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

Monday, February 15, 2016

Trump destroys Hillary

VDH explains how Donald Trump, in a single day, managed to do what the entire Republican political establishment couldn't do in eight years:
Mrs. Clinton’s campaign rhetoric is coming up empty—largely because it is at odds with the way she has lived her life and conducted her various careers over the last two decades. Voters, even younger ones, are now sorely aware of those flagrant contradictions.

The so-called Republican war on women was successful Democratic demagoguery in 2008 and 2012. That paranoid mythmaking worked with urban, unmarried young women. They were terrified of old white-guy Republican bogeymen, who would make them pay for their birth control and take away abortion on demand, were indifferent to new expansive definitions of sexual harassment, and seemed hung up on what were seen as roadblocks—religion, marriage, and family—to a young, college-educated woman’s self-expression. Yet Hillary has now lost that long-enshrined wedge issue after only 24 hours of Donald Trump’s withering counter-fire—in stark contrast to past years of failed Republican counter-strategies.
It's interesting how the Republican pragmatists are beginning to see the advantage of backing Trump rather than yet another GOPe loser.

Labels:

90 Comments:

Blogger Austin Ballast February 15, 2016 1:33 PM  

Pro-life has always been a key issue for me, since a society that doesn't value life will take anything else. I have come to the conclusion that too many people are really pro death these days so just voting for someone because of that is a losing proposition.

Trump might not accomplish all the goals I believe are necessary to protect innocent life, but he could not do worse than those who claimed to be able to do such who never made it to office because of that or who wimped out when the chance came to make a difference.

I suspect Trump would be more likely to nominate someone who could ultimately overturn abortion as protected law than Cruz or any of the Republican panzies that have been or are being put forth.

OpenID sigbouncer February 15, 2016 1:34 PM  

http://thehill.com/news/senate/269341-frustrated-female-senators-say-clinton-is-victim-of-sexism

Female lawmakers were particularly galled by recent statements by Washington Post columnist Bob Woodward, one of the nation’s most respected journalists, characterizing Clinton’s tone as “screaming.”

“She shouts. There’s something unrelaxed about the way she is communicating,” he said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”

The comment prompted the show’s host, Joe Scarborough, to interject, ”I was watching her and I said to myself, ‘Has nobody told her how the microphone works?’”

The conversation provoked a backlash, mainly from liberal media outlets, but so far neither Woodward nor Scarborough has apologized.

“I think women go through a magnifying glass that men do not. Look at [GOP presidential frontrunner Donald] Trump. Talk about braggadocio, talk about arrogance, talk about shouting, talk about demeaning, talk about insulting. It’s all there,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who was first elected to the Senate in 1992 and before then served as major of San Francisco from 1978 to 1988.

---------------------

Right Feinstein, nobody has gone after Trump at all. Despite the fact that one of Saturday's debate questions asked of Trump was solely about Trump's cursing and the way he communicates to others.

If Hillary was taking the heat Trump has for the way he speaks, her depends would be overflowing.

Blogger endwatcher February 15, 2016 1:36 PM  

Too much stupid to count her out. Keoni has it right, they don't listen.

That said I hope republicans realize soon if they don't nominate Trump they are DOA.

Blogger endwatcher February 15, 2016 1:37 PM  

Too much stupid to count her out. Keoni has it right, they don't listen.

That said I hope republicans realize soon if they don't nominate Trump they are DOA.

Blogger Krul February 15, 2016 1:40 PM  

As great as it is to see the establishment grotesques get FoxNewsed like this, I'm still half expecting TPTB to say "You're going to TAKE your Bush vs Clinton and you're going to LIKE it" come election time.

Blogger Michael Maier February 15, 2016 1:49 PM  

Hillary cannot scream because of the TONE. It's shrill and sounds fearful. She's a moron if she keeps it up.

Men with good tone just sound forceful if they yell.

FACTS ARE SEXIST!

OpenID sigbouncer February 15, 2016 1:49 PM  

"It's interesting how the Republican pragmatists are beginning to see the advantage of backing Trump rather than yet another GOPe loser."

Over half the remaining GOP candidates are now doing their best impersonation of Trump.

From The Pussy wanting now to "building a wall".
To Mr Roboto calling The Pussy "a liar" on Saturday.
And Please Clap with his I'm taking alpha lessons now so "don't talk about my mommy" or else.

This is getting ridiculous with all the out of character charades from these idiots.

Anonymous Fran February 15, 2016 2:00 PM  

@7
Funny thing is, theyve been told to stop running as "moderates" and run as trues conservatives...they tend to win when they do and lose when they run moderate.

Anonymous NorthernHamlet February 15, 2016 2:04 PM  

"working-class southern whites"

The article makes mention of this, but from what I can tell, union-aligned Dems are going to vote Sanders, at least from my conversations.

Blogger YIH February 15, 2016 2:04 PM  

Austin Ballast:
Pro-life has always been a key issue for me, since a society that doesn't value life will take anything else. I have come to the conclusion that too many people are really pro death these days so just voting for someone because of that is a losing proposition.
Agreed, but the truth is it's been a red herring since Reagan. Reagan at least tried, but at best the Bush family did nothing other than pay lip service to it for purely political reasons. IMHO in reality the Bush family is actually indifferent to the issue.
The other problem has always been that even if the Supreme Court were to overturn Roe v. Wade little would actually change. Several states had legalized it under state law prior to 1973. If allowed, few states would even consider outlawing it.
Trump is apparently 'pro-choice' though he hasn't brought up the issue nor has anyone else in the GOPe.
However the Lizard Queen's slime seems to be spreading, From Out of Rubio’s Closet: The Bachmann/Abedin Affair.
Rubotio is quickly becoming the GOPe's Richard Simmons.
Of course, Trump or no, The Lizard Queen's biggest problem is... The Lizard Queen.
Even (((Sanders))) is moving past her, if she's indicted, she's toast.

Anonymous 2 Lil' Boys on da Tracks February 15, 2016 2:05 PM  

what the entire Republican political establishment couldn't do in eight years:

Actually, it's decades - if you want to go back to The Clintons and Arkansas, it's 4 decades.
They sure are, admittedly by both sides, awefully chummy with the Bush Dynasty.
Must be that Mena and Oxford thing.

Blogger FALPhil February 15, 2016 2:05 PM  

@3 That said I hope republicans realize soon if they don't nominate Trump they are DOA.

The GOP is already kaput and there will be no recovery. I had hopes at one time that the Tea Party would nail the coffin shut, but GOP operatives infiltrated it and co opted the momentum.

It is going to take another party, but I would rather see multiple parties where there are no clear winners, and coalitions would have to be formed. That kind of inefficiency would make our lives better. OTOH, a case could be made that it doesn't really matter because there are forces at work that transcend the visible political model.

Blogger FALPhil February 15, 2016 2:06 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous Philalethes February 15, 2016 2:14 PM  

Well, it was hers to lose, and by golly, she's doing a bang-up job of it!

What was that quote? Oh yeah...

"For a woman to get half as much credit as a man, she has to work twice as hard, and be twice as smart. Fortunately, that isn't difficult." – Charlotte Whitten, former mayor of Ottawa, Canada.

Thank God for that.

Has there ever been a male presumptive can't-possibly-lose presidential candidate who has flamed out quite so super-competently?

I still remember the 1992 Demo Convention, when they played that Fleetwood Mac song over and over: "Don't stop thinking about tomorrow..." And I thought, no, they didn't pick the right song; it should have been "Lies, tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies..."

Maybe the same old gimmicks don't work forever after all?

Blogger RobertT February 15, 2016 2:21 PM  

IF he keeps it up he will blow the doors off Limbaugh as well, for camping on Cruz. He already blew the doors off Fox, Levin & Beck. He's the earthquake capital C conservatives thought was impossible. Burn in hell Ryan, Boehner, McConnell. The only way these guys hold the line on Scalia's replacement is if Trump scares them to death.

OpenID sigbouncer February 15, 2016 2:27 PM  

"Funny thing is, theyve been told to stop running as "moderates" and run as trues conservatives...they tend to win when they do and lose when they run moderate."

Einstein's Theory of Insanity is the only explanation.

Blogger James Dixon February 15, 2016 2:28 PM  

> Funny thing is, theyve been told to stop running as "moderates" and run as trues conservatives...they tend to win when they do and lose when they run moderate.

Their problem is that everyone except Trump, Cruz, and Carson have long histories of being anything but. The rank and file have noticed, and are taking it into account in their voting.

Blogger James Dixon February 15, 2016 2:29 PM  

> The only way these guys hold the line on Scalia's replacement is if Trump scares them to death.

Trump should announce who his candidate will be if he's elected, just to twist the knife. :)

Anonymous Andrew E. February 15, 2016 2:29 PM  

Trump is apparently 'pro-choice'

Why haven't you informed yourself before speaking out? Don't expect to be spoonfed everything.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/donald-trump-op-ed-my-vision-for-a-culture-of-life/article/2581271

Anonymous BGKB February 15, 2016 2:32 PM  

For a woman to get half as much credit as a man, she has to work twice as hard, and be twice as smart

I will agree they have to put in twice as much effort to achieve the same results. In a staff meeting it was announced a 4' tall b1tch got a positive letter feedback from a patient. Doubting the validity I said "that's great can you read it to us". It turned out the patient wrote about how much she struggled to bring the patient into an exam room when no one was there to help her. I thought it would be an obviously fake letter from a friend, but having it read out loud was even better. A 6'+ guy will never get a positive review simply for pushing a gurney < 20 feet. For smart I noticed women seem to plan to push work off to the next shift, even making jokes about the "pass the buck unit"

Anonymous Philalethes February 15, 2016 2:39 PM  

And then there's Maureen Dowd's take: an interesting object lesson in Sisterly Loyalty.

Meanwhile, White Knight VDH wants to blame Hillary's deflation on ol' Bill: "Does he suffer from some repressed psychological tic to sabotage his wife’s candidacy?" I wonder: Maybe Bill's doing it on purpose? I'm sure there's much we don't know about the innards of that "marriage". Maybe getting even for... I won't repeat the rumor, but the applicable term starts with "cuck..." Anyhow, from a Red Pill perspective, seems to me Bill's still got the Cad thing down, and why should any female who finds him stimulating want to do anything to help his wife? I would expect exactly the opposite, in fact.

Sure, Madeleine Albright and Gloria Fish (who apparently did need a bicycle after all?) seem to believe in the Myth of Sisterhood – or at least felt obliged to look like they did. But really, every woman knows in her heart: it's a catfight. And since our culture has abandoned the idea of elder wisdom, older women simply haven't any leverage with their younger peers any more (nor do they have the wisdom that would give them such leverage). Sic transit...

Anonymous SevenCrimes February 15, 2016 2:41 PM  

Full court press by the GOP this week to destroy Trump's 20 point lead in SC, despite the fact that he's already dismantling Hillary's campaign before the general election's even started.

Shows you precisely what side the "Principled Conservatives" are on in this fight. The Left is their ally against Nationalists, who they fight with far greater fervor than they've ever mustered against Democrats.

Blogger dh February 15, 2016 2:56 PM  

> Agreed, but the truth is it's been a red herring since Reagan. Reagan at least tried, but at best the Bush family did nothing other than pay lip service to it for purely political reasons. IMHO in reality the Bush family is actually indifferent to the issue.


There have been ongoing rumors for years that various Bush family members indulged heavily in abortions, especially during the late 1970's and early 1980's.

OpenID sigbouncer February 15, 2016 3:07 PM  

http://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/the-buzz/article60464171.html

Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump said Monday that the Republican party is breaking its pledge to stay neutral while pouncing on GOP rivals who attacked him at a weekend debate.

“I have never met people like politicians. They are the most dishonest people I have ever met,” the New York billionaire said during a stop at Mount Pleasant hotel on Monday. “They lie, lie, lie and then they apologize.”

Trump suggested that the Republican National Committee was not honoring a pledge to not hurt his campaign if the businessman promised not to mount a third-party presidential run.

Trump was booed several times during the Republican presidential debate Saturday in Greenville for criticizing other candidates. Trump said the debate audience was stacked with lobbyists and big Republican donors.

“I signed a pledge,” Trump said. “But the pledge is not being honored by them. ... They are in default of their pledge.”

Trump, the winner of the New Hampshire primary last week, spent most of his speech to several hundred spectators going after U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, his closest rival in South Carolina.

He blasted Cruz for distorting his stance on the Second Amendment during the debate. Cruz has said Trump would erode gun ownership laws if elected, while Trump calls himself the biggest gun rights advocate in the race.

“I think he’s an unstable person,” Trump said of Cruz.

Trump called Cruz a “bad liar” who stole the Iowa caucus when the senator’s volunteers spread rumors about GOP candidate Ben Carson leaving the race. Cruz won while Trump finished second.

Trump said the Iowa Republican party should disqualify Cruz’s win “if they had any guts.”

Cruz’s contradictions — touting his religious background while misstating other candidates’ records — is the reason why he is not leading among evangelical Christian voters, Trump said.

Trump has been the favorite among evangelicals in South Carolina, which holds a Republican presidential primary Saturday.

“The worst thing ... is you’re willing to lie about anything and then hold up a bible,” Trump said. “Christianity is being chopped away at. Chopped, chopped, chopped.”


Anonymous Napoleon 12pdr February 15, 2016 3:10 PM  

The way I see it, the Bush campaign is running on inertia. Dead, but hasn't realized it. Kasich is a one-trick pony. I think Rubio will emerge as the GOPe contender.

The good news is that Trump and Cruz have already shown a LOT of fight...and not too many scruples. If political campaigns are a pillow-fight, the Democrats have long filled their pillowcases with rocks. Trump and Cruz are filling theirs with nails and broken glass.

Blogger FALPhil February 15, 2016 3:14 PM  

The good news is that Trump and Cruz have already shown a LOT of fight...and not too many scruples.

Will they start a third party if the GOP stabs them in the back?

Blogger Sam Lively February 15, 2016 3:15 PM  

If only VDH was as clear-eyed about Trump's ability to destroy his GOP rivals and Hillary on Iraq.

Blogger James Dixon February 15, 2016 3:18 PM  

It's Cruz vs. Trump. Everyone knows it, including the also rans. But the GOPe won't give up without a fight. They're still desperately trying to find a candidate to oppose them, and will back Hillary if it comes to it. I wonder if Bloomberg is counting on them to support an independent run.

Blogger tz February 15, 2016 3:20 PM  

In the article, I think he made a typo. Shouldn't it be
"Cankle-biter"?

Blogger Sam Lively February 15, 2016 3:23 PM  

@24

Problem is Trump and Cruz are spending 50% of their ammo on each other.

A shame, because Cruz would have been much better served being patient, continuing to echo Trump on immigration while staying right of him on the social issues and waiting in the wings as a VP or SC choice. Instead he's gone scorched earth (as he has at every opportunity in his career) in a gambit to win it all on the first go.

Blogger tz February 15, 2016 3:28 PM  

@1 - I'm waiting to see if Trump will "bypass" the courts, starting with Roe v. Wade, or at least commit to reducing Abortion (defund PP where it does Abortion - the Reagan rule, upheld by the supreme court; require waiting periods, ultrasounds, hospital surgery standards, physicians with admitting privileges, etc.).

On #2A he already said CCWs should be accepted across the 50 states like Driver's licenses are. He might do something bold given Cruz is trying to paint him as pro-choice.

Cruz is breaking down - the bible in one hand, the manual of dirty tricks in the other. Carson is still there and still the Christian gentleman. Trump is the Blue Collar billionaire - and he didn't do it via special favors.

Anonymous No use for a username February 15, 2016 3:38 PM  

Did Trump bait the GOPe audience over the last two debates to boo in order to make the Third Party threat? I couldn't understand why he went full-bore in the SC debate. Now, it looks like he was consciously getting the audience mad to expose themselves, and the GOPe, as trying to destroy him.

Was the fight with the audience over the last two debates a strategic move?

Blogger tz February 15, 2016 3:49 PM  

In "Cuckservative", Vox goes into a short refutation of "free trade". Today, twice when it was brought up in connection with Trump, I had to go back to his original discussions and arguments, and in his response to Gary North, he mentioned he was going to do for Mises' argument what he did for Hazlitt's.

It would be very useful to extract and revise and extend that chapter into a short but stand-alone "This is why Free Trade can't and won't work" book addressing both the theoretical errors, the historical record of failure, and the practical problems.

Anonymous Dave February 15, 2016 3:51 PM  

@30

Trump did it all without special favors? He was handed everything he has by his Daddy.

OpenID sigbouncer February 15, 2016 3:51 PM  

"Was the fight with the audience over the last two debates a strategic move?"

All one needs to do is listen to the applause after each candidate is introduced in the debates. To know Trump is correct in saying "the debate audience is stacked with lobbyists and big Republican donors".

Trump is running near 60% in Drudge Polls as the debate winner. While Jeb is running in the 2% range. Yet Jeb's applause at the debates is Yuge compared to Trump's.

Anonymous johnc February 15, 2016 3:51 PM  

Hopefully Hillary somehow "steals" the nomination from Bernie. I suspect Bernie will be a much tougher candidate to beat in November.

OpenID b1bae96e-6447-11e3-b6bb-000f20980440 February 15, 2016 3:55 PM  

Trump is pivoting to the General. He knows he is going to head into the convention with the most delegates.

The question will be

1) Will the Cubans have 50% between them (likely)
2) Will either Cuban be within 5% of Trump where a brokered convention could occur without the base losing their shit.
3) Can the GOPe hold the SC open so that the base is corerced into voting because 2nd Amendment is on the line.

OpenID sigbouncer February 15, 2016 4:00 PM  

"Trump did it all without special favors? He was handed everything he has by his Daddy"

That's not accurate at all. I've posted this here before.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2015/09/03/donald_trump_s_wealth_he_isn_t_only_rich_because_of_his_dad.html

Of all the criticisms you could lob at Trump, this is a weirdly weak one. Basically, the man took a $40 million kernel and, while spending lavishly enough to surround himself with all the gold-plated bathroom fixtures his heart desired, managed to do a 26 percent better job growing his fortune than if he had quietly left it to grow in stocks without selling a single share or spending a single dividend check for 41 years. I'd say that's pretty good. How many actual money managers could brag they'd done the same with their clients' cash?

Blogger Sevron February 15, 2016 4:01 PM  

Is there any chance the GOPe doesn't fuck Trump over and hold a brokered convention? I don't see how they wouldn't do that.

Blogger SciVo February 15, 2016 4:17 PM  

Austin Ballast wrote:Pro-life has always been a key issue for me, since a society that doesn't value life will take anything else. I have come to the conclusion that too many people are really pro death these days so just voting for someone because of that is a losing proposition.

Yeah, I think that was part of why Obama won: the Republican leaders couldn't keep up the pretense that they gave a damn about the same issues as the Republican voters. Rubio has been strongly pro-life, and unapologetic about it -- but that's ultimately meaningless if his election would result in a permanent Democratic majority. For America to remain America, legal immigration must be stopped and illegal immigration reversed, so nothing else matters right now.

OpenID sigbouncer February 15, 2016 4:20 PM  

"Is there any chance the GOPe doesn't fuck Trump over and hold a brokered convention? I don't see how they wouldn't do that."

If they can't screw him over in the counting of the votes. One would have to think this is their next move. It's too obvious now of their bias against him.

I think I read somewhere here where Trump would have to make his 3rd party decision by May?

Anonymous Dave February 15, 2016 4:22 PM  

@37

It's not accurate that Trump was handed a multi-million dollar business from his Dad? No special favors there.

Blogger FP February 15, 2016 4:29 PM  

Semi OT, but more lines being drawn in the sand for GOPe media, Salem networks in this case. HotAir announces with just one day notice it is going to Facebook only comments:

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/02/15/hot-air-to-move-to-facebook-comment-system/

Ed Morrisey is blocking people on twitter:
https://twitter.com/ITTRP/status/699341187891617792

Blogger Zorro February 15, 2016 4:29 PM  

"Too much stupid to count her out."

In a country where an America-hating closet Muslim race-baiting feminist retard can get elected and then re-elected, anything is possible.

The comic Ron White is running for POTUS. I'm voting for him.

Blogger Ellimist February 15, 2016 4:31 PM  

People did the same thing vs Ron Paul. They claimed he wasn't pro-life, despite his statements to the contrary as well as the fact that he was a doctor who had delivered thousands of babies.

OpenID sigbouncer February 15, 2016 4:33 PM  

"It's not accurate that Trump was handed a multi-million dollar business from his Dad? No special favors there."

That isn't what you said @33

"He was handed everything he has by his Daddy."

Blogger ray February 15, 2016 4:34 PM  

"OTOH, a case could be made that it doesn't really matter because there are forces at work that transcend the visible political model."


At least a couple levels beyond the political, depending on the nation. And that's why a political solution, such as building border fences, is mostly more posturing. The People feel better but little actually changes. Which is the point. Big show about very little. Fences are largely political Zoloft.

Anonymous Dave February 15, 2016 4:45 PM  

@45

Looks like I'm right.

http://www.moneytalksnews.com/why-youre-probably-better-investing-than-donald-trump/

Blogger Red Jack February 15, 2016 4:52 PM  

What is interesting to me is that very few who have worked for Trump have anything bad to say about him. Even his ex wives.

Contrast that with Bill Clinton.

OpenID sigbouncer February 15, 2016 4:58 PM  

"Looks like I'm right.

http://www.moneytalksnews.com/why-youre-probably-better-investing-than-donald-trump/"

The problem with this theory is Trump's father died in 1999, not 1982.

The link below will help you further understand the ruse.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/dec/09/occupy-democrats/occupy-democrats-say-simple-investment-trumps-fath/

Anonymous Kevin February 15, 2016 5:00 PM  

He will still lose to her where it matters - in the polls. But it would be sadly ironic to have Trump win, then after republicans held on to the Supreme Court seat have Trump put in the same kind of liberal justices Hillary would have. That will be a funny, but tragic day.

Blogger Elocutioner February 15, 2016 5:01 PM  

Can you name any wealthy heirs that pursued this surefire billionaire plan? Surely one the Walton kids or someone did it, right? Seems really easy and straightforward...

Anonymous Jack Amok February 15, 2016 5:07 PM  

Meanwhile, White Knight VDH wants to blame Hillary's deflation on ol' Bill

He blamed it on several things, her choice to associate with a predatory molester being one of them. If you read that article as white knighting, you're looking too hard.

Blogger tz February 15, 2016 5:11 PM  

@45 - that is stupid. 1982 was the bottom and end of the bear market, and today we are near an historic top.
Trump would still be worth $10 billion when the SPX was at 666 at the 2009 bottom. It has since tripled but has gone down from the peak.
a 30 year T-Bond was paying 16% or more and if held to 2012 would have paid that same 16% through there and might have been even better.
If you can look backwards (2020 hindsight), you can always pick something that did better.

If you put money into the market at the top in 1929, it would be over 2 decades until break-even. You would have to put it in at the 1933 bottom but could you pick it?

Tell me what I can put $10,000 in today and it will grow at the same rate so that 34 years from now I can get at least the return of what the SPX did or more?

Worse, why should there be any actual companies in the SPX? - first there is survivor bias - Trump declared bankruptcy 4 times. How many stocks were delisted (and went bankrupt) since 1982? Trump built buildings, golf courses, other things. Why not have any businesses or companies at all, everyone can just invest in an index fund that just invests in itself and as more new money comes in, its price will go up (until there are withdraws for retirement or such).

Anonymous Dave February 15, 2016 5:11 PM  

@49

Okay so Trump wasn't handed everything from his Daddy. He was however given at least $40 million by his father, and then put in charge of a company worth hundreds of millions built by his father.

Blogger tz February 15, 2016 5:18 PM  

@54 - and he grew the $40 million (1974) or $200 million (1982) into $10 Billion of actual assets today employing thousands. Trump has brothers, they didn't grow their shares as well.

When the economy collapses, Trump might drop a bit, but not as far as the SPX is going. I don't think Trump has played the financial games (issue bonds - debt, buy back stock, pray you can issue more stock or roll over the bonds at the same interest rate when the original ones come due).

OpenID sigbouncer February 15, 2016 5:22 PM  

"Okay so Trump wasn't handed everything from his Daddy. He was however given at least $40 million by his father, and then put in charge of a company worth hundreds of millions built by his father."

True. But under Trump's guidance and real estate expansions it was estimated his self worth was up to $200 million by just 1982 (8 years later).

A point I find most interesting is that on the billionaire's list. You won't find another guy who took on as many different ventures and investments as Trump did to make himself a billionaire. Showing himself as extremely business savvy on a multitude on fronts.

Anonymous Napoleon 12pdr February 15, 2016 5:24 PM  

Even in a brokered convention, Trump gets a big voice. A brokered convention, by definition, is at last a three-way split. Probably with Cruz and Rubio. The GOPe does NOT have control, can't put their pick in without doing a lot of horse-trading. What's more likely is Trump and Cruz reaching a deal.

Anonymous Jack Amok February 15, 2016 5:26 PM  

I think Rubio will emerge as the GOPe contender.

I think he already did in Iowa. The e threw their weight behind him when it was clear none of the other party-owned pols were going to do well.

Anonymous Cheddarman of Christendom February 15, 2016 5:31 PM  

If I was the Donald, i would point out to the religious right that they have been used by the republican establishment ever since Reagan's presidency. I would ask them what they want, make some deals, and deliver.

Anonymous John VI February 15, 2016 5:42 PM  

How could !Jeb! Survive that kind of darwinian selection pressure?

Or the really painful thought. He WAS the strongest of the litter.... brrrr

Anonymous Philalethes February 15, 2016 7:36 PM  

@52: Jack Amok wrote: If you read that article as white knighting, you're looking too hard.

Didn't read the whole article as such, but found it interesting the author apparently felt compelled to include that part.

VDH is a smart fellow – though I don't think he's quite so smart as many seem to – and I share his grief over what's been done to our mutual homeland (I remember the best of California in the 1950s), but I don't think he's ever spent any time at Alpha Game or Rational Male, and his understanding of gender power dynamics remains conventional / bluepill. That's what I saw: "Poor Hillary, betrayed by her cad of a husband." Not. Or at least, if Bill has betrayed Hillary, he's only playing catch-up.

I still have somewhere a photo of Bill & Hillary at breakfast in their home in Arkansas ca. 1992. At a table for two by a window overlooking the garden, Hillary is sitting straight and alert, reading a newspaper (probably the NYT or WSJ?), while Bill is hunched over the table with his arms around his cereal bowl, looking like an overgrown, dull-witted adolescent. It was obvious to me even then who was the brains in that family.

Political realism is good. Race realism is even better. But gender realism is also required for a really clear view of the world. The three inform each other. I've long felt that the Ancients did not allow women into political affairs not because they couldn't manage the game, but because they'd be too good at it – being far more natural and shameless liars than most men. The men in politics are bad enough.

Blogger Doom February 15, 2016 8:28 PM  

The GOP, e or otherwise, stopped fighting after Reagan. They would have pissy slap contests, like fag bitches. They wouldn't come out and just call stupidity just that. That is all that Trump is doing. Hell, he doesn't even have to be completely right. He just has to hit the nail with the hammer and people would rather follow solid than prissy. For fucks sake, when the GOP went queer, it couldn't win. See how easy it really is?

Anonymous Jack Amok February 15, 2016 8:32 PM  

Didn't read the whole article as such, but found it interesting the author apparently felt compelled to include that part...That's what I saw: "Poor Hillary, betrayed by her cad of a husband."

I think you missed an important nuance in what VDH wrote. He wrote "Trump assumed that her problem was not just that Bill Clinton had been a recognized serial womanizer and cheat for over forty years, but involved far greater hypocrisies." He goes on to point out that Bill wasn't just a garden-variety philanderer, but a "retrograde sexual predator" who used his political connections to skate free when any regular Joe would've probably been in jail or at the very least unemployed and sued for sexual harassment - in large part because of the legal changes Bill and Hillary pushed for. He's the perfect example not of an "alpha player" but of a political grafter promoting laws for thee but not for me. And "voters are daily reminded of Hillary’s sexual hypocrisy" because of Bill's visibility.

It was only the first entry in VDH's catalog of Hillary's hypocritical positions. She champion's sexual harassment laws but keeps her connection to the Groper-in-chief. She rails against Wall Street while taking outlandish bribes from them. She poses as a champion of poor students while contributing to their tuition woes...

That's why I say you're looking to hard. He wasn't White Knighting, but I think you were pre-disposed to see it. It's an easy mistake to make - you see so much of it, it's almost automatic to see it whenever there's the least hint. But we should fight that reflex, make sure that we see what's there, not what we expect to be there.


I share his grief over what's been done to our mutual homeland

I do as well (it is my home state too). The Golden State really was golden, once upon a time, and everyone who looks at it and scoffs should realize it has been a very good bellweather for the rest of the country. It's size and makeup has made it a one-tenth scale model of the USA for most of the last century. At this point, if the USA doesn't bottom out lower than CA is right now, I'll be surprised (though I also expect CA to go farther into the toilet before things get better too).

Anonymous JRL February 15, 2016 9:42 PM  

70 percent chance Trump is following the Nixonian dictum, "campaign to the right, govern to the center". But that 30% chance....it's the only chance we've got. Trump's the only one with the chops to maneuver behind the scenes AND to win the media battle needed to accomplish anything. Cruz might have the political chops, but he would get slaughtered in the media.

Blogger Doc Rampage February 15, 2016 9:43 PM  

This idea that Cruz is imitating Trump in talking about a wall is just ignorant:
http://patterico.com/2016/02/07/video-ted-cruz-was-talking-about-a-wall-years-before-trump/

Blogger Matamoros February 16, 2016 1:07 AM  

Trump is probably trying to hold the RNC's feet to the fire. But the RNC also realizes that Trump will dump them in a heart beat.

Will the RNC play fair. Never. Donald's going to have to stick it up their ass so they can't maneuver and are held in position.

Maybe a good scandal about Reince and other RNC big shots would be good.

See where Trump says he'll sue Cruz over his non-citizenship if he doesn't stop the lies. That'll be interesting.

Anonymous Exurban February 16, 2016 1:25 AM  

The Charlotte Whitton quote mentioned by Philatheles actually goes,

"Whatever women do they must do twice as well as men to be thought half as good. Luckily, this is not difficult."

She would have said this around 1960. Charlotte Whitton was mayor of Ottawa when I was a small child in the Ottawa Valley. While probably a closeted lesbian, she was a noted social conservative and traditionalist. Her name doesn't appear on public buildings or streets because today's local progressives consider her a racist.

Charlotte Whitton Wikipedia entry

Blogger Nick S February 16, 2016 2:13 AM  

Napoleon 12pdr wrote:Even in a brokered convention, Trump gets a big voice.

I would be a March 1st primary voter, but I haven't been fully convinced by any of them so far and they're running out of time to win me over. Trump strikes me as primally persuasive, but only in a shallow alpha sort of way.

He's that guy that comes into a party, mingles a while and says, "Hey let's all go to the lake!" and I say, " It's cold and raining outside." He says,"Come on. It'll be great! We'll build a fire. Somebody stop by the liquor store and pick up something to drink." I say, "It's raining."

That's when the cute girl stands up and says, "What do you want me to get at the liquor store?" and half the people at the party follow him out the door...the stupid people who are particularly susceptible to the call of the alpha.

About half of those trickle back within a couple hours with great stories of how it was both fun and miserable and how somebody is bound to get hurt or go to jail. That's the Trump campaign. It's not going to end well, but...good times, bro...

Blogger rho February 16, 2016 2:47 AM  

Trump is the Republican Obama. You don't actually know what's going to happen, but if your faith is strong, great things may occur. (If you squint, and interpret hard.)

I still think Trump will refuse to take the pay cut to be POTUS, but the GOP can only be ecstatic to have a highly visible and plausibly viable candidate who can openly question the veracity of the Most Qualified Woman Ever for presidential office.

Hillary does suffer from a severe case of proximal billious rapetococcus, but her worst crime is being a goddamn serial carpetbagger--a midwest Yankee leech on a greasy Southern politician, who leveraged her husband's charm to work her way into a New York Senator seat.

Trump may have NYC values, but at least they are genuine.

Blogger ray February 16, 2016 3:38 AM  

Bit OT but I ran across this --


"Devout Christians are destined to be regarded as fools in modern society. We are fools for Christ's sake. We must pray for courage to endure the scorn of the sophisticated world.” —Antonin Scalia


Sounds like he doesn't need my prayers. Maybe I need his? :O)

Antonin is off to see The Godfather! Just a little boy again.

Blogger Shimshon February 16, 2016 3:58 AM  

I read the article and can't understand what Trump did. Hillary seems to be self-destructive, and her repulsive husband (he might have been quite the baby boomer swinger as POTUS, but today he's just another dirty old man and looks the part) is piling on. Can someone explain what Trump has done?

Anonymous Quartermaster February 16, 2016 8:57 AM  

@70
I would have put sophisticated in quotes. Almost all of the worlds "sophistication" is in their own minds.

OpenID sigbouncer February 16, 2016 11:29 AM  

"This idea that Cruz is imitating Trump in talking about a wall is just ignorant:
http://patterico.com/2016/02/07/video-ted-cruz-was-talking-about-a-wall-years-before-trump/"


My bad. I should have figured The Pussy being the political chameleon that he is would have agreed with a wall at some point in his political career.

This doesn't change the fact that The Pussy is lying and taking the Trump position as being the toughest on immigration. As evidence from his immigration statements before Trump entered the race.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/ted-cruz-knocks-scott-walker-on-immigration/article/2563591

SEN. TED CRUZ: My views on immigration are straightforward. I think there is considerable bipartisan agreement outside of Washington on immigration. There is overwhelming bipartisan agreement that we've got to get serious about securing the borders and stopping illegal immigration. There is considerable bipartisan agreement outside of Washington that we need to improve and streamline legal immigration so that we can remain a nation that welcomes and celebrates legal immigrants. I think it is a mistake for any politician to on the one hand embrace amnesty — embrace a pathway to citizenship for those who are here illegally — and on the other hand seek to restrict or punish legal immigrants. Amnesty is wrong. When I campaigned for the us senate I campaigned unambiguously against amnesty and was proud to receive 40 percent of the Hispanic vote in the state of Texas at the same time Mitt Romney was getting clobbered with 27 percent of the Hispanic vote nationwide. But I am the son of an immigrant who came legally from Cuba. Reagan referred to legal immigrants as Americans by choice and there is no stronger advocate of legal immigration in the U.S. Senate than I am. I think the right approach is to secure the border, follow the rule of law, and embrace and improve legal immigration.

OpenID sigbouncer February 16, 2016 11:41 AM  

"and half the people at the party follow him out the door...the stupid people who are particularly susceptible to the call of the alpha."

So in your portrayal of Trump supporters you're claiming Vox is both stupid and an alpha follower. Too funny.

Anonymous Jack Amok February 16, 2016 11:43 AM  

About half of those trickle back within a couple hours with great stories of how it was both fun and miserable and how somebody is bound to get hurt or go to jail. That's the Trump campaign. It's not going to end well, but...good times, bro...

And the rest of you secret kings got what, exactly, accomplished in the meantime?

Blogger Nick S February 16, 2016 12:19 PM  

And the rest of you secret kings got what, exactly, accomplished in the meantime?

Ha! Not bad, but, since my ego is impervious to external assault, I would have been more entertained by a plebeian "You're punching above your weight" approach.

So in your portrayal of Trump supporters you're claiming Vox is both stupid and an alpha follower. Too funny.

No. I think your self-assured assessment of Vox is what's funny.

OpenID sigbouncer February 16, 2016 12:37 PM  

>So in your portrayal of Trump supporters you're claiming Vox is both stupid and an alpha follower. Too funny.

"No."

So you're dicktucking from your original premise. That's what I expected would happen.

Blogger Nick S February 16, 2016 12:52 PM  

sigbouncer wrote:So you're dicktucking from your original premise. That's what I expected would happen.

No, dumbass. I'm claiming Vox might not be the unswervingly staunch Trump supporter you obviously believe he is.

OpenID sigbouncer February 16, 2016 1:04 PM  

"I'm claiming Vox might not be the unswervingly staunch Trump supporter you obviously believe he is."

I've never made that ("unswervingly staunch") assertion. You must have me confused with somebody else.

So you're now saying he's lying when he offers Trump up as the best option of the available candidates. Okay then.

Blogger Nick S February 16, 2016 1:16 PM  

So you're now saying he's lying when he offers Trump up as the best option of the available candidates. Okay then.

Oh, for cryin' out loud. I can see you're one of those idiots that needs someone to draw them a flow-chart so they can follow the logic. Then, seven pages later, does a victory dance after being soundly disabused of their misguided obstinance. Not worth the trouble.

OpenID sigbouncer February 16, 2016 1:28 PM  

"I can see"

You can't see past the end of your nose...

Blogger Nick S February 16, 2016 1:39 PM  

sigbouncer wrote:"I can see"

You can't see past the end of your nose...


Then, please enlighten me on the details of what Vox actually believes a Trump presidency would likely accomplish.

OpenID sigbouncer February 16, 2016 2:05 PM  

"Then, please enlighten me on the details of what Vox actually believes a Trump presidency would likely accomplish."

His thoughts on Trump are well documented here. You don't need me to interpret them for you. Do your own research here directly from the source to make your point.

Blogger Nick S February 16, 2016 3:13 PM  

sigbouncer wrote:Do your own research here directly from the source to make your point.

Yeah. That's what I figured. You've made my point for me.

OpenID sigbouncer February 16, 2016 3:28 PM  

"Yeah. That's what I figured. You've made my point for me."

And you're this guy:

uraniumUmbra @bigbadelite

http://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/02/a-dialogue-with-sanders-voter.html

Note his accusation of hypocrisy, when in fact he is the only hypocrite here, demanding proof despite providing none in his original assertion. This is further proof of the Third Law of SJW: SJWs always project.

Blogger Nick S February 16, 2016 3:56 PM  

sigbouncer wrote:And you're this guy:

And you're this guy.

The train is fine.

Blogger John rockwell February 17, 2016 2:13 AM  

Aaargh imagine what a Ron Paul and Donald Trump could have been.

Anonymous Jack Amok February 17, 2016 3:25 AM  

I would have been more entertained by a plebeian "You're punching above your weight" approach.

Saying you were punching above your weight would be inaccurate. Gammas don't punch, they slap-fight.

Blogger Nick S February 17, 2016 6:32 AM  

Jack Amok wrote:Saying you were punching above your weight would be inaccurate. Gammas don't punch, they slap-fight.

That has a little more entertainment value in a rapidly boring watching the socially awkward sort of way.

Post a Comment

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

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts