“He has opened the doors to the demons of Hell”

Why anyone would still pay any attention to an Obama-voting moron like Walter Russell Mead is well beyond me:

President Obama’s faltering foreign policy has taken another serious hit. It is hard to think of another American president whose foreign policy initiatives failed as badly or as widely as Obama’s. The reconciliation with the Sunni world? The reset with Russia? Stabilizing the Middle East by tilting toward Iran? The Libya invasion? The Syria abstention? The ‘pivot to Asia’ was supposed to be the centerpiece of Obama’s global strategy; instead the waning months of the Obama administration have seen an important U.S. ally pivot toward China in the most public and humiliating way possible.
Duterte clearly thinks that humiliating Obama in this way is a solid career move. He certainly believes that China will support him against the critics at home and abroad who will wring their hands over his shift. He presumably has had some assurances from his Chinese hosts that if he commits his cause to them, they will back him to the hilt.

This points to a broader problem: Obama’s tortuous efforts to balance a commitment to human rights and the niceties of American liberal ideology with a strong policy in defense of basic American security interests have made the world less safe for both human rights and for American security. As the revisionist powers (Russia, China, and Iran) gain ground, foreign leaders feel less and less need to pay attention to American sermons about human rights and the rule of law. Death squads and extra-judicial executions on a large scale: the Americans will lecture you but China will still be your friend. Barrel bombing hospitals in Aleppo? The Russians won’t just back you; they will help you to do it. Obama’s foreign policy is making the world safer for people who despise and trample on the very values that Obama hoped his presidency would advance. His lack of strategic insight and his inability to grasp the dynamics of world power politics have opened the door to a new generation of authoritarian figures in alliance with hostile great powers.

Unintentionally, and with the best of intentions, he has opened the doors to the demons of Hell, and the darkest forces in the human spirit have much greater scope and much more power today than they did when he took the oath of office back in 2009.

Unintentionally? With the best of intentions? Is Mead talking about Obama or himself? Remember, as Mead excoriates Obama’s foreign policy, that he not only voted for Obama, but voted to re-elect him. But it’s not as if Obama’s foreign policy was any better from 2008 to 2012 than it has been from 2012 to 2016.

Moreover, the man quite obviously has learned nothing from his past mistakes. Juxtapose these two phrases from the same article.

  • “Secretary Clinton is well aware of just how damaging the Filipino defection is in Asia; she helped develop the Obama administration’s Asia strategy.”
  • “Should Secretary Clinton make it to the White House, her first and biggest job will be to stop and then reverse the deterioration in America’s global position that her predecessor permitted.”

So, Mead not only voted – twice – for the man who permitted the deterioration in America’s global position, but now advocates voting for the woman who helped develop that failed strategy.

Either Mead is incredibly stupid, or, as with Obama, we need to question whether he serves those very demons to whom the doors of Hell have been opened.

If there is not a Trumpslide on November 8th, there is a very good chance that the USA will find itself at war with a Russo-Chinese alliance. And that is a war that a USA saddled with the incompetent and unwell Hillary Clinton as Commander-in-Chief will almost certainly lose.


Pardon Julian Assange!

Mike Cernovich advises Donald Trump how to ensure a Trumpslide on November 8th:

Julian Assange is a political prisoner who should be guaranteed safe passage to and refuge in America. If Trump promises to give Julian Assange a full presidential pardon and refugee status in the United States, Trump wins in a landslide.

The News Cycle Trojan Horse.

The hoaxing media has tried to ignore the corruption exposed on Wikileaks, as it implicates the media and exposes them as PR agents for the DNC. We forced the media to cover Wikileaks through the power of social media, which is why the DNC hacked Twitter today.

Trump’s promising to #PardonJulian will become news. The media will be furious. This is a news cycle.

When we don’t create news cycles, the media creates their own news cycles based on hoaxes. We must always be on the offense. Make the hoaxing media respond to us.

Attack, attack, attack. Audacity, audacity, always audacity!

The Trojan horse aspect is simple. By triggering the media into talking about Trump’s promise to pardon Julian, the media will be forced to talk about Wikileaks even more.

In addition to being a brilliant political maneuver, it would also be the right thing to do. Assange has committed no crimes in the USA.


The national polls: stretch run

Notice something very informative about the wildly divergent national polls?

  • Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Quinnipiac Clinton 47, Trump 40, Johnson 7, Stein 1 Clinton +7
  • Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein IBD/TIPP Clinton 40, Trump 41, Johnson 8, Stein 6 Trump +1
  • Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Bloomberg Clinton 47, Trump 38, Johnson 8, Stein 3 Clinton +9
  • Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Economist/YouGov Clinton 42, Trump 38, Johnson 6, Stein 1 Clinton +4
  • Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Reuters/Ipsos Clinton 42, Trump 38, Johnson 6, Stein 2 Clinton +4
  • Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Rasmussen Reports Clinton 42, Trump 42, Johnson 7, Stein 1 Tie

The number of percentage points being allocated to Johnson and Stein is between 7 and 14. In 2012, the combined Libertarian/Green vote was 1.35 percent. In 2008, it was 0.96 percent.

Now, let’s be generous and pretend that the combined Libertarian/Green vote will be 2 percent, which would be a 48 percent increase from 2012 and 108 percent from 2008. That means that the national polls are, at a minimum, off by between 5 and 12 points.

I can’t say that there is evidence of a Trumpslide at this point. On the other hand, I can’t take seriously the evidence that suggests Hillary Clinton is going to win by Mondalean proportions either. The trick, I think, will be to watch what happens as the polls go into the final week. If they tighten dramatically, that means the pollsters have been playing games and are attempting to cover themselves, which suggests Trump will win. That’s what happened with Brexit.

If, on the other hand, the polls continue to indicate significant leads for Hillary, that means they are not concerned about their accuracy and will tend to suggest a Hillary win, albeit a little closer than they’re predicting.

UPDATE: Trump appears to have revived his momentum again. Remember, he pushes, then coasts, pushes, then coasts. It looks like he’s gearing up for the stretch run.

It’s too early to measure the impact of last night’s final presidential debate, but Republican Donald Trump now has a three-point lead nationally on Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online White House Watch survey finds Trump with 43% support among Likely U.S. Voters to Clinton’s 40%. 


Third debate and more

Speaking of Donald Trump and the 2016 presidential election, in case you’re looking for a print edition and don’t want to wait, Mike has made one available via CreateSpace while we produce our paperback and hardcover versions.

MAGA MINDSET is 70 pages and retails for $9.99.

This will also serve as an open thread to discuss the third presidential debate.


The odds favor Trump

Not the betting odds, but rather, the number of betters, predict a Brexit-style upset:

It is news that will strike fear into the hearts of perhaps half of America and large chunks of the world outside of it. Despite a calamitous week of campaigning, betting markets on the US election are almost a mirror image of those on Britain’s EU referendum at this stage. And they could be pointing to a victory for Donald Trump.

Bookmaker William Hill says 71 per cent of the money so far staked is for Democrat Hillary Clinton. But 65 per cent of the bets by number are for the controversial Republican. That means a lot more punters are putting smaller bets on Trump, almost exactly the same pattern as was seen in the run up to the Brexit vote when the money was for Remain but the majority of bets were for Leave.

William Hill’s spokesman and resident betting expert Graham Sharpe, an industry veteran of 44 years standing, said: “It’s very, very similar to the Brexit vote. There is a metropolitan media bias that says Trump can’t win, but they can’t vote. In betting terms, this is not a done deal. I see parallels with the Brexit vote at this stage.”

On the other hand, they’ve still only increased the odds to 4-1 against. Nate Silver is calling it 85 percent for Hillary.

Still, they all sound awfully desperate and shrill, especially compared to anyone who can remember Reagan landslide.


The Reynolds Reform

Instapundit has to be pleased with this call for lobbying reform on the part of Trump.

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump on Monday will propose a five-year ban on executive branch officials lobbying after they leave government if he is elected, according to excerpts of a speech on fixing ethics problems in Washington. Trump also will say he plans to ask Congress to impose its own five-year ban on former lawmakers and their staff lobbying as well as set a lifetime ban on senior executive branch officials lobbying for foreign governments.

It’s not quite as strong as Reynolds’s call for a 100 percent tax, but it would certainly help drain a little corruption from the swamp.


Hillary Clinton sex scandal

Here it comes. It looks like the media is finally willing to talk about what Gennifer Flowers said openly on Hannity & Colmes back in 1998. Hillary Clinton is not even close to straight:

From Drudge: Hillary Fixer Breaks Ranks: I Arranged Sex Trysts For Her — With Men & WOMEN

I wonder when they’ll drop the Webb Hubbell bombshell. Anyhow, she should have known better than to go after Donald Trump on that particular issue.


It took them long enough

National Review finally comes around on Trump, in the form of a lengthy VDH article:

Something has gone terribly wrong with the Republican party, and it has nothing to do with the flaws of Donald Trump. Something like his tone and message would have to be invented if he did not exist. None of the other 16 primary candidates — the great majority of whom had far greater political expertise, more even temperaments, and more knowledge of issues than did Trump — shared Trump’s sense of outrage — or his ability to convey it — over what was wrong: The lives and concerns of the Republican establishment in the media and government no longer resembled those of half their supporters.

The Beltway establishment grew more concerned about their sinecures in government and the media than about showing urgency in stopping Obamaism. When the Voz de Aztlan and the Wall Street Journal often share the same position on illegal immigration, or when Republicans of the Gang of Eight are as likely as their left-wing associates to disparage those who want federal immigration law enforced, the proverbial conservative masses feel they have lost their representation. How, under a supposedly obstructive, conservative-controlled House and Senate, did we reach $20 trillion in debt, institutionalize sanctuary cities, and put ourselves on track to a Navy of World War I size? Compared with all that, “making Mexico pay” for the wall does not seem all that radical. Under a Trump presidency the owner of Univision would not be stealthily writing, as he did to Team Clinton, to press harder for open borders — and thus the continuance of a permanent and profitable viewership of non-English speakers.

Trump’s outrageousness was not really new; it was more a 360-degree mirror of an already outrageous politics as usual. One does not need lectures about conservatism from Edmund Burke when, at the neighborhood school, English becomes a second language, or when one is rammed by a hit-and-run driver illegally in the United States who flees the scene of the accident. Do our elites ever enter their offices to find their opinion-journalism jobs outsourced at half the cost to writers in India?

It sounds to me as if the conservative media is beginning to worry that they went too far and are beginning to understand that they have lost a significant portion of their audience. They preened and postured, and now, if Hillary wins, they will be tied to her like an anchor forever.

I can’t speak for anyone else, but as for me, they simply have no credibility as political observers. Their position never made one single iota of sense.


None can tell the difference

John Derbyshire awakes to the reality of the bifactional ruling party:

 I don’t know whether people nowadays still read George Orwell’s novel Animal Farm. It’s a bit of a Cold War piece. The Cold War did happen, though. And, as I’ve remarked elsewhere, it was a very big deal. It has lessons to teach; and Orwell was one of our best teachers.

The story of the novel is that the farm animals, under the leadership of the pigs, stage a revolution against the human owners of the farm. They drive out the owners and take the place over, again under the pigs’ leadership.

In the last chapter, though, an odd thing happens. The pigs start behaving like humans. One day, as the other animals are hard at work weeding the turnip field, the pigs invite a delegation of neighboring farmers—all humans, of course—to inspect the pig-owned farm. Then the pigs and their human guests have a party in the farmhouse.

The other animals hear laughter and singing from the farmhouse. They sneak up to look in through the windows at what’s going on. They see the pigs and the humans in happy concord, making flattering speeches and toasting each other. Last line of the novel:


The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again: but already it was impossible to say which was which.

Watching the GOP’s response to this media-manufactured outrage, I’ve feeling a bit like one of those farm animals. Do we really have two political parties, each representing a broad interest? Or is the current party system just a hoax on the rest of us by an Establishment who all fundamentally believe the same things?

The latter. Next question?

In the meantime, the Establishment has spoken. Voting is unnecessary. Hillary has already won the pre-election. Please to take your now-demoralized populism home and refrain from voting for the Literally Hitler Donald Trump on November 8th.


Yeah, she’s DOMINATING

At this point, Hillary Clinton could be dead for all we know, given how they’re trying to come up with excuses for her to avoid the third debate. Which is strange, given how the media has almost unanimously pronounced her the winner of the first two.

Democratic strategist David Axelrod on Saturday suggested that Hillary Clinton skip her third and final presidential debate with Donald Trump. The former White House adviser to President Obama responded to Trump’s call for a drug test before his next debate with Clinton later this month.”You have to wonder if @HillaryClinton will/should reconsider next debate, given the depths to which this has sunk,” Axelrod tweeted.

Look, David, if you’re going to drug your candidate to the point that she’s singing to herself about the pretty unicorns on her shoulder, it’s hardly outrageous that her opponent should observe the obvious fact that she’s on serious drugs.