The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

Mandos on Trump’s Victory

1. Even if you’re getting that 1933 feeling, Trump is (probably) not Hitler.

2. I waffled on prediction, because prediction is crap. But please note that reporting a 30 percent chance of victory is not the same as 0 percent. The model used is not necessarily wrong, it’s merely that, given the inputs, n percent is still n percent — i.e., possible. In general, you shouldn’t “call” anything until the outcome has more than a 95 percent chance of being true, is a good rule of thumb.

3. The worst aspect of this is the validation of the alt-right narrative. That’s the most Hitleriffic aspect of this. I think it’s still likely that there’s a lot of projection, from both sides — Trump saw them as a lever and happily used them, but whether he really believes in white nationalism is another matter. But their organization (via instrumentalization) is the most dangerous outcome of all of this. At the very least, it means that the possibility of creating cross-racial economic solidarity recedes further into the future.

4. I think that Trump is unlikely to solve the economic problems of the white working class, but if he does so, it will naturally have to be via public spending and protectionism, something that he seems inclined to do. The problem is, especially on the spending file, his own party has a large congressional delegation that has made much of their careers on the ideological rejection of public spending. If he can get around that, he has a chance at a second term. If not, not. If he breaks the current system without having an economic replacement, he will simply make the economic insecurity of his voters worse.

That, of course, is a Hitler condition — that he is forced to throw escalating “red meat” at a base whose economic demand he cannot satisfy.

5. The Supreme Court appointment issue is the worst thing to come out of this. A court that has assisted an unjust legal and social order has ensured the perpetuation of its worst elements.

6. Unlike many, I think that the email biz had not much to do with anything here. It’s too pat and inside baseball an explanation. Because no one really cares. On the other hand, it serves as just the perfect excuse to deflect blame from the Clinton campaign. Also, because no one really cares.

7. The whistleblower movement, if it can be called that, de facto figureheaded by Julian Assange, is now completely and possibly perpetually discredited with left liberals everywhere, aside from the extremely narcissistic kind. It will never be forgiven for letting a rapist into the White House because of email. On the contrary, they provided the perfect conditions for left liberals to justify to themselves state secrecy among government leaders — because the breaking of state secrecy was used to hinder a feminist advance and empower white nationalism. As I said, I don’t personally believe the emails had much to do with anything, and their contents and the inner meaning of the episode is going to be forgotten just like the Enron emails were — a social science curio. But the public interpretation of this is clear: WikiLeaks tried to stab American blacks, Hispanics, women, and gays in the back, and succeeded. A perfect alibi.

8. Though it’s not impossible, it’s unlikely that the Democrats will learn that “punishment theorists” sometimes claim a big loss would deliver them. The narrative is already being laundered into one of identity politics and emails. Because it’s not entirely wrong! Particularly the former has a large grain of truth. The Clinton camp is, yes, done for. But Democrats will depend on the Trump presidency to be a disaster in order to take back the presidency in 2020.

9. See 4 for how Trump can get out of this and win 2020. And what might stop this (i.e., his own party).


Why Trump Won


Whistleblowers vs. Democrats?


  1. Adam Eran

    I’d like to give Trump at least the benefit of the doubt on the Supreme Court. If he nominates some crony or crook (a real possibility), the scathing response may make his nominee impossible to confirm. So, just as it took the consummate anti-commie, Richard Nixon, to re-open relations with China, it may be that the consummate con man may have to nominate an honest justice.

    …Hey, it’s possible. Let’s have at least one happy thought today, OK?

  2. Kevin Brennan

    From my experience dealing with people with similar personalities, I suspect Trump will have two major priorities.

    1. Throwing some red meat to his base, to keep them loyal. Could be building the wall, could be going after Clinton. I’d even guess it will be those two things.

    2. The Republican Party. Right now, even though people are falling in line, he knows that many of them don’t like him and never wanted him in charge. He won’t be able to stand that–in a real way it doesn’t matter what they do as long as they are personally loyal to him. Paul Ryan will lose his speakership and he’s going to expect Congress to fall in line. Again, on most issues they can probably do what they want as long as they constantly acknowledge that he is the boss. My gut tells me it’s very unlikely that they suddenly develop a will to oppose him now that he’s won. Most Republicans can’t win without his base, and he’s going to control the party apparatus now and party funding (as one of his people will be in charge of the RNC).

    So to Mandos’s point 4, yes, I think he will be able to get some spending through. Whether that spending actually works, and whether it will be delivered in a way that makes a difference for his voters, is another issue entirely…

    On the rest, I largely agree. I do think this is 1933-ish. The old world order is dead. I’m not saying it would have survived anyway, but we’re past the tipping point for sure.

  3. Robert Mcneilly

    How would people react if Trump
    1. Charged bankers for the 07 meltdown

    2. Sent Bush/Cheney to the Haige

  4. par4

    This Trump is a Fascist routine doesn’t pass the smell test. The Russians suffered the most from the AXIS powers and they are more than willing to work with him. Fucking lib/progs have gone beyond delusional and are now entering psychotic break with reality territory.

  5. Just a note, Alan Lichtman predicted this on other factors than the election.

    You can look them up on Wikipedia.

  6. Shh

    Take your fear mongering and shove it where the sun doesn’t shine.

    Such disingenuous mental chicanery. I can’t even read your intellectually bankrupt, lazy, illogical crap.

    “the most Hitleriffic aspect ”

    “That, of course, is a Hitler condition”

    Do you realize what an ass you sound like when you try to emotionally manipulate people with hackneyed cliches?

    “The whistleblower movement, if it can be called that, de facto figureheaded by Julian Assange, is now completely and possibly perpetually discredited with left liberals everywhere”

    Most would lump me into the ideological camp as left liberal and I see no fault on Assange or Wikileaks at all. Quite the contrary. As one who bases my assumptions regarding the purpose of government on the writings of Thomas Paine, John Locke, and other luminaries of that tradition, I often argue that the neither of the oligarchy puppet pageantry contestants that front for main political parties in the US has a goddamn thing to do with liberalism or conservatism – no matter what the uneducated bloviators at the New York Times spout.

    What you sneer at as “left liberal” isn’t. I agree that the release of Podesta’s emails didn’t sway voters much – most of us can see exactly how corrupt the Clintoons are. However, that does not devalue the contribution. If it’s so uncomfortable to realize that the people you adore are gutting you, then adore other people, but don’t exhort shooting the messenger.

  7. Meel

    “If he can get around that, he has a chance at a second term.”

    This is a strange rhetorical move. America doesn’t need a second Trump term. America does need the kind of changes that Trump did not claim, in his campaign, were not possible. If he can get congress to enact some of those, then America wins, and if that were to happen, then, second term? Sure, why not?

  8. This is a strange rhetorical move. America doesn’t need a second Trump term. America does need the kind of changes that Trump did not claim, in his campaign, were not possible. If he can get congress to enact some of those, then America wins, and if that were to happen, then, second term? Sure, why not?

    That is, if you believe that the changes he would make would benefit everyone who needs it. There’s a middle condition, where *enough* people are better off to keep him in power, but *some* people suffer more than they are now. There are three conditions:

    1. Trump makes no major economic change in real terms -> probable 2020 loss, assuming the Democrats run a halfway-credible candidate.

    2. Trump makes a major economic change in real terms, which benefits targeted groups (while harming others, collateral damage) -> possible 2020 win.

    3. Trump makes a major economic change that benefits Americans in general -> likely 2020 win.

    Many American liberals believe that he will try for scenario 2, which is their (IMO justified) nightmare scenario.

  9. ks


    Well, well, well, now that the data is coming out, the “poor-white-working-class-who-haven’t-had-a-raise-in-36 years-and-have-been-told-to-sit-down-and-shut-up-about-it” economic insecurities narrative is falling apart.

    It’s turning out that the majority of poorer/working class whites voted for Clinton and overall, she won the majority of people making less than 50k. Meanwhile, the majority of middle to upper middle class (and above) whites voted for Trump. Trump supporter – overall median income of 7oK – typically a white male over 60 with a income of 72K.

    So much for the economic insecurity argument for the Trump victory. Meanwhile the elephant is the room gets comfortable as she remains sure that nobody will see her.

  10. ks

    Oh and about that “drain the swamp” and “fresh outsider bringing change to DC” thing….

    The current rumors are JP Morgan’s Jamie Dimon and some guy from Goldman at Treasury. Iraq war cheerleader R. James Woolsey is already on board as National Security Advisor and some combination of Newt/Christie/Rudy for Sec of Sate and Atty. General. The Senator from Alabama Sessions will probably get something and Palin is up for Sec. of the Interior.

  11. Ian Welsh

    The data I have seen does not break down wages by race, people.

    Poor whites /= poor everyone. Blacks and Hispanics are poorer.

    What we do have is that poor counties went for Trump. Especially in the Rust Belt.

    The data I have seen does not contradict the poor whites storyline, though it is also clear that many very well off people voted Trump.

    If you have exit poll data which breaks down by income & race – aka. Whites earning 30K or less; blacks earning 30K or less, Hispanics… please post it or email it to me.

    When the rust belt went Obama in the counties that are poorest, the storyline still works.

  12. bob mcmanus

    I think 4 will happen in a big way (I have a little more detail below in a thread). Trump keeps Mein Kampf at his bedside, and I suspect he knows about the pre-Keynes Keynesian economic programs in Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. Congress will easily go along, perhaps with Democratic support.

    Looking globally at the ascension of authoritarianism, there will be a lot of power and influence accruing to the first nation to abandon and neoliberalism and austerity and supplying the model for other dictators.

    It appears that Trump is keeping his word about letting Pence run things, maybe with the exception of the economy. Pence has an underling called Kris Kobach, who has ties to South Africa, and is as anti-immigrant as can be. Pence/Kobach is hiring a crew from the hardest Christian Right, possible Dominionists and Reconstructionists.

    This is very bad. Leave if you can. Protect yourselves. Remember your networds will get read.

  13. ks

    Okay, I will try and dig it out of a series of tweets I saw I think from Eric Boehlert referencing a Guardian article. I will let you know if I was off but I think those top line numbers regarding Trump’s not so working class support will hold.

  14. Lisa

    Ian’s (mostly but not entirely) right: “The data I have seen does not contradict the poor whites storyline, though it is also clear that many very well off people voted Trump.”

    Those low wage numbers are skewed by minorities.

    Three things are coming out that are interesting (more numbers later will make a more detailed analysis possible)

    (1)The number that didn’t vote overall and especially the number of Dems that didn’t vote.
    (2) The white woman vote, both the more educated and non educated
    (3) Two core Dem voters bases, Blacks and Latinos, that didn’t vote or voted Trump.

    (1) & (3) confirm what I long thought, those who just couldn’t bring themselves to vote for Clinton no matter how hard they held their noses. Those votes were down significantly from Obama. The HRC team’s astonishing attacks on its own people and activists (if they were ‘left’ or had any hint of being a Sanders supporter) hurt them dearly.

    (2) is a surprise, especially the college educated women vote.
    The non college educated vote was always behind Trump (as it has always been behind Republican) with a range of reasons for it (according to studies) some economic, some racism, some religious. A whopping 62% voted for trump, less than similar males (72%) but still amazing.
    But of the college educated women, according to the exit poll 45% voted for Trump (54% for similar men). This is despite some of the most hostile to women campaigns and proposed policies I have ever seen. It seemed as though they were the swinging (after all Trumps revelations, Pence and so on) strongly towards the Dems, but in the end they didn’t. Perhaps they are taking the place of lower income white men as the #1 mugs in voting against their self interests.

    Looks like my original prediction came true, the election depended as much on those who didn’t vote and women than anything else.

    Other interesting facts, the country is split by religion as much as anything else. Those strongly religious voted Trump (54%) those less or not religious voted Clinton (also 54%). Christians voted Trump (53%-61% according to type), Other religions and non religious voted Clinton (48% to 71%).

    The evangelical ‘christians’ (26% of the voters) came in at a whopping 81% Trump, showing, yet again, their never ending hypocrisy.

    Bizarrely despite the ‘economic’ white vote on the ‘most important issue’ question only 42% of Trump voters (52% for Clinton voters) said the economy was their #1 priority, other higher issues were: immigration 64%, terrorism 57% (showing that they are still mugs).

    56% of Trump voters said supreme court appointments were the most important factor, which given that he promised very right wing appointments which would end abortion, marriage equality, civil rights and so on is scary.

    The usual right wing schizophrenia, 73% of Trump voters said they thought the Federal Govt was ‘doing too much’ , however they always vote for policies for even more Fed Govt actions (security, military, oppressing women and minorities, etc). This question can always be translated as ‘the Fed Govt is doing too much that is positive for THEM, instead of oppressing them and doing nice things for ME’.

  15. Lisa

    The US LGBTI community is on full alert as we are now targets #1.
    Trans people especially (sigh will it ever change?). The Family Research Council is dedicated to the total elimination of trans people.

    They are all horrible for women as well of course.

    “Today, HRC expressed concern about leaked documents indicating that President-Elect Donald Trump is considering for his transition team candidates with histories of anti-LGBTQ animus, including Ken Blackwell of the Family Research Council, which has been designated a hate group.”

    “Ken Blackwell is a Senior Fellow at the Family Research Council (FRC), which was named a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. He also serves on the board of directors of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. In addition to supporting measures to ban marriage equality, he believes being LGBTQ is a choice, saying, “The reality is, again…that I think we make choices all the time. And I think you make good choices and bad choices in terms of lifestyle. Our expectation is that one’s genetic makeup might make one more inclined to be an arsonist or might make one more inclined to be a kleptomaniac. Do I think that they can be changed? Yes.”

    Former Attorney General Ed Meese is a fellow at the Heritage Foundation, an organization that asserts that laws protecting LGBTQ people are not “necessary” and “weaken the marriage culture and the freedom of citizens and their associations to affirm their religious or moral convictions…” According to NBC, the conservative Heritage Foundation is helping vet candidates for Trump’s Cabinet. Meese supported Indiana’s disastrous religious refusal law passed under Vice President-Elect Mike Pence, saying it “has nothing to do with refusing to serve gay people.” Meese has also said that marriage equality “shows how the culture has deteriorated over two centuries.”

    Kay Cole James, president and founder of the Gloucester Institute, is a former senior vice president of the Family Research Council and a former director of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. She worked in the administrations of both George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush. The Advocate reported that in her book Transforming America from the Inside Out, James compared LGBTQ people to drug addicts, alcoholics, adulterers, or “anything else sinful.” ”

  16. Lisa

    We are not the only ones… the racist and misogynists are coming out of their miserable little closets. The horrible election campaign has opened the door to them and now they think the have permission to attack women and minorities, especially smaller minority women.

    Read and weep, especially all those ‘brave’ white men attacking women…

    The ‘best’ one was the man who attacked a woman, she put him down hard and then all the ‘brave’ mates said it was her fault and she got cuffed and nearly arrested…
    He said, showing his American manliness picking on a smaller asian background woman ” ok let’s fight you can’t beat me anyways look at how small shrimpy you are’ ..she smashed him down….

    A lot of women (especially minority women) are going to get attacked, raped and murdered now.

    Oh white American men in all their ‘glory’ showing their true colours.

  17. BlizzardOfOz

    Lisa, have you ever looked at FBI crime stats? The raping and violence is disproportionately done by minorities. Par for the course – it’s not enough for leftists to deny reality, they have to invert it 180 degrees.

  18. markfromireland

    @lisa Why have you produced no evidence from a reputable source for your statistical assertions?

  19. Sandman

    Point #4 does not take into account other agendas besides Trump’s, such as his is. Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell and the GOP establishment have long-standing economic and social agendas that have little, if anything, to do with promises Trump may or may not have made on the campaign trail. This agenda has nothing at all to do with alleviating the “economic insecurities” of Trump’s base and everything to do with accelerating the financial strip-mining of the country to the benefit of only the very richest and nobody else.

    Now that the Republicans have control of all three branches of the government, they have no reason to pay attention to the concerns of the economic roadkill that voted them into office. Trump has proven that, with a little seasoning, the same old red meat will continue to keep their interest.

    Of course, this all presumes that the people who voted Trump into office are primarily motivated by “economic insecurities.” The data do not support this, haven’t since basically forever, and I for one lack the endurance to maintain the required suspension of disbelief.

    TL;DR: the hypothetical suggested in point #4 is not coming to pass. Do not hold your breath.

  20. Lisa

    markfromireland: The exit pools? Oops sorry here it is:

  21. bruce wilder

    Point 7 is just bizarre in its reasoning.

    The whistleblower movement, if it can be called that, de facto figureheaded by Julian Assange, is now completely and possibly perpetually discredited with left liberals everywhere, aside from the extremely narcissistic kind. It will never be forgiven for letting a rapist into the White House because of email. . . . WikiLeaks tried to stab American blacks, Hispanics, women, and gays in the back, and succeeded. A perfect alibi.

    The only left-liberals who will feel WikiLeaks is discredited are precisely “the extremely narcissistic kind” who followed the Clinton campaign’s efforts to oppose anti-racism and feminism to substantive economic reforms. As Point 7 itself acknowledges, these people embody the memory hole — their whole politics consists of forgetting what happened last month let alone last year so they can mouth rhetorical hyperbole about how unprecedented everything is — see Ezra Klein and Vox for many examples. And, Point 6 was “the email biz had not much to do with anything . . . because no one really cares.” So, the point of Point 7 would seem to be moot.

    The foundation of the “scandal” was just the fact that Clinton chose to run a home brew email server in order to avoid scrutiny, not the content of the emails. It may well have been a coverup without a real scandal, as I cannot recall any “smoking gun” emails released by Republicans or WikiLeaks. But, the coverup was enough to create a political tarbaby. And, the “coverup” was authored by Clinton alone.

    No will even remember WikiLeaks’ role in any of it, six months from now. Probably Julian Assange will be released from investigation by the Swedish authorities and WikiLeaks will collapse and all will be forgotten.

    Ultimately, the problem with Clinton was that she lacked credibility and she lacked credibility because she fundamentally lacked commitment to any of her “public positions”. A perfect candidate for a left that mostly didn’t really care about anything but the progress of the liberal culture — let economic fairness or reality-based sanity be damned.

    A better left would have cared about the poor judgment entailed by setting up a private email server. A better left might well have cared about the content of the email, just as a better left would have cared about the quarter million dollar speeches to Goldman Sachs. A better left might have been skeptical about the bellicosity of a woman who knew that Qatar was financing terrorists opposed to American interests in Syria, but was more impressed that Qatar was donating a million dollars in honor of her husband’s birthday. (But, that was just the appearance of a conflict of interest — no quid pro quo, just the complete absence of ethics or patriotism. So why would anyone care?)

    Clinton’s Presidency was always likely to be a disaster followed by catastrophe. Now, Trump will have the honor of being a catastrophe followed by disaster. If the Democrats are given the opportunity of a wave election in 2018 — could happen! — I recommend that they don’t take a candidate bought and paid for by Goldman Sachs and JPMorganChase. Just a thought.

    A better left will have better leadership. Be a better left. That’s job one.

  22. wintercitrus

    mandos the idiot with another idiot post.

    all wikileaks has to do is release leaks that discredit the right, and the liberals will love him again.

    people are tribal and emotional, and they have short memories.

    you were already discredited in your last moronic post. wikileaks helped to block clinton. deal with it. you clearly have an emotional bias against assange. too bad assange has done more for the world then your whiny ass ever will. that’s gotta suck that you’re a nobody.

  23. Lisa

    “The raping and violence is disproportionately done by minorities. What like this?

    ‘In a US study 93% of paedophiles were religious, many sexual predators consider churches as “safe havens, religious people can be “easier to fool” than most people, say researchers, and, even when an accusation of child sexual abuse is made, will often stand with the offender, vouching for his good character and even showing up in courtrooms for support.’

    By GRACE, Godly Response to Abuse in the Christian Environment.

    Compared to other prosecuted criminals, child molesters are more likely to be:
    -European American
    -Older than 30 years of age

    Sex offenders are often religious and many of them attend church. In a study of 3,952 male sex offenders, 93% of these perpetrators described themselves as “religious” (Abel & Harlow,2001).
    Sex offenders maintaining significant involvement with religious institutions have “more sexual offense convictions, more victims, and younger victims” (Eshuys & Smallbone, 2006; Firestone & Moulden, 2009)

    The problem is the intersection between class and race. Poor people have greater crime rates (excluding white collar crime of course) ..against each other. US blacks seem to have have higher crime rates amongst themselves. That is a classic symptom of what is called ‘minority stress’. I saw that as a kid in Glasgow for example.

    If you are white then the person that rapes, murders, attacks you is almost certainly going to be white. See this on murder rates:
    “The 2013 FBI Uniform Crime Report, a compilation of annual crime statistics, also shows similar data: 83 percent of white victims were killed by white offenders; 90 percent of black victims were killed by black offenders; 14 percent of white victims were killed by black offenders; and 7.6 percent of black victims were killed by white offenders.”

    However see this:
    This is based on victim surveys and shows not a lot of difference in violent victimisation between black and white victims in 2015 , 17.4 per 1,000 for whites vs 22.6 for blacks (the rates were even closer in 2014 20.3 and 22.5).

    The differences for males and females was striking though in 2015 15.9 for all males but 22.1 for all females, reversing the male/female ratio in 2014 (21.1 and 19.1).

  24. Bruce: I fear you’ve misread me. Point 7 is intended to explain the lens through which this generation of mainstream Democrats are going to interpret this loss and the way in which they’re going to relate to the whistleblower movement from now on. It is not intended to be a claim that that viewpoint is necessarily right — I believe that the emails didn’t matter much. But many mainstream US left-liberals believe (incorrectly, IMO) that the emails brought Trump to power due to a media obsession with them.

    LGM is a very influential liberal blog, in that I have met multiple readers of it in real life in unexpected contexts. Which is as good as it gets these days for blogs. And this is Paul Campos’ take on things:

    I supported Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primaries. I criticized Hillary Clinton sharply on numerous occasions for her far-too-cozy relationship with banksters and war criminals. I deplored the combination of greed and extreme tone deafness that led an already very rich person to take many millions in speaking fees from financial interests during the short time between her tenure at State and the formal beginning of her presidential run.

    So yes I agree, wholeheartedly and without reservation, that Hillary Clinton was a flawed candidate. But there’s an extra word in that sentence. It’s the extra word that would still be in that sentence if you replaced the name “Hillary Clinton” with any other name in the recorded history of the world.

    I’m too tired right now to give this topic the attention it deserves, but you really don’t get to avoid soiling yourself with the dirty business that is and always will be the business of politics by calling yourself a journalist.

    If you helped bring about the election of Donald Trump by doing the best you could to publicize every sordid little detail of the Wikileaks data dumps that tumbled into your lap, then that’s what you did.

    That’s what you did when everything was on the line. That’s how you decided, freely and consciously, to use your time and your very considerable talents. That’s what you chose to do at a moment of supreme moral and political crisis.

    And that in its own small or perhaps not so small way is a tragedy.

    This was an attack on Greenwald, this time, showing that this narrative is already spreading beyond Assange into the whole whistleblower idea. This is the narrative is already shaping up. Assange is going to be “forgotten” in the sense that Ralph Nader is “forgotten”, as in the stabber in the back. Perhaps in a lesser way, but still there. He (and Greenwald and others) are going to be the symbol of the cost of not falling properly behind the Democratic candidate.

    Sure there are lots of issues with the emails. The question is whether the emails were worth helping Trump come to power for. I personally think it’s an irrelevant and misguided question. But that doesn’t matter — the liberal narrative thinks it matters. Maybe it will go away in six months. Judging by the fact that third-party voters are still taxed with the Nader biz, I’m inclined to doubt it.

  25. bruce wilder

    Sorry, mandos, for the misreading. I don’t seem to be able to cock my ear in the right way, to read your posts and comments in the way you intend. But, I appreciate the correction, as I can see better now the point you were making, and it is one well worth attending to.

    Latest Glacial Minimum has been dreadful for quite a while, and Glenn Greenwald has exposed their shit before, so I somehow think this may be partly personal payback.

  26. S Brennan


    Did you really just cite a CNN poll for a reference? Sheesh…Hello; I have a call from reality…will you accept the charge?

    “A new ABC News national poll released Sunday had Clinton 12 points up on Trump…CNN’s Poll of Polls gives the Democratic nominee a nine-point edge. Donald Trump and his team are facing widening deficits in the polls…the Republican nominee seems to be on a glide path to defeat.” – CNN 24 OCT 2016

  27. Lisa

    S Brennan : Exit poll, very large sample and quite different. More information will come out later no doubt.

  28. markfromireland

    @ Lisa November 10, 2016

    One exit poll from an organisation that got this election consistently and badly wrong?

  29. Ché Pasa

    Hillary started and ended her campaign with the motto “No, you can’t.” More than anything, that’s why she’s not going to be president. That attitude permeated everything throughout her campaign, and her little closing monologue, encouraging girls and women that they can… one day, maybe … do anything (except what they can’t) wasn’t enough to overcome the essential negativity of her campaign.

    Most of the rest of the hooey over her various “scandals” was chaff in the wind.

  30. realitychecker

    @ Mandoofus

    “It will never be forgiven for letting a rapist into the White House because of email.”

    Well, if you have enough basis to label the President-elect a “rapist,” then I have enough evidence to say:

    Mandoofus is a rapist.

    Mandoofus is a child molester.

    Mandoofus is an anarchist.

    Mandoofus is the anti-Christ.

    Mandoofus tortures puppies.

    Mandoofus has sex with barnyard animals.

    Mandoofus likes golden showers.

    Mandoofus had a lobotomy midway through this election cycle.

    You lost. You Lost. You lost. You lost.

    Sucks to be you, don’t it? You got micro-invalidated. LMAO


  31. realitychecker

    @ Lisa

    Hey Lisa, put a sock in it already, will ya?

    Maybe you and Mandoofus should just get together and melt on each other like good little snowflakes.

    Trump is what you get when you chronically overplay your hand. That is the lesson of this election for all the professional victim card players–it worked so well for you, even the poor white working folks decided to get some.

    Time to look inward, victims. Try to get over some of your whitemanphobia, or even your manphobia.

    Maybe get a gun if your fears are so all-consuming.

    Just sayin’.

  32. And there you have it. The last, dyspeptic sore-winner word. It really is very Brexitty.


  33. Horseshit: “The whistleblower movement, if it can be called that, de facto figureheaded by Julian Assange, is now completely and possibly perpetually discredited with left liberals everywhere, aside from the extremely narcissistic kind. It will never be forgiven for letting a rapist into the White House because of email.

    Bush/Obama & Clinton have always been despised for their knee-jerk auto-retaliation mindset against whistleblowers – be they gov’t whistleblowers (Thomas Drake, Ed Snowden) or financial ones (Brad Birkenfeld).

    Like the anti-Goldman Sachs wing &
    the anti-military/industrial/congressional complex wing, and
    the anti-regressive taxation wing and
    the anti-bigotry wings of The Left and the Democratic party, people who support and identify with whistleblowers are all once again (and reluctantly) sitting at the “”

    Most of us within the Dem. party or party structure, identify with the “Thomas Drakes” of the whistleblower world, not wikileaks. In the same way we identify with Ed Snowden rather than, say, The Guardian, which published Snowdens disclosure of classified public documents. Wikileaks is a helpful transparency corporation and/or destination of last resort. However, this is also a similar role played by The Guardian or The Intercept, these latter two entities having a much broader scope of news delivery. Whether it is wikileaks or The Guardian, they are transparency conduits rather than the actual “whistleblowers.” Messengers, not message.

    In a few weeks, any Democrat who blames a wee dollop of transparency for Clinton’s failed “No We Can’t” campaign, will be a Democrat who publicly embarrasses him/herself. Messenger blaming will ultimately be seen for what it is.

  34. Mandos:

    The “whislteblower-movement.. . ”

    You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.


  35. Billikin

    Pardon my iggerance, but what is the “extra word” that Campos is talking about?

    “So yes I agree, wholeheartedly and without reservation, that Hillary Clinton was a flawed candidate. But there’s an extra word in that sentence. It’s the extra word that would still be in that sentence if you replaced the name “Hillary Clinton” with any other name in the recorded history of the world.”


  36. ks


    Surely you weren’t expecting anything else but smug vanity from that sore supposed “winner”. Trump ran one of the most identity politics campaigns in recent history but, as always, the finger will point elseswhere.

    Anyway, I remain mystified by the whole working class definition in that it seems like the Arab working class in say Dearborn doesn’t matter, the Asian working class in every “Chinatown” doesn’t matter, the Black and Latino working class anywhere doesn’t matter, Gay people anywhere are non-working class by default I suppose and by some remarkable alchemy, a White guy/girl who is drowning in student debt, working in a Starbucks and living with two roommates in say Portland gets magically transformed into a “coastal elite” because he/she doesn’t live in rural white America aka the Heartland aka real America.

    Apparently, the only “real” working class that we must forever try to “understand” are straight White people who live in rural America. Of course that’s not a two way street but that’s another matter….

  37. Peter*

    I know it’s not PC to enjoy watching the Clintonite windbags deflate and sputter into permanent loser status but it is sweet.

    Watching what is going to happen to Hill and Bill may be even more entertaining as all of their grifter wealth schemes dissolve. What Bankster would pay them to suck up to them when they have no suck left and what foreign dictator will deposit funds into their foundation for connections that no longer exist?

    If we are lucky we’ll get to see a special prosecutor lock her up and strip them of their ill gotten gains.

  38. Manny Katz

    I would suggest that readers give a good bit of attention to the article of Glenn Greenwald on “The Intercept.” Here is a recent link to his analysis:

    One paragraph is worth citing in this context: it’s about finding scapegoats for the Dem losses:
    “You know the drearily predictable list of their scapegoats: Russia, WikiLeaks, James Comey, Jill Stein, Bernie Bros, The Media, news outlets (including, perhaps especially, The Intercept) that sinned by reporting negatively on Hillary Clinton. Anyone who thinks that what happened last night in places like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Iowa, and Michigan can be blamed on any of that is drowning in self-protective ignorance so deep that it’s impossible to express in words.”

    This blog, IMO, has not realized the depth of the fraudulent Trump campaign and has tried to set up some false equivalencies. The potential downside consequences of the alt-right takeover of the government cannot be yet full comprehended–but just look at only the possible cabinet choices, not to mention the changes in all the agencies that protect us and give us our social safety net, nor the Supreme Court nominees that might be accepted– and one can see some of the potential dangers ahead–and even threats to health and safety.

    This blog has not delved into all these risks, but has tried to proclaim and assign positive qualities and messaging to one of the most disgraceful candidates ever to come on the political scene. The outcome will have profound, negative effects worldwide. Trump is not going to get “enlightened” while in office but will just use his cleverness and duplicity to find new ways to personally profit.

    This blog is certainly not responsible for this election outcome; the faults lie elsewhere as Greenwald points out; but it did add another nail (however small) to the American democratic coffin.

  39. Lisa

    markfromireland : Exit polls traditionally have far greater accuracy. There are several reasons for this:

    (1) They have larger samples and hence are more accurate.
    (2) People are more honest
    (3) Those who are constantly changing their mind are now fixed on one choice.
    (4) They are based on face to face meeting with the poller (always more accurate) rather than phone/etc

    They are not perfect, sources of error include:
    (1) Simple sampling error
    (2) Poor choice of polling booths which are not representative
    (3) People still lie (called the ‘shy tory’ syndrome).
    (4) Early voting, which means dependency on the less accurate phone polls.

    That being said, very large differences such as the white non college educated women’s vote are probably pretty right. Small differences could easily be within the error margin.

    See this for more details:
    And the wikipedia entry is pretty good.

    “The most visible part of the poll happens in person on Election Day. An army of thousands of interviewers are sent to hundreds of polling places around the country. Interviewers approach a certain number of voters who are leaving the polling place — the exact fraction surveyed is secret — and ask them to fill out the written exit poll survey. Pollsters estimate they’ll interview about 85,000 people on Election Day.

    But part of the exit poll has already happened before Election Day. As early voting has become more popular, it’s gotten harder to predict vote totals just by talking to people who vote on Election Day. So for the past several elections, exit pollsters have started calling people and asking if they voted early or absentee — then conducting exit poll interviews by phone. (In 2016, pollsters estimated they’d contact about 16,000 voters this way.)”

    “But the exit poll isn’t just about whom people voted for — that’s why there are interviewers even in safe states. Voters are asked to provide basic demographic information like gender, age, and ethnicity. Furthermore, they’re asked some questions about their personal viewpoints and behaviors — like their religion and churchgoing habits — and questions about major issues facing the country.

    That means the exit poll data is actually more detailed, in some ways, than the official US Census vote tallies that come out several weeks after the election. It can offer the first hints — and often the most important ones — to what voters thought this election was about. That’s very important to pundits as they try to interpret what it means.”

  40. ks

    I see the usual suspects are still! blathering with the “lock her up” stuff. Some people have truly revealed themselves this election. It’s fascinating watching the alt-left and alt-right join hands.

  41. Lisa

    I shouldn’t be surprised but I am, two serious and pretty good geo-political sites taking swipes at transgender people for no reason whatsoever, which they have never done before. Why, what that got to do with anything geo-political or election analysis?

    Sic Semper Tyrannis: “The “NeverTrump” faction was mostly neocons who were upset about his Jacksonian style engagement, and wanted a hot war with Russia over Syria, Pussy Riot, and transsexual bathrooms. ”

    Moons of Alabama: “No one but a few east-coast party goers and the NYT cares about some 16 year old girl, who thinks she is “transsexual” and wants to use a men’s public toilet. The average people think that such craziness deserves zero attention if not a hefty kick in the ass.”

    It always amazes me how people who claim they are not prejudiced …often really are.

    It doesn’t amaze me one little bit that the perceived weakest member of a reviled group is picked on. The classic are all those Muslim haters ..who bravely pick on Muslim women (of course). Those who hate Asians ..bully (small) Asian women.

    In the LGBTI world trans people, (especially trans women) are the most targeted, gay men are more accepted .. and more politically powerful and homophobes are reluctant to take them on. Lesbians are not usually thought about except as sexual fantasies by men, no one understands or even thinks about the invisible intersex people (despite there being more than trans people). But trans people ticks all the boxes ..and are often used as a proxies for homophobia as well. It is an ‘acceptable’ way to indirectly vent/attack gay men and lesbians.

    That was always the (well founded) fear that the horrible election campaign would open the floodgates to people expressing and acting on their prejudices. People being ‘given permission’ to scream out their bigotry which was kept under control by social stigma. We’ve seen this before the in UK Bexit and the Irish marriage equality campaigns. Currently seen here in Australia on our marriage equality campaign.

    Whatever the pros or cons of Trumps policies he can never be forgiven for running such a toxic, racist and sexist campaign. But given that his picks for people are all virulently anti-LGBTI and anti-women (are they going to get a nasty surprise) there doesn’t seem much prospect that it is going to get better soon.

    Still disappointing about MoA and SST though.

  42. OneForAll

    Here we go, blaming the messenger again. Clinton is the one to blame for the email problems, because she is the one who did something (a lot actually) wrong. The Democratic party are the ones who are to blame for the outcome of this election, because they deliberately chose a flawed and unpopular candidate who was currently under investigation, over a candidate who was scandal-free and popular with even people who disagreed with him – even to the point of cheating him out of millions of votes (google Greg Palast’s investigations).

    Assange/Wikileaks could be blamed for interfering with the election *only* if they had *withheld* information that the American public HAS A RIGHT TO KNOW. American voters SHOULD know as much as possible about the candidates they are voting for.

    I don’t like the outcome at all, and I know where the blame truly lies.

  43. Sandman

    @ Billikin November 11, 2016

    The extra word is “flawed.”

  44. different clue


    The guest-poster who made those statements on SST is named Tyler. He is a self-styled Alt-Rightist who I suspect is one of rather few among the SST readership. Several days before the elction, when Colonel Lang predicted a Clinton victory, Tyler in a comment predicted a Trump victory and offered reasons as to why. Colonel Lang was impressed enough by Tyler’s accuracy in this regard that he has granted Tyler a guest-post spot for us to see Tyler’s analysis on what Trump will do or attempt, and why.

    Back to the main body of this Mandos post. I think Assange does it for LULZ and advancing his anti-governance-effectiveness agenda. But if “left-liberals” think Assange stabbed them in the back on behalf of some foreign power, then the “left-liberals” reveal themselves to be the same sort of human sewage, filth and garbage as so many other filthy scum clintonites have revealed themselves to be.

  45. ks


    Unfortunately, you shouldn’t be surprised but don’t you dare be upset about it because identity politics…something…something… Can you imagine the response if those gross insults had been directed at you-know-who other parties?

    Anyway, the reality is that like most of the bloggers in this realm they are comfortable old straight white guys so whatever Trump does they won’t be affected much, if at all. More importantly, there is a deep conceit that they are 21st century Cassandras who are in possession of unique, and correct, takes on THE important issues of the day so your piddling concerns don’t matter or only matter to east coast party goers. That conceit is why they were droning on about Hillary and WWIII with Russia while having nothing to say about the more likely event of Bibi now being off his leash and starting something with Iran in an already hot and volatile area.

    To your last point, as Trump’s con continues apace and he staffs his transition team and administration with the worst, Heritage hacks, K street lobbyists, Newt/Rudy/Carson/Sarah, etc,. alt right anti-Semites and bigots it won’t get better but that won’t matter much to the bloggers you mentioned. They’ve already bought in.

  46. bruce wilder

    Sandman @ Billikin November 11, 2016
    The extra word is “flawed.”

    Campos wanted flawed, we certainly got it. Wonder what he’s complaining about?

    [to be read as sarcasm]

  47. Lisa

    different clue: Trans people only matter to two groups; the religious right (who want to exterminate us along with LGB people) who were going to vote for Trump anyway and the so called ‘alt right’ who are a meaningless, just a bunch of Twitter pushers who only stirred up people who also were always going to vote for Trump.

    Zero impact on the election, but a real impact on LGBTI people’s lives.

    Amazing how only about 25% of the population get so much attention and pandering about their hatred of LGBTI people ..and yet they get ignored for being very neo-liberal economically and extremely pro-zionist and neo-conservative in foreign affairs. And they get a free pass for that.

  48. Bruce: I think you read me wrong because I’ve taken up the position of Cassandra to the Cassandras, or as Ian likes to put it affectionately, gadfly.

    A lot of these people have an inchoate and indiscriminate rage against the mainstream, particularly mainstream liberalism, to the point that they can no longer see why it is the mainstream. I am very willing to accept and agree that there’s a lot wrong with the mainstream, but there’s a reason why it is mainstream, and no it isn’t entirely because of $$$. For a lot of this crowd, to admit this is to betray humanity. For me, to fail to admit it is to become a political cripple. I have a futile, Sisyphean wish for them to snap out of it, plus Ian seems to enjoy the variance in perspective I have with him, so I sometimes write provocatively, as opposed to the explainer-type writing I’ve done on Euro affairs, etc.

  49. Billikin

    Thanks, Sandman. 🙂

    Let’s compare combs.

    1) “So yes I agree, wholeheartedly and without reservation, that Hillary Clinton was a flawed candidate.”

    2)”So yes I agree, wholeheartedly and without reservation, that Hillary Clinton was a candidate.”

    If “flawed” is an extra word, my high school English teacher is turning over in her grave. Or at least spinning more rapidly.

  50. markfromireland

    @Lisa November 10, 2016

    I’m well aware of all of that and am very doubtful that the CNN exit poll corrected the sampling biases which they themselves have admitted were a cause of the consistent and serious inaccuracy in their electorate polling.

    Re: SST and MOA

    I’ll take MOA first. B was plainly being sarcastic in that somewhat heavy handed way that anyone whose lived in a Germanic country and works daily with Germans in English will immediately recognise.

    As a further example B also the man who wrote this:

    Not only is Trump kicking a black family out of its longtime limewashed home, he also ends U.S. government support for the disenfranchised Jihadis in Syria and elsewhere. This even months before taking office. He really is the menace we have all been warned about.

    That and the paragraph to which you objected were manifestly written by a German with remarkably good English being sarcastic in that language. Your failure to recognise that is precisely that. A failure. Your failure. And not evidence of bigotry on B’s part.

    I wonder how it would be were B to read your attempts at irony or sarcasm. You after all are a weegy who convinced himself that the UK was going to be bombed by the Russians and ran away to Australia. You have become accustomed to dropbears and have acquired their sense of humour which would doubtless confuse the fuck out of any teuton B included.

    SST: Pat and myself have had many disagreements and to say that we dislike each other is to put it mildly but a bigot he is not. Tyler is – Tyler’s a vicious little redneck thug who has periodically been banned from commenting until he tones his many and various argumenta ad hominem down. When he’s not indulging his desire to offend liberal sensibilities, which he does with a masturbatory glee, Tyler is also manifestly rather intelligent and articulate – far more importantly he has consistently been correct in his political predictions and has consistently and clearly explained why and how those predictions will come about.

    May I with sharply reduced respect for you suggest that you grow the fuck up because the opportunity that Pat, swallowing his distaste to do so, has provided to learn what our enemies are thinking, planning, and doing is far more valuable than yet another tedious instance of pearlclutchery from you.

  51. Ian Welsh

    Pat Lang’s place is one of the first places I checked after the election, and it was very useful to do so. Even though I agree with neither his politics nor Tyler’s.

    I disagree with Mandos on a great deal. He posts here not because I agree with him, but because I don’t, and because there is a significant contingent on the left which does agree with him. He’s also particularly good on how Eurocrats think.

    Generally guest posters are here because they will say things I won’t, or they will say things I might, but better AND those things are important. I might agree with them, but I often don’t. (Mandos’s first post on Wikileaks, for example, I hated as much as most commenters did but how identity left liberals saw Wikileaks was important: that they will never support it again, is important.)

  52. realitychecker

    Um, who are the savages who are now refusing to accept the results of our sacred election process?/s

    The current situation is pure heaven to witness for a reality checker. Let the liars and manipulators and hypocrites and terminal victims eat themselves up with frustration and obsolete memes. I have an endless supply of popcorn, as I have had to keep saving it up for a long time. Nothing pleases me more than to see stupid liars on fire.

    The truth shall set you free, after it gives you terminal indigestion.

    For those who simply cannot believe that the poor white working class has “stolen” their victim identity card and put it to good use, console yourselves with the reminder that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

    Then continue to eat your own livers. In a safe space, of course.


  53. Peter*


    All these demonstrations seem to be little more than small groups of savaged humiliated Clintonite cult refugees acting out their butt-hurt. The media is trying to promote them as a force but they’re mostly just pitiful. These are liberal/centrists so don’t expect any revolutionary fervor even if the out of work Clintonite quislings try to keep them stirred up.

    Watching this train wreck continue to pile up is entertaining but the liberal chattering class and their post defeat finger pointing is already boring and repetitive.

  54. ks


    As the empty self congratulatory vanity continues from the usual crowd here it appears, among other things that the Trumpsters and their enablers here voted to depose “east coast banking elites” (cough…Jews…cough…) like Goldman Sachs in order to replace them with real Americans like J.P. Morgan Chase. And Trump himself is already trying to get out of the job by “negotiating” with his advisers on how many days he has to spend in the White House.

    To the overall theme here I’ve been reliably (and repeatedly) informed that the only people who are supposed to have empathy are the liberals on the coast for what the voters in the central part of the country are feeling.

    And maybe the South.

    We’re not supposed to expect any in return, which is good because there clearly isn’t any being offered.

  55. Lisa

    markfromireland : CNN didn’t do it, it is another joint funded by multiple organisations (as per one of my link), who have a lot of experience.

    I use a simple rough rule with these.. ‘do the trends/conclusions change if you switch 5% in the numbers’?

    In this case nope. You can switch 5% in any of them and the major conclusion still stand:
    The election was won on white men, white women, lower black/latino votes for Clinton, a lower Dem vote overall, the ‘religious right’ coming out even more for Trump than Bush.

    Those were the main broad factors. Of those the only surprise (to me) was the educated white women vote.

    The religious right vote is zero surprise to me after studying this bunch for awhile, they will vote for a candidate that attacks those they hate (nearly everyone), no matter how much they personally violate the religious right’s so called ‘standards’.
    Trump could have boasted about raping 5 year old girls and they would still voted for him as long as he is against LGBTI people and abortion (etc).
    This is a well observed and studied phenomena about such people….basically that they are total hypocrites and because they are nearly all Authoritarians they will endlessly excuse their leaders’ behaviour.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén