Like A Phoenix Rising From The Ashes

trump

I’m not gonna lie. 24 hours ago, I thought the Republican party was dead.

I figured Hillary Clinton was well on her way to surpassing 300 electoral votes—perhaps even racing past the Obama ’12 total of 332. It was a foregone conclusion that the Democrats would reclaim the Senate, as well. I began to think about how eight more years of Obamacare and progressive social policies would create an entire generation of Julias, unable to perceive any possible existence that didn’t involve the evermore intrusive and invasive government’s presence in every facet of their lives. I foresaw a world where all conservative ideals and principles were denounced as racist, sexist, and nationalist, where no man would be permitted to hold a view that didn’t adhere to the one given to him by the media. I imagined a 2024 election much like a California Senate race, where two Democrats ended up fighting for the right to be President. I thought that I would never see another Republican president in my lifetime.

Of course, I was incredibly, gleefully wrong. And so was everybody else.

So today we wake up to headlines like, “Why Did Hillary Clinton Lose?” An entire industry, blinded by their infinite desire to contine the Clinton Hegemony, befuddled as to how the impossible became not only possible, but seemingly inevitable. Some of them didn’t even think it was necessary for them to vote in order for her to win. The sheer arrogance of it all is downright amusing in the aftermath.

The Left cannot handle this. If Trump had lost, if the Senate had switched hands, do you know what conservatives would have done today? They would have just kept living their lives, just like they have for the last eight years. No meltdown. No bizarre, profanity-ridden rants. No, they would have been sad and disappointed, but they would have gotten up and gone to work and continued to be the economic engine of the country, just like always.

But the Left? They’ve lost their minds. They’ve gone from rabid to straight-up unhinged. I’ve lost about 5 percent of my Facebook friends, Twitter followers, and Instagram peeps, just for saying that I was happy that Trump won. This includes people I’ve considered friends for over twenty years. Not just acquaintances, but personal friends.

“You’re the only person who is voting for Trump that I respect, and I just don’t understand it and I can’t talk about it,” said one close friend of mine. The Left succeeded in not only convincing its followers to vote for its candidate, but to think that voting for somebody else was inconceivably wrong. They could not and still can not discuss it rationally. A Clinton voter could not bring herself to admit that Trump might have been right about immigration, or foreign policy, or terrorism. No, she had to swallow the entire party line, and no deviation was allowed.

There’s infinite blame to pass around, of course, and the Left is wasting no time in doing so. But there are some real reasons why Hillary lost and nobody saw it coming—including me.

False Accusations of Racism: Listen, you just have to stop calling everybody who disagrees with you a racist. All you do when you apply the label of “racist” to your entire opposition is diminish the meaning of the word. Voting against the continuation of Barack Obama’s failed policies does not make one a racist. Wanting to secure our borders, properly vet refugees and immigrants, and solidify our nation does not make one a racist—just ask Germany how it’s working out for them. In fact, Trump underperformed with white males versus Romney in 2012. It was Trump’s performance with the Black and Latino vote that likely led him to victory, so what “racist” conclusions can you draw from that?

I’m tired of being called a racist. I’ve been teammates and bandmates with black men and women my whole life. I dated black and latina women when I was younger. I’ve hired and promoted blacks and latinos. Nobody who has ever spent a single moment around me would call me a racist. Yet my desire to return to conservative financial principles makes me Orville Faubus in the eyes of liberals. It’s ridiculous, and it devalues any actual argument they might have. Real racism exists in the world. Don’t diminish it with your political sideshow.

Failure to Nominate Rather Than Coronate: Hillary Clinton was a terribly flawed candidate, and everybody knew it—even her supporters. She carried thirty years of political baggage with her, including her lecherous husband’s, and she had nary a single positive to outweigh the negative. The media has been trying to find positive things to say about HRC for about ten years, and they still can’t do it. She has no accomplishments. She has no record to speak of. She sponsored three bills as a Senator that passed into law—and they were all completely meaningless. She had a checkered record as Secretary of State, to say the least. As Trump so simply stated, “Hillary has experience, but it’s bad experience.

And perhaps the FBI really didn’t find anything terribly damning in her emails (although it would have been enough to land a normal person in jail, or at the very least lose security clearance), but the sheer arrogance it took for her to ignore the law and create her own email server was enough to cast a shadow of doubt over her own campaign. (Do you know who StoneTear is? You should.)

But the problem was that they spent the last eight years preparing for Hillary to take the crown directly from Obama’s hands. They were ready for Hillary, but they never checked to see if she was ready to become President. And  all it took was for a little known septuagenarian from Vermont to ignore party orders and challenge her to see how quickly her support folded within her own party. They had to rig the primary election in her favor, and even then she barely won. By the time the general rolled around, nobody was excited to vote for her. The six million extra Democrats who showed up for Obama couldn’t be bothered to show up on Election Day, or in any of the early voting days that preceded it.

And now they’re really screwed, because they’re a party without a leader. They shunned Bernie and never thought to develop any bench strength. Hillary lost. Reid retired. Wasserman Schultz is disgraced. So is Brazile. Obama can’t carry the torch for them anymore. Who the hell is the leader of the Democratic party right now? You don’t know, and neither do they.

They never took Trump seriously: I’ll just let Michael Moore say it for me, as he did on his Facebook page today:

“Everyone must stop saying they are “stunned” and “shocked”. What you mean to say is that you were in a bubble and weren’t paying attention to your fellow Americans and their despair. YEARS of being neglected by both parties, the anger and the need for revenge against the system only grew. Along came a TV star they liked whose plan was to destroy both parties and tell them all “You’re fired!” Trump’s victory is no surprise. He was never a joke. Treating him as one only strengthened him. He is both a creature and a creation of the media and the media will never own that. “

—Michael Moore

The Clinton camp failed to recognize that Donald Trump wasn’t a man—he was a movement. And it took a man like Trump to lead it—a man who had nothing to lose, with no party bosses to kowtow to. He said everything that we all wished Romney had been man enough to say. And do you know who he took his cues from? Why, his old pals, the Clintons.

Like Hillary and Bill, Donald apologized for nothing. And with each arrow the mainstream media slung at him, his base supported him more.  You do realize that he has yet to release his tax returns, right? And that he’s not gonna? And that it didn’t matter? Romney tried to be the candidate the media wanted him to be—he never realized that the media wanted him to lose. Trump gave the middle finger to the media, and the more they hated him, the more we loved him.

Independents were drawn to his strength. He fought the Republican party. He fought the Democratic party. At times, the debates often looked like two or three against one, as he was forced to debate both Clinton and the moderators.

He was the hero America needed at the time we needed him most desperately. A man who wasn’t afraid of anyone or anything who managed to be the billionaire working-class hero. We knew how Trump got rich, and he never apologized for it. We had no freaking idea how Hillary did it, and she made it worse by pretending that she wasn’t an elite. Nobody bought it. She lost the rust belt—Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania—to a billionaire member of the Lucky Sperm club. Let that sink in for a minute.

We all really do want America to be great again: The simple brilliance of that slogan on that ugly red hat. It worked. It meant something to us. Listen, I know that America might not have been as great in the Eighties as I thought it was at the time. I know that opportunities for women and minorities were not what they are now. I know that the LGBT community was oppressed. I don’t know if Reaganomics was as good a policy as I perceived it to be.

But, damn it, it felt great. We stared the greatest menace the world has ever known in the eye, and we made them blink. We won at everything. We felt completely united. Hell, we even cared about the Olympics and Mary Lou Retton.

It’s been a long time since we’ve felt like that in this country. Bill Clinton’s impeachment divided us. The aftermath of 9/11 provided a brief moment of unity, but it quickly unraveled in the face of an unpopular war with an enemy we didn’t understand. We went from a cowboy, likeable President to a somewhat inscrutable “constitutional scholar” and community organizer who bowed to foreign dignitaries and proceeded to apologize to everybody everywhere for being American.

Trump said, screw that. We’re gonna win. We didn’t even know what it meant, but we liked the sound of it. He never clearly articulated how we were going to win, or even what we were going to win, but he said we were going to win! And damn if that just didn’t feel great to have a President who didn’t apologize for winning—in fact, he wanted to win more. Trump tapped into the feeling of American Exceptionalism that Obama and Clinton tried to bury. We didn’t want to become citizens of the world. We wanted to be the best. Trump made us believe we could be.

But they didn’t learn: Today, I’ve seen nothing but messages of hate and vitriol from the Left. I’ve been called an idiot. A Walmart shopper. A racist. A misogynist. A hillbilly. A Deplorable.

Go on, liberals. Keep calling me that. Keep calling us that. Keep demeaning us and belittling our experiences. Keep forgetting that the flyover states exist. Keep saying how terrible it is that white, non-college educated voters put Trump in office.

And, in 2018, when you have to defend Senate seats in Indiana, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota and West Virginia—not to mention Florida, Ohio, and Wisconsin—we’ll remind you what you thought of us today. And when you realize how close you got to permanently making this country in your image yesterday and how you let it slip through your fingers with your combined arrogance and foolishness, you’ll cry even harder when you have a super-majority, filibuster-proof Republican Senate and a 6-3 or 7-2 Supreme Court.

Hillary Clinton lost what might be the most important election in the history of our nation. But the Democratic party didn’t learn a damn thing from it.

And that makes me very, very glad.

189 Replies to “Like A Phoenix Rising From The Ashes”

    • shrug

      I have some genuine questions for you, a person who I perceive to be intelligent and also a Trump supporter. The two certainly are not mutually exclusive, but have obviously at times been described as such. At any rate, if you could help me out here I’d appreciate it. I’m a bit of a lefty, but I’m certainly no tumblr junky if you catch my drift.

      1) I know you, as an upper-middle class, presumably Christian, straight, white male have little concern for what the hard-right wingers on Trump’s staff have in mind, but how do you assuage the concerns of those that do? Mike Pence has a bad history of rather harsh attitudes towards the LGBT community in particular. And no, this is not necessarily in reference to the “religious freedom” nonsense he touted as a way to allow businesses to not serve gays -which is also bad- but rather in regards to his desire to use HIV/AIDS money in order to fund conversion therapy? As a reminder, the suicide rate of those who are enrolled in such things is 8.9 times as much as one who does not. A true small-government minded individual should find that wholly abhorrent. How does the Trump presidency reconcile with the community with that in mind? I have a feeling that holding up a rainbow flag won’t exactly cut it.

      2) While obviously the popular vote has little and less effect on the actual election (training wheels put in place largely to protect the slave states but that’s another conversation for another time), there is the fact that the majority of the voting population did not vote for Trump. I’m glad you feel united and “great” but goodness there are A LOT of people that do not. How do you think he fixes that? How would you fix that?

      3) You tout fiscal conservatism, but what is to make Trump’s ideas work any better than Reaganomics? Trickle down, assuming that that in some fashion will be his strategy, has not once been proven to work in the long run, and is objectively terrible and getting money to the poor among us. The probable desire to cut social programs will also only hurt them. I’m just not at all sure how this helps them.

      4) While Trump himself and you may not be racists or xenophobes or whatever label, A LOT of his followers are. This is not me just trying to repeat msm hysterics, but a fact. There are already reports of pro-Trump and pro-Nazi graffiti in South Philly and of Trump supporters attacking Muslims. How can the president unify the country and the many different people in it with these things happening? He certainly did nothing to calm these people down during his campaign, so what can he and his administration due to stop that madness before it truly starts?

      5) Finally, is bringing back manufacturing en masse, even if he could, even a good idea? For sure, those jobs still need to be replaced, but the amount of money that would be added to the price of goods due to all of the money that it would now cost to produce goods would, one would think, make it at best a wash. Paying ~$5k more for a compact car while not making appreciably more is not exactly something I think I could stomach.

      I apologize for any typos. I’m on my phone unfortunately. There are others. Many, many others. But this will do for now. I’m not angry Clinton lost. For reasons repeated ad nauseam, she’s an awful person and an awful candidate. No, I’m desperately concerned that he won. His staff will likely largely be made of people like Newt Gingrich and whatever other neo-cons are still active. The 2nd Bush presidency was awful for America and I’m a bit scared that that may occur again, except with this time a more erratic face.

      Reply
      • Rob

        Re #4, care to cite a source? I’ll be happy to give you numerous examples of leftists using violence against Trump supporters.

        Reply
        • hank chinaski

          Many protests, riots in Oakland and Portland so far. Oakland Mayor basically throwing up her hands. You may have seen the Chicago beat down put to music on World Star.
          Fine upstanding citizens, all.

          Reply
      • nightfly

        May I take a stab at this?

        1. It’s not likely that a Trump Administration *can* do anything untoward to the LGBT community; even if they would try, it’s much less likely they would succeed in getting anything of that nature past Congress or the courts – even a “conservative” USSC is not likely to overturn very recent precedent.

        That being said – would a true small-gov solution be that terrible? The difficulty wasn’t baking a cake for a gay person, for example, but in participating in something the baker felt immoral. So? If I walk into Secular Humanist Bookstore and ask to see a shelf full of GK Chesterton and CS Lewis, I should be laughed out of the door; I shouldn’t be permitted to come back with a court order mandating that they carry those books. Nor should I go next door to Cookin’ With Commies and demand a God Bless America cake complete with red white and blue sprinkles. They should all be allowed to decline my business if they feel it promotes things they disagree with, and I should be allowed to take my dollars elsewhere.

        2. Even in a “landslide” election, the difference between candidates is rarely as much as even 10 percentage points. We are always going to have a large hunk of people unhappy with the result. That’s not a fixable situation – I’d be much more worried if we had sham elections where Dear Leader was always sweeping to 100% of the vote, running unopposed because to run against him at all is treasonous.

        3. Reagonomics is called “trickle down” NOW, but that’s not the idea. The analogy he used (IIRC) was “a rising tide lifts all boats.” Wealth and the ability to create it and earn it comes from within, never from above; the very term “trickle down” betrays a fundamental mistake in thinking that what we earn is begrudged us from above, that we are permitted a salary that isn’t ours by right. And that misunderstanding betrays itself further whenever a politician talks about taxes: “How are we gonna pay for cuts and make up lost revenue?” they all wail. Well, y’alls can do what we do – you can stop spending on some stuff. THEY don’t pay for cuts, WE pay for increases; but they always get it backwards, betraying that they consider our money theirs by right, and ours only upon their sufferance.

        4. I honestly don’t buy it. Remember, the media absolutely sold out for HRC – they have a vested interest in undermining Trump by painting all his supporters (or at least “a lot of them”) as neo-Nazi scum. But these “reports” are always very scant on details, pictures… even a handful dominate the news as if thousands are roaming the streets in a purge-like haze. Episodes to the contrary? Trump rallies were, in fact, attacked, supporters beaten, local headquarters vandalized, supporters’ vehicles damaged, but none of that leads the news.

        Do you recall the little burst of campus bias incidents from a few years back? How many of those wound up exposed as hoaxes in the end? Pretty much all of them. People saying their best friend’s sister or whatnot were menaced by roaming gangs of MAGA-hatted hoodlums is not really evidence of anything. Even a few actual incidents wouldn’t prove anything about the other sixty million Trump voters. Besides, this is the sort of thing every Republican and conservative deals with on the regular, at least as far back as Reagan. They were ALL Hitler, until now they aren’t, because this NEXT GUY, holy crap, is he ever double-super-ultra Hitler!

        5. Those jobs left in the first place because stateside labor is more expensive than overseas, even accounting for shipping stuff there and back. I think that, should labor and manufacture costs go back down, those jobs would come back. Why not? A business is going to try to turn a profit. If they can do that by building here, eliminating the cost and hassle of overseas involvement, then they will. And one major cost reduction would be to ease and streamline excessive regulation. Compliance and fines are a major drain on economic activity, and should be kept to a minimum. That helps prices remain competitive while still paying a good wage.

        Sorry – very long, but they’re legit Qs and I don’t want to just quip my way through a conversation.

        Reply
        • jz78817

          1) DOMA was passed by both houses and signed by the president and stood as federal law for almost 20 years.You have a seriously short memory.

          2) point

          3) yet Trump won supposedly because the rising tide hasn’t “lifted all boats,” but put the sinking ones further underwater. You’re trying to have it both ways here. Again with your short memories, you forget it was the Reagan years (the 1980s) when Japan was demolishing our industry. I clearly remember ominous newspaper and magazine articles about “Japan Inc.” and how they were going to own this country shortly. Sound familiar? If not, substitute “China” for “Japan” and see if you recognize it. You all seem to think this shit is new, it’s not.

          Reply
          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

            I think the primary difference is that Japan is fundamentally a democratic nation that is committed to a high standard of living for its people. Which meant that they couldn’t undercut American labor once the yen assumed a proper valuation.

            China is a centrally managed economy that uses trade as war by other means.

          • jz78817

            None of that mattered back then, though. Remember Vincent Chin? Striking UAW workers taking sledgehammers to Japanese cars? The hand-wringing when Sony bought Columbia Pictures and people believed they’d soon buy up almost everything else? Now, we can look back and see why the predictions of doom never came to pass- their Lost Decade, their bringing of actual jobs to this country, and their aging population crisis- but back then the fears were very similar to how people view China today.

            and I think in another 10-15 years or so, we’ll have stopped worrying about China. Already industries are looking elsewhere for lower-cost manufacturing, and they’re running out of third-world countries to go to. SE Asia is getting tapped out, and most of Africa is too impoverished and unstable to invest in. Thailand, at least, keeps its military coups orderly 😉

      • David Sanborn

        For a man poking at his smartphone, it’s a well written query for Jack. It’s noteworthy that days have passed with no formal reply to it.

        Despite the GOP’s win, I paradoxically feel bad for them. Instead of getting a proven leader with intellectual chops like Eisenhower or William F. Buckley, they got Trump, the new standard for good-enough-to-win. Jack: I’ll wager $100 that Trump’s promises are forgotten once his administration is comfortably humming along in the White House, that you’ll see more croneyism and lobbyist chicanery than in any previous presidency.

        I hope I’m wrong, but I’m pretty damned certain I’m not.

        Reply
        • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

          The question was to Bark, not me. For the record, I thought it was concern trollin’ of the highest degree so that’s why the response I did provide was short.

          Reply
          • David Sanborn

            Thanks, missed that this was a Bark post, though I assume you’re both similarly aligned.

            I learned long ago not to ask more than one question, either in forum posts or in corporate emails. TL;DR is the new American dialogue.

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

            Bark is a very traditional conservative; I’m more of a populist.

            Had it been Sanders v. Trump, we might have been on opposite sides of the aisle.

          • Shrug

            Not trolling at all. The recent appointment of the anti-Semitic, white nationalist troglodyte Bannon to a high office does not make feel better about anything either.

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

            And what do you think he’s gonna do? Round up the Jews and put ’em in a train?

            Who’s gonna do it for him if he gives the order?

            Just because Lon Horiuchi shot Vicki Weaver while she was holding her baby then laughed about it doesn’t mean that the government has a million Lon Horiuchis available.

            We saw the maximum power of the office of the President during Mr. Obama’s reign. You can use the IRS to punish your opponents, you can write a little law under the guise of directives, you can try to appoint Supreme Court judges. This isn’t 1933, not by a long shot.

  1. everybodyhatesscott

    But the Left? They’ve lost their minds. They’ve gone from rabid to straight-up unhinged. I’ve lost about 5 percent of my Facebook friends, Twitter followers, and Instagram peeps, just for saying that I was happy that Trump won. This includes people I’ve considered friends for over twenty years. Not just acquaintances, but personal friends.

    I got a plea from one of my friends to stop gloating because people were in pain. He was no where to be found the 14 months trump supporters were called every sort of bad word, their election signs were getting stolen, and the supporters were being attacked. But to hurt a liberals feelings is the greatest crime of all.

    Great piece bark.

    Reply
  2. aircooledTOM

    Slow clap….

    I wasn’t a Trump fan in the primaries, but I enthusiastically voted for him yesterday. Mostly because f#@k those assholes. America is good. America is different. I will not be a world citizen. Thanks for this, Jack. This is some of the best stuff I’ve seen about what happened yesterday and this morning.

    Reply
  3. Sobro

    I was never a Trump fan and reluctantly voted for him same as I did GWB in 2000. I once described myself as a small “l” libertarian and complete anti-Democrat, so we do what we must to prevent the D’s from remaking the Republic (more) in their own image. I an especially heartened that the First, Second, and maybe even the Tenth Amendments will be taken seriously for at least the next 25 years.

    As for Trump’s more wacky ideas, we’ll just see what he can accomplish over the objections of the Never Trumpers and the D’s in Congress. But at least Trump and Congress agree that Obamacare will be no more by this time next year, and that is a very good thing indeed.

    Reply
  4. Orenwolf

    Canadian perspective:

    Most of my friends up here today have mostly been laughing, which is the same reaction we had with Brexit. A few of them commented on how we’ll be able to make fun of the US again, like in the bush years. I think they’re forgetting, though, that after September 11th, instead what most people did was live in fear of saying anything untoward the US instead up here. People were afraid to even talk.

    My own personal view? I completely get that there is a large population of the country that is having a shitty, shitty go of it, and at the same time watching how globalisation has changed not only the work situation in the US but also the cultural one. It’s not all apple trees and white picket fences anymore, and won’t be again. I get wanting to be heard and wanting to make a point. I got it with Brexit, too.

    I don’t know enough about your political system to know if one person actually has the power to enact change, or even if your president-elect is the right person, but I do get the reasons. I just wish it could have been done *without* having to be intrinsically tied to general douchebaggery as well, and that’s got a lot of people who believe people shouldn’t yell death threats at their opponents upset, I think.

    I sincerely hope you’re able to focus on fixing infrastructure, removing money and influence from the government, and focus back in on the disenfranchised masses who don’t have an alternative to their local rural employment. It’s sorely needed, and I’m sure exactly what all those voters are expecting. From an outsiders perspective, though, it almost seems like the system itself will prevent any of that change from actually happening. I guess time will tell.

    Reply
  5. VTNoah

    I certainly didn’t vote for Trump but I also don’t hate people for voting for him. I understand their reasons but it wasn’t worth it for me. I honestly think that his instability is a severe liability to the country in so many ways. Hillary wasn’t great either but I considered her to at least be able to prevent us from sliding into chaos. That said, I’m pissed at the Democrats for fucking it up so badly. Bernie was my guy, not only because he was from VT, but he followed a lot of the same principles Trump did, just on the opposite end of the aisle and with a more rational train of thought. The one thing that sticks out for me on Trump is who his likely cabinet members are going to be. If he wants to “Shake things up” Hiring Rudy Giuliani, Chris Christie, and Newt Gingrich isn’t going to do it. Bark, I respect your opinion, I just don’t agree with it.

    Reply
    • Will

      Bernie never had the intellectual ability to understand his own policies; he wanted to protect the American worker and spread the wealth, but live in a society with open borders. Those two thoughts cannot exist at the same time because the latter destroys the former. While a nice man and genuine, he was a vapid candidate at best and had no shot as his policies were extremely flawed.

      Reply
      • mopar4wd

        Actually Bernie was in favor of shutting down alot of free trade. I don’t think you read his policy positions clearly. He also (very carefully) hinted several times at slowing immigration. I think he understood exactly what he was doing.

        Reply
        • Will

          Free trade is not the issue, because tariffs aren’t the only costs to goods. He is not really against open borders and legalizing people simply because they’re “here” is not a solution either. A secured border is first. When all my immigrant ancestors came through ellis island (yeah, everyone is past 1900) they recorded, tested, accepted or rejected people and his immigration policy does not do this. I believe this is what Trump was trying to say, but is too inarticulate to do so. Bernie is weak and policies are isolationist and long term destructive. Socialism works in a vacuum, not in a diverse country (we are the ONLY diverse country). Immigration only works when immigrants (like my grand parents) choose America over their “minority”.

          https://berniesanders.com/issues/a-fair-and-humane-immigration-policy/

          Reply
      • VTNoah

        Hard to say that he’s a vapid candidate when he’s spent more than 30 years in public service making people’s lives better, passing legislation, and sticking to his principles. Look at his voting history, he’s one of the most consistent politicians out there. Please explain how Trump would be any less “vapid”

        Reply
        • Matt

          Certainly Trump would be the most vapid candidate as most of his rhetoric is pure bullshitting. But while many sympathize with Bernie’s positions, they clearly were not very well thought-out in the sense there was simply no substance to them beyond “we want free stuff.” They were completely unworkable and in that sense were more sentiments than policy.

          Reply
        • Will

          “spent more than 30 years in public service making people’s lives better, passing legislation”

          Is about as vapid as one can get. At no point can you say he “made lives better” and his policies, throughout history, have caused more harm than good.

          Reply
          • VTNoah

            Ok I’ll play.

            Corporate Crime Accountability (February 1995): A Sanders amendment to the Victims Justice Act of 1995 required “offenders who are convicted of fraud and other white-collar crimes to give notice to victims and other persons in cases where there are multiple victims eligible to receive restitution.”

            Getting Tough On Child Labor (July 2001): A Sanders amendment to the general appropriations bill prohibited the importation of goods made with child labor.

            Increasing Funding for Heating for the Poor (September 2004): Sanders won a $22 million increase for the low-income home energy assistance program and related weatherization assistance program.

            Fighting Corporate Welfare and Protecting Against Nuclear Disasters (June 2005): A Sanders amendment brought together a bipartisan coalition that outnumbered a bipartisan coalition on the other side to successfully prohibit the Export-Import Bank from providing loans for nuclear projects in China.

            Protecting Our Troops (October 2007): Sanders used an amendment to win $10 million for operation and maintenance of the Army National Guard, which had been stretched thin and overextended by the war in Iraq.

            This one is Baruth Approved..
            Restricting the Bailout to Protect U.S. Workers (Feburary 2009): A Sanders amendment required the banking bailout to utilize stricter H-1B hiring standards to ensure bailout funds weren’t used to displace American workers.

            Exposing Corruption in the Military-Industrial Complex (November 2012): A Sanders amendment required “public availability of the database of senior Department officials seeking employment with defense contractors” – an important step toward transparency that revealed the corruption of the revolving door in action.

            Another moment came when Sanders, who was then chair of the Veterans committee, worked with Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), to overhaul the Veterans Administration. McCain praised Sanders’ work on the bill in an interview with National Journal. Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) even went so far as to say the bill would never have passed without Sanders’ ability to bring the parties to a deal

        • Will

          Trump is possibly as vapid, but the difference is essentially government doesn’t solve problems, people do. This theory works, it’s what made us as wealthy today as we’ve been and why we have a functional and peaceful democracy; Sanders’ solutions are a march towards poverty and war for all.

          I find it funny that they blame white men, yet what successful country could you live in that’s not run by white men and still have the privileges you have today?

          Reply
          • VTNoah

            Sanders is someone who makes things happen, and often for the people Trump so readily claims he’s going to help. The proof is in the pudding. When Trump starts actually making things happen for the disenfranchised like Sanders has, he’ll have my respect. But he’s got a steep hill to climb.

          • Will

            @VTNOAH

            At no point has that made “lives better”. The Nuclear thing is a joke, we still have child labor and receive goods from it (nor do we really care about kids in Bangladesh), The one Baruth approved has done what?

            These are all token laws that have affected 0 to a miniscule amount of US lives. How many people are convicted of white collar crimes. The money is gone, they do not get restitution. I stand by my “Sanders is a vapid” lifelong political person. Nothing of substance, come on down!

          • mopar4wd

            Will, I think your definition then would apply to every one in politics ever. I mean a few people have pushed more interesting bills but in general politics is a game of incremental change. Fell free to present your preferred heroes.

          • VTNoah

            Well that’s just like your opinion… man…

            Regardless, what’s your counterpoint? If someone who has passed substantive bills over a long period of time hasn’t made a difference in Government, who has?

  6. Rock36

    I agree with so much written here. The biggest thing I wish Democrats would realize was that they absolutely had a hand in their own defeat.

    Trump was a beatable candidate. As of right now Trump earned 59.6 million votes, Clinton still barely pulled off a very slight popular vote lead with 59.8 million votes, but that isn’t what is interesting to me.

    What is interesting is that in 2008, Obama had 70 million votes, and in 2012 he had 66 million votes. Likewise McCain had 59.9 million votes, and Romney had 60.9 million voters.

    The looser of both the 2008 and 2012 Elections had more votes than Trump, the winner, in 2016. McCain, the recipient of a election beat down, still attracted more support than Trump or Clinton did this time.

    Now, that isn’t to say if another 5-10 million extra came out to vote, they wouldn’t have broke in the same way as they did last night, but I think it should cause the Democrats some serious soul searching about their own role in their own defeat. My sense is a lot of over-confidence, hubris, and disillusioned Bernie supporters simply stayed home, because they thought the appeal of the world they saw through their own lens spoke for itself.

    Unfortunately, I think Democrats will mostly continue to hit the easy button answer of the self-righteous, and continue to cry to the heavens with their claims of racism and ignorance and lack of education or white privilege. Although, I could never understand how exactly poor people in broken small towns were exactly privileged regardless of perceived power structures.

    This will of course will also ignore the fact that many Trump supporters voted for him in spite of his rhetoric, not because of it. Or that insulting people isn’t the best strategy for getting them to see your side of things.

    Perhaps in a more sinister fashion, they will simply ignore the problem, bidding their time until they think the demographics that allowed for Trumps victory will grow too old and too small to matter in the future.

    For many people this may have indeed been their last chance to be heard and represented.

    Reply
  7. Tomko

    Trump received a mandate, yes. But it is important to underline that he did not receive an endorsement from the majority of voters.

    That map represents land mass and not population. In that sense it serves to confuse the reality of last night’s results.

    Trump deserves congratulations on his win. But any dispassionate review of the election will reveal that it is Hillary who lost, and not Trump who won.

    Hillary a supremely flawed candidate. Trump, the textbook definition of the ugly American as viewed by the rest of the world’s population.

    Elizabeth Warren will now carry the democrat torch to the next generation whoever they may be.

    America’s Brexit this is. An undeniably historical turn of events. The last gasp of white Europeans before the inevitable decline of western civilization. Whatever it may come to be, revel in the moment, chant U-S-A and dream of a glorious future for your children that will never be. For the unstoppable march of demographics is fast approaching from the west, south and east.

    But none of this will shake my appreciation for America or its many peoples. For they will endure long after this chapter of history is closed.

    Reply
    • Rock36

      You illustrated my point about ignoring what could be learned here by dismissing the phenomenon as a “last gasp” of a declining demographic very well.

      I agree this can be seen as a Hillary loss, but that is kinda the point. Why was it a Hillary loss exactly? What does that say about the fundamental assumptions of the left in America? How have they been invalidated or not? What and why were the assumptions biased? Why did it make all demographics respond as they did, and what does it all mean to them? I’m not asking you to answer those questions for me, they are rhetorical.

      More to the point. Claiming, that through dispassionate observation, it was really a Hillary loss and not Trump win can and does lead to intellectual laziness. It is reductionist at best. It allows one to seek solace and comfort in undercutting the meaning of a Trump victory by confirming the view that Trump is still the ugly American and his supporters are as dumb as ever, and chalk up Clinton’s loss a simple mea culpa that doesn’t require any real course correction or re-framing for the Democrats in the future.

      The truth is that Trump’s victory and Clinton’s failure are an interdependent whole. A whole that is incomprehensible without both and irreducible to one or the other. Hopefully the future leaders of the Democratic party, whether it be Elizabeth Warren or someone else, see this and truly take it for the learning opportunity it represents.

      Given the intense complexity of society, you can not think linearly about the results of this election, and conclude that waiting for white majorities to “die out” or be “out-massed” is the appropriate strategy for dealing with what happened.

      Regardless of the fact that Hillary pulled off a tiny lead in the popular vote, the amplifying feedback loops of a future Republican Presidency supported by a Republican Congress, and a conservative Supreme Court will have reverberating effects for who knows how long. The whole is quite literally more than the sum of its parts here.

      The inevitable march of demographics will also be shaped by what happened here, and it doesn’t necessarily mean that all growing minorities in the nation will continue to be blue Democrats forever more. Especially if governmental gridlock is broken with the Republican domination, and god forbid there is actual success to be found therein. This is about futures, and positions of continued advantage. It will be up to the Republicans to maintain it now. The inevitable march of demographics being anti-Republican is not a foregone conclusion….yet.

      Time will bear this out of course, but simple predictions often fail and fail spectacularly. We only have to look to yesterday to see evidence of that.

      Reply
      • Tomko

        The results of this election pivoted on one issue: Hillary’s emails.

        If you remove those emails from the equation the voters elect Hillary every time.

        It was Hillary’s decision, and her decision alone, to have a home brew server. Had she followed procedure her emails would have never been disclosed unredacted on a schedule calculated to wound the final weeks of her campaign.

        This is how Hillary lost the election.

        To claim that Trump won the election is to imply that he installed that server for Hillary; which clearly he did not. Trump was the electoral beneficiary of that critical error committed by Hillary. He was not the cause.

        Reply
        • Rob

          Anecdotally, I talked to as many people outraged about Obamacare (I refuse to call it the Affordable Care Act, since, well, it’s not actually Affordable) as they were about the Wikileaks emails. I see this election as more of a referendum on government overreach, and I think a lot of Trump voters were willing to roll the dice rather than continue down the road of Obama’s 3rd term.

          And I do agree that many on the right were completely freaked out when Obama was elected, but I have a hard time equating buying ammunition with rioting, violence, and destruction of private property. The NYT/CNN crowd is terrified of right-wing extremism but cannot bring themselves to acknowledge that leftists are the ones who tend to protest violently.

          Reply
    • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

      If you take California out of it, Trump won the popular vote by a couple of million, I believe.

      California went overwhelmingly for Hillary, so much so that it’s basically a one-party state right now. Which explains why its residents think and behave as if they live in a one-party country.

      Reply
          • Will

            I’m curious on how California thinks it can secede without the guns they are so desperate to take from its citizens. It’d be a short revolution!

            Sing the rebel song! Rebels are we, born to be free, just like the fish in the sea.

          • widgetsltd

            Does this mean that you are not planning to run any more races in California? It’s awfully convenient to discount the votes of millions of Americans simply because they do not agree with your view of how things should be. If Trump’s trade war costs me my job and renders my home worthless, I could end up back in my home state of Ohio, penniless. Sounds like a plan to me.

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

            Dude, I raced in Malaysia, where sharia law is in effect. I’ve raced in Canada, where they won’t let you have fountain soda. And I’ve driven in Singapore, where they lock up gay men for two years if they catch ’em boning. So my disagreement with the general moral and ethical position of most Californians won’t stop me from taking a green flag there. For the record, Mrs. Clinton feels the same way; last I saw, she’d taken more than a billion dollars from countries that throw gay people off buildings and lock people up for playing protest music.

            The fact that California (and Washington, and Oregon) has become immensely wealthy by helping the Chinese cloaca dump garbage into Middle America even as the jobs head back out the same way in no way obliges anybody in the red states to protect that wealth. Why don’t you sell your house in California and come back to Ohio? For the price of a studio apartment in San Francisco, you could live in Indian Hills. Help us Make America Great Again!

          • jz78817

            “I’m curious on how California thinks it can secede without the guns they are so desperate to take from its citizens. It’d be a short revolution!”

            I honestly wanted to see Tim Draper’s “Six Californias” proposal happen. Just to see the look on Silcon Valley’s faces when they found out how much they’d have to pay for, you know, water.

          • CJinSD

            I had a customer complain to me about the $550 a month she paid for water while living in Sacramento, to which I responded, “good.” Around five years ago, I had one complain to me about the bombed out quality of our San Diego roads while bragging about how great all the roads were in Sacramento, prompting me to near-shout, “you’re welcome!” in his face.

      • CJinSD

        I know plenty of people with sound minds and values in California, both in San Diego and Fresno. They’re often associated with the farming industry, so they know that Stalinism isn’t all about paying for sex change operations and sanctuaries for other countries’ violent criminals. There’s that part where they start controlling people with their stomachs too, and Hillary Clinton would have given Sacramento license to move the game along.

        Reply
      • Rod Jones

        California is the sixth largest economy in the world having just surpassed France. For you to make blanket statements about everyone who lives there is less than intelligent. BTW good luck on getting Trump to keep any of his campaign promises….as in, for starters Obamacare. Thought it was going away…sorry about that. How about “Im going to put her in jail”? Sorry its not happening. Im a fan of both you and your brother but your blind devotion to a thin skinned bully who doesnt read or prepare for anything leaves me wondering who you two really are behind the scenes of your auto journalism.

        Reply
        • Bark M Post author

          You don’t have to wonder. I’m a Trump supporter, and I have been since the day Dr. Carson withdrew from the race.

          Reply
          • Rod Jones

            You liked Carson? Wow. Some of the things that he said defy reality. I can almost understand how people got conned into supporting Trump, but Carson? Never! To like or support him is beyond belief IMHO.

          • Bark M Post author

            Carson is a political novice, but he’s a brilliant, good, honest man. He’s the anti-Trump—and yet you also hate him. Mmmkay. What exactly would satisfy you in a candidate?

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

            The greatest thing about Carson’s candidacy is that it gave the media three months to talk shit about a black brain surgeon. It was like reading an imaginary confederate Internet.

          • Bark M Post author

            I just read that interview, and found it to be 100x more interesting and substantial than anything HRC ever said. Carson isn’t “likely a smart guy,” he’s a pioneering brain surgeon. I think I’m likely a smart guy, and I’m guessing Dr. Carson spots me 20-30 IQ points on a slow day.

          • mopar4wd

            It’s the debt and budget part about the debt ceiling that dove me nuts and the host tried to get him to answer and he talked in corporate america style circles.

            Carson is a smart man and had a very good career. But just because your good at something doesn’t mean you would be good at something else. I used to joke you know when an engineer decided to DIYsomething, great at designing a system, awful at fixing someone eles’s.

        • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

          Not sure where you are getting “blind devotion” from. That’s a bigger stretch than me characterizing Californians based on voting statistics.

          Reply
          • Rod Jones

            Ok blind devotion was the wrong thing to say….apologies.

            Consider this issue….do you honestly believe that putting Donald Trump in charge of 7100 nuclear warheads is a responsible thing to do considering his thin skinned nature and propensity to lash out at and get revenge on anyone who criticizes him? Forget all the social, tax, jobs, and immigration stuff…the fact that he will be able to launch nukes on two minutes notice scares the shit out of me.

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

            I don’t think putting ANY seventy-year-old person in charge of the nuclear arsenal is a great idea. But as Scott Adams pointed out, at least he’s always sober. Hillary is a serious drinker who is known for throwing violent temper tantrums. Trump is fundamentally a pacifist.

            And although my military experience is limited to a stint in the Civil Air Patrol, even there I learned that launching nukes isn’t as simple as a president pushing a button. Particularly not in the post-Cold-War era.

    • Will

      At no point is this really analogous to brexit, the US isn’t leaving an economic and political system. Nothing has changed. It’s only comparable because the media ignored a significant voting public and are clueless assholes.

      Reply
      • Tomko

        It is quite analogous when you consider that in both cases the voter was offered the choice between: 1) continuing on a clearly known path along a contiguous direction; and, 2) a series of murky promises that better things are ahead by making a series of U-turns and changing direction onto an unknown path.

        Furthermore, both electoral systems chose to turn the ship of state around to return to a hope of better days past.

        Reply
        • Will

          The system of government and our economic future does not change much with our political system. Instituions, economic and political control remains the same. Brexit was a break from a union. An analogous example would be California voting to break away. This country is Red, always will be due to why most people are here, it’s simply a correction to the norm.

          Reply
    • VolandoBajo

      If Elizabeth “Pocahantas Weeping” Warren is going to be the one carrying the DRC torch going forward, it looks like the conservative movement in this country has little to fear for at least the next several years.

      Reply
      • Felis Concolor

        Yeah, what can Fauxcahontas do: accuse Trump of selling her people out for a few cases of moth-eaten blankets, rusty rifles and cheap whiskey?

        Reply
  8. Ronnie Schreiber

    Two of the smartest people that I know, Jack and my son, were Trump supporters early on and I argued with both of them, preferring Cruz or Jindal, but I came to believe that only someone as flawed as Trump could take on the Clinton machine. Hillary had a ceiling where she couldn’t go above 45-48% but Trump had a solid floor. No matter what he said, he wasn’t going to go below 40-42%. People already knew what he was, calling him names wasn’t going to change anyone’s opinion.

    I disagree strongly with Trump on tariffs, on jawboning Ford, on eminent domain and a number of other issues but the bottom line was that Hillary would have been worse. I was willing to accept the possibility that Trump will be a disaster to avoid the certain disaster that Hillary would have been.

    Leading up to the election my two biggest concerns were the Supreme Court and how politicized and lawless the executive branch has become. Agencies don’t follow the Administrative Procedures Act and just issue regulations by fiat, the IRS continues to slow walk conservative non-profit applications, the Dept of Education is still waging a hysterical war on heterosexual men on campus, and the EPA helps pollute rivers and put lead in Flint’s drinking water.

    I figured that with Hillary there would just be more intrusions, more suppression of free expression and the only way to stop her was to vote for Trump.

    Though I still have reservations about Trump, I laughed when I watched Hillary’s supporters cry at her victory celebration. Then I ran the video again so I could laugh some more. It’s time those precious snowflakes got slapped in the face by reality.

    I don’t bother with polls until they have actual votes to count. I went to dinner around 8 feeling cautiously optimistic but steeling myself for a much more leftist America. There were signs that Trump might pull off the rust belt states. When I drove down to Mid Ohio a couple of weeks ago to watch Jack, Mark, Charlie and Matt race in the AER series, as I drove through small towns and rural Ohio, I saw a ton of Trump signs, but the only Hillary signs were at homes obviously connected to the Democratic party.

    Then, a week before the election I was at a blues club in St. Clair Shores, in Macomb county, home of the Reagan Democrats of yore. It was the night of the 7th game of the World Series and the game was on the flat screens around the bar. In a genius ad placement, the Corrupt Hillary ad of Trump’s ran right between the 9th and 10th, as the game went into extra innings. At the table next to me was a white guy, maybe 25 or 30 years old, with a cannabis leaf on his baseball cap and a Miller lite in his hand. When the ad came on, he started giving it a slow clap.

    So there were indications but I’ve been disappointed on election night too many times to get my hopes up.

    On election night when I got home after eating, around 9 PM, I checked the Ace of Spades site and they said the NY Times probability gizmo had Hillary at 57% and falling. Within minutes, of all news sources, the freaking New York Times was saying that Trump was more likely to win. When their algorithms have real voting data to work with, they can be very accurate. The NYT’s final results are pretty much what they predicted at about 9:30 PM.

    Then it was just a question of waiting for the big news agencies and tv networks to call Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania for Trump.

    Reply
    • jz78817

      “Then, a week before the election I was at a blues club in St. Clair Shores,”

      the Blue Goose Inn? If so you were a mile south of my house.

      Reply
    • VTNoah

      Funny to see that under Hillary free expression would be squashed. I don’t deny that progressives are insanely sensitive. All I have to mention is “safe space” and you get what I mean. That said, she didn’t openly threaten the press for reporting facts like Trump. You’re a member of the press so I would hope you understand the gravity of that. I also believe the exact opposite of you that Trump would be a disaster but not as bad as Hillary. The key here moving forward is to have vigorous discussion without demonizing “the other” at the end of the day we’re all American and on the same team. We’ve got to figure out how to work together because the truth is often in the middle.

      Reply
      • Ronnie Schreiber

        From my little window on how the sausage is made, I’d say that Trump and conservatives in general have legitimate complaints about press bias. I can’t say that I’m sympathetic to media types about being targeted for complaints by Trump and his supporters when the press keeps egging on the screaming howler monkey SJWs to crucify their Emmanuel Goldstein of the moment.

        Reply
        • VTNoah

          Agreed on the point about screaming howler monkey SJW’s. Time will tell to see what he does. My observation is that he’s very thin skinned and prone to lashing out. Unfortunately he’s got the US government behind him which is very concerning.

          Reply
  9. jz78817

    We all really do want America to be great again:

    and what do you mean by that?

    But, damn it, it felt great.

    and that’s the problem. how this feels is way more important to you than how it is.

    if you think Trump is going to deliver even 1/10th of 1% of the stuff he’s promised, you’re going to be disappointed.

    this is the first presidential election where I woke up to the results and felt nothing. Literally nothing.

    Reply
    • everybodyhatesscott

      I dont disagree he might do nothing but the odds are still better than the rest. Thats how bad the rest was

      Reply
    • Rock36

      But how something feels will almost always be more important to anyone than how it is. I’d imagine that is true for yourself as well if you reflect on it. How you feel will influence, to some degree, what you think something is, or at least the meaning you assign to it.

      If that is too philosophical for you, then I’m sure you can agree no two people can exactly agree on what anything actually is anyway. Especially in politics and history.

      Reply
  10. Dave L

    A-Freaking-Men! As a resident of Massachusetts, I found it necessary to thank my friends, family and colleagues in North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Michigan. Lots of pain here, but what the hell- I can take a leak in the women’s room while smoking a joint.

    Reply
  11. Paul Alexander

    The reason I’m happy Trump won is for the simple fact he’ll lower the temperature on the boiling tensions with Russia. The rhetoric has been getting scary lately and in case anyone thought otherwise, both countries still have their nukes on standby ready for mutual destruction. Not sure how I feel otherwise. I do appreciate his desire to get out of those horrific trade agreements.

    Reply
    • Economist

      Agreed. That and his opposition to the TPP were the biggest reasons why he got my vote.

      Nice write-up, Bark. Hopefully we can see more like this in the near future from you.

      Reply
      • hank chinaski

        The MIC seems itching to restart the cold war. Her statement at the debate to create a no-fly over Syria was soon followed by a Russian task force to the Med.
        The Soviet Union and Warsaw pact are ghosts. I can’t fathom the need to even maintain NATO today, let alone expand it.

        Reply
  12. Dirty Dingus McGee

    A big thumbs up to Bark for writing what many feel. I remember chatting back and forth on these subjects when you still were on your solo site.

    I have been working, at least part time, since 1973 so Trump will be my 9th president to work under the umbrella of.. Some era’s have been far better than others, did fantastic in the 80’s, less so in the 2000’s. MOST of the rules, regulations and policy’s 40 years ago were suggested by the president and implemented by the Congress and Senate. With the proliferation of government agency’s, most now come from faceless bureaucrats that are un-elected and unknown. Some started out with good intentions, OSHA, EPA, perhaps even the NSA, but have now become a force unto themselves. Unless these agency’s get slowed up some, we will likely continue on the same path we have been on.
    I haven’t researched it, but it seems that in recent years (16 or so), the use of executive orders by the president has increased dramatically to push thru their ideas. More often than not, this is met by wailing and gnashing of teeth by the opposition party. Both sides have done it, so there is plenty of blame to go around.

    Politics, and the power that goes with it, are a blood sport. I watched it from the inside starting in the mid 90’s as a lobbyist, then in 2000 as a volunteer on a gubernatorial campaign (candidate won against an incumbent in a shock to many). Since then, I only participate as a voter. My experience showed me that Samuel Clements was correct when he stated; “There are 2 things you don’t want to see made, sausage and laws”. ..

    Reply
  13. Bigtruckseriesreview

    #1.The media tried to pretend that the job market was going great when in actuality part-time work was replacing full-time work because employers were hiring people for shorter than 40 hours in order to avoid having to pay healthcare costs.

    In reality, the market is way up because it currently only represents WALL STREET. Main Street’s money is trying to stay out of foreclosure and paying student loans.

    The Housing market is stagnant. Foreign money, business and retirees are the only people buying now.

    There are several bubbles in the economy due to the Federal Reserves 0% interest rates.

    Job OPPORTUNITY is LOW. You can’t easily leave one job and go to another for equal or greater pay.

    #2. Obamacare was insolvent from day one.

    It took 10 years worth of taxes to pay for just six years of benefits. By 2018 Obamacare was going to be unaffordable, but because more people started accessing healthcare – the premiums went up quicker – and it fell apart quicker.

    I’m willing to bet that the individual mandate is ultimately what cost HILLARY the election.

    #3. There was lack of enthusiasm for Hillary Clinton. She was thrown under the bus in 2008 for Barack Obama and there was an attempt to throw her under the bus again for Bernie Sanders.
    Bernie Sanders had his own level of charisma and he stole a huge amount of excitement away from Hillary’s campaign. When Hillary and Debbie Wasserman Schultz conspired to marginalize him, it only made the Democratic voters less enthusiastic for her.

    GARY JOHNSON should also be recognized as a SPOILER. He sucked up between 2 and 4% of the vote. Stein got less – but still hurt Hillary.

    #4. Donald Trump did multiple rallies and had massive turnout because he excited and galvanized the people. Exit polling shows that Donald Trump did far better with black voters than Romney did and he even did decently with Latino voters compared to how Romney scored with them.

    #5. Donald Trump turned the people against the GOP. Then Donald Trump turned a lot of the Democrat voters against the DNC. In doing so he also turned the people against the mass media outlets which have been polarizing us all along.

    Donald Trump won 3 victories: he beat the GOP, he beat the D&C and he beat the media itself.

    In reality, his offensive remarks should have torpedoed his campaign long ago but what the media couldn’t count on was the fact that his charisma coupled with the anger of the disenfranchised could help push him over the mark and that the situation on the ground had gotten so bad that people were willing to take the word of a megalomaniac sociopath over a pathological liar.

    BREXIT and the 2016 presidential election happened for the exact same reason.
    This is America’s BREXIT.

    I saw this coming three years ago and no one believed it.

    Even as he hacked away at 16 more-than-qualified Republican candidates…no one believed it.

    He barely spent any money because he understood something that I understood a long time ago.

    ATTENTION = $$$

    Donald Trump is a troll and the typical way you deal with a troll on the Internet is to simply ban them or block them. THEY WILL NEVER STOP.

    But what happens when you run into a troll that you can’t ban or block and who commands so much attention that you can’t ignore him?

    THIS…

    Reply
    • mopar4wd

      Big truck Love it. At least you know what you got. I have to agree it’s funny watching the entrenched left squirm. The people I don’t understand (and Bark comes close to this) are the people acting like Obama supporters in 2008 saying he’s the 2nd coming and will fix all out problems. Ain’t gonna happen.

      Reply
  14. faygo

    judging nearly an entire half of the voting public through the reaction you find within your social media is massively generalizing. “the Left” is no more monolithic than “the Right”.

    the (d)evolution of “social” media in the last 8 years means the reaction today ≠ reaction in 2008. additionally, the surprising nature of the result here means that everyone on one side of the equation had become convinced of the result, then got the rug pulled out from under them. while both McCain & Romney were known figures, they don’t have decades of nationwide partisan baggage on either side.

    the orthodoxy on both sides blew it this time around. Dems, as you noted, decided before the primary contest (such as it was) what result they wanted & were pretty shameful in the way they went about it. GOP candidates thought that Trump would go away and none of them were smart enough or dynamic enough to see how he was connecting with the voting base of their party, whom they’d ignored and acted in direct opposition to for years.

    I’m not sure that “all conservative ideals” are termed racist, sexist or nationalistic, at least not by a rational observer (media, no matter where, isn’t that). not sure how any of the other than I guess being pro-life fit into those bins. I would also argue that Trump doesn’t really hew to the all the traditional conservative values either. the irony of a GOP nominee being against free trade and for the little guy while the Dem was status quo and in the pocket of Wall Street is rich to say the least. I am curious as to how he’ll sell a massive infrastructure spending plan (one way to actually provide good paying jobs _not_ at minimum wages) to a GOP congress obsessed with avoiding deficits and averse to increasing taxes.

    the vitriol which with Trump put out his message and the way it was frothed up by a small portion of his base made it easy for anyone who wanted to to demonize the entire side of the race as “racist”. that is clearly garbage. whether pandering to that lowest element in the party disqualified him from having other desirable policy positions was up to everyone who shared the rest of his views.

    the genius of the campaign slogan is that each person’s view of “Great Again” is somewhere in his litany of promises and statements – every politician has to do this, no judgement there. the tent has to be big enough to get everyone you need into it and leave them enough space to not feel like everyone is exactly aligned on every issue. however, once you tar supporters with the “racist” brush, you can quickly define them as personifying whatever bad old days status quo you want, be it casual racism by landlords or refusal to recognize same sex marriage as a right or the inability to acknowledge the American tradition of assimilation of differing cultures & religions.

    I want to think that Trump blew as many dog whistles as loudly as he did while running but will not necessarily release the hounds. the tenor of political discourse has gotten uglier and less civil by leaps & bounds, done no service whatsoever by social media. having the leader of the party be as boorish, bully who lied (with impunity as far as his supporters are concerned) at every opportunity doesn’t set a very good example for anyone, be it kids or disaffected 40-somethings or the mythical old racist white man. in one way it might actually be better that Trump won for those folks – with an HRC win, I figured we’d be in for a handful of domestic terrorism incidents based on perceived rigged election results or bad things done by whatever brand of “other” the doers decided was the root cause.

    how far things change in the next two and next four years will tell the tale as to whether this was an ultimate cultural tipping point or not. the narrative would definitely have been much different with the 1% swing needed in PA/MI/WI to switch the result the other way. as it is now, Trump has a chance to deliver on what he promised his base, we will see whether he’s able to do it or not.

    outside of whether he is able to achieve his policy aims, I fear his demonstrated reactionary nature, his apparent fundamental misunderstanding of how government works and whether he will be led astray by Newt, Rudy, Chris and all manner of other entrenched creatures of the system. time will tell.

    Reply
  15. jz78817

    o you know what conservatives would have done today? They would have just kept living their lives, just like they have for the last eight years.

    and that’s bullshit. I remember when it looked like Obama was going to win, I heard (in person) no end of bleating about the coming Brownshirts that The Manchurian Candidate was going to send to round up your kids into FEMA re-education camps. In 2000, I heard no end of bleating (in person) how Bill Clinton was going to cancel the elections and just decide not to give up the presidency.

    also in 2000 (and 2004) I heard no end of liberals saying how they were going to flee to Canada if Bush won (none of them did.)

    everybody on a particular side loses their minds when the opposing party wins the presidency. Saying otherwise is to have a very selective memory.

    Reply
  16. rwb

    Hmm.

    At the risk of exposing him as a fundamentally good person, I have a strong, permanent respect for, and owe a deep debt to your brother (to whom I should say again, even though it’s the wrong thread, happy birthday!) for the incredible kindness and generosity he’s shown to me; that, while I’ve stated out of his earshot that you and I, Mark, might get into a fistfight if we were to meet. I’ve said, candidly to a neutral party, that only one brother seemed to have the nuance gene, and I am reluctantly willing to admit this to both of you.

    I still can’t be entirely sure that one of us wouldn’t talk the type of shit in person that would lead to a tense situation (though I will try to keep things civil as long as Tito and his handmade vodka doesn’t come into play,) but I understand your perspective, and respect your position as stated here, even though I don’t yet see in these choices a path that will lead to the realization of the fundamentally reasonable end goals you expect.

    I’ve said elsewhere that the supernovae, openly suicidal expressions of the most histrionic elements of the far-left have given me a perverse sense of justice as they’ve expressed rabidly vitriolic ignorance of all perspectives but those of their peers; although I’m still not totally comfortable with even the most annoyingly strident elements of society being denied basic rights, if the worst expectations come to pass.

    I guess, though I figure I’ll end up OK, I don’t yet see a holistically positive endgame. If simplistic, protectionist policies come to pass, I expect a drastically reduced standard of living for those who rely on a low cost of living, and no significant change in the number of people within this class, which is at odds with what I assume was the intent of a vote for change.

    But whatever. I don’t really know anything about how this shit works, and I no longer believe anyone else does either.

    Reply
  17. Bigtruckseriesreview

    I knew this was going to happen.

    I called this election PERFECTLY from over a year ago.

    Donald Trump is a sociopath, megalomaniac, billionaire troll.

    And now he’s got the senate, house and will have the SCOTUS.

    Now the liberal intelligentsia will have to watch him give the state of the union.

    MSNBC, CNN, Maddow and the View and every other lib talking head will have to watch him stand triumphant above them.

    I got my Christmas present early this year.

    Reply
    • VolandoBajo

      Exactly what you said, BTSR. I too have been watching and waiting, expecting that the polls were deliberately tilted away from Trump to try to discourage Trump backers from going out to the polls, but of course, his following could see through that, and they made it a point to show up en masse.

      I have believed that DJT would go all the way to the White House since back when he was one of several RNC candidates, but I got tired of trying to convince people I knew that even people who normally don’t vote, and people who normally vote Dem, would turn out for for him.

      And they did.

      And I will be celebrating Christmas early also, along with you, BTSR.

      Excellent piece, Bark. I may not agree with your assessment of men’s business fashion, but you are spot on in your analysis of what happened re: the election.

      Reply
      • DirtRoads

        I work in a federal building and we have no presidential pictures, except the one in my office of Obama.

        Sweating, with the word “COPE” under it.

        Reply
  18. mopar4wd

    Bark The right did meltdown in 2008 and 2012 stop kidding yourself look at the right wing media catalogs they went nuts facebook went nuts.

    Reply
    • jz78817

      Yep. I don’t know how hard you have to try to be able to forget the hysteria amongst the right wing when Obama was not only elected, but re-elected. Because it was real, palpable, and not kept in secret.

      but what I said earlier is true. I literally have no emotion whatsoever about the outcome of this election. I feel nothing.

      I have mild tinnitus in both ears; it’s a low-grade, high pitch tone I hear constantly. I’ve had it at least since I was 5 or 6 years old. so, it helps me get to sleep at night if I have a broadband noise source playing quietly at night to mask it. when it’s warm, a fan will do. but I usually just put the radio on (to 89X) and tuck in. when I awoke this morning, the first thing I consciously heard was Cal Cagno saying “Well, I did not see this coming, but Donald Trump will be the next President of the United States.” and all I could think was “huh.” If I had awoke to hear “well, as expected, Hillary Clinton is the next president,” I’d probably have gone “huh.” Because there were no surprises here. I knew- regardless of how I voted- either an entitled, contempt filled member of the political establishment would bring us more of the same which isn’t working, or an unhinged, uncontrollable lout would bring us God knows what. I don’t think Matt Stone and Trey Parker believed we would still be faced with Douche vs. Turd 12 years after they aired that show.

      So no, I feel nothing about this election. No joy, no anguish, no resentment, no despair. At worst, reality will put its leashes on Trump and he’ll be (at worst) a mediocre president.

      What I do feel strongly about (again) is the absolute ugliness in the aftermath. This time it’s coming from the left. It’s really striking from me when the left’s most rational response is from Michael Fucking Moore. I’m on a couple of other message boards where the membership leans liberal, and they’re melting the fuck down. Big time. When you point out that their relentless, demeaning smugness:

      http://www.vox.com/2016/4/21/11451378/smug-american-liberalism

      isn’t going to win them any converts, their response is “fuck them, they deserve to be ridiculed.”

      We are, at our core, an ugly people. the only difference between us is which group of us is expressing ugliness today.

      today, its Democrats.

      In 2008 and 2012, it was Republicans, despite Bark’s claims to the contrary.

      Reply
          • Dirty Dingus McGee

            Thats been going on since at least the sixties. Remember the noted conservative groups, Weather Underground, Symbionese Liberation Army, Black Panthers? The “left” has their fair share over the years. The most notable on the right has always been the KKK. Are there “right leaning” groups other than them? Of course. I however don’t recall any organized mass uprisings from the right; rioting, burning, looting and beating hell out of people, for disagreeing with them. A lone whacko here and there yes, but not a mass uprising. If the “right wing militias” were as prominent as some want to give them credit for, Obama wouldn’t have made 100 days in office without a serious assassination attempt..

  19. Matt

    Jack, I appreciate your honest take and you reopening the opportunity for dialogue on this election here on your website. I missed it during the election and wish you had posted on this stuff more often.

    Let me expound on the racism angle for a bit. I don’t believe that all Trump supporters are racists, but for many of us, especially those of us who are at least a little bit brown, it was impossible to ignore the race-baiting in Trump’s major addresses. His blatant and implicit characterizations of latin immigrants as rapists and murderers – especially during the convention speech – were both factually inaccurate (as a matter of degree – latin immigrants are no more likely to be violent criminals than non-immigrants) and clearly intended to play on the prejudices of many voters. The same can be said for Trump’s support of Stop and Frisk. And these weren’t just throwaway lines – he lead both of his two biggest speeches with these themes.

    What is partly so insidious about this language is that it seems to flow in one ear and out the other for white voters – they hardly even register it. But for many of us with even a little bit of brown in us, it was the scariest, most alarming moment we’ve ever experienced in the political process. Here was a major candidate blatantly scapegoating immigrants for an asserted increase in violent crime that DOES NOT EXIST.

    I do appreciate the feedback I’ve gotten here previously that coastal elites like myself do not have to share neighborhoods with violent minorities (that is to say, minorities who are violent in bad neighborhoods – obviously not all minorities are violent), and that it’s easy for us to say that everyone should be accepting of immigrants and minorities. But that level of insidious race baiting was just impossible to ignore, and is in large part what is behind my understanding of a major component of Trump’s platform to be based on racism.

    Reply
    • arbuckle7809

      The way you felt when Trump talked about Latin immigrants is how the working-class white people that voted for Trump feel when the media and Democrats talk about them.

      Insidious race-baiting is basically the strategy for the entire political spectrum now.

      Reply
        • Arbuckle

          I’ve heard for months that anyone voting for Trump is complicit (or even supportive) of sexual assault and that white people don’t care if the police mow unarmed minorities down in the street.

          But no actual walls. So you got me there.

          Reply
          • Matt

            When the Republican response at the convention immediately following several severely unjustified shootings of innocent black people by police is a massive kiss to “blue lives matter” and zero acknowledgment of the bereavement in black communities, combined with the candidate giving a speech about how immigrants and black people are roaming the country murdering white people, it’s not hard to see where the left would get this from.

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

            To some degree, the whole “Black Lives Matter” movement is like a casino: the only people who participate are people who can’t understand math or statistics.

            And the putative BLM utopia of limited police interaction, strict gun control laws, and 100% Black supervision already exists: it’s the South Side of Chicago.

          • mopar4wd

            I fail to see how deplorable’s was any worse then what Trump said about Hispanics or Muslims. I find it kind of funny that line offended all the people supporting Trump that think the world has gotten too politically correct. Also his own spokeswomen agreed last week that a number of his supporters were deplorable.

          • jz78817

            Yep. The people who complain about “political correctness” and “people who are always offended” are the first to get ready for war if you say “happy holidays” to them in December.

    • mopar4wd

      It didn’t help that many openly racist groups backed him and he didn’t reject them much (or some groups at all) Not all Trump voter are racist off course but most white racist were Trump voters.

      Reply
      • jz78817

        the KKK and storrmfront.org have supported (with or without outright endorsement) pretty much every non-Democratic candidate for a while. that Trump didn’t swear them off strongly enough doesn’t imply the people who voted for him are all swell and dandy with white supremacists.

        which is one of the key points Bark wrote about I strongly agree with. one of the tenets of the left’s meltdown after this election is their accusations that you have to be racist/xenophobic/homophobic to vote Trump. But the one thing that’s come close to breaking my mind is how Trump has resonated with the union voter base. whether or not he can actually do anything about them, his speeches about NAFTA and TPP have broken the once solidly Democratic-voting union bloc.

        so did union voters suddenly become racist homophobes or something?

        Reply
        • Mopar4wd

          I agree on them not being all racist. I agree with Bark as well but it’s important to understand where the view comes from. He just had a lot of very vocal racist support. He also had a tendency to retweet some of their stuff. Like I said your not a racist if you voted for Trump but plenty of racists voted for him.

          Reply
    • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

      I’d say it’s based on nationalism more than racism.

      Trump, and most of his supporters, are more concerned about what you think than what you look like. Look at the acclaim his base gave to “Diamond and Silk” on YouTube — Trump even had them attend a debate as his guests. And Trump has talked quite a bit about the importance of the Latino community in this county — but he draws a sharp line between productive legal immigrants and the “undocumented” crowd.

      Reply
      • Matt

        Sorry but I don’t get the distinction. There are plenty of productive undocumented immigrants. They came here to escape a desperate situation in their home countries and work diligently here. Many would actively like to have legal status but can’t under the existing framework. That is to say: the only thing preventing them from becoming enfranchised citizens (“productive legal immigrants”) is the lack of a pathway for them to do so. I know this because my wife is an immigration attorney in rural Virginia and works with them directly.

        At some point, there seems to be a schism between Trump voters decrying “victimization” of liberal voters but then also scapegoating immigrants and trade for the lack of economic opportunities they have instead of focusing on ways that they could create economic opportunities themselves. If, as Bark asserts, conservatives are the economic drivers of this country, why don’t they act like it?

        Reply
        • Ronnie Schreiber

          If your wife is an immigration attorney working for illegal aliens (I’m old enough to remember advertisements reminding aliens to register so I’m not going to use that nonsensical Orwellian euphemism) you have a direct financial interest in the immigration problem not being solved.

          As for creating economic opportunities, the statists and leftists running the government and its agencies have created a regulatory web that obstructs the creation of new businesses and new jobs. It’s not China and Mexico that are stopping the creation of new businesses in America, it’s Washington D.C. and your state capital.

          Reply
        • DirtRoads

          Just calling them “undocumented” instead of “illegal” is diminishing the efforts of people who came here legally, and those of us who were born and raised here in the USA.

          They are here illegally, because they skipped the border paperwork and have broken our laws. Whether they are productive or not isn’t the issue.

          There are pathways. Go back home, turn around, cross the border legally. Learn to speak English (which used to be a hard and fast requirement) and pay taxes on the money you earn here.

          There’s nothing unfair about that. What is unfair is they also expect welfare and free health care and education. What gives them the right? Not everyone gets a damned trophy.

          Reply
    • Ronnie Schreiber

      “Little bit brown”? Well, the racialist bean counters consider Arabs to be brown too. Based on history, the biblical narrative and genetic testing, Jews are cousins to Arabs. Also, in Europe they said that Jews were swarthy and sleeping with their women (who does that sound like?). I know that the intersectionalists busy sucking up to the Arabs consider Jews to be honorary whites but if Arabs are brown, can Jews be beige?

      Reply
  20. mopar4wd

    Bark did you actually say the words fiscal conservative and Trump together? Did you actually hear any thing he said between wall and great again?

    Anyways I considered Trump, But he was just to unpredictable, Too off the cuff, and too fake for me to go with. At least with Hillary’s fakeness you knew what your getting. The Nuclear comments and some of his views of world politics made me feel our country will be less secure and more of a target. But that’s gone now. As said Hillary was a horrible candidate the DNC has some soul searching for putting her up.

    A few years ago someone at Breitbart claimed the republicans could win if they doubled down on white voters and kept turnout low. Every one thought he was nuts. This is however exactly what happened.

    Now we get to wait and see if Trump goes GOP or goes his own way fighting his party and the Dems. No one knows what will happen yet. My guess is something bad will happen and Dems will keep some control in the midterms but I’ve been wrong before.

    Should have run Sanders or Biden.

    Reply
    • Domestic Hearse

      “Should have run Sanders or Biden.”

      Had the Dems the vision to deny Hillary the long-standing “dibs” she claimed for the presidency, and given the nomination to either Uncle Joe or Crazy Uncle Bernie, Trump probably would have lost.

      First, Crazy Uncle Bernie had a movement behind him — young and old — who felt the country could be progressive and fair at the same time. While light on facts how we’d pay for all of it, Bernie still attracted an extremely excited and enthusiastic following — young and old alike were drawn to his anti-establishment from-the-left approach. But alas, Crazy Uncle Bernie and his followers met the establishment for realz, and it turns out it was the DNC itself, and it had conspired against him in favor of Hillary’s dibs. This left almost all Bernie’s followers — potential Dem voters — so disgusted, they left for the anti-establishment Trump or stayed home in droves.

      Second, Uncle Joe from Scranton, PA connects with the rust-belt union member voters. States where white men still vote Democrat like Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania — heck, even West Virginia — would have stayed with their union’s Democratic candidate endorsement were Uncle Joe the Democratic candidate. Uncle Joe, the man who tragically lost his wife and daughter, only to pull himself together, then lose his son, yet manage to answer his party’s call to run, would have been a hero to Everyman. A guy who knows about loss, fear, anger, desperation. A guy Joe Lunchbox could connect with. But no, he concocted an excuse for the party, because Hillary had dibs.

      And why did this enormously unpopular woman have dibs? Because eight years ago, Obama stole her birthright. The presidency was supposed to be hers, and this smooth, charismatic black man beat her to history — took what had been promised to her. He was supposed to wait until after her two terms, but he didn’t. So the Democratic party, out of obedience to the promised Clinton Dynasty, made sure she was the candidate, and by giving her dibs over Crazy Uncle Bernie and Uncle Joe, dug her political grave and sealed a Trump victory.

      Reply
    • MrGreenMan

      That was Patrick J Buchanan, who has said that a consolidated white vote would win the election for 30 years since he published Suicide of a Superpower. However, Mr. Trump gained in share of minority voters over Mr. Romney; the binary position that white = closed borders, non-white = open borders is a false one set up by the same people who said that opposition to Mrs. Clinton was sexist, when Trump got white women (and Catholics!).

      I heard Mr. Trump’s economic advisor say that the first thing was to extend the term on the bonds and get the US off the crack cocaine of 0% interest so that we could start having a real, working debt market again. Seemed like a good idea. I also heard Mr. Trump himself say it’s not right that Bush doubled the debt and then Obama more than doubled it. Sounded more fiscal conservative than people who claimed that label (which Trump eschews; he doesn’t do labels much, except Deplorables, whom he loved.)

      Reply
      • mopar4wd

        He called for:
        Spending 600 billion on infrastructure
        Not cutting entitlements
        Cutting taxes
        Expanding military spending
        All without any way to pay for it
        No way on hell can you call him a fiscal conservative

        Reply
    • VolandoBajo

      No, it was HRC and Debbie Wasserman Schulz who helped to keep the Dem turnout low. But Trump brought out both disaffected Dems and people who normally are apathetic to vote for him.

      Trump if anything, by his clear statements of his position, tended to bring both supporters and opposition to the polls. It’s just that he got more of the former to come out, as we who supported him tended to believe.

      But I find it hard to believe that even HRC diehard supporters truly believe in her, as opposed to merely dislike Trump.

      After all, how could you have missed videos of HRC saying things like that there were no classified emails on her server, interspersed with James Comey saying “we find X classified email threads on her server”. Same for many other direct lies she kept repeating, but which only the truly committed no matter what supporters of hers believed.

      Reply
      • mopar4wd

        I agree the DNC pick was the biggest factor in keeping people form the poles. The comment was more that the far right thought they had to repress it, they actually just needed to go up against an awful opponent as it turns out. The RNC did manage some effective voter suppression in NC this cycle but not enough to make a difference.

        Reply
  21. Matt

    I should add Trump’s launch if his political career with the birther play. That was blatant race baiting, and atrocious. That will be his defining association for many of us.

    Also, sorry Bark, for assuming this was by Jack. It read like a Jack piece to me.

    Reply
    • MrGreenMan

      It’s all about your perspective how you saw that action.

      I remember that time. I remember lots of people saying that Mr. Obama was illegitimate, and then I remember people claiming that Mr. Obama had presented all the documentation. Snopes ran an article saying that it had been provided. Bill O’Reilly said he had seen it.

      Then, eventually, Mr. Trump brought so much sunlight to the issue, that Mr. Obama did what he was so stubborn and opposed to doing from the moment his relatives claimed he was born in Kenya – simply settle the matter. Once he released the document, Bill O’Reilly recanted, Snopes was revealed as the political liars and hacks they have become, and the issue was forever settled.

      So, Mr. Trump, by shoveling the manure, on an issue brought up by Camp Clinton and left to linger, ended the rumor campaign and the constant talk. Mr. Trump did Mr. Obama a service by forcing his hand and thus silencing the gossip and claims he was illegitimate.

      And, no, I was no fan of him then. I thought he was the loudmouth from WWE and the Apprentice up until I heard a policy speech from him early on in 2015.

      Reply
  22. Widgetsltd

    I did not vote for Trump, do not like him as a person, and I am still a bit uneasy about how otherwise reasonable people could elect such a guy. He will soon be our President, though, so what I want to know is this: Will he start a trade war that costs millions of us our jobs? Many, many, many jobs are at least partly dependent on trade. I would not find it an improvement to trade a solid, upper middle class salaried position for $10/hour working in one of manufacturing facilities that he has promised will return to the USA. Make no mistake about it: Trump cannot bring back the high manufacturing wages, cozy healthcare benefits, and glorious pensions of the good old days.

    Reply
  23. rich

    I am an immigrant to these shores and it its moments like this that make me say GOD BLESS AMERICA

    and now a musical break

    Reply
  24. Michael V.

    They called you a Walmart Shopper? How low can you go. Seriously, I think Trump is nothing but a con man who was smart enough to say what would get him elected. I find it hard to believe he’ll do any of the things he said he’d do. I guess that makes him like every politician, ever, you could say.

    Reply
  25. The F0nz

    I wanted so badly for Trump to win the majority vote, but lose the electoral college. He would have unleashed hell and dismantled that BS approach. It could have ushered in a more modern and appropriate approach to a republic.

    Alas, twas not to be.

    Reply
    • The F0nz

      By unleash hell, I mean he would have whipped up an uprising sufficient enough to move the government in a positive direction. Now that he won in this manner, nothing will change…

      Reply
      • Bark M Post author

        The popular vote is completely and utterly meaningless. Trump could have won it if he had chosen to spend any time at all campaigning in NY, IL, or CA. He wisely chose not to chase that fool’s gold.

        Reply
  26. mopar4wd

    Big truck Love it. At least you know what you got. I have to agree it’s funny watching the entrenched left squirm. The people I don’t understand (and Bark comes close to this) are the people acting like Obama supporters in 2008 saying he’s the 2nd coming and will fix all out problems. Ain’t gonna happen.

    Reply
  27. N3TRUN

    As someone who voted for Hillary, grudgingly at best, I couldn’t agree more that she was extremely flawed as a candidate and isn’t a likeable human being. I don’t feel any great sadness for seeing her lose even though I voted for her and I do feel some relief that the Clinton train is leaving the DC station.

    As the son of immigrants and the husband of a recent immigrant, I can tell you that Trump’s focus on reducing immigration has our family worried about the future. His rhetoric and proposals for putting up walls, refusing people entry due to their religion, etc reflected a philosophy that is opposite of American ideals (see Statue of Liberty).

    In any case, he’s our next president and I look forward to working with him to bring the country together after this very nasty election cycle.

    Just as an aside, I remember laughing at the French election system when Hollande was elected a few years ago. They had something like 16 candidates all talking at once and proposing a ton of outlandish things they’d do if elected. I wondered aloud at the time how anyone could make heads or tails of any of them to be able to make a decision on who to vote for. Standing in the voting cubicle on Tuesday, I was struck by the lack of choice I had. Our election cycle needs revising so that we all can have more choice at the ballot. I feel that had we 16 choices on Tuesday things would have turned out much different. I know I would have voted for someone other than Hillary, at least.

    Reply
    • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

      I’m always nervous when people compare the Ellis Island days to the situation in 2016.

      Two hundred years ago, or even one hundred, this country was vastly under-populated, short on labor both skilled and unskilled, and mostly open for settlement. It also wasn’t that great of a place; look at all the people who chose to remain in poverty across the ocean!

      In 2016, as Mark Kriokorian and others have said, there is effectively no limit to the number of potential immigrants. There are two billion people who would like to come to the United States, and many of them are on the way in one form or another. When they get here, they will find a country with more labor force than jobs to occupy it, an oversupply of nearly every kind of worker, and a job base that shrinks every year as automation replaces human beings and the skilled positions are sent to follow their unskilled relatives overseas.

      Worse yet, when those millions of immigrants arrive, they now have an expectation that they will be supported by a social safety net, in many cases indefinitely.

      I have to confess I was much more bullish on immigration before I spent time in New Mexico, which has been turned into hell on earth by a seemingly unlimited supply of people who hate this country and its inhabitants yet are eager to take a free ride.

      Reply
      • Kevin Jaeger

        Indeed, spending time near the southern border really opens your eyes to the problem. I’m not even American, but even from my perspective up in west Quebec I have to agree 100% with Trump that America urgently needs to implement a reasonable control on its immigration system.

        And frankly, people can stick the talk of dog whistles and racism and other bullshit when perfectly reasonable statements are made on the topic. EVERY country, including Mexico, has immigration controls and enforces their laws according to their own interests. Canada deports Mexicans if they haven’t legally immigrated.

        If you want to know why you have Trump you can start with the tendency of calling people racist when anyone mentions the utterly uncontrolled crime problem in the southwest.

        Reply
      • N3TRUN

        I totally agree with your (and others’) assessment that potentially several billion people would like to join us in this here United States to get a free ride. No debate there. Lets call them unwanteds for lack of a better word.

        There are, however, a lot of very potentially useful individuals who are capable, educated, and would like nothing more than to live a normal life here. Lets call them the wanteds.

        Turning immigrants into a target will stem the tide of the unwanteds but will also inevitably paint the wanteds with the same brush. This has happened a few times in our history and each time it got ugly. My parents went through it in the late 60’s. Luckily, my wife did not. Why does this matter? Because we don’t raise enough math-heads, engineering nerds, and software phreaks to maintain our place in the food chain. So we rely on a lot of people to put their faith in a system that will allow a faceless corporation to make an official place for them in our country with a working visa that will hopefully turn into full citizenship. We actually need more of them, not less. If you target immigrants, the international talent pool that we have been benefitting from for all these years will get smaller.

        So yes, the ‘tired unwashed masses’ ideal isn’t alive in 2016. But our stance on immigration and how we treat people who are ‘not from around here’ does matter. I, for one, am hoping it doesn’t get too ugly before it gets better again.

        Reply
        • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

          “Because we don’t raise enough math-heads, engineering nerds, and software phreaks to maintain our place in the food chain.”

          We raise plenty of them. But very few of them bother to go all the way through school because those jobs, too, are being “creatively sourced” from elsewhere.

          There’s been an utter collapse in CS majors. Not because the incoming kids are stupid — but because who wants to go $200k into debt so you can compete with some guy with a quick-bake “PhD” from India?

          Reply
          • N3TRUN

            I’m getting the feeling that we are both talking and neither of us is listening to the other 😉

            Its much easier to find accord in a bar with someone of a differing opinion that on the internet.

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

            I agree with what you’re saying — heck, I have a Bolivian friend who took a path to citizenship here and got a great job with BMW Financial — but I think that our current immigration policies don’t do a good job of getting us “the wanteds”.

    • Ronnie Schreiber

      There is ample precedent in U.S. immigration law to bar particular nationalities. Jimmy Carter banned Iranians while our embassy staff was held hostage. I would simply ask Muslims seeking to enter the U.S. if they are part of the “Ummah” and if they answer affirmatively the go to the back of the line. Roughly analogous to the concept of Christendom, the Ummah is the worldwide Muslim community, but it’s not just a religious concept. Ummah means “nation” in Arabic. We wouldn’t be restricting members of the Muslim religion but rather people with Muslim nationality.

      Reply
      • mopar4wd

        I think your still basing it on religion even with the adder. No matter what listing it as Muslim ban runs afoul of many American values.

        Reply
  28. Josh C.

    “Today, I’ve seen nothing but messages of hate and vitriol from the Left. I’ve been called an idiot. A Walmart shopper. A racist. A misogynist. A hillbilly. A Deplorable.”

    Speaking as a left-wing, bi-coastal, Clinton voter who is not happy with the outcome of the election: you don’t deserve that. While I don’t agree with some of your and Jack’s political opinions, I think they come from an honest place and I’m not going to unfairly reduce them to racism or sexism or other -isms.

    I’d like to think I’m not alone among liberals in this thinking, either. Yesterday, at the NYC MBA program where I study, we had a forum where people could discuss the election results and how they felt about them. The vast majority are upset, but people also made that same point: that to dismiss Trump’s appeal as based entirely on hate or bigotry is unfair and counterproductive. People recognized that the feeling of neglect you referenced is legitimate and that a lot of people deserve more attention from our government than they’ve gotten.

    “Listen, I know that America might not have been as great in the Eighties as I thought it was at the time. I know that opportunities for women and minorities were not what they are now. I know that the LGBT community was oppressed.”

    By the same token, I appreciate your recognizing that. A lot of the distress over Trump I’ve heard from women, minority, and LGBT people I know is related to it. They (and I) are worried that “Make America Great Again” implies going back to a time before (what we see as) a lot of positive social change. People are genuinely scared that their workplace protections may go away, their marriages may be annulled, and that the level of oppression that existed in the not-so-distant past may come back. While I’m more hopeful than some, it’s still worrying.

    Anyway, just wanted you to know that this liberal, at least, appreciated the analysis and thought it was a good read. We’ll see what happens over the next four years.

    Reply
  29. Domestic Hearse

    “Starbucks said it removed “symbols of the season” used in the past, which have included reindeer and ornaments, in favor of a simple, two-toned red cup.

    When the cups rolled out in late October, Starbucks (SBUX) vice president Jeffrey Fields said the company “wanted to usher in the holidays with a purity of design that welcomes all of our stories.”

    THIS. This is the PC, all-inclusive, media-mandated TOLERANCE that many regular people from regular places with regular jobs have had up to here. For so many Americans, the SJW Tolerance Police have invaded too much of our lives, gone too far with their demands, and just need to dial it back. Trump for many is the antithesis of a red Starbucks holiday cup that has “a purity of design the welcomes all of our stories.” Fly-over, don’t-mean-nothing Americans are sick and tired of it. Stop telling me a dude with boobs should be allowed to stand next to my child in a public restroom in the name of tolerance. Don’t tell me to not be offended if an illegal immigrant burns the American flag in the name of tolerance. How dare you remove “under God” from the pledge of allegiance just because we need to be more tolerant. Don’t tell me my town’s Christmas tree should be retired because it’s not tolerant. I’m tired of being tolerant. I’m tired of hearing the values and virtues that built America are no longer permitted because they aren’t tolerant. We’ve grown weary of being told to be more tolerant — and we’re not buying it any more.

    Signed,

    The Deplorables

    Reply
    • rwb

      One thing I’ve always found funny is that the “deplorables” comment was… very poorly phrased, but pretty obviously intended to describe the openly, genuinely, violently hateful people who felt invigorated by and took literally the hyperbole that sane people brushed off as, most likely, just abrasive rhetoric. A full half of his supporters don’t fall into this category, but a much smaller percentage unquestionably do.

      Unless you’ve beaten up someone who doesn’t look like you solely for that reason,or told them to “Go back to ________, you _____!” it probably wasn’t intended to describe you. Not sure why people so openly embraced the label. Pretty unbecoming of anyone who can discern subtlety. Maybe that’s the problem.

      Reply
      • Kevin Jaeger

        Except EVERYONE gets called racist. Propose a conservative-based welfare reform and you’re racist. Question the overall size of government and you’re racist. Have a policy disagreement with Obama and you’re racist. Say the Mexicans should obey the same immigration laws that Canadians do and you’re racist.

        Sorry, no sale.

        Reply
        • rwb

          You’re not really taking exception to my point; that’s just another side of a similar coin, and not a problem with only one side or the other.

          When complementing a black person for an excellent turn of phrase, or telling a woman she looks nice at work become “microaggressions,” and are in turn assigned the same label of being a “racist” or “sexist” act as would be given to starting a “white power” chant or actually believing a woman’s work is worth less than a man’s, the words lose meaning to the point of irrelevance to many people, and the intent is lost.

          That’s not entirely removed from what happened with the “deplorables” comment or even Obama’s “guns and religion” debacle (where the underlying point was that people are just plain pissed for very valid reasons, but because it was expressed so clumsily and insultingly, the main thrust became irrelevant and, the statement was only remembered as a slur. As for whether his actions reflected the intent or the slur is a different can o’ worms.)

          The intent in this case was pretty clearly not that Trump Supporters Are Deplorable, it was that there are genuinely deplorable people who have been given a sense that maybe their behavior is OK because they take Trump’s most inflammatory bluster at face value. It’s a small percentage, but it’s true that these people exist.

          The same people who make noise about PC SJWs or whatever are getting offended by the same misunderstandings & subtle slights as the people who invented the words to describe them, and I see some irony there.

          Reply
    • jz78817

      Starbuck’s is a business. They’re doing something they think will broaden their appeal and make them more money. Sounds like something you should actually be supporting.

      If you don’t support what they’re doing, the solution for you is easy. Don’t buy anything from Starbucks. But you don’t really want to “solve” the problem, you just want to piss and moan about how oppressed you are.

      Reply
    • jz78817

      Oh and the Pledge of Allegiance didn’t contain “under god” until 1954, 67 years after it was originally written.

      Reply
  30. Matt

    I must have missed all those press conferences Hillary held questioning his nationality and launching her political career. Even taking that ridiculous assertion as true, there’s a far cry between a bunch of staffers spit balling a potential line of messaging and the circus that Trump convened on the matter.

    Reply
  31. mopar4wd

    I agree the DNC pick was the biggest factor in keeping people form the poles. The comment was more that the far right thought they had to repress it, they actually just needed to go up against an awful opponent as it turns out. The RNC did manage some effective voter suppression ion NC this cycle but not enough to make a difference.

    Reply
  32. mopar4wd

    So watching coverage of the pretests around the country I had a thought. First I have to agree the left has now taken it further then the right did.
    Second (I’m not saying any of this behavior is appropriate or should be encouraged)
    Jack often argues that the middle of the country will one day awaken to try and take their country back. He may have the side wrong. The left has gotten more and more vocal in the past 10 years Between BLM and Trump and maybe even occupy, there has been a steady progression. The left is starting to look more like the left in places like France (willing to tear the clothes off a CEO threatening pay cuts). So while the middle america faction may have the guns it appears the urban left has the will. An odd turn of events.

    As Jack says the best chance for the future would be for the Urban poor and middle class and the rural poor and middle class to come together and realize they have a common enemy, But unfortunately wedge issues still drive us apart.

    Reply
  33. kvndoom

    America is already unified in one respect… no love for one’s fellow man. So much name calling and labeling and spite. It doesn’t even matter which party, which religion, gender, or anything else. People (self included) have forgotten how to love outside of their microcosm.

    Even if Clinton had won, I’d still be reading 200+ posts of animosity. That says more about us than any specific words.

    Reply
  34. DirtRoads

    Dammit Jack all these links to click in your tome. Great read. Glad Trump won too, although I didn’t vote, as Idaho is a completely red state so I would have been redundant. I know, I know.

    I voted for Bill both times, then voted for W both times. Voted against Reagan my first time in the booths.

    Here’s the thing about the liberal media and social structure lately. I can boil it down to two things they do when they disagree with what your opinion is (“Embrace Diversity” is just a bumper sticker to them, nothing real):

    Label and shame
    Label and shame
    Label and shame

    If they don’t like what you like, but have no real thought in their head other than what has been handed to them, they will first label you (racist, misogynist, illiterate etc), then shame you (you want to kill babies and run over the poor in your Corvette and to hell with starving people in Africa, you racist!) (sometimes they label you more than once).

    I’m sick of it, and when I saw how politically incorrect Trump was, I liked him. I didn’t know if he’d win, but when Hillary ran against Obama, I thought wow, I druther have anyone than Hillary in there. Same thing this time, only I was far more serious. My wife and I literally prayed that God would see this through.

    Great read as always, thanks for the enlightening words.

    Reply
    • Blight Fight

      God didn’t have anything to do with this, white people afraid of black and brown people did. And thats not from a Democrat…just an American who pays attention and doesn’t rely on morons like Jack Baruth to formulate my opinions. And no one is judging you on a daily basis,’stop hanging on Limbaugh and Hannity’s every word. They too are sore, swollen buttholes who have the right and privilege to sprout off at the mouth despite knowing minimal, for multiple hours a day with an audience. Their bias and ego earned their roles on radio, not their knowledge or expertise…despite what they tell you and the rest. Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton were our choices because the Democratic and Republican electorate is chocked full of absolute mummalards who recite nonsense and read nothing, expecting a self prolaimed billionairre to be somehow different than the remainder of richards and sell outs in our government.

      (This one, too—Bark)

      Reply
      • DirtRoads

        Who the hell are you talking to? Did you even read my post?

        Other than the comment about God, which I shall henceforth ignore from you, what does the rest of your post have to do with anything I said?

        Never mind. I don’t care.

        Reply
  35. Blight Fight

    I am not a Democrat and I am not a Republican. In fact, both sides are jaded, divisive and full of biased nonsense. But Jack Baruth is a stupid idiot with a sore, swollen butthole thats been open too long sprouting off hateful, hypocritical idiocy. Yes Jack, your butthole is wide open and only mummalards like the smell of your garbage farts. On your own website, so you can just delete the comment from a far more intelligent creature than yourself, despite the fact that all of it is true and you are an absolute jerk off of the first degree. Enjoy this moment just before you are badly disappointed by an energy salesguy who just got you to buy a $10,000 vacuum sight unseen. No wall, no deportation, no death to ACA, no conservatism, no end to NAFTA, no tariffs, no real tax cut for the middle class or poor…in fact, Donald is a Democrat who just saw a sales opportunity in a community of Republican morons who bought the argument that George W was phenomenal and the black man ruined it all. The Republican Party is defunct and the only credible thing DT has done to date is corrode the coating of the garbage Democratic Party so that they can soon join the Republican Party in the afterlife. Whigs and Federalists soon to follow you blind, lying piece of dog end.

    (I pulled this comment out of the spam filter because I thought it was really funny—Bark)

    Reply
    • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

      When I read stuff like this, all these dudes who are sexually obsessed with me, it makes me think we should have a special pay section on this site where dudes like this can drop $19.95 a month to see my dick. I could buy a Ducati Panigale with the money.

      Reply
  36. Blight Fight

    I’ll check back tomorrow to see if either of my comments are printed. Likely they will not be which will prove the fact that R’s only talk to R’s and D’s only talk to D’s. If the first two comments are deleted and never posted, I will surely make a point to read, cite and obliterate your fairy tale opinions as fecal rubbish in my future publications.

    Reply
    • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

      What comments are you talking about?

      Thanks for your contribution, and good luck with that “talking to D’s” you seem to be interested in. I’m flattered — I truly am — but this is the 80’s and Loc is down with the ladies.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *