629 Comments

J’ai voté, BABY

Expand full comment

Top of the morn to ya, Rod, the Lord has blessed us bigly!

Expand full comment

To celebrate, I think I might drive into Winchester and have a Reuben and a beer for lunch. How sweet it is!

Expand full comment

Good choice, sir. I'll have to save serious celebration for the weekend, but right now, just glorying in the victory and indulging in a bit of smugness in the face of any wokies I meet.

Expand full comment

Oh, that sounds really good!

Expand full comment

Yep. The Cork Street Tavern makes a real fine Reuben with fries on the side. Right amount of corned beef, toasted bread, sauerkraut and Russian dressing.

Expand full comment

Replace the sauerkraut with coleslaw for me. Try it, you'll like it.

Expand full comment

That's called a Rachel, sometimes. I also like turkey pastrami instead of corned beef.

Actually, now I'm kinda craving that—probably gonna walk down the street to the deli for lunch. Derek's got the right idea.

Expand full comment

I’m hungry.

Expand full comment

Yeah you’re from New Jersey! It’s best with corned beef. What here is called Sloppy Joe.

Expand full comment

I'm big on the "Balboa" too. My favorite version is hot roast beef with melted Swiss cheese on garlic bread (fresh Italian seeded bread).!!

Expand full comment

I like how you celebrate, Sir.

My fave origin story: Reuben Kulakofsky, a Lithuanian-born Jewish grocer residing in Omaha, Nebraska, asked for a sandwich made of corned beef and sauerkraut at his weekly poker game held in the Blackstone Hotel from around 1920 through 1935.

Expand full comment

A beautiful story, Alcuin. Funny how much joy Mr. Kulakofsky provided to the world with his sandwich. The only thing I ever invented was Sun Drop and whiskey.

Expand full comment

I had to look up what a Sun Drop is.

Expand full comment

Sun Drop can't be found everywhere. It can be found in North Carolina. It is a wonderful mix with whiskey. And I didn't invent it actually. My very good friend Marty Horst invented it over forty years ago.

Expand full comment

We had it in Kentucky when I was growing up. It always looked awful in the bottle so I never tried it.

Expand full comment

Arrrgh! No! Sun Drop is almost as bad as Cheerwine. NC has had better “exports” aplenty.

Expand full comment

It's kind of like Sprite

Expand full comment

I probably never told you I once went to the Prairie Chicken festival near Stevens Point .

Expand full comment

Try Rye, Sprite, Bitters(preferably Cherry and Walnut), half whole orange, maraschino cherry- it’s my version of a Wisconsin Old Fashioned- picked up the idea in at Old Fashion restaurant in Madison Wisconsin. In Wisconsin they tend to go for brandy or even applejack. Rye is best.

Expand full comment

You can drive out nature with a pitch fork, DEI, surgical procedures, and Planned Parenthood, but it always comes roaring back.

Expand full comment

Reality will not be denied.

Expand full comment
11 hrs ago·edited 11 hrs ago

I'm going to say something which I don't think I have said around here, though I've implied it and I know many others here believe it:

The American Left and all of its works and all of its ways is evil. That doesn't mean I think goodness and godliness reside on the Right, although as our host has often noted, at least they don't hate us, many of them share our sensibilities, and many others of them can be persuaded to be our allies. Elon Musk is a prime example of this. ( I watched most of the election coverage on Tucker Carlson's stream. The man can get guests. Two of them were Musk and one of his little boys. If that stream is being rerun, which I imagine it is, it's worth watching that segment, not so much for what Musk says, as for that kid. He's hilarious, a challenge to the infuriating adage that there is no such thing as ADD, and his liveliness and Musk's obvious pleasure in him speak well of Musk. )

But consider what it says about the Left that Musk may have saved the country. If he hadn't bought Twitter, would we be having this moment? And isn't Musk the achiever if not necessarily the example someone whom everyone should admire? My knowledge of rocketry is limited to science fiction, but dang, I admire that man. Yet, simply because he wanted to make and keep Twitter free, he became an object of the Left's hatred and scorn as much as RFK, Jr., Gabbard, or any of the others. They also hate him because he's exceptional; he's gifted in a way no one else really is, and their instinct has been to destroy him for that alone. The Left despises signs of life. When I was a slobbery, enthusiastic puppy dog of a little boy, we had a neighbor with the tenderness of a razor strop. I don't remember her, but my mother said later that she used to look at me with disgust. Once, she narrowed her eyes and said, "If he were mine, I'd put an end to that!" Her own two children were terrorized into expressionless stillness. I can't help the occasional hope that in young adulthood, they took care of Mama, if you know what I mean.

A healthy culture cherishes its Musks and its Kennedys and without question its Vances. We all realize the nightmare we'd have been in for if The Awful had won. They certainly would have done everything they could to destroy X, to destroy Musk. Trump would be facing prison for what Alan Dershowitz says was a disgraceful prosecution. DEI would have become bellicose. The Awful would have gotten to appoint much of the federal bench. The Awful and The Pathetic, for whose knuckleheadedness we should thank God as we thank him for Musk's brilliance, Trump's indomitability, and Kennedy's eccentricities, really would have done everything they could to suppress speech and possibly religion which hasn't "evolved" as they think it should.

I was pleasantly surprised by Trump's acknowledgement of victory speech. It was statesmanlike. This time, he has what he lacked before, a mandate. It's time for him to retire from vaudeville. He can still play the troll occasionally, as Truman did, for the sheer pleasure of it as well as for the delight it gives his partisans, but this really is his chance for greatness. Someone last evening made what I thought was an astute observation, that the American political figure Trump compares best with is Andrew Jackson.

One idea I have is that while we can't have a Cabinet level office such as Male Reclamation, the beatdown which men and boys have suffered in the last forty years is certainly a matter for the government's attention if anything is. If Bobby Kennedy is going to be a Health Czar of some kind, maybe it should be under his purview.

Expand full comment

That was pretty darn good, Bobby. Kudos.

Expand full comment

What American left? If only we had one. You're talking about a pack of liberals.

Expand full comment

"They certainly would have done everything they could to destroy X, to destroy Musk."

Yep. The would have found some alleged irregularities to cancel first all the SpaceX contracts and then the Tesla subsidies. The media lapdogs would never let us hear the end of how Bad Musk is.

Expand full comment

Out of sincere curiosity, what do you see that deems the American Left as evil, in their totality?

Expand full comment

I think we're going to all be surprised by the incoming Trump administration's speed and focus. Unlike 2016, eyes are wide open.

Expand full comment

I really hope so, too! It would be nice if peace reigned in this country for once.

Expand full comment

We won’t have peace, they are too rabid. But if they can be pushed to the fringe it might be good enough.

Expand full comment

Unlike 2016 it's got J.D. Vance.

Expand full comment

Especially now that Trump has his handpicked team (Vance, Vivek, Tulsi, RFK, Elon), unlike last time where he won by surprise and got a bunch of staffers dumped on him by Neocons

Expand full comment

Average Life Span of a Trump advisor appears to be about 2 years.

Expand full comment

Still quite a bit longer than a Kamala staffer!

Expand full comment

People forget that, but then she never got much negative news over it.

Expand full comment

Yo voy a votar en Donald Trump…that Spanish language campaign Salsa song keeps floating through my head. My husband and I celebrate our 19th year wedding anniversary with a Trump win! Not bad, and a bottle of Trump winery sparkling Blanc de Blanc, here in Virginia. Wish Hung Cao had made it 🙏.

Expand full comment

Re Hung Cao: me, too! But I'm ecstatic about Trump and Vance. I hope that they don't fumble the great advantage they have now to fulfill their promises :)

Expand full comment

I think Hung Cao would have won the House race that he lost in 2022 had he run.

Expand full comment

We are celebrating our 46th anniversary today..looking back on many elections over the years. But oh! how joyful is this one!

Expand full comment

Congratulations!!! 🍾🎉

Expand full comment

So few comments so far because y’all stayed up super late!!!

Expand full comment

yes, Mr. Cao is terrific! This household supported him

Expand full comment

Fellow Virginian here. I wish Cao had made it also. I’d have loved to see no more of Kaine. Hope maybe Cao will run for something else soon.

Expand full comment

In what sense did they win "bigly," This is 2016 redux, same exact map.

Let us hope Mr. Vance has a great future ahead of him, but unless Mr. Trump departs office early, it won't be as a vice president, an office one of its holders described as "not worth a pitcher of p***". And Trump is not known for letting anyone share his limelight.

Expand full comment

Hahaha, you’re delusional. Trump straight up ran the table and won the popular vote, how is that like 2016?

Expand full comment

Jon is not equipped for this.

Expand full comment
founding

:) It's for sure a hard day for him. But I'm willing to share my joy!

Expand full comment

Ran what table?

In 1992 I recall Clinton fans calling his victory a "landslide". That was ridiculous and it's just as ridiculous to say that this year. Trump won a narrow victory. He will have a tight najority in the Senate and maybe (or maybe not) in the House.That's the facts.

Expand full comment

Jon, look what he was up against, the gauntlet he has been made to run. Which of us could have withstood Engoran, Merchan and Letitia James. The Mar a Lago raid alone would have given many people a heart attack. The FBI went searching through his wife's clothing! Meanwhile, Biden has boxes of classified documents piled in his garage, a garage Hunter the bribe taker has access to and doesn't so much get a slap on the wrist.

Expand full comment

Your attempt is valiant.

Expand full comment
founding

Good day, Anne! I'm so happy our paranoia about election shenanigans was wrong! Hooray!

Expand full comment

Yesterday about killed me.

I could not sleep at all.

Even today, i feel like ive been run over by a mack truck. The shenanigans being reported in PA voting places (my state) were driving me to despair, because I knew PA was a make-or-break it state.

Expand full comment
founding

I was up pretty late myself and I'm a bit of a zombie today--luckily I have an understanding boss :)

The shenanigans failed! Our democracy may survive. I have more political hope today than I can remember. I bet you do too!

Expand full comment

You don't know that. I think a lot of credit has to go to the RNC and assets on the ground who kept an eye on the Democrats. I'm quite sure the margin of victory is truly bigger in some states (like, um, you know, Michigan and Pennsylvania) thanks to Dem skulduggery.

Yesterday Vickie Palladino, City Councilwoman for the 19th district in Queens, was on the spot in Whitestone making sure the techs arrived to fix jammed readers.

Anybody with the time should get her X feed. She's love young dream with snowy Italian hair:

https://x.com/CMvpaladino

Expand full comment
founding

I agree with you. But it wasn't enough to win. The shenanigans ultimately failed. Fantastic!

Expand full comment

I interviewed her for a book I'm doing in Queens. A funny and admirable lady who stood along against the NYC Council in attacking drag story hour. May her tribe increase throughout the city.

Expand full comment

Vickie Palladino looks like every mom, grandmother or aunt of mine and all my friends who grew up in Northeast Queens!

She says what she means and means what she says. She takes no prisoners!

I do hope her tribe increases also, but I’m afraid that time and way of life is disappearing from NYC.

Expand full comment

Love Vickie P. I was born in Whitestone and grew up in Flushing -- she reminds me of so many strong Italian women I knew. Here in NOVA, I'm surrounded by AWFLs (affluent white female leftists), but whenever I hear her, I'm at home.

Expand full comment

But remember, that no slap on the wrist is in part how we got here today. Many took notice when the prosecutor said Biden was incapable of defending himself. The media tried to deep-six that, but thanks to the internet they couldn't.

Expand full comment

Biden's incompetence to stand trial would have been grounds for invoking the 25th Amendment.

Expand full comment

I am sure Obama and Pelosi made him aware of that when they forced him to stand down as the nominee.

Expand full comment

Gauntlet? Oh the poor put upon billionaire.

Expand full comment
8 hrs ago·edited 8 hrs ago

Being a billionaire is meaningless to the bullet flying toward your head or the bars on the jail cell waiting for you, even though you’re either innocent of the crime charged or have been railroaded via bullshit abuse of process.

Trump endured far more than the average billionaire would have been able to endure, much less the average non-billionaire.

Expand full comment

A couple of assassination attempts is not "being made to run a gauntlet."

He was likely guilty of some of the charges against him, although the one case that went to trouble was a tenuous house of cards.

Expand full comment

Billionaires can suffer stress related illness and death like anyone else, despite their ability to compensate for it.

Get real. All you have to stand on is "They have had their reward". So what?

Expand full comment

I suffer stress is one thing. I was made to run a gauntlet is ludicrous.

Expand full comment

The "Blue wall" states that KH and Co. were counting on all flipped red. Whoopsie!

Expand full comment

Yes, as I said-- it's 2016's map.

Expand full comment

Yeah, you also called it a "narrow victory." Maybe try getting your story straight.

Expand full comment

It was a narrow victory. So were 2016 and 2020, and whoever won wanted to claim a mandate. There was no mandate. About half of America rejected whoever won. Every time. That shows what lousy candidates they all were. There is a majority that could be rallied to a reasonable, decent candidate who had some fresh policies that resonate better with the electorate. Nothing remotely like it has happened yet.

Expand full comment

That's an important distinction. In 2016, Democrats complained that Hillary won "a majority of the popular vote" but she didn't. She won a plurality. Neither candidate could manage a majority, so neither one had anything to crow about. But crow they always do. If Kamala had secured an electoral college majority with 49 percent of the popular vote, she would have crowed like it was a Mandate, and a Personal Triumph. It would have been neither. After two elections like that, getting (gasp) to 51 percent is something of an accomplishment. But as a majority or a mandate, its not particularly impressive. As Ambrose Bierce wrote, the president is one of a small elite group of whom, and of whom only, it can be said that a large number of their fellow countrymen did not want them to be president.

Expand full comment

May be the same map state-by-state, but not county-by-county, which is what really matters.

"Bigly" -- I think a lot of people, myself included, thought it was going to be a good deal closer.

Expand full comment

Yeah, I was prepared for a Kamala win, but then I live on a blue coast. My drive to the Midwest this summer showed me a country that was going the other way - very few Harris signs along the interstate - but I had no way to weigh it (after all, I didn't see many Harris signs in rural Minnesota).

Expand full comment

In rural Pa. and Ohio (I live in Pa. near the western border), the Trump-Vance signs outnumbered the Harris-Walz signs "bigly" -- probably six- or seven- to one.

I even saw one parody sign in rural Pa. that was extremely juvenile but made me laugh out loud for that very reason. It looked exactly like the standard Harris-Walz sign but had the 'S' deleted from Harris and a 'B' where the 'W' should be for Walz. You figure it out. ;-)

Expand full comment

Team Hirsute Jewels.

Expand full comment

And Susan Wild - gone! (At least I hope so.) And Bob Carey - gone! (At least I hope so.)

Expand full comment

Here in the Chicago suburbs one almost never sees Republican yard or banners, but some Trump ones started appearing in mine the last couple months. That never happened in 2016 or 2020 as I recall. Suggested something had shifted.

Expand full comment

I'm from up there; I went to high school in Elgin.

Expand full comment

I've been to Elgin. I liked it.

Expand full comment

I was shocked to see Trump signs on the NW side of Chicago in October.

Expand full comment

I was shocked to see one next door to me in the heart of Austin TX.

Expand full comment

Trump took Nassau County. Many Jews live in Nassau County. Staten Island was a foregone conclusion.

Expand full comment

Oh, Long Island was definitely Trump territory, I think more than Westchester, and NJ (though I'm not sure about that)-- Trump signs from Montauk to even (!) Great Neck, where Iranian Jews are a good deal more conservative than the assimilated Reform and Conservative Jews.

Expand full comment

Looks like even the blue states have shifted around 10 points red. And the diversity of the coalition that has put him into power this time is stunning, not like anything we've seen before: the Latinos, the Blacks, the Muslims, the young. I don't think the Democrats ever grasped just how much a lot of colored folk hate their condescending racism, or how bleak their idea of the future is.

I saw this coming; I made a bar bet a week ago that Trump's gonna break 300 in the EC and possibly even eke out a popular vote win. All the morale was on his side, and Harris was merely appointed—no one wanted her. The White House for this lame duck session is gonna be chilly, to say the least.

Expand full comment

The thing is, there was really no alternative to Harris. The Democrats have only a handful of obviously competent leaders (I'll skip the names, it will only start a huge pile-on). Ideological capture is ruining their minds, and so many see it.

PS: Looks like the pile-on started anyway. ;-)

Expand full comment

They've got no bench.

Expand full comment

Actually, the Democrats have a pretty long bench. All have the same left politics but they are diverse. Wittmer. Newsom. Polis. Moore. Pritzker. Beshear. Shapiro. The scramble for 2028 begins today.

Expand full comment

I wrote "obviously competent" not "long"! hehe

That's not to say that the other wing of the party, the MSM, won't try to manufacture the mirage of competence, as they did this year.

Expand full comment

Shapiro is the only good one from that list. Plus he puts PA in play. Newson works for the Dems until people know more about him and his time as governor.

Expand full comment

I really hope they try to run Newsom. I can't wait to see that greasy turd humiliated at the national level after what he's done to my state

Expand full comment

Cooper, outgoing NC Governor. Shapiro. Klobuchar.

Expand full comment

I thought fairly well of Klobuchar, despite her treatment of Kavanaugh, until I saw her attempt to reign in 'disinformation.' Now, not so much. Still, she is in the first rank.

Expand full comment

Klobuchar is the queen of disinformation suppression. She only wants accurate speech vetted by experts she approves of. In other words, she’s very bad news.

Expand full comment

Whitmer KO'd her career with distribution of a "Dorito chip" as a mockery of Holy Communion stunt. Pritzer hasn't seen a child he doesn't want to sexually maim. His family fortune is funding the relentless campaign to sexually mutilate children. Also, IL economy not going so great. Newsom has destroyed CA and will gladly do to the other 49 what he's done to CA. No thanks. He is Pelosi's nephew. Ugh. I think Shapiro may get it. At least as Veep.

Expand full comment

Whitmer and Newsom were barely stumping for Harris. Both are secretly celebrating today because they see a path to the WH in 2028.

Expand full comment

Pritzker has lots of money. Democrats approve of Pritzker being a pervert. All perversions, no matter how bizarre, are heartily approved by the modern Democratic Party.

Expand full comment

And we should never let go of the Dorito moment. It should be a shadow and spectre that haunts that fool.

Expand full comment

Oh, D. Do you really governor Hocus Pocus has a chance?

Expand full comment

The party put itself in the position of not being able to field a candidate ready to go over the edge into full-scale Leninism except a senile old man with a shrewy wife telling him what to do.

One of the big stories is the ability of lack thereof of the Dems to purge itself of extremism. If they can't, on a national level at least they'll become less and less relevant.

Expand full comment

Agreed (other than the wife part, of which I know nothing). The 4 year circling of wagons around Biden was the immediate cause of this 'disaster'. No one of ability was ready to step up when he stepped down, and the manipulation of the media was fully exposed.

A less immediate cause was the fatal pick of Harris in 2020 in the first place. I wonder in an alternate universe how Vice President Duckworth would have faired?

Expand full comment

Lest we forget, Joe only wished to appear centrist once he won. Take the border, his full-throated backing of the most radical elements of the trans movement, and Bidenomics, and he governed from the far left.

Expand full comment

That's the problem with having the world's largest megaphone. It can create a hell of an echo.

Expand full comment

The fact that Harris won NJ by only 4 points says a lot. Biden carried the Garden State by double digits in 2020. Harris under-performed everywhere. Heck, I'd wager that Biden would have done better than Harris last night. She was an awful candidate.

Expand full comment

And now Biden can sail off into his final dotage with the self-satisfaction that only he could have defeated Trump, and that the clean articulate black guy should have never stabbed him in the back like that.

Expand full comment

How smug do you think Biden feels right now? Wonder if he voted for Trump out of spite

Expand full comment

I bet Biden thinks he would have defeated Trump.

Expand full comment

It's a private ballot. . . .

Expand full comment

If Vance is [still] smart he will avoid sharing the limelight with Trump. Al Gore was not helped by sharing the limelight with the Clintons.

Expand full comment
15 hrs ago·edited 14 hrs ago

I agree with this. Moreover Trump has sunk many a career of those who got close to him. I also doubt Musk will last long if he does get some manner of position. Even Washington DC is not big enough for two such Jovian egos. Musk would be smarter to play Svengali in the shadows as Thiel is doing.

Expand full comment

Elon is going to pare down the Swamp hopefully. We probably could eliminate half of fed employees and run the country better IF DEI is eliminated as the hiring and promotion criteria. Eliminate the federal job security. Hiring and firing at will, just like private industry. No government employee unions.

Expand full comment

I doubt much of that is gonna happen.

Expand full comment

I think that’s probably all in the realm of fantasy … but I’m hoping anyway!

Expand full comment

Looks like you were wrong about Vance sinking Trump.

Expand full comment

I don’t recall saying that, only that he didn’t bring anyone on board and might turn some people away. No MAGA was wavering on Trump until Vance was added. But in the end the VP picks, I think, were mostly irrelevant as they usually turn out to be.

Expand full comment

Trump will have difficulty getting any sitting Senator (besides Marco Rubio, Teen Vampire) to serve in his administration after what he did to Jeff Sessions.

Expand full comment

You're probably right. Whatever I think of Sessions politically he was one of Trump's best appointments.

Expand full comment

We'll know Trump will be a disappointment if he appoints Lindsey Graham Secretary of Defense.

Expand full comment

DC is always a giant mass of egos

And boardrooms are even more run by narcs. Successful adults know how to manage this and work together to get shit done

Trump and Elon have been in this business a long time. I'm guarantee you they will be fine.

Expand full comment

Trump and Musk have not been in business together (by the way why do so many people call him by his first name as if he were their next door neighbor or cousin?) Both are used to being the sole Grand High Poobah. Good grief, as someone else pointed out here Trump couldn't even get along with Jeff Sessions who was quite on board with Trump's policy initiatives. Just the fact Sessions tried to give Trump good advice when he was wrong damned him Trump's eyes.

Expand full comment

According to chatter, Clinton after Florida was given to Bush called Gore into the Oval Office and called him a "stupid son of a bitch" for not using him in 2000.

Expand full comment

More Clintonian narcissism. Gore would have won in 2000 had he been the incumbent and the Clintons back in Arkansas. The Democrat's willful blindness is what robbed Gore of the presidency.

Expand full comment

The Dems have to stop trotting out the zombies. Why bring out Clinton and the Obamas? It's political mortmain.

Expand full comment

What Thomas said. Vance is going to have to be very, very tactful and watch where he steps for the next four years. At least he will (hopefully) not have to deal with Trump's children running around loose in the White House.

Dana

Expand full comment

I think it’s a matter of context. Trump is a convicted felon. He continues to face prosecution. What has come to be called the MSM was not merely against him, it was fanatical in its opposition . I am New York Times subscriber. I get the physical paper on Sunday and sometimes it builds up on me.Yesterday I was going through sections I hadn’t gotten through. Well here’s what I found, an editorial section where every writer with the semi exception of Ross Douthat wrote an anti Trump article, a book review section where a sub section was devoted to how bad Trump is and a magazine section where every other article was an attack on Trump. I watched some TV news yesterday and Oprah was on saying if Trump won there would be no more elections. A pollster was announcing that Harris was way ahead in Iowa. Trump was outspent. Unlike 2016 , Trump does appear to have taken the popular vote and to have carried states that he lost in 2020.His opponent denounced him as a fascist. In context, he won biggly and I admit, I’m surprised.One does have to like what happened, to acknowledge it happened.

Expand full comment
15 hrs ago·edited 14 hrs ago

Well, Trump's 2016 victory was by far the bigger surprse. This year almost everyone acknowledged he had a serious chance of winning.

And yes. I've already seen someone post predictions on Facebook so gruesome and dark they make my nuclear war trilogy seem like a comedy of manners. I received it as a touch of levity, though if there are substantial numbers of people who think that way we are going to have an interesting four years.

Expand full comment

On MSNBC last night they said Europe’s borders are going to be redrawn, the world is panicking, they’re going to “clearcut” Gaza and do “full ethnic cleansing”, Congress will be suspended because “that’s what autocrats do” “like in Hungary” and so on and so forth….

Expand full comment

I doubt much will change in Europe, but my jury remains out on Gaza.

Expand full comment

I was just making fun of their incessant bedwetting. In Gaza Israel is going to do whatever they think they need to do, regardless of whatever the US president says.

Expand full comment

Yeah I agree on that. (And leveling Gaza is exactly what any other country in the region would do, right wrong, that's how the kofte gets made)

Expand full comment

"Trump is a convicted felon."

I think that's part of why he won. Americans could see the lawfare plain as day, and the unfairness bothers us; it runs counter to every idea we'd like to have of what this nation is.

Expand full comment

You’re not wrong but I think there are people out there who responded to the law fare as proof that Trump was unfit and Democrats pounded away at the theme. Net-I don’t know whether it helped or hurt.

Expand full comment

I think Sethu is correct, as people came to understand the facts Trump gained support.

Expand full comment

Right. Voters could see the gross violation of "equalu justice for all". The more lawfare attacked, the more support Trump received. It was an in-kind donation to Trump.

Expand full comment

People also realized that anyone can become a "felon" if you hold opinions the government doesn't like. What happened with Trump is a prototype for the US going down the UK route

Expand full comment

And that felony conviction will be overturned under any fair reading of the law.

I am not sure of the real estate conviction, it was unjustified by the facts but appellate courts don't retry the facts of the case, at best they can only vacate and order a new trial.

Expand full comment

Well the remand would pertain to the application of the law. From what I can remember, the penalty was grossly disproportionate with regard to the offense.

Expand full comment

Yes, the appellate court can remand a case back for resentencing only. That's not good enough. I don't know the facts of the case well enough, but if the judge basically instructed the jury to ignore the banks' testimony on their appraisal processes, or somehow sided with the prosecution on this, then it can be argued that the judge pulled Trump's primary defense out from under him, and a complete re-trial would be justified.

Then it would get very interesting: trying to pull a sitting president into a state court could be seen as interfering with the duties of a Federal officer, which is a crime. I doubt anything could be done to Trump before January 20, 2029.

Expand full comment

My recollection on this is hazy but I think the civil judgment was based on a rather weird New York law . I’ve tried fraud case and my understanding was that fraud involved the following elements-1) Knowing misrepresentation 2) That misrepresentation was relied on 3)Reliance was reasonable- you can’t claim to be wronged if it’s obvious you knew something was untrue 3) You were actually harmed- you lost money most often being the issue.

Now in this particular case almost none of these classical elements of fraud were present. The alleged victim didn’t even claim to have been victimized.So somehow we get a finding against the defendant. When we get to the judgement, we have a huge proportionality question .To the point of raising constitutional questions. Well that’s it for me.

Expand full comment

Yes. My point about bank appraisals is that since banks do their own #2 is an impossibility. #4 (harm) also didn't happen per the bank testimony.

For the life of me either the jury was misled (improper instructions - and yes, the proportionality issue raises the question of the judge's impartiality) or the jury was deficient in some legal way, which would indicate a change of venue.

I know you are over the border from NY, but do you think an appellate court would ignore all this and uphold this politically motivated conviction?

Expand full comment

Always contrarian. Always sour and looking to rain on the parade.

Trump's going to win the popular vote, which a Republican hasn't done since 2004. He's going to win over 300 votes in the Electoral College. He's outperforming his margins of victory in those states in 2016. He's going to be only the second man to come back after defeat and win a second non- consecutive term. For those who care about such things, he's captured more minority votes than any Republican candidate of the last 50 years.

You don't have to like Cheeto Jesus and drink all the MAGA Kool- aid to be able to acknowledge the history the guy has made and how consequential he is to the American story.

I'd close by flippantly telling you to "Never change," but, Christ Almighty, I kind of wish you would.

Expand full comment

Right -you don’t have to like what happened,,to acknowledge it happened. Again I didn’t expect this.I thought Trump would narrowly lose, the Dems would take the House ( which they might) and at best for the Reps they’d narrowly take the Senate or maybe not.

Expand full comment

I had it pegged similarly, although I thought DT would narrowly win (but might lose the popular vote again).

Expand full comment

That’s what I thought. Not being a Trump supporter, I’m not thrilled but the Democrats have lost touch with much of their traditional constituency. Trump looked old & tired at the end & rambled weirdly so them losing to him is on them. I don’t think Shapiro would have made a difference in PA but maybe. What would have possibly made a difference is if Biden had declined to run again last year & they had an open primary. I was expecting Harris to win narrowly because of all the Republicans & former Trump officials all over social media saying January 6 was it for them & they were voting for Harris. I guess that was offset by Trump’s gains with black men, Latinos & non college educated women. I have been wrong about the election the last 3 times so in the future I’m not going to try to guess.

We’ll see how the next 4 years turn out. Trump will no doubt do some stuff I agree with but there are 3 things that concern me. #1, tariffs. Bad for the consumer, costs are paid by the importers, not China or wherever, & passed on to the consumer. #2, putting RFK, Jr. in charge of public health. The guy is a crank. Talked about banning vaccines. I hope he means not having mandates as I don’t want see polio & diphtheria come back & if a rabid fox bites me, I want to be able to get a rabies shot. #3 Trump complained about what he considered politically motivated prosecution, and he wants to go after political opponents the same way. How about if he just pardons himself & actually works on our problems?

I originally thought Trump was a Hillary plant. Then I thought he was an aberration from the “normal” Republican Party. No, the party will continue with Trumpism after Trump is gone. “Never Trump” Republicans will either make their peace with Trumpism without Trump, or join the Democratic Party as moderate Democrats. Or they might try to start a new party but I doubt it.

Yesterday when polls didn’t look good for Trump in PA at first, he started squawking about cheating in Philly. Dropped that one like a hot potato. Also recently tradbros & manosphere types were saying the 19th Amendment should be repealed. Since Trump won, not gonna hear that anymore.

Well life goes on.

Expand full comment

Donald Trump has bragged in the past about the Covid vaccine developed under his auspices. I very much doubt he's anti-vax, certainly not in any comprehensive manner. If RFK tried to ban vaccines (is there any office that has that power?) I can see Trump giving him his pink slip. One thing about Donald Trump: He enjoys firing people.

Expand full comment

Bobby Brainworm has backed off on banning vaccines, says he just meant to ban mandates & give people a choice. So that’s better but i’d hate to see kids get some godawful disease because their parents are antivaxxers. But he’s still weird. The tariff thing is worrisome though. If people think food is expensive now…..

Expand full comment
7 hrs ago·edited 3 hrs ago

I'm supportive of carefully targeted tariffs, but I don't think we should enact those on food stuff. One of history's great calamities, the Irish Famine, involved import duties on food. (Potato crops failed everywhere in Europe in the 1840s-- only Ireland had an actual famine).

There's also a huge issue with getting rid of the immigrants who work in the fields. A few states tried to substitute native born workers and those experiments were ringing failures. Like it or not we need

foreign workers in our fields, and that's been true for a good long time, longer than I have been alive.

Expand full comment

Yes, the electoral college magnifies the popular vote. I mentioned 1992 above. Clinton won with 43% of the popular vote-- but 370 electoral votes. A landslide? Not really. No. Certainly that was nothing like Reagan's 1984 victory where he took every state but one (and also lost DC). Neither does this compare.

Expand full comment

I agree in part. This is a "big" win but not a landslide.

Expand full comment

It's as big a landslide as we're gonna see in our polarized times; he ran every single swing state. Contextually, I think it counts. Half the country would vote for a blue fencepost, so that's not really a fair criterion at this point.

Expand full comment

Contextually, yes -- I agree.

Expand full comment

You are right & the other half would vote for a red fence post. I am wondering if “swing voters” are a myth.

Expand full comment

Well, this was the first time I voted since 2008, so there's also that. One side or the other could piss you off enough to the point that you become activated when you were previously content to stay on the sidelines.

Expand full comment

I still feel like you're trying to pretend the Democrats didn't get booty blasted last night.

Kamala lost literally every single swing state. There's no way to spin this other than a huge blowout. And the total votes is a red herring because Democrats automatically lock in NY and CA. If those states were broken up they'd never hit past 150 electoral votes

Expand full comment

This was no landslide. To quote Wellington, it was a close run thing.

Expand full comment

Funny how Kamala Harris is almost 15 million votes behind Joe Biden's 2020 performance. Very interesting.

Expand full comment
founding

Dick Cheney showed just how powerful a VP can be in shaping policy.

It's true that Trump doesn't share the limelight easily. But it is also true that he put together an impressive group of supporters including Musk, Kennedy, Gabbard, and Vance.

Expand full comment

I'm skeptical anything will come of it except the same frustrations and dismissals Trump's underlings knew in his first administrations. No, it will be all Trump all of the time.

The Cheney situation was highly unusual-- a one off as I cannot think of a single other VP (even those who later like LBJ and TR were highly effective presidents) who wielded such power and influence.

Expand full comment

Cheney power came from who the president was. Let that sink in.

Expand full comment

Jon, the Democrats did not outperform in one county. No county in the entire in the entire country. The analogy you're looking for 1980.

Expand full comment

Reagan won (EC) by 489-49 in 1980, and by a larger popular vote margin, though that was also complicated by the presence of John Anderson in the race. This is not equivalent to 1980 at all. At best it may be compared to 1988, though the EC vote margins (428-111) were a good deal larger than we are seeing here. So maybe 2004?

I don't get the fixation on counties. No state votes by county, though NE and ME do vote by congressional district. The best commentary I've seen yet (and of course better is probably going to come as this is all finalized) is that this represents the triumph of GOP GOTV efforts in rural areas while too many urban voters stayed home or voted third party (as I did). That is a pretty damning indictment of Kamala Harris and her campaign, as is the fact that many downticket Democrats outperformed her, but do keep in mind that these things can turn on a dime, as W found out in 2006 after a solid victory in 2004 and Obama also learned in 2010 after his win in 2008.

Expand full comment

Sigh. I didn't says it was "equivalent". When you compare two things you admit they're different.

I'm not "fixated" on anything. I just pointed it out.

Expand full comment

The more I think about it the more I think 2004 is the best analogy, though no, not a perfect one (9-11 was still a factor). Still, Bush had been a minority vote winner, and the Democrats convinced themselves they had a good candidate in Kerry and that the polls could be read as pointing to victory. Only to see Bush reelected by a solid majority-- and win majorities in both houses of Congress, and in other downticket races too. But that did lead to talk of a "permanent GOP majority", and we know how that turned out.

Expand full comment

I recall sensing that GWB was trailing a bit, and that reversed after the Beslan school massacre in Russia. I still wonder if that massacre caused a kind of 9/11 flashback for many U.S. voters.

Expand full comment

Well, the GOP ran a superb campaign that year, and Kerry came across anyway as an empty suit.

Expand full comment

One thing that was hardly mentioned on the news was the bomb threats called into precincts in Georgia, which were determined to come from Russia. That should have been a bigger story.

Expand full comment
founding

Do we know those actually happened? It was odd when the media talked about them how quickly they jumped to: "but there weren't any bombs; they aren't credible threats." The MSM wanted the story to catch on (and they were fed it by the FBI for this purpose), but it didn't catch on because as soon as they said it was Russia everyone's bullshit detector went off. It was rightfully ignored.

Expand full comment

Well it certainly bears looking into though I think the election was a lot more secure this time. Just because Trump didn’t collude was Russia doesn’t mean there are not bad actors from Russia, China & Iran trying to create mischief. Russian media called Trump “our guy” which doesn’t sit well with me but I think Trump wants to defuse tensions with Russia. Which is not necessarily bad as long as he doesn’t throw small European countries under the bus.

Expand full comment
founding

You're right, of course. Russia can be (probably is) a malicious actor, and the MSM repeatedly lies (or dramatically exaggerates) about Russia interfering in our elections. Both can be true at the same time.

I think Trump will bring peace to the Ukraine conflict. It will probably be a peace favorable to Russia. But it will be peace.

Expand full comment

"lies (or dramatically exaggerates)"

Aside from intent, not much difference there.

Expand full comment

Pretty sure that was a DNC intern trying to delay the vote, same with the water main break in Fulton county last year.

Anytime I hear "secret plot" and "Russia" in a new story, I can pretty much guarantee it's a load of BS from the DNC

Expand full comment

I doubt that, the affected precincts were heavily black & Democratic leaning. It can be true that the media & Democrats see Russians under every bush AND true that there are bot & troll farms & bad actors there doing stuff for their own purposes. They’ve also tried to influence elections in other countries. As do we. But as far as I know, we’ve never called in bomb threats to overseas voting precincts. Though with the CIA I’m not going to say it never happened ever.

Expand full comment

Bot...farm...bot...farm...I...will...vote...Trump...vote...Trump...yesss...

I mean, seriously! Only someone who really believes in clingers, deplorables, and garbage can believe this stuff works!

Expand full comment

Harris lost so hard she ran away from her own watch party

Expand full comment

OK, but that still beats Trump's refusal, for months on end, to admit defeat in 2020.

Expand full comment
9 hrs ago·edited 9 hrs ago

Because he didn't lose. Why would you concede something you didn't lose?

Just some interesting data:

Obama: 69 million votes in 2012

Hillary: 65 million votes in 2016

Biden : 80 MILLION VOTES in 2020

Harris: 64 million votes in 2024

It's so obvious it's laughable. And Trump did a great job not giving in when he clearly knew they cheated

Expand full comment

Trump lost in 2020. You might as well try to claim the sun rises in the west if you say otherwise.

Expand full comment

1) It still can't be proven that 2020 voter fraud was a problem of this magnitude. I've worked with numbers both academically and professionally and 81 million total with an excess of 7 million is not that much of an outlier. It's not really obvious.

2) Nixon conceded in 1960 for the sake of the country, when he had better grounds to allege fraud than Trump did in 2020.

3) I agree that appearances matter and better procedures need to be legislated to reduce the appearance of fraud - Schumer was always warning us about appearances, right? It's too bad the GOP hasn't really done so, they were lucky this year ("Random chance has worked in our favor, Captain").

Expand full comment

Great analysis.

Here's the e-mail I sent to my family this morning:

>>Well as I told you people over and over: Relax...Trump has got this.

Haha!

No seriously, I have never in my life been so delighted to have been so wrong. There's a spring in my step this morning. American democracy lives! To borrow a legendary line from sportscaster Al Michaels as the seconds ticked down in the shocking victory of the American national hockey team over the heavily favored Soviets in the 1980 Olympics: Do you believe in miracles??? YES!!!

I mean, it turns out that a platform of ruinous inflation, the sexual mutilation of children, open borders, rampant crime, forever wars, and the cancellation of free speech is not terribly attractive to voters. Who could have guessed.

In fairness to myself, I did make a good case last week for Trump winning:

"First, the case for Trump. There is widespread dissatisfaction with Senile Joe's unpopular presidency. The wrong-track polling number is consistently right around 75%. There is a widespread sense that something has gone wrong. The public no longer trusts our institutions. Recent polling shows a slight but definite shift toward Trump though the consensus and average of all current polling data points to a dead heat one week out. Still, by every measure, the country is ready for and wants change...and Kamala, the Regime puppet, does not represent change. Bottom line: by all normal standards of politics and history...and in a sane world...Trump would be the odds-on favorite to win a free and fair election."

I also pointed to 1980 where what had shaped up for the entire campaign as a very tight election broke big in the final hours for Reagan as people en masse decided that their nervousness about the notion of a supposedly dangerous actor being put in the White House was outweighed by their disgust with the failures of Carter's presidency. Something like that happened yesterday.

The thing is, Trump desperately needed cheat-proof margins. The polling said he didn't have them. The polling was wrong. Spectacularly wrong. Again. In fact, underpolling the Republican vote has now become a seemingly standard feature of media political analysis. It seems to happen in almost every presidential election.

But let's put all the analysis and the whys and the wherefores aside. This is one of the most extraordinary stories in American history. There is no precedent. How a guy who was cartoonishly and relentlessly vilified as the essence of evil, obsessively pursued and persecuted, impeached, indicted, prosecuted, convicted, targeted for assassination...returned in triumph to the White House.

We will never know the impact of two intangibles in helping this to happen: First, our prayers...to include the ones we said together last night which joined the cascade being said by millions of good Christians throughout the land. Second, my willingness to step forward and take one for the team by bravely forecasting a Kamala victory, thus exposing myself to the embarrassment of being totally wrong...a deal that in the end God could not turn down. But I'll never get the credit I deserve...

Expand full comment

Well, I wasn't entirely sure Trump would win. Thought it more likely, than a Harris win, but I saw the possibility of some dirty political and electoral tricks affecting the results. Thankfully, if there were any such shenanigans, they made no difference in the end.

Congratulations to all Americans for making the right choice. Even those that voted for Harris, may not know it yet, but they will be better off under a Trump-Vance presidency, especially with the likes of Tulsi Gabbard, Elon Musk and RFK Jr in positions of power. May this be a start of a prosperous, peaceful and God-affirming era in world history, where a lot of the current rifts and conflicts are brought to an end!

Expand full comment

I am not surprised. Indeed, I predicted Trump would win in 2016. I've had a simmering contempt for many of my fellow eligible voters since the Reagan-Carter election. I'm referring to the ones who fail to show up and vote, not the ones who voted for the winner.

Some important points:

Rod is a journalist, in the traditional sense. He believes in reporting truth in the face of the need for news outlets to make a profit by getting the attention of people with sensational headlines and "Here, let us do your thinking for you" writing. This is generic, I submit, not contradicted by any topic or issue being reported. Indeed, as a progressive liberal, I am long since in despair of my fellow travelers and believers who insist on believing what they are told to believe instead of having an ounce of critical thinking to employ.

I have a hope. I hope, deep in my heart, that the people who gleefully voted for Trump will not close their eyes to his betrayals of them. Betrayal is the primary aspect of Trump's modus operandi. He betrayed his business partners, his employees, his family, all of which for decades BEFORE HE ENTERED POLITICS.

Trump's only goal in life is to live it on his terms over all others. I can't help one somewhat snarky prediction: being elected President of the U.S. is his last best hope to avoid his criminal prosecutions.

Expand full comment

Trump has been the most loyal president to his constituents in my lifetime, and I've been around since the second Clinton term.

But more broadly, I also hope that liberals realize how much they've been betrayed by every authority figure they've looked up to:

-The media

-The Democratic Party

-Pollsters

-The FBI

-Black Lives Matter

-Unions

Especially if you're a white liberal, you need to realize that the Left wants you dead and gone. They don't give a crap about you at all. They call straight white men the scum of the earth and will then beg for votes. And then they assume all minorities owe them votes because they push for the lowest common denominator DEI hires. I hope 2024 is a wake up call that this attitude doesn't fly anymore with the American people.

Expand full comment

Well, I suppose you believe that the Republican Party has been loyal, too. I'm 68 years old, my span of time view is a bit longer than yours.

Expand full comment

No, it's obvious he is writing only about Trump.

Expand full comment

Not so indicated, but I was being sarcastic. I've known about trump for decades before he entered politics.

Expand full comment

Yes, and about the GOP being not so loyal too.

Expand full comment

It will probably be an enlightening day at the school where I teach. Hard to know whether, percentage wise, more students or staff will take a post-election holiday. Mark Halperin’s warning about the greatest mental health crisis in US history strikes me as one of the most prescient election predictions!

Expand full comment

Sir, you should counsel your school's lefties, pat them on the back and let them cry on your shoulder.

Expand full comment

Pats on the back, yes. I draw the line at shoulder crying lolz. I don't want to send my good threads out to the dry cleaner.

Expand full comment

A factor- Tim Walz! I know at least one on the fence voter who went for Trump because of Walz. I suspect they were a surprisingly large group. Consider Andrew Sullivan who of course endorsed Harris but thought and publicly said Walz was a bad pick and showed what a poor decision maker Harris was. He also said he would have voted for Vance as did the person who flipped to Trump because of Walz( the one I know).Also consider Walter Kirn who won’t say who he voted for but made it clear he loathed Walz and felt his home state of Minnesota was degraded under his leadership.Finally notice that while Harris carried Minnesota,Amy Klobuchar polled better than the Harris - Walz ticket and in a Democratic leaning state, the Harris’ victory (with the states governor as her running mate) is pretty unimpressive.People carry on about Josh Shapiro ,and not picking him was a mistake. Why? He may have had coattails in all important Pennsylvania. Also - and I don’t usually leap on something like this- not picking Shapiro did have a whiff of , if not anti semitism , of we must placate pro Palestinian voters in Michigan. Don’t think that worked out too well!

Expand full comment
author

If Kamala had picked Shapiro, she would have taken PA. Wouldn't have made the difference, but who knows what other very close states she might have won? Coulda woulda shoulda

Expand full comment

Had Harris had the guts to pick Shapiro, she would have won the presidency. As simple as that.

Expand full comment

Harris was limited by her need to pick a VP who wouldn't outshine her. That greatly reduced her choices.

Expand full comment

That's hilarious to imagine: her sitting there, thinking, "Now, who is even more feckless than I am? Ah, I've got it! . . ."

Expand full comment

Or the campaign "Hey look we found Cam from Modern Family, just a littler gayer, but he has a wife!"

Expand full comment

It was disturbing to see a video of Walz go for a handshake with his wife, but then think better of it and opt for an awkward bro hug instead.

Expand full comment

So it's not just me? I saw Walz mincing around on stage and I thought "uhhhh this guy's got some sugar in the tank" if you catch my drift.

Expand full comment

Harris was intimidated by Shapiro's smarts and political ambitions. He reportedly wanted a bigger role as VP. Harris wasn't having it. As someone born & reared in CA, she went with the vibes.

Expand full comment

She was also afraid of the pro-Hamas legion within the Democratic Party.

Expand full comment

That gave me a chuckle

Expand full comment

Reduced them to nothing

Expand full comment

No.

Expand full comment

The "coach" business passed its sell-by date by the middle of September. But they kept hammering it. Just imagining that strange creature having access to the showers was unsettling. Towards the end he started to curse mildly to show how butch he was. A really bizarre performance.

No way to get beyond correlation, but do not discount her incredible refusal to attend the Al Smith Dinner. Doubt it tripped any meter, but it was woefully ham-handed.

Expand full comment

I couldn't help noticing that Walz's entrances, quick stepping, animated, arms waving, head turning several ways at once, jack o' lantern grinning, were eerie in their resemblance to Heath Ledger's performance as The Joker.

Expand full comment

Or Brokeback Mountain.

Expand full comment

It was actually amazing how completely tone deaf that whole team was. Did they not realize how bad everything made them look? Or maybe Kamala was such a nightmare that they figured there wasn't any point in her trying

Expand full comment

"...do not discount her incredible refusal to attend the Al Smith Dinner"

No, but then my anti-Catholic bigotry meter was already tripped. I bet she was afraid someone would throw holy water at her, or something.

Expand full comment

Not much she could have done tbh.

Remember, Obama picked Biden because he needed a VP dumber than him

Then Biden picked Harris because he needed a VP dumber than him

Then Harris...well you know ;)

Expand full comment

Will our halfwit so-called Left finally hear the rebuke? I doubt it. Will they recognize that millions of these voters don’t exactly love Donald Trump—they just loathe what Democrats have become? Probably not. Just too painful for them. I expect doubling down, more frantic sawing on the branch they’re perched on.

How can they come down from wokeness when those woke identities are all they have?

It’s sad really.

Expand full comment

I love schadenfreude, sometimes.

Expand full comment

Everyone loves schadenfreude sometimes.

But I’m not exactly elated by this outcome. Only candidate of the four I trust is Vance. Still, it’s good to see the public has rejected the Social Engineers, er, Democrats.

Expand full comment

I think that Trump has done a wonderful thing, here, and possibly something only he could have done: our Napoleon in a golfcart, as NS Lyons says. I'm feeling optimistic about what he and his team could do with this chance.

Expand full comment

Yes, I do think only he could have done it. It started pre-2016 and has just kept building, a wave built on just the kind of brute-yet-subtle rhetoric you underline.

“Always be ready to speak your mind, and a base man will avoid you.” Trump’s power is related to Blake’s line here. Trump underlines a truth contained in the line—namely that you don’t have to speak *accurately*, just speak your mind.

It’s driven the entire Left and much of the GOP to go to perverse lengths to “avoid” him. Thus proving their baseness. For all to see.

Expand full comment

Look forward to that. Here's the extent of my schadenfreude:

https://claytestament.blogspot.com/2024/11/disappointed.html

Expand full comment

The Kriss is hilarious. Mostly fair I'd say. Not fair to us really, but so what? Geniuses get a pass.

Expand full comment

"...our Napoleon in a golfcart..."

Ha! And not a man on horseback, thank goodness!

Somehow I got an image in my mind of Marley's ghost in Bill Murray's version of A Christmas Carol.

Expand full comment

Sethu's referencing this:

https://theupheaval.substack.com/p/the-world-spirit-on-a-golf-cart

Expand full comment

Thanks, I hadn't seen it. Funny fact: I was in the same room as N.S. Lyons last week, but I didn't get to meet him.

Expand full comment

The Napoleon bit does not cheer me on. The guy was anything but admirable-- a dictator who ordered assassinations and censored, exiled and sometimes arrested his critics at home-- and a warmonger abroad. We need a George Washington (or even just a John Adams); let's leave the potentates, emperors and war lords to the foreigners.

Expand full comment

Well, we take the world-historical personages that we’re given, and we don’t get to dictate the specific parameters. There’s morally admirable, and then there’s force of nature.

Expand full comment

Re: we take the world-historical personages that we’re given

But why "take" someone who "was as great as man can be without a shred of virtue to his name," - Goethe's description of Napoleon.

Re: and then there’s force of nature.

Hurricanes are forces of nature-- and there's nothing admirable about them. Aristotle, perhaps thinking of his erstwhile pupil Alexander, said, "Nothing great enters human affairs without a curse."

Expand full comment

Hey man, you know who's feeling more schadenfreude than you? Yup, Jill Biden.

Expand full comment

Ouch.

D.

Expand full comment

I love it when Trump's bullying rhetoric -- using playground slurs and "I'm the only genius in the house" -- is echoed by his supporters. Allow me to give you a clue: both sides dehumanize the other side.

What would Jesus say to that?

Us vs. Them. Spy vs. Spy (Mad Magazine reference). Name your opposition the enemy, it's the easiest and laziest way to dismiss your fellow humans.

"He is interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections." The American President (1995), screenplay by Aaron Sorkin.

Expand full comment

I would suggest checking out Scott Adams' book *Win Bigly* for more insight into what exactly Trump is doing with rhetoric. The gist is that while it's rather amoral, it's also highly effective persuasion. (And in general, the more scruples we have, the fewer persuasive tactics are available to us.)

Expand full comment

My similar citation is Terry Goodkin's Wizard's First Rule: People will believe a lie because they want it to be true, or because they're afraid it might be true. Looks similar to me, but it's nice to have more than one point for comparison. Thanks.

Expand full comment

There are also things such as being directionally accurate but fudging the facts (which gets people's attention onto the topic you wanted), using strategic ambiguity (so that people's imaginations can fill in the blanks as they wish) and activating confirmation bias (the playground taunts serve as an anchor for future perceptions).

Of course, we could say, "But that's manipulative and wrong." But the point would be that since humans aren't really the rational creatures we'd like to think they are, these things work, whatever the morality of it might be.

Expand full comment

“They’re eating the pets, they’re eating the cats!”

Directional accuracy. And the factual fudginess forces the entire media to put it on blast.

Mission accomplished.

Expand full comment

Or even when he first started talking about his big beautiful Wall: he got the attention to the issue of illegal immigration, and it just stayed fixed there, as the media could not stop obsessively talking about what a dumb idea that was.

Expand full comment

Indeed, the main plot consequences in Goodkin's book (by the same name as the Rule) is that everyone is vulnerable to the Rule, including wizards.

I view it all from a sort of Zen point of view. Things happen, people react or respond, thus is human nature continually confirmed. 😉😊

Expand full comment

Peanut will be avenged.

Expand full comment

This to me is the story. Will they marginalize AOC, will they drop the trans lobby (and be willing to pay the price for that?), will they finally admit they opened the border? Or will the shrink into irrelevance on the national level? Don't expect it this week. It's too much fun watching Joy and Joe and Dana.

Expand full comment

Yes, the corner they’re painted into. They’ve now a huge swath of Millennial and younger voters who live and breathe the ideology. Their whole idea of “Democrat” or “Left” is precisely this shit soup called Woke. Which the public, including the youngest men and more and more Latinos, refuses to drink.

It’s going to be interesting to watch.

Expand full comment

Jimmy Carter's idealism and inexperience (I don't think he was any more incompetent than that) painted them into a corner in 1980, and they were out of it by 1992, thanks to broken promises and a third party run. Nothing is permanent.

Expand full comment

Carter was not incompetent. He hired Paul Volcker, he updated the military. But he was a coward.

Expand full comment

I do not believe that Carter was a coward. I do believe he was kindhearted to a fault. He was and is a man of compassion, even for those of his opponents who treated him harshly.

Expand full comment

I’m thinking of Iran.

Expand full comment

Carter was stuck, especially with Reagan and other Republicans working to prevent him getting a PR boost before the election, or so I see it.

Expand full comment

Carter had pacifistic leanings, and he was a perfectionist (which factored into the Operation Desert Claw failure). I don't see him as a coward at all.

Expand full comment

Every president does a few things well, even a bad president. For Carter, the Egypt-Israel peace treaty was a positive. Same with the Panama Canal Treaty. Airline deregulation was a success. He provided very good Saturday Night Live skits by Dan Akroyd.

Expand full comment

Jimmy Carter is a more complex and opportunistic character than I think most of you realize. He shifted, left , right depending upon certain winds. No saint he.

Expand full comment
8 hrs ago·edited 7 hrs ago

Carter was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Not unlike Herbert Hoover, who was also a good guy and far from stupid. Had Gerald Ford won in 1976 the late 70s would have played out much the same-- but with dynamically opposite political consequences.

Expand full comment

Disagree. I think we would have gone to war with Iran had Ford been re-elected. Air and sea blockades, bombings, pinprick amphibious raids, but no real invasion.

But then again, perhaps Ford would have been less humanitarian than Carter, followed the State Dept advice, refused the Shah U.S. entry, and none of it would have happened.

Expand full comment

The Shah had good friends in US protocol circles in both parties. Ford would not have stiffed him. And neither would he have gone to war with Iran: it's too close to the USSR.Might a rescue mission have gone better than Carter's? Maybe.

Expand full comment

I don't believe in saints. I believe in people. He was a politician at the time, and he played the game. Badly, to be sure.

Expand full comment

But saints are people.

Expand full comment

But I do believe that, in part, he shifted due to the 'goodness and intelligence' he saw in those blowing the winds. There were certain parameters that didn't change much, such as fiscal conservatism.

Expand full comment

No. They learn nothing and forget nothing. On Twitter today my lefty friends inform me that "hate won." That is literally their only takeaway from this election: the other side represents "hate" (they of course represent only compassion and selflessness and virtue); and a majority of voters chose "hate" for inexplicable reasons, they must simply be evil people led astray by the Orange Hitler.

That comic book view of America is arguably why they lost. But they won't be giving up their comic narrative any time soon, because that might mean admitting - gasp! - that a majority of Americans don't see that they are the good guys, on the "right side of history!"

Expand full comment

I think you’re right. The Democrats used to be a political party, but now they’re basically a religion. Most of the active among them won’t disavow.

And the “comic book” element not only made them obnoxious to all who live in the real world, it forced them to way overplay their hand on the policy front. “Because racism is bad, defund the police! Shoplifting is not a crime! No number of immigrants is unsustainable because … white people are racist! Trans women are women so we must fund their surgery! Because … bigots!”

Expand full comment

Re: The Democrats used to be a political party, but now they’re basically a religion.

And this does not apply to the MAGA cult that used to be the GOP?

Expand full comment

It won't after Trump is gone. We'll have to see what happens then.

Again, this is what is so baffling about the woke cult: there is no one cult leader. It is an amorphous cult. I haven't seen much of the MAGA people personally, but I sense that apart from Trump they too are amorphous in beliefs.

Expand full comment

There are elements of religion, sure, but “personality cult” is the proper way to describe the Trump phenomenon. Most of the real content is just American exceptionalism. Which has long been shared by the GOP. This American “religion” verges on idolatry, but 1) it is not anathema to our republic, and 2) since most of its traditional adherents are also Christian, it’s not utopian.

Our current Left, on the other hand, is utopian. And the religious element is totalizing. Which is to say: anathema to our republic.

https://claytestament.blogspot.com/2022/02/the-left-is-religion.html

Expand full comment

Agree about "personality cult".

Tje Left is not a cuktceither. You are confusing having a (fiercely held) philosophy with religion. They aren't the same thing at all.

Expand full comment

You’re right on this-That is literally their only takeaway from this election: the other side represents "hate" (they of course represent only compassion and selflessness and virtue); and a majority of voters chose "hate" for inexplicable reasons, they must simply be evil people led astray by the Orange Hitler.- and it’s very distressing.

Expand full comment

nahhh

talking to my liberal friends this morn the new Party line is "she lost because of sexism and racism."

there is just no way liberals will ever abandon the idea that everyone who isn't one of them is some kind of bigot. it's the foundation of their worldviews.

Expand full comment

Say hello to the new Party line, same as the old Party line.

Expand full comment

It will be interesting to see how things shape up for candidates in 2028. A couple of the California propositions that were heavily backed by progressives failed. If you think Harris could scold, you haven't heard Newsom the way we in California have. Ay ay ay.

Dana

Expand full comment

First thing: as of right now, Trump does have the popular vote in addition to the electoral college. That's exactly what I wanted to see!

Second thing: it's great that he won the presidency, but the next phase will be how he handles the next 2 years. I'm especially interested in if Elon Musk can, in fact, substantially pare back the bureaucracy.

I used to be a believer in slow, deliberative processes, but the time for decisive and effective action is now.

Expand full comment

Major talking point taken away from the screeching Left. Beauty. Let them whine about the EC now.

Expand full comment

Repeating my comment from the other thread: Went to bed at 10:00 EST, knowing only that the issue-related exit polling was going Trump's way. Didn't stay up and watch the returns (haven't done that in decades. To me that's like watching paint dry, when I know it will be perfectly dry in the morning. The idea that people have election watch parties baffles me.), so saw the results when I woke up this morning. Happy with them, of course, but mainly glad that it wasn't closer. Less ongoing drama that way!

Wish the Dems would have won one of the Houses, though. Full DC control by either party is a flirtation with disaster in my book. We shall see what the GOP does with it.

"Those who see in Mr. Trump a profound rejection of Washington’s present conventions are correct. He is like an atheist defying the teachings of a church: The challenge he presents lies not so much in what he does but in the fact that he calls into question the beliefs on which authority rests. Mr. Trump has shown that the nation’s political orthodoxies are bankrupt, and the leaders in all our institutions — private as well as public — who stake their claim to authority on their fealty to such orthodoxies are now vulnerable."

In other words, he's a spanner in the works of the Machine, American version.

Expand full comment

Well said, sir. Good morning to you.

Expand full comment

I am a Proud Member of The Gridlock Party!

Expand full comment

I don't think that multiculturalism committed suicide. It more likely evolved into a new healthier form. Pray it continues to do so. Perhaps we will somewhat recover the melting pot ideal.

Expand full comment

I'm definitely happy with the Trump win... I wasn't meaning to stay up so late, but couldn't seem to help myself. I am pleased he pulled off a win in Wisconsin. However, this time the "vibe" I have is that this election is a chance for course correction, and it's much more than the elected officials, that each one of us is now urgently tasked with loving God, loving each other, and truly being part of our communities. Otherwise, this win means nothing.

Expand full comment

This is a chance for everyone to take their next step forward, whatever that is, whether a small good thing or starting their big dream. Take the momentum from the day and let it propel you into the thing you ought to do.

Expand full comment

Sad that Hovde lost to the lesbian.

Expand full comment

That is disappointing, especially since he was still leading by 2 points at 2am. The advertising against him was overwhelming and over-the-top vicious. I do wonder if things are close enough to trigger a recount. I will grant, though, that Hovde only did as well as he did on Trump's coattails.

Expand full comment

Interesting that trump won the presidential election here but Tammy baldwin won the senate race. People are complicated, obviously.

Expand full comment

One has to wonder what sort of person voted for Trump and Baldwin. That's probably two or three percent of the population of Wisconsin. Who are these folks?

Expand full comment

Who even knows. The ads against Hovde made him look like a creep, I think.

Expand full comment

Baldwin has a lot of name recognition. Her campaign came out of the gate basically accusing him of being Satan incarnate. Then it was "abortion, abortuon, abortion". Baldwin also distanced herself from Harris a lot. I don't think Hovde's campaign knew how to deal with things, & they were vastly outspent.

Expand full comment

Funny how supportive of abortion Tammy Baldwin is when she doesn't fulfill the requirements of conceiving a baby.

Expand full comment

Ticket splitting used to be the norm. Hence Reagan won in a colossal landslide, but that had little effect on downticket races in 1984.

Expand full comment
8 hrs ago·edited 7 hrs ago

Both parties used to have liberal, moderate and conservative wings. This has changed over the past thirty years. Both parties are close to being monoliths these days.

Reagan's 1984 landslide was lonely. The Republicans gained something like 14 House seats and zero Senate seats.

Expand full comment

Re: each one of us is now urgently tasked with loving God, loving each other, and truly being part of our communities.

That should be true always, no matter who's in the White House.

Expand full comment

Absolutely! I just wanted to point out that there's a relationship between politics & culture that we absolutely do have influence on.

Expand full comment