and when he called Brooklyn to tell them what to do, they would take his advice the way you might indulge your senile old grandpa instead of the most gifted Democrat politician since JFK. They would just ignore him and do whatever ADA the supercomputer told them to do.

    Replies: @whorefinder

    … so then Sea Hag and her cronies considered Jupiter too old to be useful?

  158. @Steve Sailer
    @Abe

    thirtysomething, an important show in its time in the 1980s, disappeared for about 20 years until they figured out all the complicated music rights.

    Replies: @whorefinder, @whorefinder, @Kylie, @Boomstick

    thirtysomething was also famous for casting a bunch of actors who would later be better director, producers, and writers than actors.

  159. @Steve Sailer
    @Abe

    thirtysomething, an important show in its time in the 1980s, disappeared for about 20 years until they figured out all the complicated music rights.

    Replies: @whorefinder, @whorefinder, @Kylie, @Boomstick

    repeat comment, please delete Mr. Unz.

  160. @Steve Sailer
    @Abe

    thirtysomething, an important show in its time in the 1980s, disappeared for about 20 years until they figured out all the complicated music rights.

    Replies: @whorefinder, @whorefinder, @Kylie, @Boomstick

    The “Wiseguy” series is available on DVD but the climactic last episode is missing from the first story arc because it uses “Nights in White Satin”. The entire story arc involving the record industry, “Dead Dog Records” is missing, too, because of the many songs used in it.

  161. @Steve Sailer
    @Abe

    thirtysomething, an important show in its time in the 1980s, disappeared for about 20 years until they figured out all the complicated music rights.

    Replies: @whorefinder, @whorefinder, @Kylie, @Boomstick

    “WKRP in Cincinnati” was one of the first TV shows that integrated popular music into the storytelling, and for years the rebroadcasts and aftermarket sales had the same music rights problem.

    Music licensing deals cut at the time of production were for a limited number of years. Hugh Wilson commented that WKRP was videotaped instead of filmed because when the show was originally produced, a loophole in music licensing deals reduced fees for using songs in videotaped programs. The loophole was intended to accommodate variety shows. When the show initially went in syndication shortly after its 1982 cancellation, the original music remained intact because the licensing deals were still active at the time. Once the licenses expired, later syndicated versions of the show did not feature the music as first broadcast, but rather generic “sound-alikes” by studio musicians to avoid paying additional royalties. In some cases (when the music was playing in the background of a dialogue scene), some of the characters’ lines had to be redubbed by sound-alike actors. This was evident in all prints of the show issued since the early 1990s, which included its late-1990s run on Nick at Nite.

    The expense of procuring licenses for the original music in the series delayed any release of a DVD set for years. When it finally was released, much of the music was replaced by generic substitutes. Some scenes were shortened or cut entirely, and voiceovers were used to avoid using unlicensed musical content. However, some scenes that were originally edited out for television (and therefore never seen before) were added back into the episodes to give viewers the back story which further explained a later scene.

  162. stratAgem

    Couldn’t sit on it any longer, Generous Host.

  163. @International Jew
    If the Dems were to ask me, I'd encourage them to hire a more diverse campaign staff. In particular, more black computer geniuses for the analytics effort.

    Get some of those black female "mathematicians" too that, according to a new movie, were the brains behind NASA's space program.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Hibernian

    The people who had that kind of job during WWII were not Einsteins, but also far from being dummies. They had strong academic backgrounds at least at the undergraduate level. I hink Admiral Grace Hooper started out doing this type of work.

  164. @Forbes
    @countenance

    So, more fake news apparently...

    It bears repeating--if you view news reporting as performed by Democratic operatives with by-lines you be wrong.

    Trump's data operation was run out of San Antonio. What are the chances anyone in the lapdog media knew this, or reported on it substantively? In other words, you're taking Dem operatives word for the judgement of superiority (which, of course, is opinion not news).

    Replies: @Forbes, @countenance

    We have found out after the election that Kushner led Trump’s data efforts and while they weren’t as grandiose or expensive as HRC’s, they were carried out in an effective and clever manner.

    My opinion about the data game, the ground game and the debate game is that they are pass/fail propositions, not “mine is bigger than yours” propositions. You just need to do each of those things well enough, not necessarily better than the other candidate(s).

  165. The reason for this is obvious. After Obama won in 2012, we got hagiographic stories about his data game. It wasn’t that much longer after that when that bubble popped, but only if you were paying close attention. Then the Census report came out in the middle of 2013, laying the Obama team’s data lie bare. However, much of the senior Democrat leadership never paid attention, and kept eating the refuted dog food. This is why HRC could be so arrogant about the power of data this year. She never knew that 2012 was all about WCW and EBW, and 2016 was also about WCW and EBW, only inverted.

  166. @Anonymous
    @Abe

    What's the book?

    Replies: @Abe

    What’s the book?

    BROKEN ALLIANCE by Jonathan Kaufman.

    Sorry, the glitches with the book search turned out to be my fault and not Google’s. You can read the chapter about Donna Brazile’s early life and background there.

  167. @Barnard
    @Jack D


    Sotomayor is an affirmative action baby but both Ginsburg and Kagan have real intellectual chops. They (especially Kagan) may be committed leftists but they are no dummies. There have been plenty of Republican S. Court justices who were not as bright as these two.
     
    Do you mean Republican appointed Justices or conservative Justices? Also, which ones in particular don't measure up to Ginsburg and Kagan intellectually? I have never read or heard anything from Ginsburg in particular that makes me think she has "real intellectual chops." I don't even think she has a coherent judicial philosophy outside of the Constitution says whatever the left wants it to say at any given moment.

    Replies: @Anon, @Jack D, @Johann Ricke

    Do you mean Republican appointed Justices or conservative Justices? Also, which ones in particular don’t measure up to Ginsburg and Kagan intellectually?

    I think he’s generalizing from the fact that Jewish judges tend to be fairly on the ball. Unfortunately, he may have zeroed in on the two exceptions to the rule. I haven’t seen any indication that either justice is anything more than an empty suit.

  168. @Jack D
    @Jefferson

    All the talk about the popular votes is just an attempt to pull some sort of symbolic victory from the jaws of defeat. All the candidate knew going in that whoever wins the EC becomes the President. If there was no EC and the election was based purely on the popular vote, Trump might have pursued another strategy and the vote totals wouldn't be what they are now. Trump let Hillary run up a huge lead in California because he knew it didn't matter. Losing California by 1 vote and losing it by 3 million votes is the same in the game as it is played under the current rules. Under different rules Trump would have pushed back in California - more advertising, more legal challenges to the millions of permanent resident aliens who are registered to vote. Etc.

    BTW, one of the first things that Trump and the Republican Congress should do is pass a law that any non-citizen who is caught voting is no longer eligible for citizenship and will be deported. It should be possible to cross check voting records with citizenship applications and green card records. Aliens vote now because they have no fear of consequences. Voting when you are not eligible to vote indicates a total disrespect for American legal and political institutions but of course in places like California it has been wink wink nod nod by the local authorities.

    Replies: @res

    pass a law that any non-citizen who is caught voting is no longer eligible for citizenship and will be deported

    I wonder if it would be enough to have a meme that this is possible and might be retroactive.

    I wish we could know how prevalent voting by non-citizens really is. The more I think about it the more I think the “3 million illegal immigrants voting” meme and fact check were intentional exaggerations to discredit questioning of non-citizen voting in general.

    Here’s a 2014 paper discussing this topic:
    Do non-citizens vote in U.S. elections?

    This was particularly interesting:

    By contrast, North Carolina is a plausible case. If more than 5.1 percent of non-citizens residing in North Carolina turned out to vote in 2008, then the vote margin they gave Obama would have been sufficient to provide Obama with the entirety of his victory margin in the state. Since our best estimate is that 6.4 percent of non-citizens actually voted, it is likely though by no means certain that John McCain would have won North Carolina were it not for the votes for Obama cast by non-citizens.

  169. @Forbes
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    Number one mistake of Hillary's campaign was putting the campaign HQ in Brooklyn. Brooklyn is an insulated hipster haven (heaven?). The Brooklyn-resident workers and volunteers aren't natives, they're transplants that, for the most part, hate where they're from. They moved to NYC-Brooklyn to escape where they grew up. They've come to The City as if moving to Mecca. In other words, they're the opposite of the core Democrat demographic in 'flyover country.'

    And if you looked at their CVs, I doubt Penn State, Ohio State, or Michigan State made an appearance. You can't target a market about which you're totally ignorant.

    Replies: @Connecticut Famer, @black sea

    People who can’t look back with some fondness at the place and people of their upbringing are generally emotionally troubled or socially disconnected figures. I don’t mean ever single such person, but as a trend. I once worked with a women who spoke with great rancor about her parents and her brother. She was an emotional dumpster fire, and her own inner-turmoil probably created this sense that home and family were to be escaped from and left behind.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS