...For the past six months my Republican friends and I have watched Donald Trump’s ascendancy and asked ourselves whether the voters had gone crazy. The voters aren’t crazy. We in the Republican elite were crazy: we thought we could allow the American economy to remain a rigged game indefinitely. The voters think otherwise. That’s why Trump is winning. That’s also why Bernie Sanders, the least likely presidential candidate in living memory, gave Hillary Clinton a run for her money. If you don't give people capitalism, the late Jude Wanniski used to say, they'll take socialism.
...Upward mobility is America’s gauge of well-being. It’s not the decline of median family income that gets under Americans’ skin, but the perception that the elites have pulled the ladder up behind them. During the quarter-century after Ronald Reagan's inauguration, it was only a slight exaggeration to say that someone in every family got rich. They bought a cable television franchise, started a website, got some stock in a high-flying tech company, flipped real estate, or ran a small business that became a big business. Inequality didn’t bother Americans as long as they had a chance at a winning ticket--not necessarily a fair chance, but at least the kind of chance that paid off occasionally for ordinary people. As long they could see that people like them were becoming rich, they kept playing the game.
...In 2008, the door shut on middle-class aspirations with a giant crash.
#1
Many do not realize it but we are witnessing the transformation of the Republican Party that began with the autochthonous Tea Party movement. There is no turning back.
The King is dead. Long live the King.
#2
I would say the crash started with the internet bubble popping at the end of Clinton's term followed by Sept 11 which prevented the recovery.
George W. Bush's recovery was tepid and ended with the 2008 crash that Obama exploited.
People have gone from the economic WOW years of the 90s to a decade and a half of laying low for fear of layoffs and working class folks are sick of it.
#3
There are several reasons for what is happening now.
I met David Goldman, aka Spengler, last May. He's a really sharp guy with an interesting history and outlook on education.
My one surprise in this article is his admission that the elite, including himself, didn't get it at first. It's been obvious to most of us 'burgers and followers of Insty for a long time that the major factors of unrest are as he noted.
1)The ramming down our throats of the whole Nanny State PC agenda;
2)The destruction of the individualistic structure of the economy. It's always been true that polls show that plebs don't vote for "ruin the rich" agenda because they picture themselves as moving "uptown". Now that that is no longer in play (see article) ruining the rich, especially the political elites is very attractive.
Basically all the individual issues play into these two major themes.
3) The attempt to by the leftward end of the political spectrum to hothouse-grow the middle class. Hence the mandate for sub-prime loans and educational loans, among other things. Mr. Goldman briefly alludes to the former.
#5
What I think is happening, for what its worth...
The left has gone to far left from the union workers and blue dog democrats. These folks can't stomach most Republicans after years of programming but Trump comes off as acceptable.
I base this on the reports I've read recently of (a) Trump winning in open primaries but losing in closed primaries (b) Record low Democrat turnout plus really high Republican turnout.
That combined with the Evangelicals going for Trump explain the bulk of his numbers. Going into the future we should see more closed primaries so the theory will be easily tested in time.
#6
Pappy, you're correct in your recognition of Reynolds' law.
That kind of falls into my second theme about the destruction of individuality in the economy. The salient bit is the Marxist "from each according to his ability to each according to his need".
Let's all worry about equality of outcome rather than opportunity. Can't have that nasty individualism round here.
Direct from the father of Fascism; the Fascist conception of life stresses the importance of the State and accepts the individual only in so far as his interests coincide with those of the State,
Anyone else see the rise of Il Duce 2 as the goal of the progressives?
#7
I believe that cold simmering anger at what has been done to us over the last eight years or so has a lot to do with the popularity of Trump. The ordinary, rather conservative, flyover-country, working-class Americans are so pissed at the condescension, snobbery and outright sabotage that the bi-coastal elites, to include the media and that Angelo Codevilla calls the "Ruling Class" that they will vote for anyone who appears to be frightening the heck out of that particular class. Trump has the mainstream media and the Establishment GOP baffled and frightened. That's a nice change from eight years and more of being a punching bag for the bi-coastal elites.
Posted by: Sven the pelter ||
03/02/2016 15:26 Comments ||
Top||
#9
I believe the seeds of our discontent were planted by Clinton. People might think the economy was humming back then but some structural problems were being put into place by Clinton. The Community Reinvestment Act, the failure to secure the border and the failure to respond to bin Laden or Saddam Hussein can all be laid at Bill Clinton's feet. Then there was NAFTA and that's when we started noticing that almost everything we found in the stores was made in China.
Bush used bin Laden as an excuse to invade Iraq on behalf of the Soddies but he did absolutely nothing about bin Laden, the CRA, China or the border. By 2008 it was ready to collapse on him and it did just that. People got wise to Bush which is why Jeb had to leave this year's campaign in such an ignominious manner.
But they might not yet be wise to the Clintons. So if the Republican elites continue to undermine Trump they are quite likely to end up with another Clinton in the White House. Maybe that's what they want.
EU you're on the right path there. They are all on the same team. I'd put the rot a trifle earlier, with GHWB and his lies. Then Clinton did as you said. GWB noticed a few of the problems but wouldn't really fight the system about them. I won't bash him for the fact of Iraq. Given 9/11 it was really necessary....but the implementation???
#11
88 maybe. It was always disturbing to me that Bush Senior and Bubba became friends. And it really was in the late eighties that I starting noticing plastic crap from China. I remember wondering during the first Gulf War what difference it made to us if Saddam overran Kuwait. Which regime was more oppressive, the Kuwaiti royal family or Saddam and why do we care as long as we can buy the oil? Our government keeps meddling over there and things keep getting worse.
...a reliable foot soldier for the Democratic party who uses his by-line to advance the agenda...
channeling the Democratic establishment's fear that Donald Trump is unstoppably advancing like the Blob on the capital, has laid out Hillary Clinton's defense plan against him. The first thing Hillary will do is fire up the liberal base and circle the wagons.
Today’s New York Times delivers the most comprehensive report yet on the evolving Dem strategy. It’s worth dividing the Dem approach into two categories: First, there are the attacks that are designed to tear Trump down in the eyes of core Dem constituencies (minorities, single women) and groups of gettable swing voters (suburbanites and college educated whites).
The Republicans are also belatedly realizing they must outbid Trump on key issues like immigration, jobs and national defense to stop his advance. In both cases the problem will be whether anyone will believe them this time. Hillary's credibilty problems need no explanation. But the GOP must also outbid Trump in a way that unambiguously binds them to their pledges. This time the promises need collateral. James Hohmann writing in the Washington Post observed that the most threatening aspect of the rebellion has been its surprising vehemence, almost bordering on kamikaze determination.
Nice language. It's not 'kamikaze' to insist that a national politician have a core set of beliefs, and to act upon the same. But it is a striking contrast to the Democrats, who can be counted on to have no beliefs other than what the hive-mind tells them to have...
Up until now the political elite always believed that discontent could be bought off. But by backing Trump voters have echoed Sherlock's famous defiance to Moriarty, this time as dialogue between the middle class and the establishment. That's when you know it's serious.
Moriarty: It has been a duel between you and me, Mr. Holmes. You hope to place me in the dock. I tell you that I will never stand in the dock. You hope to beat me. I tell you that you will never beat me. If you are clever enough to bring destruction upon me, rest assured that I shall do as much to you.'
Holmes: 'You have paid me several compliments, Mr. Moriarty,' said I. 'Let me pay you one in return when I say that if I were assured of the former eventuality I would, in the interests of the public, cheerfully accept the latter.'
Commitmentment is a powerful weapon in the theory of deterrence. "Precommitment is a strategy in which a party to a conflict uses a commitment device to strengthen its position by cutting off some of its options to make its threats more credible. ... For instance, an army can burn a bridge behind it, making retreat evidently impossible. A famous example of this tactic is when Hernan Cortes had his men scuttle the ships in order to eliminate any means of desertion. Alternatively, in the context of the Cold War, fail-deadly retaliation systems such as the Soviet Dead Hand make a response to a sudden attack automatic, regardless of whether or not anyone is left alive to make decisions."
Supporting Trump is equivalent to burning the bridges. There's no way back. It's a very potent strategy for those with nothing to lose. Whether the Republicans or the Democrats, whose response so far has been a day late and a dollar short, can call and up the ante remains to be seen. The establishment, unlike the voters, is risk-averse. They are too used to gambling with other people's money to go for broke. They are more likely to offer the appearance of reform rather than its painful reality and hope smoke and mirrors suffice to halt the blaze.
#5
Today’s New York Times delivers the most comprehensive report yet on the evolving Dem strategy. It’s worth dividing the Dem approach into two categories: First, there are the attacks that are designed to tear Trump down in the eyes of core Dem constituencies (minorities, single women) and groups of gettable swing voters (suburbanites and college educated whites).
The NYTs seems to think Trump is some passive boy scout like the Pubs ran in the past. I began to think the Pubs really didn't want to win the Presidency. They seemed destined to pursue failure every election. Trump will come out swinging and he will use the ammo he has to attack Hillary. She is probably more vulnerable than Trump on many fronts. If the FBI indicts her, she's a goner (although it is just a gut feeling but I doubt the FBI will indict her). That would be too much to hope for.
#6
FBI presents evidence for indictment. DOJ has to prosecute, but don't hold your breath, yet.
A good note was that the IT Dude that set this up was given immunity to thwart his 5th amendment refusal apparently today. He refuses now, he goes to PMITA jail
Posted by: Frank G ||
03/02/2016 21:45 Comments ||
Top||
#7
"They still don't get it. Trump is not our candidate, he is our murder weapon."
I am so stealing that, Nguard.
Posted by: Barbara ||
03/02/2016 22:00 Comments ||
Top||
#8
The guy that set up her mail server was given immunity today. Obama is the only one with the power to see to it that Sanders is the Dem nominee. And Obama WILL use that power.
To give a bit of background, the conditions on the ground in Chechnya around 2004, when he assumed command of the country after his murdered father, was dire. Putin wanted a clean resolution; the Chechen people were fractured, split among the Chechen Nationalists and the International Islamic Brigade fundamentalists. The nation wanted peace, the Jihadists wanted Jihad and the world was watching.
Kadyrov found himself allied with Putin, and forced peace happened, up to this point. There’s been other incidents, most notably the 2011 Domodedovo Airport Bombing, but overall, he’s kept the place straight, by hook, crook, or however else.
Given recent statements by him in regards to Chechen fighters on behalf of ISIS and the lesser known brigade fighting for Right Sektor in Ukraine( a Ukraine Nationalist/Anti-Russia militia and political party), both of these events point to a direction that may rapidly go south. According to CSM:
In fact, Kadyrov is issuing an ultimatum to Mr. Putin to step in and personally support him for reelection in voting due this September, or risk destabilizing the strongman rule that has kept Chechnya pacified for the past 8 years, they say.
[DAWN] THE fight against extremism needs to be stepped up -- not soon, but now. In an acknowledgement of that urgency, the interior ministry has announced a host of measures to be taken against Death Eaters, many of the steps being designed to prevent terror suspects from organising, communicating, travelling and funding potential terror acts. While the specific steps mooted may have an impact on the margins and may prevent some individuals from drifting back into the embrace of extremism, the new measures have left some fundamental questions unanswered. Why, for example, is the state, and the interior ministry in particular, always so eager to boast about any step it dreams up in the fight against militancy, but is always reluctant to identify the specific individuals against whom the measures have been or will be applied? Often times, the difference between mere public relations and actual, valuable counter-terrorism and counter-extremism measures taken up by the state is difficult to establish.
Both before NAP was mooted and since, the state does not appear interested in genuine transparency. Numbers are frequently offered up, but most are scarcely credible. The unprecedented crackdown that the state claims it has conducted on forces of Evil countrywide is allegedly reflected in the tens of thousands of individuals who have been detained by the state. Yet, those mass detentions do not appear to have spurred mass action in the courts by relatives of the alleged Death Eaters. Are they ghost numbers that the government frequently reports? Or if the individuals are real, do they belong to Death Eater networks where it is a settled part of the cat-and-mouse game with the state that occasional arrests and short-term detentions are the price for long-term freedom? It is perhaps the greatest present-day mystery: an alleged massive, unprecedented crackdown on forces of Evil of every hue nationally has resulted in scarcely a peep from the forces of Evil and their backers.
What is always missing is a basic map of extremism in the country. Which are the groups involved? How are they organised? How are they funded? Who are the leaders? How do the organizational structures cut across provinces and perhaps even the borders of the country? Nothing has been established publicly, not even a simple, up-to-date list of proscribed groups and the individuals who comprise it. Even where specific measures are announced -- such as those by Nisar Ali Khan on Monday -- there are questions. Barring individuals affiliated with proscribed groups from having a driving licence or acquiring a SIM is unlikely to prevent those individuals from driving or using mobile phones. Perhaps the sum of the measures announced previously and on Monday may have some impact on the margins, but extremism is a problem that is beyond the capability of a single ministry -- or even a single government, at the centre or in the provinces -- to address. The country may have NAP, but it still lacks national action in a meaningful sense.
Posted by: ||
03/02/2016 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11122 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[DAWN] THE fight against extremism needs to be stepped up -- not soon, but now. In an acknowledgement of that urgency, the interior ministry has announced a host of measures to be taken against
