Is Trump the Alinskyite Radical in this election?

Allowing a stupid person to demonstrate their stupidity by asking them a hard question does not confer responsibility for their stupidity upon the questioner.

By choosing to hold a rally at UIC, Trump knew that he could get his enemy to demonstrate who they are and what tactics they prefer. It does not make him responsible for what they chose to do. And what he ultimately chose to do was prevent violence, not promote it.

Trump was pushing a negative so hard it became a positive and allowed him to ridicule his opposition. BLM, OWS and SJWs are being turned into the Bull Connor of the 21st century by their own actions. Trump is just giving them the opportunity to reveal themselves. Then he makes them live by their own rules. On Hardball:

MATTHEWS: When you set up rally in Chicago where it’s mostly Hispanic and blacks, you knew there would be a lot of people that have the time to come out and protest your situation. It was no surprise here, was there in what happened? Given the venue of your event,

TRUMP: It shouldn’t matter. You’re the first one to say it. It shouldn’t matter whether it was whoever lives in the city. It shouldn’t make a difference. Whether it’s white, black, Hispanic, it shouldn’t matter.

MATTHEWS: They don’t like what you’re saying. They don’t like what you’re saying.

TRUMP: We shouldn’t be restricted from having rally here because of ethnic make up or anything like that. I’m somebody that feels strongly it shouldn’t make any difference. You usually feel that too. I’m surprised you’re bringing this up because it shouldn’t matter,

Do you believe those were spontaneous responses? You can almost see Trump restraining him self from saying, “Alinsky…You magnificent bastard. I read your book.”

Look at Alinsky’s rules and recall how many of them have been observed by Trump thus far. Trump stopped the War on Women by applying Rules 2, 4, 5, 6, 9 and 12 to Hillary through Bill Clinton, with a big assist from Bill Cosby. He froze his 16 Republican competitors to the point where none of them could effectively respond to him.

Cruz is still my preference, but should Trump win the nomination he will give a master class to whom ever the Establishment grants the Democrat nomination in the tactics they have used to dominate the national debate for the last 30 years. And should Cruz prevail, he would do well to learn from Trump’s demonstration of Alinskyite tactics.

* RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.”
* RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.”
* RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.”
* RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules
* RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
* RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”
* RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.”
* RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.”
* RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”
* RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.”
* RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”
* RULE 12: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”

68 thoughts on “Is Trump the Alinskyite Radical in this election?”

  1. What nonsense. So now there are “restricted zones” where only a certain party or a certain view can speak.

    This is University, for crying crying out loud. If we cannot have freedom of speech here, then where do you imagine we will have it. This is univ This is, of course, why the Left sets up “safe zones” in the first place, to exclude alternate opinions from the public square.

    It is not about “trump being clever”, it is about Trump just exoecting America to act like America.

    By supporting this notion of “poltical zones”, hoever indirectly and innocently, you are lending aid to the Left.

    Whawt the nation need to do is resoundingly reject this, and this need to loudly come from both Parties.

    This is not a “reenactment” of the 1960s, and that time was more of a rehearsal for what is going on now. This is just the sort of thing the NAzIs, the Leninists and the Maoist did in the last century. These are brown shirts fully backed by the Democrats, their donor “class”, and their propagandists in the media. It is mnstorous and need to be not just called out but stopped right now.

    I this is not done we face a summer of riots, planned and executed by the left, and this time around, it will provoke a real response. The irresponsibility of both parties allowing this amount to treason.

  2. Thank you. This clarifies.

    And Bill Ayers, who assumed millions would need to die if the revolution succeeded, is out in front of the cameras.

  3. There were plenty of patriots who thought that 1775 was a lousy time to start a revolution and there was significant debate in 1776 as well. I think 2016 is a lousy time to start a street war. I might be wrong. “Vote Trump Get Jumped” is actually for sale as a t-shirt.

    Expecting America to act like America is clever. It’s also brave. It’s also likely going to pull a lot of GOP “anyone but Trump” voters home in the general election if this sort of nonsense continues.

  4. Trump stopped the War on Women by applying Rules 2, 4, 5, 6, 9 and 12 to Hillary through Bill Clinton, with a big assist from Bill Cosby. He froze his 16 Republican competitors to the point where no

    …where no what?

  5. Thanks for reading s closely. Bad copy & paste.

    to the point where none of them could effectively respond to him.

  6. ” a lot of people that have the time”

    Meaning of course those who have no jobs and those who don’t go to class.

    I’ve had a bit of a debate on Facebook with Michael Lotus about whether Trump chose that venue to provoke the riot. I don’t know but wonder if an advance team chose the largest site for this weekend. There are larger sites but they might have been booked.

    A Sanders supporter tried to rush the stage in Dayton. Dayton, for crissakes !

    I think Trump might be thinking they will respond like the synapses they are. Stimulus=reflex.

    This is the left we are talking about here. Anybody could predict the response but the Trump people may be more careful about tickets after this.

    I have been to Cleveland. I wonder how much will be left after the GOP convention?

  7. I don’t know but wonder if an advance team chose the largest site for this weekend.

    Trump has been very careful in his selection of venues. Was he really looking for a lot of disaffected working class whites at UIC? I suppose they’re as likely to be there as anywhere else in Chicagoland. Some how I’m thinking Peoria, Effingham, Mount Vernon, Carbondale fit past choices better.

  8. The first rule of politics in the mass media age: the truth is of no importance, image is everything, he who shapes the narrative shapes events.

    The narrative is now being shaped: Trump’s violent extremist rhetoric causes violent behavior. Example:

    Analysis: Chicago chaos tests Trump promises of unity by By Steve Peoples and Julie Pace on Mar. 12, 2016:

    ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — Donald Trump says he can unify the country. Now, he has to prove it.

    The Republican presidential front-runner canceled a Friday night rally in Chicago rather than enter a tense cauldron of animosity between his supporters and protesters — some of whom then proceeded to face off in several violent altercations as the political gathering veered dangerously close to a riot.

    It was an ugly incident unlike anything seen in presidential politics in decades. Yet Trump has denied any responsibility for the clash and showed little willingness to change his tone as he returned to the campaign trail on Saturday.

    The latest dark chapter in an already unconventional 2016 White House campaign comes as the Republican front-runner insists he’s beloved by African Americans and Hispanics and makes calls for unity a central part of his closing argument ahead of Tuesday’s slate of primary elections in five delegate-rich states.

    The Chicago chaos presents the biggest leadership test yet for the Republican outsider, the deeply divided Republican Party and an even more sharply splintered nation that he seeks to lead.

    And while extraordinary by any standards, perhaps the biggest surprise was that it didn’t happen sooner.

    Since casting Mexicans immigrants as rapists and criminals in his June announcement speech, Trump has encouraged supporters to embrace anger tinged with xenophobia. In recent weeks, his rallies have featured several minor incidents of violence involving protesters, almost all of them minorities, with Trump repeatedly encouraging his supporters to fight back — and to do so with violence if necessary.

    Yes, it is unfair, distorted, and full of lies. But, no one other than the most deeply committed political junkie knows that, and nobody other than the Trumpeters cares. Those of you who think that these events will catapult Trump into the White House may be sadly disappointed.

    Most Americans avoid political news like they avoid tofu, most of them are far more worried about who is on the bubble for the NCAA tournament, and who will be the Bronco’s next quarterback, than they are about the election. The message they will take away is that Trump causes violence and must be shunned.

  9. There’s a heliport only two miles from the UIC Pavillion. This is the reason they chose this venue. The tight campaign schedule dictated it.

  10. Trump may be the most confrontational of candidates (and certainly I find him irritating) but anyone who has noticed the “Move-On” and “War on Wall Street” rallies and the reactions in Ferguson, etc. (esp in Chicago) would be surprised, it seems to me, that any venue in Chicago wasn’t likely to draw out this kind of raw irrationality (guided perhaps by malevolent rationality) to whoever the Republicans put up. Wouldn’t Cruz or Rubio or even Kasich have seen a smaller form of this? More power to Trump to figuring out how to play their game – though once looting is added, I suspect the summer outings will be even more violent & attractive to some. (And dangerous for others: I see a story of a chef who was getting his MBA to help him start a business – a young black pro-Trumper – who was shot. To be black and conservative at those dustups is likely to be risky.)

  11. I’m responsible for my own actions. When people say things I don’t like I cannot physically assault them because I feel it’s justified. Imagine the pickle a certain prominent politician in America would be in, if that were so. Millions would be gang-attacking the dais for the insult, slander and deception they’ve endured during his campaign, and the years afterward. I read that DiMassimmo got a hold of his leg. Not sure about the local laws, but in many places that’s assault. I’m sure Trump has some decent, if not clever attorneys. Can lawfare work both ways?

  12. We are in for a period of civil strife, characterized by moving, increasingly violent street battles that reflect the desperation of the continuing criminal enterprise that has been in charge of this country, and will fight to maintain its control over such a fabulous wealth generating cow, that they have been milking for billions in graft, in the face of any other faction seeking to take it from them.

    Most of the labels we are used to using, especially left and right, are completely useless to describe the various factions involved. At the upper, establishment level, think blues vs greens, much like the Byzantine Empire’s factional battles. That more accurately fits the DNC vs RNC contest than liberal vs conservative.

    As for the Chicago fight, that was only a preliminary match. We can already see the shape of the anti-Trump campaign, reflective of the various slanders flung at the Tea Party movement in general, but amplified by the “Hitler” nonsense, and the previously successful inversion of castigating those reacting to violence as the truly violent ones, while the actual instigators of the violence are merely protesters, driven by justifiable outrage at the horrors they have had to endure.

    The media love this framework, as it allows them to posit moral value to their chosen faction, and condemn the other side as being culpable, either for being violent, or professing beliefs that inspired violence in their opponents.

    We can already see the latter contention, and we will soon see the former if any Trump fans decide to really fight back. Any and all ensuing conflict will automatically become the result ofTrump and his followers, regardless of the actual sequence of events.

    What the media, and those who have become so used to its protection, don’t understand, even after the many failed gambits that have already occurred in this election cycle, is that a large part of the electorate, who used to rely on, and believe, the spin the msm put on events, no longer care what their claims are, and often assume that the opposite is true.

    This is going to be a wild ride.

  13. I inadvertently clicked to a Yahoo “News” piece and it reminded me why I never read Yahoo “News.” More blaming the victim.

    Many Americans will not “turn the other cheek” when confronted with an in-your-face incitement by a radical protester. We are getting sick and tired of the Left’s power plays against us.

    The only way to stop the Left’s uncivil behavior, like crime, is retribution and punishment. They know that and they want it televised. Use a woman and see the sympathy as she is wrestled to the ground by burly men.

    Some have thought that law suits by Trump are forthcoming. If so, he’ll have to carefully pick his venues as many judges owe their appointments to the Left. In any case, it will take years.

    The City of Chicago can not be expected to act to stop this conspiracy to deny civil rights to other citizens nor can we expect action the Federal DoJ.

    I would not be surprised if some take up vigilante actions against the leaders but better if they looked like “accidents.” Imagine Bill Ayers’ house burning to the ground due to an electrical fire. They need to be scared. Today, they act with impunity and so show not restraint.

  14. Today, they act with impunity and so show not restraint.

    Why should they show restraint? Cruz, Rubio, Kasich and most of the conservative media have blamed Trump and his supporters for the violence even though it was clearly left wing thugs who were responsible. It goes without saying that the MSM agree with them. The scumbag who tried to attack, maybe even kill Trump yesterday, is being interviewed on CNN as if he were a respectable citizen. (Do you think someone who tried to attack Obama have been so quickly released on bail and treated by the MSM as just another concerned citizen?). I fully expect Murdoch’s neocon Fox News to also give him a platform.

    Someone has to stand up to the Left before they will ever even consider restraining themselves. Conservatives throughout the Anglosphere are weaklings who have grovelled to the Left for half a century. Cruz, Rubio, and Kasich are the norm. Trump is the first leader in my lifetime to challenge them. Specific policies at this point are close to irrelevant. This is war. The Left have been fighting for generations. The Right have to show up for the fight some time soon or it’ll be too late.

  15. MLK never burnt down Bull Connor’s house. Leave Bill Ayres’ alone. Leave him defeated at the ballot box. Roll back every Obama Executive Order.

  16. “you who think that these events will catapult Trump into the White House may be sadly disappointed.”

    Yes, that may be true but the opposite result seems not to occur to you.

    Trump’s rally in Chicago, the Belly of the Beast, as it were, might be aimed at the Republican primary Tuesday. Where do you think Illinois Republican voters live ? Chicago ? Not many and those that do are probably Gold Coast residents and divided between ruling class and Trump supporters. Outside Chicago, the distribution might be quite different.

    I guess we will see but I am long way from predicting this election result.

  17. Many portray Trump as a demagogue, but those critics usually miss the sequencing of figures, first there is the Cassandra, then the Demagogue, then the Reformer. Here is a 20 year old Charlie Rose interview with Sir James Goldsmith, the Cassandra who preceded Trump and who predicted how GATT would play out and the consequences for society. To my mind there is a pretty significant linkage between Goldsmith’s arguments and the environment today which is giving rise to Trump.

    Joining the fray is Laura Tyson. Fascinating watching this with the benefit of 20 years of hindsight. Goldsmith’s reasoning from core fundamentals absolutely trumps Tyson’s arguments from economic theory. What Goldsmith predicted has come true, what Tyson predicted, and Rose supported because he, like a lot of us educated folks, knows how the theory is to be argued, has not come true.

    Goldsmith is a more eloquent spokesman for Trump’s trade positions than Trump himself or any other public figure who is arguing on behalf of Trump. If only Trump could speak like this.

  18. TangoMan, that is a great video and meshes almost exactly with Trump’s message.

    The Smoot-Hawley Tariff gave the world, especially us, the impression that it created the Great Depression and therefore free trade must always be defended.

    I’ve done a lot of reading about Coolidge and that era and the protectionist forces were mostly a reaction to the slump in agriculture after World War I when Europe began to be able to feed itself again. All through the 1950s, farm price supports were based on “Parity” which mean farm prices in 1918.

    The US government was dependent on tariffs for revenue until the 16th Amendment. The 1920s economy was being manipulated to deal with German war reparations and the interest rates were kept artificially low by Benjamin Strong as part of that. Unfortunately, he died in 1928 and his successors did not make any changes as stock market speculation took off. The role of the tariff, itself is not agreed upon.

    According to Ben Bernanke, “Economists still agree that Smoot-Hawley and the ensuing tariff wars were highly counterproductive and contributed to the depth and length of the global Depression.”There is strong disagreement about this. Alfred E. Eckes argues that Smoot-Hawley had little effect on the severity of the Great Depression,[6] as does Douglas A. Irwin in The Review of Economics and Statistics, “Smoot-Hawley … probably did not contribute significantly to the economic downturn.”

    Of course, the Democrats had much to do with the depth and duration of the Depression and are eager to shift the blame to Republicans, who were in power in the 1920s and who passed the tariff.

  19. It’s worth noting what Second City Cop thought about it

    Sometimes that blog goes off the deep end of both sides of the pool (Superintendent McCarthy is an idiot! McCarthy is a scapegoat!!), but here they make a good point. I was also thinking of the 2012 NATO summit while watching the Trump rally. That summit was textbook crowd control. I think they even re-wrote the textbook.

    The weak link on Friday was obviously admittance into the arena. Letting so many Bernie supporters and anti-Trump protesters in was the critical problem. I’m not sure there was anything that could’ve stopped that.

    However, outside the arena just didn’t look right. During NATO they divided and funneled protesters down separate streets that were lined with riot cops. Any possible convergence areas like intersections or parks were barricaded.The smaller crowds were still allowed to yell and protest, but they were mostly surrounded and neutered.

    The Trump rally was different. The intersection just outside was open. The parking lots and parking decks were unsecured. They let all those people out of the arena with nothing preventing them from converging right out front.

    Friday night could’ve easily been a lot worse. The question is were the police just incompetent or deliberately holding back?

  20. What makes you think a police dept. under the control of Rahm is going to take any steps to prevent leftist groups from disrupting a Republican rally, especially one for Trump.

    Do you honestly believe all these incidents happen in a vacuum, with no interconnections or larger context?

    We are entering the violent second act of the ongoing culture war that started in the ’60’s. There will be increasing violence as the election cycles progress.

    The final showdown will be in the 2020 cycle, not this year. This is the shakedown cruise.

  21. Mrs. Davis – please understand that I do not advocate burning down anyone’s house. I see it as a possible example of the reaction if things go on like this.

    As to Grruray’s point about crowd control problems, there may have been a lack of timely communications between the security inside the arena and the CPD. Perhaps the decision by Trump to cancel was not given to CPD with enough advanced warning for reinforcements to arrive and proper security outside to be arrange. If so, there’s a lesson learned for USSS and Trump’s security team.

    Of course, with scuffling going on inside, Trump’s team would be eager to get them all outside and dispersed.

  22. Interesting comment.

    There was no way the political powers that be wanted a successful Trump event in the city. They didn’t want anyone to see that there was a base in a Democratic city for Trump. They didn’t want to see the police challenge BLM in any meaningful way. And in a Sanctuary City, you can’t treat your Hispanic base with anything but kid gloves. Especially when those groups are doing the dirty work of running Trump out of town.

    They wanted Trump run out. They wanted a narrative of “free speech”, so long as “free speech” was from the Left.

    Everything else was just a “little exuberance”. Nothing to see here, move along. You Trump people should stay out of this city. Things happen. Hate to see anyone get hurt.

    Emmanuel is in trouble and the opponents of his organized a lot of that riot.

  23. I believe that lumping Cruz in with the establishment types is laughable. Trump is “flexible” and more likely to give to get deals from DC and their allies than Cruz is. Trump doesn’t back down from the agent provocateurs and neither has Cruz in the past.

    No doubt that these public meeting provocations are targeted and professionally organized. They will continue if they have the desired effect. If not, they will go away to return in the summer and fall. I think the provocateur organizers are greatly misjudging the response, both in size and intensity. But if this tactic proves successful, it will escalate further in size and frequency. Routinely competing riots would further the corruption of the political process. Is this the road to civil war? God forbid.


  24. Depending on what happens tomorrow, I could see a Trump/Cruz ticket coming out of the convention.

    It is a lot like what Lincoln did and Harding did. The animosity between Trump and Cruz is a problem but if Cruz does not have a big day tomorrow and Trump does, watch for some diminution of the competition.

    Cruz is not that big a help in governing but would reduce the possibility of a catastrophic mistake by the party.

    There is a significant chance that Trump is a one term president , if elected, and while he would never say that, it might be a strong inducement for a young candidate like Cruz.

    I could see Gingrich as chief of staff and Sessions as majority leader.

  25. The left will never back down. All human institutions and governments tend toward socialism as they mature, it is observed, and the latest election activities prove there is no compromise being considered by the left, only total victory.

    Until the conservatives can get it through our heads that this is a war, and we are trying to be all gentlemanly and they are trying to annihilate us, we allow the continued growth of the Deep State and it is Socialist.

    No government voluntarily shrinks itself, either. The shrinking HAS to be forced from outside, period. Friends, the direction of this election and its consequences will determine the state of our existence for the next several years. I hope we leave something worth fighting for for our grandkids.

  26. Mike K Says:
    March 14th, 2016 at 10:53 am

    A Trump/Cruz ticket once was, for a while, my ideal. I’m afraid that I am at “hold my nose” status for Cruz. Since he had that meeting with Jeb!, Rubio, and Kasich just before the last debate and a) openly is working with them, b) hired Silverado Savings & Loan thief [and Bush son] Neil Bush to run his campaign finance operation, and final straw c) refused to defend the First Amendment against BLM, Occupy, and the Sanders campaign when they physically attacked Donald Trump makes him at best barely tolerable.

    One of the main functions of a Vice Presidents is to be assassination insurance for the President. The concept being that the VP succeeding to office would be more repugnant than the President. Cruz is showing that he is far more acceptable to the GOPe and the Democrats than previously expected.

    It all may be moot, anyway.

    A Republican National Committee Standing Rules Committee member told the membership Friday that convention delegates are not bound to cast their votes at the convention according to primary vote results in the first round of voting.

    Curly Haugland of North Dakota, a long time member of the RNC Standing Rules Committee, sent a letter to the RNC membership at large about this issue. He explained how he came to the conclusion that all Republican delegates who participate in the 2016 Republican National Convention are unbound on each ballot round, including the first.

    1) If the delegates are not bound to the results of their local primaries on the first ballot, there is absolutely no reason to have primaries. The GOPe can name who they want. And they can try to elect them without voters.

    2) If they are not bound for at least the first ballot, they are open to bribes and threats by the party to vote as the GOPe wants.

    3) Changing the rules after the primaries is stealing the nomination. It will mean the death of the Republican party [not a bad thing at that point].

  27. True. They’ll never back down no matter how placated the message. Free dope, tuition, cheese, it don’t matter, burn baby burn. Witness Sanders getting shouted down by the BLM goons. Regardless of who the person on the podium is, they need “space to destroy”. Until rioting starts having consequences, it will continue.

    I was a Ted guy, but I’m hearing more and more about his wife’s involvement with the Council On Foreign Relations and the North American Union business. His claims that Trump is stoking the anger is horseshit. It won’t win him many votes, and serves to validate the mob and their benefactors.

  28. PenGun Says:
    March 14th, 2016 at 12:06 pm

    A fact that we take great comfort in, you can be sure.

  29. PenGun, you had better stay up there with the grizzly bears and metrosexual men like Trudeau until the revolution is over.

  30. “all Republican delegates who participate in the 2016 Republican National Convention are unbound on each ballot round, including the first.”

    Nobody ever said that the GOP does not know how to lose elections.

    I can’t believe they would try that. It would mean a violent revolution, something I have feared for several years.

    No prominent Republican challenged the ruling class’s continued claim of superior insight, nor its denigration of the American people as irritable children who must learn their place. The Republican Party did not disparage the ruling class, because most of its officials are or would like to be part of it.

    Never has there been so little diversity within America’s upper crust. Always, in America as elsewhere, some people have been wealthier and more powerful than others. But until our own time America’s upper crust was a mixture of people who had gained prominence in a variety of ways, who drew their money and status from different sources and were not predictably of one mind on any given matter.

    The British UKIP revolution seems to have stalled but the “migrant” crisis will revive it.

  31. “PenGun, you had better stay up there with the grizzly bears and metrosexual men like Trudeau until the revolution is over.”

    So simple.

    I have black bears where I live. They are basically harmless unless you do something strange and freak them out. Only a fool wanders where there are Grizzly’s without significant deterrence.

    Trudeau was a bouncer and fights, well he used to before he became PM, 2 nights a week at his boxing club, and has done so for perhaps 20 years. This is why the Conservative black belt went down so easily when they had an exhibition match.

    I doubt there is an American politician can live with him in a ring.

  32. The British UKIP revolution seems to have stalled but the “migrant” crisis will revive it.

    By somewhat opposing the Germans on Syrian migrants/invaders and holding a referendum on the EU Cameron has neutralised Ukip, at least for the moment.

  33. “I doubt there is an American politician can live with him in a ring.”

    Except in a debate, of course.

  34. “Except in a debate, of course.”

    He won with a significant majority. He can debate very well, perhaps not at his father’s level though.

    American politics is just a slugfest these days, you have a nominee perhaps.

  35. One of the main functions of a Vice Presidents is to be assassination insurance for the President. The concept being that the VP succeeding to office would be more repugnant than the President. Cruz is showing that he is far more acceptable to the GOPe and the Democrats than previously expected.

    Trump should be able to placate Cruz supporters through his choice of appointments and how he governs, that is, give his supporters reform which is motivated by conservative principles. This can’t be 100% Cruz but it needs to be better than the establishment alternative would be. Trump also needs to be able to implement his reform ideas which deviate from Cruz’s vision.

    Cruz as VP fails for the reason you specify. The Cruz vision moves, mostly, in a different direction than the Trump vision, Trump wants to expand the party and broaden the policy vision, Cruz wants to narrow the party and double down on “conservatism” at a time when the public is rejecting the Republican brand of conservatism.

    Trump needs a compromise VP, one who will advance his vision but also one who can satisfy Cruz supporters and Establishment supporters as being acceptable and that person is Kris Kobach. Harvard and Yale Law, Baptist, home schools his kids, hasn’t made enemies (as far as I can tell) subscribes to much of “conservative” orthodoxy but he’s been a demon on the immigration issue.

    Trump’s immigration program is carried out by Kobach, hopefully Kobach subscribes to Trump’s platform of broadening the party and redefining it, but we can’t read the future.

  36. So Pierre begat him a tough guy. A tough guy who’s embraced the racist, anti-Christian, anti-Semite running the area below the 49th. The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree, apparently. I remember my Canadian relatives opinion of the old man, as well as the nest of vipers that is Quebec. Frankly, back then I was shocked.

  37. The conservative black belt, Patrick Brazeau, was also drug addict and alcoholic and now manages a strip club. He claimed that he took a dive to collect on the 3 -1 odds in his favor, but who knows. The guy sounds like a psycho. He was a tomato can whether he threw the fight or not.

  38. Yeah Brazeau was tool of the Harper machine. It turns out a lot of em’ were crap. The fight is on youtube, he got his ass kicked.

    Umm as a country that’s not especially Christian and one that generally has problems with Israel’s ‘solutions’, we are likely to get along with Obama.

    The old man was a bit of a genius but America did not like him much, that’s fer sure. I’m sure the modern world has many shocks awaiting your attention. ;)

  39. “That might explain the bad thinking.”

    Cheap shots all over. He does appear to be all there, you can make your own observations. Won an election that was well contested. A boxing club that’s any good will, have very few concussions.

    I’ll throw one back. About half, maybe more of the people running for President seem to me to have suffered some kind of brain damage. That’s just from what I can see. ;)

  40. “America did not like him much, that’s fer sure.”

    Neither did the Canadian dollar, as I recall.

  41. So Pierre begat him a tough guy.

    Pierre begat a Tumblerina. Take the most vapid Tumbler memes and put them into a person in charge of a nation and you get over-the-top virtue signaling we see at the expense of the people of Canada. Pierre was an autocrat who enacted a silent coup d’etat in Canada and his spawn seems to have inherited those traits and combined them with the nuttiness of his crazy mother.

  42. There’s no way around these problems. Some people see danger immediately as it presents. Others only later, and then PennGuns of the world are there throwing gasoline onto the bonfire of danger because they believe that they’re doing good – ideology blinds them to reality.

  43. Won an election that was well contested.

    1.) Trudeau won the women’s vote due to his nice hair and pretty boy looks. Women are notorious for voting this way. Combine this with the dynasty and celebrity appeal and you get an even bigger bloc of voters who are impervious to reason.

    2.) The longer Harper was in office the greater the mood for a change. This ousting the incumbent phenomena is seen all over the West. This is exactly what happened in rock-ribbed conservative Alberta where they ended up electing communists as a protest vote where every voter thought he was acting independently and come the end of the evening they all realized the magnitude of their screw-up, they had all protest voted and elected someone they didn’t actually want.

    This election victory doesn’t say anything positive about Trudeau of his party.

  44. Cheap shots. It’s the American way. With no substance and google you can come up with almost anything to fit your purpose.

    We are pleased with our new PM. Too bad you are unlikely to get anything that will please you.

    “then PennGuns of the world are there throwing gasoline onto the bonfire of danger because they believe that they’re doing good – ideology blinds them to reality.”

    One n in PenGun but hey. The irony is very rich in this little gem.

  45. “It’s the American way.”

    I would think that someone of your brilliance and sophistication would not wish to be tarnished by an association with the lowly Americans.

    If you feel the need to leave us to our benighted pursuits, we will understand.

  46. We are pleased with our new PM.

    I get you. You were also pleased with Harper for all of his years in office, right?

  47. “You were also pleased with Harper for all of his years in office, right?”

    I doubt PenGun was pleased. He swings pretty hard left and likes goofy media types.

  48. I doubt PenGun was pleased. He swings pretty hard left and likes goofy media types.

    I have to disagree. I’ve parsed his logic and I understand him. Allow me to demystify his logic for you.

    We are pleased with our new PM.

    Here is PenGun speaking on behalf of all Canadians. We know that all Canadians did not vote for Prime Minister Zoolander, so the only basis on which PenGun can claim that all Canadians are pleased with Zoolander is that he is in office.

    So by applying some transitive mumbo-jumbo we can safely conclude that because Harper was in office PenGun was also pleased with Harper, as were all Canadians, because they all have to speak in one voice.

    The fact that Zoolander won with 39.4% of the popular vote compared to Harper’s 31.89% and that voter turnout was only 69%, meaning that Zoolander won with 29.89% assent from all eligible voters is simply immaterial to the issue of a collective voice for all Canadians.

    Ergo, if all Canadians are happy with Prime Minister Tumblerina, then all Canadians were happy with Harper and because PenGun is a Canadian, he too was happy with Harper.

    See, I have delved deep into the abyss and I understand how these things work.

  49. One BIG issue that hasn’t been mentioned on this thread is Trudeau’s embrace of the muslim invasion, already paying dividends.

    The fact that our most detested president in living memory happily expresses complete camaraderie with Trudeau speaks ill of Canada’s future. We’re getting rid of our bad guy socialist, Canada’s just getting settled in with theirs.

    As a resource exporting country, Canada’s economic health for the foreseeable future is going to be difficult enough without blowing out the expense side of the ledger as socialists do. I wish it weren’t so, but Canada’s future is diminished by Trudeau, not enhanced.

  50. Oh lord. This has nothing to do with the subject at hand. That you would spend post after post trying to put down our new PM indicates you have nothing to say about what’s happening to your pitiful country.

    TangoMan you are an fool. To take my ‘we’ and transfer that to, well, some figures reveals nothing. Of course there are sides in Canada, we have our right wing that ran the place while Harper was in power. That will probably not happen again soon as we are a basically liberal people. Many people are worried that Trudeau’s stated intention to run deficits to address infrastructure will be a bad move. As we are caught in the US war with Russia and as depressing oil prices is part of that war we are suffering from the low price on our oil, as is Russia. We however are not in the position Russia is in and we have a lot of resources both natural and human. His effort to make that work better is a sane response to a very broken global financial system.

  51. MikeK,
    While there were likely several significant causes of the great depression, I’m convinced that the largest of these was the monetary expansion during the “roaring twenties” aided by the Fed as amply demonstrated by Friedman. The republicans were more than a little complicit in that as Hoover so amply demonstrated. The balance of trade during the rebuilding of Europe was definitely in surplus for the US, resulting in the necessary accumulation of gold reserves (rather than primarily by investment in US capital from abroad) in order to zero out the balance of payments.

    When our export trade diminished due to European recovery and increasing trade restrictions, US companies dependent on exports began to fail, default on their debt and literally thousands of banks were forced to write these assets off, suffered cash flow deficits that soon put them in the red. As these failures wiped out the saving assets of millions, investment and consumption fell rapidly.

    Smoot Hawley was one of the factors that made this the Great Depression as it significantly changed the rules of the game and by limiting international trade based on comparative advantage (on both sides of the exchange of goods and services) depressed much of the potential for recovery. As the balance of trade swung negative for the US the gold flow reversed itself and the bank failures shrunk the money supply by a multiple of the bank reserve losses. Any expansion to stabilize the money supply and reduce the increased risk of both saving and investment was not likely due to the value of the dollar being tied to gold reserves. On the other hand, both Hoover and of course FDR applied fiscal stimulation of aggregate demand with a combined effect that aggregate supply could show little growth (loss of export markets, crowding out of investment, increased risk for investment). Business had been made vulnerable by the low interest rates of the 20’s and the bubble of european demand for our goods and services during recovery. Quite literally they had built excess long term capacity based on debt.

    The build up for WWII stimulated aggregate demand and aggregate supply as overseas trade was increased without the crowding out of investment from the internal fiscal stimulus. This circumstance was effectively a change in the rules and risk calculations that spurred investment and aggregate supply. To the extent that people were psychologically motivated to support our own war effort by buying US securities and desirous of increased saving in a world increasingly more dangerous and uncertain the savings rate increased as well. Yes, our military buildup increased employment directly without the true inflationary results being seen due to rationing and increased saving. For example my dad sent all but $10 a month home to be saved while he was in Europe. This amounted to several thousand dollars. The end of our Great Depression was not primarily government fiscal stimulus (largely offset by borrowing) as much as it was increased aggregate demand from international trade and the increase in aggregate supply as productive assets could be had with minimal crowding out..

    This was the period of the birth of discretionary monetary policy through Fed open market operations, with all of it’s negative subsequences for the future.

    Yes our guns, ammo and willingness and proficiency to use them as required is a great source of both our society’s strength and a deterrent to those elites who would try to rule us for their privilege a’ la crony capitalists, progressives, internationalists, socialists and jihadists.

    By the way, Grizzlies have no concept of deterrence. You show them a gun and they still kill you. You better be ready to use it and it better be big enough. Dispite your comfort with black bears, an adult male or female with or without cubs is perfectly capable of killing without warning. Provocation being in the mind of the animal, not human intension.

    On the other hand, power elites will only respect an armed public if they know it can and will defend itself from force. It is dawning on them that many of us will. The wait time for ATF special permits (for things like automatic weapons, etc.) has significantly increased over the last decade. The sequester has nothing to do with that. Not to mention those who will prepare without the government’s permission to exercise their constitutional rights. I used to worry about the feds having that info in the event of any confiscation attempts, but the number is now large enough to make that less likely. We say down here, “Come and take it.” As Barry said to his supporters, “…they bring a knife, we bring a gun….” OK if that’s what they want, we can play that game.

    I’d rather settle it at the ballot box, but that has to be with equal and full rights of both sides to assemble to hear their leaders. Shutting down a private or public assembly is not free speech any more than shouting “fire” in a closed room full of people is. Respectful dissent is fine. Disrupting crosses the line. If the demonstrators get physical, then the right of self defense is appropriate. That is why adequate physical security to prevent such escalation is appropriate. Letting a violent stage stormer go is much more incitement to future riot and disruption that someone affirming the right of self defense. I only support Trump’s statements in that vain, not those where he is affirming assault or lauding the apparent assaulters.

    Blaming Trump for inciting this violence is a classic case of blaming the victim. Alinskyism. If I were the other republican candidates, including Cruz, I would never cast Trump’s poorly considered remarks as the cause of these incidents. This disruption will continue and they are likely future targets You can take issue with specific Trump statements without making or implying the unjustified leap to causation of these incidents. Trump rightly called out the progressives as the intensional, sufficient cause. This is a professionally funded, manipulated and organized effort just as BLM and OWS were and are.

    We have been warned how Summer and Fall can degenerate. The political elites can choose to address it proactively or reactively as they politicize it for whatever short term gains they see. The latter could quickly get beyond containable. God help us if it does go that route. Pass the ammunition.


  52. You are welcome to your gun culture. You will not be able to bring your government under control with guns. At some point you may figure this out.

    Voting is a much better way. Now it’s extraordinarily hard to screw with Canadian elections. All hand counted with scrutineers from all the parties watching. Your methods appear to be much easier to skew.

    I like computers and have been playing with them since the late 80s. As I ran servers for years I got to deal with all kinds of trickiness on line. I have a pretty good idea how security works and can secure a network. I would not trust a computer I did not have access to for anything as serious as counting my vote. It’s just too easy.

    I have been charged by a large male black bear I named Thomas. I did what you have to do and stood my ground. It’s a ritual charge, to see if you are prey. One does need to know this if you are going to be out among them, most people will run which is dumb. I’ve clocked black bears at over 40 mph. Harmless is of course relative. Grizzly’s are just dangerous.

  53. You are welcome to your gun culture.

    PenGun could you please explain why some Canadian provinces, and especially your territories, have higher homicide rates than the northern tier of American states if America’s gun culture is the primary culprit behind American homicide rates?

    Enquiring minds want to know.

  54. That will probably not happen again soon as we are a basically liberal people.

    Keep in mind that voters in Toronto PREFERRED Mayor Rob Ford over the leftist alternatives. Fatigue with Harper shouldn’t be taken as preference for Zoolander.

    As for being a liberal people, I’m surprised that you’re advocating for the bringing in of Muslim fundamentalist with backgrounds in goatherding, a people and occupations not known for spawning western liberalism.

    Your people are your society. Change the people and you change the society.

  55. The only thing that saves Canada is cold winters. The same is true of Minnesota. Both are magnets for nuts but cold winters tend to keep them indoors. Can anyone imagine what Chicago would be like without winter ?

  56. If Trump wanted to hold a rally in the lobby of the building where Sanders has his HQ, and could lease the space from the building owner, he should be able to do so.

    But, anyway, I have lived in Chicago (my whole 65-yr life, except when away at college and a year when my wife worked for the City of Gary which had a residency requirement) but maybe you can help me because I am at a loss–where else in Chicago could the Trump campaign find a venue for a night rally of about 5-10,000 people, with decent transportation to and from, in the Midwest winter and in basketball/hockey season when most indoor venues are hosting a sporting event or one day away?

    Maybe Trump was trolling for trouble, maybe not, but unless you can answer my question it is not warranted to assume he was.

  57. “it is not warranted to assume he was.”

    Someone suggested United Center but I asked if it was booked and got no answer. I think Trump’s advance people did not realize the strategy of the Soros faction.

    The violence will get worse and worse and, while I don’t blame Trump for canceling, it was the equivalent of Reagan pulling the Marines out of Lebanon after the barracks bombing.

    This will be a hot summer and very long.

  58. The Bulls were playing Miami at the United Center last Friday.
    The Sears Centre in Hoffman Estates holds 11000 and is empty for much of the year including Friday.
    Allstate Arena in Rosemont holds 18000 and was empty that night.
    Loyola University on the far north side holds about 5000 or so.
    There are probably a few others I’m not thinking of, but those are the ones that seem safest. Loyola would’ve been the best option because it’s in a quiet, compact neighborhood and the Chicago police would have jurisdiction.
    Obviously Trump’s campaign blew it. His reliance on the air game and lack of a ground game finally caught up with him last week, although it ultimately didn’t matter for the primary.

Comments are closed.