A Tribute to Trump Supporters by Richard Sale


Whatever their class or station in life, everyday people  have a right to live normal life that has its moments of satisfaction and pleasure and peace. So many people live lives of quiet desperation, and over time,  if the conditions of their life continues make them suffer, they will feel alarmed, oppressed and cheerless.

Trump supporters are very aware of these things: the vast wealth that has infiltrated politics, the closing of the doors that were to help them rise in life,  the flood of consumer goods, that they are being ignored by the TV news.  All this funds indignation and anger that social evils that make them miserable are allowed to continue without efforts to alleviate or change them for the better. They believe it is entirely unjust that they have to suffer from needless misery all their lives.

Many people don’t have time to reflect on the meaning of their lives. Their lives consist of strenuous exertions, back breaking efforts, and for many the rewards for those efforts is piddling. They are fated to work like oxen and their pain only ends when they die. No respite, no encouragement, no praise or honors are theirs.  For the majority life offers noting but the  slavery of work.   

President-elect Trump said he loved uneducated people. His aim was to reach people through their feelings. I may disagree with many of the stances of such people, but uneducated people are still people. They are proud, they fearlessly confront suffering, they provide for their families and children, but without rewards and new incentives, providing for others becomes a thankless task.

People who lack education, who aren’t cultured, who have no knowledge of history are still human beings, and they still have rights. The goal of any political system is to provide the means for people to pursue happiness in any way they can under the law. We all have a right to be happy and contented and proud, They work to expand the benefits and pleasures earned by their efforts. We used  to respect “the “common good” as an ideal, but the common good isn't common any more. The common good these days belongs to the elites. If you don’t belong to an elite, you feel betrayed and left behind. No enjoys second place.

Tedious, poorly paid work  which offers no prospects, strangles ambition. Human beings must have certain prospects before them or they wither under ceaseless drudgery. A hopeless life is a dismal one.  To try to improve your lot, when the social and political conditions denies us any feeing of real worth, is the worst fate imaginable.

When people are trapped in that kind of life they will choose to change it.  They hope for escape, and the hope of change helps them to endure  their lot. That is what Trump supporters feel. Patrick Henry wrote, “we have it in our power to create the world new.”   President-elect Trump campaigned on this idea. He told his supporters that he would build a better, more just order of human society. He said that certain evils had no right to exist, and that he would combat them.

No human being should die feeling that his or her was basically a disappointment.

In 1925, a British clergyman noted these things as enemies of the common people:

Wealth without work.

Pleasure without conscience

Knowledge without character.

Commerce without morality.

Science without humanity.

Worship without sacrifice.

Politics without principle.


Perhaps the battle against such things can begin anew.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

133 Responses to A Tribute to Trump Supporters by Richard Sale

  1. plantman says:

    Well stated.
    I would call myself a leftist, but I think the Democrats have completely betrayed their working class base and tried to conceal their treason with fake tributes to gender and race issues that barely conceal their utter hypocrisy.
    This campaign to topple the elected president by confusing electoral delegates with circumstantial evidence served up by the obfuscating CIA is the last straw. The democratic party is a corrupt Mafia of special interests, over-educated think tank toadies and groveling politicos. We should be thankful that they are hastening their own well-disserved demise.
    Good riddance!

  2. Dorothy108 says:

    With all due respect, Mr. Sales; it was not just the ‘uneducated’ that voted for President Elect Trump. College educated women, did prefer Mrs. Clinton, however, only 39% of college educated men voted for her.
    Secondly, I live in California. From what I saw at the San Jose rally, and elsewhere, the anger is not on the Republican side. It is the Democrats who rioted, and harassed Trump supporters. I was a life long Democrat, until I witnessed the insanity of the slanted media, and the malicious behavior of the Democrats. Their behavior this election cycle showed no respect for laws or other people. You can expect vandalism here if you put up so much as a Trump bumper sticker on your car. The real violence in this election cycle is and was on the left. Perhaps Republicans are angry, but the violence from BLM to shooting police, to beating up Trump supporters was on the left.

  3. mike allen says:

    Meanwhile Trump himself is declaring he will establish “safe zones” in Syria. This is the same thing Clinton wanted to do, and the reason many commenters here feared a nuclear war with Putin. But I guess the logic is that it’s OK if you are a Republican.

  4. turcopolier says:

    mike allen
    I am inclined to think this foolishness is a tactic to get Tillerson confirmed. pl

  5. Annem says:

    It is worth considering that Trump doesn’t realize or doesn’t care about the contradictions in his public statements and his nominations and the tendencies of the Republican Congress. He wants to cooperate with Russia but confront China and Iran, two countries that are working on a Central Asian trade network and which cooperate on many things, including Syria.
    Safe zones, meanwhile, mean that the “rebels” can regroup and continue to harass the Syrian regime, with new training and weapons.
    There is pro-Turkish sentiment among some in his entourage, but which Turkey, the one that is looking East to Russia and company or the one that we have pretended is our “ally” in the war against ISIS within NATO.
    There is also no reason to believe that Trump plans to be anything but a good friend to Israel and Saudi Arabia that stand on the anti-Iran side of this conflict.
    Is the anti-Muslim Trump supportive of the Wahhabis of Arabia who are driving sectarianism and extremism in the region. Will Putin explain all this to him?

  6. Nancy K says:

    It is not just the poor and uneducated that voted for Trump. I know many well educated and affluent people who voted for him. I can understand their vote much more than I can understand why someone with little would vote for someone with everything, who surrounds himself with people who have everything. The saying is true the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. If the Pences of this country have their way the saying can revert to the alternate version which is the rich get richer and the poor have babies.

  7. Stu Wood says:

    mike allen
    I agree with your dismay at Trump’s statement on “safe zones” in Syria but really, who can believe anything he says. I would not try to count the number of things he has said and backtracked on.

  8. shargash says:

    I’m just hoping it is not a sign he’s being rolled by the Borg.

  9. Eric Newhill says:

    Mike Allen,
    My understanding is that Trump’s safe zones are for civilians (especially women and children); sort of a cordon to keep them safe from jihadi predations.
    Whereas Clinton’s proposal was no fly/safe zones to keep the “moderate” head choppers safe from the Russians and Syrian Army.
    Maybe I’m wrong about that, but that is what I gleaned from the news and the candidates themselves.

  10. Babak Makkinejad says:

    Richard Sales:
    I think your assumption regarding the possible composition of Trump voters is not accurate.
    I have met at least one person, a fairly intelligent man, who chose to vote for Trump on 2 items:
    1: Roe-vs-Wade – which he opposed as he considered abortion to be murder.
    2: Composition of US Supreme Court – which he wished to be coming from the Republican ranks.
    He could not be singular.

  11. BillWade says:

    Correct me if I’m wrong but I believe “safe zones” are more or less refuge camps for the displaced while Clinton was ready to install “no-fly zones” which would have greatly angered the Russians.
    I find the article itself disturbing. My particular county voted 2/3 for Trump and 1/3 for Clinton: “People who lack education, who aren’t cultured, who have no knowledge of history are still human beings, and they still have rights.” The people that live in my county are, by and large, fairly well-educated, are certainly cultured to some extent at least, have a more than adequate notion of history and are mostly fairly well-off retires with pensions and savings – they’d like the same for their children. Trump got his votes from the smart among us nation-wide excepting the coastal urban areas.

  12. MRW says:

    You have an elegant mind, Richard Sale.

  13. VietnamVet says:

    I did not vote for Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. She is the epitome of an enemy of the common people. To her they are deplorable. I am hoping that Donald Trump is not running a bait and switch. If he continues the endless Bush/Obama Wars and does not alleviate the despair of working America; the breakup of the Atlantist West is assured. Global Transnational Organizations by their structure and function to extract wealth do not have consent of the governed. I doubt Americans will be fooled twice in a row.

  14. ked says:

    Let’s gauge the Pres-elect against the clergyman’s standard;
    Wealth without work. 50/50
    Pleasure without conscience. 80/20
    Knowledge without character. 75/25
    Commerce without morality. 75/25
    Science without humanity. what’s science?
    Worship without sacrifice. worship? sacrifice?
    Politics without principle. 80/20
    Mr. Sale, you clearly respect the plight of the common man in America today, and put it very well. I concur, completely. It is unfortunate that a perfect political-cultural storm enabled Trump to demagogue his way to the apex of empire. That’s fate for ya. Maybe he’ll invert the scores I’ve given. Maybe he’ll become enlightened, personally, about science, worship & (personal) sacrifice. I sure hope so, for the sake of the common folk, our nation & his own soul.

  15. Lochearn says:

    I think it was someone on this site who described himself as being of the “hard Grapes of Wrath left” which I took to mean not the PC globalist left, and most definitely not the Marxist left. Simply someone who is conservative in the social sense, but wishes to see more equality in society, both of opportunity and remuneration for work. I sense that there are some like me, who, paradoxically, were very pleased that this conservative billionaire won the election.
    I see Marxism as a most evil, insidious ideology, which distorted what working people wanted and usurped their fledgling movement. It described the boss as a capitalist to be hated and destroyed as opposed to an entrepreneur, thanks to whom one had a job. Of course a struggle was necessary in the early days to redress a balance that I see as emanating from English aristocratic snobbery and disdain for the “common man.” After all, what other aristocracy in Europe dispossessed their peasantry of their land and homes as the English did in their “enclosures?” As English aristocratic “hardware” intermarried with Jewish “software” a formidable combination developed (the British Empire, for example) that Americans WASPS imported, rather than the more Germanic conception of work as a contribution of all for the benefit of all.

  16. Richard Sale says:

    Nr, Trump said he loved uneducated people. He didn’t single out any party.

  17. ISL says:

    Richard Sale,
    your well-targeted musings reminded me last week when I was listening to a Sirius program where an author suggested voting should require a test, with the progressive interviewer agreeing. The underlying assumption is that only folk who reach the right answer deserve a say in their future, else their rights are those of my dog (or less).
    The liberal elite have betrayed more than just the working white class, they are betraying America.

  18. Pitch Pole says:

    ked –
    You’re being generous with your percentages, most like. Maybe he will become enlightened, perhaps he’ll bring the change the world and so many inhabiting it need. His administration picks don’t portend well for the start or his current state of enlightenment. Maybe he’ll make them all dance on a string and damned their views. He’ll be mighty busy contravening his appointees if the welfare of the planet and the common man is his prime intention.
    I remember GWB’s bemused puzzlement when the chickens really came home to roost during his 2nd term. I’m sure he rationalized it all away in the end and our elite culture of no accountability let him fade with little consequence. In some of the late photos it seems like he got it – a simple man, for all his silver spoon upbringing, with a sentimentality under it all….? I don’t know as our current president elect has a humanistic sentiment underlying his character. The stress of the office, the serial crises, the weight of it all fall on a man whose character is so far outside the norms not only of our leaders but our general populace – get your tray table stowed and your seat in fully upright position.
    What’s more interesting and perhaps most critical will be how the people who voted for him react if things go sideways. So far we just have a cabinet to point to – goldman sachs alums, industrial plutocrats, science deniers and creatures of the environment destroying extractive industry. Just appointments so far… In the latest pres elect speech I saw, he appeared to be trying to tamp down the fires he’d stirred in his supporters (“all in good fun, we all wanted to win, right???”). But if his administration brings on a crap storm to dwarf that of the GWB years, who will the common man trump supporter blame? And how will our president elect channel that energy?
    Interesting times….
    – Pitch

  19. DWhite says:

    “…We all have a right to be happy…”
    I thought we only had the right to pursue happiness

  20. mike allen says:

    Colonel –
    We agree that it is “foolishness”.
    What you suggest about the crafty old businessman Trump just using a ‘safe zone’ as a bargaining ploy is the same thing my neighbor claims. As opposed to the menopausal Hillarybeast who wanted to use it as a ploy to start a nuclear holocaust. I am gobsmacked that politics can induce such incongruities.
    In any case, if he goes forward with his so called ‘safe zone’, I am hoping it is to keep the Turks and their flunkies from bombing and shelling Kobani. And the Kurds in Afrin too, that IMHO would logically be the next target for al-Nusra headchoppers that Assad evacuated to Idlib.

  21. Bandit says:

    Unfortunately, then Trump is in the same position as was Obama who contradicted every campaign promise he made, and we, many of us anyway, were stupid enough to believe the first time around. My expectations of Trump are severely limited. If the only thing he does is keep the US from fomenting war with Russia, China or Iran, then anything he does to positively affect the lives of US citizens would be icing on the cake. I expect he will do no worse than Obama although I think many areas of domestic policy will adversely affect those who voted for him.

  22. Bandit says:

    “Maybe he’ll become enlightened, personally, about science, worship & (personal) sacrifice. I sure hope so, for the sake of the common folk, our nation & his own soul.”
    Dream on

  23. TonyL says:

    A very thoughtful post, and I understood and agreed with the sentiment by heart. The Democratic party has abandoned them once by going so far to the right. But I am afraid they will be disappointed again when finally realized that they have been conned by a snake oil saleman. As ked said above, just look at Trump’s appoinments to the future cabinet, I don’t see any sign that he is going to honor his promises to the working poors while campaigning.

  24. crf says:

    During the election campaign and continuing post-election some vocal Clinton supporters have not only criticized Trump, and that is quite fair play, but also criticized Trump supporters in general.
    The reams of polling and analytics, which have continued post election, allow one to “construct” typical Trump voters, often with very unflattering characteristics. It’s made more real by reams of stories profiling actual Trump supporters, often in ways that reinforce these constructions. So it is not just Trump behaviour and policies which are deplored by many Liberals, but the “average” or “typical” traits of his supporters, which are then assigned or applied by liberals to individuals. (For example, is any guy wearing a red hat a legitimate political target?)
    This is just not proper: in most any other social scenario this would (correctly) be seen as prejudiced thinking, and prone to error.
    In addition to not being proper it is politically suicidal. What’s the Democratic message going forward to be: “So, many of you voted for Trump, and our analysis suggests that you’re probably pretty deplorable, but vote for us next time.”
    My suggestion would be to attack Trump’s policies, and attack his character. But leave his voters out of it.

  25. Tyler says:

    You’re calling me uneducated? LMBO
    From the comment section there’s some people mad af Trump won.
    Mike Allen,
    Would you like to make another bet that Emperor Trump will not get us into a hot war in Syria?

  26. Tyler says:

    Godless progressives LARPING as Moral Templars is always good for a late.

  27. ToivoS says:

    I think the Dems betrayed their working class base by focusing on identity. They used identity to divide the working class on sex, race, gay, whatever. The one identity they ignored was the white working class male and the women who loved them. They defined these people as the enemy of various identity groups whereas in the past the working class (including all of it component parts) saw finance capital as its adversary.

  28. ToivoS says:

    I agree safe zone and no fly zone are two different things. As we know Trump also promised to cooperate with the Russians in the fight against ISIS in Syria. I am sure that Putin and Lavrov would be more than accommodating with Trump about setting up some safe zones in Syria — this could be done through diplomatic negotiations and carefully defining exactly what a safe zone is.

  29. LondonBob says:

    The older you are the less likely you went to college(university). The higher your income, the more likely you voted Trump.
    Anyway I agree with Doug Wead, Trump has been one of the most impressive President Elects you guys have had. His Cabinet picks look good and he has already started to deliver on some of his promises.
    Internationally a President Fillon can’t come soon enough, will be a an important driver of change in Europe’s foreign policy and will be an important supporting act for President Trump. A whole host of minor European states are chafing away at the current policy under Frau Merkel and are just waiting to bolt.

  30. All,
    I think it useful to turn matters round, and ask not who are ‘Trump supporters’, but who are ‘Hillary opponents’.
    There are clearly many reasons why people of very different views, backgrounds, levels of income, education, etc, in the United States cordially loathe the Clintons – as also, in the UK, the Blairs.
    Among them, one was to my mind aptly characterised in an article by Michael Barone, to which Steve Sailer linked on the invaluable ‘Unz Review’ site, back in October, as ‘Lennonism’. The opening paragraphs of the article are I think worth quoting at length:
    ‘“The president believes the world will be a better place if all borders are eliminated — from a trade perspective, from the viewpoint of economic development and in welcoming people from other cultures and countries.”
    ‘The president in question is Bill Clinton, speaking soon after leaving office, on Sept. 10, 2001, in Melbourne, Australia. There’s apparently no transcript; the quotation is from the businessman who hosted the forum in an article in the next day’s Melbourne newspaper, which appeared, thanks to time zone differences, about 12 hours before the airliners hit the Twin Towers.
    ‘The words are an interesting indicator of a general attitude, a prevailing sentiment taken largely for granted not just by Democrats and Americans like Clinton but also by elite leaders of many parties in the advanced democracies around the world.
    ‘Call it Lennonism, after John Lennon’s lyrics in “Imagine.” “Imagine there’s no countries,” Lennon wrote. “Nothing to kill or die for. … Imagine all the people living life in peace. … And the world will be as one.” It’s an appealing vision, but perhaps an odd one for someone born, as Lennon was, when and where the Battle of Britain was raging in the skies overhead.
    ‘Today, 15 years after Clinton’s talk in Melbourne, Lennonism remains the credo of many elite leaders but is in grave trouble with voters’
    (See http://www.unz.com/isteve/lennonism/ .)
    Actually, it is not such an odd vision, if one knows something about the complex cultural ambiguities and conflicts of Liverpool, the most Irish of English cities. As to the war, Lennon’s feckless banjo-playing merchant seaman father went AWOL, during it, his parents split, and he ended up at age five having to choose between them. So it’s perhaps not so odd that he was not so lost in the myths of 1940 as, say, Mrs Thatcher.
    But the vision expressed in the song is utopian dottiness, all the same, and dottiness of a very dangerous kind. Moreover, in the hands of people like the Bill and Hillary Clinton, and also Tony and Cherie Blair (who also comes from Liverpool) it has become deeply corrupt.
    It is the growing awareness of all this among very diverse groups in diverse places which is one of the elements alike behind the failure of the ‘Remain’ campaign in the UK, and Hillary Clinton’s defeat.

  31. J says:

    Justin Raimondo of Antiwar has a good article regarding why D.C. (o, McCain, Lindsey Graham, CIA, etc.) hates Tillerson even more than they hate Trump:
    Because Tillerson wants ‘PEACE’ with Russia!
    We need IMO a formal Alliance with Russia, and an end to the hog feeding trough called NATO.

  32. turcopolier says:

    Toivo S
    Someone would have defend “safe zones” and prevent their use as jihadi base areas. Who do you nominate? A piece of paper with Lavrov’s signature will not “do it.” pl

  33. Macgupta123 says:

    Like with all those pharmaceutical advertisements on TV that promise to cure whatever it is that ails you, it is best to read the fine print; often the “cure” is worse than the affliction.

  34. GaryS says:

    “No human being should die feeling that his or her was basically a disappointment.”
    At the end of life, what one has attained in life will be infinitely less important, or not important at all, to how one has led his or her life.
    “There comes a time in the life of every man when at the supreme and tragic hour of death, his friends and relatives ask, ‘How much did he leave?’ It is just at that split second God is asking, ‘How much did he take with him?’ It is only the latter question that matters, for it is only our works that follow us.” — Fulton Sheen (The Moral Universe)

  35. turcopolier says:

    mike allen
    Trump is negotiating with McCain over Tillerson’s confirmation. McCain knows that Trump will do what he pleases after he gets what he wants. pl

  36. aleksandar says:

    On December 9, the Central Intelligence Agency issued an assessment to lawmakers in the US Senate, stating that Russia intervened in the election to help Trump win by releasing hacked Democratic Party material through WikiLeaks. President Obama ordered a “full review” into the matter, while President-elect Trump mocked the assessment and criticized US intelligence services.[6][7][8] The Federal Bureau of Investigation and National Security Agency agreed with the CIA report on Russian interference.[9]
    (9) FBI backs CIA report on Russian interference: report”. washingtonpost.com. Retrieved December 16, 2016.
    So wikipedia cite WAPO as a source that confirms russia involment in Trump election. The only source. So far, if I am right, FBI is silent.
    Who said that wikipedia was honest and neutral ?

  37. LeaNder says:

    Moreover, in the hands of people like the Bill and Hillary Clinton, and also Tony and Cherie Blair (who also comes from Liverpool) it has become deeply corrupt.
    that’s the point.
    although, I had to heavily suppress the Pavolovian Dog in me being offered the juxtaposition of Clinton/Blair with Lennon. 😉
    Not least since my generation seems to be the ultimate evil in the more polite circles on the right here. Nutshell impression after reading our main right weekly over here for a while. That was the only issue on which they seemed to somehow get more irrational. …

  38. Nancy K says:

    Of course you are entitled to any opinion you have but do you really need to insult women, especially older women. I hope you remember that Trump is older that Clinton.

  39. Croesus says:

    In my opinion (maybe, rather, my hope), Trump intends to set aside those old ways of doing business that the eggheads defined as this type of balancing or that type of balancing; or that demanded taking this side as opposed to that side. It’s not the moves in the game that Trump will do differently; he will redefine the game.
    This comment by “Erebus” on Ron Unz’s forum offered a similar assessment: http://www.unz.com/tsaker/neocon-panic-and-agony/#comment-1696014
    In essence, Trump will attempt to make USA a participant in OBOR rather than allow himself to be forced to choose between continuing to pursue the neocon (failed) dreams of hegemony, or oversee the decline of USA.
    If so, he will have the voice and counsel of George Washington in his corner.

  40. J says:

    It appears that Trump’s pick for ambassador to Israel is a pro-settler NY based attorney David Friedman who is to the ‘right’ of Netanyahu.

  41. Croesus says:

    E Michael Jones tends to get overwrought, but he echoed the reasons I could not possibly vote for Clinton: she oversaw the assassination of Qaddafi and cackled over it — a psychotic demonstration if ever there was one; she oversaw the complete destabilization of Libya, with no rhyme or reason. She has the blood of hundreds of thousands on her hands.
    Jones has a PhD; I don’t, but with respect, Mr. Sales, it doesn’t take an education to make the fundamental judgment that Clinton demonstrates callous disregard for human life. To have such a person become the first female president would have set a terrible precedent.

  42. Fred says:

    “Let’s gauge the Pres-elect against the clergyman’s standard;”
    Why the hell should we do that, we were not electing a clergyman.

  43. Dubhaltach says:

    Mr Sale
    The seven social sins you list at the end of this piece are by Gandhi who can in wise be described as an Anglican clergyman although the mistake would probably tickle him greatly 🙂
    I believe that originally it dates from some time during the 1920s, he wrote out a copy for his grandson (Arun) shortly before he was murdered.

  44. Larry Kart says:

    Another perspective, from detective novelist Michael Innes’ rather spacey (Borges-like before Borges) 1942 novel “The Daffodil Affair” (the third paragraph in particular):
    “Consider the stars. What is natural to believe of them? What notions come spontaneously into men’s minds? Clearly the notions of astrology. Compared with them the notions of Copernicus and Newton, of Kepler and Einstein, are temporary, local, and eccentric in the highest degree.”
    “But the notions of Copernicus and his followers work. Their predictions come true. Whereas with atrologers –”
    “Wine interrupted with a a wave of an amiably dismissive hand. ‘The human race, my dear Appleby, is much too shock-headed and has much too short a memory, to take much notice of whether predictions are fulfilled are not. They must have a magical and irrational element of sufficient substance to satisfy the magical and irrational appetites which make up nine-tenths of the content of the human mind.’”
    In particular, while I think I understand a fair deal about Trump’s appeal and why there are ample reasons to fear and despise the Borg, what I can’t get my head around is the volume of outright lies that Trump and his surrogates keep emitting and the way these lies are either ignored or happily swallowed (in the name of a good cause?). Not that these are the only lies one hears from politicians, but never before in my experience (maybe in the heyday of Joe McCarthy?) have I seen anything like this in terms of blatancy and volume. This is a good thing for the well-being of the body politic?

  45. mike allen says:

    Tyler –
    “Emperor Trump”????
    God help us all if that comes true.

  46. Fred says:

    I believe this should be called “cultural marxism”. It is interesting that all these folks move about from metropolis to metropolis but never seem to land, and certainly do not live, in places like Abuja, Freetown, Monrovia; just to name a few. London and Paris seem to rank right up there though. To quote a line from “Revolt of the Masses” by Ortega, who Richard referred to in a different post, “To be English, German or French is to be provincial.” They have forgotten, if they ever understood, that the civilization about them did not spring forth from Nature but was a creation of generations that had gone before; What was the phrase from Rathenau, “vertical rise of the barbarians”? That seems an appropriate description of our globalist multi-culturalist “elites”. On that note I think another insightful piece of Steve’s is this article about the view of terrible alt-right by the sister of the most elite white male in America:

  47. Dorothy108 says:

    Richard Sale wrote”Trump said he loved uneducated people”
    Thank you for your reply. Agreed. Throughout his life, President-elect Trump has always exhibited a soft spot for the ‘common’ man and woman, especially, those who work with their hands.
    However, what made me write my first actual post on this, Col. Lang’s very august website, is that I keep hearing about the poor downtrodden ‘uneducated and uncultured’ who support him. However, the reality is, Trump voters, come from all walks of life. I invite you and anybody who has not done so, to look at a full rally, eye the the crowd. There are hundreds out on youtube. What you will see is that Trump supporters are hardly the victims described in the MSM.

  48. Walrus says:

    The Walrus Law: “Governments achieve the exact reverse of their stated intentions”. Obama, “the peacemaker” proves it yet again; endless wars and the pauperisation of yet more Americans as the paths available to a better life are systematically closed off. So much for hope and change.
    My prediction is that a Trump Administration, full of bankers, arch conservatives and plutocrats as it is, will do more for the common man than the Democrats have done since FDR.

  49. ex-PFC Chuck says:

    Paul Craig Roberts, who was an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration and who became shrill about the time of the invasion of Iraq, cites a post at commenter b’s Moon of Alabama blog, asserts that movement to turn Trump-committed electors is a coup d’etat in progress that has a good chance of succeeding.

  50. ToivoS says:

    Of course your concern is correct. What I was pointing out is that Trump can make diplomatic effort to establish a “safe zone” with Russia’s agreement without committing the US to further military involvement. I didn’t say (nor do I believe) that it would necessarily work, but it would allow Trump to kick that can down the road and keep his promise to work with Russian to resolve the Syrian crisis.

  51. ked says:

    well, I’m a generous dreamer.
    I agree that other than the State, Treasury, & Commerce his appts are a sop to the base (except Mitch’s wife – she actually knows how to run a Dept. … heck, maybe she’ll run the Cabinet meetings). His style is reliance on close-in & loyal sounding-boards & thence immediate policy-making. He doesn’t care about the Cabinet and most Depts… that’s pre-twitter gov. Just as for our nation, he will face internal discord in his gov (we will hear “you’re fired!” a lot) and among the disparate blocs of voters & interests that elected him. It is in managing that, that his presidency will be revealed – it may be frustrating… given his streak of vengence, imagine how he he will react to leaks. If he’s not careful, he’ll get wrapped around the axle pretty quick. I also fear Nat Sec may suffer from his reactive style. He’s so smart, he’s at risk of being finessed ir set-up. If it gets really bad, the gov will work around him – it’s a core competency.

  52. doug says:

    I really don’t see the electors throwing this into the House. Virtually all of the ones calling for a “Briefing” are Democrats pledged to HRC. It’s wishful thinking amongst some of the Borg.
    The end of PCR’s article states “In other words, whatever the outcome tomorrow and January 20th, the fight is ongoing.”
    That is, of course, obvious. The Democrats and significant swaths of the Republicans in Congress will continue to attack Trump after he is sworn in. Interesting times.

  53. Jack says:

    I voted for Trump. My rationale was simple. The probability that Trump would escalate a conflict with Russia leading to mutual annihilation was very low relative to Hillary who had a track record as a warmonger and called for a no-fly-zone in Syria during the campaign, which IMO, would have put us on an escalatation ladder. I opted for the uncertainty of Trump vs the certainty of Hillary.
    If the only thing Trump achieves during his presidency is to reduce our foreign military and covert destabilization interventions I will consider his presidency a success.
    I notice that many liberals judge Trump on a liberal scale. He’s not gonna push their agenda in fact he’ll try to reverse them. As Obama noted after his victory, elections have consequences. I am very pleased that he’s bringing in people from the military and business to staff his administration. Civilian government experience is over-rated in my book as there are no consequences for failure. I fully recognize that the inertia of the bureaucracy and the political back slapping game is not to be underestimated. There can be no root & branch reform until we are in catastrophe.
    Considering his monumental electoral victory over the Borg Queen and the assault of the big media and big money combine as well as the political establishment of both parties, essentially on his own wits, I am open to being surprised on his accomplishments in office. Of course what I would consider a positive outcome will definitely not be the idea of good in a left and liberal frame. I also hope he’ll drive the PC lords mad with his irreverence to their hypocrisy.

  54. FourthAndLong says:

    I don’t doubt the truth of what you say as per California. Not at all. But it is not a complete account of boorish behaviour in the immediate aftermath of November 8th. According to media reports I’ve sampled since the election, incidents of attacks on minorities in the wake of the election were widespread and not infrequent.
    To wit and notably, CBS sixty minutes I think it was who encouraged President elect Trump to discourage such behaviour on air during a television interview. And would he not mind saying so in real time during the interview? And Mr. Trump complied without hesitation, looking directly into the camera, emphasizing that such followers of his should; ‘Stop it,” if I recall his words correctly.

  55. VietnamVet says:

    I agree. Internationalism has been mixed together with the belief in the free movement of people, capital, services and goods to become the reigning Atlantist’s ideology. The problem is that they have purposefully hid their seizure of power. The day the poor working slobs figure out what is going on; it is all over. Tomorrow will shall see if Electoral College elects Donald Trump President. This will be the first hole in the dike.

  56. jdledell says:

    J – Not only is Friedman to the right of Netanyahu, he is to the right of Naftali Bennett. He is a strong advocate of Israel annexing the West Bank. At a shul in Kiryat Arba, I heard him answer a question about the annexation of the West Bank giving the Palestinians the right to vote. His answer was ” why should we, we don’t give the donkeys the right to vote.” That comment sums up David Friedman.

  57. kao_hsien_chih says:

    Vast majority of the voters in the 2016 election were the “usual” suspects. Most Republicans voted for Trump. Most Democrats voted for Clinton. I’d reckon at least 90-95% of the voters would have done the same thing if the candidates were Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas instead. The so called “Trump voters” are a very small minority (there are many more who are “like” them, but they’d have made the same partisan choice even if Trump were not involved) This small minority was important enough to break the conventional wisdom by acting unexpectedly, but it is important to note that vast majority of voters who voted for Trump were NOT “Trump voters,” but just Republicans.

  58. Dr. Puck says:

    What is this “pauperization?”
    Is this a qualitative or implicitly quantitative summary?
    If this comes to be clarified then I’ll be able to make an expert’s inquiry into ‘as the paths available to a better life are systematically closed off.’
    Thank you.

  59. LeaNder says:

    interesting in combination with “nuclear holocaust”. Very special attempt at male bonding? 😉

  60. Fred says:

    I thought the EU’s foreign policy was made in Brussels not Paris.
    “A whole host of minor European states are chafing away at the current policy under Frau Merkel…”
    You mean forced settlement of economic immigrants at the expense of local citizens in both money and culture?

  61. Nancy K says:

    It truly sickens me that Trump has chosen Friedman, but then I dislike the rest of his choices also. In bed with Goldman Sachs and Israel, really draining the swamp isn’t he.

  62. ked says:

    Yes Fred, we ought completely untether our elected officials from any reference to ethics &/ or morality. Ya know, Trump IS already changing things! I almost can’t wait for the next Prez to follow his model.

  63. Fred says:

    “usual suspects” “Just Republicans” Trump voters are a “tiny minority” You sound as bad as all the liberals I spoke with at the non-Christmas holiday party I attended last night.

  64. ked says:

    I’ve heard for years from “thought leaders” of all ideological points of the compass calling for a qualifying test for voters. Mostly they’ve sat on the conservative end of the spectrum. But maybe that pov came from the Poll Tax wing of the right wing and everything will be different now.

  65. Fred says:

    Yes and they are going to double down over the next four years by pushing talk about “wealth disparity”. They of course will not mention that the richest man on earth, Carlos Slim Helú, Mexican citizen, made much of his wealth by the privatization of utilities owned by the Mexican state nor that he makes millions each year on calls from Mexicans working in the US and fees on remittances they send home. Nor will they mention the extreme violence and corruption in Mexico; how that drove millions North looking for at least a better economic life. Perhaps if our foreign policy focused on helping fixing that country on our border rather than every other place on this Earth maybe those Mexicans here could go home again – and make Mexico great again. I’m sure the owner of the NYT will put his crack investigative journalists on that story pronto.

  66. Fred says:

    Damned silly but some find it funny.

  67. mike allen says:

    Nancy K –
    Please accept my apologies. I voted for Mrs Clinton and consider her a genuine American heroine. We all were cheated by her loss to the Trump/Putin team. I should have added a snark alert on that sentence. It was written tongue-in-cheek to imply that Trump is the hysterical one and a neurotic monstrosity IMHO.
    Guess I need to go back to school and study up on how best to portray irony if I am ever to get it right.

  68. steve says:

    “President-elect Trump said he loved uneducated people.”
    Of course. He wanted their votes. Living close to NYC it has been difficult to avoid Trump gossip and news over the years. Remain unaware of any concrete actions he ever took that would have demonstrated this love for the uneducated. Like most politicians, he was certainly willing to talk about it though.

  69. charly says:

    pauper, Latin for poor or in English the very poor
    pauperization means becoming poorer and for proof see American life-expectancy.

  70. Walrus says:

    The Gini index of income inequality has been steadily rising for years.
    Workers wages are the lowest share of GDP since 1929.
    More than half of Americans have less than $1000 to their name.
    Intergenerational economic mobility in the USA is low compared to other countries and getting worse.
    Wages growth is stagnant.
    There is much more data than I can possibly post that demonstrates that Trumps deplorable have been getting the short end of the stick for years and they are sick and tired of it as evidenced by their vote for someone who claims to want to dethrone the rentiers and their acolytes in Washington.
    Are you one of these people who blames the poor for being poor? The bad choices thing?
    Alternatively, do you believe that no other country could possibly treat its citizens better….and then we can start on health costs and outcomes, infant mortality and a heap of other measures..
    But Hey! Look at it this way. There is massive room for improvement and to make America great again…for its whole population, not just the nomenklatura, like it is now.

  71. MRW says:

    Richard, read this: http://blog.dilbert.com/post/154553282956/persuasion-and-isis. This guy called Trump for Prez in Sept 2015.

  72. Cee says:

    I think you are correct. Now Russian troops are protecting areas like that.

  73. Cee says:

    Don’t believe it. That ambassador blows the US honest broker bullshit out of the water. Israel will implode as allies continue to flee.

  74. Cee says:

    Many were left behind, others like myself were tired of the arrogant liars. Your article reminded me of this
    The racism unleashed by Trump can be understood as directed at the political elite rather than minority groups.

  75. Cee says:

    I voted the same way, yet these bastards are STILL trying to start another Cold War with these hacking accusations.
    Snowden was discovered? I want a damn name of the culprit or they can shut the hell up.

  76. Cee says:

    The GOP already said nyet to his infrastructure spending plans.
    Trump voters should target any obstructionists for defeat.

  77. Eric Newhill says:

    Kao, who would have guessed that republicans would vote republican and democrats, for the Democrat?
    So it would seem, despite the polling experts comments to the contrary, maybe it really was misleading when polls that skewed heavily democrat in their samples had Clinton winning the election?

  78. LeaNder says:

    Internationalism, feels would have fitted equally well into the earlier version: Cultural Bolsheviks. The problem goes deeper. If I had to chose in an ad-hoc fashion: neo-liberalism?

  79. LeaNder says:

    Thanks, Fred, once again, this was an interesting glimpse into the latest variety of activist pressures from below experienced in US universities. But somehow also demanded from above? The students as a to be satisfied “customers”? I am not aware of the same over here, have to find out.
    But let me give you, a self-declared Cultural Marxist:
    I was a bit startled browsing through some of her articles on the Eidolon blog. There seemed to be contradictions, on first sight. Reading a couple of her texts. The one below irritated me most, I guess. Only later I discovered we both seem to have loved Ovid’s magnum opus early. Here she reduces him to the misogynist components. … That’s how reception shapes your reading I guess. Or patly, I guess.
    Random pick: To that list of marginalized voices I would add one more: junior scholars. …
    constantly increasing identity politics down to the no doubt, at least over here, percariat among lecturers. They partly don’t even get minimum pay. … outside the diverse sectors of tenured or regular staff members.
    Breitbart: Campus Special Snowflakes Melt Upon Contact With Greek Mythology, John Hayward.
    Donna Zuckerberg: In the Culture War Between Students and Professors, the University Is the Real Enemy
    The more she leaves activism behind and returns to her field the more interesting she gets. On the other hand … her struggle with “the authoritarial voice” leaves me completely unsatisfied and admittedly with the slight bad taste of fake.
    I don’t think, I will be ever fully convert to Townhall or further right, but this is interesting. I arrived for studies at the FU slightly later, and left Berlin not too long after. The activists domination of the classroom was hard to endure …

  80. HawkOfMay says:

    I’m always interested in the source of quotes and while Ghandi popularized the quote it seems he did not originate it. Regardless it must of made an impression since this quote is written on a wall near his tomb. Some searches revealed that President Carter closed his eulogy to Hubert Humphrey with a reference to this quote.

  81. HawkOfMay says:

    Comey has not stated Brennen misunderstood their meeting. The statement from Brennen is pretty clear as far as it goes. I’m curious to see if we will get a direct statement from Comey or not.
    “Earlier this week, I met separately with FBI [Director] James Comey and DNI [Director] Jim Clapper, and there is strong consensus among us on the scope, nature, and intent of Russian interference in our presidential election”…”The three of us also agree that our organizations, along with others, need to focus on completing the thorough review of this issue that has been directed by President Obama and which is being led by the DNI.” — CIA Director John Brennan

  82. turcopolier says:

    mike allen
    “the Trump/Putin team” That is a completely unsupported and libelous description. Tell me why I should not ban you for an ad hominem attack. pl

  83. Colonel Lang,
    Let me put in a plea on behalf of ‘Mike Allen’.
    His ‘ad hominen’ attack is patently completely irrational.
    However, in terms of shifting opinion in Britain, he and people like him are an absolute godsend. In what is a difficult task of getting people to jettison intellectual baggage from the past, Mike is an absolute godsend.
    What we have in on this side of the Atlantic is a complete intellectual muddle and flux.
    Among our friends, there are many people of whom I am fond who are, as it were, ‘died in the wool’ supporters of Hillary Clinton.
    Among what might be called the ‘NCO classes’ – the term does not accurately ‘fit’, but has to do as a ‘sighting shot’ – there are very many who see her as like the Blairs, and Camerons, and Osbornes (the ‘officers from Hell?) and really loathe her.
    And a not necessarily very large, but significant and growing part of this constituency is ‘Putinista’. (Among many facts about Putin that people cannot grasp, he is quite patently, a product of the ‘NCO’ classes who can do as well as any ‘officer’, and indeed better, because of his origins – and also, get ‘officers’ (think Lavrov) to work happily for and with him.)
    As I know from old friends I respect – because my social circles are quite mixed – there may be a possibility of a new coalition of ‘officer’ and ‘NCO’ elements.
    The more the ‘Clintonistas’ keep trying to cover up for the abominable nature of their heroine, and denying the facts about her complete spiritual corruption, the easier things get for me.

  84. kao_hsien_chih says:

    Umm, I did. I believe so did Jack and several other people posting here. That vast majority of voters voted according to their party affiliation is just a statement of fact, not a putdown. The difference between a .300 hitter and a .250 hitter is just 5% of the overall sample. But a .250 hitter is mediocre and a .300 hitter is great. People who can get 5-10% of the voters to break their habit make history.
    The problem with the polling experts is not that they get the 90-95% wrong. But they don’t know which how the remaining 5 to 10% will break and assume that they can be safely ignored. That was the mistake that many polling experts made–and mind you that this is exactly the mistake that one would make if the sample were to be stratified by party. I think we have to come to recognition that both in 2012 and 2016, the winning candidates won by outperforming among the decisive 5-10% of the electorate than the experts expected and this is far more important than it sounds and underscores that Trump is far more than a mere Republican who would not have gotten no more than just regular Republican votes.

  85. kao_hsien_chih says:

    To be fair, Lennon was not a nice person even if he sang about nice things and got shot. There is a certain amount of veracity in that juxtaposition.

  86. kao_hsien_chih says:

    Students in US pay very large sums of money for their “education.” And students who actually pay money are actively sought after by universities because they make profit for the university (based on my actual and very unpleasant experiences from the “producer” side.) As the saying goes, the customer is always right, and when they don’t want to be told that they are wrong, then the pressure from above is also to cheer them on. Somewhat the exactly the opposite of my perspective on things: a friend of mine who went to a Jesuit-run university said that one of the priest-professors told him that, when they are through, they will be either “real” Catholics or unbelievers (for good or for ill, my friend did become an unbeliever when he was done). I don’t think this is an attitude that is encouraged in most US institutions these days–certainly wasn’t in my prev job.

  87. kao_hsien_chih says:

    This is where the political dynamic between “Trump voters” and the Republicans in the electorate becomes stark. In the electorate that voted for Trump, the Republicans may far outnumber actual Trump voters, but there are enough of the latter that they can help defeat quite a lot of Republican officeholders, IF they are willing to not vote party–either vote for the Democrat, or at least, deny them the votes via abstention, and if Trump is willing to egg them on, officially or unofficially, while they do so. This, in turn, depends on both the willingness of Trump and a large chunk of the Democratic Party (even if not the latter’s leaders) to seriously and credibly cooperate with each other where they have mutual interest–e.g. the infrastructure, even if that means risking wrecking the Republican Party in the House. This will be a high stakes gamble–IF Trump really means what he says.

  88. mike allen says:

    Colonel –
    A thousand pardons, I was suffering from late night indigestion, and watching the MSM fawning over the man. But as a matter of record there are many commenters that have made ad hominem attacks on Mrs Clinton here on your otherwise outstanding blog. Many of them as bad or worse.

  89. MRW says:

    “I voted for Mrs Clinton and consider her a genuine American heroine.”
    For doing what? Marrying Bill? Being First lady? She had zero qualifications to be SecState. She used her Senate run to get some cajones for a presidential run. Her accomplishments, imo, were de minimus. She obviously had zero understanding of how the Electoral College trumped the popular vote, or she would have campaigned in a completely different way.

  90. MRW says:

    Annem, may I introduce you to a different perspective:
    “Persuasion and ISIS”

  91. turcopolier says:

    mike allen
    I have not allowed anyone to say that she is the agent of a foreign power. a crook? Yes. OK. I will accept your explanation. pl

  92. Tyler says:

    I notice the bet goes untaken, though.

  93. Tyler says:

    The same people who want us to believe McCarthy wasn’t right now want us to believe the Russians hacked paper ballots through magical means.
    What a time to be alive.

  94. Tyler says:

    FYI Russian Ambassador killed in Turkey.
    Woo son.

  95. Cee says:

    but there are enough of the latter that they can help defeat quite a lot of Republican officeholders, IF they are willing to not vote party
    You just described me and many others that I know. We’re done with party politics.
    I’ve been that way for years when I was chair of the Ross Perot Reform Party in my state. He quit and Clinton was the the alternative.
    I’m fed UP and those who represent a narrow segment will be replaced.

  96. different clue says:

    I am not aware of any Sanders supporters practicing any sort of violence.
    If you or others are aware of any Sanders supporters violencing people or vandalizing Trump signs or stickers, we are better off knowing about it, if links to true-news stories of such incidents can be provided.
    The violence you speak of came from Clintonites and Obamacrats. They are not considered “left” by any of the sort of leftist who supported Sanders. And some of their Clintobamacrat violence was directed against Sanders supporters. Confusing Clintobamacrats with “the left” could lead to mistaken analyses about who is who’s enemy, and mistaken predictions going forward.

  97. different clue says:

    One could go even further and say that the the DLC Third Way Clintonite Democrats betrayed their working class base as their first priority. And their secondary focus on identity was a diversionary distraction to prevent just enough people from understanding their true nature as revealed by NAFTA, WTO membership, MFN for China, etc.
    It is these New Democrats, these Clintobamacrats ( our analog of New Labor Blairites) who took over the DemParty and are trying to purge all possible Working Class Democrats out of the Party. The Working Class Democrats can either try to reconquer their DemParty and purge the DLC Clintonite Obamacrats out of it, or they can all leave it and try growing a legitimate Party of their own. Unfortunately, enough of them have Stockholm Syndrome and nostalgiac loyalty to a former Democratic Party which is no more . . . that not enough of them will do either one. Some will try, but it won’t be enough.

  98. different clue says:

    I voted against Clinton by voting for Trump to achieve three things.
    1: Avoiding Nuke War Clinton with Russia and re-normalizing relations with
    2: Permitting the R + 6 to exterminate all traces of jihadi rebellion
    throughout Syria.
    3: No more Free Trade Agreements. ( I realize Trump may not be smart
    to understand the deeper issues. There is a risk that he will support
    a re-worked TPP/ TTIP/TISA/etc. if they have been cosmetically
    reworked to appear like better deals in the narrowest biznissmon
    I understood the risk I was running that his domestic agenda and cabinet people and so forth would damage my domestic interests here. And I am dismayed at how he is assembling a team based on the pursuit of sack and pillage, arson, spray-paint and loot even faster and more thorough-goingly than I would have expected. But it is a risk I ran, and as long as I get the Three Big Things, I think we may live long enough to try to mitigate and then reverse some of the domestic damage Trump will leave us with.

  99. different clue says:

    It doesn’t take very many people to vary from their traditional usual-suspect voting patterns to change an outcome.
    Here in Michigan, I have read that Clinton lost Michigan by 20,000 votes; thereby losing all of Michigan’s electoral votes. I also read that 80,000 Democratic voters found Clinton so distasteful that they left the “president” bubble altogether blank and unfilled entirely . . . even while voting for strict party-line Democrats in every other line and marked bubble. If everything else had been the same, with just the one single difference that those 80,000 “no vote for President” Democratic voters would have voted for Clinton, then Clinton would have won Michigan by 60,000 votes and taken all the Michigan electoral college votes.

  100. Eric Newhill says:

    Tyler, One more month all that is wrong will be righted; to include Turkey’s insolence and this Jihad/Caliphate nonsense generally. Trump and Putin; Gods right and left hands.

  101. LeaNder says:

    kao, I realized he was a difficult person and Yoko Ono herself is pretty eccentric too (women is the nigger of the world, wasn’t it?). Yes:
    On the other hand necessary to have the FBI watch him? … and of course the nutcase.
    … needed to let David’s note somewhat enforced by Fred’s response sink in for a while. 😉

  102. Eric Newhill says:

    P.S. and there was just a truck attack on a Christmas market in Berlin with at least 9 killed and 50 wounded.
    By the time Trump and Putin work out their plans, NATO won’t lift a finger to assist Turkey, IMO. Deplorables, worldwide, are sick and tired of Jihad and sick and tired of the limp wristed confused responses to it.
    It’s damned ridiculous that the countries that simultaneously defeated Nazi Germany (the best military force on the planet when WW2 commenced) and Imperial Japan can’t annihilate a bunch of backwards maniacs riding around in the desert with machineguns screwed to the roofs of Toyota pickup trucks. Once the will and vision are organized and Borg colluders purged, the IS is on it’s way to becoming a footnote in history books and Erdogan will get the Saddam treatment.

  103. LeaNder says:

    kao, the Jesuits are interesting circles. One of them brought Zen from Japan over here. He studied with a Zen master over there. … I volunteered in their academy here in C. for a while.
    I am aware it is completely different over here. But some of the stuff vaguely reminded me of Berlin and the poor Profs that had their seminars taken over by one or the other post SDS political camps. Usually by the leader within a group of followers. …

  104. Dorothy108 says:

    Agreed on the older you are, etc., you voted for Trump. This my also be due to watching the big box stores open, the mom and pop stores get shuttered along with a lot of other small businesses; watching our children, after receiving their college degree, remain at home. In the years since 1980, rents went off the roof, while opportunities for Americans, dwindled. There are other factors, but those of us, who are a bit older, have watched a steady decline here, while the msm, tells us how great everything is.
    Agreed also on most of Trump’s cabinet picks, especially Tillerson. I was reminded of this comparison of the major oil companies, in the low profit 2015. http://www.oilfieldexpat.com/?p=894
    Hopefully, Tillerson whose work at Exxon Mobil put him in contact with many state players, around the world, in addition to his much bandied about relationship with President Putin of Russia. (good article from the NYer on his background: http://tinyurl.com/Tillerson-bio
    As for Fillon, let’s hope he wins his run off, and can help Chancellor Merkel gracefully center her policies, but I will not hold my breath on that.

  105. Dorothy108 says:

    Actually, until I witnessed the antics of the Democrats, and the MSM’s slanted reporting, as I said, I was leaning towards Bernie Sanders. Though, fiscally, Sanders made me a bit, queasy. Believe it or not, many of Sanders’ policies like reigning in some of the ridiculous trade deals, and his original stance on immigration before he watered it down to run on the Democratic ticket, rather similar to President-elect, Trump’s.
    Absolutely agreed on where the violence came from, as the investigative documentaries by Project Veritas proved: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY
    I apologize if you do not like my use of the left. Perhaps the terms, ‘left’ and ‘right’ are overused. To clarify, personally, the term ‘left’ not only applies to Bernie Sanders and his supporters (of which I was once one), because, Mrs. Clinton used and is still using, to this minute classic tactics of ‘leftist’ organizer, Saul Alinsky. As you know, they corresponded, and Clinton went on to write a 92 page homage to Alinsky, while at Wellesley.
    That said, I was disgusted when her campaigns tactics against Bernie Sanders came to light. I continue to be amazed at her inability to take responsibility for her own actions. At this point, from the ‘there were no classified emails on my server’ to the the paid for rioting, to leaving her supporters to fend for themselves on election night, to the endless recounts, and now the blame it on the Russians (sans proof), I just feel like the Hillary Clinton machine, formerly known as the Democratic Party and their incessant collaborators, the main stream media are very sore losers.

  106. kao_hsien_chih says:

    That’s exactly the point. It’s not a huge difference, BUT, the bottom line is that, according to the rules, that’s the difference that counts. On one hand, I think anyone who tries to delegitimize the results by nagging about them is nuts. On the other hand, it is equally true that, assuming Trump is serious, he’d have to deal with huge numbers of people who voted for him not because of his programs, ideas, or whatever, but because he had an R next to his name. Or, as someone put it, Trump enjoyed electoral advantages of being both an independent (vis a vis “Trump voters”) and a major party candidates (vis a vis “Republican voters”). Now, he has to deal with the consequences. This will be interesting. Hopefully, not too much, though.

  107. MRW says:

    And after you read this article (OK, blog post), then read these words from Trump’s speech last Friday in Florida:
    “You people were vicious, violent, screaming, ‘Where’s the wall? We want the wall!’ Screaming, ‘Prison! Prison! Lock her up!’ I mean you are going crazy. I mean, you were nasty and mean and vicious and you wanted to win, right?’ Trump said to the crowd of thousands. ‘But now, you’re mellow and you’re cool and you’re not nearly as vicious or violent, right? Because we won, right?’”

  108. different clue says:

    It’s quite all right. I wasn’t giving voice to any sense of personal insult. I was expressing a sense of philosophical-ideological unease at seeing situations possibly misunderstood and opportunities possibly lost because of mistaken ( in-my-view) non-differentiation between different lefts. ( And Bitter Berners like me would say the Clintonites are a velcro-decoy faux-left devoted to leading people over the buffalo jump . . . and not really leftists at all).
    I can understand the view that any user of methods devised by the leftist Saul Alinsky must be a Saulinsky Leftist her own self. But I think that view may be mistaken. Aulinsky wrote his methods down. They can be understood, weaponised and used by anybody. Tea Party elements used Alinskyan methods to disrupt the Democrats’ “sell Obamacare” Town Meetings, for instance.
    And the current propaganda-field being generated around Putin, Trump, hacks and leaks, etc. is part of the Democrats’ use of McCarthyist methods learned from the Republicans of McCarthy’s day who first pioneered them. They can be used by anyone who cares to use them . . . right, left, anybody.
    (I personally think that Clinton’s primary source of inspiration is Richard M. Nixon. Her coverupping and paranoid self-pity are Nixonian all the way).

  109. mike allen says:

    David Habbakuk –
    Well thank you, but I can stand on my own without your plea.
    I am glad you think of me as a godsend though. I will try not to disappoint you in the future.

  110. mike allen says:

    A crook? If you expect me to eat that insult on a good woman without comeback then you should ban me. Mrs Clinton has a thousand times more ethics and morality than President elect Trump.

  111. turcopolier says:

    mike allen
    Well, the US Attorney for the southern district of NY and his sitting grand jury will deal with the question of her virtue. pl

  112. Fred says:

    You did point out the politics without principle which seems to apply rather aptly to the lifelong politician who lost; however you left compassion out of that list of clergyman standards.

  113. mike allen says:

    Colonel –
    She would love a day in court. But I predict it won’t happen unless that US attorney hurries and convenes the grand jury before late January. After inauguration Trump will squash it in order to keep a cloud of doubt over the Clintons and to try to burnish his own image as magnanimous.

  114. turcopolier says:

    mike allen
    Trump would not have kept this man on as US Attorney if he intended that, and a large number of donors are preparing lawsuits for embezzlement against the Clintons. pl

  115. mike allen says:

    Colonel –
    I hope he goes forward with it myself. It will give her a chance in open court to disprove all the BS.

  116. MRW says:

    “The older you are the less likely you went to college(university).”
    According to the 2010 census (think that was the year), ages 54-64 had the highest education, meaning university.

  117. Dr. Puck says:

    I don’t blame the poor for being poor. I also rarely ask a question that I don’t already have a strong clue as to how it may be addressed in a studious, non-ideological way.
    It would be the case that the trajectories of economic inequality since the end of WW2, at which point the US had the most fully functioning industrial and agricultural economy in the world, are well studied in non-ideological terms.
    My own summary is: it is a complicated subject matter concerned with many domains of change. So, it would be that Walrus writing “‘as the paths available to a better life are systematically closed off.'” begs the question,
    How did this used to work? How did it work between 1945-1960? Between 1960-1980? Etc..
    In fact, how would leaders of a political economy manage an economy if its only goal–yes, a simplification for the sake of a thought problem–was some realizable and modest version of the American dream?
    This ‘so-called’ dream boils down to the practical situation of the householder. Rent or mortgage, food, utilities, transportation, insurance of several kinds, savings to insulate one from precarity and sudden structural expenses. Should we add college education for two youngsters at a state school?
    Crunch those numbers.
    Contrast this all with what we have today, the left/right battle between, to simplify, the nanny state and a kind of arch calvinist “personal responsibility.” The thorns here come out of that ideological battle being many leagues different than what is posed by the thought problem, “how would you manage an economy to support it providing a decent householder’s economy all up and down the continuum of skills and experience?”
    And let’s assume the aptitude is strong and hard working and able to commit to not obtaining the goals ‘all at once.’
    Shall we deconstruct why it has come about that the CEO is to be valorized for nowadays making 300 times the average wage of his average employee, or, why it is, per Piketty, that the holders of capital, and paper (!) no longer are very inspired to leave the precincts of rent seeking, or the casino, for the more uncertain territory of the so-called “supply-side,” and the construction of ‘final goods’ capacity prior to the arrival of demand?
    But I simplify, right? The process through which winners and losers are determined does offer the story about consequential effects come to be absorbed by the working class.
    However, in noting this I am reminded that, for example, the response to the housing crisis was itself a compromise, but, that many argued for ideological (?) reasons that what was required was the redemptive violence to livelihood that could be accomplished by complete foreclosure of the householder’s distressed equity, and the ‘salutary’ collapse of the not-so-humongous enough to go righteously kaput, banks.
    So, the counsel was for vast creative destruction. (Those people are now in charge of the American economy. Just sayin’.)
    I despair of the dialing down from the pragmatic recognition that the stability of an economy is discoverable in the stability of the average, or mean, householder’s economy. It seems to me recognizable that team Trump, and GOP Inc., understand that the economy is not going to be maneuvered to return to the year 1951.
    What would a coherent non-ideological argument promoting the growth of the mean householder’s wealth look like? And, poverty? Seriously, like the poor householder in East Cleveland? For example. . .
    Look toward the bottom of that list and see if you can make out the shape of future economic policy, or its color.

  118. Eric Newhill says:

    There was a discussion here before the election wherein I (and a couple others) said that the polls could not be believed because, for one thing, they showed, for example, 37% Ds and only 25% Rs in the sample, whereas the best intel has the % Ds and Rs in the population to be much closer; maybe only 1% more Ds. So no surprise that Clinton was ahead in the polls by a few points. If one were to have representative sampling the race would be tied or Trump ahead.
    You and someone else argued that party affiliation is “attitudinal” and that it isn’t important to have representative sampling along party lines. The stated party affiliation is just how people are feeling at the time of the poll (to which I replied “nonsense”). It’s all there in the archives of this blog. In fact, a few commenters went so far as to say that I was “certifiably crazy” for suggesting that such sampling errors were a serious issue.
    I’ll drop the whole thing now and never bring it up again. I just find the revisionism interesting and wanted to poke you a little to see how it would play out. Human psychology fascinates me.

  119. Sam Peralta says:

    …Or be convicted by a jury!
    Considering all the shenanigans by the Clinton Foundation and their pay-to-play schemes the US attorney should have a field day calling the Saudi sheikhs to the witness stand.
    Your “genuine American heroine” was so inspiring with her heroism including coming under fire in the Balkans that she couldn’t get enough Democrats to vote for her in Michigan and Wisconsin.

  120. Dorothy108 says:

    “I don’t doubt the truth of what you say as per California. Not at all. But it is not a complete account of boorish behaviour in the immediate aftermath of November 8th. According to media reports I’ve sampled since the election, incidents of attacks on minorities in the wake of the election were widespread and not infrequent.”
    Indeed, there were many reports, I heard them, too. However, it’s often a good idea to follow up on news reports because as time went on, many of those same reports turned out to be hoaxes perpetrated by followers of Mrs. Clinton:
    Here are a few of them:

  121. Dorothy108 says:

    Agreed, and agreed. I think the comparison of Mrs. Clinton to former President Nixon, is apt. When I saw her say, ‘I don’t know why I am not 50 points ahead’ I was reminded of Humphrey Bogart’s great portrayal of Captain Queeg in Cain Mutiny.

  122. different clue says:

    About OBOR . . . I would propose a new acronym which better suits the reality of what China is working to achieve. That new acronym would be . . . COBOR-CPS. Which stands for China’s One Belt One Road Co-Prosperity Sphere. China hopes to turn every place reached by its OBOR into a source of raw materials for China and a captive market for Chinese goods. They plan to achieve the “captive” part by exterminating every thing-making industry they can in every country their OBOR touches.
    We in America have already received a taste of that Chinese approach due to MFN for China. Whole industries dismantled, packed up into crates, shipped to China, and remantled there. OBOR membership for America? Wouldn’t China just LOVE to build a road under the Bering Strait to Alaska! For myself, I would like to see America aVOID becoming China’s New Overseas Tibet.

  123. different clue says:

    Sam Peralta,
    I think Clinton lost a lot of votes in Michigan when she promised that “when elected” she would appoint Bill Clinton to be in charge of the economic recovery plan and program. That promise brought back bitter memories of Clinton’s aggressive and successful support of NAFTA, WTO Membership and MFN for China. It was an unforced error on candidate Clinton’s part, and a significant own-goal.

  124. kao_hsien_chih says:

    You are mistaken. I explicitly said that you SHOULD stratify by parties. The attitudinal bunk was brought up by someone else trying to counter my argument and I recall that you posted that I pointed out what was on your mind. You can search for the old posts yourself if you don’t believe me.
    What I brought up afterwards was that 1) In 2012, Obama did in fact outperform his predicted votes when stratified by party affiliation; 2) this was repeated in 2016 by Trump. Simply trying to predict the votes by party would have shown Trump losing the votes, few thought hey might be, that delivered him the victory in the Midwestern states: this is exactly the mistake of the sort I’m trying to draw attention to.
    The vast majority of the voters vote party. This is exactly why one SHOULD ALWAYS stratify by party. But this misses the subtle twists where a critical minority behaves differently. To say otherwise is to mistake Trump for Romney, which, apparently, some of the self-claimed Trump partisans seem to think. This band of real “Trump voters” are few, but critical–without them, 2016 would have been a near repeat of 2012. I’m completely confused as to why some people allegedly supporting Trump think that he should be treated like any other Republican.

  125. Eric Newhill says:

    Not just stratify, but also representation in the sample proportional to the population; or sample strata weighted to reflect the proportions in the population.
    I apologize if I have misrepresented what you said. I always enjoy reading your comments, but sometimes I miss the subtleties and nuances in them.

  126. Richard Sale says:

    There is no assumption involves=d.
    Richard Sale

  127. Richard Sale says:

    that is news to me, but thank you. I try to write from the heart.

  128. Richard Sale says:

    At times they do. They caused the working classes to lose faith in progress.
    Richard Sale

  129. Richard Sale says:

    I misquoted the Decleartion.

  130. Richard Sale says:

    That quote was from Trump. It isn’t mine.
    You are so touchy, Tyler.

  131. Richard Sale says:

    thank you.

Comments are closed.