The Big Middle Finger

Honestly, that is the only way that I can account for the out-of-completely-left field popularity of Donald Trump. He is not a notorious small-government libertarian like the Koch brothers, or has any previous political interests of any stripe to recommend him particularly; not even any detectable small-government, free-market and strict Constitutionalist Tea Party sympathies to recommend him.  If anything, he has always appeared to me as one of those big, vulgar crony-capitalist, unserious reality-TV personalities; the epitome of vulgar architectural bad taste and in blithely using his money and influence to cheerfully run over anyone who got in his way. His campaign at first seemed to be a particularly tasteless joke – a grab for publicity on the part of a flamboyant personality who never seemed to get enough of it, in a bad or a good way. So – all props for having the sheer brass neck to start playing the game, and playing it with calculated skill.

My supposition at the first about Donald Trump was that his main value lay in speaking the unspeakable; that which dare not be said in the polite company of the establishment political elite and those in the media who are their obedient handmaidens. He was opening up the circle of that which would and could not be talked about in polite society. It’s quite Victorian, isn’t it? This whole range of things which we aren’t supposed to talk about, or even notice in polite society, isn’t it? Especially if we live in those places where the Ruling Class dwells and associates only with other members of the ruling political, monetary and intellectual elite ….

Now that he had brought it all out, and proved resoundingly that there was no downside in the polls or news coverage to talking about it – dragging the whole fetid carcass of open borders and a lot of other stuff into the open – then other prospective candidates for the highest office in the land could also talk about it. Skyrocketing crime, the bias of the press, the criminal misconduct of Obama administration functionaries like Hillary Clinton, replacing American citizen workers with cheaper labor, government agencies like the EPA, the Bureau of Land Management, the IRS, and the misbegotten security organization that is Homeland Security allowed – nay, encouraged to abuse regular citizens in job lot … all that and more have made ordinary Americans angry. Very, very, angry, angry with the fury – not the incandescent fury of a thousand burning suns, which most often is demonstrated by frenzied mobs burning down city blocks and random “others” having the snot beaten out of them and/or lynched.

This is that cold and calculating fury, just about one inch from becoming a black hole of anger.  (I wrote about this cold anger previously.) This is the cold fury of people who do not care much about Trumps’ personal and personality flaws, about his business dealings, his crudity, his morals, his taste in architecture, his political inconsistency in saying whatever hits home with the audience he is speaking to at the time, or really – anything of that. They don’t care. The thing that matters – to these working class and flyover country Americans of all ethnicities, orientations and colors – is that Trump is scaring hell out of the Ruling Class, as Angelo Codevilla described them. Backing Trump, cheering him on at rallies and in social media is the way to give the biggest middle finger gesture possible in the direction of the Ruling Class … that very class who added the insult of contempt to the injury of being a completely incompetent and bungling Ruling Class.

38 thoughts on “The Big Middle Finger”

  1. I lived for years in NYC and never gave the guy a thought. Just another millionaire from the celebrity pages with weird hair. At an earlier point in history, his campaign would have seemed to me, laughable. I mean, really? But that was prior to 2008, the ensuing seven years and complete and ineffectual opposition. Christie? a great, belligerent figure at the podium, but this is a guy with sharia law in his state and who could ever forget the walk on the beach?

    I find it difficult to remain optimistic, I enjoy all the Molotov’s he’s been tossing, and would encourage him to put the pedal down, but I still feel this thing is going to take a weird(er) twist and we’re going to get fooled again.

  2. That’s the thing, exactly, Will. People are so po’ed that they just don’t care — as long as the molotovs keep coming, and the Ruling Class is standing there with fear in their eyes. That’s the appeal.

  3. We’ve had an crybully horse’s ass of a president for the past 7.5 years. Now it’s the GOP’s turn to put up their own horse’s ass.

  4. There is a lot of data beginning to emerge on voters in the primaries. We’ve only had four so far thus the data is limited in terms of representativeness but it’s pretty rich with respect to voter characteristics.

    Here is one guy who is taking county level data and analyzing it after each primary.

    The best predictors of being a Trump voter? Living in a county with a lot of poverty, a lot of foreign born, a lot of blacks, a lot of Hispanics, etc.

    The best predictors of being an Anti-Trump voter? Living in a county with lots of educated people, be it HS grad rate or college rate, and lots of white folks and lots of people with high income.

    We’ll see if these 4-state trends hold up across the country, but so far it’s clear that the people who have to live up close and personal with diversity and multiculturalism are flocking to Trump and those who can isolate themselves from diversity and multiculturalism seem to be voting for other non-Trump candidates.

    Clearly the solution here is to go full speed ahead with Obama’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing program and force diversity into non-Trump counties.

    Frankly, I’ve never understood why Republicans don’t actually hold liberals to their professed speech. Liberals say that they love diversity, well then, specifically target white liberal congressional districts and jam diversity and section 8 housing into those districts while sparing the districts which vote Republican, because why force onto Republicans something that they don’t want when there are plenty of liberals who say that they want it. Politics ain’t beanbag.

  5. target white liberal congressional districts and jam diversity and section 8 housing into those districts while sparing the districts which vote Republican

    That’s actually a brilliant idea. Give them what they claim they want.

    What I found most interesting was reading somewhere that someone attended a Hollywood dinner party and was shocked to hear everyone there was going to vote for Trump. But they would deny it publicly. I think that’s telling. Interesting also that they know the Harvey Weinstein’s would blacklist them. Fortunately for them, their profession is pretending to be what they are not.

    Now, the rumor is that he wants Newt Gingrich for his chief of staff, and that sounds like a good job for Gingrich.

    Personal failings aside, Gingrich is a really smart guy, very savvy on the issues facing America, knows the legislative process forward and back, is well connected to the DC illuminati, and believes in things like balanced budgets, free markets and small government. Leftists hate him for all those reasons, and he doesn’t care and isn’t afraid to tell them so. I think he’s perfect for the job.

  6. It is not only the initial upraised middle finger to the GOPe. It is only starting to be mentioned, but it has been noticed, that the entire energy of the Republican party has been devoted to trying to stop Trump. That same energy has not been evident at any time trying to stop anything Obama wants. In fact the Republican held Congress has given him more than he has asked for since they got both Houses.

    That level of energy is approaching panic. It has been reported openly in the New York Times, Politico, and other political news sources that the RNC and major donors have hired consultants to plan how the Republican Party can support a Third Party candidacy IF Trump wins the nomination at the convention. They have not named who their savior will be, although a third Romney run has been mentioned.

    Keep in mind that this is the same RNC that demanded that Trump sign a loyalty oath not to run third party. And that it would only by done if Trump wins by the rules.

    This is not a new tactic. In 2010 here in Colorado TEA Party Republican Dan Maes won the nomination for governor fair and square. He won the Caucuses, the State Convention, and the statewide primary election. The response of the State Republican Party, who would rather lose to the Democrat than win with the TEA Party or any Conservative, was to send Republican former Congressman Tom Tancredo to the Constitution Party. In return for them nominating Tancredo for governor, the Republican Party funded his campaign [and other Constitution Party campaigns], sent their donors to the Constitution Party, and refused to fund or campaign for their own duly nominated official candidate.

    They were willing to give the governorship to the Democrats rather than tolerate a non-GOPe candidate. And they did. We have had a Democrat governor since with no Republican complaints.

    Them raising the very concept of doing this is going to make Trump supporters even more P.O.-ed, and make them not want to vote for anything Republican. Them actually doing it is going to mean the literal death of the Republican Party. And at that point, it will be deserved and a good thing.

  7. “someone attended a Hollywood dinner party”

    It was WEST HOLLYWOOD, which is the gay ghetto of LA. That was interesting but could be a fluke.

    My daughter lives in far left Santa Monica and is a Bernie fan but her mother gave her the Peggy Noonan column from a week ago and she said it was very interesting.

  8. Them actually doing it is going to mean the literal death of the Republican Party. And at that point, it will be deserved and a good thing.

    I disagree. This Trump phenomenon is not an event, it’s a process. Steve Sailer devised the Sailer Strategy long ago, I don’t even know when. I independently figured this out back in the late 90s. In all multicultural societies, race begins to overlap with political identity. If Democrats are the champions of blacks, for instance, then in a who:whom contest, black gains come at the expense of whites. Someone, some party, will step forward to champion the interests of whites. The Republicans have been strongly resisting taking on that role even while their share of the white vote is growing and their share of the minority vote is flatlining. They’re resisting because they’re products of a societal liberal propaganda effort. A party can resist only so long until their fate is carved in stone.

    Trump IS NOT the champion of any such movement. He’s in favor of Affirmative Action and other ethnic give-aways. What we’re seeing with Trump is a mighty backlash against immigration arising from cultural and economic concerns. America is not a “proposition nation” it was a white European nation seasoned with a historical black underclass which created an uneasy polity. Today, America is not a multicultural nation, it’s a nation that’s being dissolved. We have Arab-American interest groups lobbying gov’t to create a new ethnic categorization for them so that they can stop being grouped with white people and instead qualify for a host of ethnic benefits that flow to Asians, blacks, Hispanics, Native Americans, and other groups. All of these benefits come at the expense of whites. People want to stop this dissolving process and they yearn for the nation of their youth. No one wants 100 Mexicans or 100 Muslims to move onto their block. Someone else’s block, yeah, but not their block. That’s not a workable model for society.

    The Republican Party is undergoing a hostile take-over by a numerically superior force. They were content to have, say, 30% of the population excluded from the political process and voiceless, so what is wrong then with disenfranchising the 5% of the hard core conservative electorate and not giving them a party? Isn’t turnaround fair play? That won’t happen though, what will happen is a new, modified conservatism is going to develop and it will surpass the Trump Administration otherwise a return to business as usual will never see Republicans winning again because the demographic changes and the small base of true believers simply isn’t large enough to win elections. Do these bitter-enders in the Republican Party want power or purity? Choose one.

    The future after Trump is going to have to entail a vigorous war against all Equal Outcomes measures put forth by Democrats because in a who:whom battle, every gain for Democrats comes out of the hides of white America. Trump doesn’t get this, he likely rejects it. Most voters sense this but I doubt that they’re prepared to articulate it. Most politicians don’t want to articulate it, but they might be seeing the light starting to shine on the issue. There is going to be a lot of awkward and painful cultural deprogramming taking place in the coming decades. As more whites flee from the Democrats toward the Republicans, the Republicans are going to have to figure out how to speak to their liberalism. They will find a way because winning elections is more important than idealogical purity to “conservative” principles, whatever those may be.

    Crying over what might have been, a conservative renaissance, is useless. Conservatives had their chance to stop the demographic transformation of America and they were either bamboozled by smarter, more devious, liberals or they sold their souls to corporate paymasters, and so the lost the demographic audience which would find those conservative ideas appealing. The movement has only itself to blame for creating an America which is hostile to their ideas. Sorry, there are no pleasant ways to bring about a do-over.

    The Republican Party will continue forward after the Trump Administration leaves the scene but it won’t be same as it was this past decade. The bitter-clingers will have to modify their views or go off into the sunset of irrelevance where they can nurse their wounds in private.

  9. “The Republican Party will continue forward after the Trump Administration leaves the scene but it won’t be same as it was this past decade. ”

    Here is where the Michael Lotus concept of America 3.0 comes in. Would the red states ever secede from the blue states ?

    I don’t know but that is one way to deal with it. I think we are seeing a migration like that in England that I referred to in another thread. My friends in England live in a small city in the southeast that is ethnically 95% English and they know it and are proud of it. Some one in the other thread asked what those who cannot afford the sky high housing prices will do ?

    I don’t know. People in this country are moving to Texas and Arizona. The Obama people are trying to punish those red states.

    I guess we will see. I really mean you because I will probably be gone. As someone said, I am increasingly interested in the present and less in the future.

    I still study subjects I will probably never use but some of that is just intellectual stimulation.

  10. Protest vote? You betcha. Yesterday, as I selected Donal Trump and pushed the red VOTE button I muttered “take that, you SOB’s.”

  11. Here is where the Michael Lotus concept of America 3.0 comes in. Would the red states ever secede from the blue states ?

    This is implausible. Think of blue cheese or a melted ice cream sundae. Blue States and Red States are thoroughly mixed, and exist in their present formulation because the net balance leads one way or the other, and this applies only to the Democrat-Republican axis.

    The best alternative is like something close to the Great Migration which occurred in the break-up of Greater India. A big sort, of sorts. We can try to make it as humane as possible – a Resolution Trust type of agency buys your house in a blue state and sells you a similar house in a red state, same with jobs, etc. Even this though becomes a nightmare because how do you get everyone to agree to the sorting criteria?

    Some one in the other thread asked what those who cannot afford the sky high housing prices will do ?C

    That was me.

    When I look at governance issues I try to discipline myself to think not simply about my self-interest but what would be good for someone who is disadvantaged. This is why I reject the current model of wealth being used as a means of self-segregating because if I didn’t have wealth, then I’d be stuck in a no-win scenario where the society outside my front door was dissolving before my eyes and crushing my soul and my hopes for my children. When you posted that Noonan column, you highlighted her insight about the protected class, which is a very good formulation she devised. They don’t give a rat’s ass about the problems that they’re creating for those who don’t have the wealth to escape. I care about those people. I’m willing to see returns on my investments decrease in order to make their lives better.

    The problem for your friends is that they exist at the mercy of their government. As bad as totalitarian impulses are in the American Government, they’re worse in the UK. Frankly, I’m surprised that American liberals invented the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing program but just wait until the Brits import it over there. Where are your friends going to live when their government is actively demonizing them for self-segregating and then pouring resources into projects designed to diversify their redoubts?

    I guess we will see. I really mean you because I will probably be gone.

    Frankly, I’d much rather have society go down the crapper sooner than later because I’d rather my kids be young and under my protection when it happens than older and on their own. I actually want to bequeath a better society to them, not a worse one, so the sooner we face catastrophe the sooner we can begin rebuilding.

  12. He is not a notorious small-government libertarian like the Koch brothers, or has any previous political interests of any stripe to recommend him particularly; not even any detectable small-government, free-market and strict Constitutionalist Tea Party sympathies to recommend him.

    This comes close to a Pauline Kael moment. Not every does—and few should—decide a vote by ideological conformity.

    Are you sure “notorious” is the word you wanted, with its connotation of criminality and immorality? (No punctuation marks its use as ironical; and even use of establishment terms ironically increases their hold on everyone’s mind.)

    The moment in which normal Republican candidates can be considered for office passed, ended by the decades of lies and broken promises. (The same could be said for Democrat candidates, which is why Her Royal Highness is in trouble—not enough trouble, IMHO.)

  13. Choosing Trump seems a bit like cutting off your nose to spite your face – a sad form self-destructive anger takes: the party of Lincoln and Reagan represented by a man who is, essentially, as Rubio describes him, a con-artist. So a man who has put many a small potatoes business and low-wage worker out in the street – unpaid and unhired – while escaping personal bankruptcy (perhaps, indeed, always legal) is going to get the job that a man who pared down companies to keep them out of bankruptcy and with greater potential to keep and hire new workers (a delicate balancing act that leaves some without jobs, of course) loses. I can understand the anger of many a conservative at both the message and the ridiculous waste of resources that is our educational system, but replacing it with some kind of bullshit and expensive seminar to be rewarded by a photograph with a cardboard Trump figure seems to be choosing the completely phony over the largely phony (and the self-interested litigious – they signed the paper!). Have we reached the place where we say, you made me do it – you horrible, caving in Republicans, made me vote for a worthless con man by being so terrible and treating me so badly? Are we becoming like all those who blame others for our misery? The waste. Of our energy, our thinking, our virtue, our history.

    (Not that I don’t understand it – in one poll, I said I opted for positions far stronger and with fewer regulations on hot button issues to send a message. My vote, however, I consider a good deal more sacred than answer some pollsters with lop-sided options.) Sure, I’ll vote for Trump over Hillary. Each Friday’s e-mail drop makes it more and more clear that we are dealing with the kind of person who blithely sacrifices her country and individual, selfless lives out there trying to protect it – and what for, shabby graft, self-promotion, laziness. I won’t forget her plutonium deal with Russia – this woman should be in jail. He may be a conman but they are less dangerous than traitors.

  14. E-guy, I didn’t think skeptical quote marks were required in this august company ;-)
    Exactly, Ginny – exactly; a gesture indicated exactly how furious people are. The Trumpsters are that furious with the party of Lincoln and Reagan, which in its present-day iteration sabotaged Sarah Palin, and did the same to the various Tea Parties and Tea Party candidates when it seemed that they were not amenable to big-gov biz as usual, and stood around with their finger in their ear when Romney got run-over like Wylie Coyote by the establishment media.

  15. There is more here than meets the eye. If Trump wins Hillery will crucify him. I don’t think there’s much doubt about that.

    He separates the sheep from the goats and herds the result towards some kind of republican victory. This will mostly destroy the party as none of the power brokers get anything from him at all. So a trump win kills off the GOP, and ensures a Hillery presidency.

    Very slick, only the Russians are in your class when it comes to power.

  16. Pewggy Noonan had a great op-ed on this – dividing the political insiders as “Protecteds” and the Trump Supporters as the “Unprotecteds” – who have felt the effects of “open borders” and one-way trade deals.

    Months ago I emphasized with Trump – he is singing my song too, but on closer examination of his background have to wonder, to borrow and old slogan, “where’s the beef”.

    We will soon see if Lincoln was right.

  17. “who is, essentially, as Rubio describes him, a con-artist.”

    There are some comments about Rubio suggesting that Trump is not the only “con artist” in the race,

    Kasich and Walker are probably the most conventional candidates this year. Walker left early, maybe because he decided he did not have the backing to get anywhere.

    Kasich has been kind of smarmy and is reputed to be a nasty sort of guy.

    I wonder a bit about Carson. He is wealthy from this career and may be hanging around to see if Trump implodes. I would vote for him if he looked like he had any chance.

    If we wind up with a brokered convention and Romney ends up the nominee, I would vote for him in a nanosecond. I think he would lose although I still wonder what is going on with Hillary. The Press is not allowed to video her getting into her airplane. What is that about ?

    “The problem for your friends is that they exist at the mercy of their government”

    They may but the Goodwood Revival, which was on the weekend we stayed with them has 100,000 attending and the tickets are around 200 pounds per day. That sounds like power. We”ll see. They are my age so probably not too worried about 20 years from now.

    Today they are off to India for their annual visit. She is very old British military aristocracy. She had an ancestor who was one of Wellington’s officers at Waterloo. His name was Arthur Shakespeare. I believe that is him. She has his journal describing the battle.

  18. Months ago I emphasized with Trump – he is singing my song too, but on closer examination of his background have to wonder, to borrow and old slogan, “where’s the beef”.

    Where’s the beef? Every single other candidate in the race is promising to punch you in the face, Trump doesn’t make the promise. With Trump you stand a slim chance of not being punched in the face compared to outright certainty with every single other candidate. You have nothing to lose by siding with Trump, even if he’s lying and does end up punching you in the face.

    Secondly, policies can be changed come a new movement, new political circumstances, new administration, but demographics are very hard to undo. If Trump follows through on deportation, he can screw up every single other aspect of his time in office and the next administration can rectify those screw-ups and we’re much better off than legalizing 30 million invaders who vote Democrats, 80-20, if that.

  19. A commenter on the posted the entire Kipling poem, which I am thinking is very relevant now. (I swear, I think that Kipling is sort of the literary patron saints of the small-government, strictly constitionalist, libertarian-inclined party.)

    by Rudyard Kipling

    It was not part of their blood,
    It came to them very late,
    With long arrears to make good,
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    They were not easily moved,
    They were icy — willing to wait
    Till every count should be proved,
    Ere the Saxon began to hate.

    Their voices were even and low.
    Their eyes were level and straight.
    There was neither sign nor show
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    It was not preached to the crowd.
    It was not taught by the state.
    No man spoke it aloud
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    It was not suddenly bred.
    It will not swiftly abate.
    Through the chilled years ahead,
    When Time shall count from the date
    That the Saxon began to hate.

  20. Sorry to respond to the resident idiot, but Seriously? Hillary? Whose husband is a corrupt rapist, who worked to cut down and silence his victims, who is even now under investigation by the FBI for what amounts to treason by stupidity? That Hillary? Trump will Murder Her. The public will all get to know Bills rape victims when Trump puts them on TV in 50 states. She couldn’t win against a ham sandwich.

  21. As I have said before, I am ambivalent on Trump. Couldn’t be happier if he actually governs the way he talks but I have seen no evidence in his past behavior that he would do so. The cynic in me feels that he is just using this as he knows this exploits a huge dissatisfaction by millions over the status quo.

    That being said one thing I do like about him – well, 2, is (A) his utter lack of concern for “PC” talk and (B) his going after anyone who attacks him like a pit bull.

    He is a master manipulator of the press and the fact of a general MSM bias towards the left might be negated. IOW if he is nominated this might be a campaign unlike others where the Republican is generally the punching bag to the media and the Left.

    I think Hillary was taken aback a bit when he accused her of being an enabler to Bill’s abuse of women.

    Sgt Mom: Kipling’s poem reminds me a bit of the Scots-Irish, and the book James Webb wrote about them.

  22. From Mike K. : I wonder a bit about Carson. He is wealthy from this career and may be hanging around to see if Trump implodes. I would vote for him if he looked like he had any chance.

    I don’t know as much about him as I probably should, but will learn more if/when things sort out. At the moment, I believe him to be the only real — albeit slim — hope for a near future which is not a total disaster.

    I believe him to be principaled but not divisive; a man who would be willing to stand firm against his political opposition no matter what, but do so respectfully (probably more than they deserve) and with the stance that they are wrong, not evil. (Doesn’t matter if they are or not in this context.)

    I know he is criticized for his quiet, calm, unemotional, demeanor. My impression (and I think impression is most of what we have to go on with the candidates) is that he is the grown up in the crowd.


  23. “She couldn’t win against a ham sandwich.” Hell, she couldn’t win against a kosher ham sandwich.

    Except I fear she will. All she needs is the corruption of government and the media. Isn’t that pretty much guaranteed?

  24. Mom, well said.

    Trump can not deliver on any of his lavish promises because he has no plan and his compass always points to himself. It always has and everything he is now saying points to this being solely about his personal wining the power, prestige and popular acclamation of the office. He is an empty suit.

    If nominated, he will have plenty to use against the Hildabeast, but do not forget she will have ample to use against him. And she will. If this mud fest comes to be, then it will come down to voting blocks, pop cultural values (do you like free stuff? first woman POTUS! You are a victim and I’m here to make that right, etc.) and emotion. Her best (only?) shot is Trump.

    I believe that either Cruz or Rubio can make the case against her personally and ideologically. I favor Cruz because he scares the GOPe as much or more than Trump and he’ll support and do things that will have great positive effects for decades. I can support Rubio even though I convinced he owes to much to the GOPe. He is likely to be more independent that that would imply. I can support Carson because he is a quality person who has good instincts and will be strong in the face of opposition. He is very capable of sorting out what to do based on picking and listening to the right advisors. His compass is consistently pointed in the right direction and he is smart. Kasich is too progressive for me, but I trust him more than Trump. I would strongly resist his using political power to fulfill his ideas of Christian charity.

    If Trump wins, the deals begin and any promises/positions he is currently espousing will be null and void. He’ll be most worried about his own gains from insider trading and selling government protection to his crony buds and labor unions with plenty of spin on making “America great again” and “winning in trade.” He is as much or more of a narcissist than Barry and owns no particular ideology other than himself as CEO of the country. That is a recipe for short term disaster and long term implosion.

    Get over being angry and pick somebody (there is more than one good choice) who will actually accomplish something positive, such as appoint originalist judges for a start.


  25. “All she needs is the corruption of government and the media. Isn’t that pretty much guaranteed?”

    She also has a secret weapon, that I have not yet figured out.

    An under-the-radar startup funded by billionaire Eric Schmidt has become a major technology vendor for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, underscoring the bonds between Silicon Valley and Democratic politics.

    The Groundwork, according to Democratic campaign operatives and technologists, is part of efforts by Schmidt—the executive chairman of Google parent-company Alphabet—to ensure that Clinton has the engineering talent needed to win the election. And it is one of a series of quiet investments by Schmidt that recognize how modern political campaigns are run, with data analytics and digital outreach as vital ingredients that allow candidates to find, court, and turn out critical voter blocs.

    The story is rather disturbing. Why are these billionaire tech guys working so hard to keep Democrats in Power ?

    I can understand the simple stories, like the Swiss arch criminal billionaire who just wants to stay out of jail like Marc Rich.

    Why are the techies so intent on keeping the Democrats in power ? I once read that Schmidt’s wife was a big abortion supporter but it goes beyond that.

    Maybe it’s just crony capitalism but I wonder.

  26. Oh my dear children. You think your silly votes and the people you appear to elect are running America?

    No they are not. The people who run America are largely unknown. They killed the Jack Kennedy for going off the reservation. You might have noticed Obama did little of what he promised and lots he would not have done before he was elected. “That’s a lovely family you have there, pity if anything happened to it.”

    Hillery is just what they want and she will happily advance their agenda. Trump will be dealt with if needed, but I doubt he can beat her straight up.

    Again, the big boys are playing ‘no rules hardball’. If you don’t understand that, very little will make sense.

  27. >Again, the big boys are playing ‘no rules hardball’. If you don’t understand that, very little will make sense.

    Being a celebrity billionaire for 30-years, in the organized crime infiltrated casino business no less, Donald Trump is a much -harder- target than Pim Fortuyn.

    Just ask the press guys getting man handled by Trump’s personal security.

    That is why the political class is going Ape-S**t.

    Trying a media hate-campaign to get the usual people hearing voices to try and off Trump, like the Dutch powers that be did with Pim Fortuyn, will both fail and hurt their media property’s ratings.

    Please see Rupert Murdock’s Fox New Channel 50% loss of viewership since Nov 2015.

  28. After having been buggered by the GOP in the last several elections, with their milquetoast candidates and their rolling over in Congress for the Democrats, I’m in the mood to Let It Burn.

    The Democrats *will* burn it all, either through the election of the head of a crime syndicate with a vindictive streak a mile wide, or a doddering socialist unburdened by the failed and murderous history of his philosophy. Both hate America and what it originally stood for. Either one will burn what’s left of America with mad glee.

    Trump may be a disaster but I don’t think he hates America. So in that sense — in accordance with my impulse to Let It Burn — Trump stands a chance of at least being a controlled burn.

  29. The groundbreaker in subtle political manipulation was Edward Bernays with his Engineering of Consent. He was a relative of Freud and used psychological methods to sway both voters and consumers. The Freud family is still involved in PR and politics, having worked for Tony Blair and the Clintons.

Comments are closed.