Be Not Afraid

I don’t have the time for a long post, but I’ve seen weird outcrops of despondency, and frankly, I’m tired of it.

First, it’s bizarre despondency.  Glenn has been worried we’ll get COCKY. I am too.  The polls are going our way, and yeah, it worries me that people will believe them, because we know what the polls were like last November.

So, it is not … unreasonable to worry that we are perhaps being gaslighted to minimize our enthusiasm/voting fervor.

For various reasons though, I don’t think so.  The reasons aren’t really palpable but they range from “the left can’t seem to fake defeat due to their cultish nature” to “they’re not acting like their internal polls make them confident either.  In fact, they’re acting like it’s the end of the world.”

But still, if you suspect the polls are cooked the right attitude is to be guarded, not despondent.

Apparently, though, there’s some critter running around with his head on fire, saying this is just like 94.  The level of disdain I have for political “scientists” can only be measured by the magnitudes used to measure the distance between the stars, but even then this prediction and comparison staggers me.

Unless this guy is coming at it from the left, which explains some of the crazy.  Yeah, Clinton got his hand slapped in 94 for having his hand so far up the cookie jar we couldn’t see his shoulder.  Also, the right had the contract with America.  Also, the Clintons were showing themselves to be not the happy and traditional couple we expected (and I’m sorry, it’s been a long time, was this before or after the cigar?  If after it explains the left’s obsession with porn stars, because they think it’s the same thing.  Because good LORD they’re dense on moral questions.)

Hand up cookie jar = Clinton and Hillary were threatening us with Hillarycare, which in its second version is so popular it’s decimating the dems electoral chances.  The contract with America offered us relief from some of that crazy/governmental power grabs/taking more of our money.  And the Clintons sold themselves as a traditional and happy couple.  Etc.

Okay, how things are different: NO ONE, not even the fundies who supported him, thought Trump was any less than a libertine.  My fundie friends usually say stuff like “Uh… G-d uses whatever instruments he pleases.”

Trump is, OTOH, on OUR side.  Not just in terms of being on the side of America, but in terms of giving us tax relief, and so far he’s tried really hard to keep his campaign promises (which frankly is novel enough it has me staggered.)

AND what are the dems offering?  Honest to G-d abolishing ICE and increasing our taxes.

Also, they’re acting in repulsive and bizarre ways, having dropped the mask completely on all fronts.  Oh, yeah, they also want us to apologize and bend over to North Korea and Iran tout de suite.

If you think that’s a winning program with America, you must be a producer of The View.  In fact, with the caveat on polls, but these are usually more accurate than electoral ones, the majority of American people couldn’t care less about: ICE or “children in cages”.  The majority of Americans are REALLY tired of illegal immigration.  And the minorities are MORE so.  MOREOVER, the American people also don’t care about Russia, which seems more than a little an unhinged nightmare conspiracy.  And they don’t give a rat’s tiny *ss how many porn stars Trump slept with.  (The left never got that our problem with clinton was two fold: the selling of a false image and the fact he perjured himself to cover up his affair.  If he’d do it on that, what else was he lying to us on? Which is why they think this is a winning strategy. Because on moral questions they’re beyond dumb.)

Does this mean we’re going to keep the House in November?  Answer unclear.  There’s way too much time for too many things to happen between now and November.

What if we lose?

WHAT if we lose?  Yeah, I know the left is beyond unhinged, but you know what, our system has checks and balances built in.  My guess is that if the left wins, their show of freakery will cause an even bigger backlash against them in 2020.  Only reason this didn’t happen and they got Obama was that Bush didn’t show when he was being attacked or what policies weren’t his fault, or the consequences thereof.  You think the dems will be more subtle now?  You think Trump won’t tell the world what’s happening behind the scenes?  Oh, please.

But there is more to it than that.  We’re going to lose some elections.  Yes, even against the communist freakery the left has become.

Keep your head.  An election is not the end of the world.  What happens if we lose?  WE KEEP FIGHTING.

The left is quite literally out of time.  Their proper element is the 1930s when technology and therefore society was going in a more centralized direction.

Our times are undoing what the “mass production” times did in tech and in mind.

In the end we win they lose.  Yes, there will be setbacks.  Yes, there will be loses along the way.  Victory for them took close to a hundred years.  You expect victory in two?  Oh, please.

Keep your head down and work.  We’ve got this.  In the end we win they lose, but it might be our grandchildren who see the full light of freedom (and promptly squander it.)

I’m not sure if we get there without a major disruption, either.

So, build under, build over, build around.  BE NOT AFRAID.



277 thoughts on “Be Not Afraid

  1. The polls are going our way, and yeah, it worries me that people will believe them, because we know what the polls were like last November.

    The polls are often wonky. In the years since I began voting they have rarely been accurate, and occasionally they have been startlingly off base. We rarely see reportage about it, but if you are one of the rare birds who pays attention and has a memory span greater than that of a gnat you know.

    1. Yeah. I’m not putting great confidence in hte public polls. But the internal are usually better, and as crazy as the left is acting, they MUST be dismal.

      1. The polls, as we have seen the last few years, are PROPAGANDA. They would very much like you to believe that DemocRats are going to take the House and the Senate, and use polls to make it look that way.

        They might win, but we will not be able to tell from the polls. Because they’re bullshit.

        Incidentally, you are very naughty indeed for making fun of Alexandria Occasionally Cortex like that. It was a fruit-fly brain, not a fruit-bat!

        And thanks again for the linkage, Sarah. Seeing those Insta-lanch numbers, reading the comments, it is a huge validation. Makes me feel like I’m not just yelling at the TV.

        1. This, big time. It’s very easy to manipulate polls when you’re the one taking them. And I trust the Propaganda Press about as far as I can throw them.

          1. Oh, dear God. You don’t really think that’s possible, do you? Surely the people who didn’t elect Hillary will be even more turned off by the FruitBat.

              1. That’s what got Dollar Billy the Democratic nomination; he was a nobody, but he was probably the senior Democrat who wasn’t getting ready to retire or facing indictment.

                1. OTOH, the classic path to the nomination runs through a governor’s mansion. Not the Senate, and certainly not the House.

                  Yes, Trump failed all these qualifications…but he’s the exception that proves the rule. Had the GOP Establishment been competent in winnowing the field, Trump’s campaign would have died sometime in March of 2016. And we would probably be discussing President Perry or Walker.

                    1. The exception that proves the rule. One Senator…facing another Senator. Who suffered from the Noble Loser Syndrome.

                    2. It wouldn’t have mattered if the Republican nominee was a combination of Abraham Lincoln and George Washington–after the financial crisis happened on a Republican’s watch (Yes, we all know it wasn’t his fault), the Democrats could have run Hillary Clinton and won going away.

                  1. Nearly all Presidential nominees have been Senators or Governors (including those who were Vice President first).

                    1900-2016, there were 61 major party nominees (30 R, 30 D, and Teddy Roosevelt in 1912). 29 were governors, 17 were senators, 15 were neither. (Of the latter, five were US Representatives.)

                    However, of the last ten, 3 were governors, 6 were senators, 1 was neither.

                    It comes and goes. In 1900-1956, only 2 of 31 nominees were senators. In 1960-1972, all 8 nominees were senators. Then from 1976 to 1992, only 1 of 10.

                2. President Clinton got the nomination in large part because of the work he had done with the Democratic Leadership Council, of which he served as chair from 1990-1991. 

                  A 1995 DLC statement said it: “seeks to define and galvanize popular support for a new public philosophy built on progressive ideals, mainstream values, and innovative, non-bureaucratic, market-based solutions.”  Yeah.  Really?  Is that what Hillary Care was, an innovative, non-bureaucratic, market-based solution? 

            1. Why take chances? Help her to find her true purpose in life. Crash test dummy, perhaps.

          2. I’m a former New Yorker. I’d love to be able to say I expatriated to the Granite State because New York voters were stupid enough to elect an carpet bagging liar like Clinton to the Senate; but I left NYS years before then because of their horrible taxes.

            Unfortunately, too many of the current residents of New Hampshire thought electing 3 democrats to the Senate and House was a good idea. /sigh

                  1. As a resident of that flatland I’m almost offended. Would be if it sadly weren’t true. The big nuisance is not just the idiots from Massachusetts screwing things up but same day registration combined with a large University. When things are being won or lost by a couple hundred votes 10,000 or so unmitigated idiots can ruin your whole day. That combined with the big L libertarians always throwing in on the blue side seems to have permanantly screwed up the last of the conservative New England states.

                    1. It’s enough to make you want to go beat up a couple of Delgonian Overlords, isn’t it?

                  2. Having hiked from the base of Mount Greylock to the summit, once, I can’t say that Massachusetts is exactly flat, but when it comes to tall mountains New Hampshire’s got it beat, no doubt.

                    1. I like New Hampshire’s mountains. But, oh my, go hiking in, or even just for a drive though, Rocky Mountain National Park. Talk about feeling a mile closer to Heaven!

                    2. Or:

                      1) Road to the Sun (Glacier)
                      2) Beartooth pass
                      3) N. Cascades

                      Top two are in Montana, few trees, way above timberline.

                      Last in Northern Washington.

                      Been over the Rocky Mountain NP road towing a trailer. Long line of vehicles, so we were not holding up traffic, not that there was a lot of places to pull over. We did when possible, if no other reason we wanted pictures too. Problem wasn’t going up, it was coming down. Hubby stopped at every pull out without fail. To cool the brakes. Coming down the lane is on the downhill side of the road. It is a LONG way down off that pass without anything between you & down.

                    3. Coming off of hills like that with a trailer behind you makes you curse the stupidity of engineers who have phased out manual transmissions in newer vehicles.

                      They can do a lot of engineering and create an automatic transmission where you can choose the top gear, choose tow/haul and a compression brake, and have it downshift on its own; and for a tremendous amount of engineering create a transmission that with a little user know-how will work almost as good as a manual. . . Or they could have just put a manual in it and let the driver decide when and which way he wants to shift.

                    4. Yes. Current tow vehicle has a “manual” override. I don’t know how to use it (I don’t drive if we are towing the trailer, period), but hubby does & he said it makes those type of passes “easier” but still not comparable to being able manual shift & staying off the breaks.

              1. Oh, yes, Californicators. Got plenty of them in Oregon when I lived there. Probably al throughout the Western states. }:-(

                1. Idaho is a popular destination, because they can buy a 27-room McMansion there for the price they sold their 1-bedroom bungalow in [insert Failifornian city here]

                  1. My aunt and uncle did that in the 90’s except they went to Texas. Sold their Malibu 2 bedroom and moved in down the street from Ross Perot.

                    1. Or the guy I knew when I was a kid here in Kentucky. He went to California to work, then later sold his home out there and built a 7,000sqft log home here.

              2. This is why they used to have residency requirements. An idea whose time has come again.

        2. Indeed – basically, what they are trying to tell us is that “We’re winning – so don’t you deplorables even bother to vote!”

        3. I do NOT excrete polls.
          I will readily admit that my excreta does, indeed, stink.
          However.. polls generally stink even worse, hard as that might be to believe. Polls might be made of selenides, perhaps even tellurides. And polonides are Right Out for every reason you can imagine – and a good many you are right to refuse to imagine.

      2. I would not be surprised if the internals were dismal.

        I recall the shock when the union faithful proved not so and the ‘Reagan Democrats’ became a thing.  I strongly suspect that one of the causes for hysteria on the left is the recent court decision that eroded the choke-hold of the public employee union bosses upon the public employees.  While telling the public fear stories about a world out of The Handmaid’s Tale, what the leadership truly fears is the collapse of their power base and the potential long term loss of a block of voters they have taken for granted. 

    2. And that would largely be because of two things: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics – as in, a carefully-worded poll question is frequently not carefully reported – and because a statistically significant portion of the voting public *simply does not trust pollsters and will lie to them.*

      1. When I was young and believed polling could be useful I would talk to pollsters. Then I encountered push-polls, was annoyed at the attempted manipulation, and hung up whenever I recognized one – but that resulted in my listening more carefully to the wording of the questions and realizing they were usually slanted to elicit the desired response.
        I have hung up on every pollster for the last 20 years.

        1. Caller ID for the win! Come election season, we tend to be very careful about screening our calls, and haven’t talked to a pollster.

          OTOH, in our area it’s tough for a democrat to get elected as anything, so we’re usually not prime polling subjects. (“Informed Electorate” is another bowl of swill, seemingly a grifting operation.)

          1. “it’s tough for a democrat to get elected to anything”

            Well maybe in your section of Oregon. I’m in Lane County … grrrrr.

            1. I know; the RC part of my handle is Red County (Klamath, in this case, though there’s others…). Doesn’t look like we’re too popular in Salem, but we do our best to get along without their “help”.

                1. Every winter we’ll get whining about using studded snow tires. Yes, they’re close to useless west of the Cascades, but routes into town (or over the mountains) have some spots where the studs are really essential. And in winter, we don’t always have a choice of timing. Depending on the winter, I can have a few miles of perma-ice on weekly shopping trips, and a few tens of miles if I have to go over the Cascades. Early April (when the cars must be destudded) trips can be pretty exciting.

                  The amount of money that they claim for post-stud roadwork seems like a drop in the bucket compared to that for the pet projects from our dear beloved governor.

                  We’ll also get fatuous statements about gun control “the police are just a few minutes away, donchaknow?” Not here; 45 minute response times are pretty common, and we’re not that far out. [Comments about shoveling time redacted. 🙂 ]

                  1. > “the police are just a few minutes away, donchaknow?”

                    I wonder if they know how many times I can stab them in half of a few minutes, and how many houses away I can be with the other half.

                  2. You have police show up in your neighborhood? How does that happen? And we have police that live in our neighborhood!!!

                    1. Our town has an unfortunate tendency to end up at the top of the TV news. Rather often, despite the “metropolitan*” area has maybe 400 people.**

                      It’s been the SWAT team once, and though we managed to sleep through the ruckus, the police (and ambulance) felt obligated to come out when our “next door” (several hundred feet away) neighbors had a drunken argument that escalated to gunfire. The boyfriend lived, and she ended up in jail. We’re really glad that house is no longer a rental.

                      Otherwise, we’ve had an “interesting” death or two. Best to skip descriptions. Somebody might want to eat.

                      The only nice thing about marijuana legalization is that it pretty well destroyed the local drug dealers’.

                      (*) I’m counting a radius of 10 miles from the town center. It might have grown with the tendency of some folks coming back with kids to live with g’parents.

                      (**) I haven’t read it (it’s in the stack), but Rick Steber’s Buy the Chief a Cadillac describes the effects of the termination of the Klamath Tribes reservation. Some towns ended up really well off, with good ranches. Others didn’t, with lots of problems. I think we’re on the poorer side of the middle.

                  3. They don’t care that it takes 45 minutes. They get a rush out of every subhuman that is killed. Proves to them their superiority for being inthe landed gentry class.

                    1. From personal observation, it’s not so much cynicism, but an utter cluelessness about rural living. They (frequently) actually think the police can show up in minutes. We saw renters at a house next door (mentioned above) who seemed to think the landlord would take care of the garbage, despite the transfer station being 1/3rd mile away, and said landlord about 850 miles away. The county code enforcement people took a dim view of that attitude. 🙂

                      And it’s not class. I’ve seen the “better than thou” attitude displayed by a person living in a small house west-side, played upon a rural. 10 acres, 1000, we don’t look all that different. OTOH, the 1000 acre rancher might show up to Costco in a King Ranch F350, but the Stihl ballcap looks the same as the small landowner’s. On the gripping hand, he might use a Stetson or other wide-brimmed hat. Mine’s too weathered to take to the city, unless the weather is really foul.

                    2. Not referring to class in the sense of owning land or money, but the attitude of the ruling class and its sycophants that they are innately better than those hicks that aren’t cultured enough to live in the gated community with them.

                      Not a universal belief on either side, but the same person that thinks only cops need guns also believes gas should be 8-9 per gallon and cars should be very expensive because you just use public transport. They think that you don’t need gas in the -20deg winters to heat your house, or electricity to cool the 110 deg summers. Just move somewhere the weather isn’t as bad. You can get a job waiting tables or selling trinkets to other people playing the service money go round.

                    3. “The county code enforcement people took a dim view of that attitude.”

                      Well that’s one way to draw in Bears, Cougar, Coyotes, & other opportunistic, critters.

                    4. We haven’t seen any bears around (they like the forest a couple miles away), but the coyotes and cougars were already around. The little critters had a ball. OTOH, the feral cats ate well for a while.

                      The renters nearly had child services come around because of the crap, but they left before The Man came down on them. Left the garbage behind, thus giving the owner extra incentive to sell the property. The new owners are really good. Whew.

                    5. @aacid14: We got that at Costco a while ago. A couple thought we needed a lecture on the evils of sugar-free hot cocoa mix. I simply ignored the fools, while $SPOUSE used the death-stare that freezes SJW blood at 15 paces. They got the idea.

                      Attitudes like theirs can’t get to you unless you let them. It takes work to develop the ability to ignore such crap, but it’s doable. I just remember the source. If I’m feeling generous, I’ll feel pity for them (a-la Mister T), but usually I can ignore them. (One guy was geeking out over a “generator” that was a battery pack with inverter. He thought I should be excited over it, and I simply told him it was useless for my applications. I didn’t plan to burst his bubble so thoroughly, but I did. Oh well.)

                    6. If their attitude wasn’t going to stamp on me, I wouldn’t care. But the decisions of san fran, nyc, and dc are going to harm me financially and potentially physically if they break medicine more than it is.

        2. “I have hung up on every pollster for the last 20 years.”

          Well, it’s a start. But think how much BETTER it would be if you could eliminated the words “up on”.

        3. Any kind of poll brings out the libertarian in me. Information is valuable. You are providing no value to me, so fair is fair I provide none to you. To make it clear I always lie to pollsters. In the 88 democrat election I claimed to have voted for Jesse Jackson to an exit poller. I have given answers that would make Lenin smile mixed with those suitable for John Birch. I have claimed ancestries more totally divorced from reality than that of Massachusetts senior senator. However as I’ve gotten older (and Caller ID became common) I have just ignored them. Hey!!! I wonder if thats part of the issue in polling being total crap. Anyone with half a brain can avoid polling. So only those with an agenda (or those from under a bridge like myself) will answer. How the hell do you sort that out of your statistics without imparting a huge bias…

        4. I hang up on the robo-callers. If there’s an actual person, I tell them: “I’m sorry, I no longer participate in political polls.” The people on the other end of the line didn’t design the poll and courtesy is cheap.

    3. Polls are usually designed to produce the desired result. And that’s as simple as targeting your respondents. Want people who hate Trump? poll any upscale neighborhood on the Left Coast. Want the opposite? poll flyover farm towns. (While back I read a good article on how this works, which had hard numbers, but can’t seem to find it again.)

      Upshot is that polls are a way of steering the undecided, since people tend to go along with the perceived majority. Only rarely are polls anything like accurate or unbiased.

      1. I saw a claim that somebody said with some distress that they wished they’d voted for Brexit once they knew it won.

        I don’t… I don’t get it. I get “Whew, the option I preferred won even though I didn’t make it to the polls.” I get “Oh no, the option I preferred lost; I wish I had made it to the polls.” I get “Oh no, this is worse than I thought; I wish I had voted differently out of strategy.” I do not get “I wish I had voted differently just to be on the winning side.”

        But then I am currently biting my tongue to avoid starting fights I haven’t the time to follow through over people who make snarky comments about Brexit or (the latest annoyance) how disturbed they are about seeing pro-life protestors or surely the Republicans know an honest history will not be kind to them and do they really believe they’ll win thoroughly enough to destroy history like they’ve been trying to do to science and journalism.


    4. CACS, another factor in polls: people flat won’t answer them, or answer them honestly. Several factors involved:
      1. The volume of phone spam has gotten unhinged. Em and I get less than most (because of another development I’ll cover) and it’s still 6-10 calls a day. And we’re on the do not call list, both Federal and state. That law may be the most ignored since the 55 speed limit.

      2. Between caller ID and phone number lists on phones, people know if someone’s calling they want to talk to, and they ignore anyone they don’t know. In our case, Sprint has a lovely call reporting function so that we know if a number has a history of spammer use, and we can pre-emptively block the numbers and report/block any new ones after the first contact. And we do.

      3. Finally, thanks to Fakebook, Twit, etc., people are waking up to the implications of data mining technology. Anonymous surveys? NO SUCH THING. If nothing else, even a random dialler has to keep track of the numbers it has called so it doesn’t call them again or too soon. Those phone numbers can be matched to your answers and to you. When they see Antifa outside people’s homes, or threatening on national TV to target Trump supporters where they live and work, does that encourage an honest answer? or any answer?

      I give polls 10 years at most.

  2. It’s something in the water, and the wall-to-wall coverage the far end of the (D)s, plus the “mid-terms always flip the House and often the Senate.” And I’m irked that CA donors are funding a TX federal senate candidate, Beto (formerly Robert) O’Rourke.

      1. I’ve been sending monthly since he announced. Beto O’Rourke needs beating like a red-headed stepchild.

    1. I used to be annoyed at outside the state money and endorsements for Congressional elections. That was until I realized that it doesn’t matter if you elect someone from your state who is going to do what you want them to do but they’re outnumbered by the opposition in Congress. You need the majority in Congress, in both houses, to be doing your will; which means other states races matter to you, and deserve consideration of your support in whatever forms it takes.

      1. It would be nice if at least somewhere around half the donations raised come from in-state though. I think our current senator is getting around 15% at the moment.

      2. This is why my California money went to Cruz – with DiFi and The Kamela, I don’t really have a Senator, so I’m outsourcing the job they won’t do.

        1. and soon DeLeon, because apparently Fineswine isn’t anti-gun enough for them anymore.

  3. As long as Senate remains controlled by Republicans, not end of world if Democrats take power in House. Two years of Dems passing crazy bills that will never be ratified in Senate would be no bad thing for 2020 elections.

    It is astonishing how left wing have lost their minds because of Trump, the maladjusted progressives have taken over Dems party and they are going to let their freak flag fly.

    1. As spineless as the Republicans currently in power are, I really don’t see how much of a difference it will make if Democrats take control of House and Senate.

      1. Just the house will mean impeachment. And when the economy is tanked it will usher in Obama 2.0. We will see federal agents lining conservatives afainst tge wall and executing them in my lifetime.

        1. They would need a super majority, because Trump would do like Clinton and just ignore an impeachment, they need the supermajority to actually remove him from office. They aren’t going to get the supermajority this election. And frankly the Republicans in Congress already act like the Democrats are in charge, they let them run the show and set the agenda.

          I don’t really like Trump, he is way too liberal, which is why I didn’t support him in the primaries. On the other hand he does actually have a backbone. He is too liberal and supports liberal policies I am against, but I can at least trust him to stand fairly firm and not buckle to a little pressure from the Democrats. The current crop of gutless Republican congressmen are certainly not capable of doing that. So they aren’t sending anything useful to Trump’s desk. Frankly I figure there wouldn’t be a lot of difference if they lost the majority, because Trump would veto the truly outrageous bills the Dems can’t get through congress now, and most of what he would sign would likely make it through now, because the Republicans already cave to the Democrats constantly.

          1. The two troubling facts in this round are 1. You put a lot of trust in Republican senators that there won’t be 20 senators that would cross the aisle at the greivous crimes uncovered of not berating PootyPoot at a press conference after trying to get somewhere on points of agreement and obstruction of justice via tweet.
            2. Trump does have the danger of being a dealmaker. Democrats have gotten poison pills in before and write the bill right they could get even amnesty thru him. Never mind we’ll be still on omnibus bills that will be chock full of bad but shutdown bad.

          2. ” And frankly the Republicans in Congress already act like the Democrats are in charge, they let them run the show and set the agenda.”

            Which is why impeachment will succeed. Don’t think Republican and Democrat; think Ruling Class vs Ruled.

        2. Dude, you are seriously getting yourself worked up into doing something stupid. The scenario you’re proposing is about as likely as Bernie Sanders suddenly developing a clue about economics.

          1. 10 years ago the idea of government health care was a concern. Two years later every insurance plan was defined by the govt and a huge chunk was paid for by or bought through them. Even just one year ago pols had to couch amnesty in ‘we will make sure to enforce now’. Today they straight up admit that there should be no US border and that we need to pay for anyone that can scrape together a coyote or plane ticket. Republicans have no excuse as to the last omnibus that again blew the margins. The Repubican senate has decided that the executive branch can make treaties with terror nations but not put tariffs on countries whose economy is dependent on ip theft. The Republican house says that you must listen and believe any amnesty claim and that domestic abuse in Honduras requires more support than abuse in Fairfax.

            I see the Republicans rolling over as more likely than not. Only thing that tempers it is Garland.

    2. “Two years of Dems passing crazy bills that will never be ratified in Senate would be no bad thing for 2020 elections ”

      They aren’t interested in passing bills. They will take control of the comittees and start “oversight” which will consist of hauling anyone who agrees with President Trump and smearing them with leaked information. If the smearees refuse to appear, they will issue subpoenas, and they do in fact have the authority to have people arrested for “contempt of Congress”. The GOPe won’t use that power; the Democrats most certainly will.

  4. Doesn’t matter. Assume we’re behind. Work to close the gap. If we ARE behind, we pull out a victory. If we’re ahead, we add to the margin of victory.

    Crush the liberals, see the Dems driven before you, and hear the lamentation of the media. (and check out the “Conan, the Musical” YouTube video)

    1. Oh so much this. Pull it off or at least get damn close to put some (more) fear into the opposition… or knock that ball not just out of the park into orbit and make ’em feel like they’ve not only lost, but lost forever.

      Ultimate success will be when Democrats start burning effigies of Karl (Rat-Bastige) Marx. Ox not holding breath.

      1. Heh. Maybe I should make a good effigy of Marx, torch it and take pictures. Then post it anonymously on various social media with a caption of, “Marx Lied and Betrayed Us All. Capitalism is really the way to go!”

            1. Actually, trademarking it, like Pat Riley did with “Threepeat” might be what needs to be done.

              1. At first I was sort of irked anyone did that. But then I realized… by doing so, he made sure anyone else would NOT be nearly as annoying lest they have to pay him, so it’s win after all. Irritation reduction via the harnessing of greed! A seriously cool hack.

      1. This is actually why I appreciate Glenn Reynold’s “Don’t get cocky” advice — it’s a reminder that, even though things may look good for us, we shouldn’t get complacent.

        I have on occasion suggested to Democrats that they *should* get cocky, because I want them to be convinced they are going to win, and that they might as well stay home….

        1. It’s also very important to keep control of state governments, because the Democrats have made clear that if they get control they are going to rig the system to favor Democrats through things like jungle primaries, ranked voting, and gerrymandering (which in usual doublespeak fashion will be called anti-gerrymandering).

        2. Alpheus they got cocky. Witness the presidential 2016 election cycle. Her annoyingness wasn’t even really bothering to campaign as she had it in the bag. In addition 8 years of the Lightbringer brought with it State Legislatures that are almost uniformly red but for the die hard states. We need to hold on to those until 2022 at which point things get ugly. With thanks to a local politician Elbridge Gerry who first applied the idea gainfully in the U.S.A (my current residence lies in the heart of the dreaded Gerrymander).

          1. A couple of weeks ago, someone on Sarah’s blog made a list of all the scandals that prevented Hillary from getting the Presidency.

            I can’t remember why I didn’t respond to that particular comment, but I wanted to add, in addition to all that,

            (1) Hillary convinced herself that she could win Arizona (if I recall correctly), and spent a lot of time campaigning there.

            (2) She brushed off cries for help in States she expected to win (Wisconsin and Michigan, if I recall correctly, among others) because she was 100% confidence she wouldn’t lose those States.

            For all this talk about swing States having an inordinate amount of influence on the Electoral College, Hillary proved that (1) swing States aren’t all that predictable — they change from election to election, and (2) you misjudge which States are swing States at your peril.

            So, Hillary lost in part because she was too arrogant to listen to her lieutenants, who were asking for reinforcements.

            1. There was only one scandal. PootyPoot reached thru the net, held a gun to voters heads and made them vote trump. Otherwise it would have been a 50 state landslide donchano.

              But Trump gets two scoops ice cream when guests get one.

    2. Our GOPe congress critter (Greg Walden, the only R congressman in Oregon) mightily pissed people off when he endorsed another establishment type–one who tried running as “a principled conservative”–on the Democrat ticket after washing out in the R primary.

      He’s running a bunch of TV and radio ads; IIRC more than in the past when he was relatively safe. He’s still not showing much in our area due to the above…

      We voted against him in the primary, but to be safe, we’ll vote for the clown in the general. Still, we haven’t forgotten. There’s another primary in 2020.

  5. In 1994 we had the Contract with America–a genius move on Gingrich’s part which turned what is normally 435 local races into a national one. We also had pro-Second Amendment people energized by the passage and signing into law of the Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban, this when the move to shall issue on carry licenses was just gaining momentum.

    This isn’t 1994. As you say, I don’t think there’s a historical parallel for what we have now. I will tell you this, though, there are at least some people who opposed Trump going in not because they did not like what he promised, but because they didn’t believe his promises. A lot of those people are going to switch sides all right, from “not Trump” to “Let’s keep this going.” I know, because I are one of them. 😉

    1. I too did not believe Trump’s promises. My vote was premised on him not being Hillary Clinton – not that it counted here in Illinois in terms of how the electoral college votes were cast.

      There are always historical parallels for what we have now. I’m just not sure which of the parallels are likely to hold – for example, we may be looked at a 1970 style election where the Republican party (which holds the Presidency) loses some seats. A ’72 style election (post Watergate) would be a disaster for Republicans. Flip side, a 1934 (support for New Deal policies) or 1998 (reaction to indictment of Clinton) style election would possibly see the Republicans actually pick up seats on a net basis.

      Predictions are hard, especially about the future and now there is a significant population which won’t agree to talk to pollsters.

      1. As I put it, ‘Trump got my vote, but I wasn’t so much voting for him as against Hillary.’ and he wasn’t what I expected…. and that’s a good thing. He has, so far, turned out far better than I had expected/imagined/feared.

        Really, I was sort of expecting an LBJ kind of mess.. which would still be a nasty mess, but not a Clinton mess.

        1. Yeah. He’s still not a completely known quantity and everything might still go very badly (or not), and sure, Hillary was completely predictable… but I’m still far happier dealing with uncertainty and still glad that She Lost.

        2. I’ll throw in with the “voting against Hillary” crowd. And Trump has turned out better than I expected. Unfortunately he has also stood by some of the stuff he campaigned on which I didn’t agree with (attempting to keep campaign promises is almost unheard of in a politician, and I’m impressed, not mad that he has done so. Still if it is an issue I am at odds with I’m not necessarily happy that he has stood firm on it) such as ‘fixing’ or ‘replacing’ Obamacare rather than repealing it. I was livid with most Republicans because while Trump ran on ‘fixing’ it almost all other Republicans ran on repealing it. I don’t blame Trump for continueing to want to fix or replace it after being elected, that is what he promised to do while campaigning after all (which was one major reason I didn’t support him) . On the other hand all the Republicans who ran on repealing it and then changed their tune as soon as the votes were tallied and they won reelection? Yeah, they made me spitting mad.

          His stance against the NRA and his support and signing of additional gun control laws after Parkland was totally predictable from looking at his record of support for gun control in the past. I can’t really be mad at him for staying true to his record, but again it is a reason why I didn’t support him in the primaries.

          I would have been much happier with a more conservative President. But I have been fairly impressed with both Trump’s spine and his continued support for policies that he campaigned on. He’s what we got to work with and has turned out better than I expected. More liberal than I would wish, but again, no surprise, I knew that long before he was elected. At least he seems fairly trustworthy to at least give a wholehearted attempt to follow through on his promises. Which frankly makes him more predictable than everybody seems to think he is.

      2. I believed the Senate would hold Trump to his promise about who he would nominate to the Supreme Court. That counted for a lot.

        I didn’t expect him to try so hard to keep the rest of his campaign promises. In retrospect, you don’t usually succeed in business if you keep breaking your promises, and Trump is treating his campaign promises the same way he did his business ones.

        1. And what I find especially impressive is that he’s managed to follow through on so many of them, while facing near-total opposition from the rest of the government every step of the way.

          1. The one thing I find troubling about that is it indicates just how badly power has become concentrated in the Presidency, relative to Congress.

              1. if the Federal government was reduced in size and scope back to its proper constitutional role and function, then controlling it would not be such a big deal, and there would be no reason for the mass amounts of lobbying money spent on it to try to buy favors. Limited government is the solution to so many of the problems. Big Government is the disease and Limited Government is the cure.

                1. The only caveat is that the federal government has failed at its core duty of national defense. We have heen under invasion for most if my life, with it rising exponentially over past 4 years. National defense and borders are one of the few enumerated powers given to the federal government. Diplomacy be the second, another area where the feds have given away the store to China and others. The current US Economic performance is based on the kabuki of money going around with no creation of product and the production of spyware like google and facebook. Won’t take much to smother oil.

                  Even if you removed everything from the feds that doesn’t belong the country be heading off the precipice.

                    1. Assuming you’re referring to illegal immigration, indications are that it’s started to turn around, and that any appearance of continuing to increase is just due to all the media attention it’s gotten because of Trump.

                    2. I’m assumign that is what he is referring to. Actual numbers say it declined and stayed down during the obama admin until he executive ordered the DREAM act.

                  1. And those core, constitutionally enumerated powers are what the Federal government should be doing, and doing so much better; protecting the borders, dealing with other nations, etc In other words protecting our ability to live as free people

            1. Well, an awful lot of that concentration happened during the Clinton and especially the Obama administrations. Maybe not a big percentage overall, but a largish scoop of shit on top. And much of itmwas done with scant attention to legal nicities, so (as the Left is discovering) Trump can defend undoing it by pointing out that it was illegal in the first place.

              1. I’ll also add, a large part of what he’s doing is reversing Obama’s acts of fiat. Live by the pen and phone, fail by the pen and phone, and all that.

                Hopefully that will make future presidents more cautious about pinning their legacy on things that can be done, and hence undone, by a swipe of their successors’ pen.

        2. I’d say his work to keep his campaign promises to the best of his abilities speaks strongly of Trump actually having a strong core of integrity. Sure he’ll try to get out of a bad deal if he can; but he’ll pay up, in full, if you stick to your guns on it. And notice, if he runs into opposition that he can’t get any traction on for one of his promises, he tables that and works on the other ones, but he doesn’t give up on the stalled ones, he just bides his time until he can push it a little farther later.

          That’s actually the strategy the progressives have been using for the past 7 decades on a lot of their issues.

          1. He’ll pay up if you have a *contract*. Anything not in writing doesn’t actually exist. (Which is why it’s sort of funny watching people freak out about his loose talk in early stages.)

            He seems to have honestly related what *his* priorities were when making his campaign promises, rather than spouting a list of things he thought people wanted to hear but that he didn’t care about.

            The difference, maybe, between Romney and crew talking about how tax cuts aren’t a message that appeals to the 47% of people who don’t pay income tax, and Trump directing his tax cut talk at middle and lower classes and making it sound like a really good idea.

            1. how tax cuts aren’t a message that appeals to the 47% of people who don’t pay income tax,

              The funny part about that is… if that 47% work, then they are paying income tax. The fact that they get a refund equal to or greater than the amount they paid doesn’t register with them as “not paying taxes”, even if, technically, net, they didn’t pay anything.

              And this is how you can tell that Romney, et al, fail at the “talking to normal people” just as much as the Democrats do.

              1. Even if I get it all back at the end of the year (which I don’t); it still amounts to an interest free loan of the money to the government for the year.

                1. We try to pay both fed & state in April every year. Mean it’s an interest free loan to us 😉 Note “try”. Had years where we’d pay the feds & get money back from the state, not change a thing & the next year we’d get money back from the feds & pay the state. Didn’t change anything because they balanced. Whatever we owed one we were getting paid near that amount from the other. Now that we’re retired, hubby may need to up the withholding on the feds & lower it on the state, or start filing quarterly to the feds. We’ll see how the fed tax cuts actually affect us this year.

                2. But since it’s taken off the check before the money is in your hands, the majority don’t see it that way. Meanwhile you get caterwauling that even if someone pays no income tax they pay fica and sales tax so it’s mean to not give them money in tax reforms.

                  1. Sales Tax???

                    Sorry. Couldn’t resist. It was fun working in Oregon, for clients in WA & CA. They’d call that something new that didn’t have an option for Sales Tax or even Use Tax. Or just how to change the rate because of legislative changes. Since the call was always a panic one, my response was always “what’s sales tax?” Anyone who knew me & knew where the company was located, response was “ha ha, …” Newer client staff essentially said “What?!?!”, upon which my response would be “Uhhh, you know where we are located right?”, upon hearing “Oregon”, their response mirrored the “ha, ha, …!”

          2. And in retrospect, that is apparently what he has always done.

            The sad thing is that, if Congress on either party’s side had any real bargaining skills, they could be getting all sorts of goodies for and from Trump. But they are not working or keeping any agreements, so why not bypass them? They want to be bypassed because they are lazy. (Or blackmailed, or bought.)

      3. Trump was my third choice. The first folded under opposition, and the second kept doing establishment tricks that didn’t set right with me. That settled me on DJT, and he’s the first politician we ever directly gave money to. Paraphrasing Lincoln’s words on Grant: (I’ll keep him; he fights.)

        1. He was my last choice of the Republican field. Though I’d have voted for him over Bernie, I didn’t have to struggle much to vote for him over Hillary (and didn’t flirt with the idea of Gary over much while doing it.) And I know people who would have voted for Bernie had he gotten the nomination. (An utterly ineffective president isn’t the worst thing that could have happened.)

          I know people who’s final choices were more neck in neck than that and did go ahead and vote for Gary Johnson, though possibly because they really didn’t think that Trump could win anyway.

    2. Trump was making some promises I like.

      I simply have no trust in him.

      I trust the modern Democrats to try to do things that are worse. Most of my current fears regarding Trump is the damage he may do to the cause of opposing the Democrats. I think he is too much like the Democrats of fifty years ago, and of the New Deal.

      1. IMO Comparing Trump to the Democrats of 50 years ago is a Good Thing.

        The Democrats of 50 years ago were better than the current Democrats. 😉

          1. Trump is a straight line JFK Democrat all the way down the line, and the mainstream Democrats want him beheaded.

            Jus’ sayin’.

          2. “Trump is a JFK Democrat” Very largely, in terms of policy. But Trump doesn’t curry favor with academic intellectuals in the way that JFK did, and they resent it a lot.

            1. Trump did not hold meetings at his house with weird liberal theologians, just to see how his family could avoid basic Catholic moral teachings. Advantage: Trump.

      2. I expected him to
        1. Not be Clinton
        2. Make leftists go bonkers in amusing ways.

        I have to give him both, though the second was drops in the ocean next to the unamusing ways.

        1. Oh Trump is definitely NOT Clinton, and much that that would have entailed. (We wouldn’t have gotten a Justice Neil M. Gorsuch from her.)

          As for making leftists heads spin and sputter he is doing a rather good job, isn’t he?

    3. I am also moving from “voting against HRC, but not for Trump” to “voting FOR Trump” rather than just against his opponent.

        1. “I am also moving from “voting against HRC, but not for Trump” to “voting FOR Trump” rather than just against his opponent.”


      1. Trump is not my perfect candidate. I don’t ever expect to see that. In many ways he has proved potentially better than I hoped. Only time will tell if he can pull it off the shake up he is attempting.

    4. This is going to be the theme for 2020. In 2016, Trump was a gamble. In 2020, he’ll be running as the incumbent – and with a track record of solid accomplishment. Yes, he’s got some habits that make a lot of folks grind their teeth, but he’s delivered where it counts.

      And against this, the Dems seem likely to field another superannuated leftist who the voters have rejected.

      Quite aside from the potential for Trump to get tired of the antics and start prosecuting people for 18 USC Section 2384. Seditious Conspiracy. Carries a 20 year sentence. 🙂

      1. is that the Democrat Establishment pulled the rug out from under the ‘superannuated leftist’ their rank and file seemed to prefer. Ok, maybe it wasn’t quite that clear cut, but it looks that way. Instead they went with a superannuated (arguably criminal) member of The Club. So the first issue is, will they try THAT again, or will they go for a Far Left Loon? They haven’t got any Nationalist Populists, thiugh they might try to brand one of their own.

        Have they learned ANYTHING? For that matter, will they genuinely try for the Presidency or will they concentrate on holding on to power within their Party?

        I think most of their available paths are losers (as regards the General Election, anyway), but it will be interesting to see which way they jump.

      2. Actually, that sounds like a good campaign message.

        Donald Trump – a President with a track record of solid accomplishment.
        Donald Trump – he delivered where it counts.
        Donald Trump – the President America needs for 4 more years.

  6. I, too, voted for him by reason of NOT being Clinton…and have been more than surprised. And sure, while I’m not pleased about the whole porn star thing (in large part because Dude, what the hell? I’m a heterosexual woman, so I don’t get it…but who in their right mind would cheat on someone who looks like Melania??? Especially with someone who looks like THAT????), but the point of it is–and that the dems entirely fail to grasp–he did not do this while he was the president and he was not abusing a position of power with a starry-eyed twenty year old intern.

    Also, he’s not an actual rapist. Oh, sure, ‘accusers’ were trotted out of the woodwork early on…but I find it telling that they have melted away to nothing, whereas the women who originally accused Billy Boy of rape have not gone away. Trump may be a bit rude and crude (especially when he has an expectation of speaking in private to another person, rather than being recorded), but that’s a long way away from being an actual rapist.

    And while early on I felt that maybe his staff/family/whatever should take his Twitter privileges away, I know strongly suspect he’s doing it on purpose, because it sets the media idiots screaming their heads off every damn time and lets him get on with things in the background.

    Basically, this is not only shaping up to be a lot better than I thought it would be, it’s also become massively entertaining.

    1. Me too — initially I was bothered by his Tweets, but then somebody pointed out that he uses Twitter on the media the way I use the laser pointer on the car. Now I just sit back and enjoy watching them chasing that moving red dot.

      1. I still dislike the tweets. I would probably prefer the possibility that they are calculated information warfare against the media, but am concerned he may genuinely be very erratic. But the media in their efforts to impeach him have shown themselves to be at least as untrustworthy and inconsistent with reality.

        1. I think many of the tweets lower the dignity of the office he holds… on the other hand, it’s fun to see him keep tapping the fish tank.

          1. I’m not happy with the tweets…but they are such a magnificent smokescreen for the work getting done, and yeah, OK, watching the press and pundits chase them like a terrier with a squirrel… yeah.

          2. I’m not thrilled with the tweets. But I don’t think the dignity of the office could suffer any greater than what it’s already been put through. Actions speak much louder than mere words to me.

            1. I prefer the tweets to the way previous Republican Presidents have had to fight to get their message through the hostile media. Careful ‘statesmanlike’ pronouncements that the media could chop to bits didn’t work worth a damn for either Bush. Reagan had a way of going over the heads of the media, but they weren’t quite so out-of-the-closet then. I’m not sure it would work now, even if Trump was as good a speachmaker as Reagan was.

              The tweets don’t seem to distract Trumo from first issues, and they work.

          3. > lower the dignity of the office

            I might have agreed, if the office had had any dignity for at bare minimum the last century (I don’t know enough earlier US history to say about before).

            1. The office had some dignity when George Washington held it.

              Some folks like to trot out quotations from the political feuds of his immediate successors. One of them called another a hermaphrodite.

              Later on, Andrew Johnson was nearly impeached because of feuding over his policy positions. One man’s vote was all that saved him from removal from office for the ‘high crime’ of having different opinions.

                1. aacid, if you weren’t a regular, I’d wonder if you were a troll.
                  I say again, check your emotions. You’re viewing things through a weird filter.

                  1. Will see if being away helps or if family breaks me more. But tbh the emotions driven more by the daily poor news that does not matchup with what I thought of as reality.

                    Not trying to troll but I’ve been rolled on being hopeful in all but two elections in my life.

                    1. She’s right.

                      GDP growth 4.1% after we were told 2.5% was unattainable
                      Unemployment lowest in 17 years.
                      Black unemployment lowest on record
                      EU lowering trade tarriffs.
                      ANWR opened to development
                      Illegal Immigration down significantly
                      Manufacturing jobs coming back to the U.S.

                      There’s more, but that’s what I could remember and verify easily.

                    2. I’ve been rolled on being hopeful in all but two elections in my life.

                      Understandable. And it’s probably still going to be the case that all the rest of them will go back to their old ways of promising whatever will get them elected and then refusing to take their constituents’s calls when they make it to Washington.

                      But think of it this way: you know you can’t trust what they say (whether “they” is politicians or the news media) so you have to dig a bit and find out what they actually do. You can trust (for good or ill) what they do.

        2. I haven’t had much use for the so-called dignity of the office since–for my own living memory–Bill Clinton. If I were to include pre-1980 presidents in that, then I’d say, at the very least, LBJ and Jimmy Carter likewise lowered the dignity of it all. (And I could go all the way back to Andrew Jackson, who was utterly appalling in personality, habits, and policy.)

          I’ve never bought entirely into the idea of “well, you don’t have to respect the man, but you should respect the office” because what the man (or woman) does while holding that office has a direct impact on the dignity, reputation, and integrity of that office. And by this late stage, the office is awfully battered and stained thanks to far too many holders’ caring only for the power of it.

      2. Joining the “Me too” line.

        Voted for Trump because
        * Not a Clinton
        * Clinton’s had turned on their “friendship”

        Wasn’t a fan of his morals, hey people he’s on his 3rd wife. Sure the other wife’s got good settlements, I’m sure, but come on, $$$ aren’t as good as if they’d stayed married to the guy, let alone the “where are they?”. As already pointed out what has been alleged keeps fading away to nothing, even then what I heard being shrilled is “I threw myself at him, he took, & then didn’t call in the morning.” See, morals above.

        Twitter. I thought he & his handlers were nuts. Now, I agree, it is like lazer’s for the cat or “squirrel”, to the left.

        1. I have to concede that while his abilities as a husband appear to be something of a train-wreck, he seems to have done a decent job of parenting: his children are not and have never been tabloid installments. I’m sure they have their issues, but overall they seem to be a low key bunch who, if they do get into trouble, do it in private.

          1. His kids are a credit to his & their mother’s parenting. Good start.

            One can’t take all the blame if a kid goes wrong. One can’t take all the credit when they turn out great either, but the latter they can take credit for the foundation. He provided great foundations.

            1. Definitely. I mean, I’ve seen some awesome parents who still had some kids who chose to go very bad (or at least very stupid)…but that was because they chose to. The foundations were there.

      3. What I’m uncomfortable with is not the tweeting: the ‘stray voltage’ tactic works and the ‘I wanna be offended’ crowd deserves it. I worry that he’s running it out out of only his head – it’s very high risk. You go with the people you have, though,

      4. I’m not sure how one safely uses laser pointers on a car. I’m hoping your car is a mistyped “cat”, yes?

    2. I think Trump and his staff understand Twitter a whole lot more than most people in the world. Sure, it superficially looks like he’s just shooting his mouth off. But look a the timing, look at the effects. Are they supportive? Are they a distraction and misdirection for something else going on? Who’s he trying to build up? Who’s he trying to make look bad? If Trump were a used care salesman, I’d be scared to go into his dealership; because he’d probably convince me to buy one even if I didn’t need it.

      1. I think he’s a stage magician. Which with all his tv experience, makes a lot of sense to me. “Look at me waving a handkerchief in my right hand and not at me palming the rock with my left!” Or in Pres. Trump’s case “Look at my tweet and not at my Executive Order!

        1. Hopefully turning into, hey proggie, it was a cape not a handkerchief and you missed the sword but it didn’t miss you. So sorry, not.

      2. I’ve been saying for a while: At this point theories which deny that “Trump is playing four-dimensional chess” need to give some extraordinary evidence to back up the claim.

        Something on the order of “Donald Trump’s mother’s maiden name was Teela Brown”.

        1. That’s what Scott Adams has been saying about him since a year before the election.

        2. The exact opposite is true, IMO. There’s been enough own goals that I’m worried we’re going to end up with 1992 redux.
          Good night, given how bughouse nuts the Dems have been lately, the GOP should be prepping for a sweeping victory in November. Right now, the question is whether the relative balance of power will remain unchanged in the Senate.

  7. In past administrations I would kind of hope the R’s lose control of the House, because then nothing would happen. But lately change has actually been for the good, so now I don’t know.

    Kind of weird, though, that the D strategy is to ask for help to make everybody miserable and destroy the country.

    1. yep. You have to understand, it’s a bubble. They think everyone hates America as much as they do, and that everyone wants “the rich” punished.

      1. Well, I DO want rich liberals punished. A hearty dose of the tax whip would do the country a world of good.

      2. But because we were smart enough to plan for our retirement beyond SS, & the kid’s college, they think we’re rich. Never mind that neither of us ever made 6 figure salaries; nor netted such to pay taxes on, combined; & we’re on standard deduction even with house interest & taxes.

        1. The definition of rich used is someone who makes more than average, isn’t a government employee, and doesn’t give enough protection money. Just as the dem definition of middle class is “govt worker making 75k plus bennies.”

          1. That’s just it. Individually we didn’t make more than average (for the area), below average for the State, & nationally. BUT out of what we made, we paid ourselves first, kid’s education second, paid our bills, saved some more, spent our discretionary funds on what we could afford.

            Now were those discretionary funds put into a reusable RV instead of European or Mexican vacations or cruises? Maybe.

            1. Thats even worse. To the government, By being self sufficient you denied a real person of a job in the government doling out benefits to the red state subhuman masses.

            1. It’ll hurt the slaves not of the government gentry. The workers and their politicians will not lose a cent.

              1. When that crash comes how will the voters respond? Probably take it out on the elected officials. Unfortunately, it will be whoever is the elected officials at the time, and not the ones who saddled the state with the prodigious unfunded liabilities. Meanwhile there will be a great demand that the federal government bail Illinois out. That probably would lead to more voter anger, on a national scale. Depending who is in power and on how it is handled it might be what is needed to create a much needed change.

                1. When it comes to unfundable government pensions, what’ll happen is the voters will scream fix or else and the only fix without a fed bailout is to cut the pensions. So the pensions will be cut and the recipients who try to sue will be told “sovereign immunity”. The Sheep Look Up/No Blade of Grass.;)

                  1. Yes. They’ll cut pensions. But the ones they will hurt will be those like mom. Not the Belottii’s of the public pensions. They’ll scream that 1% is not enough reduction for mom’s ($5), & something like $1000 is too much to take from Belottii for all that the deduction #’s represent 1%. Personally I think there should be a maximum you can draw regardless of what you have earned or put into the system. Like SS.

      3. Have you seen the video? The way the Twitter employees “know” it is all bots is that “no one likes America”, and no one would ever talk like that.

        Hence why they all need a good shadowbanning.

    2. Yeah, all the lefties shouting about how they are hoping the economy crashes and things get bad for people just so they can get elected is a little head scratching. That may be stuff you talk to your team about in the back room, not something you spout off in public, on TV or at the podium.

      1. They just point to “i hope he fails”. As to why they want the people in the economy (their enemies) to be hurt, its partly from anger but part tactics. The greatest damage is often done in the wake of crises. The depression, great recession, etc.

        1. Remember that the left’s goal is the “fundamental transformation of America”. They have openly advocated overwhelming deficit spending on social programs and expanding government as a way to bankrupt it in order to force “revolutionary change” (Cloward-Piven strategy), and since that time have only continued to pursue their goal. The only difference now is that the mask is coming off much more often and their Marxist roots are being exposed. The only difference between then and now is they have added the poisonous identity based neo-Marxism of Critical Race Theory to the mix, because classic communism of the Soviet Union doesn’t sell as well. They are willing to use the skin of private enterprise to achieve their goals, but they view private individuals and instruments as mere tools of the state, and they do so in pursuit of international socialist goals. Thus, they are using Fascist methods to achieve Communist goals. Throw the race/identity based aspect in the mix, and Communazi is a perfectly appropriate moniker for their ideology.

        1. And it isn’t even as if they deliberately TOOK the masks off. They started gibbering and shaking like so many palsey sufferers and the masks are hanging off their ears and chins.

  8. 2016 proved one thing beyond a doubt; political polls are absolutely, 100% useless in predicting an election. Instead, they are a means of manipulation. Either encouraging one group, or sowing discouragement in the opposition. Just like Phantom says, propaganda.

    If the polls say we’re losing, then it’s time to dig in and work harder and smarter. if the polls say we’re winning and it’s already a lock, then it’s time we all showed up to ensure it’s a landslide. Because that’s what happened in 2016; the Dems thought they had it all sewn up, and didn’t get 100% of the turnout they needed. We need to prove we’re smarter than that.

    As I was saying over in PJ, has President Trump been using the White House or Oval Office as a brothel like Bill did? I doubt it. Is President Trump offering visitors special cigars? Not hardly. If he’s not doing the bad behavior, then he doesn’t have to lie about not doing bad behavior, unlike former Pres W.J.C.

    Another point is that while apparently Mr. Trump or his attorneys have paid off his previous partners for their silence, and usually quite generously, and ultimately from Mr. Trump’s personal finances, not his campaign finances; Mr. Clinton never did any such thing. In fact, both Clintons were all about coercion and threats to the victims of Bill’s sexual appetites.

    Does Trump say things that aren’t true? Heck yes. It’s part of his style to go from the absurdly untrue to what’s real and workable. The question should be, does Trump tell you lies that he wants you to beleive are really true? Compared to Big O and the C’s; Trump is a bastion of honesty.

    Dr. Jerry always said, “Despair is a sin.” Fight the despondency by being prepared. No matter what happens between now and November, make sure you’re registered to vote. Get your like-minded friends and neighbors to register too. Read or listen to multiple sources on both sides before making your decisions (Because even the media on the Right isn’t always truthful.). Make damn sure that you get to the polls and mark your ballots on election day; and offer your like-minded neighbors a ride there and back too.

    1. Polls aren’t actually useless, but most national polls have severe limitations when it comes to predicting presidential outcome or control of Congress, largely due to insufficient granularity and sample size.

      1. (Ding) That. The national polls were fairly accurate. The problem was that no one really checked up on Michigan, Wisconsin, and Penssylvania.

        1. The exact reason I dislike the ‘polls are wrong’ hope coatrack. Usually hit within margin of error unless something is badly skewed in turbout model. That’s been the case for the past few special elections. The district polls are showing poor shape, most of the reps couldn’t care because they’re headed for no show patronage jobs, and between tge bureaucracy, media and even just a dem house if you think theyre screaming scandal now, just wait.

          It’s not just about getting Trump. It is about harming anyone that even thinks of helping a non-annointed candidate, and reminding us slaves that we are worthless and disposable.

  9. > our system has checks and balances built in.

    Our system also has the built-in assumption of fair elections.

    My county used to have big cardboard ballots, which you marked with a big felt tip pen and dropped into a box. Periodically, an election official would, in clear sight of everyone, open the box, take out the ballots, and carry them to one of the card tables of volunteers, ususually senior citizens, who then sorted and counted the votes and marked them down on yellow legal tabets. These were periodically passed up to the senior polling official, who periodically tallied them up and phoned the results in to Little Rock. You could walk around and look over their shoulders and count along if you wanted; that’s what the system was designed for.

    Then a couple of decades ago, the Voting Commission, which is one of those appointed bodies that doesn’t seem to actually be accountable to anyone at all, decided that we MUST have electronic voting machines, and of course chose as their provider the company with the worst record of security and accuracy in the business… there’s no oversight or anyone responsible for their security, and I never managed to find out where the money to purchase them came from…

    I make my selections on the touch screen, but whether my vote is going anywhere past that, there’s no way to tell.

    “Polls Show Americans Are Disillusioned With the Election Process!”

    “Gee, you think?”

    1. You think you’re in bad shape? Colorado went all mail as soon as the dems seized the senate first time in 34 years. Because it’s “cheaper.” Yeah, it’s much cheaper for them to cheat. Easier too.

    2. We have paper ballots that are read by an optical reader. It feels a bit like sliding your ballot into a paper shredder, but that’s because I’m weird.

      But the voter puts the ballot in the machine and you can see the read out of what number your ballot was. I don’t think that there’s another step to counting the votes. You’d think it was instant. But otoh, we did have boxes of ballots go missing a few years ago and a delay in getting the state results, so who knows.

      1. With our old system the counting was done at the precinct level; the ballots were never out of public sight.

        The only excuse they ever gave for the electronic machines was that they were “faster”, but the counting always got done by the statutory midnight cut-off without them…

        1. I wrote software for 35 years & you’d have to: Prove It Too Me first. Good luck with that.

          Currently dealing with trying to get my insurance to pay for a dental implement that is medical equipment. So far:

          1) request submitted by paper, rejected because it has to be submitted by computer.
          2) Submitted by computer, black hole disappeared.
          3) Resubmitted by computer with assistance of insurance with provider to insure all the correct codes & insurance information where it needs to go & for services receiver (me) insurance #’s. Again. Black. Hole.

          Gave them the 10 days requested, this time logged into insurance online & did chat. FINALLY someone who knows how to dig. Here is the situation as stands:

          1) Provider submit claim with correct codes as verified by insurance provider. 2) Gets validation back through their system as accepted. But NOT by insurance provider although it apparently (haven’t seen it) appears so. But by their software’s clearing house.
          3) Software clearing house upon review is rejecting it because provider is a dental/orthodontist using medical codes, without informing provider. And (apparently) no oversight or ability to over rule software.

          Now provider’s staff is working with 2nd tier software support (after being transferred all over) to solve the problem. Knowing how computer system software systems normally works, my thought is “only 2nd tier?” for what gut tells me is a software upgrade fix. “Oh C&(^%$” this has to go on for another 5 or 6 months before the insurance will issue a waver for paper submission; has to get close to the 12 month filing deadline.

          Before anyone says anything. Item is paid for. Provider owes me money back on what the Insurance pays. Item. Is. Not. Cheap. No, the insurance does not know that, none of their business. Provider wants to see this through as their situation can’t be left this way … but still.

          Rant or Vent (YMMV) over.

          1. I’m getting to the point where I’m actively *ashamed* at my industry and just how awful it is.

            We haven’t learned a *damn* thing in the last 20 years.

            1. Yes. The other extreme can be a problem too. But at least at the last job I worked at you couldn’t say we weren’t responsive or getting to someone who could help right now & get a solution out in a timely fashion was a problem.

              There was no tiered “support”. There was “is it a program” or “is it IT database type”. That is it.

              It also meant that if someone called with a problem you first checked to see if someone else had already called & it was already fixed, & the current caller didn’t have the needed patch.

              It also meant the same programs could get changed a lot. Clients got everyone else’s reported fixes or requested changes, sometimes that was also problematic. But not responsive, oh heck no.

              1. My blogfriend Wonderduck files claim codes for a living. They are always making people work hellish overtime, and the whole computer system has gone down for days, several times. (Which leads to more mandatory overtime, of course….)

            2. There is a book written in 1961, The Mythical Man-Month. When you read it, you realize that we still haven’t moved past the problems Brooks described then.

          2. Wondering if this reaches the level of small claims court? I just find myself thinking insurance companies could be leaving themselves open to a class-action suit by an enterprising lawyer…

            1. Not going to let it go much longer. I’ll give the provider another week to connect with the software provider. If no solution, she can followup on the solution they need on her own & I’ll file as the the insured. Get the paper work from her. Scan it. Then use my account to file it.

    3. Still vote by paper, but at home, then drop off or mail. The external envelope is required to be signed. Vote is still secret but they don’t pull your voted on sheet until signature verified against the registration rolls. Note, even when we were still going to the polls to vote, you signed in. No id was required (that I remember), but you did sign in. Once verified, vote paper is pulled & put in pile to be counted. There is also a secrecy envelope you can put your vote into so no one can see how that signature voted.

      They will call you in for signature validation if it doesn’t match. Hubby & son both have been called in. Their signatures are atrocious & never match.

      Electronic voting. Firmly believe that committed votes should be printed out put into a signed envelope & turned in for electronic vote back up. When printed out, voter then has the chance to yell “foul” if not exactly like they voted. Turned in back up paper votes could be then used if someone calls election foul in general, which likely someone would, so why not use electronic as the backup & printed vote as the real vote. Printed vote would have the advantage of not having ballet marked incorrectly or hanging chads. Unless you are using pre printed ballets then alignment issues are a huge problem. Really have not thought about electronic voting systems, just channeling my experience with any software that has to print information onto pre-printed forms. PIA doesn’t come close to the expression needed.

      1. I used to be a proponent of electronic voting. Then I decided if someone couldn’t be arsed to go to the poll and vote, to hell with them.

        Arkansas has mail-in votes; you have to provide documents proving you’re out-of-state and unable to go to the polls; ie pay stubs or rent receipts from out of state, military orders, etc. Or a document signed by an MD licensed to practice in this state, saying there’s a medical reason you can’t go. (it has to be something on the order of an iron lung, ebola, etc.)

        The Feds said we couldn’t require photo ID at the polls because it’s racist, but there are big fanfold printouts at each polling station. You can only vote at your assigned station, and they cross your name out on the list before you vote. If your name is already crossed out, unfriendly people want to know why.

        Having worn the +10 Spiked Jackboots of security administrator, I’m in favor of all of that…

        I’m sure we have as many illegals as anyone else, but I’m fairly certain none of them are voting unless they’re going through the trouble of stealing the identity of someone already registered to vote. Registration requires a birth certificate or passport.

      2. Vote is not secret. Senile parents and people who are ill get voted for by other people. In addition, it’s much easier to fake thousands of votes.
        TRUST me if we eliminate early voting and voting by mail, the country will realize it’s not divided half and half.

        1. I’m fine with going back to the polls rather than voting by mail. We used to have to sign in. So, if there is already a signature next to your name, you could raise holy heck.

          1. We’ve got books you have to sign, a requirement to show your ID, and paper ballots… that are scanned into a computer for counting.

            It’s that last step that worries me a bit.

        2. I am in favor of limited absentee ballots, such as those for people serving in the military. (We must make every effort to make sure they have access to the vote — they are putting their live on the line for the nation.)

          I like to vote at the polls on voting day, something we still can do here in North Carolina.

          1. Yes, in case of hardship and genuine need, you should be able to vote early or by mail. BUT ONLY THEN.
            I once voted early in NC in the 80s. I had to prove I’d be out of the country on voting day. (Plane tickets.)

        3. It’s amazing how many nursing homes and alzheimer wards are full of lockstep dems.

            1. iirc the East St. Louis, IL fraud was brought to light when someone noticed that the former head of the St. Louis, MO Republican Party had voted in several elections where nearly no or no republican votes were tallied within the district he was registered in.
              Oh, and he’d been dead for all of those elections and never lived in ESL.

        4. I AM NOT FINE with eliminating early voting. More often than not I would have been unable to vote if early voting was eliminated. I see no problem with early voting as done in Idaho. Where for a specified period of time (I think a month) before election day you can go in to the county courthouse, show your picture ID, proving you are a citizen; they’ll look you up on their list of registered voters and you go over to the polling booth, fill out your ballot and when you hand it to them you must sign the list proving you have voted. Everything exactly identical to voting on election day, except with it being at the county courthouse rather than your local precinct. No more chances for fraud than there is on election day voting, no one else can vote your ballot like mail in, and you have to have picture ID to prove you are you.

          As far as I have ever been able to see, attempts to eliminate early voting (as opposed to absentee or mail-in voting) are only effective at eliminating that portion of registered voters who work at jobs where they are not always home and/or available during voting hours on election day.

  10. The Dem election strategy seems completely bat-guano crazy.
    RAISE TAXES! Why? They aren’t running anything out about balancing the budge or reducing the deficit. This seems like an open power grab. And if, as seems likely – the last article I saw on tax revenue was that we were ahead of last year, we end up collecting more in taxes and it gets pointed out I don’t see the populace at large thinking highly of the Dems.

    Abolish Ice! Why? Unless the position is completely ignoring all immigration law, someone is going to have to enforce the laws. Eliminating the department that is currently enforcing most of them just pushes the responsibility off to another agency. Though, consolidating agencies might not be a bad idea. I’d definitely get rid of ATF and DEA. The FBI should be able to screw that enforcement up just as easily as the current agencies.

    I can confidently say that ND’s loan House seat will remain Republican. The Senate seat up for re-election this year is currently held by a Dem, but last poll I saw had her challenger leading by a few points. Seems like every poll taken lately has the Republican challenger gaining and the Dem losing support. I suspect that seat will flip Republican come fall.

    1. Raise taxes – why shouldn’t they. Their constituents either get paid by em, don’t pay them, or have enough money to avoid them.

      ICE – their position is that border patrols are there to welcome, hand them their voter id card and ship them where the democrats want to change the population. Fun fact – nationally ice is now more disliked than liked because of the propaganda campaign.

      They’re running on the Trump Hate filling their base and hoping for people to feel bad about the mean Republican congress not just cancelling the border qnd Trump’s “daily missteps” and “criminality”

      Senate has a safe map for the GOP, even if none of the seats targeted are won there isn’t a huge risk. 2020 has the class of 2014, the year that the reps took the senate. Plus the coattails of presidential elections where the less reliable voters come out. It only took two years for healthcare to get hammered. First bill from a dem congress to dem president will be amnesty and open borders. Say hi to blue texas.

      1. My fear is that even if the GOP keeps the Senate, if Democrats get the House, and thus the Speaker of the House as 3rd in line to the Presidency, the radical leftists will feel free to try to murder both Trump and Pence and install the Democrat as President since they feel that the election was not legitimate, and since Trump/Pence are “evil Nazi’s”, the next logical step is that murder is okay. I mean, they already tried to kill a bunch of Republican Congress Members and have seriously injured several (Steven Scalise, Rand Paul, among others). They think they are in a war that they must win “by any means necessary” and they have made it clear that violence is one of those means.

          1. Maybe Mccain will live long enough to see his beloved federal government carpet bombing those despicable tea party hobbits.

          2. Which the left crazily seems to want and think they can win, notwithstanding that they would be fighting all the people that they have dubbed “gun nuts”. I suspect that they think for some reason the military would support them, which is either delusional or Obama’s officer purge and replacement was far broader than it apparently was (and Obama actively tried to replace officer corps with those who were loyal to him before country and loyal to leftist ideology uber alles).

        1. Yep. Not just them, though. They want all of us either on our knees before them or dead. Just be the politicos first.

  11. I think my take on Trump is different to most. What I trust in him is his basic intelligence and his interstellar sized ego.
    1. He knows politics from dealing with sleazy politicians around the world.
    2. He understands the evils of the regulatory state from dealing with insufferable government regulations on construction projects around the world.
    3. He actually knows how to bargain. I have dealt with dot Indians as a handyman. I think the Indians are possibly genetically prone to haggling. I learned to start from a totally outrageous position so that I could be talked down to a reasonable price. The Donald gets this. I had to work at this. He positively revels in outrageous haggling.
    4. He is a past master at triggering the lame stream media. Sooo many grins at the media’s expense. He is the Twitter President and I genuinely love it.
    5. He wants to go down in history as America’s greatest President. That is where his ego comes in. The great presidents set or changed the course of America. O’whatshisname wanted to fundamentally transform America. Trump want to go down in history as the man who “Made America Great Again”!!! So yes I have my faith in his ego.
    6. Is he a good man? Maybe, maybe not. I don’t care as long as he succeeds at MAGA. I don’t need to personally like him.
    7. A Hillary win would complete the destruction of the SCOTUS. I could not let that happen.

    I started out a Cruzer. I hated the way Trump treated him. But I recognized a will to win that I have never seen in a Republican. Was he a real Republican? I wasn’t sure but gave him the benefit of doubt because he had been swimming in Democrat shark infested NYC waters. His earlier statements and positions were just playing the NYC game.

    Was I worried about him? Hell yeah! But he was the man opposed to the Clinton Crime Family.

    1. I don’t know if he’s a good man either, but I feel confident in at least saying he isn’t an EVIL man. And he, unlike 99% of politicians of the last several generations, appears to grasp the concept of enlightened self interest. Do what’s good for me, but if it’s also good for everyone else, things get even better for me (and everyone else, and no one but lunatics will try to stop me).

      If we were going with D&D alignments…Lawful evil or chaotic neutral AT WORST (and unlikely), and chaotic good at best. :p

      1. Given how he screwed over some of his smaller contractors in the real estate world, Trump may, in fact, be somewhat of an evil man. I didn’t vote for him because I thought he was a good man, in fact. Cheating on your wife (assuming he did so, which I regard as probable at this point … and if he didn’t cheat on his current wife, he clearly did on some of his prior ones) is not the mark of a good man. It was sufficient for me, at least, that he appeared to be less evil than Hillary. I didn’t vote for him in the primaries (my favorites had largely dropped out of the race by the time Illinois voted), but I sure did in the general election (of course, my vote was utterly irrelevant given my home state, but that’s another discussion).

        In a D&D campaign, he’d be the guy who rolled up a chaotic neutral worshiper of Loki/Coyote/the local trickster god in the pantheon whose cleric/worshipper is rather unique – he doesn’t heal and actually plays like a weird combination of illusionist/mesmerist/thief. To put it another way, like Mercy Thompson Hauptman in Briggs’ more recent novels, his superpower is chaos. His opponents end up getting hit by a truck they didn’t even see coming. He’s annoying, brilliant and absolutely unpredictable in some fundamental ways. But with a good GM who knows this guy is coming, you are likely to have one of the more memorable gaming sessions you’ve had in some time – but there is no guarantee your character will actually survive the evening.

        1. “of course, my vote was utterly irrelevant given my home state, but that’s another discussion”

          Yes. My home state too. For all that most the counties voted for Pres. Trump. But by state population percentages, over all state went for you-know-who. Even then technically I got out voted by those in my County too, oh well one of these days … (I can dream).

          1. Arizona was going to go for Trump, while Pima and Santa Cruz Counties, aka Metro Tucson, were going to go for Hillary.

            My little vote for Gary Johnson wasn’t going to make a difference, no matter how much hate the Clintonistas want to hate me fore it.

    2. #7 makes it so there is an awful high bar to reach before I’d actually be *sorry* that he won. The Dem take on the Constitution and judges is fundamentally destructive. I don’t want a judge who will give me what I want if it goes against the Constitution. The Court is the one government body that should be the least susceptible to any sort of emotional bias. It’s their jobs.

    3. Was he a real Republican?

      What is a real Republican at the moment?  It not clear what that is going to be going forward.  Though less obvious than the Democrats at the moment the Republican party is also in flux.  

      Whatever, regarding Trump, I did know was that he wasn’t a good old-fashioned American Progressive.

  12. The thing that gripes me about the Left carrying on about Trump’s ‘morals’ is that not too long ago they were defending Billy-Bob Clinton for BANGING THE HELP; i.e. having sex with someone whose position in society compared to yours makes it difficult to say “No.” And that was a pattern for all of Bubba’s Bimbo Eruptions.

    Trump has affairs with a porn star and a nude model – i.e. two sex-workers – and they have a Cow.

    *falsely sweet voice*

    Sweeties, I have neeeeews for you. I know perfectly well you can’t tell the difference between a mouse and a mastadon, but I (and a lot of my fellow voters) can tell the difference between a jerk and a rapist.

    1. I suspect that womanizing is what Trump does instead of drinking. But if he doesn’t stop himself from the stupid, he does not let it affect his business.

      As a choice of vices, it is better than some. And yes, it sure beats theft, rape, and murder as hobbies.

        1. Trump was sleeping with Marla Maples when he was still married to the first Mrs.Trump. And there were allegedly other women between Marla and Melania, and before Marla.

          It is actually kinda amazing how quiet the media are about the old bits of gossip. (Probably because there are so many old nice comments and inconvenient festive photos of celebrities happily hanging out with Trump.)

          1. I’d have thought that it’s because it’s old news.

            The tabloids in the 80s and 90s were full of Trump’s exploits, so it’s not… news to anyone that he was like this.

            1. Not a surprise to me, either – I used to read The Village Voice, back then – as well as a bunch of other magazines, and OMG, he and Marla and Ivana were a regular fixture in the tabloids and in the VV.
              Kind of a marvel, really – how his exes are extraordinarily civil. The alimony must be generous, and I assume that the divorce settlements also included some kind of cast-titanium steel non-disclosure agreement.
              And his kids all seem quite well-adjusted, functional and rather happy. If their home life growing up had been an absolute train wreck, I’m pretty certain they would have been much less functional as adults.

    2. And the Democrats aren’t actually the worst offenders there. I don’t expect any better from pagan worshipers at the First Church of Marx. No, the people I’m most offended by are the so called conservatives who want to come across with the “no true Christian” would possibly support President Trump. David French or Bill Kristol are prime examples of what ace at Ace of Spades refers to as the Coup-Cucks-Clan.

  13. A rat’s -tiny- hindquarters? Seems to me a rat is half to three-quarters hindquarters … which describes the Left rather conservatively.

  14. About those “average” mid-term election losses … let’s look at the record, eh? Below is a table (sorta kinda — if anybody knows how to get WP ((may it delenda est)) to accept a table, I am not that one) of mid-term losses for the president’s party in the first term mid-term election — the first opportunity the opposition party has to encourage voters’ repudiation of the administration — since JFK’s ascendancy in 1960. The results divide into two groups, normal and “wave” elections:


    Average: 26.9…..13…………….53

    The wave elections occurred on four occasions — initiated by (in order) LBJ’s Vietnam war, Watergate, Hillarycare and Obamacare — with an average loss by the presidential party of 53 House seats. Normal first term mid-year elections, OTOH, averaged a mere 13 seat loss (9.5 seats if we do not exclude George W Bush’s first mid-term, when his party gained> in the post-911 aftermath.)

    It is reasonable to put Reagan’s 1982 mid-term into either column or exclude it altogether as a unicorn event, borne of the horrible MSM and Democrat (But I Repeat Myself) assaults on him and the pain of wringing the Socialism toxins out of the economy.

    Thus, rather than commingling apples and oranges to “find” an average loss of 26.9 House seats — enough to toggle the House to the Dems in 2018 — we are left with the question of whether this years voting will more nearly resemble a “normal” election or a “wave” election.

    I leave that question as an exercise for the Huns Assembled.

    1. Right now numbers were right in the middle. 20-30 seats. Senate 0-2 (trustworthy enough that the RSC pulled ad buys from west virginia since manchin +10). But always varies on what propaganda gets out and is believed. Most people still watch their nightly news which is no less left than cnn or msdnc.

  15. It is unlikely that they’ll notice me, much less mention me, but in light of recent events, I hereby submit my official (and non-negotiable) WorldCon Bio:

    David Langley

    Your attention is appreciated.

  16. My concern right now is what the Left will do if their frustration mounts due to a continuing series of electoral losses. Mind you, I’m not saying that they shouldn’t be dealt a continuing series of electoral losses. But frustration is going to mount. And a number of them have made it clear that they’re quite happy to use pretty much any and all means – including illegal ones – when they can’t get their way legitimately. I’m expecting domestic bombing campaigns. But I’m also concerned about the potential for even worse events to occur.

    1. I’m conflicted. I must say I don’t take the Hobby Protest Left all that seriously. I doubt they really have the stones to do any real street fighting. Not the kind where the street sweepers have to look out for eyeballs afterwards.

      The feral underclass is another matter, but they are very concentrated in Democrat strongholds.

      And then there’s the issue of, what does the Democrat Establishment think it’s doing? I don’t really see the constant agitation as being fruitful in getting undecided votes, which they desperately need to win elections. OTOH it’s a fine tactic for welding the rank and file to them if they suffer losses. I think the way Trump brushed aside the Republican Establishment may have them worried about their positions in their own Party….as I may have said a dozen times before.

      These midterms are going to be interesting.

      1. I think you’re right about the Hobby Protest Left. We have some in the family (oh, the shame of it) and when questioned, they haven’t got the cojones for more than tossing out a glib non-response, after which they run away crying. These people fighting in the streets? No way.

        1. But it was not so long ago that we had the Puerto Rican (funded inadvertently by the Episcopalian Church; they all got on the same heavily funded national committee) and Weather Underground bomber/thugs. And they almost all got off scot free, or were pardoned by Obama.

          1. We’ve already had one attempted assassination that was buried in minutes by the press. Juries have let off activists who beat a man because he was a trump supporter in full view of LE, fire, and EMS. Vandalism, assault and battery and the like are all accepted by the mainstream democrats.

            FALN And WU were at least subversive organizations and were pursued by government. Now the government will support and fund these groups. Already saw fit to fund Al Qaeda back in 2014.

            1. I don’t wear ‘gimme’ hats or political slogans. But if the rabid left attacks me I intend to execute the Istanbull Twist on at least one of the little idiots.

              I wonder how they’ll react to that.

  17. I’ve been trying to describe why people voted for Trump to my (liberal) friends, and they just can’t seem to get it. They can’t get what Trump tapped into and why he is there.

    They can’t get that there’s a lot of people that view the liberal experiment of places like San Francisco as the problem and not the solution.

    I even have a whole rant on this that requires me to hush my audience at least six times before I can finish it. And, they still won’t or can’t get it.

    1. Try something simpler: “They voted for Trump because they hoped he would destroy the Republican party, destroy the Democrat party, and prevent us from having a Clinton presidential dynasty.”

  18. I wouldn’t be so sure about “they’re not acting like their internal polls make them confident either. In fact, they’re acting like it’s the end of the world.” That’s not to say that I think that it is a bad sign either, just that they’d be acting like it’s the end of the world no matter what.

    I’ve a lot of Facebook and real-life friends who are left-wing, including one friend who is trying to immigrate to Canada because of the election. Here’s my best analogy:

    Say that tomorrow you woke up, picked up the newspaper and discovered that both the NRA and the Republican Party had declared that guns should only be in the hands of the police and military and that both organizations were putting all their funds and efforts into repealing the second amendment. Okay, I’m sure that you’d fight, but after two years would you be calm, even if polls suggested that the repeal effort was going to fail? I suspect not — you’d still feel that you were plunged into a dystopian hell.

    I think that that is what is going on in their minds. For all their adult lives, they’ve been told that the Republicans were the party of racist white men, and that demographic changes would eventually destroy them. I remember being told this in 1990 by a professor in a class I was taking. Obama’s election showed (to them) that this actually happened. The media and all their friends said that Hillary was absolutely sure to win. She didn’t even need any positions other than declaring “Its HER turn!”, because the statement that she wasn’t male was all that was necessary and important to distinguish her from the Republicans. And her “deplorable” statement had a severe impact on them as well: nobody wants to admit that the candidate that they supported with all their might made a horrible mistake, even to themselves. So, it was suddenly okay, and GOOD, to declare, and think, that anyone who would vote for Trump was deplorable and evil. Reaching out to anyone on the other side, or compromising, was just not necessary anymore. Or even desirable.

    And then Trump won.

    I think their entire world collapsed on them, and they are not going to calm down. Maybe their internal polls are on their side, but it wouldn’t matter — nothing would make them relax.

    And, to be honest, this is what makes me upset. After all, many of my real-life friends are caught up in this, and it is not a good or productive place to be in. The whole point of politics is supposed to be discussing issues and policies, and they can’t do this because of the hellfire around them. This does not bode well.

    1. Slither, they never discussed the issues. Now they’re unhinged and flat out seeing things that ain’t so. Like “Violence against gays increased under Trump” — no, it didn’t.
      So, insanity.
      And yep, I’m 55. Ever since I’ve been alive, they scream loudest when they’re losing.

  19. The contract with America offered us relief from some of that crazy/governmental power grabs/taking more of our money.
    Interestingly, I think it was a first run (from the Congressional side) at what would turn into MAGA. It was a populist-oriented revolt, based in our traditional strengths and anti-socialist in nature, and anti-incumbent because “throw all the bums out”.
    But, because it was politicians it didn’t seem to mature and actually go through (adequately). Maybe Trump will be a bit different (though we still have the problem with too many politicians who think they’re aristocracy.)

Comments are closed.