On November 4, 2016 we predicted that Donald J. Trump would win the election. We provided a map of a state by state analysis. We declared on that Friday before the Tuesday elections three states “too close to call”. Those states? Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, all of which Donald J. Trump won.
Relive election night 2016. Alcina lighting votive candles; Appollos5600 taking on the Big Media distortion of the numbers; GonzoTx lighting up candles too; JtJames chewing fingernails; Lorac wishing she liked drugs/liquor; Outris keeping up with the vote numbers; NoMoBama calling George W. Bush a jerk; Tony Stark calling the wins and losses of electoral votes; S following the number and calling out the discrepancies; everyone worrying about Florida at the beginning of the night; Admin at 8:01 noting the panhandle votes still not in; S at 8:02 totaling up the wins/losses; Lu4PUMA at 8:06 cheering on the panhandle as Hillary still had the Florida lead; S cheering up GonzoTx at 8:07 with the vote totals with Hillary ahead “gonzo closing 48.9 to 48.2”; Admin at 8:12 “Light those damn candles!!!!”; Admin at 8:15 “EVEN!!!! 48.5% At worst, recount. LIGHT THOSE DAMN CANDLES!!!!!”; S at 8:15 noting Trump ahead in Florida by 1,000 votes; Alcina at 8:16 with candle power “admin, i’m gonna burn this house down!”; Valleyboy cheering at the race stretch in Florida; Outris at 8:28 with the NYTimes giving Trump the Florida win; McNorman at 8:41 getting sick; NJLurker2 trying to keep calm; at 9:04 JtJames “dying”; Lorac at 9:05 bringing the news that Chris Wallace said Trump might be president; Admin at 9:14 “it’s beginning to smell like Brexit”; by 9:15 Florida and Ohio almost sure Trump and the tears of fears become tears of joy; by 9:30 even the New York Times forecast changed from a Hillary 93% chance of winning to a Trump victory!!!
It was over for Trump. He was now President Elect Trump.
Williamstown (United States) (AFP) – With unemployment declining, the local truck plant expanding and optimism on the rise, one industrial heartland region has become a microcosm of the reinvigorated America promised by Donald Trump.
Seen from Williamstown, 300 miles (500 kilometers) west of Washington, the political tumult since Trump’s November 8, 2016 victory appears artificial to those who welcome his leadership as a break from business as usual.
The sleepy West Virginia town is in Wood County where 70 percent of voters celebrated the anti-establishment victory. A year later, they are pledging their loyalty to the Trump revolution, praising the billionaire businessman-turned-national-leader for already delivering on his declaration to reverse their declining fortunes. [snip]
National indicators of consumer and business confidence corroborate the sentiment. [snip]
Runnion, the truck driver, says he is already committed: In 2020, he’ll vote Trump.
Trump voters remain Trump voters. As long as that does not change, Trump trumps.
But what about the polls???? The polls are terrible for President Trump just as they were for candidate Trump. President Trump can’t win say the polls. But the ABC News poll chief Gary Langer says something different:
Democratic advantage for ’18 might not be what it seems (POLL) [snip]
For one thing, despite President Donald Trump’s historic unpopularity, almost as many Americans say they’ll vote in 2018 to show support for Trump as to show opposition to him, 22 versus 26 percent, with half saying he won’t be a factor. Indeed 57 percent of Republicans say they’ll vote to show support for Trump, while fewer Democrats, 46 percent, intend to send a message against him.
Further, among the results of this poll, produced for ABC News by Langer Research Associates:
Just 27 percent of Americans express confidence in the Democrats in Congress “to make the right decisions for the country’s future,” matching the low set when the question last was asked January 2014, and a wide 16 points below its peak in 2009. The Democrats’ confidence rating is almost as poor as the Republicans’ in Congress (21 percent trust) and worse than Trump’s (34 percent).
The main change for congressional Democrats from their peak in 2009, moreover, is diminished trust in some of their key support groups — under 30s (down 27 points in trust), Democrats themselves (down 26 points) and liberals (down 21 points).
The Democratic Party leads the GOP among all Americans as being “more concerned with the needs of people like you” (49-36 percent) and as “better representing your own personal values” (46-37 percent). But the Democrats had advantages that big on these same questions in October 2014, and still got hammered a few weeks later.
Indeed today, the Democratic lead on concern with “the needs of people like you” shrinks from 13 points among all adults to a mere 3 points among those most likely to vote in 2018. And the 9-point Democratic advantage on personal values among all Americans goes to a non-significant 3-point Republican advantage among the likeliest 2018 voters.
Similarly, the Democrats enjoy an 11-point advantage among all adults in the sense that the country would be better off if they took control of Congress in a year’s time, 37-26 percent. Among the likeliest voters, though, this shrinks to essentially nothing, 2 points.
It’s the same mistake most dummkopf analysts made about 2016. National polls which include the massive Obama Dimocrat populations of California, New York, Illinois, distort what will happen in elections in favor of Obama Dimocrats. The red states and the blue states (which Hillary Clinton won such as Virginia) will vote the usual red/blue ways. It is the swing states that make congress and presidents. As we’ve written before, citing Democrat pollsters, the polls read correctly portend Republican victories in 2018 and 2020.
* * * * * *
As we celebrate, President Donald J. Trump is in Asia to lead the world. On Tuesday night, President Donald J. Trump addressed the National Assembly of South Korea. The reactions from even the leftists in South Korea demonstrate the war by Big Media against President Donald J. Trump is failing even in Asia as the Big Media fake news is destroyed by reality:
“Far from the ‘madman’ the media portrays, Trump came across as perfectly normal, smart, and well-mannered,” read one of the more than 1,200 posts on Naver.com.
Another wrote: “Wow, best speech ever. I feel so safe to have such a great U.S. president who is so determined to resolve North Korean issues.”
Yup. “I feel so safe to have such a great U.S. president….”
Update II: Winners and losers tonight? Big winner is Steve Bannon. Bannon has more evidence that the establishment way is the losers way. As President Trump, who gave a terrific speech in South Korea but took a few seconds immediately after to send a Tweet on the race put it, “Ed Gillespie worked hard but did not embrace me or what I stand for.” To win the GOP establishment must embrace President Trump. GOP candidates who try to be coy and two-faced with the public about whether or not they support President Trump – will lose.
Big losers are all those who hope to “reform” the Obama Dimocrat Party into a party they control. Bernie Sanders and his bros, Donna Brazile, all those who want to get rid of the Dim establishment, they all lost. The Obama Dimocrat establishment has proof after the night’s election results that they can still win in states Hillary won. The Obama Dimocrat establishment can now say to the naysayers “we win when we run establishment candidates in states that Hillary won so stop whining about change. Hope for change in the Obama Dimocrat Party is dead. Dead.”
Obama Dimocrats can’t win any state that President Trump won. As long as the status quo remains and President Trump wins states he won in 2016 and Obama Dimocrats win states they won in 2016 the big winner remains the champ, President Donald J. Trump. With this status quo result Obama Dimocrats can continue to lose and live to scream and rage at the results of their failures. For Obama Dimocrats winning the same states as they won in 2016 is losing.
Update: Prediction time. This is a close one. Will Ed Gillespie pull out the win in Virginia. Hells bells this is a tough one. Gillespie had momentum going into the race so that gives him some edge. But Northam, as noted below, has all the advantages. So, to whom do we award the victory tonight?
Gillespie. Gillespie wins Virginia. Why? Yeah, he’s a closer and he began to run a Trumpy campaign near the end of the race. But is this enough? Is this enough to carry him over the edge? No. This is not enough to carry him over the edge.
But perhaps divine intervention? Um, divine intervention, hummm? You want divine intervention. Here’s divine intervention: this might just do it. This might just be enough to stop Dims from voting and the highly energized pro-Trump voters might toss Gillespie a favor and come out for him. If so, Gillespie wins.
Donna Brazile is a pig, or a cow, or as Hillary Clinton allegedly refers to her, a brain dead buffalo. That’s not to say that Donna Brazile, the pig, the cow, the garbage scow is 100% wrong in her latest book which is solely designed to make money for the self-interested Hillary-hating Donna.
The only reason we write about the pig, the cow, the garbage scow, called Donna Brazile, is because we at this website have a history with her, and because Donna Brazile and Hillary Clinton will have a great impact in tomorrow’s election in Virginia. Also, we like to gloat and we have a lot to gloat about as many of our predictions from 2007 and afterwards come to pass.
* * * * * *
DONNA BRAZILE IS A PIG
Donna Brazile is a long-time Hillary hater. Donna Brazile is also a long time self-interested pig who will do anything to promote her non-existent skills. We recall Donna Brazile when Brazile joined with Bush Republican Karl Rove to advance her interests over Democratic Party interests. We also recall when Donna Brazile attacked this website. Brazile at that time was employed as an “impartial” observer by CNN but Brazile was a pro-Obama hack who was only interested in attacking Hillary Clinton in 2007.
Donna Brazile helped rig the 2008 election for Barack Obama (recall Michigan and Florida). But as the horrible eight years of Obama ended, Brazile realized she needed to ingratiate herself with Hillary Clinton if the gravy train was to continue to bring money and position to Brazile. So in 2016 Brazile helped rig the election for Hillary Clinton by even providing Hillary Clinton with debate questions well before the debate occurred. For Bernie, zilch.
Now, with Hillary Clinton defeated and the Obama Dimocrat Party on a leftward lurch, Donna Brazile has written a book which describes the rigged 2016 Dimocrat primary election. Brazile in her book claims the 2016 primary election was rigged by the DNC in Hillary Clinton’s favor:
I had promised Bernie when I took the helm of the Democratic National Committee after the convention that I would get to the bottom of whether Hillary Clinton’s team had rigged the nomination process, as a cache of emails stolen by Russian hackers and posted online had suggested. I’d had my suspicions from the moment I walked in the door of the DNC a month or so earlier, based on the leaked emails. But who knew if some of them might have been forged? I needed to have solid proof, and so did Bernie. [snip]
By September 7, the day I called Bernie, I had found my proof and it broke my heart.
Ever the buffoon, Brazile gets furious when President Trump or anyone else says, as Brazile admits in her book, that the 2016 Dimocrat primary election was rigged for Hillary. Brazile describes how the Hillary Clinton campaign controlled the DNC well before the primary ended and controlled the DNC finances sufficiently for all to see the primary election was rigged, Elizabeth Warren says the primary election was rigged, Bernie Sanders’ supporters know the primary election was rigged, but Brazile then denounces the notion that the primary election in 2016 was rigged. Brazile will undergo any contortion necessary to make money and stay in the spotlight.
Donna Brazile also claims Hillary Clinton’s campaign treated her like a “slave”. Brazile writes she prepared to remove Hillary Clinton as the nominee and replace her with Joe Biden after Hillary’s collapse in the polls and at the World Trade Center site. Brazile also attacks airhead and corrupt Debbie Wasserman Schultz. But that is all frankly uninteresting. What is interesting is that Brazile is exposing the chasms in the failed Obama Dimocrat Party. What is fascinating is the impact Brazile, and Hillary Clinton, and the great President Donald J. Trump are having in tomorrow’s governor election in Virginia.
* * * * * *
THE ELECTION IN VIRGINIA
Obama Dimocrats were supposed to win the Virginia governor’s election tomorrow. For the longest time the Obama Dimocrat was way ahead in the polls. Barack Obama campaigned in Virginia for Obama Dimocrat Northam. Obama Dimocrats earlier claimed the Virginia governor race was a herald for the sure win results in 2018:
Northam enjoys almost every structural advantage
Most polls have shown Northam ahead in the race, and there’s an easy explanation: He enjoys almost every structural advantage.
Trump: In addition to his 38 percent approval rating in The Washington Post’s poll, 57 percent of voters say their views of Trump are important in deciding their votes.
History: With just one exception (in 2013, when Terry McAuliffe defeated Ken Cuccinelli), the party that controls the White House has lost every gubernatorial election in Virginia going back to the 1970s.
The GOP’s poor performance in Virginia: Since 2005, Democrats are 9-1 in major statewide elections in Virginia (for president, Senate, governor), including Hillary Clinton’s 5-point victory in 2016.
Cash: Northam is outraising Gillespie, which is striking given Gillespie’s background as a former chairman of the Republican National Committee and lobbyist.
The advertising war: Northam is outspending Gillespie on the TV airwaves, while party spending has been about even.
“If Democrats lose, it will be a very big story, and there will be many assessments of what it means about the party’s prospects in the midterms next year,” Rozell said.
Republican Ed Gillespie was losing bigly in the polls. Then Gillespie began to campaign like Trump. Gillespie attacked gang crime by illegal immigrants. Gillespie began to focus on illegal immigration. Gillespie began to rise in the polls even as NeverTrump Republicans accused him of abandoning them and becoming more like winner Trump. As Gillespie became more Trump-like, the Obama Dimocrat Northam became more of a lying loser:
Ralph Northam’s campaign continues to drown in controversy as Virginia campaign finance reports revealed that the Northam campaign coordinated with the Latino Victory Fund to push a “sickening” ad that featured an Ed Gillespie supporter attempting to run down minority children.
Northam also recently flip-flopped in favor of banning sanctuary cities; the progressive Democracy for America denounced the Ralph Northam campaign for Northam’s about-face in favor of banning sanctuary cities.
Northam’s flip-flop is emblematic of Obama Dimocrat tactics. The tactic is to publicly flip-flop on positions to fool the voting public when those positions are an impediment to election victory. No principles.
VIRGINIA, BARACK OBAMA, AND 2018
The back and forth is not what hurts Northam in Virginia however. The problems for Obama Dimocrats are problems we have described for years. The problems for Obama Dimocrats is Barack Obama and Obama policies. Hillary Clinton became the Obama Third Term and that doomed her. Barack Obama is the kiss of death in Virginia too:
Clinton was guilty of “malpractice” in how she conducted her 2016 Presidential campaign, Greenberg told me. Even worse, he said, Democrats were repeating the same political mistakes a year later. “Look at Virginia right now,” Greenberg said, as soon as we sat down in his second-floor office. “We have a candidate”—Ralph Northam, the Democratic gubernatorial nominee—“running as Hillary Clinton. He is running on the same kind of issues, and has the same kind of view of the world. It’s the Republicans who talk about the economy, not the Democrats.” This was the approach that doomed Clinton against Trump. The electorate was angry in 2016 and remains angry now, Greenberg said, and Northam, a Norfolk doctor, didn’t get it. Neither did Clinton and the team of Obama veterans who staffed her Brooklyn headquarters. “If you live in the metro areas with the élites, you don’t wake up angry about what’s happening in people’s lives,” Greenberg said.
His rant was notable for a variety of reasons, not least because Greenberg was the pollster who helped Bill Clinton win the White House in 1992, and he has been a participant in every Democratic nominee’s Presidential campaign since, including Hillary Clinton’s. His criticism illuminates an urgent question for the Democratic Party, not just in next week’s governor’s race in Virginia but in the midterm elections of 2018 and beyond. Could Trump, as deeply polarizing and unpopular as he is, even be reëlected?
Greenberg and other prominent Democrats still furious about last year’s Clinton campaign think it’s entirely possible, unless the Party figures out, and fast, a way to tackle the problem that sealed Clinton’s fate in 2016: how to appeal to the disaffected white working-class voters who provided Trump’s unlikely win a year ago.
“That debate,” Greenberg told me, “which would have been pushed off had she won, is immediate.”
In the weeks after Greenberg published his critique, I spoke with several other veterans of the Bill Clinton years who shared his appraisal of Hillary’s campaign—and said that their advice had also been ignored. “They viewed people like me and Bill Clinton as yesteryear,” one, who ran his campaign in a key Midwestern state and played a public role in Hillary Clinton’s campaign there as well, said. “They thought the world has changed, politics has changed. But their analytics were flawed. They were treating this like a third term for Obama, and it was a big mistake.” The internal critics, they told me, had also included the former President, but he was, as Greenberg put it when we talked, “frozen out.”
This was, I realized, one of the hidden stories of the 2016 election. [snip] But, even if the fight is in part an exercise in after-the-fact finger-pointing, the campaign’s internal struggles over how to talk to the Trump base in the formerly Democratic states of Middle America are just as relevant, polarizing, and unresolved today as they were a year ago. Should Democrats bet their future on attacking Trump and pledge, as the California billionaire donor Tom Steyer now wants them to do, to pursue Trump’s impeachment, at all costs, if they win back the House next year? Should they give up on the white voters who went for Trump in 2016 even though many had been reliably Democratic in the past? Was Clinton’s defeated primary challenger, Bernie Sanders, right to try to pull the Party to the left?
Without a resolution to these questions, the next Democratic nominee may well end up caught in the same trap in which Hillary Clinton found herself, stuck defending the legacy of the two-term Obama Presidency, even as the economic dislocations of the Obama era fuelled the rise of populism on both left and right.
But I haven’t talked with a single Democrat or independent analyst who doesn’t think that the Party remains in serious danger of another electoral catastrophe.
Recently, another former Bill Clinton adviser, the onetime White House political director Doug Sosnik, published an op-ed in the Washington Post arguing that, as the headline put it, “Trump is on track to win reelection.” Sosnik contended that Democrats needed to immediately start figuring out how to appeal to voters in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, where a shift in votes for Trump won him the election. I mentioned the Sosnik article when I recently ran into a Washington operative who had also served as a key White House aide to Clinton. “Of course, Trump could win,” he said. “We’re the party that doesn’t have a message that speaks to the country or stand for anything other than being against Trump.” [snip]
“The Democratic Party today is divided over whether it wants to focus on the economy or identity,” Greenberg said when we talked. That is, as he pointed out, just what the Clinton campaign was fighting about a year ago. Greenberg and others who came out of the Bill Clinton era—like the former President himself—had never really let go of the economy-first mantra that got them to the White House in a different time, and they felt that there was a generational conflict with the Obama operatives who held sway over Hillary Clinton’s 2016 strategy. It was a fight that dogged the Clinton campaign all the way until its final days, when Greenberg and his allies inside the campaign pushed unsuccessfully to close with a focus on her plans for the economy.
In Virginia the Obama Dimocrats should by all rights win. They should win bigly. The big wins would then presage bigly victories in 2018. Like Hillary Clinton in 2016 all systems are go for a big Obama Dimocrat win in Virginia.
The hope for change by Obama Dimocrats is that the legal system can eliminate the Obama Dimocrats’ political/electoral problems. In 2016 the Obama Dimocrats via Hillary Clinton thought they could race-bait their way to electoral victory. But Trump happened.
As Virginia votes tomorrow, we will watch the election returns even as we prepare to celebrate the one year anniversary of the election of President Donald J. Trump. Meanwhile Hillary Clinton will not be celebrating.
Hillary Clinton will be fighting old fights with Brazile and the Obama leftists. Hillary Clinton will be regretting the moment she became the Obama Third Term and the Shield Maiden of Chappaqua. Hillary Clinton will remember how she smeared her lips with the Obama kiss of death.
Hillary Clinton will be fighting fights from the past as President Donald J. Trump, fighting for America in Asia, will be Making America Great Again.
Especially conflicted prosecutor Robert Mueller, today indicts Paul Manafort and Rick Gates in a last ditch desperate move to save his own job. The indictment is based on old business deals in Cyprus and nothing to do with President Donald J. Trump or the Russia based witch-hunt of the president.
The indictment is presumed to be a tactic to force Paul Manafort to make up lies against President Trump and Russia. Will it work? No. First, President Trump did not collude with Russians nor get elected because of Russia. Even if the worst of the witch-hunt charges were true they were not illegal at all and merely “trying to create crimes” as Professor Dershowitz has demonstrated.
Secondly, the notion that this old business deal will somehow scare Paul Manafort is comic. Paul Manafort is a tough lawyer with even tougher lawyers who knows that Andrew Weissman, the Mueller henchman whose specialty is finance crimes, is a bit of a clod. Weissman’s earlier prosecutions on Enron were all thrown out of court:
They say he intimidated witnesses by threatening indictments, created crimes that did not exist and, in one case, withheld evidence that could have aided the accused. At one hearing, an incredulous district court judge looked down at an Enron defendant and told him he was pleading guilty to a wire fraud crime that did not exist. [snip]
Mr. Weissmann’s cases against Andersen and Merrill Lynch lay in shambles just a few years later.
The Supreme Court, in a 9-0 vote in 2005, overturned the Andersen conviction. A year later, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals erased all the fraud convictions against four Merrill Lynch managers. The jury had acquitted another defendant.
“People went off to prison for a completely phantom of a case,” said Mr. Kirkendall. [snip]
Given Mr. Weissmann’s long association with Mr. Mueller, who has given him a prominent management role in one of the most important investigations in U.S. history, The Times took a look back at Mr. Weissmann‘s’ 2002-05 Enron task force tenure.
His hardball tactics seem intact today. Within weeks of his arrival in June, the FBI executed a no-knock, predawn raid on Mr. Manafort’s condo. Agents stayed for hours after waking up the target and his wife.
Then a leak appeared in The New York Times. Mr. Mueller had informed Mr. Manafort that he would be indicted. It’s an old Enron tactic: Scare people into talking.
Paul Manafort knows this history of failure by Weissman and Mueller so Paul Manafort will not be scared by these two stooges. (Another Mueller henchwoman, Kyle Freeny formerly of the money-laundering unit at the Department of Justice, has her own history of lies before Judge Hanen which led Judge Hanen to say “The misconduct in this case was intentional, serious and material,” Hanen wrote in May 2016. “In fact, it is hard to imagine a more serious, more calculated plan of unethical conduct.”)
Why Did Mueller Indict Now?
This week the F.B.I. will finally produce documents to congressional investigators on Fusion GPS which will at the very least embarrass the F.B.I. and the Department of Justice. Mueller wants to distract from this because it exposes how James Comey, Mueller’s friend, is at the center of most of the created crimes dreamed up by President Trump’s enemies.
This week the F.B.I. informant on the Uranium One investigation will communicate with congressional investigators. Mueller wants to distract from this too because Uranium One and the related scandals directly implicate Mueller and the entire Obama gangster government.
Especially conflicted Mueller wants to distract from all the calls for his resignation and that of his corrupt team.
This week President Trump will name a new Chair of the Federal Reserve, an appointment that is very important to the American economy. On November 3 President Trump will go to Asia on a very important trip to confront North Korea even as three American aircraft carrier battle groups circle that rogue nation. This week congressional Republicans will unveil the President Trump tax plan too. Mueller wants to distract from all that President Trump will do.
Mueller indicts Manafort in order to try to appear relevant and effective. But its too late for Mueller. Mueller will try to use this indictment to distract from questions about his own insurmountable challenges and conflicts.
Mueller has already been exposed on many of his conflicts. Perhaps if he had indicted someone on anything two months ago or even a month ago, before Mueller himself faced many ethical questions this indictment of Manafort could be seen as something other than the distraction it is from the increased calls for Mueller’s resignation.
These are great days. Finally there are substantial reasons to believe that the decades long lies and generations long treacheries will be exposed and democracy restored. The truth must be uncovered if America is ever to be great again. President Donald J. Trump is responsible for this stunning book of revelations about to be written.
Don’t think for a second, not even a nano-second, that the opponents of President Trump do not understand the fate that awaits them as President Trump successfully peels away at the onion of the hitherto protected lies. Bob Corker, Jeff Flake, Don Lemon, Big Media, Islamic terrorists and their supporters, the Obama Dimocrats, the whole long line of Trump haters understand their days are numbered in days short of years.
More glorious for supporters of President Trump is that we can now see the contours of the opposition. Those contours are clear as the chalk tracing police outline around the carcasses of dead gangsters. Today there was major breaking news about Fusion GPS. Tomorrow and in days to come there will be more revelations.
* * * * * *
The JFK Document Release
Ignore the JFK assassination conspiracy theories. The October 26 release of documents related to the Kennedy assassination in 1963 are an important moment in our current history and the book of revelations to come.
Recall that for many months after the inauguration of President Trump the F.B.I. and intelligence agencies such as the C.I.A. trashed the new duly elected president in a slew of leaks intended to remove President Trump from office. The leaks and manipulations from NeverTrump neocons alongside Obama Dimocrats utilized a fake “Russia collusion” and “saint Comey” line of prosecution and eventually led to obaminations such as the appointment of deep state stooges and cronies to run the Department of Justice and Mueller – the especially corrupt prosecutor.
The attempts by the deep state and Big Media to remove President Trump from office in the first several months failed. Soon thereafter, after the opposition to the duly elected president realized that President Trump would remain in office, the gears shifted. Politico, led the stenography squad to herald the shift in tactics.
After the realization struck that President Trump would remain president for his full term, the deep state and its stenographers began a campaign to save themselves. The immediate problem was the release of thousands of documents related to the JFK assassination.
For decades Americans have been fascinated by the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy and a document release on the assassination would reflect badly on the intelligence agencies and investigatory powers. For example, the security apparatus either knew about Lee Harvey Oswald, the assassin of the president, or they did not – both of which pose troublesome questions for the security forces and the intelligence community.
Consider, Oswald was a former Marine with knowledge of American radar systems, who at the height of the cold war traveled to the Soviet Union in an era in which travel was much more difficult, renounced his American citizenship to U.S. officials and declared to the U.S. officials in Moscow he had important military information to give to the Soviet Union. In some newspapers the Oswald defection to the Soviet Union was front page news on October 1959. Then, after living in the Soviet Union Lee Oswald decides to return to the United States! Either the intelligence/security services kept track of Oswald or they did not. If they did track Oswald, why didn’t they know what he was up to? If they did not keep track of Oswald, why didn’t they. It’s a no win series of explanations that the security services and intelligence apparatus would have to explain if all the documents related to the JFK assassination were published.
Enter Politico. In an article Politico declared that release of all the JFK documents would be a disaster because the American people would be confused, the poor darlin’s… it was all too confusing and people would raise questions, ‘so please, please, President Trump keep the documents and the truth away from the American people until the experts can digest the information and release it after it is properly prepared, if ever’. Think we exaggerate? Read the Politico mess:
As it stands now, the document release this month will be a logistical nightmare, with the public suddenly flooded with a huge online library of documents—tens of thousands in total—that will be, at first, mostly incomprehensible even to experienced students of the assassination. The National Archives, abandoning its plans to release the documents in batches over the course of several months, said this week that it will instead release everything at once—all on the same day—sometime between now and the deadline on October 26. [snip]
With everything made public at once, pandemonium is all but guaranteed, since major news organizations around the world will want to know, almost instantly, what is in the documents that is new and potentially important. And there will simply be no way for historians and other researchers, even those with a special knowledge of the Kennedy assassination, to make any authoritative judgment as they try to page through tens of thousands of pages of files all at once.
Four days later, the campaign to keep the JFK documents secret reached a level of comedy when Politico published yet another article so deranged and so debased, it can only be termed “retarded”:
Trump administration and other government officials say privately that President Donald Trump is almost certain to block the release of information from some of the thousands of classified files related to the November 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy that are scheduled to be made public in less than a week by the National Archives. [snip]
A congressional official who has been closely monitoring the issue, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Trump had been under pressure from the CIA to block the release of some of the assassination documents on national security grounds, possibly to protect CIA tradecraft and the identity of agency informants who might still be alive.
Any observer with a lick of sense would ask themselves in response to the stupid Politico article, “why would President Trump seek to deny Americans information and protect the very agencies that have sought his destruction by shielding them from being exposed as either corrupt or liars in documents decades old?” The answer to this obvious question came from President Trump in a Tweet that declared he would not stop the release of the JFK documents.
President Trump will not block Americans from reading source documents about the JFK assassination. The truth will be revealed to all. The deep state, the octopus, the Swamp, took on President Trump and now they will be defeated. This is all part of one big Obama SuperScandal.
Jeff Flake, Bob Corker, Resigned To Their Fates
It’s a great day today. On Tuesday, as President Trump prepared to go to the Capitol to organize the corrupt GOP in an effort to reform the American tax system, the miserable Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee attacked. In a series of vicious interviews Corker denounced the president and called him a liar and mentally unstable.
The beauty of these attacks is that they come from the defeated. It’s a great day today. Senator Flake spoke to the Senate today to announce he will not run for reelection without reflecting on the fact he is loathed in Arizona. Bob Corker previously announced he will not run for reelection. Both announced they will not run for reelection because they could not win reelection, not with the growing determinative strength of President Trump in the party he took over.
All of these Trump haters, Flake-McCain-McConnell-Corker, are all dinosaurs who’s time has long passed. The moment Donald Trump became the nominee they were obsolete. The moment Donald Trump became President Trump, their days were numbered.
All of these defeated Senators have long been part of the deep state that has sought to control Americans, instead of protecting America. Corker was a co-conspirator with Barack Obama on the treacherous Iran deal supported by the deep state and other enemies of American democracy. Jeff Flake like McCain and McConnell support illegal immigration and any war at any time along with what they term “free trade” no matter now unfair and harmful that trade is.
They’re all gone. President Trump has removed them. Their allies are next. The Obama SuperScandal too will be exposed and the perpetrators removed.
The Uranium One scandal is one tentacle of the Obama SuperScandal. Many assume that this is a Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton scandal. If only that were so. Uranium One is part of the Obama SuperScandal which leads to many of the other related scandals.
However, this October 2017, Uranium One matters, bigly. We warn everyone however, this is not a Hillary and Bill scandal. This Uranium One story is bigger than just Hillary and Bill. Like the JFK papers release, much much more will be revealed than just money grubbing.
Russia, Uranium One, Mueller, Hillary Clinton, Fusion GPS, The Deep State, The Octopus
Watch all these stories merge into one giant Obama SuperScandal.
Until September 2013, the FBI director was Robert Mueller — who’s now the special counsel probing Russian meddling in the 2016 election. It’s hard to see how he can be trusted in that job unless he explains what he knew about this Obama-era cover-up.
I’ll go the Post one better. Virtually whatever Mueller has to say about his involvement or non-involvement in this metastasizing scandal, he must recuse himself immediately for the most obvious reasons of propriety and appearance. Frankly, it’s outrageous that he, Rod Rosenstein, or anyone who even touched the Uranium One investigation now be involved with the current probe — unless the real name of the FBI is actually the NKVD. This is not how a democracy is supposed to work, even remotely. Forget transparency — this was deliberate occlusion.
Clinton campaign, DNC paid for research that led to Russia dossier
The Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee helped fund research that resulted in a now-famous dossier containing allegations about Donald Trump’s connections to Russia and possible coordination between his campaign and the Kremlin, people familiar with the matter said.
Marc E. Elias, a lawyer representing the Clinton campaign and the DNC, retained Fusion GPS, a Washington firm, to conduct the research.
Fusion GPS hired dossier author Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer with ties to the FBI and the U.S. intelligence community. [snip]
Prior to that agreement, Fusion GPS’s research into Trump was funded by a still unknown Republican client during the GOP primary.
The Clinton campaign and the DNC through the law firm continued to fund Fusion GPS’s research through the end of October 2016, days before Election Day.
F.B.I. Director James Comey tried to blackmail and intimidate President Trump with the phony dossier. John McCain pushed the lies to the F.B.I. and other outlets. Buzzfeed unwittingly helped President Trump when they published the dossier and people laughed that anyone could believe such drivel. And it appears that it was the Bush family that first paid for the dossier. The chain of custody, so to speak, is the Jeb! Bush campaign, the Hillary Clinton campaign, the F.B.I. Those last three initials should clue everyone onto the Obama SuperScandal.
Workers of firm involved with the discredited and Fake Dossier take the 5th. Who paid for it, Russia, the FBI or the Dems (or all)?
Not only did Hillary2016 push the Fusion GPS lies via the Russians. There were other connections we now know between the Russians and Hillary2016:
FBI watched, then acted as Russian spy moved closer to Hillary Clinton
As Hillary Clinton was beginning her job as President Obama’s chief diplomat, federal agents observed as multiple arms of Vladimir Putin’s machine unleashed an influence campaign designed to win access to the new secretary of State, her husband Bill Clinton and members of their inner circle, according to interviews and once-sealed FBI records.
Some of the activities FBI agents gathered evidence about in 2009 and 2010 were covert and illegal. [snip]
At the time it was hired, the firm was providing hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in pro bono support to Bill Clinton’s global charitable initiative, and it legally helped the Russian company secure federal decisions that led to billions in new U.S. commercial nuclear business, records show.
Agents were surprised by the timing and size of a $500,000 check that a Kremlin-linked bank provided Bill Clinton with for a single speech in the summer of 2010. [snip]
A day after the arrests of the sleeper ring, another event captured the FBI’s attention.
Thousands of miles away in Russia, former President Bill Clinton collected a $500,000 check for giving a 90-minute speech to Renaissance Capital, a Kremlin-connected bank, and then he scored a meeting with Putin himself.
The check caught the attention of FBI agents, especially with Hillary Clinton having recently returned from meetings in Russia, and her department working on a variety of issues where Moscow had an interest, records show.
One issue was American approval of the Russian nuclear company Rosatom’s purchase of a Canadian company called Uranium One that controlled 20 percent of America’s strategic uranium reserves. State was one of more than a dozen federal agencies that needed to weigh in, and a Clinton deputy was handling the matter.
The second issue was the Russian company TENEX’s desire to score a new raft of commercial nuclear sales to U.S. companies. TENEX for years was selling uranium recycled from old Soviet warheads to the United States. But that deal was coming to an end and now it needed a new U.S. market for its traditional uranium
And the third was a promise Secretary Clinton herself made to Russian leaders to round up support in America’s Silicon Valley for then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev’s dream for a new high-tech hub outside Moscow known as Skolkovo. [snip]
The bank that paid Clinton was promoting the Uranium One deal’s stock.
We have repeatedly requested lots and lots of special prosecutors be appointed to investigate. Thus far the corrupt Department of Justice, the corrupt F.B.I, the corrupt intelligence services, the corrupt security apparatus, have managed the massive scandal well enough to keep special prosecutors from being appointed. But even here there is some good news:
Congress Probes Whether Obama DOJ Used The ‘Trump Dossier’ Before Surveillance Court
Both the House and the Senate are investigating whether the former President Barack Obama’s administration used intelligence in a salacious “Trump Dossier” as “evidence” before a secret federal surveillance court to obtain permission to spy on Donald Trump campaign aides and later his transition team. [snip]
The FBI used the dossier to secure permission to monitor the communications of Trump associate Carter Page, based on U.S. officials briefed on the Russia investigation, CNN reported in April. [snip]
The presentation of evidence before the special surveillance court would have been FBI-generated documents delivered by Obama Justice Department attorneys, according to a congressional source familiar with evidence requirements before the court. At the time, FBI Director James Comey presided over the bureau and Attorney General Loretta Lynch oversaw the Justice Department. [snip]
That would mean the Obama administration pursued “a type of manipulation of intelligence data and false intelligence data to mislead a court,” diGenova said. “It’s staggering in terms of its implications.”
The possibility the Obama administration might use the unproven allegations before a FISA court “constitutes a crime of unbelievable dimensions,” he said, adding: “It requires the empanelment of a federal grand jury.”
Grassley added a new twist to the “Steele” dossier, noting in his letter to Wray it appeared the former British agent also gave his same set of allegations to his compatriots in British intelligence. United Kingdom court legal proceedings appended to Grassley’s letter show Steele on Dec. 13, 2016 gave the same dossier to a “senior UK government national security official.”
Senator Grassley correctly notes that if the dossier was given by the F.B.I. to the British intelligence services and then British intelligence gave it to the F.B.I. the FISA court could have been deceived if the F.B.I. sought warrants based on the British intelligence reports without disclosing to the court that the source was the F.B.I.
NBC reports that Tony Podesta (the brother of Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta) and his firm are the subjects of a criminal investigation by the special prosecutor.
And this comes amid new reports that the FBI gathered evidence for two years as Russian agents — including a major sleeper cell — worked to gain access to then-Secretary of State Clinton, husband Bill and members of their inner circle. [snip]
All this, of course, follows reports the Obama administration knew Russia was engaged in a campaign of bribery and extortion — yet allowed a deal to go through giving Moscow control of one-fifth of America’s uranium.
Yes, there’s something to investigate here.
President Donald J. Trump is under attack by the deep state Swamp comprised of Obama Dimocrats, the intelligence apparatus, the Department of Justice, and all those who were supposed to be guardians of our democracy, not unelected dictators who rule over the land of the free and the home of the brave.
The scandals are not about Hillary Clinton, uranium, urine soaked dossiers, money, nor emails. The scandals are but the tips of the iceberg we can see. The danger is deeper, beneath the waters:
Here’s the kicker: The Uranium One scandal is not only, or even principally, a Clinton scandal. It is an Obama-administration scandal.
It’s finally dawning on people: The Russian nuclear racketeering was an Obama administration scandal, which Congress ignored and the Justice Department investigated but did nothing to stop. Justice looked into the Russian crimes in 2009 and 2010, but waited until 2014 to do anything about it. And even then, it didn’t answer any of the larger questions. It can’t be ignored any longer.
So why didn’t the Department of Justice and the security/intelligence overlords who monitor Americans and try to carve history as they want it to be do anything? That’s foolish to ask. The Octopus that swims in the deep state Swamp did exactly what it wanted to do. Their problem is that Trump beat them all.
The fight is not yet over. President Trump is bidding his time. There will be at least three earthquakes about to be unleashed by President Trump. Those who worry about why things are not being exposed as quickly as we want must wait for the earthquakes. The first thirteen days of October were important. The last few months of 2017 will be epic.
The fight is not yet over. But the Octopus of the deep state will soon find they are up against a man who fights.
Further, President Trump, like a boxer in his prime, with eight arms not the regulation two, delivers his powerful blows against leftist culture then recycles the blows to strike at leftist politics, then bludgeons the political left with the same blows he rains down on leftist culture then leftist politics then back to leftist culture.
It’s not just President Trump either. President Trump has so impacted the culture and the political swamps that it’s almost as if the political winds and tides act in obedience to the President.
All the while, President Trump gains strength as he weakens the left, which makes President Trump ever stronger to devastate the left even more. It’s a cycle that feeds the cycle, a fire that feeds the fire.
The one-two combination punches which lead to more one-two combination punches are fearsome and likely to increase in frequency and force.
* * * * * *
Culture War – Hillary Clinton, NFL, Weinstein, Virginia
Consider the issues President Trump addressed during the first thirteen days of October. On the culture side was the NFL and the millionaire players who refuse to stand and respect the American flag and the republic for which it stands. At a political election rally President Trump attacked the millionaire players who kneel and disrespect the flag. The NFL soon felt the gale force concussion-dealing blows from TrumpNado.
In walked Hillary Clinton to continue the cycle. Hillary defended the kneeling football players for their political stance disrespecting the flag on the cultural fields of football. Immediately President Trump pounced and politically trashed Hillary’s dumb defense of the cultural insult to the flag.
Somehow Hillary Clinton cannot understand that her hapless political support on this cultural issue helps President Trump. Somehow Hillary Clinton cannot see that it is the NFL, not President Trump, holding emergency discussions to try to defuse the issue which President Trump is only too happy to highlight every day. President Trump is winning on the cultural football kneelers issue and that helps him politically. Hillary, unable to see that she is lending support to vanquished armies, appears a dunce unable to distinguish a retreating army from an advancing army.
Hillary Clinton is also a figure in a cultural issue which has been used by the political left to attack President Trump specifically and the GOP generally. The issue is sexism and misogyny. Here, it is the political winds and tides doing President Trump’s bidding, not President Trump himself.
Harvey Weinstein. Harvey Weinstein and his crimes appear to the dunces to be a cultural issue. It’s not about hypocrisy though. It’s not about culture. It’s not about social norms. It’s about politics. The left has used culture issues as ammunition in the political war. Now it is all on the other foot as metaphorically mixed President Trump turns the tables, or rather the political winds and tides shift to favor President Trump and the GOP.
The Harvey Weinstein scandal is no longer about Harvey Weinstein. It never was just about Harvey Weinstein, as we explained. But the political left wanted to restrict the issue to Harv in order to protect the Hollywood cultural/political left and most importantly the entire structure of the political left leadership.
Again, Hillary Clinton, “clueless” as Alicia Silverstone’s character in the movie of the same name. Only, Hillary Clinton is pretending to be clueless. It took Hillary Clinton, defender of women, a long time to speak up about her pal Harvey. Then Hillary expressed shock and ignorance. The Harvey money would not be returned by Hillary however. Then today, any dunce that thought Hillary Clinton did not know about Harvey Weinstein became slack-jawed as a long-time Hillary and Bill crony from Hollywood, um, cut to the chase:
Harvey Weinstein may have been at the top of the sexual predator food chain, but these kinds of atrocities against women routinely go unreported and unpunished in the entertainment industry. The No. 1 casting criterion in Hollywood is that, above all else, an actress must be “hot and fuckable.” [snip]
As more and more women have come forward, A-listers who are normally intrepid, social injustice sniffers have scrambled to condemn Weinstein and announce that they had no idea all this was going on. Some said this despite knowing him for decades, starring in his films and being friends with accusers who starred in his films. [snip]
However, I will be the first to admit that clearly delineated moral choices can still be painfully complex where friendship is involved. One of the best friends I will ever have and a man I love dearly, former President Bill Clinton, has certainly taxed my feminist conscience, but always without diminishing my affection. I even helped write his apology to the nation for his own sexual misconduct, was sitting next to him when he delivered it, and believe to this day it was based on something that was none of our business. And yes, some may call it hypocritical, but I confess to having had no problem warning at least three top-level Democratic operatives against allowing Harvey Weinstein to host political fundraisers.
Top-level operatives of the party knew, and therefore Hillary knew. A good friend from Arkansas warned about the dangers of political fundraisers with now cultural pariah Harvey Weinstein so Hillary knew. But Hillary kept quiet and collected the cash. Same as the other women who knew. And the men who knew.
Gee, all those powerful, strong, bold women!!!! They all knew and they all kept quiet. Powerful rich women kept quiet. Women advertised as “strong and bold” kept quiet. Are there any truly strong women in the political/cultural leftist world???? Or are they all whores who pretended to be powerful and strong only to remain silent and tamed as long as the money was inserted?
Rose McGowen comes out the best in all this. Even better is the strong and powerful Ambra Battilana Gutierrez who after Harvey attacked her, immediately went to the police station to report the assault then cooperated with the police and recorded Weinstein only to have the politically powerful leftist District Attorney refuse to prosecute. Hillary Clinton? Yeah, she knew. So much for strong and powerful and bold.
Linda Bloodworth Thomason told top fundraisers about Harvey. But still Hillary Clinton went to Harvey Weinstein’s house to raise money. Praised Harvey Weinstein. Does anyone doubt that everyone knew and that many of those had to have warned Bill and Hillary Clinton that Harvey Weinstein was a predator even as he used his position of cultural power to help elect political figures?
Hillary Clinton knew. Hillary Cliton! When it is politically useful it is clit-on. When not, clit-off. Everybody knew:
We knew about the man’s hunger; his fervor; his appetite.
There was nothing secret about this voracious rapacity; like a gluttonous ogre out of the Brothers Grimm.
All couched in vague promises of potential movie roles.
(and, it should be noted: there were many who actually succumbed to his bulky charms. Willingly. Which surely must have only impelled him to cast his fetid net even wider).
But like I said: everybody-fucking-knew.
And to me, if Harvey’s behavior is the most reprehensible thing one can imagine, a not-so-distant second is the current flood of sanctimonious denial and condemnation that now crashes upon these shores of rectitude in gloppy tides of bullshit righteousness.
And do you know how I am sure this is true?
Because I was there.
And I saw you.
And I talked about it with you.
You, the big producers; you, the big directors; you, the big agents; you, the big financiers.
And you, the big rival studio chiefs; you, the big actors; you, the big actresses; you, the big models.
You, the big journalists; you, the big screenwriters; you, the big rock stars; you, the big restaurateurs; you, the big politicians.
I saw you.
All of you.
God help me, I was there with you.
The 49-year-old spoke about how she experienced harassment as early as 13 years old, when a fifty-year-old crew member said he would teach her to dance, ‘and then proceeded to push against me with an erection.’
A year later, she said, a married director stuck his tongue down her throat while on set.
When the magazine Movieline decided to feature Ringwald on their cover in 1995, ‘the head of a major studio – and, incidentally, someone who claims himself to be horrified by the Harvey allegations’ was quoted saying: ‘I wouldn’t know [Molly Ringwald] if she sat on my face.’
That studio head was later alleged to be Jeffrey Katzenberg by a number of outlets, linking to the magazine issue.
Jeffrey Katzenbach is one of the Katzenjammer leftists at the former DreamWorks, leftists all. Katzenbach made rich by his cultural life gives money to political Obama Dimocrats and other leftists to fulfill their leftist dreams.
Jeffrey Katzenbach and the other cultural leftists exposed alongside Harvey Weinstein will have to curtail their political donations as their money is now toxic. Katzenbach is not alone. Bob Weinstein, brother of Harve, tried to pretend he was shocked by Harve’s behavior. Soon Bob Weinstein too was exposed.
All these cultural leftists would ordinarily be called to use their “star” power to pull political loser candidates over the finish line in elections. Now, they are all neutered. Neither Matt Damon nor Ben Affleck, nor any of the Hollywood fakes will be going to Virginia for the big election there. It’s an election Obama Dimocrats know they cannot afford to lose:
Democrats See Virginia Governor Race as a Must-Win
A loss would give Republicans full control of Old Dominion government and raise questions about Democrats’ viability in a political environment seen to be trending in their favor. [snip]
But Virginia is often seen as something of a harbinger, however imperfect, of the political climate to come. Thus, Democrats are pulling out all the stops.
The Obama Dimocrat has led the Virginia Governor’s race in all polls except for the latest poll wherein Ed Gillespie, the Republican, is ahead. The kiss of death himself will campaign for Ralph Northam, the Obama Dimocrat, this Thursday. Why has Ed Gillespie raced to the top of the polls? A cultural issue President Trump began to speak about and which is a sure winner politically:
Gillespie recently rolled out new ads targeting Northam for being weak on crime and illegal immigration, and 40 percent of responders said they only trust Gillespie on crime. Just 24 percent of responders said the opposite, that they only trust Northam on crime.
President Trump spoke out about the MS-13 gang and Gillespie uses the gang’s slogan in a very provocative ad:
There was a time, before Trump, when race-baiting worked to elect Obama Dimocrats. No longer. RAPE, KILL, CONTROL are the MS-13 motto. President Trump is not afraid to speak out on cultural issues and therefore wins politically and now others follow his lead.
Obama Dimocrat Northam needed Barack Obama to campaign for him in order to bring in the black vote. But Northam has tried to play a sneaky game and he has been caught:
The cultural game of white southern leftist candidates pretending to love black people but keeping pictures of black candidates off the literature doesn’t work any more. President Trump has taught Republicans how to fight back fearlessly on both cultural and political grounds.
Thirteen Days: Enemies Foreign And Domestic – Iran, ObamaCare
The earlier “thirteen days in October” of significance involved JFK’s confrontation with the Soviet Union and Cuba. President Donald J. Trump the first thirteen days of October 2017 likewise has confronted America’s enemies, foreign and domestic.
The actions of the first thirteen days are exactly what we suggested a few days after his election victory President Donald J. Trump should do:
We know exactly what President Donald J. Trump must do, how he must do it, and when he must do it. Ignore what anyone else says. We know. We know. We know. [snip]
President Donald J. Trump must do exactly the opposite of what Barack Obooberama did in exactly the opposite way of how and when Obooberama did it.
It’s not even a year, yet the man who never sleeps is no longer slowly moving his agenda forward. After months of preparatory work and lots and lots of action, President Trump is now draining the swamps, moving his agenda forward, pushing the entire federal bureaucracy to move forward, and making huge leaps and bounds to move the Trump MAGA agenda forward across all fronts.
Against Big Media, the Dimocrats, the GOP establishment, the intelligencia, Academia, Big Business, Big Institutions, the neo-con right, and the totalitarian left, Donald J. Trump fought and won. [snip]
President Trump represents an invasion that seeks to overthrow the political order. The political order will fight back.
What President Trump understands is that once you land on the beach the imperative is to move swiftly inland and capture territory. President Trump, like the General Patton he so often references, knows that the army must move forward with surprising speed and worry about patching problems up as you go along.
Some parts of the beachhead advance. Other parts of the invasion are stalled. The order is to keep moving forward. There’s blood everywhere. The necessity is to break through the roadblocks and move forward. Move forward. There’s blood everywhere, but move forward, even when it is your friend that was mowed down, move forward, move forward: [snip]
Let’s look at the entire battlefield: the GOP establishment continues to fight back with delay tactics while the neo-cons and their bureaucratic allies continue all out war with flame-throwers and exhortations to fight on against President Trump. From the left it is madness and fury against President Trump. All along President Trump continues to move forward, move forward.
From late January until September 2017 the battle was to capture the beachhead and bring order to the chaotic invasion forces and logistics. Establish the beachhead, then more forward, move forward.
The beachhead is now established. The enemy fortifications identified and at the first stages of destruction. The Generals and supplies are all on the beachhead; the invasion moves forward, forward.
The first thirteen days in October: when the political/cultural invasion of the swamp blasts through to destroy the outflanked enemy.
After weeks of seeing his agenda imperiled by Republican divisions and infighting among his aides, Trump has been a whirl of activity this week, reasserting his campaign priorities and trying to deliver wins for his fervent but frustrated base of supporters.
Trump took steps to dramatically undercut the Obamacare health system, sent notice he was willing to scuttle the nuclear deal with Iran, moved to roll back coal-plant limits, and again demanded a wall along the Mexican border.
And on social media the Republican president appeared to relish his feuds with the news media, senior Republicans in Congress, and National Football League players who have protested during the national anthem. [snip]
But by the end of the week, he had made more progress in undoing the policy accomplishments of his Democratic predecessor, Barack Obama, than he had in some time.
4 Ways Trump Has Moved to Undo His Predecessors’ Legacies [snip]
What Mr. Trump Has Done: The Trump administration has made a variety of moves, including two major actions on Thursday, that could fundamentally undermine the viability of the federal health care marketplaces, a central part of the law.
The most recent actions — allowing insurance companies to sell less expensive plans with fewer benefits and ending subsidies to insurance companies that help low-income consumers pay out-of-pocket costs — are the latest in a series of initiatives that strike at the heart of the insurance marketplaces set up under the law. Earlier moves included cuts to advertising and services that help consumers sign up for plans on the marketplaces, as well as an effort to weaken enforcement of the individual mandate. [snip]
The Iran Nuclear Deal
The United States and five other world powers reached a deal with Iran in July 2015 to limit that country’s nuclear program in exchange for lifting crippling international sanctions. The Obama administration argued that while the deal did not include all of the provisions it wanted, it was the “best bet” toward curbing Iran’s nuclear capabilities.
What Mr. Trump Has Done: On the campaign trail, Mr. Trump regularly denounced the deal, saying that it did not last long enough and that it did not cover ballistic missile launches or Iranian involvement in regional terrorist activity. After reluctantly recertifying the deal in July, Mr. Trump said Friday that he would not certify Iran’s compliance again.
Even the leftists at The Atlantic understand that President Trump had to do what he did because Barack Obama was either a treacherous America hater, a full tilt boob, or both:
In withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal and the Paris climate-change accord, in announcing that he was “canceling” the U.S. opening to Cuba, Trump seemed similarly determined to dismantle Obama’s achievements in international affairs. [snip]
But to the extent that Obama’s foreign-policy legacy is under threat, it’s not only Trump that’s doing the threatening. Some accomplishments are fraying for reasons that have nothing to do with the 45th president’s apparent contempt for the 44th. Obama’s legacy partially depends on his bets that certain countries—Cuba, Iran, Burma—would, with time, respond positively to diplomacy, which the former president once described to The Atlantic as “the element of American power that the rest of the world appreciates unambiguously.”
Yet in the admittedly short time since Obama left office, those bets haven’t paid off unambiguously. The Obama administration’s efforts to encourage Burma’s transition to democracy and to create favorable conditions for Iranian leaders to moderate, for instance, are now in jeopardy in large measure because of actions taken by those governments. These shortcomings raise questions about whether Obama, who considers himself a realist, was overly optimistic about the possibilities of engagement. [snip]
Meanwhile, Obama prided himself on keeping the United States out of new military quagmires—on endeavoring to leave his successor with a “clean barn”—but his failures to halt North Korea’s nuclear-weapons advances, tame the Taliban and other militant groups in Afghanistan, and stanch the bloodletting in Syria saddled the Trump administration with the prospect of new or renewed military conflicts in those countries. [snip]
Speaking to reporters last week, John Kelly, Trump’s chief of staff, offered a different interpretation of why Trump has pursued the policies he has. “I don’t mean any criticism to Mr. Trump’s predecessors,” Kelly said, before laying the criticism on thick: “But there is an awful lot of things that were, in my view, kicked down the road that have come home to roost, pretty much right now, that have to be dealt with.”
On foreign policy, President Trump has to reverse the Obama policies if we are ever to Make America Great Again.
On domestic policy, President Trump has to reverse the Obama policies if we are ever to Make America Great Again.
On simple things such as the culturally important “Merry Christmas” greeting, President Trump in October has made it clear that he will say “Merry Christmas” and encourage “Merry Christmas” with the same vigor he has “encouraged” the NFL to respect the flag. The politically correct euphemisms such as “seasons greetings” or “happy holidays” should not be forced from those that want to say “Merry Christmas”.
On issue after issue President Trump is fighting to Make America Great Again. Russia? It turns out that the big scandal on Russia is not Trump related, but rather Hillary Clinton related, Barack Obama related, Eric Holder related, Justice Department related, FBI related.
There’s a lot for President Donald J. Trump to do. We’ll write about the death dealing political earthquakes to come real soon. For now, we can rejoice on all that President Donald J. Trump has accomplished, especially during the first thirteen days in October.
Update: Well, our Twitter account has been removed because of the truths we wrote about scum. We’re in good company. Rose McGowan is off Twitter too for telling the truth.
This Twitter purge of the truth follows our FaceBook account removal earlier. We’re not saddened by any of this. We know that the flak comes when you are over the target. That’s why this website has so often and so ceaselessly been under attack.
The Twitter purge is not surprising because that is what totalitarian leftists do. Snakes bite, totalitarians purge. We know Twitter and FaceBook are leftist totalitarian organizations that repress the truth as much as possible. As to FaceBook, FaceBook was, according to Aaron Sorkin who made the movie “The Social Network”, founded on hatred of women:
Mark’s blogging that we hear in voiceover as he drinks, hacks, creates Facemash and dreams of the kind of party he’s sure he’s missing, came directly from Mark’s blog. … Facebook was born during a night of incredibly misogyny. The idea of comparing women to farm animals, and then to each other, based on their looks and then publicly ranking them. …
More generally, I was writing about a very angry and deeply misogynistic group of people. These aren’t the cuddly nerds we made movies about in the 80’s. They’re very angry that the cheerleader still wants to go out with the quarterback instead of the men (boys) who are running the universe right now. The women they surround themselves with aren’t women who challenge them (and frankly, no woman who could challenge them would be interested in being anywhere near them.)”
Hey, maybe it is time to look into Mark Zuckerberg and FaceBook for Harveyesque behaviors. Indeed it is time to look at all the leftist totalitarian organizations such as Google and Twitter. We know Google is busy firing and suppressing opinions not in conformity with the leftist totalitarians.
Who knew what and when did “he” know it? What politicians knew? Associated Press does not mention if Malia Obama, who worked for Weinstein as an intern, knew. Did Barack and Michelle Obama know? Why not? Hillary? Bill? Harry Reid? Nancy Pelousy? Obama Dimocrat Ben Mankiewicz of TCM? Hollywood agent Ari Emmanuel, brother of Rahm the Chicago Mayor? Robert Redford of Sundance? Jane Fonda?
Harvey Weinstein isn’t about male misbehavior, but leftist power [snip]
Women were just as silent as men. If not more so. The most vocal Harvey apologist now is Donna Karan. [snip]
There’s no mystery here. Everyone on the inside knew what he was. Even plenty of those with only a passing knowledge of the industry knew.
Harvey Weinstein was protected by power that he accumulated within a leftist industry and which he cloaked in leftist politics. Hence the Obama fundraisers, Hillary photos, Bill Clinton interview, the Planned Parenthood shindig and all that. It’s why he tried blaming a right-wing conspiracy afterward.
Twitter and FaceBook and Google can all conspire to suppress the truth. We’ll trust to justice as Billy Shakespeare understood it, Foul deeds will rise, Though all the earth o’erwhelm them, to men’s eyes.
Harlot, strumpet, prostitute, whore, hooker, – just a few words to describe the filth called Ashley Judd. Ashley Judd, the self proclaimed “nasty woman” who protested against President Donald J. Trump on the Saturday after the inauguration, is also a self-confessed prostitute. Skank Judd is not the only skank in the culture. There are lots of Hollywood “stars” who make millions that are skanks. Some like Matt Damon are male skanks, male prostitutes. There are lots of sports “stars” who are skanks too. Millionaire football players in a sport that has a high number of men who beat up women and commit crimes are also skanks. These skanks were safe until President Donald J. Trump kicked them in the groin.
We are not taking literary license when we describe Ashley Judd and Matt Damon, along with the other skanks as prostitutes. We mean they literally are prostitutes. They are whores. Harlots. Hookers who sell themselves and their alleged oft proclaimed “principles” for profit.
But instead of the dominant cultural elites’ destruction of President Trump, what is happening is that President Trump is warping the culture, devouring the culture, trumping the culture!
We now see the collapse of the left as President Donald J. Trump is the undisputed winner of the Kulturkampf, the culture war the left has waged against America.
To the totalitarian left it is an American Horror Story. The left has waged a cultural war against American values for generations but in the past nine months the culture war from the left surged. For generations the left waged a cultural war against American values without any pushback. But in the past nine months the totalitarian left has learned that President Donald J. Trump fights back – and wins.
* * * * * *
The totalitarian left for generations has controlled the cultural conversation to define America and to disparage the values of Americans. Football and sports generally resisted the cultural left’s hatred of America. Since the election of President Donald J. Trump though, the totalitarian left made their move to turn football against America or at the very least to finish off the game as a major source of entertainment. It was supposed to be a win/win for the left.
The totalitarian left has always hated football (and NASCAR) because the sport appeared to be particularly patriotic and appealed to white working class men. The left never like all that flag waving even if it was paid for with tax dollars. Still, the left tried to disparage football but always failed to bring the sport down. The totalitarian left had one foothold in the sport however – sports writers.
Sports writers, such as the fabled Hunter Thompson who later went on to write about the political world, had one “talent”. They wielded a vast vocabulary and fevered (often due to drugs or drink) imaginations. This ability to describe the same action in fresh ways made these “creative” writers a natural for the sports world. After all, how many ways can you describe the same action in fresh new ways? A ball is thrown, the ball is caught, the player moves in this or that direction and accomplishes this or that failure or triumph. How many ways can you say all this over the course of hundreds, thousands of games, season after season, year after year? Sports writers, exercised their ability to write the same thing in new and “creative” ways. These refugees from “creative” writing courses at colleges, most from the left wing of the political spectrum, couldn’t play the games, but they could describe them and shape the public perception. We went from Hunter Thompson to Keith Olbermann.
In the cultural landscape the dream merchants of Hollywood had a singular role. Hollywood used to cheerlead America through tough times such as World War II. Hollywood used to make great biopics about figures such as Christopher Columbus. Hollywood used to manipulate public opinion to extol American values particularly when those old Jews from New York ran the studios. Those old Jews understood the debt they owed to the country and genuinely loved America.
That was the old world. Donald J. Trump for years saw what was happening as the cheerleading for America became a ceaseless attack against America. In 2017, Donald J. Trump became President Donald J. Trump, and the world changed again. The silence from those who like America was broken. The old “shut-up” turned to Twitter screams. The fight was on.
This week the fight all but ended. The fight will continue to be waged. But we know who will ultimately win. It’s like Hitler’s Europe after the invasion at Normandy. Eventually Berlin falls.
Unlike Yankee Doodle Dandy, Donald J. Trump was not born on the fourth of July. But President Donald J. Trump was born on Flag Day.
Perhaps that birth date explains why President Trump has so often talked about respect for the flag. Candidate Trump was not happy with the insults to the flag as millionaire football players like Colin Kaepernick refused to follow the manual of the National Football League and stand respectfully for the national anthem and salute the American flag.
Eventually, President Trump spoke out, and hit hard. Big Media and all the leftist sports writers declared President Trump a dud. Football would win. The kneelers would win. Big Media declared Trump a loser and the anti-American millionaire football kneelers the victors. This past weekend, it became clear Big Media was once again wrong. President Donald J. Trump won the fight against the National Football league and the kneelers.
The final knife in the throat of the National Football League was thrust by Vice President Michael Pence.
Vice President Pence in his home state of Indiana, where he is very popular, walked out of the game between his home state and the team from San Francisco when San Francisco millionaires refused to salute the flag. It was a brilliant move. San Francisco versus a man from Indiana in Indiana favors the man from Indiana. But it is so much more.
When Vice President Pence walked out it was a signal that this fight was only going to escalate. President Trump and Vice President Pence understand they have won this fight and will push on until complete and total victory. The NFL also understands they have lost and Trump/Pence have won.
Why? Why was the walkout by Vice President Pence so important? The walkout by the Vice President not only signals that Trump/Pence think they have won. The walkout also is a signal to others to begin to walk out.
Not only that however. The walkout by Vice President Pence is a signal to fans to walk out, but it is a signal to others in the political world to do the same thing. Recall our prediction about this:
Next year, around Labor Day, when the political campaigns go into full swing will also be the time the football season starts. Get ready for President Trump to beat the NFL into the ground in the next season of 2018. We can’t wait. President Trump will score a 2018 election touchdown in part because of the kneeling fumbles of the NFL.
Next football season, as the political election season also begins, political candidates will follow Vice President Pence’s lead and walk out after football millionaires kneel and disrespect the flag. GOP candidates will walk out. Obama Dimocrats will have to explain why they don’t walk out. The NFL understands that every game after Labor Day 2018 will become an opportunity for Trump supporters to demonstrate their support of the flag and the man born on Flag Day.
President Donald J. Trump tackled the National Football League and won a touchdown this year. Next year, during the 2018 elections, President Donald J. Trump will win the super bowl of election victories.
American Horror Story – Harvey Weinstein
Few Big Media outlets want to discuss the Harvey Weinstein story. Even fewer, in and out of Big Media, understand the massive implications for the left that is the Harvey Weinstein story. The Hollywood skanks of the cultural left are in collapse in the same way the leftists of the sports world have collapsed.
Hollywood skanks, prostitutes, harlots, like Ashley Judd and Matt Damon are responsible for the collapse of the Hollywood left. In two big articles at the New York Times and The New Yorker, the leftist hypocrite whores have been exposed.
Weinstein was a strong supporter of Hillary Clinton 2016 run, donated to her campaigns 10 times between 1999 & 2016 https://t.co/pxomeBo0FT
Political prostitutes such as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are also exposed by the stench wafting from the burning Hollywood hills. It will be an interesting political season after Labor Day 2018 as many of the Hollywood “stars” and political harlots are forced to explain their Harvey Weinstein connections.
What are the allegations about Harvey Weinstein? Let’s start the same way the New York Times started it’s Harvey Weinstein article, with prostitute Ashley Judd. After Ashley Judd, years later, discusses the disgusting sexual harassment she suffered by leftist Harvey Weinstein, this is what skank Ashley Judd says:
Could he give her a massage? When she refused, he suggested a shoulder rub. She rejected that too, she recalled. He steered her toward a closet, asking her to help pick out his clothing for the day, and then toward the bathroom. Would she watch him take a shower? she remembered him saying.
“I said no, a lot of ways, a lot of times, and he always came back at me with some new ask,” Ms. Judd said. “It was all this bargaining, this coercive bargaining.”
To get out of the room, she said, she quipped that if Mr. Weinstein wanted to touch her, she would first have to win an Oscar in one of his movies. She recalled feeling “panicky, trapped,” she said in the interview. “There’s a lot on the line, the cachet that came with Miramax.”
Not long afterward, she related what had happened to her mother, the singer Naomi Judd, who confirmed their conversation to a Times reporter. Years later, Ashley Judd appeared in two Weinstein films without incident, she said. In 2015, she shared an account of the episode in the hotel room with “Variety” without naming the man involved.
It wasn’t a “quip”. ‘Get me an Oscar and you can touch me’ is what prostitute Ashley Judd said. It’s like the old joke of the man that offers a woman a million dollars for sex. When she says “OK” the man lowers his offer. The woman objects. The man responds, “we’ve already established that you are a prostitute. All we are doing now is haggling about the price.” Whore Ashley Judd’s price was a dildo in the shape of an Oscar. Nasty woman.
Women before and after the Ashley Judd rendezvous with Harvey Weinstein were abused by Harvey Weinstein. Nasty skank Ashley Judd did noting to stop Harvey Weinstein. Ashley Judd is a skank prostitute.
Decades of Sexual Harassment Accusations Against Harvey Weinstein [snip]
In 2014, Mr. Weinstein invited Emily Nestor, who had worked just one day as a temporary employee, to the same hotel and made another offer: If she accepted his sexual advances, he would boost her career, according to accounts she provided to colleagues who sent them to Weinstein Company executives. The following year, once again at the Peninsula, a female assistant said Mr. Weinstein badgered her into giving him a massage while he was naked, leaving her “crying and very distraught,” wrote a colleague, Lauren O’Connor, in a searing memo asserting sexual harassment and other misconduct by their boss.
“There is a toxic environment for women at this company,” Ms. O’Connor said in the letter, addressed to several executives at the company run by Mr. Weinstein.
An investigation by The New York Times found previously undisclosed allegations against Mr. Weinstein stretching over nearly three decades, documented through interviews with current and former employees and film industry workers, as well as legal records, emails and internal documents from the businesses he has run, Miramax and the Weinstein Company.
During that time, after being confronted with allegations including sexual harassment and unwanted physical contact, Mr. Weinstein has reached at least eight settlements with women, according to two company officials speaking on the condition of anonymity. Among the recipients, The Times found, were a young assistant in New York in 1990, an actress in 1997, an assistant in London in 1998, an Italian model in 2015 and Ms. O’Connor shortly after, according to records and those familiar with the agreements. [snip]
In public, he presents himself as a liberal lion, a champion of women and a winner of not just artistic but humanitarian awards.
In 2015, the year Ms. O’Connor wrote her memo, his company distributed “The Hunting Ground,” a documentary about campus sexual assault. A longtime Democratic donor, he hosted a fund-raiser for Hillary Clinton in his Manhattan home last year. He employed Malia Obama, the oldest daughter of former President Barack Obama, as an intern this year, and recently helped endow a faculty chair at Rutgers University in Gloria Steinem’s name. [snip]
“But behind the scenes, it was a mess, and this was the biggest mess of all,” he added, referring to Mr. Weinstein’s treatment of women.
Dozens of Mr. Weinstein’s former and current employees, from assistants to top executives, said they knew of inappropriate conduct while they worked for him. Only a handful said they ever confronted him. [snip]
After reaching a settlement with Mr. Weinstein, Ms. O’Connor withdrew her complaint and thanked him for the career opportunity he had given her. [snip]
“I am just starting out in my career, and have been and remain fearful about speaking up,” Ms. O’Connor wrote. “But remaining silent is causing me great distress.” [snip]
“She was disappointed that he met with her and did not seem to be interested in her résumé or skill set.” [snip]
Across the years and continents, accounts of Mr. Weinstein’s conduct share a common narrative: Women reported to a hotel for what they thought were work reasons, only to discover that Mr. Weinstein, who has been married for most of three decades, sometimes seemed to have different interests. [snip]
“If a female executive was asked to go to a meeting solo, she and a colleague would generally double up” so as not to be alone with Mr. Weinstein, recalled Mr. Gill, the former president of Miramax Los Angeles. [snip]
“It wasn’t a secret to the inner circle,” said Kathy DeClesis, Bob Weinstein’s assistant in the early 1990s. [snip]
In 1997, Mr. Weinstein reached a previously undisclosed settlement with Rose McGowan, then a 23-year-old-actress, after an episode in a hotel room during the Sundance Film Festival. [snip]
In March 2015, Mr. Weinstein had invited Ambra Battilana, an Italian model and aspiring actress, to his TriBeCa office on a Friday evening to discuss her career. Within hours, she called the police. [snip]
The Manhattan district attorney’s office later declined to bring charges.
Political “donations” protected Harvey Weinstein from indictment. Other than possibly Rose McGowen all are revealed as skanks, male and female. Disney, the cultural leftist corporation that supports Barack Obama, owned Miramax at points that sexual assaults against women were ignored. All the people who knew or should have known are responsible. The skanks like Matt Damon kept quiet after having helped squash stories about Weinstein. Most of those that knew are famous or rich cultural leftists and contributors to the Obama Dimocrats. See why we think this signals the collapse of the left?
Big Media whores at the New York Times knew about Harvey Weinstein’s assaults against women for more than a dozen years but refused to publish. Harvey Weinstein masturbated in front of a woman news anchor more than ten years ago. Big Media silence protected Harvey Weinstein.
Harvey Weinstein is a nasty man. Harry Weinstein didn’t just do locker room talk. He really did grab ’em by the pussy. Harvey Weinstein was not alone. The totalitarian left was there, cheerleading, as Harvey’s hands crawled up women’s dresses.
The do-nothing Republican Congress does not have to do a thing to win in 2018 and 2020. That’s because Obama Dimocrats will make GOP big wins in 2018 and the reelection of President Donald J. Trump the only choice for normals.
We don’t think the do-nothing GOP congress will pass tax cuts, let alone tax reform. ObamaCare repeal? We doubt it. Immigration anything? Um, no. We don’t think they will have to do a single damn thing. Yet, the GOP will win big in 2018 and even bigger in 2020.
We are as convinced now in October as we were early this year and throughout the rest of the year when we forecast big GOP wins in 2018 and 2020. Our forecasts and reasons are indisputable.
So deranged is Hillary Clinton that even the Bezos Washington Post which loves “gun control” mocked her assertions after the Las Vegas shooting by what appears to be a loon son of an F.B.I. ten most wanted pop.
The crowd fled at the sound of gunshots.
Imagine the deaths if the shooter had a silencer, which the NRA wants to make easier to get.
Hillary Clinton is not alone in her deranged Las Vegas mutterings. Loons such as Senator Chris Murphy, Mike Bloomberg, Senator Blumenthal, Senator Pocahontas Warren, and Congressman Himes, all jumped inside the kook-kook clock to chime about gun control. Gun control works only on law abiding citizens, but don’t tell these self-interested anti-Trump kooks that.
And as someone who cheers when Stephen Curry or Von Miller speaks out and makes the president look small, I’ve reluctantly become convinced that many athletes are making a tactical mistake.
Yes, the athletes and their allies can make nuanced, genuine arguments about why kneeling during the national anthem is not meant as a rebuke to the entire country. Liberals have rallied to their side, almost uniformly. I have the same instinct.
Winning over blue America, however, is a pretty modest goal. The kneeling argument needlessly alienates persuadable people, and it’s one the athletes don’t need.
It’s not just “athletes” making a tactical, rather, strategic mistake. It’s Obama Dimocrats. All these doofs manage to do is expand their cheering squads and votes in the encircled blue states; and give ammunition to the hordes of pro-Trump revolutionaries ready to take down the Hunger Games Capitol and capital cities filled with Obama Dimocrats. Meanwhile the normals continue to march on in support of President Trump:
CNN host John King said Sunday that NFL owners have data supporting President Donald Trump’s claim that television ratings have gone down because of players’ protests during the national anthem.
“NFL owners so far siding with their players for their right to free speech, but they’re also keeping close tabs on the financial impact and the public relations impact of this confrontation,” King said.
He went on to say that the NFL owners have research “clearly showing the president is right” when he claims the national anthem protests are one factor in TV ratings dropping.
“Since the president weighed in, the owners are now dealing with a surge in ticket holder requests for refunds,” King said.
For once CNN is not stating Fake News. And, to quote the Mets fans’ “Wait until next year.” Next year, around Labor Day, when the political campaigns go into full swing will also be the time the football season starts. Get ready for President Trump to beat the NFL into the ground in the next season of 2018. We can’t wait. President Trump will score a 2018 election touchdown in part because of the kneeling fumbles of the NFL.
David Leonhardt is not alone at the New York Times with his warnings of Obama Dimocrat Gotterdammerung. Repulsive Anti-Trump (and anti-Hillary) Frank Bruni tells the Obama Dimocrats to get ready, get ready, get ready… to lose:
Democrats, Please Get Ready to Lose
There’s a saying that what matters isn’t winning or losing. It’s whether you beat the spread.
But what’s the spread for Democrats in 2018?
Is the spread — which means the predicted margin of victory or defeat — gaining the 24 seats in the House that are necessary for a majority in the chamber? That’s certainly doable. I could argue that it’s probable.
But I could also make the case that Democrats fall five, 10 or 15 seats short. And I could imagine a demoralization that shadows and thereby dooms the party in 2020, when the stakes are even higher.
Is the spread control of the Senate? With just three turned seats, the Democrats have it. What promising math. But what a punishing map: There are more vulnerable Democrats up for re-election than there are vulnerable Republicans. Despite Donald Trump’s wackiness and the G.O.P.’s woes, Democrats could easily lose ground here.
Frank Bruni hates President Donald J. Trump. But the obvious even dawns upon the dead. Frank Bruni finally sees what we saw many months ago. President Trump triumphant! Obama Dimocrats humiliated again and eating their own bowels:
So the task ahead is twofold and tricky. They must move heaven and earth to wrest Congress from Republicans, who’ve demonstrated little backbone for standing up to an erratic, egomaniacal president in desperate need of containment.
But they must also, somehow, keep their expectations in check, because the long game is the White House, and it won’t be served by the acrimony and sense of futility that disappointment in 2018 could bring.
Howard Wolfson, who was one of the chief strategists for Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign, summed up the situation well.
He said that the House majority must be Democrats’ nonnegotiable goal, because it matters so much and is indisputably attainable. But if they don’t succeed, he added, “There will be a circular firing squad.” And it will be an especially furious one.
Progressives will point to moderates who lost their contests as definitive proof that the party should move left. Moderates will point to progressives who didn’t prevail and insist the opposite. And the infighting could be another lucky break for Trump, whose life story is already a fable of outrageous fortune.
Bill Clinton used to say that if you’re walking down the road and you see a turtle on a post — you can be sure the turtle did not get there by accident. The Frank Bruni totalitarian left wants to believe that 2020 will be “another lucky break for Trump” and continue a “life story” which “is already a fable of outrageous fortune.” President Trump was lucky to be born to his parents. But it is not “luck” to find him on top of the post, giggling. It was hard work and smarts that got Donald J. Trump into the White House.
Deep down, the totalitarian left and Frank Bruni understand that President Trump earned his 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue address. In 2016 they were with “her”. The American people are with “him” and Obama Dimocrats know the “him” is Trump. For all the happy talk about wins, Obama Dimocrats are losers and the know it:
“You have to shoot for the stars,” the Democratic operative Hilary Rosen told me. “You might just reach the moon.”
But even as Rosen said that, she hedged any prophecy of a rout, in a manner that spoke to the difficulty of properly calibrating optimism in 2018. She worried about Democrats’ policy agenda. She worried about the party’s tone. “I still think we lack a sunny, aspirational outlook,” she said. “We’re going down in the mud with Donald Trump.”
She added that the party wasn’t focused on change in the right, compelling fashion. “The change that Donald Trump was selling was blowing up the system,” she observed. “What’s our change? Is our change to patch up the system? Not very sexy.” [snip]
Two new directions that many progressives in the party have indeed latched onto — tuition-free college and single-payer health care — make some G.O.P. leaders’ hearts go pitter-patter, because they’re convinced that a majority of Americans, including many independents, aren’t ready for either, not when the cost is bluntly explained.
“I think Democrats are making a huge, huge, huge mistake,” said one prominent Republican strategist who is carefully studying House races and may help steer a few of them. He expressed guarded confidence that the G.O.P. would hold onto its majority in the chamber, because, he said, the Democratic Party “is now being controlled by 20 people who are running for president, and that’s causing them to move too far left.”
He also marveled that Democrats had done nothing to take away one of Republicans’ most trusted targets: Nancy Pelosi. As long as she remains the Democratic leader in the House and Republicans can describe their opponents as servants of a San Francisco liberal in office for so many decades, they’re in good stead, he said.
For all his false bravado and excuses for why the GOP wins (gerrymandering) in 2018 which will lead to demoralized Obama Dimocrats losing again in 2020 (Bruni’s version of our Hiroshima and Nagasaki article) you can still smell the fear stinking from Bruni’s pores as he cannot comprehend why President Trump’s fights with the GOP establishment help President Trump and his army of normals:
I’m told that in some focus groups, when Republican voters are asked to name the leader of their party, most don’t mention Trump. He’s an unclassifiable entity in an orbit all his own. So while it’s possible that any disgust with the president will be taken out on the Republican lawmakers who curtsied to and coddled him, it’s not out of the question that those lawmakers would be regarded, and judged, separately.
Name another president in recent decades who publicly taunted and savaged peers in his putative party the way that Trump does. Name another president who was such an eager, audacious agent of disorder. There’s no tidy precedent for Trump, no historical model that snugly accommodates him. He proved that in 2016, and could prove it anew in 2018.
“Those who look to the past to predict the current political moment do so at their folly,” said Representative Joe Kennedy III, one of the regional vice chairmen of the D.C.C.C. So while he told me that he’s enormously heartened by the quality of Democratic candidates being groomed for House races, he’s not placing wagers.
That’s wise, considering: Democrats must recover from a breathtaking decline, during the Obama years, of the party’s representation at every level of government below the presidency. The party holds only 15 of 50 governor’s offices. While Republicans control both the governorship and the legislature in 26 states, Democrats have that monopoly in just six.
“We didn’t get here overnight,” Rosen said, reverting to management-of-expectations mode. “I think it’s unrealistic to think we’re going to turn it around in a single election.”
Frank Bruni and his Obama Dimocrat ilk of numbskulls do not understand that President Trump’s fight with the GOP establishment is a feature, not a bug.
In 2018, the GOP winners of the primaries will be Trump supporters. Already Corker is gone and will be replaced by a Trump supporter. Jeff Flake will soon be gone either because he decides not to run or because he will be destroyed by Trump supporters in the Arizona primary. Trump hater John Kasich will be term limited out of the Ohio capital. Obama Dimocrat McCaskill in Missouri, Donnelly in Indiana, Sherrod Brown in Ohio – all will be replaced by Trump supporters in the U.S. Senate. Those who stand with Trump will win in 2018. Those who kneel against the Flag will lose in 2018. In 2020 Trump triumphant.
Democrats in Iowa looking for ways to win back Trump voters
DES MOINES, Iowa — Iowa Democrats are looking for the prescription that will help them emerge from their withered condition, after dominating just a decade ago.
After sending progressive Tom Harkin to the Senate for 30 years and twice delivering the state for Barack Obama, Democrats are powerless in the House, Senate and statehouse, and remain stunned by President Donald Trump’s solid Iowa victory last year.
While it’s a familiar scenario across the upper Midwest, the pressure on Iowa Democrats to recoup the working-class voters who marched with Trump is more intense: They’re charged with setting the tone in a little more than two years for the party’s presidential nomination. [snip]
“I think it starts with letting these working-class people know that we see them, we hear them and we know what they are going through, and we have a plan,” Ryan, from blue-collar Warren, Ohio, told The Associated Press on Saturday. [snip]
“We’ve lost touch with certain voters,” state party chairman Troy Price said. “We talk about issues, but not the values behind the issues. We haven’t done the best job communicating with the people we fight so hard for. It’s why we are where we are.” [snip]
“It’s difficult to go into the rural areas of Iowa and find anyone who will admit to being a Democrat.”
Tim Ryan says he wants to let “these working-class people know that we see them, we hear them”. But that is a lie. Obama Dimocrats are neither seeing nor listening to the working class in Iowa or anywhere.
On ‘Dreamers’ Deal, Democrats Face a Surprising Foe: The Dreamers
WASHINGTON — As Democrats warily prepare to negotiate an immigration deal with President Trump, they face an unexpected political foe: many of the 800,000 young, undocumented immigrants threatened with deportation whom they are championing.
These ungrateful, un-American illegal aliens threaten American elected officials and Obama Dimocrats cower to the illegals. Ungrateful sons-of-bitches:
The pressure from some immigrant activists to reject any compromise that would tighten border security has frustrated Democratic leaders, who recognize the political risks of being labeled the party of open borders — a potentially lethal tag as they seek to regain support from working-class voters across the Midwest.
Fearful of concessions to Mr. Trump that could increase immigration enforcement aimed at their families and friends, the activists are targeting Democratic congressional leaders with loud political protests. And Democratic politicians may be vulnerable. They have already shifted to the left on a number of issues, such as health care, as they try to take advantage of liberal fervor stoked by the Trump era.
But moving too far to the left on border security could hold serious risks for a party that lost the presidency with defeats in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan and Iowa — all states where immigration remains a hot-button issue.
John Feehery, a Republican strategist, said a Democratic pushback on border security would reinforce “the perception that the Democratic Party has largely abandoned and forgotten about the white working class.”
The illegal immigrant Dreamers argued that since they came illegally to this country they were little bitty babies and now that they are in their twenties and thirties they demand, not ask, demand to stay. But they undermine their once-upon-a-time argument. Now they want the parents who violated the law and are illegal aliens themselves to be citizens. They are not “dreamers”. They are liars.
The Obama Dimocrats are now in a trap of their own making. Obama Dimocrats cared about illegal immigrants more than American citizens. Like treacherous snakes (remember Trump’s poetry readings of The Snake?) these illegal aliens now bite the Obama Dimocrats:
They have already signaled that they are willing to consider Republican demands for increased enforcement along the border with Mexico in exchange for a legislative fix to the threatened Obama-era program called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, which protects young immigrants brought to the country as children.
“It is naïve for us to believe that we will get 12 Republicans to vote for DACA or the Dream Act without putting something on the table,” said Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, an original co-author of the Dream Act, which would offer a path to citizenship for certain undocumented immigrants brought to the country as children. “There’s always going to be a group that wants more. There are some people who want all or nothing. I consider this to be a world of reality that I live in.”
Democrats need to be mindful not just of white working-class voters but all voters, said Cornell Belcher, who worked as one of President Barack Obama’s pollsters during his 2008 presidential campaign. Democrats have to “thread a fine needle,” he said, because polls show that voters broadly “feel as though their borders need to be more secure.”
But activists worry that any compromise could carry a very personal price: Their own long-term safety might be secured only in exchange for an increased threat of deportation for their undocumented parents and friends who do not qualify for such protections under the program.
That is a deal that many of them are not willing to take.
“We are going to do whatever it takes to push both parties to pursue what we are demanding,” said Cristina Jiménez, executive director of United We Dream. “We don’t want a situation where my brother, who has DACA, will have relief from deportation, and we will have more enforcement and more ICE agents who end up going after my mom and my dad.” [snip]
Conservatives want those principles to include a call to limit the number of new legal immigrants and emphasize the entry of high-skilled workers instead of the family members of immigrants already in the country. They want to expand the “E-Verify” system to ensure that businesses do not hire workers who are in the country illegally. They are insisting on stepped-up immigration enforcement throughout the country’s interior. And they want Mr. Trump to get his wall along the southern border. [snip]
Immigration activists reject such demands as meanspirited and much too far-reaching. [snip]
Publicly, those young immigrants and their allies say they will not accept what they consider draconian measures in exchange for a deal on DACA, or on the Dream Act, the bill dating back to 2001 that would provide a pathway to citizenship for young immigrants brought in illegally as children.
Obama Dimocrats are surrounded by snakes draining them of their very blood. The white working class that has turned against their football millionaires is watching. The Trump supporters in Iowa are watching. The snakes are biting the swine:
Democrats also must weigh the political risk of being seen as weak on security issues as they try to recover from their 2016 losses.
During the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation’s annual conference last month, Kathleen Wells, a black radio host, challenged several members of Congress to explain why black Americans should embrace allowing more immigrants to remain in the United States who might compete with them for jobs.
The swine in the swamp are ready to lose. President Donald J. Trump will help them lose even more than they can imagine.
Las Vegas is a horrific bloody scene of carnage this October eve. The political carnage next November will be even bloodier.
We understand why Hillary Clinton is deranged and unhinged. Hillary Clinton in 2016 ran, as we repeatedly declared before, during, and after the 2016 election cycle, the stupidest campaign we have ever seen. Our “thought crime” amongst many of our pro-Hillary readers during the 2016 campaign who became unhappy and upset with us for writing the truth was that we saw the stupidity of Hillary2016 and wrote it down for posterity before others had the intelligence and courage to write what was obvious. Hillary Clinton ran the stupidest campaign in 2016 and we are not alone in that assessment. Hillary Clinton’s strongest advocates in the past, such as Stanley Greenberg, have pretty much written the same assessment; the only difference is that we wrote our assessment when it mattered, when Hillary could have changed her crackpot trajectory.
Hillary Clinton’s book “What Happened” is a manifestation of a deranged, unhinged, mind in the throes of madness. It’s not a grand madness such as that suffered by Medea. It is not a comic lunacy exhibited by Mean Girls. It is not even a redeeming madness such as seen in “A Woman Under The Influence“. Hillary Clinton’s madness is tawdry and cheap. It is a maudlin public pity play which deserves nothing but virulent contempt.
Hillary Clinton’s book should not have been called “What Happened”. Hillary’s book shoulda been called, recalling Hillary during the Whitewater scandal, “Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda, How I Failed To Run A Smart Campaign And Instead Ran The Stupidest Campaign Ever.”
Hillary’s book coulda been called “The Queen of Denial – How I Failed To See 2016 Would Be A Change Election So I Ran A Status Quo Election Campaign Then Instead Of Admitting MY Failures I Persisted In My Refusal To Acknowledge Them.”
Hillary Clinton’s book woulda been more honest if Hillary Clinton called it “Election For Dummies: How To Run The Stupidest Campaign Ever By Hiring Your Enemies And Insulting Your Voters Who Want Change Not More Of The Same.”
It’s madness upon madness from Hillary Clinton. In her hysterical madhouse tour to sell books and justify her madness Hillary Clinton has made putrid statements attacking President Donald J. Trump. Unfortunately for Hillary Clinton we have a long memory.
* * * * * *
We remember the Hillary Clinton we supported. Barack Obama and the totalitarian left attacked Hillary Clinton in 2008 when she declared that if Iran attacked Israel with nuclear weapons she would “obliterate Iran”. We applauded.
Hillary Clinton made the same clear case against Iran, and declared that she wanted Iran to understand the consequences of their actions, as President Donald J. Trump made against North Korea. Yet now, the wretched Hillary Clinton attacks President Donald J. Trump for the same logical stance.
“I want the Iranians to know that if I’m the president, we will attack Iran (if it attacks Israel),” Clinton said in an interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”
“In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them,” she said.
“That’s a terrible thing to say but those people who run Iran need to understand that because that perhaps will deter them from doing something that would be reckless, foolish and tragic,” Clinton said.
Hillary Clinton slammed President Trump’s speech at the United Nations, calling it “dangerous.”
“I thought it was very dark, dangerous, not the kind of message that the leader of the greatest country in the world should be delivering,” Mrs. Clinton said Tuesday night on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert.” [snip]
“What I hoped the president would have said is something along the lines of ‘we view this as dangerous to our allies, to the region and even to our country. We call on all nations to work with us to try to end the threat caused to us by Kim Jong-un,’” Mrs. Clinton said, referring to North Korea’s leader.
President Trump at the United Nations declared his preference for diplomacy even as he listed the many crimes committed by North Korea against its people and its neighbors, including the kidnap victims snatched by North Korea. Then President Trump made a clear statement to North Korea: The United States has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea. That’s much more diplomatic language than “obliterate”.
Hillary Clinton’s attacks against President Trump are the work of a deranged, unhinged, mind. Either that or she is a liar who has forgotten her own “obliterate” form of diplomacy. Perhaps these unhinged statements, or lies, are why more Hillary voters regret their 2016 vote than Trump voters.
In 1994 Hillary Clinton held a long press conference to address the Whitewater scandal. It was that lovely pink Chanel suit that inspired the color scheme for this website. It was a lovely Hillary Clinton that declared criticisms of her failure to answer Whitewater questions earlier as “coulda, woulda, shoulda” wastes of time. What Happened happened, argued Hillary Clinton and there was no point in revisiting the past.
But now, Hillary Clinton in her latest book, is in full couldawouldashoulda nonsense. Let’s play couldawouldashoulda to demonstrate to Hillary Clinton and her cohort of the mad why couldawouldashoulda is so utterly stupid.
Goose meet gander. Are Hillary Clinton and Hillary Clinton voters justified in the “if only” couldawouldashoulda game? Play couldawouldashoulda from the Donald J. Trump point of view. If the Access Hollywood tape had not aired so near the election Donald J. Trump coulda won bigger. If the GOP establishment had rallied to Donald J. Trump and supported Donald J. Trump he shoulda won bigger. If Donald J. Trump raised more money from the super rich and outspent Hillary, not Hillary outspending Trump, he woulda won bigger. If Big Media was not so invested in attacking Donald J. Trump he couldashouldawoulda won bigger. If Bernie Sanders had not given Hillary Clinton a pass on her email scandal during the primaries then Donald J. Trump couldashouldawoulda won bigger as the email scandal woulda resonated even more. If the Russians buying ads on Facebook to support Black Lives Matter and Hillary had been exposed during the election Donald J. Trump couldawouldashoulda won bigger. If more illegal aliens had killed more Americans like Kate Steinle and Big Media did not try to cover up the news then Donald J. Trump couldawouldashoulda won bigger. If Ohio governor John Kasich had lived up to his pledge to support the GOP nominee and attended the GOP convention to laud Donald J. Trump then Donald J. Trump couldawouldashoulda won bigger. If Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush had not attacked Donald J. Trump and used their power and influence to support Donald J. Trump instead of attacking Donald J. Trump especially at and around the GOP convention then Donald J. Trump couldawouldashoulda won bigger. If GOP elected officials like Kelly Ayotte had supported Donald J. Trump instead of opposing him and asking him to drop out of the race Kelly Ayotte would still be a senator and Donald J. Trump would have won New Hampshire and couldawouldashoulda won bigger. If Big Media had exposed all the lies and corruptions of Barack Obama’s Iran deal then Donald J. Trump couldawouldashoulda won bigger. If all the lies of Barack Obama had been discussed and highlighted by Big Media then Donald J. Trump couldawouldashoulda won bigger. If, to carry on with the Hillary Clinton madness, it had rained and flooded out New York City on election day then Donald J. Trump couldawouldashoulda won bigger. If California had been burned down to the ground with wildfires in the big cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles then Donald J. Trump couldawouldashoulda won bigger.
Trump out-campaigned Clinton by 30 percent in Florida, winning by 1.3 points a state that had gone Democratic in 2008 and 2012.
In Pennsylvania, Trump made 23 percent more visits and won the previously blue state by 1.2 points.
The biggest disparity came in Ohio, where Clinton made 17 stops and Trump made 26. He won the state by more than 8 points. In North Carolina, Clinton made 16 stops as Trump made 23, and he took the state by a little under 4 points.
And in what may prove to be this cycle’s most stunning 11th hour upset, Michigan hosted Trump 13 times in the last 100 days. Clinton visited just six times in comparison…
If Hillary Clinton had a brain left she would read our analysis before the 2016 election. Years before Hillary Clinton registered Hillary2016 we discussed why Hillary Clinton was running a stupid pre-official campaign. After Hillary2016 was announced our analysis continued and we pointed out all the failures and future failures to come.
What Happened in 2016? We laid it all out years before the 2016 election began. In September of 2013 we called Hillary Clinton 2016 a “Muddled Message Mess”. Hillary Clinton was a Muddled Message Mess in 2013 because she could not choose whether she wanted to run as a “stay the course” candidate in 2016 or as a “change” candidate. In “Muddled Message Mess” we declared that 2016 would be a “change” election. Stupidly, irredeemably stupidly, Hillary Clinton first tried to have it both ways then Hillary eventually slit her electoral wrists when she became the Obama Third Term.
It wasn’t just a Muddled Message Mess. The entirety of Hillary2016 was a mess. Robby Mook did not have the stature nor the smarts to be the campaign manager. With a name like Mook it is almost like advertising his ineptness.
Robby Mook failed because Hillary Clinton failed. In 2008 Barack Obama won because Big Media race-baited Hillary Clinton during the primaries and then John McCain was race-baited during the general election. In other words, Barack Obama won in 2008 because he understood that after eight years of George W. Bush it was “time for a change” and ever the flim flam con man Barack Obama took full advantage for self-advancement to fool the idiots who supported him.
Instead of the correct analysis, that race-baiting by Big Media on behalf of Barack Obama in 2008 is what got him the nomination and eventually victory in the general election, Hillary Clinton and Robby the Mook convinced themselves than nonsense such as metrics and analysis is what won the victory.
We wrote our many analyses of the stupidity of the Hillary Clinton campaign starting years ago and culminating on election night. This week in the leftist American Prospect a longtime friend of the Clintons let loose with his analysis of the 2016 election and Hillary Clinton’s failures. Notice how the analysis and language of Stanley Greenberg mimics the language and analysis from what we wrote years ago:
How She Lost
Malpractice cost Clinton the election, but her ambivalence on big issues was produced by big structural factors that affect all Democrats.
By Stanley Greenberg
Hillary Clinton’s tragic 2016 campaign faced withering criticism in the press, social media, and now, in Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes’s inside account, Shattered. From my vantage point as lead pollster for the Democratic nominees in 1992 and 2000, part of the closing clutch of pollsters in 2004, and invited noodge in 2016, I have little quarrel with the harshest of these criticisms. Malpractice and arrogance contributed mightily to the election of Donald Trump and its profound threat to our democracy. So did the handling of the email server, paid Wall Street speeches, and the “deplorables” comment. And her unwillingness to challenge the excesses of big money and corporate influence left her exposed to attacks first by Bernie Sanders and then by Donald Trump and unable to offer credible promise of change. [snip]
For me, the most glaring examples include the Clinton campaign’s over-dependence on technical analytics; its failure to run campaigns to win the battleground states; the decision to focus on the rainbow base and identity politics at the expense of the working class; and the failure to address the candidate’s growing “trust problem” or to learn from events and reposition. [snip]
The campaign relied far too heavily on something that campaign technicians call “data analytics.” This refers to the use of models built from a database of the country’s 200 million voters, including turnout history and demographic and consumer information, updated daily by an automated poll asking for vote preference to project the election result. But when campaign developments overtake the model’s assumptions, you get surprised by the voters—and this happened repeatedly.
Campaign manager Robby Mook and his team believed that identity politics, demographic trends, and Trump’s temperament would be enough to win, so they could avoid confronting the “trust problem.”
Astonishingly, the 2016 Clinton campaign conducted no state polls in the final three weeks of the general election and relied primarily on data analytics to project turnout and the state vote. They paid little attention to qualitative focus groups or feedback from the field, and their brief daily poll didn’t measure which candidate was defining the election or getting people engaged.
The models from the data analytics team led by Elan Kriegel got the Iowa and Michigan primaries badly wrong, with huge consequences for the race. Why were they not then fired? [snip]
Campaign chair John Podesta wanted to fire Mook, but Clinton stood by him. She rightly admired previous campaigns in which big data and technology were big winners, yet in 2008 it was the candidate and his appeal more than the technical wizardry that pushed Obama over the top. [snip]
For Clinton, however, giving up the analytics team was like giving up consultant Dick Morris at earlier tough moments—a man who was thought to bring unconventional powers to play. That Mook didn’t share his results with others in the campaign reinforced his mystique as a data wizard. But that lack of transparency was malpractice. Standard practice is immediately sharing national, battleground, and state polls, as well as automated canvassing and other metrics with the senior campaign team at the very least, usually with the war room, and sometimes the whole headquarters. That is how a nimble campaign operates.
The malpractice grows exponentially with their failure to focus like a laser on winning each target primary or battleground state. Rather than shifting resources and media buys across states based on the analytics’ projection of cost per delegate or voter, they needed to focus on how to win each must-win, winner-take-all state. That meant more distinct state strategies, focus groups, and state tracking polls right to the end.
The campaign’s approach senselessly and increasingly drove up Trump’s margin in white working-class communities, tipping Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Florida. The analytics model built around these assumptions was so simple-minded it portended disaster. Despite overwhelming evidence that the Democratic base wasn’t consolidated or excited, the campaign believed Trump’s tasteless attacks and Clinton’s identification with every group in the rainbow coalition would produce near universal support. Thus, they stopped trying to persuade voters and measured only the probability of support for Hillary. The campaign’s task was turning out those Clinton voters, and they fell frustratingly short.
Hillary Clinton ran a stupid campaign. In 2008 Hillary Clinton was not able to understand that what matters is getting delegates during a primary. Barack Obama’s campaign only cared about delegates. Vote totals did not matter. Hillary Clinton would win huge victories at the polls then get few delegates from those victories. Barack Obama would barely win or lose but would gain lots of delegates. In caucus states Barack Obama worked with the establishment to get delegates while the Hillary Clinton campaign mostly ignored the corrupt caucus states. The results of this 2008 stupidity meant that Barack Obama got more votes from playing insider games (recall Florida and Michigan).
In 2016 Hillary Clinton learned nothing. Against Donald J. Trump Hillary Clinton ignored white working class voters who lived in swing states. Hillary Clinton did not learn from 2008 that in a general election what matters are electoral votes not huge margins in numbskull states like New York, California, and Illinois. Hillary Clinton did not learn a thing from 2008. Hillary Clinton has not learned a thing from 2016. It wasn’t couldawouldashoulda reasons she concocts. Hillary Clinton lost because she did not have a clue about what she needed to win.
Clinton and the campaign acted as if “demographics is destiny” and a “rainbow coalition” was bound to govern. Yes, there is a growing “Rising American Electorate,” but as Page Gardner and I wrote at the outset of this election, you must give people a compelling reason to vote. I have demonstrated for my entire career that a candidate must target white working-class voters, too.
Not surprisingly, Clinton took her biggest hit in Michigan, where she failed to campaign in Macomb County, the archetypal white working-class county. That was the opposite of her husband’s approach. Bill Clinton visibly campaigned in Macomb, the black community in Detroit, and elsewhere.
The fatal conclusion the Clinton team made after the Michigan primary debacle was that she could not win white working-class voters, and that the “rising electorate” would make up the difference. She finished her campaign with rallies in inner cities and university towns. Macomb got the message. “When you leave the two-thirds of Americans without college degrees out of your vision of the good life, they notice,” Joan Williams writes sharply in White Working Class: Overcoming Class Cluelessness in America.
Additionally, Sanders campaigned against bad trade deals like NAFTA and the TPP to show he’d battle for working people. NAFTA was the work of Bill Clinton and the TPP was a signature initiative of Obama. Hillary Clinton needed some distance. My wife, Representative Rosa DeLauro, headed up the anti-TPP forces in Congress, but despite her incessant lobbying of Podesta, Clinton offered only a muddled opposition.
Stanley Greenberg’s article deserves a full read. Of course, what we wrote years ago is a much more important read for anyone trying to understand what happened in 2016.
Greenberg writes about the “Trust Problem” and why it grew as the campaign progressed “progressively”. But Greenberg misses the point we never have that Hillary Clinton’s biggest “trust problem” was that no matter what policy proposals she made no one believed her because they did not think she could get the job done. Trump supporters believed Trump would and could get the promises he made done. It was the old Bill Clinton motto come to life “better to be strong and wrong than weak and right”. Even if you believed Hillary Clinton and believed in her policy proposals you did not think Hillary could or would get the job done. That was the real “Trust Problem”.
Greenberg does not get the full reason why Hillary Clinton lost as well as we do. But he has some gems:
Shattered suggests that Obama advisers inside and outside the campaign, including David Axelrod and David Plouffe, believed Hillary Clinton herself was the principal obstacle and doubted the campaign could course-correct. Mook and team believed that identity politics, demographic trends, and Trump’s temperament would be enough to win, so they could avoid confronting the “trust problem.”
Greenberg has his own couldawouldashoulda:
What might have happened if Clinton had attended a focus group herself, as Nelson Mandela did in 1993 when our research showed that his African National Congress was seen as “out of touch” and taking too long to bring change? What might have happened if she had watched people expressing their exasperation and desperation with the economy and politicians—and talking about her ties to Wall Street, her perceived lack of truthfulness, or their knowing nothing of her economic ideas? But the Clinton campaign never facilitated that kind of redirection.
Hillary Clinton was so deluded that she became the Obama Third Term in a change election year:
Hillary Clinton fully identified with President Obama’s vision on identity, opportunity, honest government, inequality, the economy, and America’s upward direction, viewing his campaign and governance as successful. She stocked her campaign with his consultants and those who had worked in his White House.
Barack Obama and his Third Term, Hillary Clinton were and are still deluded under their blanket of leftist delusion:
Obama and Clinton lived in a cosmopolitan and professional America that wasn’t very angry about the state of the country, even if many of the groups in the Clinton coalition were struggling and angry. Clinton decided only reluctantly to qualify that narrative in favor of one more sensitive to those who were left behind.
Obama’s refrain was severely out of touch with what was happening to most Americans and the working class more broadly. [snip]
Incomes sagged after the financial crisis, pensions lost value, and many lost their housing wealth, while people faced dramatically rising costs for things that mattered—health care, education, housing, and child care. People faced vanishing geographic, economic, and social mobility, as Edward Luce writes so forcefully. At the same time, billionaires spent massively to influence politicians and parked their money in the big cities whose dynamism drew in the best talent from the smaller towns and rural areas.
Clinton’s default position was Obama’s refrain about America, but she did invite real discussion of these issues and got close to embracing a change posture during some economic speeches and her convention address, and in the debates. But when the campaign got rocked, she reverted to the Obama narrative.
Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton wanted the Obama Third Term. America however wanted CHANGE. Not false hope and chump change. America in 2016 wanted real CHANGE from a change candidate. Greenberg cites Hillary Clinton’s repeated failures to understand America in 2016 and his personal interactions with Hillary Clinton and Hillary2016 for course corrections which did not happen (Early on, I chided the campaign privately for starting every economic talk with dutiful praise for Obama’s handling of the economy, and later told them not to keep saying, “America is already great.” The new American majority, I wrote, “is looking for a president who will address the building problems”—and “not a third term of Obama.”
Hillary Clinton wanted to be the Third Obama Term come Hell or high water. Donald J. Trump promised a change he could deliver. Hillary Clinton offered policy that failed and would fail again. Hillary Clinton deserved to lose and she lost.
Read this anecdote via Stanley Greenberg and see why Hillary lost:
Right before the Connecticut primary, I watched Clinton and my wife, Representative DeLauro, host a café discussion with working women. Beforehand, she greeted me warmly, and afterward Rosa and I hung back in the holding area to let Clinton and me speak alone and frankly. She was really moved and disturbed by what she had heard on the campaign trail, recounting the similar stories from women in suburban Philadelphia, Tampa, and Brooklyn. “They’re in such pain. People are at their wits’ end. They feel hopeless.”
I said, yes, that is exactly what’s happening in the country, which she acknowledged, but then said, “How do I talk about their pain without sounding like I’m criticizing President Obama and his economy? I just can’t do that.”
If you think we are tough on Hillary Clinton and Hillary2016, Stanley Greenberg calls Hillary2016 “completely schizophrenic” (“I just can’t understand why you feel the need to run on progress. You are the past and Trump is change and a better life. You sound clueless in blue collar America.”) Hillary2016 and Hillary Clinton were a muddled message mess.
* * * * * *
The madness of Hillary Clinton is cheap and tawdry. Unlike the great madness of Medea in the play by Euripides, Hillary Clinton’s excuses for her election loss are like piss compared to fine wine.
Medea, the princess who helped Jason steal the Golden Fleece from her father the king, went not so much mad, as vengeful. Medea fled her native land with Jason out of love; Medea loved Jason so much she chopped her brother into pieces, threw the butchered meat of her sibling into the sea so that her father who gave chase in ships would be delayed as he religiously stopped to pick up the pieces of his dismembered son. When Jason of Corinth leaves Medea in order to marry the Greek princess of Corinth, Medea kills the princess as well as the two children she has borne Jason. It is Jason who is driven into madness by the vengeful and righteous Medea. No tears or couldawoldashoulda from the powerful Medea.
No Medea here. Hillary Clinton is deranged and unhinged in a most tawdry manner. Like a homeless hag muttering to herself, ordinarily we would ignore her. But madness is contagious. Hillary Clinton is deranged and unhinged because she never saw what was right in front of her.
Up to the very last hours of election night 2016, Hillary Clinton and Hillary voters were absolutely sure that Hillary Clinton was set for a win. It was delusion.
We knew Hillary Clinton was going to lose. On the Friday before the Tuesday election we published our election prediction and a map of which states Hillary would lose and which states Donald Trump would win. We had doubts about New Hampshire and Colorado. We forecast a Trump win with 281 electoral votes. We only left three states as “too close to call”. Those states? Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania. We thought Trump would win at least two of those states which would make for a larger margin of victory.
On election night, as the New York Times projected a 98% chance of a Hillary win, we provided stellar election coverage (our comments section is an historical record of the play-by-play as the election hurtled towards a Trump victory worthy of Greek drama from the ancient world.) Other websites on the left called a early victory for Hillary. We said, “Trump Will Win.”
The goons of the left knew deep in their bones that Hillary would win. The New York Times, Nate Silver’s silly 538 site, Huff n’ Puff Post loons, DailyKooks, all declared a quick and easy victory for Hillary Clinton even as the night disappeared with only three hours left. Those last three hours however made our analysis that much smarter.
Hillary Clinton never saw it coming. The train. The Trump train. The Trump train that was about to mow her down. And that is why Hillary Clinton is deranged and unhinged.
Hillary Clinton and her voters acted out the latest American Horror Story: Cult. They were sure of victory. No way a man that had never run for political office or been an Eisenhower who won the war in Europe, no way could he win. No way. No way. No way. Then he won.
The unthinkable happened.
Joan Didion’s old essay On Morality: Because when we start deceiving ourselves into thinking not that we want something or need something, not that it is a pragmatic necessity for us to have it, but that it is a moral imperative that we have it, then is when we join the fashionable madmen, and then is when the thin whine of hysteria is heard in the land, and then is when we are all in bad trouble. And I think we are already there.
The fashionable madmen and madwomen are in a whine of hysteria. Hillary Clinton and her failure to see reality and her moral imperative to be in the White House once again has driven the madmen and madwomen into the streets.
Madness is contagious.
The contagion continues to spread. It is now on football fields. But there is a cure. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were cured after years of madness.
Update: Very Strange days indeed. With his powerful speech in support of Luther Strange President Trump might succeed and Strange might win the race that was unwinnable according to all the polls.
We’ve watch the speech repeatedly. It is a powerful speech. It’s powerful because it is brutally honest. President Trump laid out his reasons for supporting Strange pretty much as we noted in our article (below). President Trump also vouched for Strange even as President Trump said Strange might lose in which case PDT would campaign for Moore. President Trump added that Strange would win the general election with ease whereas Moore would have a tough race.
Some other reasons to vote for Luther Strange have now appeared. For one, Moore has come out against the ObamaCare repeal as embodied in Graham/Cassidy. If Luther Strange or Vice President Pence, who will campaign for Luther Strange before Tuesday’s election, focus on this point, Strange will get a powerful boost.
In addition, news has emerged about Senator Corker’s role in persuading President Trump to back Luther Strange. That news has been utilized by Moore supporters to lambaste Strange as an establishment lackey. But we noticed, in an entirely unrelated matter we are told, that the anti-Trump Senator Corker arrived at support for the tax reform bill to be released this week in the Senate almost immediately after President Trump agreed to campaign for Senator Strange. Was there a deal? Strange days.
We are torn on this issue. We want to support President Trump and understand if President Trump emerges as the decisive factor in the Alabama primary race then President Trump will gain strength against his GOP establishment foes. On the other hand we would like to see many primary challenges against anti-Trump freaks like Jeff Flake and a Moore victory would kindle insurrectionary fires in every primary campaign. But if President Trump is seen as the decisive factor in any senate primary race then the GOP establishment might be sufficiently cowed. We’re conflicted. But we see President Trump as the man that might salvage Strange and at the same time beat the establishment with an establishment supported candidate. Strange Strange days.
Meanwhile as the NFL attacks President Trump we side with President Trump and support his call for a boycott of football. Then again, we don’t care for football or sports so our opinion on this does not count for much.
If NFL fans refuse to go to games until players stop disrespecting our Flag & Country, you will see change take place fast. Fire or suspend!
Strange days. Two elections and the implications for many others are part of the very Strange Brew as we bid farewell to Summer and wrap ourselves in Autumn colors.
Friday night, a President Trump rally is scheduled for Alabama. On Sunday a German election looms with grave consequences for the continent. Both elections in Germany and Alabama will say much about the current world situation and the future. It’s a Strange Brew.
In Germany the people are in dire straits. Angela Merkel, the alleged candidate of the right, who is really a true daughter of the old East German Soviet has betrayed the German people with her immigration policies. Throw her out!
Throw her out would be the thing to do. However the totally crackpot leftists nominated someone who is even more openly in favor of the destruction of Germany/Europe/The Free World than Merkel. Both Merkel and her Sergeant Schultz opposition are terrible. The German people therefore have no alternative. Well, there is Alternative for Germany:
Anti-Immigrant AfD Party Draws In More Germans as Vote Nears
Party’s upswing suggests undercurrent of popular distrust threatening to unsettle country’s politics
WISMAR, Germany—Candidate Georg Pazderski of the anti-immigrant Alternative for Germany spent nearly half his speech in this harbor town earlier this week highlighting the danger of Islamist terrorism. Chancellor Angela Merkel dispatched the topic in roughly 80 seconds in an address here the next day.
As this country’s election campaign reaches its crescendo ahead of Sunday’s vote, its participants appear to be fighting different battles. Ms. Merkel, looking assured of victory, is engaging her opponents in mainstream parties on pensions, infrastructure, education, and economic policy. The Alternative for Germany is creeping up in the polls while positioning itself as the only party sounding the alarm about what it says is the existential threat posed by Muslim immigration.
The AfD, as the party is known, is now polling above 10%, less than its peak early this year and well below what other far-right parties elsewhere in Europe have garnered in recent elections. But for Germany, if the polls hold, its impending entry into parliament would mark a turning point in a country where right-wing populism has long been banished from mainstream discussion. And it would show that despite Germany’s thriving economy, an undercurrent of popular distrust and discontent threatens to unsettle a largely stable political system.
The unease is especially apparent here in the former East Germany, where unemployment is higher and the mainstream political parties less deeply anchored than in the more prosperous former West. But AfD is drawing rising support from across the country, polls show.
Interviews with AfD supporters conducted in recent weeks, from the German southwest to here on the Baltic seacoast, yielded one common complaint: Mainstream politicians, the voters said, don’t take their concerns about immigration seriously enough.
Sunday’s German elections will be watched to see how many seats Alternative For Germany garners. It won’t take many seats to send a powerful message, it’s a parliamentary system after all and Merkel won’t even get 40% of the vote. Merkel’s forecast win will be closer to the mid thirties, if that high. There are other dangers for Merkel:
Opinion polls have confirmed the far-right populist AfD’s challenge to the Left party for third place in Germany’s federal elections. Chancellor Merkel has called on people to vote as concerns about abstention grow. [snip]
In polls published on Friday, the AfD was seen to strengthen its third place setting by two percentage points to a projected 13 percent of the vote in an Insa survey commissioned by Bild newspaper, which put it near its highest ranking so far this year. The CDU kept its top spot with 34 percent support, down 2 points and the SPD was down one point to 21 percent. The Left party was showing 11 percent support. [snip]
While voters have a choice of 42 parties and 4,828 candidates, the focus has sharpened on the top three, and the likely coalition which will come from the votes. While the CDU has been holding its position as the SPD weakens, if the opinion polls prove correct then both parties would see their overall share of the vote fall to a level they have not seen since 2009. [snip]
In the last federal elections in 2013, some 29 percent of registered voters did not cast a ballot. This week, polls showed those planning either not to vote or unsure of who to vote for at 34 percent.
Fears of a low turnout, which many experts have said would benefit the AfD as its base is motivated to head to the polls, have encouraged mainstream parties to call for voters to turn out on Sunday.
The German elections this weekend are important. But the big election is the Strange election this coming Tuesday. This is a Whiskey Bar election. It reminds us of the Dreigroschenoper Bertolt Brecht song about Alabama, don’t ask why.
How strange is this Alabama election? The incumbent senator is Mitch McConnell’s pal Luther Strange whom Trump has endorsed. The primary campaign challenger is the anti-establishment Judge Roy Moore. Can anything get Moore Strange than this election?
President Trump has endorsed Luther Strange because Strange voted the way President Trump wanted without any favors or pleas needed. But Strange is the GOP establishment’s guy!
On the other side of Strange, there are many Trump supporters who endorsed the challenger because they want Moore change. Trump’s Secretary of Housing, Ben Carson has called for Moore change.
Sarah Palin has campaigned for Moore change! Sean Hannity and Mike Huckabee want Moore change! Yikes! What is going on???
President Trump remembers how in 2010 and 2012 the GOP chose very right wing candidates then lost the general election and President Trump wants to avoid that fate. However this is very red state Alabama and we doubt that Moore can lose the general election. If Judge Roy Moore wins this primary election on Tuesday, then he will likely win the general election too.
“What’s happening in Alabama is being watched in the halls of Congress and the Senate,” Moore said at a rally over the weekend. “They know what is happening in Alabama. Mitch McConnell knows what is happening in Alabama. They know it is going to affect the future of elections of other senators in 2018 in other states.”
If Judge Roy Moore wins on Tuesday the entire GOP establishment is under threat. That’s why the President Trump endorsement of Strange is so very Strange.
After today the President Trump endorsement is especially Strange. But maybe not so strange in light of how Trump deals. After all, Moore is likely to win on Tuesday. If a Trump rally moves the election to Luther Strange the GOP establishment will clearly see the absolute value of an endorsement by President Trump. Trump gains.
If Strange loses and Moore change carries the day, President Trump can still declare that he did what he thought was right. President Trump can also say in full honesty that the proponents of Moore change all declared their allegiance to President Trump at every rally for Moore.
What would we like to see happen? What would be the best outcome of all this?
We would like to see Moore win on Tuesday. We would then like President Trump to address the ObamaCare vote in the Senate and the latest lies by John McCain immediately before or immediately after this coming week’s ObamaCare vote.
John McCain ran for the senate with lies to the people who voted. McCain lied when he said he would oppose ObamaCare and deserved votes. McCain lied repeatedly.
So what should happen? Moore should win on Tuesday. If Moore wins on Tuesday that should be a strong warning of what awaits the liars of the GOP establishment. Win or lose however, the ObamaCare vote should be taken in the Senate to force the liars out into the open. Immediately before or after the ObamaCare vote, President Trump should announce the congressional ObamaCare exemption is no longer as, a way to punish liars like McCain.
Update: Greatest President Donald J. Trump speech ever? It was a great speech. So great it does not require much analysis. It was clear, direct. No ambiguity. Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton:
“This was the best speech of the Trump presidency, in my view,” Bolton said. “I think he was as clear and direct as it’s possible to be.”
Trump said the U.S. would destroy North Korea if forced to defend itself or its allies; Bolton said that was a memorable line.
“I think it’s safe to say, in the entire history of the United Nations, there has never been a more straightforward criticism of the behavior, the unacceptable behavior of other member states,” Bolton said.
In addition, he said Trump’s critiques of the nuclear deal revealed the White House would not tolerate “half-measures and compromises” that allowed Iran and North Korea to progress to the verge of having deliverable nuclear weapons.
He also praised Trump’s line, which was met with near silence at first, that the collapsing regime in Venezuela was an example of socialism being successfully implemented.
“There are a lot of people in the UN. who have never heard anything like that from an American president,” Bolton said. “I think this was an outstanding speech, and I think it will serve the president very well.”
Some critics will ask “Should President Trump have attacked North Korea or given this speech?” President Trump was right to give the speech. Why? Because, as we stated in our short initial article (below), the American armed forces must first stockpile weapons before any attack on North Korea.
The need to stockpile weapons before an attack on North Korea holds back President Trump’s strong hand. The President must first make sure that before any attack on North Korea there are plenty of Tomahawk missiles and MOAB bombs in the arsenal even after the attack. After the use of a MOAB bomb in Afghanistan the U.S. arsenal held only about a dozen MOAB bombs. MOAB bombs are needed to destroy tunnel infrastructures which is why they are sometimes referred to as bunker buster bombs. A dozen of these bombs won’t be enough before an attack on North Korea.
Likewise, the need for Tomahawk missiles. An attack on North Korea will require many hundreds of Tomahawk missiles.
The reason why stockpiling of weapons is so important is because President Trump understands that an attack on North Korea might lead the Persian Empire of Terror (a.k.a. Iran) to believe that the United States is otherwise preoccupied in Asia and therefore the time ripe for the Persian Empire of Terror to make moves. All countries must understand that the United States can attack North Korea yet still maintain enough weaponry to defeat other opponents. Peace through strength.
Other than understanding why President Trump gave North Korea this one last chance to avoid an overwhelming fire and fury attack by the United States, not much analysis of the clear and direct President Trump speech to the United Nations is needed.
Our comments section will include highlights of the Trump speech (Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech too) and the transcript when available.
The leader of the Free World will address the United Nations today. In the same way tough leadership has forced Republican leadership in congress to get something done, finally, the America First president will do what has to be done to get his agenda accomplished.
President Trump has been a harsh critic of the United Nations for many decades. Today, as President, Trump will be an avenging angel demanding CHANGE from that corrupt organization. North Korea has its last chance today and will sit on the front row. After today all that stops war is the time requirements of stockpiling needed weapons.