ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Saturday, February 27, 2016

The preference cascade

Glenn Reynolds makes a connection between the Trumpening and #Brexit:
In America, Donald Trump — who many of the experts thought had no chance — is dominating the polls. In Britain, meanwhile, much of the public seems to be mobilizing in favor of exiting the troubled European Union — a British Exit, or Brexit.

Writing in The Spectator, Brendan O’Neill puts this down to a class revolt on both sides of the Atlantic. And he’s right as far as he goes, but I think there’s more than just a class revolt. I think there’s also a developing preference cascade. O’Neill writes: “In both Middle America and Middle England, among both rednecks and chavs, voters who have had more than they can stomach of being patronised, nudged, nagged and basically treated as diseased bodies to be corrected rather than lively minds to be engaged are now putting their hope into a different kind of politics. And the entitled Third Way brigade, schooled to rule, believing themselves possessed of a technocratic expertise that trumps the little people’s vulgar political convictions, are not happy. Not one bit.”

Well, that’s certainly true. Both America and Britain have developed a ruling class that is increasingly insular and removed from — and contemptuous of — the people it deigns to rule. The ruled are now returning the contempt.
Robert Prechter predicted this more than a decade ago. It's also happening in other European countries. This is what happens when the social mood changes. The blithe, mindless optimism that permits the populace to be used and abused by the financial elite is gone. People are seeing more clearly now, and they are beginning to recognize what was done to them, and by whom.

There will be a reckoning. There will be many reckonings. And unfortunately, not all of them will be pretty, or even civilized.

When the tide goes out, it's easy to see who was naked all along.

Labels: , ,

262 Comments:

1 – 200 of 262 Newer› Newest»
Blogger Mr.MantraMan February 27, 2016 11:35 AM  

Scolding the white devil, the Cuckservatives greatest mistake, now it's easily identified as personal.

Anonymous BGKB February 27, 2016 11:37 AM  

Trump being audited 12 years in a row is probably the best advertisement for him yet. We know the first thing he will want to build is a wall, and can guess at the first thing he will want to break.

Blogger Salt February 27, 2016 11:53 AM  

There will be a reckoning. There will be many reckonings.

"To me belongeth vengeance, and recompence; their foot shall slide in due time: for the day of their calamity is at hand, and the things that shall come upon them make haste." - KJV

Who is to say what His instruments shall be?

Blogger Ingot9455 February 27, 2016 11:55 AM  

Yeah, just like Rush Limbaugh is audited every year like clockwork by every state he visits (especially new York) to see if he did any work in that state for some requisite number of days and they can catch him out, make a stink, and tag his income.

Better Republican credentials could not be found.

Blogger praetorian February 27, 2016 11:56 AM  

But we've been told repeatedly by a duck sicker that trump will never win the election.

Vox, are you suggesting that someone interested in social justice might... lie to us?

Blogger Cinco February 27, 2016 12:03 PM  

@2 Trump being audited 12 years in a row is probably the best advertisement for him yet.

During the last debate, this is where Cruz lost me. The thought of releasing tax statements only validates what the IRS does/is and to that extent, it really lets me know what Cruz really believes.

Trump should have immediately retorted with a reference to this. The IRS is no ones friend, it is almost universally despised.

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein February 27, 2016 12:07 PM  

Trump being audited 12 years in a row is probably the best advertisement for him yet. We know the first thing he will want to build is a wall, and can guess at the first thing he will want to break.

The Fed?

*Asks innocently*

Anonymous Brick Hardslab February 27, 2016 12:09 PM  

There are several ways we could drop the IRS and still fund our government. It's Leviathan's teeth.

Anonymous BGKB February 27, 2016 12:12 PM  

The Fed?*Asks innocently*

The (((FED))) could not have existed without the IRS. They sprang forth at the same time.

Blogger Lovekraft February 27, 2016 12:21 PM  

This reminds me of the Oscar awards a few years back with Ellen Degeneres. Does anyone else here remember that selfie picture with those goofy high school grins and startstruck eyes?

Who could possibly hold them in anything other than derision after seeing that photo?

Anonymous Rolf February 27, 2016 12:25 PM  

Yay, PrefCasc!

If Trump can nuke the IRS, the Fed, and the BATF from orbit, establish the FairTax, pick a SC justice in the Scalia mold, and build that wall people keep talking about, I'm willing to forgive him most of the rest of the crap he's likely to pull. And, thought that other stuff might be damaging, it'll be a lot more entertaining than watching the slow-motion destruction of the nation that's been going on for the last decade and a half.

Blogger collisioncat67 February 27, 2016 12:33 PM  

Just when I've become convinced that people in general were stupid beasts, perfectly content to let their elitist "betters" lead them around by the nose, even to the meat packing plant; the Trump phenomena occurs.

Maybe there is hope after all.

OpenID mattse001 February 27, 2016 12:34 PM  

Trump is a clown. That won't change, no matter how many rubes he cons.

Blogger James Dixon February 27, 2016 12:37 PM  

> Maybe there is hope after all.

There is always hope. The Lord works in his own way and in his own time. Maybe Trump is his tool to restore the republic, maybe he's his tool to destroy what it's become, maybe he's neither and things will continue as they have for another few years. But work he does.

Blogger Nemo Maximus February 27, 2016 12:41 PM  

@12 Trump is not a clown - although he sometimes disguises himself as one as he goes about mesmerizing the people. It's not a preference cascade, it's hypnosis. He is the Mule, wrecking the progressive plans of the "I Love Science!" Foundation University crowd. Except it's too late for him to die young, and he has an heir and a spare. Seldon wept.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan February 27, 2016 12:44 PM  

What I take from the Left's rhetoric is the notion of talk down, as an example from what I've read from that Scalzi asshole is what he says and it's not much it has to be delivered at a talk down tone. Now imagine if the talk down tone was negated and hence despised

Anonymous Shut up rabbit February 27, 2016 12:47 PM  

mattse001 wrote:Trump is a clown. That won't change, no matter how many rubes he cons.

Good for him. US politics is a circus.

Anonymous The other robot February 27, 2016 12:50 PM  

Whoa! Has Trump got mattse001 thinking past the sale?

He's no longer telling us that Trump will not win. He's now telling us that Trump is a clown.

Anonymous #8601 Jean Valjean February 27, 2016 12:53 PM  

Here is an excerpt from Prechter's 1995 book "At the Crest of a Tidal Wave":

"The coming trend of negative psychology will be characterized primarily by polarization between and among various perceived groups, whether political, ideological, religious, geographical, racial or economic...Political manifestations will include protectionism in trade matters, a polarized and vocal electorate, separatist movements, xenophobia, citizen-govt clashes, the dissolution of old alliances and parties, and the emergence of radical new ones."

Long Wavers also talk about the emergence of "protector" presidents during the winter stage of the cycle.

Enter Trump.

Anonymous KPP February 27, 2016 12:55 PM  

@12 "Trump is a clown. That won't change, no matter how many rubes he cons."

Ah, the disdain!

Anyone who supports Trump MUST be an ignorant rube that is too stupid to know that he's being conned. Yet Trump is also a clown himself, implying that he's the stupid one as well. The stupid clown putting one over on the stupid folks. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

But Matt is smart enough to see through the stupid clown's con game. Yes, very smart indeed. If only everyone were smart like Matt, we'd have a bright future in America. But only the smart people like Matt can see that.

Anonymous coyote February 27, 2016 12:59 PM  

"a clown"... yes, the court jester who makes the nobles titter nervously, the knights look to whose patronage they actually need, commoners begin to actually see the farce as reality and bring out the pitchforks...

Blogger Lovekraft February 27, 2016 1:03 PM  

@ mattse001: projecting? What role, should your pick win and Trump doesn't, would you have we minions play, if you had unlimited power? Answer truthfully. If you say 'let you live your lives", then why criticize us for our pick?

Unless you provide one of those rare tidbits of truth from a sjw.

Anonymous Man of the Atom February 27, 2016 1:03 PM  

mattse001 wrote:Trump is a clown. That won't change, no matter how many rubes he cons.

Matt Walsh? Is that you? You sly, silver-tongued, churchian dog!

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein February 27, 2016 1:03 PM  

@12 ...no matter how many rubes he cons.

You think Trump's gonna cross the rubes he cons, as it were?

Anonymous Susan February 27, 2016 1:05 PM  

It isn't just Britain and Americans revolting.

It has also been instructive and amusing to watch the absolute terror of the ruling elites south of our own border with regard to just the notion of a Trump presidency.

For the first time in decades, these corrupt pustules are going to have to face their own problems without the American safety valve which siphons off the overflow.

2017 and 2018 should be interesting times if and when Trump gets the big chair.

Blogger SciVo February 27, 2016 1:06 PM  

When the tide goes out, it's easy to see who was naked all along.

Here is a link to the reference, for anyone who didn't recognize it. (Ctrl-F for "naked" to jump to it.)

Anonymous BGKB February 27, 2016 1:18 PM  

Anyone who supports Trump MUST be an ignorant rube that is too stupid to know that he's being conned

We at least accept that the people voting for free stuff are making the right decision for themselves because they could never achieve based on merit better than welfare provides.

You think Trump's gonna cross the rubes he cons, as it were?

You know darn well Matty has no idea what crossing the rub e con means. He thinks he will be the commissar not the body in the ditch.

Anonymous Turd Burglestein February 27, 2016 1:19 PM  

Run along now little boy and go fap to your pictures of bernie sanders or hillary clinton depending on what your sexual preference is.

Blogger Phat Repat February 27, 2016 1:24 PM  

I believe the EU was established as a mechanism to reign in/compete against the US/GB. A common currency, defense, open trade, and ease of travel within the EU by its members, etc..., is not necessarily dubious. Unfortunately it seems to have gone awry as was evident by the handling of the invaders. Perhaps that's a good thing as the true intentions of the EU is now evident and must itself be contained or abolished. I believe it will be contained.

Given all that, Brexit isn't likely as the pound sterling is going to be eviscerated. And Brexit would only accelerate that. In fact, we in the US shouldn't get too comfortable either. Know what I'm sayin?

Blogger SciVo February 27, 2016 1:26 PM  

Lovekraft wrote:This reminds me of the Oscar awards a few years back with Ellen Degeneres. Does anyone else here remember that selfie picture with those goofy high school grins and startstruck eyes?

No, because I don't do Twatter. But you made me curious, so I found it, and yeesh. If "group vanity" ever gets a word with a dictionary entry, that should be the illustration.

Blogger John S February 27, 2016 1:27 PM  

Whoa! Has Trump got mattse001 thinking past the sale?

He's no longer telling us that Trump will not win. He's now telling us that Trump is a clown.


Shades of Dubya's good buddy, ex Mexican president Vicente Fox: "I'm not paying for that fucking wall!" Not, "there isn't going to be a wall"... Sale is already assumed. Ha!

And Trump's reply? "The wall just got 10 feet taller!"

If talking shit to foreign enemies engaged in zerg rushing our hometowns with illiterate mestizo halfwits isn't enough to secure your vote... Maybe our side is better off without you.

Anonymous Jack Amok February 27, 2016 1:30 PM  

Just when I've become convinced that people in general were stupid beasts, perfectly content to let their elitist "betters" lead them around by the nose, even to the meat packing plant; the Trump phenomena occurs.

Maybe there is hope after all.


As I've said before, MPAI, but also MPANCI.

Most people are indeed idiots, but most people are not complete idiots. You can put one over on them for a while - maybe even a long while - but sooner or later the contradictions become too obvious for most of them to ignore any longer.

Trump is a clown. That won't change, no matter how many rubes he cons.

Thanks for sharing that, goatse001.

Blogger SciVo February 27, 2016 1:35 PM  

Rolf wrote:If Trump can nuke the IRS, the Fed, and the BATF from orbit, establish the FairTax, pick a SC justice in the Scalia mold, and build that wall people keep talking about, I'm willing to forgive him most of the rest of the crap he's likely to pull. And, thought that other stuff might be damaging, it'll be a lot more entertaining than watching the slow-motion destruction of the nation that's been going on for the last decade and a half.

I'd settle for a wall and an "envio de dinero" tax. And it's been at least three decades, if not five (or fifteen).

Anonymous Jack Amok February 27, 2016 1:43 PM  

Something else Reynolds noted at the end of that column.

" now it’s our ruling class that is hidebound by political correctness, and it takes movement by the masses to give it permission to express a controversial view. That’s a major change, and it’s one that the ruling class isn’t likely to appreciate much. But having subjected itself to the chains of “acceptable” opinion, what can it do?"

They've used political correctness for decades to squelch opposition and silence dissent, but now that they're in a position where those "unacceptable" subjects need to be discussed in order to address the serious problems we have, they can't. Similar to how SJWs keep doubling down until there's no face-saving way out, our would-be nobility has boxed itself into a corner where it cannot even acknowledge the most important problems exist, let alone try to fix them.

Blogger praetorian February 27, 2016 1:49 PM  

If talking shit to foreign enemies engaged in zerg rushing our hometowns with illiterate mestizo halfwits isn't enough to secure your vote... Maybe our side is better off without you.

That's some USDA Prime+ Ilk commentary, right there... Almost kakistocratic...

Blogger SciVo February 27, 2016 1:51 PM  

Phat Repat wrote:Given all that, Brexit isn't likely as the pound sterling is going to be eviscerated. And Brexit would only accelerate that. In fact, we in the US shouldn't get too comfortable either. Know what I'm sayin?

No.

Blogger Phat Repat February 27, 2016 2:10 PM  

SciVo wrote:Phat Repat wrote:Given all that, Brexit isn't likely as the pound sterling is going to be eviscerated. And Brexit would only accelerate that. In fact, we in the US shouldn't get too comfortable either. Know what I'm sayin?

No.


What part?

Anonymous Hooc Ott February 27, 2016 2:23 PM  

"The ruled are now returning the contempt."

I live fairly away from it all in a small American town. So I ask the history buffs here how bad were rural areas during the French Revolution?

Did all the be-headings and riots and looting and other monstrosities happen mainly in Paris or did it spill over into the country side as well?

Anonymous VFM #6306 February 27, 2016 2:24 PM  

What you seem to be saying, mattse, is that Trump has crossed the rubes he cons.

OpenID mattse001 February 27, 2016 2:31 PM  

14. Nemo Maximus
"Trump is not a clown...He is the Mule..."
The Mule was a mutant; a freak of nature. So I guess I'm with you so far...

OpenID mattse001 February 27, 2016 2:33 PM  

17. The other robot
"He's no longer telling us that Trump will not win. He's now telling us that Trump is a clown."

Embrace the healing power of "and."

Blogger hadley February 27, 2016 2:36 PM  

It is a Trump + Bernie wave. The tide overwhelms both the Republicans and the Democrats. Both parties are becoming increasingly irrelevant. Citizens of both parties are realizing that the party differences on issues that really matter are almost non-existent.

Glenn senses it, but even he cannot cut his ties to neo-connery and the false party dichotomy entirely.

And poor Ed Driscoll is even worse. Not to mention Ace of Spades and his recent Trump Tantrum.

They are scratching their collective neocon GOPe heads, watching the tide go out in Phucket on Boxing Day, lifting their eyes to the horizon and seeing that horizon-wide whitecap approaching in the distance.

Some, like fools, trot down to the beach to get a closer look, and gleefully start collecting handfuls of shells from the now-exposed ocean floor as the water wall approaches.

And some, like Glen, look away and start gathering their beach blankets and cell phones "just to be sure" ... but sure of what, they do not know. Its just an "uncomfortable feeling", for now.

The tidal wave that is approaching is going to drown many of them and render their lives and ideologies inconsequential. Their political corpses will be collected from the tangled refuse miles inland.

There will be no escape for those who keep nattering on about Liz Warren being a "Fauxcohontas" or Trump being a "secret liberal" (as though anyone cares).

Drop your cell phone and blanket and run for higher ground, Glenn. You have only a few precious seconds.

OpenID mattse001 February 27, 2016 2:38 PM  

19. KPP

I'm a Cruz supporter. As far as I can tell, the difference between the two supporters' camps is that Cruz supporters aren't ruled by their emotions.

I feel sorry for Trump supporters, especially on this site.
You've been fighting monsters/staring into the abyss so long that you've become what you hated (to mix metaphors). I guess you think payback makes it justified.

OpenID mattse001 February 27, 2016 2:41 PM  

21. Lovekraft
1) I'm not an SJW.
2) Your "role?" This isn't a morality play, but yes I would let you live your lives. The problem with the Donald is that I doubt he'll do the same. He's another version of Obama, complete with creepy cult of personality supporters.

OpenID mattse001 February 27, 2016 2:43 PM  

22. Man of the Atom

No, different Matt. It's a common name.

Anonymous Big Bill February 27, 2016 2:44 PM  

These cucks clutching their pearls and hyperventilating about Trump the Clown and Bigot remind me of my grandfather whingeing about FDR.

When the people get good and truly pissed, there is no telling WHO and WHAT they will support. Best not resist too much longer, Glenn.

Blogger Derek Kite February 27, 2016 2:46 PM  

The mother of all reckonings arrived in 2008, and with a pile of freshly minted cash the elites bought themselves time.

There is a fixed law; reality intrudes. The easiest way to learn is to listen to others, the lessons of history. The next easiest way is to get the hint from experience. The hardest is to be forced by circumstance and the loss of all you hold dear to submit.

The hard reality that 'conservatives' are facing is that all the quaint notions such as rule of law, constitution, limited government, not wrong in themselves, are meaningless. It is practice and culture. The first arises from the second. Liberals thrive on corruption and theft, conservatives blather on into irrelevance. The reckoning has arrived; they had very stong hints back when Bush tried amnesty. But no, they have to face their destruction to learn.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 2:48 PM  

23. TontoBubbaGoldstein February 27, 2016 1:03 PM
"@12 ...no matter how many rubes he cons.

You think Trump's gonna cross the rubes he cons, as it were?"

I think his tenure (if elected) will be marked by gridlock. Congress won't willingly reform, and Trump can't make them. When stymied, I think he'll at first be tempted to lash out, then he'll simmer down when reminded that impeachment is back on the table.
At that point, he'll either start "dealing" with the establishment (aka selling out), or lose interest.

In tone, his administration will have the same feel as Obama's to supporters: the promise of a grand crusade that turned into utter disappointment and disillusion.

Anonymous Man of the Atom February 27, 2016 2:51 PM  

mattse001 wrote:22. Man of the Atom

No, different Matt. It's a common name.


Common thought patterns too. Real easy mistake to make.

Blogger Gaiseric February 27, 2016 2:54 PM  

@5. Clearly you meant to use this gif.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 2:54 PM  

26. BGKB February 27, 2016 1:18 PM

You think Trump's gonna cross the rubes he cons, as it were?

You know darn well Matty has no idea what crossing the rub e con means. He thinks he will be the commissar not the body in the ditch.

1) Rubicon: the river in Italy demarcating the limits of the state and over which no Roman general was supposed to bring his army (towards Rome) because it was a threat on the city. Julius Caesar did so. And no, I didn't look that up on Wiki.
2) I don't think I'll be a commissar because I'm not part of the system. I have no power over my fellow men, and that's the way I like it.

Blogger Derek Kite February 27, 2016 2:55 PM  

Newt Gingrich and Jan Brewer are backing Trump. See what happens when you 'lose' a debate.

Blogger Gaiseric February 27, 2016 2:56 PM  

I think his tenure (if elected) will be marked by gridlock. Congress won't willingly reform, and Trump can't make them. When stymied, I think he'll at first be tempted to lash out, then he'll simmer down when reminded that impeachment is back on the table.

At that point, he'll either start "dealing" with the establishment (aka selling out), or lose interest.

In tone, his administration will have the same feel as Obama's to supporters: the promise of a grand crusade that turned into utter disappointment and disillusion.


Could be. I suspect that the candidates on 2020 will literally cause SJWs to faint in fear, in that case. Assuming that the people are even willing to wait that long.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 2:59 PM  

30. John S
And Trump's reply? "The wall just got 10 feet taller!"

Either this is retarded braggadocio or Trump just admitted that the original proposed construction specs were inadequate.
Hmmm...what do you suppose the added cost of 10 extra feet along a 1000 mile border will be?
I guess it doesn't matter since somebody else will be paying for it, at least in your imaginations.
That sounds like socialist thinking.

Blogger Salt February 27, 2016 3:02 PM  

Matt Edwards wrote:I think his tenure (if elected) will be marked by gridlock.

Foreign policy. That is a perogative of the Executive. Much of what Trump has talked about revolves around it. It's foreign policy that'll start jobs returning to America. Deporting illegals, that too is the Executive. The House and Senate won't stop Trump. If he starts doing as he's said he will, Congress-Critters will either follow his lead or be gone.

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein February 27, 2016 3:07 PM  

Matt Edwards wrote:23. TontoBubbaGoldstein February 27, 2016 1:03 PM

"@12 ...no matter how many rubes he cons.

You think Trump's gonna cross the rubes he cons, as it were?"

I think his tenure (if elected) will be marked by gridlock. Congress won't willingly reform, and Trump can't make them.


Oh, but he can. Trump is the perfect guy to use the bully pulpit to push Congress around.

Gridlock would be the less desirable outcome...but as Clinton/Gingrich demonstrated; gridlock is waaaaay better than most alternatives.

PRO TIP:
Resist the temptation to go directly from the argument that a Trump presidency will be impotent due to gridlock, straight to the "Trump is a dangerous demagogue/next Hitler" argument.

Blogger pyrrhus February 27, 2016 3:08 PM  

@42 Cruz supporter....Cruz is a Canadian who has sworn fidelity to Israel and Goldman Sachs...How has that program been working for the last 30 years?

Blogger Lovekraft February 27, 2016 3:08 PM  

"but yes I would let you live your lives"

How is it you would prefer the status quo, where your version of leaving me alone consists of heavy taxation, affirmative action, misandric media and courts etc?

And if you would change the status quo, who other than Trump is best motivated and qualified to do that?

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 3:09 PM  

45. Big Bill February 27, 2016 2:44 PM
These cucks clutching their pearls and hyperventilating about Trump the Clown and Bigot remind me of my grandfather whingeing about FDR.

FDR was a socialist who did lasting damage to this country. We are still living with the fallout to this day. I think a little whingeing might be in order.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 3:14 PM  

51. Derek Kite February 27, 2016 2:55 PM
Newt Gingrich and Jan Brewer are backing Trump. See what happens when you 'lose' a debate.

I intermittently have respect for Gingrich because of his experience and ability to read politics. I have no respect for Brewer because she's an establishment sellout of the first order.

Jan Brewer is quite the "get" for "anti-establishment" Trump. LOL

Blogger tz February 27, 2016 3:21 PM  

"Gridlock" sounds like a term used to describe the fences and gates around a FEMA camp. The establishment ought to be praying that Obama closes and demolishes GITMO before his,term ends.

I'm so grateful the establishment is burning the bridges they might have been able to use to retreat.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 3:22 PM  

54. Salt

I admit, Trump will have the power to do *some* of the things he promised. But as has appeared on other forums (Instapundit, actually), the border is just the tip of the iceberg for America's problems.

National debt, wars (?), entitlement reform, SCOTUS picks, etc.
Trump will need Congress for all of those, and if he secures the border but America collapses from another direction, it won't matter much.

The border is a necessary but not sufficient condition for American restoration.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash February 27, 2016 3:24 PM  

John S wrote:If talking shit to foreign enemies engaged in zerg rushing our hometowns with illiterate mestizo halfwits isn't enough to secure your vote... Maybe our side is better off without you.



That just went up on twitter

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 3:26 PM  

55. TontoBubbaGoldstein February 27, 2016 3:07 PM
Trump is the perfect guy to use the bully pulpit to push Congress around.

Obama thought that as well on his SCOTUS replacement (true, it's not over yet but it isn't looking like things will change).
When Congress decided the issue was worth fighting over, they fought.
Maybe Trump will shame them, but I wouldn't bet on it.

Blogger tz February 27, 2016 3:26 PM  

The establishment has been preaching a form of "if they don't have bread, let them eat cake" for two decades.
They've lost their heads.
But not so much they don't worry abuut Trump actualizing and realizing it.

Maybe Trump can make a deal with ISIS so the sharp spikes on the Whitehouse fence can be graced with the heads of the house and senate.

Anonymous Rolf February 27, 2016 3:28 PM  

Imagine the press conferences that Trump would have, compared to those that Captain Zero has now. Instead of fawning beltway insiders lobbing softballs trying to "protect their access," you'd have an adversarial press arguing with a man with more braggadocio than the last five presidents combine. All sorts of interesting facts and events are likely to come to light. That, by itself, might be worth the price of admission.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan February 27, 2016 3:28 PM  

Maybe the right is hesitant to face the left with personal politics but they ain't shy about it with fellow rightists. As evidence Sailer's thread on naming the new cucks party has 217 comments, this will be fun, first cucks then the left

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 3:29 PM  

55. TontoBubbaGoldstein
PRO TIP:
Resist the temptation to go directly from the argument that a Trump presidency will be impotent due to gridlock, straight to the "Trump is a dangerous demagogue/next Hitler" argument.


PRO TIP:
Resist the temptation to make straw man arguments, since I neither stated nor implied Trump would be an all-powerful dictator.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents February 27, 2016 3:31 PM  

And Trump's reply? "The wall just got 10 feet taller!"


Matt Edwards
Either this is retarded braggadocio or Trump just admitted that the original proposed construction specs were inadequate.

It's rhetoric, not dialectic. Stop sperging.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 3:31 PM  

56. pyrrhus
Birtherism is a kind of disqualification, isn't it?

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 3:36 PM  

57. Lovekraft February 27, 2016 3:08 PM
"but yes I would let you live your lives"

How is it you would prefer the status quo, where your version of leaving me alone consists of heavy taxation, affirmative action, misandric media and courts etc?

And if you would change the status quo, who other than Trump is best motivated and qualified to do that?


1) I don't prefer the status quo. I would reform PARTS of the system. If you reform it all, then you have a different system.
2) Cruz. He has the right sensibilities and respect for the Constitution. I have little fear that he even *wants* to be a dictator.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 3:40 PM  

65. Rolf
The office of the president isn't there for our entertainment. If you think it is, you need to vote Camacho.

Blogger praetorian February 27, 2016 3:43 PM  

you've become what you hated

You mean we've become the team that's been beating the shit out of us since 1914?

Horrifying.

See you in the death camps...

Blogger Gaiseric February 27, 2016 3:46 PM  

Matt Edwards wrote:The office of the president isn't there for our entertainment. If you think it is, you need to vote Camacho.
Haven't you been paying attention? Getting the Mexicans OUT is the policy proposal, not voting them into the White House.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 3:48 PM  

71. praetorian
No, I mean that you've become an echo chamber of groupthink, willingly ceding your agency to the collective.
For example: Trump must have some flaws that people here recognize, but they will never admit them because it "would be giving the opposition ammunition!"
...the same justification the EuroSocs used to cover up the rapefugee bullshit.
When you're worried about how something *seems* instead of what it *is*, you've already lost.

Blogger Gaiseric February 27, 2016 3:49 PM  

Matt Edwards wrote:Jan Brewer is quite the "get" for "anti-establishment" Trump. LOL
You do realize that just because a couple of admittedly Establishment politicians were smarter than their colleagues and got out in front of the obvious way the wind was blowing as a way to save face for themselves doesn't mean that you can imply with impunity that that makes Trump an Establishment insider, right?

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 3:50 PM  

72. Gaiseric
Gee, I hope that doesn't also apply to Cubans!

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 3:52 PM  

74. Gaiseric February 27, 2016 3:49 PM
Matt Edwards wrote:
Jan Brewer is quite the "get" for "anti-establishment" Trump. LOL

You do realize that just because a couple of admittedly Establishment politicians were smarter than their colleagues and got out in front of the obvious way the wind was blowing as a way to save face for themselves doesn't mean that you can imply with impunity that that makes Trump an Establishment insider, right?


Then, there's Chris Christie too.
What's that "Goldfinger" quote about enemy action?

Blogger Gaiseric February 27, 2016 3:59 PM  

Do you know what "a couple" means? I wasn't talking about Jan Brewer and her husband.

Blogger Ron February 27, 2016 3:59 PM  

@mattse001

I feel sorry for Trump supporters

Whenever I see someone write this, I know they've given up. Disclosure: I don't care who wins. I'll vote for Trump, but only because I am voting for the ideal, not the man. I think the man is probably just another asshole playing the public. But he says the right things, and he hasn't ass raped us yet, so I'm willing to give him the chance.

That said, please don't use that phrasing again. I would rather you wrote:

you may have won this round Trumpistas, but we Cruzites will be back again Muahahahahhahah!

See the difference? One is bitchy, the other is awesome (and mad - but in an awesome way).

Blogger Unknown February 27, 2016 4:00 PM  

@mattse001

Agreed. But then many of his supporters evidently believe Game of Thrones is a Gallup Poll. Amerika is more like a circus, and circuses need clowns to distract the children. They also need elephants in tutus, but Hillary took that job when Monica took up smoking.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 4:04 PM  

77. Gaiseric February 27, 2016 3:59 PM
Do you know what "a couple" means? I wasn't talking about Jan Brewer and her husband.

I assumed you were referring to the original post, which named Brewer and Gingrich. I added that Christie made three.
If that was incorrect, please let me know.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 4:05 PM  

78. Ron
It was a bit passive aggressive of me. Okay, I'll try to watch my phrasing in the future.

Anonymous Faceless February 27, 2016 4:07 PM  

Matt Edwards wrote:30. John S

And Trump's reply? "The wall just got 10 feet taller!"

Either this is retarded braggadocio or Trump just admitted that the original proposed construction specs were inadequate.

Hmmm...what do you suppose the added cost of 10 extra feet along a 1000 mile border will be?

I guess it doesn't matter since somebody else will be paying for it, at least in your imaginations.

That sounds like socialist thinking.


Or it's funny. Why so serious? I guess this is Saturday whack-a-sperg.


Matt Edwards wrote:71. praetorian

No, I mean that you've become an echo chamber of groupthink, willingly ceding your agency to the collective.

For example: Trump must have some flaws that people here recognize, but they will never admit them because it "would be giving the opposition ammunition!"

...the same justification the EuroSocs used to cover up the rapefugee bullshit.

When you're worried about how something *seems* instead of what it *is*, you've already lost.


He's a loudmouthed asshole that's about 50/50 on most things, except, for the one issue - should America be permitted to exist as a nation? - he has been on the correct side of this.

Remember - most VP regulars supported the SNP in the Scottish election, even though we all knew they were crazy socialists. They were the only ones talking about SNP out of the UK. That's why UKIP is the right choice when they are the force for Brexit.

If Americans don't govern themselves, and instead you can import as many new voters as required for whatever political view you want to advance, there is no protection of any liberty of any kind. The GOP has been refusing to act correctly since 1986 at least. Rubio was in the Gang of Eight; Cruz was for amnesty before he was against it. Bluto (which, if you're slow, is not a complete 100% positive thing to call Mr. Trump...) has been correct on what is required for the existential threat of the loss of self-government to foreign interests.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 4:16 PM  

82. Faceless

Okay, my turn:

I don't think it's true to say Cruz ever supported amnesty. The closest he ever came was the poison pill amendment during the Go8 fight, and even Chuck Schumer admitted it was a poison pill.

What Cruz DID support, around 2013, was an INCREASE in H1-B visas. That gave me pause, but he has since reversed his position. I've never heard him explain or admit that he reversed (maybe he thinks there's no point in nuance since it will be taken out of context). I also know that Senators get their information from lobbyists who have an incentive to lie about how they're using the visas.

I can't prove my reasoning, but I get the feeling that either Cruz now understands the abuse of H1-B visas or at least understands that it's radioactive. He hasn't screwed me on anything else I can see, so I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on that issue.

Anonymous Faceless February 27, 2016 4:17 PM  

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/01/28/ted-cruz-s-flat-out-lie-on-immigration.html

De Posada is a former Director of Hispanic Affairs for the RNC and founder of the Latino Coalition, a conservative Latino organization that worked with the Bush administration unsuccessfully to pass immigration reform. “My criticism is that Cruz can say, ‘Things have changed and I’ve changed my position.’ But don’t sit here and flat out lie that you have never been for legalization when the facts are very clear.”

When a 46 year old man pivots on such a big issue within the first term of his first federal office, perhaps he's not the fully baked representative of movement conservatism as he claims. The thing people like to see about changed minds and changed opinions is a sequence of actions taken compatible with that new opinion; remember, Mr. Cruz is in year 4 of his first federal office, his position on the border evolved only in 2014 with Glenn Beck and Teddy Bears at the border, and, before 2014, he was a much more pro-legalization politician. It's definitely not his time.

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 4:18 PM  

@12 mattse001

Trump is a clown.
---

You can make anything funny by adding midgets and/or chimps

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 4:21 PM  

@23 TontoBubbaGoldstein
@12 ...no matter how many rubes he cons.

You think Trump's gonna cross the rubes he cons, as it were?
---

Good one

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 4:23 PM  

84. Faceless
"De Posada is a former Director of Hispanic Affairs for the RNC and founder of the Latino Coalition..."

You realize that source is incredibly impeachable, right?
I've even bolded the suspect credentials.

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 4:23 PM  

@27 Turd Burglestein

Run along now little boy and go fap to your pictures of bernie sanders or hillary clinton depending on what your sexual preference is.
---

ewww- you mean GEEZER PR0N is a thing?

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 4:25 PM  

@29 SciVo
If "group vanity" ever gets a word with a dictionary entry, that should be the illustration.
---

Yipe, that must be what it's like to wake up in hell.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 4:28 PM  

84. Faceless

In fact, as you read through the article you can see it's full of crap. Besides Posada, every other critic is anonymous. Just nameless "officials" in the Bush administration.
BTW, it was Cruz' job to carry out his boss' wishes. The article states that Cruz' work never resulted in amnesty.

That's a hit piece.

Anonymous Faceless February 27, 2016 4:28 PM  

Lastly, I suggest that there is insufficient time and record for you to see the clear changed opinion as genuine conviction instead of a response to prevailing winds.

Mr. Trump said after Iowa that he does not get credit for self-funding. Self-funding means something. He could spend that money elsewhere. He doesn't have to be remembered as Mr Bluto D Trump Asshole, Builder of the Mexican Wall, for all time. He could be known as billionaire playboy maker of golf courses. But, he will be thus remembered -- and at the expense of his own money. That means something - he didn't take $110 million in SuperPAC money; he wrote his own checks.

Now, there are tons of things Sen. Cruz could have done to prove he is a believer in this. I think the filibusters have been phony when done by him or Rand Paul (except Paul sure did raise awareness, and then capitulated) - because nothing got done. Where is the legislative fight? The amendments demanding DHS build the border wall or do something? Where is the admonition of Mr. Johnson that DHS is failing the Homeland?

Now, over a career, he could get 1/10th the credentials that Sen. Sessions, who has fought the fight at every turn, has earned in the Senate. However, again, to believe it is nothing that a man who spends his own money to be forever linked to a particular idea that has been so on the minds of Americans that the GOP base fought their own sitting president GWB over amnesty, but to believe that a man in year four of his first federal term, who changed course halfway in that term, and who has nothing to show for it to prove that he believes these things any more than Paul Ryan believes in small government - that's its own form of blind emotional devotion to Sen. Cruz.

Anonymous KPP February 27, 2016 4:33 PM  

@42 "I'm a Cruz supporter. As far as I can tell, the difference between the two supporters' camps is that Cruz supporters aren't ruled by their emotions."

Yup, that's the difference right there, fer sure. All of us rubes being conned by the clown are just being whipped into a frenzy of emotion that eschews any weighing of the issues or rubbing our two brain cells together. Because if we really, really thought about it, we'd be in the Cruz camp, doncha know. It's only because we're stupid and emotional that we can't see the glory of The Cruz (PBUH).

"I feel sorry for Trump supporters, especially on this site. You've been fighting monsters/staring into the abyss so long that you've become what you hated (to mix metaphors). I guess you think payback makes it justified."

Yeah, your pity. You can keep it. We know what we'll get from Cruz, because he's the safe establishment bet. Maybe a bit more "conservative" than your average establishment conservative, but still far to the left of what we need.

Those of us supporting Trump want to see a lot of messed-upedness rolled back. I doubt there's a one of us that sees Trump as the perfect guy to give us what we want and if he is elected it may all be a boondoggle, but so what? Even if he's a "secret liberal Democrat" the Congress can keep him in check, right? Just like they worked so hard to roll back all the crap we got from Obama, right?

I will vote for Trump just so he gets a chance to do the stuff that he's promised. If it doesn't get done, we're none the worse for it. If it does, we're better.

Maybe I am staring into the abyss. Maybe I'm sick of the Machine grinding ever forward toward the edge. I'm willing to throw the spanner into the works to see if he can reverse direction. Cruz would just bark out an order for "Half speed!" while the grind toward the abyss continues. Because that's what the establishment does.

Anonymous Icicle February 27, 2016 4:34 PM  

They are scratching their collective neocon GOPe heads, watching the tide go out in Phucket on Boxing Day, lifting their eyes to the horizon and seeing that horizon-wide whitecap approaching in the distance.

Some, like fools, trot down to the beach to get a closer look, and gleefully start collecting handfuls of shells from the now-exposed ocean floor as the water wall approaches.

And some, like Glen, look away and start gathering their beach blankets and cell phones "just to be sure" ... but sure of what, they do not know. Its just an "uncomfortable feeling", for now.


Yes. It's here. It's here. The cascade.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Hf_XkgE1d0
"Those aren't mountains. They're waves."

Anonymous Rolf February 27, 2016 4:37 PM  

@70 - never said that it was. But I'd rather an entertaining man ripping holes in a corrupt establishment and throwing leftist lapdogs into paroxysms of hysterical breakdowns while giving hope to the common man, than a boring and conventional plod to certain national collapse and destruction. Would you rather destroy the nation with certainty (but quietly) with more business as usual, or roll the dice on salvation?

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 4:37 PM  

91. Faceless
1) Trump's "self funding" doesn't impress me. He doesn't need to fund much at all, with all the free press he gets from the liberal MSM.
Did you see the extra time CNN gave Trump after the last debate? Can you say "the fix is in?"
2) The Senate isn't the presidency. The criticism that "Cruz didn't get anything done" in a chamber where 60 votes are needed to get most stuff done, with a corrupt establishment that doesn't want to be reformed, strikes me as odd.
Considering the GOPe's corruption and their fetish for seniority/clock-punching, what did you think a freshman Senator would get done in 4 years?

Cruz did call McConnell a liar from the floor of the Senate, and I consider that an accomplishment.

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 4:38 PM  

@63 Matt Edwards
Obama thought that as well on his SCOTUS replacement (true, it's not over yet but it isn't looking like things will change).
---

Comparing a lame duck president who has exhausted all of his political capital against a fresh president who might be entering office with a mandate.

Remember when Obama got in his first couple years he got practically everything he asked for.

Anonymous Faceless February 27, 2016 4:40 PM  

Matt Edwards wrote:84. Faceless

In fact, as you read through the article you can see it's full of crap. Besides Posada, every other critic is anonymous. Just nameless "officials" in the Bush administration.

BTW, it was Cruz' job to carry out his boss' wishes. The article states that Cruz' work never resulted in amnesty.

That's a hit piece.


You should consider owning that your man was wrong, has had his eyes opened, and has changed, and then ask what proves he has changed thoroughly and absolutely. Mr. Trump spends his own money to establish this truth in the American political dialogue.

Tucker Carlson published this information the same as this hit piece. Now, I don't know how much there is to know about Ted Cruz before he was the Tea Party choice in 2012, but here you go:

http://dailycaller.com/2015/12/16/on-immigration-reform-its-ted-cruz-2005-vs-ted-cruz-2015/

Now, Mr. Cruz was on the board of a group called HAPI. George Soros groups that monitor conservatives and do their little reporting say Mr. Cruz was on the board of this group. Other documentation says that this group weighed in on both the Bush initiative and the 2008 election. HAPI made positive statements about Sen. McCain and comprehensive immigration reform. HAPI claims and others claim HAPI worked with Mr. Bush on his failed amnesty.

So, on things we can find, when the GOP was in favor of immigration in the Bush years, Mr. Cruz was on the board of a group aligned with that effort.

Now, it's clear to me that Ted Cruz changed his mind in 2014. Seeing tens of thousands of people hauled by train from the southern to northern border of Mexico to be stuck various places by the Obama administration - while that same Obama administration was in court fighting Arizona and asserting its executive prerogative to not enforce the law - should have changed people's minds.

However, it's a simple question - no fruits, just salad - what has Ted Cruz done other than rhetoric in his bid for president to so solidly convince you that the scales are off his eyes and he is now to the right of Trump on this issue? It's an emotional and visceral disgust for the carnival barker, and some anger that the carnival barker was right on this key issue, that motivates the hagiography of Cruz.

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 4:42 PM  

@76 Matt Edwards
Then, there's Chris Christie too.
--

Kris Krispy and the Worm Rodhman were not exactly the best of endorsements to pick up :P

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 4:42 PM  

92. KPP
We know what we'll get from Cruz, because he's the safe establishment bet...
Sure. That's why Dole said he's rather have Trump (among other GOPe), and Graham implied that Cruz should be assassinated...because the establishment loves them some Cruz.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 4:44 PM  

94. Rolf
I would rather save the country. We differ on which candidate will best be able to do that.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 4:46 PM  

96. Were-Puppy
Remember when Obama got in his first couple years he got practically everything he asked for.
The first two years, Obama had a Democratic Senate and House.

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 4:47 PM  

@87 Matt Edwards
84. Faceless
"De Posada is a former Director of Hispanic Affairs for the RNC and founder of the Latino Coalition..."

You realize that source is incredibly impeachable, right?
I've even bolded the suspect credentials.
---

I love you Cruzers. You guys blame the others of believing in blind faith, but that is exactly what you all do. Projecting.

Anonymous Faceless February 27, 2016 4:49 PM  

Matt Edwards wrote:91. Faceless

1) Trump's "self funding" doesn't impress me. He doesn't need to fund much at all, with all the free press he gets from the liberal MSM.

Did you see the extra time CNN gave Trump after the last debate? Can you say "the fix is in?"

2) The Senate isn't the presidency. The criticism that "Cruz didn't get anything done" in a chamber where 60 votes are needed to get most stuff done, with a corrupt establishment that doesn't want to be reformed, strikes me as odd.

Considering the GOPe's corruption and their fetish for seniority/clock-punching, what did you think a freshman Senator would get done in 4 years?

Cruz did call McConnell a liar from the floor of the Senate, and I consider that an accomplishment.


That was not my question of what he accomplished. What has he tried? Has he put forth amendments to instruct things to happen? Has he fought the good fight in the Senate? Has he used parliamentary maneuvers to try to force important action on an unwilling executive? I am happy to know these things.

We simply value different things. Writing your own checks instead of sending out emails begging for money every day is - to me - a tangible thing showing me that he means what he says on this issue. Jeb Bush believed in nothing and stood for nothing as he only had OPM. Calling a man a liar with your best Arthur Branch impression is to you a tangible thing showing you that Mr. Cruz means what he says on this issue. Fred Thompson didn't persuade me much, and he made some great statements, too, but didn't try to do anything.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 4:50 PM  

97. Faceless
1) Tucker Carlson: another incredibly impeachable source. He booted Mickey Kaus from his website because he wouldn't shut up about immigration (or wouldn't accept the party line). Yes, I know that Kaus is a Democrat.
2) What concrete thing did Cruz do?
The Gang of Eight bill didn't defeat itself, you know.

Blogger cavalier973 February 27, 2016 4:51 PM  

John Sullivan prefers Cruz to Trump to Rubio...

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/431951/donald-trump-gop-future

He points out, however, that Trump has brought in a lot of people not normally engaged in the political process, and that any shenanigans to cut Trump out of the nomination would simply result in losing these new voters.

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 4:54 PM  

@99 Matt Edwards

Sure. That's why Dole said he's rather have Trump (among other GOPe), and Graham implied that Cruz should be assassinated...because the establishment loves them some Cruz.
---

Stage Divin' Bob Dole endorsed Rinubio.
Linda Graham, well, what can anyone say about xer :P

Anonymous TBA February 27, 2016 4:56 PM  

A question from a foreigner:
How sure are people on this blog that Trump will actually try hard to reduce immigration and the number of immigrants in the country? Do you trust him, or is he just your best bet?

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 4:56 PM  

Best bet

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 4:56 PM  

102. Were-Puppy
Let me be a little more precise:
The groups that De Posada heads are RENT SEEKING operations.
The racial preferences were established by the left, then slowly internalized by the establishment right until they now accept the leftist premises. They either do this because they've gone ideologically wobbly, or because it benefits them personally (it doesn't much matter which).

De Posada's entire reason for being is to extract money from the federal government.
Why would anyone believe such a person on immigration?

Blogger praetorian February 27, 2016 4:57 PM  

When you're worried about how something *seems* instead of what it *is*, you've already lost.

Hi Matt. Here's how it is.

Shut up and get out of the way. You are useless at best.

Anonymous Jay Will February 27, 2016 4:58 PM  

"Both America and Britain have developed a ruling class that is increasingly insular and removed from — and contemptuous of — the people it deigns to rule"

But more importantly its an OUTGROUP ruling class. Hitler was right! A million plus British white men killed for the Jews. They weren't heroes they were sheep who were played. They killed for people who hated them and have ALWAYS hated them.

The self-destructive gamma and womanly feeling would rather import an enemy to stop the bad feelings he gets from looking at the jock, even if that importation will eventually be far worse.

That is the Jew play! Strong Islam v Strong Europe, fight each other, kill each other, yessss, yesss. Out of the ruins of the deaths of a millions of alphas/betas/deltas we will reign still!

Blair in Daily Mail today. Human scum, he hates me I know he does. Abstractly only, but I never even thought about people like him. But he hates me and his ilk hate me, but worse they hate my lovely family. Because they don't care for them, and they are supposed to be OUR leaders. They are not they deserve to die an Islamic death.

I am ready to kill and die for all this shit. Come get me British fucking scum police. End my gamma life now. Knock on my door and change me forever.

Metamorphosis - shut the internet down and scum like me will be on the street, no kids, no love, nothing, dead inside, despairing, wasting my life away........but fill me with hate and I BREATHE.



Blogger VD February 27, 2016 5:02 PM  

How sure are people on this blog that Trump will actually try hard to reduce immigration and the number of immigrants in the country? Do you trust him, or is he just your best bet?

Not at all. Best bet. We KNOW the others won't do a damn thing except increase them.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 5:02 PM  

105. cavalier973
I'm not a big fan of bringing in people for it's own sake.
Realize that if 100 IQ is the average, that means 50% of the population is DUMBER THAN THAT. It may come off as "elitist," but I don't want those people voting.
I especially don't want them voting if they have made no effort to follow politics in the off-election years.

Blogger Elocutioner February 27, 2016 5:03 PM  

Matt Edwards wrote:2) What concrete thing did Cruz do?

The Gang of Eight bill didn't defeat itself, you know.


No, it didn't just defeat itself. And neither did Cruz defeat it nor put a legislative hold on it to prevent passage. As a matter of fact Cruz had precisely zero discernable impact on stopping S. 744 as it cruised through cloture in the Senate 82-15 and passed 68-32 with 14 GOP Senators (including Rubio) voting for it. It only died in the House after Dave Brat won a stunning upset in the primary to unseat Cantor. Sources say Boehner had already whipped the votes and they were deciding which day to schedule the vote and how best to celebrate our final immolation. Cantor's historic loss justifiably gave most Reps cold feet. But us rubes are too stupid to see that Cruz was all talk. We also didn't notice his $250k grift to get the co-chair of NRSC while the Mississippi primary shenanigans went down and he refused to endorse any Tea Party challengers that year. But I'm sure he's really an outsider uncontrolled by CFR or GS or Mercer or anyone like that. Heil Trump!

Anonymous KPP February 27, 2016 5:04 PM  

@99 "Sure. That's why Dole said he's rather have Trump (among other GOPe), and Graham implied that Cruz should be assassinated...because the establishment loves them some Cruz."

Were these statements made before the caucuses and primaries started or after? Was it before or after the field narrowed? Were they speaking specifically because they were Trump supporters or were they saying he was merely a better choice than Cruz because they thought Trump more electable?

Just because Cruz isn't every establishment Republican's cup of tea, doesn't mean that he isn't a part of the establishment. I've already granted that he was more conservative, but he's not where I want him to be on several issues I consider most important. Trump is.

If it becomes a race between Trump and Cruz for the nomination, we'll see who the establishment lines up behind.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 5:07 PM  

106. Were-Puppy
Stage Divin' Bob Dole endorsed Rinubio.

Yes he did. I'm just sayin' that the establishment's flowchart goes like this:
1) Jeb!
2) Rubio
3) Trump
4) Hillary
5) Cruz

Right or wrong, the establishment thinks they can make a deal with Trump. They also would rather have a Democrat statist than a real reformer; that's what they did in the VA governor's race.

Blogger praetorian February 27, 2016 5:09 PM  

Best bet.

And it probably won't matter anyway: my boys are outnumbered 2 to 1 in their age group by hispanics.

Trump at least starts the conversation: the first step is admitting you have a problem.

In that sense, he has already won.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 5:09 PM  

110. praetorian
Shut up and get out of the way. You are useless at best.
No. Make me.

Blogger SciVo February 27, 2016 5:16 PM  

Phat Repat wrote:What part?

As MattSE said, "Embrace the healing power of 'and'."

1. Likelihood of Brexit
2. Evisceration of pound sterling
3. Acceleration by Brexit
4. Discomfort of U.S.

You seem to be coming from a separate dialogue and assuming at least a common set of responses to those questions, if not agreement.

Blogger Cataline Sergius February 27, 2016 5:22 PM  

I think Van Crevald was closer to the mark.

This is all part and parcel of the world wide crisis of legitimacy of the state as defined by the Treaty of Westphalia.

Both major parties are failing.

It's more tribal than anything else, people are withdrawing their support from the Republican Party and giving it to something that doesn't have a name yet.

Which is presumably why the old rules don't apply to Trump. He's become a matter of Identity. Consequently he could famously be, "shooting people on fifth avenue" and it wouldn't affect his popularity.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 5:26 PM  

114. Elocutioner
"Democrats may have been onto something last year when they said that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) has more influence over House Republicans than John Boehner.

The San Antonio Express News reported this week that Cruz may have once again demonstrated his clout with conservative lawmakers in the lower chamber, this time using his sway to quash immigration reform."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/ted-cruz-house-republicans-immigration-reform

"Cruz spent the weekend in Iowa with Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), the most outspoken critic of comprehensive immigration reform in the lower chamber. It’s a potentially fruitful relationship for both lawmakers.

Cruz, who has become an influential voice among House Tea Party conservatives, can help cement opposition to merging the broad Senate package with one of the narrower House bills that could pass there this fall."

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/188422-ted-cruz-looms-large-over-comprehensive-immigration-reform

"“There’s absolutely no doubt that an immigration push is going to divide the Republican Party and take the focus off Obamacare,” Heritage Action spokesman Dan Holler told Bloomberg Businessweek, which reported earlier this week that Cruz was meeting with House tea party Republicans."

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/immigration-cruz-splinter-Republicans/2014/01/31/id/550124/

"Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) may have stopped immigration reform legislation in the House by calling it what it is with one word: 'amnesty.'"

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2014/02/13/house-gop-amnesty-advocates-upset-ted-cruz-may-have-killed-bill/

There.
That's 4 sources: 1 leftist, 2 centrist, 1 right that all agree Cruz was coordinating the fight in the House and was central to it.
Feel free to find opposing sources that deny this, if you can.

Anonymous Jack Amok February 27, 2016 5:31 PM  

Do you trust him, or is he just your best bet?

Trust no one. But you still have to place your bets.

I'm a Cruz supporter. As far as I can tell, the difference between the two supporters' camps is that Cruz supporters aren't ruled by their emotions.

If laughing at sanctimonious prigs is being ruled by my emotions, than bring it on! The country is headed for a train wreck and there's no avoiding it, so we might as well enjoy the excitement. Not many people get to experience the times we will see.

Personally, I'd rather things were boring, but that's not my choice to make. All the can-kickers already made it, and there's no going back now, so fire up the music and let the bad times roll.

However many of us live through it will have a shot at better days on the other side.

Blogger Groot February 27, 2016 5:33 PM  

@46. Derek Kite:
"It is practice and culture."

I believe you are correct that this is what impels Trumpism. (The term "practice" here comes from philosophy and anthropology, and is similar to the sense of the practice of medicine, say, but extends further to religious, alimentary and all other cultural realms. It is how we practice our lives, with implicit focus on habits, customs, rituals, training, specific knowledge and the other necessities of correctly carrying out a practice.)

In the first part of the 20th century, there was an enthusiasm for relativism, moral and cultural, along with the rise of the blank slate theory of no human nature, and the belief in the perfectibility of mankind through socialism and progressivism. Anthropology, in particular, reveled in how different cultures were so very different.

One of the most enthusiastic of the molders of humanity, the National Socialists of Germany, caused a kerfuffle, however, what with World War II, the holocaust, and their concentration camps. The Nuremberg Trials, in particular, forced many to articulate rationales for condemning those who were, after all, following orders, yet committed atrocities.

It turns out that the search for an overarching system of ethics that allow us to rise above crass relativism (the technical term) has been the focus of Philosophical Ethics for some centuries now. There are four main approaches.

The first is known as the Sentimentalist approach, with its best known adherents being Hume, Adam Smith, and Confucius. It bases its approach on promoting the best sentiments of mankind, such as generosity, desire for honor, and the approval of others, etc., and for suppression of the bad sentiments via rigorous moral education.

The second is known as the Rationalist approach, with Kant as its voice. It seeks to base a universal ethics on an understanding of Practical Reason (in contrast with the Pure or Theoretical Reason of science). Through use of categorical imperatives, it seeks universal ethical principles that must never by violated, such as the dictum that lying is always wrong.

The third is the Utilitarian approach, and is the best known, with proponents such as Bentham and Mill. They use utility, a sort of currency of happiness, to measure and compare outcomes, with a focus on the greatest good for the greatest number. In contrast with the Rationalists, they are consequentialists, flexible in their basic ethical principles.

The fourth approach is the Contractarian, looking at social contracts, and includes Plato, Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Rawles. They seek to come up with rules almost from a game theoretic approach.

But I would say that Trumpism stems from another, fifth, approach, and many of you here will recognize its appeal. This is the Communitarian approach, which does not accede to the rejection by the other approaches of what they find most important. The game theory of Utilitarians, the veil of ignorance of the Contractarians, the categorical insistence of the Rationalists, even the optimism of the Sentimentalists, all try to reduce humans to stick figures which are interchangeable with any other human.

But what of our culture, our music, our families, our religion, and all else we treasure most? The Communitarian does not say that one culture is better than any other, but it does allow the people in a culture to declare their own preference for their own culture, and have that be a legitimate philosophical tenet. It does not say that one race is superior, but it encourages the building of a race's culture by allowing, even promoting, freedom of association.

OpenID sigbouncer February 27, 2016 5:34 PM  

110. praetorian
>Shut up and get out of the way. You are useless at best.

"No. Make me."

3rd grade comeback that's hilarious!

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 5:36 PM  

@109 Matt Edwards

I've dug up all kinds of things about Cruz and they usually get handwaved off. At least you give a reason to doubt that link, so props there.

Anonymous BigGayKoranBurner February 27, 2016 5:37 PM  

For example: Trump must have some flaws that people here recognize, but they will never admit them

Matty really is stupid enough to post comments the first day he found the site. All of Trumps flaws are already out in the open.

36 phat In fact, we in the US shouldn't get too comfortable either. Know what I'm sayin?

Jewish lightning will strike the FED? Even the gays here are prepping for the Nigapocalypse

You've been fighting monsters/staring into the abyss so long that you've become what you hated

I have dated coke fiends but I am sure I am not one of them.

<"but yes I would let you live your lives" with a large portion of your paycheck redistributed to Latrina's 21 illegitimate crackbabies.

De Posada is a former Director of Hispanic Affairs for the RNC and founder of the Latino Coalition of Miami Foam Parties.

88 ewww- you mean GEEZER PR0N is a thing? Dan Savage new thing is pimping out groups of wetbacks for geezers & cancer patients that are not served by other pimps. Jobs Americans wont do indeed.

we'd be in the Cruz camp, doncha know. Matty is a whore for those Gold Man Sacks.

Best bet. And it probably won't matter anyway: my boys are outnumbered 2 to 1 in their age group by Hispanics

One golden dawn vs. 30 anarchists, white privilege is genetic.
https://crushzion.k0nsl.org/1-greek-nationalist-golden-dawn-member-vs-30-anti-white-racists/
"“5/2/11 in Athens: Α gang of 30 anarchists fighting against 1 member of Golden Dawn (Greek National Party) in a store. Although they use pepper spray and every object they find, the Nationalist beat them with a stick and put them to root"

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 5:39 PM  

@110 praetorian

Did I read that right? Cubans at 3.7%, and yet there are 2 in the presidential race?

I think another aspect of globalism is to keep pushing anybody but natives.

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 5:43 PM  

@114 Elocutioner
But I'm sure he's really an outsider uncontrolled by CFR or GS or Mercer or anyone like that.
---

Mercer is a bigwig over at Breitbart, and yet there the Cruzers act as if that place is in the bag for Trump.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 5:44 PM  

124. sigbouncer
That's the response that internet tough guys deserve.

Blogger Elocutioner February 27, 2016 5:47 PM  

@121 So all you've got is a bunch of talk about how he MAY have killed the bill in the House while he DID NOT kill it in the Senate with a hold when he could have. Nothing tangible. In software we call this vaporware.

Blogger Aeoli Pera February 27, 2016 5:48 PM  

When the tide goes out, it's easy to see who was naked all along.

Easy for a superintelligence maybe.

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 5:49 PM  

@116 Matt Edwards

Yes he did. I'm just sayin' that the establishment's flowchart goes like this:
1) Jeb!
2) Rubio
3) Trump
4) Hillary
5) Cruz

Right or wrong, the establishment thinks they can make a deal with Trump. They also would rather have a Democrat statist than a real reformer; that's what they did in the VA governor's race.
---

Then why are they going behind the scenes trying to line up Romney to stop Trump?

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 5:51 PM  

@120 Cataline Sergius

Consequently he could famously be, "shooting people on fifth avenue" and it wouldn't affect his popularity.
---

When that line came out, I remember thinking he could become a folk hero depending on who he shot

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 5:52 PM  

126. BigGayKoranBurner
Matty really is stupid enough to post comments the first day he found the site.
Sorry, gaybag. I've been here for at least two years, just infrequently. Maybe VD can back that up with his godlike admin powers.

Matty is a whore for those Gold Man Sacks.
If GS "owns" Cruz because he took out a $1 million loan, then by that logic the banks "own" every mortgage holder in the U.S.
Is that what you're trying to imply, slave?

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 5:57 PM  

@121 Matt Edwards
Feel free to find opposing sources that deny this, if you can.
---

Expand H1Bs ++ from the horses mouth. Nobody has ever been able to explain this one to me. They usually just ignore it.


Soccers and Teddies This is a classic that he'll forever have a hard time putting behind him.

Blogger Elocutioner February 27, 2016 5:57 PM  

Were-Puppy wrote:Mercer is a bigwig over at Breitbart

I bring up Mercer because he's spent millions on Cruz and reportedly owes billions in taxes. And his name is rarely brought up. That association is a huge red flag. But somehow Trump doling out money is worse than being the puppet receiving it.

As for Breitbart the writers do seem to be relatively independent. I usually only follow a Nero or Nolte link these days.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 5:58 PM  

130. Elocutioner
"Holds, like filibusters, can be defeated through a successful cloture motion."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_hold#Origin_and_intent

1) I'm happy to again do your research for you.
2) Gee, on an 85-15 vote what do you think the odds are that the establishment could've mustered the 60 votes necessary to override a Cruz hold?
1%? 2%?
It's a mystery why Cruz didn't try that "one weird trick" to stop amnesty.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 6:00 PM  

132. Were-Puppy
See #2 on the list.

Blogger Nate February 27, 2016 6:01 PM  

"If GS "owns" Cruz because he took out a $1 million loan, then by that logic the banks "own" every mortgage holder in the U.S."

in 2012.

And paid it back completely.

Which is like saying Bank of America owns you because they held the mortgage on the house you sold 5 years ago.

Blogger Elocutioner February 27, 2016 6:01 PM  

@137 Ah, very good. Thank you for a factual rebuttal. I was wrong about that.

Blogger Halifax Donair February 27, 2016 6:01 PM  

@42 In that case, I have a car for sale. Only driven in Canada. Undercoating is half price this week. What colour Bricklin will you be driving off our lot?

Blogger Doc Rampage February 27, 2016 6:05 PM  

It's amazing watching all of these lame-ass attacks on Cruz. It's gone from his wife is blah blah blah, his dad is blah blah blah to Cruz was on the board of a Republican-aligned organization that endorsed the Republican presidential candidate who was pro-amnesty so Cruz must be totally pro-amnesty. And when Cruz was a lawyer working for a pro-immigration client, he wrote a pro-immigration paper on behalf of his client so Cruz is totally pro-immigration.

Do you people have any intellectual honesty at all? The worst is Cruz's proposed amendments to the amnesty bill that people are trying to swing as a pro-amnesty position, taking the word of pro-amnesty activists who would like to destroy Cruz's candidacy. Find someone who *during that fight* thought Cruz wasn't trying to kill the bill. He was trying to force the Republican senators to explicitly show that they knew what they would be getting by voting down amendments that would prevent those things. At the time the fight was going on, no one on either side doubted that Cruz was the most effective opponent of the amnesty legislation. It's only now, after Cruz won, that people are lying about what happened so other anti-immigration people won't realize that they have Cruz to thank for killing the bill. And you rubes are eating it up.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump has openly, in his own words, endorsed the Clintons and other corrupt Democrats who want to remove all barriers to 3rd world immigration. He has, in his own words said he has no problem with partial-birth abortion (also known as infanticide or baby murder). he has, in his own words, endorsed taking homes and property away from these uneducated people he loves so much and giving it to rich developers like him.

So sure, you can forgive Trump for all that, but Cruz taking a loan from Goldman Sachs? He's the Devil!

How much business has Donald Trump done with Goldman Sachs?

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 6:05 PM  

135. Were-Puppy
H1-B visas: see # 83.

Soccers and teddies: I got nothing, other than some Christian charity. It was a mystery to me why Beck did that, and I lost respect for him.

Anonymous Rolf February 27, 2016 6:06 PM  

@100 - Agreed. But I don't see anyone on the ballot that can do that. If by "best" you mean "least worst," then I'm still not sure which would be "best." My original comment stands alone as an observation of one aspect of what a Trump presidency would include; it's more a resigned acknowledgement that one of the current top ten candidates will win than a positive endorsement. And please note the caveats are not small things.

By the time the primary gets to my state, it'll all be over but the shouting, so my preference is totally moot.

Blogger SciVo February 27, 2016 6:08 PM  

Matt Edwards wrote:In tone, his administration will have the same feel as Obama's to supporters: the promise of a grand crusade that turned into utter disappointment and disillusion.

It's possible, but I don't expect it. Trump's shown a willingness to not only defy but insult TPTB, and even expose the kayfabe behind the scenes. There's a bit of the same sense of him needing to be herded in the right direction, but his "supporters" are more cynical and his starting point is more anti-establishment.

For seven years, progressives have accepted their Messiah folding on every point to the military-industrial-media-congressional complex. Because he only has preferences -- not principles -- and his base is pussies. Trump might have the first problem (I don't know), but definitely not the second.

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 6:10 PM  

@136 Elocutioner

As for Breitbart the writers do seem to be relatively independent. I usually only follow a Nero or Nolte link these days.
---

Brietbart is a fun site in the comments sections. That's were i've been practicing rhetoric ever since SJWAL came out.

Blogger SciVo February 27, 2016 6:14 PM  

Matt Edwards wrote:30. John S

And Trump's reply? "The wall just got 10 feet taller!"

Either this is retarded braggadocio or Trump just admitted that the original proposed construction specs were inadequate.

Hmmm...what do you suppose the added cost of 10 extra feet along a 1000 mile border will be?


The train is fine.

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 6:17 PM  

@142 Doc Rampage
It's amazing watching all of these lame-ass attacks on Cruz.
---

Yeah, forgive us for daring question anything about Cruz.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 6:18 PM  

142. Doc Rampage
+1000

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 6:20 PM  

So you guys who are Cruzers, do you think it was a net positive or negative with him giving Beck such a spotlight?

Blogger Groot February 27, 2016 6:22 PM  

@142. Doc Rampage:
"Do you people have any intellectual honesty at all?"

I think we'll have an answer to that question very shortly.

Two predictions, and here they are in writing:

1) Within a month, Trump will clinch the Republican nomination.
2) Within a month, he will cuck you, veering hard to the left for the General.

Blogger John S February 27, 2016 6:22 PM  

Either this is retarded braggadocio or Trump just admitted that the original proposed construction specs were inadequate.
Hmmm...what do you suppose the added cost of 10 extra feet along a 1000 mile border will be?
I guess it doesn't matter since somebody else will be paying for it, at least in your imaginations.
That sounds like socialist thinking.
Matt

No, Matt, that's called rhetoric. And it serves a legitimate dual purpose: it puts a smile on his supporters' faces, giving them a morale boost.

More amusingly, it makes his political opponents crazy, and pissed off people are more likely to shoot their mouths off without thinking about possible consequences.

Now I realize that it might look clownish from a sufficiently detached perspective (have you been checked for the 'tism, btw?)... But the rest of us are enjoying the show.

Ps. I don't mean to join into a dogpile against you. You've held your position against all challengers admirably. Well done.

Blogger James Dixon February 27, 2016 6:24 PM  

> Cruz. He has the right sensibilities and respect for the Constitution.

If he respected the Constitution that much he'd know the original meaning of natural born citizen and know he's not eligible.

> For example: Trump must have some flaws that people here recognize, but they will never admit them because it "would be giving the opposition ammunition!"

If you bothered to read the past Trump discussions you'd know better. He's a damn Yankee who's flip flopped on practically every issue over the years and is as likely to double cross us as not. But everyone else (including Cruz) is certain to double cross us. Anything else you want to know?

Look, if Cruz wins the nomination I consider him a moderately acceptable candidate and I expect I'll vote for him. But I'm not voting for him over Trump.

> Realize that if 100 IQ is the average, that means 50% of the population is DUMBER THAN THAT. It may come off as "elitist," but I don't want those people voting.

It doesn't take a 100 IQ to realize you've been robbed of your livelihood, your retirement, and your country; then vote accordingly.

> Yes he did. I'm just sayin' that the establishment's flowchart goes like this:
1) Jeb!
2) Rubio
3) Trump
4) Hillary
5) Cruz

From what I've seen it goes Jeb, Kasich, Rubio, Hillary, Cruz, then Trump. But I'll grant that Cruz barely edges out Trump.

> No. Make me.

We won't bother. If you're stupid enough to lie down on the railroad tracks, the train will simply run over you.

> Sorry, gaybag. I've been here for at least two years, just infrequently. Maybe VD can back that up with his godlike admin powers.

Maybe you should try reading while you're here then. If you did you'd know how we feel about Trump.

> ...then by that logic the banks "own" every mortgage holder in the U.S.

Good thing I don't have mortgage then, isn't it? And when I did it amounted to 2 years of take home pay. Is Cruz taking home $500K/year, Matt?

Blogger Gaiseric February 27, 2016 6:24 PM  

Doc Rampage wrote:It's amazing watching all of these lame-ass attacks on Cruz.
Cruz is fine. In slightly better days, he'd probably be an excellent president.

Today, he has absolutely no chance of getting elected. He has absolutely no chance of using his position as a bully pulpit to accomplish anything. He has absolutely no chance at destroying the cultural Marxist political correctness.

And his immigration conversion sure was both recent and convenient. It wasn't that long ago he wanted to increase H1-B visas 500%.

There's no point in talking seriously about Ted Cruz. If he were as strategically smart as he thinks he is, he would have avoided getting into serious dust-ups with Trump, and angled for a veep slot. Cruz covers a lot of Trump's weaknesses (Constitutionality and seriousness) and vice versa (charisma, leadership, hand on the pulse of the electorate.) They really would have made a great team together.

I favor Trump, because the sooner we fix immigration and kill the strangle hold of political correctness, Marxist indoctrination, and the traitorous Fourth Estate, the more likely we are to have a country left in which a guy like Ted Cruz can be our President and worry about Constitutional fidelity.

I'm not interested in the consolation prize of voting for the candidate that matches my ideology most closely (even if he's a dubious American) only to have him accomplish nothing that saves the country.

The watchword around here, if you want to be so keen on lumping all of us together, is that if you don't like Trump on these issues, wait until you see what 2020 puts up if he either fails to do what he promised, or doesn't win. If we even get that far before something more drastic is done.

Blogger Noel Bon Tempo February 27, 2016 6:26 PM  

Trump does not need the approval of Congress to deal with the immigration issue. All he has to do is to enforce existing law. this is an executive function.

OpenID sigbouncer February 27, 2016 6:27 PM  

"Sorry, gaybag."

*shakes head*

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 6:29 PM  

150.
I've barely seen Beck himself. It was more like a piece of news that came over the wire, then went away.
Is Beck some kind of central figure in the Cruz campaign? That would be news to me.
(but in general, Beck is kooky)

Blogger Rusty Fife February 27, 2016 6:30 PM  

Matt Edwards wrote:I think his tenure (if elected) will be marked by gridlock. Congress won't willingly reform, and Trump can't make them.

Most of what he has proposed is already law. It is just up to the executive to do it.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 6:33 PM  

152. John S
Ps. I don't mean to join into a dogpile against you. You've held your position against all challengers admirably. Well done.
Thank you. It's been fun.
Rhetoric. Ah yes, I've heard of this "rhetoric." Can't say I'm a big fan, given a choice between it and dialectic. Still, it has it's uses and yes...I suppose I knew what Trump was doing with that quote.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 6:35 PM  

153. James Dixon
The good thing about your post is that you led off with birtherism, saving me the time of reading the rest of your post.

Thanks!

Blogger James Dixon February 27, 2016 6:36 PM  

> Most of what he has proposed is already law.

Including the construction of a wall at the border: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Fence_Act_of_2006

Blogger Rusty Fife February 27, 2016 6:38 PM  

Matt Edwards wrote:Rhetoric. Ah yes, I've heard of this "rhetoric." Can't say I'm a big fan, given a choice between it and dialectic.

Wait. What? VD regular?

*Massive reading comp failure detected.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 6:38 PM  

153.
J/k, I read the rest of it:
It doesn't take a 100 IQ to realize you've been robbed of your livelihood, your retirement, and your country; then vote accordingly.

No, it just means you have no idea how to fix it. Especially by voting.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash February 27, 2016 6:39 PM  

The "Goldman Sachs" objection to Cruz is not the loan, although that's skeezy as hell. It's that Cruz' wife, Heidi is an Executive VP at GS, a literal member of CFR, and on the board of an NGO dedicated to one world government and erasing borders.
Okay Cruz fans, time to explain away or ignore that.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 6:42 PM  

156. sigbouncer
The guy's screen name is "BigGayKoranBurner" and I'm supposed to tiptoe around that? Um...no.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother February 27, 2016 6:46 PM  

Matt,

To get more of a perspective on Sigbouncer, look him up by his previous handle, Tiny Tim.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 6:48 PM  

164.
Heidi Cruz isn't being elected, her husband is. I would imagine she has more decorum than to comport herself like Hillary, as a "co-president."
I've heard no word, but would not be surprised, if she left GS for the duration of her husband's presidency.

Blogger Gaiseric February 27, 2016 6:49 PM  

Ah yes, I've heard of this "rhetoric." Can't say I'm a big fan, given a choice between it and dialectic.

Can't say I've seen much evidence of that. Like most anti-Trump fans, your objections (at least as stated here) seem to be more emotional than rational. I've yet to see a truly rational objection to Trump. More often, the objections are either 1) made up of a bunch of speculation and crystal ball assumptions passed off as if they were facts, 2) pointing out things that are common knowledge, and which are not unique to him (but which are given a pass in other candidates) 3) virtue signaling of the dogmatic libertarian or True Conservative™ style, 4) boiled down to thinking that he isn't very nice or likable. The notion that Larry Correia offered me in a recent argument that he'll likely grow the government because he has never really expressed any small government sensibilities yet is the closest thing to a cogent argument I've really seen yet.

To which, of course, the begged questions that never get a satisfactory answer are 1) so who do you prefer that actually has a chance to win and is better? They have to meet both criteria, mind you. And, 2) why is your priority what is—relatively speaking—policy esoterica when we have a sufficient existential threat that if we don't turn this ship around in just the next few years, we're not very likely to have a recognizable America left in which we can debate about whether or not tripling the number of ICE agents is either realistic or doable?

As a commentor on Steve Sailer's blog recently said, and I thought the wording was sufficiently well put that I've quoted and archived it (as did the Heartiste): "Worrying about free trade and healthcare is ridiculous when white children are already a minority in the US. I care about blood and soil, and Trump is the only candidate that even understands the concept. Libertarian ideological straight jackets mean nothing to me. Every quasi religious concept about liberty and freedom has been used by a parasitic elite in the name of open borders, offshoring and outsourcing and against white males. Free trade with Mexico and China has been an obvious and unmitigated disaster. Slap on the tariffs.

Libertarianism is a coward’s ideology. It’s an attempt by white males to argue in their own interest by ideological means instead of arguing plainly for what’s in the interest of their own blood and culture like every other ethnic group does. Every libertarian ideal has been turned against them by their ideological opponents. To be a libertarian you have to believe in open borders and free trade (or make some Rube Goldberg argument about why it’s more libertarian to believe otherwise) despite the fact that this is dispossessing and impoverishing white males who make up 99.9999% of all the libertarians that ever were or ever will be. To be a libertarian means to choose liberty over survival because how can you be a libertarian if you let sanity trump laissez-faire? In the future, when the last libertarian is bludgeoned to death with the last copy of Atlas Shrugs by some black panther militia man, he’ll be bitching with his dying breath about violations of his property rights and voluntary agreements."

Anonymous Jay Will February 27, 2016 6:51 PM  

What is the general opinion on here about fighting wars for Israel? The Jew owned media hates Trump. They hate him because they are worrying that their century of bullshit may be up. I think a lot of them are secretly hoping that it goes tits up for their masters so they can be honest.



Blogger Gaiseric February 27, 2016 6:53 PM  

Jay Will wrote:What is the general opinion on here about fighting wars for Israel? The Jew owned media hates Trump. They hate him because they are worrying that their century of bullshit may be up. I think a lot of them are secretly hoping that it goes tits up for their masters so they can be honest.
Thanks for reminding me. Another major problem with Cruz. He's not running for President of Israel, although apparently that's a more acceptable gig in a Republican race than running for the President of Mexico a la ¡Jeb!

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 6:57 PM  

168. Gaiseric
My objections to Trump are based on observation over 20 years. I'm old enough to remember his rise as a "thing" in the NY real estate market. I've read dozens of pieces on him over the years, so much so that I think I have sketched out his character:

He's a vain blowhard with *some* competence in the business, but whose main talent is self-promotion.

In conjunction with my other life experience around similar people, I find it unlikely that he has either the talents or temperament to hold the office of president.

I hope that analysis wasn't too emotional for you.

Blogger Gaiseric February 27, 2016 7:00 PM  

You're kidding, right? That's nothing but emotion. You didn't cite a single fact. You didn't even obliquely refer to one.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 7:05 PM  

172.
How exactly would you like a record of my life experiences conveyed? Neural download or Vulcan mind meld?

Anonymous Jay Will February 27, 2016 7:08 PM  

Its completely irrelevant what Trump is about overall. Its instinctively obvious that he means, stop my town/city/area getting browner and browner.

In the UK what Trump has said would get him locked up. Our hope is America's hope, if he he gets in we can lose this multiculture crap and talk about halting Islamic immivasion.

Go Trump!

Blogger Snidely Whiplash February 27, 2016 7:10 PM  

Matt Edwards wrote:He's a vain blowhard with *some* competence in the business, but whose main talent is self-promotion.
So the difference in character with Cruz or Rube-EO or literally any other candidate, is some competence in business

Matt Edwards wrote:Heidi Cruz isn't being elected, her husband is. I would imagine she has more decorum than to comport herself like Hillary, as a "co-president."
As I said "time to explain away or ignore that."

OpenID sigbouncer February 27, 2016 7:23 PM  

"Matt,

To get more of a perspective on Sigbouncer, look him up by his previous handle, Tiny Tim."

You're barking up the wrong tree inch high.

Blogger James Dixon February 27, 2016 7:31 PM  

> The good thing about your post is that you led off with birtherism, saving me the time of reading the rest of your post.

That's fine, as I've told Tommy in the past, the feeling is mutual. Of course, you have no explanation as to why I'm wrong.

You know, supporters of Cruz like you are beginning to make me consider a third party candidate if he wins.

> No, it just means you have no idea how to fix it. Especially by voting.

I thought you were ignoring everything else I said. But it's nice to hear you projecting your own lack of being able to fix things onto others.

Blogger Nate February 27, 2016 7:34 PM  

"1) Within a month, Trump will clinch the Republican nomination.
2) Within a month, he will cuck you, veering hard to the left for the General."

I dunno if it will happen that soon. What I expect is him to keep going as is... and destroy the dems Clinton vs Dole style...

Then I expect him to completely fold when he takes office. He will be Dubya Part 2. His first major act will have nothing to do with immigration... it will be to ramp up the Patriot Act to 11.

Then on immigration I expect him to fall for the exact same trick Reagan fell for. He'll trade Amnesty for a Wall to be built next year... and next year... it won't be built.

Anonymous The other robot February 27, 2016 7:37 PM  

It's interesting that someone who has posted here on and off over the last two years has to suddenly come over and give us the benefit of all this thoughts.

Either this is retarded braggadocio or Trump just admitted that the original proposed construction specs were inadequate.


He is simply pointing out that they are only making their position worse.


Hmmm...what do you suppose the added cost of 10 extra feet along a 1000 mile border will be?


Who cares when Mexico will be paying for it, one way or another. A tax on all those remittances will be very easy to impose.


I guess it doesn't matter since somebody else will be paying for it, at least in your imaginations.
That sounds like socialist thinking.


You are such a shallow thinker. It is simply pay for use. If they want the money they get from remittances they have to pay.

I have to say, Tiny Dick was better at arguing.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 7:39 PM  

177. James Dixon
I thought you were ignoring everything else I said.
I said j/k.
But it's nice to hear you projecting your own lack of being able to fix things onto others.
Yes, I'm projecting my lack of being able to fix things with a 140 IQ onto the half of the population below 100 IQ. Except for the fact that I can fix things while they can't...other than that, the comparison is exact.

Blogger Matt Edwards February 27, 2016 7:43 PM  

179. The other robot
It's interesting that someone who has posted here on and off over the last two years has to suddenly come over and give us the benefit of all this thoughts.
You're welcome! Someone said you were here and needed help tying your shoes. Again.

Anonymous johnc February 27, 2016 7:44 PM  

There's no doubt that Trump could be a real disappointment after being elected. Of course, he could also move further to the right. That's not off the table either.

But if he turns out to be a complete fraud, and he betrays the American people, I think he does it at great peril to his personal safety. People are beyond fed up.

Blogger weka February 27, 2016 7:49 PM  

But... the Trumpenation of the USA will not lead to blood on the streets. It will not lead to the under-undersecretaries that do not change with each administration continuing with their deep state agenda. It probably will not lead to the States splitting. It probably will lead to a wall, and Obamacare being quietly euthanized.

In the UK, there will probably be Brexit and then Scotland will leave (Briefly: the ScotNationalists will send it bankrupt, and then there will be the second act of union). Again, it will be fairly peaceful.

I would not put money on France being peaceful when le Pen wins. Or loses. Or Germany when PEGIDA wins. Or Greece when Golden dawn wins. I have more hope for Italy, because any sane Italian hates the government and Brussels, or Switzerland, because it is rich and it has border controls.

And I expect to Scandinavians to go all a-viking.

Vox is correct. There will be blood. Since I correspond with people in Europe, I fervently pray that my reading of the times is incorrect.

Blogger praetorian February 27, 2016 7:51 PM  

Matt, me telling you to shut up wasn't for my benefit.

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 7:51 PM  

@157 Matt Edwards

I've barely seen Beck himself. It was more like a piece of news that came over the wire, then went away.
Is Beck some kind of central figure in the Cruz campaign? That would be news to me.
(but in general, Beck is kooky)
---

He's one of the more amusing characters in this presidential election :)

Blogger BunE22 February 27, 2016 7:51 PM  

Matt Edwards wrote:153. James Dixon

The good thing about your post is that you led off with birtherism, saving me the time of reading the rest of your post.

Thanks!


I don't personally know Cruz, but his Harvard law professor did. He wrote this:

Under Ted Cruz’s own logic, he’s ineligible for the White House

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 7:53 PM  

@161 James Dixon
> Most of what he has proposed is already law.

Including the construction of a wall at the border: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Fence_Act_of_2006
---
But Vicente Fox isn't paying for That F'n Wall! Maybe we get a double wall out of this.

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 8:01 PM  

@164 Snidely Whiplash

Speaking of Heidi Cruz, here is where the deed is done.

Search for Heidi Cruz, read it for yourself



Vicente Fox and the North American Union

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 8:06 PM  

@169 Jay Will
What is the general opinion on here about fighting wars for Israel? The Jew owned media hates Trump.
---

All of them, including Trump, was pissing me off at maybe the last debate where they were all prancing around trying to prove who is the best "friend" of Israel. I don't have a problem with Israel, but dammit, these guys are running for President of the United States, not Israel. I don't care what they think about Israel, I want to know what they are going to do to kick out the invaders here, push back PC, and straighten out our trade and economy.

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 8:12 PM  

@178 Nate

Then I expect him to completely fold when he takes office. He will be Dubya Part 2. His first major act will have nothing to do with immigration... it will be to ramp up the Patriot Act to 11.
---

IF he want's to really be GWB 2, he should dig up Harriet Myers and nominate her for Scalias seat, and quickly "cut a deal" with some muslims to control our ports !

Blogger Gaiseric February 27, 2016 8:14 PM  

@173: Your position is basically a slightly more articulate version of what I called "He's not very nice!" While it does have the advantage of making you sound a little bit less like a woman, it's not dialectic. And your loaded rhetorical words don't make you sound like the kind of person who prefers dialectic either. What you are offering is rhetoric. And snark.

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 8:15 PM  

@182 johnc

But if he turns out to be a complete fraud, and he betrays the American people, I think he does it at great peril to his personal safety. People are beyond fed up.
---

Yep, I agree. If he tries to pull some shenanigans, they won't be for free any more.

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 8:24 PM  

@186 BunE22

Not just Teddy, but people like Rubio and Jindal

Even though these are dismissive of the natural born citizen requirement, it's not going away.


That's a bunch of lawsuits

Dems salivating over it

I think Grayson is one of the biggest idiotic dbags in congress, but he'll probably follow through on it.

Blogger Nate February 27, 2016 8:28 PM  

"IF he want's to really be GWB 2, he should dig up Harriet Myers and nominate her for Scalias seat, and quickly "cut a deal" with some muslims to control our ports !"

the amusing thing is you think those things are out-of-the-question.

They aren't.

If Trump is sincere.. I expect him to take a bullet in the gut early in his presidency. Sort of a "remind you of your place" bullet. When he comes out of surgery and takes power back... just like Reagan... all his crazy ideas will be gone.

Anonymous The other robot February 27, 2016 8:34 PM  

If Trump is sincere.. I expect him to take a bullet in the gut early in his presidency. Sort of a "remind you of your place" bullet. When he comes out of surgery and takes power back... just like Reagan... all his crazy ideas will be gone.

I never thought of that option.

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 8:37 PM  

@194 Nate

the amusing thing is you think those things are out-of-the-question.
---

You're projecting. I have no illusions of what this guy might do once he gets in office.

Blogger Were-Puppy February 27, 2016 8:39 PM  

I'm still waiting on the Clintons to wack Bernie so she can get the nom, and then who knows what they might try against Trump.

Blogger Gaiseric February 27, 2016 8:49 PM  

Clintons don't need to whack Bernie. With most of the rest of the primaries coming up in the next couple of weeks, Bernie is the dog that don't hunt. Without the structural advantages that he has among the totalitarians of Yankee-land in the NE and the totalitarians of Hippy-land on the Left Coast, his support is limited to young, white liberal college students and the like, and a few graying hippies who think maybe he's going to make them feel like it's Woodstock again.

1 – 200 of 262 Newer› Newest»

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts