Tag: politics

Trump is still the only option

It’s not Trump vs Cruz at this point, it’s Trump vs Ryan. Matt Forney explains that Cruz is just Ryan’s stand-in at the moment:

While Ted Cruz and his fanboys might fantasize about him winning the nomination in a brokered convention, it’s not likely to happen. Beyond Cruz being ineligible to serve due to being a natural-born Canadian, he’s widely despised by his fellow Republicans for his habitual dishonesty and abrasive attitude. The only reason he’s currently racking up endorsements from party insiders like Jeb Bush and Lindsey Graham is because they want to use him as a club to beat Trump with.

GOP establishment hacks have begun floating the idea of nominating House Speaker (and 2012 vice presidential nominee) Paul Ryan as a compromise candidate at the convention. Not only would this represent an unprecedented insult to the party’s base, nominating Ryan would guarantee a Democratic victory in November. The Mitt Romney/Paul Ryan brand of Republicanism is so repulsive to voters that not only did it lose them the 2012 election (an election they should have won due to Obama’s unpopularity), Ryan’s own hometown refused to support him.

In any event, Donald Trump and his supporters will need to turn the heat up after his loss in Wisconsin in order to thwart the GOP establishment. Voting for Ted Cruz will ensure that the nomination goes to Ryan, Romney or another Wall Street-owned company man who will both disregard the interests of the American people and lose to the Democrats. If you’re serious about pulling up the floorboards of the GOP to expose the rot within, Trump is your only option.

It’s rather remarkable that so many Republicans would rather lose to Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders than simply get on board with Donald Trump. C’est la vie, as it has been said by others before, at this point, all politics in the USA is little more than laying the groundwork for Round Two.

I wanted to like Paul Ryan, but he’s been an unmitigated and shady cuckservative for nearly as long as he’s been on the national scene.

Wisconsin results

This is your post to discuss the primaries in Wisconsin today. Poll average has Cruz ahead by 5 and Sanders by 3.

Preliminary exit polls show 7/10 GOP primary voters support the Muslim ban in Wisconsin. I doubt this matters much, however, as I expect many Cruz voters would support it too.

The best place for incoming results is Decision Desk HQ.

Liberals, not conservatives, hate science

As Maddox has amply demonstrated, they don’t “fucking love science”, they like pictures that remind them of science. Actual science, they hate, because it’s not careful of their precious feelings and tends to gradually destroy their sacred narratives:

I first read Galileo’s Middle Finger: Heretics, Activists, and the Search for Justice in Science when I was home for Thanksgiving, and I often left it lying around the house when I was doing other stuff. At one point, my dad picked it up off a table and started reading the back-jacket copy. “That’s an amazing book so far,” I said. “It’s about the politicization of science.” “Oh,” my dad responded. “You mean like Republicans and climate change?”

That exchange perfectly sums up why anyone who is interested in how tricky a construct “truth” has become in 2015 should read Alice Dreger’s book. No, it isn’t about climate change, but my dad could be excused for thinking any book about the politicization of science must be about conservatives. Many liberals, after all, have convinced themselves that it’s conservatives who attack science in the name of politics, while they would never do such a thing. Galileo’s Middle Finger corrects this misperception in a rather jarring fashion, and that’s why it’s one of the most important social-science books of 2015.

At its core, Galileo’s Middle Finger is about what happens when science and dogma collide — specifically, what happens when science makes a claim that doesn’t fit into an activist community’s accepted worldview. And many of Dreger’s most interesting, explosive examples of this phenomenon involve liberals, not conservatives, fighting tooth and nail against open scientific inquiry.

It’s probably not a book anyone who reads this blog regularly needs to read, but it may be one that most of us would like to give to someone we know. As Nassim Taleb explains, what passes for science simply isn’t really science and it certainly isn’t reliable.

What we are seeing worldwide, from India to the UK to the US, is the rebellion against the inner circle of no-skin-in-the-game policymaking “clerks” and journalists-insiders, that class of paternalistic semi-intellectual experts with some Ivy league, Oxford-Cambridge, or similar label-driven education who are telling the rest of us 1) what to do, 2) what to eat, 3) how to speak, 4) how to think… and 5) who to vote for.

With psychology papers replicating less than 40%, dietary advice reversing after 30y of fatphobia, macroeconomic analysis working worse than astrology, microeconomic papers wrong 40% of the time, the appointment of Bernanke who was less than clueless of the risks, and pharmaceutical trials replicating only 1/5th of the time, people are perfectly entitled to rely on their own ancestral instinct and listen to their grandmothers with a better track record than these policymaking goons.

Indeed one can see that these academico-bureaucrats wanting to run our lives aren’t even rigorous, whether in medical statistics or policymaking. I have shown that most of what Cass-Sunstein-Richard Thaler types call “rational” or “irrational” comes from misunderstanding of probability theory.

Cruz snaking Trump delegates

Keep this in mind when you hear Republicans pontificate about democracy and the will of the people:

Sen. Ted Cruz is out-hustling Donald Trump and looks set to ensure many Arizona delegates will defect to him in a convention floor fight. The Texas senator, who ever since Iowa has played a stealthy ground game in contrast to Trump’s chaotic populism, is taking steps to snatch the Republican presidential nomination from The Donald at the convention in July.

The New York businessman easily won last month’s Arizona primary taking 47 percent to Cruz’s 25 percent, scooping up all 58 of the state’s delegates. That’s nearly 5 percent of the 1,237 Trump needs for the nomination, and they’re tied are to him on the first ballot.

But Cruz, exploiting deep opposition to Trump among grassroots Republicans, has been far more active in Arizona than Trump, insiders say. He’s recruiting candidates for the available 55 delegate slots, that along with the other three delegate positions filled by party leaders, would be allowed to vote for him in a multi-ballot contested convention.

“Cruz, out of all the campaigns, has the most folks on the
ground and has been the most organized,” Michael Noble, a Republican
consultant in Arizona who is neutral, told the Washington Examiner on Friday. “Trump has no real organization in Arizona,” added GOP
strategist Sean Noble (no relation) in an email exchange. “Cruz will get
most/all Arizona delegates on second ballot.”

This is all according to the rules. The problem is that it is indicative of structural and institutional corruption, not that this comes as any surprise. Legality is not morality. Of course, if the Republican establishment doesn’t like the Trump wind, they really won’t enjoy reaping the nationalist whirlwind that is beginning to swirl even now.

What is alarming about this to me is the way it reveals the elite political establishment to be extraordinarily short-sighted. No wonder the Republicans have conserved nothing. Unlike the die-hard Left, they have no long-term strategy, only short-term tactics.

Feminist faux-cons drink the Kool-aid

You will probably note that NONE of these women have ever been featured on this blog, with the exception of Dana Loesch, aka Mamalogues, who once played the part of a punching bag when she took umbrage concerning my lack of respect for mommyblogging. That’s because none of them are anything but feminists of one wave or another who are attempting to make media careers out of the female imperative.

Female Media Members ask Trump Campaign to Fire Core Lewandowski

The press is to have an adversarial, yet civil approach to those in, or running, for elected office. Never in this line of work is it acceptable to respond to reasonable and legitimate questioning with use of physical force. The photographs, audio, videos, and witness accounts documenting the treatment of Michelle Fields by Corey Lewandowski, Donald Trump’s campaign manager, are inexcusable and unprofessional. Donald Trump should immediately remove Lewandowski from his campaign. However unlike the Trump campaign, we believe in making a statement on the record to clearly highlight the difference between right and wrong,” it concludes.

Signed.

Dana Loesch (Radio America, Blaze TV)
Katie Pavlich, (Townhall, Fox News)
Meghan McCain, (America Now Radio, Cosmopolitan, Fox News)
S.E. Cupp, ( New York Daily News, Glamour, CNN)
Mary Katharine Ham, (CNN, The Federalist)
Christine Rosen, (New Atlantis, Commentary)
Christina Hoff Sommers, (American Enterprise Institute)
Bethany Mandel, (The Federalist, Acculturated)
Emily Zanotti, (American Spectator)
Elisha Krauss, (Ben Shapiro’s radio co-host)
Karol Markowicz, (New York Post)
Kristen Soltis Anderson, (Washington Examiner)
Mona Charen, (Ethics and Public Policy Center, Creators Syndicate)
Sarah Rumpf, (freelance)
Brooke Rogers, (National Review)
Mary Chastain, (Breitbart)

Now notice who is not on it. Ann Coulter. Helen Smith. Ilana Mercer. Camille Paglia. Even Michelle Malkin, who was my original model for a conservative media whore, had more sense than to sign on to this collective conservative career suicide note. If I were a right-wing publisher, I would no sooner rely upon any of them to contribute than the average Jezebelle.

The only real disappointment is Christina Hoff Sommers, but this demonstrates that no woman who calls herself a feminist of ANY kind should be trusted to reliably stand up to the Sisterhood.

The abortion misstep

Trump mishandles a media ambush on abortion:

  • Host Chris Matthews presses Trump on anti-abortion position, repeatedly asking him, “Should abortion be punished? This is not something you can dodge”
    • “Look, people in certain parts of the Republican Party, conservative Republicans, would say, ‘Yes, it should,’” Trump answers
    • “How about you?” Matthews asks
    • “I would say it’s a very serious problem and it’s a problem we have to decide on. Are you going to send them to jail?” Trump says
    • “I’m asking you,” Matthews says
    • “I am pro-life,” Trump says
    • “How do you actually ban abortion?” Matthews asks
    • “Well, you go back to a position like they had where they would perhaps go to illegal places but we have to ban it,” Trump says
  • Matthews then presses Trump on if he believes there should be punishment for abortion if it were illegal
    • “There has to be some form of punishment,” Trump says
    • “For the woman?” Matthews says; “Yeah,” Trump says, nodding
    • Trump says punishment would “have to be determined”
    • “They’ve
      set the law and frankly the judges, you’re going to have a very big
      election coming up for that reason because you have judges where it’s a
      real tipping point and with the loss of Scalia, who was a very strong
      conservative, this presidential election is going to be very important,”
      Trump says
    • “When you say what’s the law, nobody knows what the law is going to be. It depends on who gets elected,” Trump says

Obviously, this was “gotcha” journalism on Matthews’ part (once he established that he was referring to illegal
abortions he knew he could pin Trump between having to either say women
should be punished or that women could break the law with impunity),
and as we saw last year with the whole Kurds/Quds Hugh Hewitt debacle,
Trump is susceptible to badgering. The other problem here is that it
isn’t clear that Trump truly believes some of the things he’s forced to
say as a Republican candidate, which leads to exchanges like that
recounted above. “Don’t overthink it: Trump doesn’t understand the
pro-life position because he’s not pro-life,” a Cruz aid tweeted. Here’s
Politico with a bit of context:

Trump’s policy idea is a departure from most state abortion
restrictions, which don’t impose penalties on the women who get
abortions. Typically, any penalties are imposed on the physician who
does the procedure.

The anti-abortion movement in recent decades has shied
away from the perception that it is “punishing” women for getting
abortions. Instead, it has focused on penalties for the
physicians who provide them, such as imposing medical or legal
restrictions on their practice. In some rare situations, women have
faced charges associated with abortions they have attempted on their
own.

Having realized this had become a PR fiasco, Trump promptly walked back his comments.

This is a statement released just moments ago, in which the
billionaire revises his statement, calling the women “victims”, and
stating it is doctors who should be held legally responsible for
performing the illegal act:

If Congress were to pass legislation making abortion illegal and
the federal courts upheld this legislation, or any state were permitted
to ban abortion under state and federal law, the doctor or any other
person performing this illegal act upon a woman would be legally
responsible, not the woman. The woman is a victim in this case as is the
life in her womb. My position has not changed – like Ronald Reagan, I am pro-life with exceptions.

That’s one of the risks of being outspoken and unafraid. People will lay traps for you, and from time to time, you will step in them. Trump made an initial mistake by hemming and hawing, thereby letting Matthews know that he didn’t have an effective position staked out and encouraging him to press on it. Then, he made the mistake of answering the dilemma posed instead of falling back on the trusty old “I’ve got people for that” evasion.

And finally, he compounded his error by backing down. The correct thing would have been to stand by his correct position in the abstract – women absolutely SHOULD be punished for murdering children  – while providing a practical temporization of it by observing that the primary goal is to save children, and politically, it will be impossible to stop legal abortion in a female-majority democracy if women are punished for having abortions.

In other words, he should have said that while he believes women are responsible for their criminal actions, and ideally should be held responsible for them, in this particular case, the interests of the unborn children should be prioritized and the punishments focused on the abortion providers.

We are the spectre

Allum Bokhari thoughtfully provides establishment conservatives with a Guide to the Alt Right:

A specter is haunting the dinner parties, fundraisers and think-tanks of the Establishment: the specter of the “alternative right.” Young, creative and eager to commit secular heresies, they have become public enemy number one to beltway conservatives — more hated, even, than Democrats or loopy progressives.

The alternative right, more commonly known as the alt-right, is an amorphous movement. Some — mostly Establishment types — insist it’s little more than a vehicle for the worst dregs of human society: anti-Semites, white supremacists, and other members of the Stormfront set. They’re wrong.

Previously an obscure subculture, the alt-right burst onto the national political scene in 2015. Although initially small in number, the alt-right has a youthful energy and jarring, taboo-defying rhetoric that have boosted its membership and made it impossible to ignore.

It has already triggered a string of fearful op-eds and hit pieces from both Left and Right: Lefties dismiss it as racist, while the conservative press, always desperate to avoid charges of bigotry from the Left, has thrown these young readers and voters to the wolves as well.

National Review attacked them as bitter members of the white working-class who worship “father-Führer” Donald Trump. Betsy Woodruff of The Daily Beast attacked Rush Limbaugh for sympathising with the “white supremacist alt-right.” BuzzFeed begrudgingly acknowledged that the movement has a “great feel for how the internet works,” while simultaneously accusing them of targeting “blacks, Jews, women, Latinos and Muslims.”

The amount of column inches generated by the alt-right is a testament to their cultural punch. But so far, no one has really been able to explain the movement’s appeal and reach without desperate caveats and virtue-signalling to readers.

Part of this is down to the alt-right’s addiction to provocation. The alt-right is a movement born out of the youthful, subversive, underground edges of the internet. 4chan and 8chan are hubs of alt-right activity. For years, members of these forums – political and non-political – have delighted in attention-grabbing, juvenile pranks. Long before the alt-right, 4channers turned trolling the national media into an in-house sport.

I leave it to you to decide whether we belong with:

  • The intellectuals
  • The natural conservatives
  • The meme team
  • The 1488ers 

Regardless of their merits and demerits, all of these alt-righters are to be preferred to the cuckservatives and the GOPe sellouts.  I’ve been called “an alt-right figurehead” and I am perfectly fine with that.

And if you’re going to call me a nationalist, that’s fine. Just make sure that you get it right and call me a “red nationalist”.

Michelle Fields quadruples down

Keep this in mind when you’re dealing with a woman. They NEVER stop doubling down, because they simply can’t believe that they’ll have to deal with the consequences. Michelle Fields is actually pressing charges against Donald Trump’s campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski.

“Mr. Lewandowski was issued a Notice to Appear and given a court date. He was not arrested. Mr. Lewandowski is absolutely innocent of this charge,” Hicks said. “He will enter a plea of not guilty and looks forward to his day in court. He is completely confident that he will be exonerated. Mr. Lewandowski is represented by Scott Richardson of The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. in West Palm Beach, and Kendall Coffey of Coffey Burlington in Miami.Inquiries are to be directed to Mr. Richardson’s office.”

Setting aside the fact that she claimed to have been grabbed on the UPPER arm and the bruises she showed were on the lower arm, there are still some significant doubts concerning who touched her in the first place.

As some have suggested, Trump’s response should be to require all members of the media to sit in a pen, for their own protection.

Relativity and the ideological spectrum

I’ve designed a nine-point ideological scale for reasons that will be readily apparent soon, and I’m in need of some clarifying examples. Here is what I have so far, but I feel as if there could be better examples. Ideally, the more famous the individual, the better; accuracy is far less important than familiarity.

One is extreme left, nine is extreme right. The goal is to clarify, not obscure or start arguments, so leave Hitler and anyone else likely to spark debate out of it.

  1. Vladimir Lenin
  2. Karl Marx
  3. Angela Merkel
  4. Bill Clinton
  5. John F. Kennedy
  6. George W. Bush
  7. Ronald Reagan
  8. Thomas Jefferson
  9. Ayn Rand

Another idea would be to provide multiple examples from different fields, from economics, from politics, and from philosophy. I’m entirely open to suggestion here, with one caveat: I am not at all open to suggestions of multiple axes or anything more complicated than a single 9-point scale.

And if you know what this is concerning, please resist the urge to demonstrate as much. When I want to make an announcement, I will make an announcement. In the meantime, keep an eye on your emails tomorrow.

Sanders sweeps Saturday caucuses

Hillary’s meltdown continues:

Bernie Sanders swept all three Democratic caucuses Saturday — scoring
victories in Hawaii, Alaska and delegate-rich Washington state.

While the underdog’s West Coast wins are not nearly enough to trip up
former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s path to the nomination, his
wide margin of victory provides his campaign with a burst of momentum
heading into a 10-day break before the next primary contest. The Vermont
senator’s big victories are also typically followed by a considerable
fundraising bump.

Sanders was victorious in Washington state’s caucuses 72.7 percent
to Clinton’s 27.1 percent and won Alaska’s caucuses by a landslide,
defeating Clinton 81.6 percent to 18.4 percent. At 4 a.m. Sunday, with
87.8 percent of precincts reporting, Sanders was declared the winner in
Hawaii, leading Clinton 70.6 percent to 29.2 percent.

I will be surprised if Hillary Clinton doesn’t withdraw from the race for health reasons before the DNC. She quite clearly is not well and she won’t want to endure the humiliation of losing to such an obvious no-hoper as Sanders.