Coarse Correction: The Real Significance of the 2016 Election

About a year ago, the respected Harvard political theorist, Harvey C. Mansfield, Jr., wrote an op-ed about Donald Trump for the Wall Street Journal titled, “Why Donald Trump Is No Gentleman.” Mansfield made the case that the appellation “gentleman” is one used so rarely these days that we forget, even, to note its opposite.  

He also wrote:

The outstanding person in this election is Donald Trump, in that he attracts the most attention, but the outstanding fact is the voters behind him who excuse Mr. Trump for his ungentlemanly behavior….

Incapable as he is of appreciating the gentleman, Mr. Trump earns the disdain of the promoters of gender neutrality. Mr. Trump’s resistance to political correctness, however, has the coarseness of a male [this months  before the Access Hollywood tape]. Or what used to be the coarseness of a male. Now that women are practicing to swear like sailors, Mr. Trump is a reminder of male superiority in the department of vulgarity. Surely no woman would have run his campaign.

Mansfield’s essay, then, invites consideration of the coarseness of his female opponent. She was after all the embodiment of vulgar pandering to sex preference. In fact, his penetrating essay implied that Trump had a good chance of beating Hillary Clinton precisely because he was willing to be crude and in that contest, he could outmatch even her.

The subhead of Mansfield’s article tells the tale in more detail: “Like Machiavelli, [Trump] makes clear that winning dishonorably is better than losing honorably.” Can a citizen survey the field of honorable candidates, losers or near-losers, all—be his name Romney, McCain, or Bush—without revulsion and fear for the future of republican government? Could any of 2016’s supposed gentlemen candidates have beaten Clinton by flipping those Midwestern states and Pennsylvania?

Two weeks after Mansfield’s article appeared, Trump named Kellyanne Conway his campaign manager. In that sense a woman did run (and win) Trump’s campaign. It seems that the coarse candidate made the very course correction that Mansfield implied was impossible: the Machiavellian candidate’s truthfulness about political correctness needed political protection (not to speak of wisdom) in Conway’s form.

How did Trump stump the smartest campaign masterminds and conquer Lady Fortune? For one thing, he delighted more than conservative voters with his skewering of media figures and intellectuals. His keen insight was that Americans, whatever else they may think, do not like to be told what to think. And as his recent tweeting shows, the all-important proxy war with the media as the front for intellectuals continues into his presidency with Trump standing in as the unlikely champion of the people.

In this light, consider anti-Trump pundit George Will’s onetime praise of Trump who, Will then noted, “believes that excess can be a virtue” and in that belief “is as American as Manhattan’s skyline…. Brashness, zeal and elan are part of this country’s character” (quoted in The Art of the Deal, 1987). That was then. But the Will of the Trump era not only renounced Trump but the Republican Party that embraced him as well.

Mansfield narrows Trump’s attack on political correctness to questions having to do with women, but Trump included racial and ethnic identity politics as well.

Haven’t all card-carrying conservative intellectuals at some point denounced affirmative action and identity politics as corrosive of the souls of citizens and of the common good? After all, how does a judge in San Diego even get a case about a New York-based Trump University? More to the point, how did this adherent to a policy of favoring one identity group over others become a judge in the first place?  Why isn’t calling out a “Mexican judge” turnabout as fair play? It’s not as though he hit a girl.

If a candidate won’t defend his own interests, using all weapons at his command, why should the public think he will zealously defend their common interests, especially against pseudo-aristocratic racial/ethnic claims of privilege? It is scarcely egomania, let alone “white nationalism,” to defend oneself from fire coming at one from a safe space. Why are low blows and insults tolerated when they are directed at Republicans, but “unpresidential” and “beneath the dignity of the office” when they are repulsed in equal measure? In fact, Aristotle makes it clear that permitting an injustice to oneself is a vice.    

With these things in mind, I turn now to a book written by three distinguished conservative intellectuals who again combine their talents to produce what may well be the most insightful book written on the 2016 election. In Defying the Odds: The 2016 Elections and American Politics, James Ceaser (University of Virginia), Andrew Busch (Claremont McKenna), and John Pitney (Claremont McKenna) resume their quadrennial series on American presidential elections, going back to 1992 (Pitney having first joined for the previous book).

As I wrote of the 2012 edition, their latest deploys witty prose in combining “the best in political journalism with the most relevant political science scholarship—in other words, a citizen’s perspective but with statistical and empirical support and, above all, historical . . .” background.  Their focus on progressive striving to overcome natural rights and conservative gestures at defending those rights is surely unique in contemporary political science on campaigns.

Not coincidentally, a former student of the two Claremont coauthors, Heidi Cruz, emerged the most impressive spouse in the campaign.

But for all their seriousness and the seriousness with which they attempt to take Trump (and pro-Trump sources such as the Journal of American Greatness and its successor, American Greatness, “Flight 93” author Publius Decius Mus, and Dilbert cartoonist Scott Adams) they end up missing Trump’s significance for American politics.  

align=”left” Review of James Ceaser, Andrew Busch, and John Pitney, Jr., Defying the Odds: the 2016 Elections and American Politics (Rowman & Littlefield, 216 pages, $29.95)

Ceaser’s concluding paragraph (he stands in for all three authors) epitomizes the book’s strengths and weaknesses: “No one . . .  had been more of an outsider. No one had disrupted his own party and the conventions of politics more. No one had, in a single election, laid low the reigning dynasties of both his own party (the Bushes) and the other party (the Clintons).” Just before this, however, they write, “Although it was clear what Trump was against, it was never quite clear what he was for.”

They were unsure, for example, whether Trump would bring about a new form of identity politics, “white nationalism,” or instead call for a new emphasis on “citizenship and the nation.”

In a similar vein, Ceaser sometimes lapses into a kind of moral equivalence between Trump and Clinton—considering both anti-constitutionalist and “authoritarian.” Certainly, these authors should understand that the rise of intellectual elites (e.g., the Clintons with their Yale law degrees  and Obama as the first president with both parents holding Ph.D.s) distorted recent politics.

Trump’s ‘Political Friendship’

While Machiavelli always enlightens, Aristotle provides even better insight into the Trump campaign. Aristotle (Politics V.6) explains, “Oligarchies change most often in two most obvious ways. One occurs when they treat the multitude unjustly, for then any champion is sufficient, especially when it turns out that the leader comes from the oligarchy itself….”

Moreover, though neither Ceaser nor Trump uses this language, the America of failed promises we are now presented with is properly labelled a majority faction, which threatens individual rights and the common good, as seen in the constitutionally dubious waging of futile wars, promoting of illegal immigration, and preference for globalist policy over American interests. With the threat of yet another Bush or Clinton, prime causes of their current discontents, Americans turned as in 1860 to the unlikely candidate most likely to throw off “the slave power,” as the Decius once put it.

Thus Trump opposes identity politics, not by singling out groups, but instead by showing how an American identity is superior to all others (and especially to divisive sub-groupings of Americans). Trump’s patriotism is what Aristotle called political friendship, a kind of friendship of virtue. It is the unity of purpose, individual and national, that Lincoln described in the Gettysburg Address.

align=”right” Thus Trump opposes identity politics, not by singling out groups, but instead by showing how an American identity is superior to all others (and especially to divisive sub-groupings of Americans). Trump’s patriotism is what Aristotle called political friendship, a kind of friendship of virtue. 

Far from being its enemy, such a “populism” becomes essential to preserve constitutional government, just as clearly as identity politics destroys it. It promotes a higher identity that unites rather than divisive sub-identities that set us against each other. And this is why the political correctness of identity politics is a necessary step to build that enduring faction known as the administrative state. That kind of authoritarianism and anti-constitutionalism is wholly assumed by Clinton. Quite the opposite with Trump.

Ceaser’s characterization of Trump as “post-ideological” misses that Trump is in fact pre-ideological—he thinks in terms of the whole American nation, not in terms of the groups that comprise it. Trump is more like Lincoln at Gettysburg than Madison in Federalist 10.

In a similar way, Trump was clearly the strongest candidate of a weak (not strong, as the conventional wisdom held) Republican field. His serious opponents were pretty much either parochial governors, callow senators, or yet another Bush. The man with “New York values” was, ironically, the only national candidate.

With this Trump in mind, I make my own observations about 2016, including a few major differences with Ceaser:

  • Their comparison of 1992 and 2016 doesn’t work, because George H.W. Bush ran away from Reagan, and Pat Buchanan despises Lincoln.
  • Modifying  the charge that 2016 was “perhaps the most uncivil, vulgar, scandal-flecked campaign in living memory” one should recall the impeachment and trial of Bill Clinton, the political attacks in the anti-Goldwater campaign of 1964, and the Truman campaign of 1948.  
  • A Clinton television ad featured young kids in front of a TV watching Trump at various campaign moments. That played two ways.  I saw the way liberals treat their kids: Dump them in front of a TV without adult supervision.
  • Trump proved himself the best Catholic in attendance at the Cardinal Dolan-hosted Al Smith dinner, speaking truth to power by launching an impolitic attack on Hillary Clinton for her support of abortion rights, to the boos of the assembled audience. Trump won the Catholic vote.
  • Choosing Mormon Evan McMullin as a possible anti-Trump spoiler in Utah was itself a form of low identity politics, showing how corrupted and anti-American their partisan opposition to Trump had become.
  • Making America great again requires a stronger military, so no one should have been surprised by his cabinet and National Security Council adviser picks.
  • Besides demolishing the leading members of party establishments, Trump would redefine the Republican Party as the workers’ party, and welcome back black men as Republican voters (they cast 13 percent of their votes for Trump).
  • Finally, there is the matter of FBI Director James Comey’s various interventions or non-interventions, which continue to reverberate. Our authors write,

If third parties, FBI directors, Russians, and racists are not really satisfactory explanations for Trump’s win, can anything else be offered to help understand this surprising election? An alternative story might be built around world trends, rioters, a weak president, and rampaging progressives.

While there is much in that, the real alternative story of 2016 is Comey as a representative of the administrative state, which Nixon had made his concern. We still don’t know the extent of Comey’s attempts to go well beyond his investigatory obligations to exercise political influence.

Just as the left makes every attack on the administrative state an attack on the 1964 Civil Rights Act, so every Republican Administration becomes for the media and Democrats a replay of Nixon and Watergate. Nixon tried to rollback the Democrats’ successor to the New Deal, the Great Society.  Republicans still haven’t learned the meaning of Watergate, which was far more a political crisis engineered by partisan Democrats than a constitutional crisis brought about by Nixon. Republicans have yet to recognize that their Machiavellian enemies in the bureaucracy, media, and politics brought about Nixon’s demise. Trump has seen that crisis early on in his presidency, embodied in James Comey, and is gamely fighting it..

Content created by The Center for American Greatness, Inc is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a significant audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@centerforamericangreatness.com

element_content=””]

About Ken Masugi

Ken Masugi, Ph.D., is a senior fellow of the Claremont Institute. He has been a speechwriter for two cabinet members, as well as for Clarence Thomas when he was chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Masugi is co-author, editor, or co-editor of seven books on American politics. He has taught at the U.S. Air Force Academy, where he was Olin Distinguished Visiting Professor; James Madison College of Michigan State University; the Ashbrook Center of Ashland University; and Princeton University.

Want news updates?

Sign up for our newsletter to stay up to date.

264 responses to “Coarse Correction: The Real Significance of the 2016 Election

  • Superb commentary, sir!
    Thank you.
    I consider myself fortunate to find such an intrinsically valuable resource for conservative, fundamental thought, of America’s virtuosity, and discussion as the”American Greatness” blog.
    This article renders itself as well worthy of repeat reading, and meditation of the references.
    Thank you, again!

    • my best friend’s sister-in-law makes $77 per hour from home and she’s been fired from a job for seven months and last month her payment was $13529 just working on the internet for 3 hours each day.. ➤ see➤ this page
      ➜➜➜http://www.GoogleFinancialCashJobs301InternetAll/All/Wage….
      ✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶:.::kr301…

  • After a succession of Republican candidates who would not defend themselves against vilification, Trump came forward and attacked back using the Democrat techniques of personalizing enemies and focusing vilification more effectively than the Democrats did. Lots of Trump voters saw that he was a fighter, that he was not cowed by political correctness, and that it was possible that he would fight for them – as indeed he subsequently has.

    Against Democrats who campaigned on identity politics seeking to unite a series of “minorities” who have nothing in common – Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, Gays, Trans, Muslims together with women – all to be united by hatred of the vilified common enemy = white men, AKA white Privilege – three things happened. First, the white men noticed that they were being vilified and voted for Trump. Second, while single women joined in against Trump, married women realized that it was not in their interest to vilify their own husbands and voted for Trump. Third, within the “minorities” people who had no desire to live the ersatz existence of dependence on the state and instead wanted a shot at jobs, prosperity and the opportunity to be independent self-sustaining people voted for Trump.

    This is why Trump won. The beauty of it all is that he is now actually doing what he said he would do. The Republican Congress is not helping much but Trump is doing all he can do. Great Supreme Court nomination. Significant reversal of the suffocating Obama Regulatory hypertrophy. Major decline in illegal immigration and effective steps to deport illegal criminals. Use of the bully pulpit to help bring back American jobs from overseas by the tens of thousands. Pro-Business climate igniting a stock market boom and significant investment. We still need the tax reform and the restoration of marketplace incentives in healthcare but Congress has to act to do that. As a Trump voter I like what I see.

    • It is not ‘whitemen’.
      It is white trash, the bottom of the barrel .
      You are not a credit to your race.

      • Get a 9mm semi-auto hand gun. Place the business end in your mouth and pull that trigger thingy. Then you will have done the greatest thing you as an individual could do to aid his nation. Thank you.

      • You probably do not realize it or care, but “white trash” is a hateful term and shows serious bigotry on your part.

      • I think he is one of the Russian trolls that now come across as Democrats, just like Putin planned.

      • The dark side of the force, hatred, negativity, loathing – is strong in you.

      • What a sad, sorry comment. Goes to upbringing…or the lack thereof.

      • I prefer to be called – Cracker Devil … but Red Neck or White Trash… I’m ok with it… doesn’t matter that I hire people, am a veteran, successful father….

        Oh…and I’m a Deplorable Cracker Devil!!

        MAGA!

  • Uhh.. Ken?

    Nice review, sensible commentary – but if you actually want to know how Trump won you have to step outside your peer group and think about how most Americans feel and react. Most Americans were badly hurt by Obama et al and saw in Trump a man who spoke their language, was reviled by the people who hurt them, and promised to aim the magic words “You’re fired” at the Washington establishment. i.e.He says the right things, does so clearly and plainly, has the right enemies, and people believe him.

    • My granddaughter and I went to a Trump Rally in Estero, Florida. The stadium was packed, everyone talking about Trump and the great chance he had against Clinton. When he spoke the audience went wild (so did we) he told what he was going to do, and many of those things have already been done. He needs help from the Republicans to get other things passed such as healthcare and tax cuts. But thank God he won, a rally that was a tremendous event. God Bless America

    • Agreed. We’re fed up with liars who tock perty and have a string of meaningless degrees. We want somebody who speaks plainly and knows what it’s like where we live. Trump’s spent his working life among working folks, talking with them, getting to know them, treating them like adults rather than irritating children to be talked down to.

      • “Trump’s spent his working life among working folks”

        If by “working folks” you mean lawyers, accountants, and PR men.

      • There’s a man clinging to his bitter twisted ignorant beliefs. Trump cut his teeth on building sites with working stiffs. People like you just have no clue why the working man identifies with him. Meanwhile he just keeps on winning them over.

      • He cut his teeth on building sites watching the working stiffs work. The only shovels he’s ever held were gold-plated.

      • Trump has indeed spent his working life among lawyers, PR men and accountants. Also carpenters, steel workers, plumbers, sheet rockers, painters, electricians, welders, window installers and washers, a-c installers, tile installers, wallpaper installers, bricklayers, concrete workmen, road workers, railroad workmen, caterpillar drivers, forklift operators, secretaries, doormen, and others. All speak well of him.

      • And yet the Democrats most dedicated followers are grade school dropouts living in inner housing projects. Go figure.

      • They’re not, actually – they’re pretty unreliable unless they see someone who looks like them on the posters.

    • After clearing the decks of his Republican rivals, POTUS Trump proceeded to lay waste to HilLIARy’s campaign. His rallies drew thousands, hers dozens. He made promises, & he’s slowly, methodically keeping them. He’s appointed a good man to lead the VA, and recently signed legislation to make it easier to fire incompetent VA employees. Taking care of our Vets was a cornerstone promise, & he’s delivered. Using his Twitter account to generate a smoke & mirrors cloud, he’s making changes to benefit all Americans, while the media has seizures over his tweets. Kinda fun to watch…

      • Ha! Who knew that a simple twitter account could be such a fantastic weapon of mass distraction! Trump may well be as crazy as they say…………crazy like a fox!

  • Trump should organize a media advocacy group to talk the MSM off the ledge as they respond hysterically to his Tweets. He could call it “Move On” or something like that…

    • They can’t “move on” because they’re having a full out, 2 year old, sitting in the middle of the floor, screaming,crying,holding their breath, turning beet red fit. Their “fete accompli” was not accompli ed. Ding dong the witch is dead (or damn near it)……..and her flying monkeys are in disarray!

      • “Their “fete accompli” was not accompli ed.”

        Well put! :)

      • It’s “fait accompli”, s’il vous plaît , “fete” is a party !!!!

      • I think that was the point. Here’s hoping Okie is that insightful.

      • I must confess, I wasn’t that sharp, but I like your interpretation even better…. Thanks.

  • Marvelous piece.

    This sentence alone should be highlighted and re-posted again and again:

    “If a candidate won’t defend his own interests, using all weapons at his command, why should the public think he will zealously defend their common interests, especially against pseudo-aristocratic racial/ethnic claims of privilege?”

    Can’t top that one.

    • Exactly. Why should I vote for a candidate whose primary loyalty is to the establishment when the establishment is stripping me of my wealth and denuding me of my rights?

      • Trump’s magic was in convincing you that he was a better choice if your concern was ” stripping(you) of wealth and denuding (you) of rights”.

      • The calculus goes like this: Trump is wealthy. Therefore, he wants to protect wealth. Therefore, he will help me to protect my wealth. This reminds me of a cartoon that used to feature “sideways thinking”.

      • Seems to me, Trump knows how politicians extract wealth from commerce. Trump contributed to Hillary, only to get the booby prize of her showing up to his wedding (or perhaps at least the didn’t work against his business interests at best). Seems to me he’s working to undo that.

        And I used to think he was in the race to make big money (seeing the $2 billion Clinton Foundation as being jealous of that). But upon talking to a close friend and forensic psychiatrist, I’ve concluded he ran to make a legacy for himself, of making America Great. He’s already rich enough.

      • And I suppose you expect us to believe that your wealth and your rights got no assistance whatever from society at large, or even from what you call “the establishment”? Without that society, you would have neither. It would be every man for himself. A sociopath’s paradise.

      • The sociopath’s paradise currently exists in Chicago, in Antifa, in Black Live (only) matter and all of the partisans dedicated to shredding the Constitution. Big Government exacerbates that which you ignore.

      • It speaks volumes to someone’s outlook that they would equate ‘establishment’ with ‘society’. Talk about internalizing statism.

        Almost as bad as the people who think ‘Freedom of Expression’ = ‘Deference to Corporate Media’.

      • What nonsense. Nobody ever said or implied that anyone got wealth with no assistance whatever. But we all get that same assistance. Without MY existence, MY wealth would not exist at all.

      • No, we don’t all get that same assistance. That’s just a lie from an oblivious mind. Your existence DOESN’T matter. You are an evolutionary dead end.

      • You made me laugh with that last line. I got progeny. Lots of progeny. Being old, I’ll reach my personal dead end presently; but evolutionarily my line’s doing just fine, thank you. But your comment makes pity your own dead end.

      • Sure. And all your progeny will be progressives in reaction to your horrible example.

      • “we don’t all get that same assistance”

        riiighht.
        Only wealthy, white people are allowed to get an education, and use the roads and bridges and other infrastructure to create wealth and prosperity………..

        dumfooq

      • ignorant doosh: do you deny these facts?

        “we don’t all get that same assistance”

        riiighht.
        Only wealthy, white people are allowed to get an education, and use the roads and bridges and other infrastructure to create wealth and prosperity………..

        dumfooq

      • maybe you aren’t fabulously wealthy because…..you’re a loser, born stoopid!

    • Why would anyone think that Trump is defending anyone’s interests except his own?

      • Because of his record and his willingness to take political risks.

        Next question.

      • The only joke here is you.

      • Trump’s interests do not put my interests at risk. The Establishment’s interests are a direct threat to my interest.

      • Nice deflection but that doesn’t mean that he is “defending” YOUR interests.

      • You are a damn fool if you don”t know that any elected official only protects their own interests. The trick is to elect one with interests that match up with your personal interests and those of your country. IntellectGetOne2 provides a nice list of these in this thread.

      • I would accuse you of having a reading comprehension problem, but in your case i believe it was deliberate.

      • No deflection Dave…other than yours. If you voted for Hillary you should ask yourself the same question. How is it that she was defending your interests? Or are you really that naive?

      • i guess you can’t see that the lack of conflict in interests in practicality assumes the defense of our interests. if Trump and his voters/supporters want the same things, his efforts in fighting for what he wants is also fighting for what we want.

      • The premise doesn’t assume anything. It is itself an assumption, but it is you who infer a connection of the two dissimilar things, your own interest and Trump’s accidental lack of conflict with your interest. Somehow, you connies just can’t do logic.

      • So thinks u if u have no logic. U are no different than joe the plumber, who sees his imaginary 250k a year income at risk while he will never make more than 45k.

      • You appear to be unfamiliar with the wage scale in the trades on the East coast. If Joe is a master plumber he’s easily making 6 figures a year and if he owns the company $250k should be the floor not the ceiling on his earnings.

      • Why don’t u google joe and see how familiar u are w/ reality.

      • Let’s see, a master plumber who can easily make $150k/year in the greater NYC metro area is going to buy as company that only nets him $45k/year? You think that’s what he meant when he said his company makes $275/year?

        Or is it impossible for you to imagine anybody blue collar making more money than you do?

      • Oh crap. Sorry. I am being delusional. Man, that million I paid in federal taxes over the last 8 years totally mislead me. When I was doing my taxes, I was curious about how many individuals in the us actually broke the 300k mark. Nationally, it is about 1.5 percent. So, there are either very few so-highly-successful master plumbers out there or they are lying on their taxes and the former seems more likely.

        As for Joe, he had the same delusion many others have. A) he was never a master plumber. B) he was never gonna become a master plumber and became a unionized auto plant employee with nowhere close to a six digit salary.

      • Glad to see you can man up and admit the delusion of your ways. The NYC area is lucrative for the unionized trades (plumbers, electricians, etc) but nobody makes $300k/year doing it. The “individuals” making that kind of money are all small business owners who pay tax under the individual income tax. If you’re actually paying $125k/year in taxes (and since this is the interwebz nobodys buying it) you should ask who they use for taxes cause your accountant sucks.

      • I actually don’t pay that much. 55k a year goes into a sep ira. That defers 20k in taxes for now, but will ultimately be taxed on withdrawal. No. If u are single and w/ minimal deductions, 38 percent goes to Uncle Sam despite whoever is your accountant.

      • This is a dumb argument and it has always bothered me. Essentially, you assume that people are “voting against their own best interests” because they don’t agree with YOU. That is not the case, for rich or for poor, because Joe may be incredibly ambitious. Or, may never make more than 45K in his entire life, but is smart enough to realize that he won’t make THAT in a no growth, progressive, hell. Or he may feel that priorities other than money are important enough to make the difference. (And there is a long, long list here.) OR MAYBE HE JUST LOOKS AT THE PROGRESSIVE’S OWN URBAN BASE AND THEIR DECADES OF SUFFERING UNDER PROGRESSIVE RULE AND DECIDES YOUR PROMISES ARE NOTHING BUT LIES.

        Or, any of the above.. Or all of the above..

        Regardless, he doesn’t trust a bunch of totalitarians to provide better outcomes for him, and the facts are on his side.

      • Stupid, wow, what a clever insult. I have no idea what a progressive is. Are u sure things in the world are that binary.

      • Trump’s interests do not put my interests at risk, unless I get in his way, annoy him, or have any financial relationship with him. Isn’t The Establishment a comedy group from the ’60s?

      • Obamacare repeal.
        Paris Accord repeal.
        Major tax reform.
        A new American-first foreign policy.
        An attitude to knock the arrogant press back from their preening perches.

        You hearing it now?

      • I’d like to see him and the Republican Congress pass some actual bills.

        The accomplishments you cite above are either not legislation or they have not been passed.

        “Knocking the arrogant press back from their preening perches” is a source of emotional satisfaction, but its not governing.

      • Yes it is. Robespierre’s closing of Danton’s scurrilous printing press was definitely an act of governing. Seriously: the media wants to create a narrative about future world inevitability that is inimical to thoughtfulness itself.

      • Wait a minute. Are you defending Robespierre? Why not Stalin? Why not Hitler?

        Are you suggesting that Trump should pass a bill— I am talking about legislation here, you know– that closes the “scurrilous press”?

        What are you talking about?

      • Well then call your Senator! Today! Tell them to vote for the bills! Your president is not your congressman nor is he your senator!

        You have to stop being a passive silly citizen who just thinks that a great president is all you need to vote for and all the responsibility you have is whining and complaining that one man in the white house is not doing everything you want. Stop acting like a two year old! You are a citizen of the United States! Take some responsibility!

        Your whining while you sit back and do nothing is such a pathetic action!

        Stop being pathetic!

      • And stop being gratuitously insulting.

        Not a word of your rant is true.

        You appear to approach the slightest criticism of Trump in the same way he approaches criticism of himself: with a full-scale attack that alienates both his friends in Congress and his enemies.

      • LOL, so you don’t know how a bill is passed and you claim you want the president to do it, then I call you out and you tell me I’m being untrue!

        What a sad little pathetic citizen you are!

        Get a clue! CONGRESS passes legislation. Trump stands ready to sign-it!

        You are just too stupid to engage any further!

      • Sorry, but conservatives don’t live on rails.

        We live on freedom.

        It is you liberal progressives that are taught you must stay on the rails!

      • I don’t think any of those things and I do know how bills are passed.

        But are you saying that the President has NO role in legislating?

        By all means disengage. It will be a relief.

        And we all know that it is not because I am too stupid.

        Its because I am too smart for you.When a debater starts throwing silly insults, everyone know he has lost.

      • LOL, sure, I have the one who has to explain the role of the President is signing bills.

        And then you, in your infinite wisdom, after being told the president has to sign bills passed by our Congress — YOU ask me the brilliant liberal progressive question:

        “But are you saying that the President has NO role in legislating?”

        Oh how DELICIOUS to have a liberal progressive show the depth of his liberal progressive intelligence!

        Sure!!!! You go with that! A president has to sign a bill for it to become law and that’s “NO role in legislating”!

        Now we know why conservatives keep winning elections! Liberals like you think that when a vote count is higher for a conservative, it must have “no role” in electing the conservative!

        Hahahahahahahaaa!

      • It’s strange how much the Trumpsters identify with Trump. It’s like some kind of morbid fascination.

      • More than a morbid fascination, they actually want to be him.

        Where I see a rather feminine, soft, deeply insecure bully, they see a stud bull who can push people around and get away with it.

      • Ummmm… did you think bills “magically” pass the house without votes?

        You know its about six months into the administration right?

        I don’t know what grade school you went to, but here in the USA we have a bicameral legislative body, with sub-committees, committees and chamber votes and then reconciliation.

        It took two years for the country to elect a president. You think six months or so is too long to pass major legislation (minor legislation is passed with ease).

        Also, who nominated the SCOTUS justice? Who got him appointed? Who leads every cabinet level agency in the executive branch now?

        You think those are not accomplishments?

        You are a silly little citizen!

        Did you think that

      • Obamacare repeal – bellyflopped on that once, probably going to do it again. At any rate, passing an unpopular healthcare bill with no bipartisan support in 2009 did not do any favors for the Democrats in 2010. Does no one learn from history?

        Paris Accord repeal – removing us as an important power on the world stage. Rah-rah.

        Major tax reform – already floated it and was laughed off the stage.

        A new American-first foreign policy – I don’t see any policy at all.

        As for the press, they hardly seem intimidated by him, LOL.

      • Another butthurt liberal suffering from cognitive dissonance.

      • So you admit the Obamacare repeal has passed the house within six months of Trump taking over and is now on the verge of passing in the senate.

        Check!

        You admit our renunciation of the pathetic Paris appeal shows American leadership — versus the Obama follower-ship for US participation in the first place.

        Check!

        Tax reform is off the stage? WTF are you talking about? You do know that Hillary lost right? Tax reform is deeply underway.

        Check!

        You don’t see an American-first policy because you have your head so far up Hillary’s arse! Ask the Germans what they are doing about NATO funding!

        The press is running around like a chicken with its head cut off! Trump is playing them like a violin.

        You really bore me. If you have a point to counter mine, then make it!

        You failed so far.

      • Since you missed the actual news

        Obamacare repeal – The bill is collapsing under its own weight and must be addressed.

        Paris Accord repeal – removing us from having top pay $3 trillion to China and India, so hopefully they will pollute less (good luck on that)

        Major tax reform – already floated it and is awaiting Obamacare repeal.

        “A new American-first foreign policy – I don’t see any policy at all.” Really? Pressure on China to rein in North Korea, selling natural gas outside of the US to remove Russia as the sole provider to Western Europe thereby keeping the price low and causing the lower prices to put a dent in the Russian economy, once again backing our allies in the Middle East. Pretty good start!

        “As for the press, they hardly seem intimidated by him”, Really? They seem to be having mental meltdowns and are destroying their reputations, along with that of their employers

      • 70 year old billionaire runs for president, and you think he is doing it for his own benefit? A year and half of 16 hour days on the campaign trail, the disparagement and hatred from the media and half the population, the 24 hour-a-day job that is the presidency, and you think he needed that?

      • Ok then, show me in what way he is benefitting from being president, other than those ways that anyone serving as president benefits.

      • Other than those ways that anyone serving as president benefits? Why, aren’t those reasons enough?

      • Ok, so if every president defends only his own interests, then your comments are meaningless in regards to this analysis of President Trump.

      • What??? I did not say that every president defends only his own interests, I said that Trump defends only his own interests.
        I would accuse you of having a reading comprehension problem, but in your case I think it is deliberate.

      • Ok, then how is Trump benefitting from being president? Obviously not the salary. I guess there is the prestige that comes with the office. Please tell me how else he benefits.

      • Prestige is very important to megalomaniacs like Trump. No one takes the job for the salary.

      • So that’s it. You think he is in it just to satisfy his ego, and that is not typical of presidents. I will concede that, but at the same time, many see him, as stated in the original comment above “zealously defend(ing) their common interests, especially against pseudo-aristocratic racial/ethnic claims of privilege”.

      • Typical inability to produce facts, just headlines.

      • You have trapped yourself. Please name a President that did not defend his own interests.

      • Being a butthurt nevertrumper looks good on you. Cry more.

      • I find it strange that you think childish cliche name-calling has any effect or significance.

      • Trolling for the sake of trolling. Around and around we go eh?

      • Totally. Of all the Never Trumpers, the worst are the still-unhinged Cruz-bots.

        Get a clue guys – even Ted has let the primary campaign go.

      • It’s true. Poor Ted has lost his looks, is visibly losing his hair, and has no believers in his having been the choice of God anymore. I almost feel sorry for him.

      • For one thing, as soon as he won the election, he doubled the membership fees at Mar a Lago. Fact. That action more than doubled his profit from that resort. I suppose you believe George Washington did the same.

      • “He is doing this for his own benefit”.

        Could you be more specific?

      • No, he can’t. You’re dealing with one of the most bilious NeverTrumpers still trolling comment sections on conservative themed websites.

        Best just to ignore it.

      • Oh what’s the matter trump snow flake? Open forums are only for milo or Anne? Poor u, boo hooo is your safe space being violated?

      • The Clintons used government service as their road to wealth and power. From renting out the Lincoln bedroom in the White House to selling presidential pardons to influence peddling as Sec of State, the Clintons have no one’s interests but their own front and center. The voting public sensed that fact especially in blue collar areas like PA, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin.

      • They “sensed” that “fact”. Possibly with minor assistance from the conservative media, who threw any and every accusation they could imagine or fantasize at the Clintons for 15 years, many of which are sworn to by conservatives in the absence of even a tissue of evidence for it.

      • Unfortunately, renting out the Lincoln bedroom, selling pardons (look up Marc Rich) and influence peddling are established facts about the Clintons. Secondly, conservatives are not Clinton supporters anyway so what does it matter what they believe? It was independents and even blue collar Democrats that swung the election to Trump in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. They are not influenced by conservative media. They are the ones that did not appreciate being called “bitter clingers” by Obama and “deplorables” by Clinton. Face up to the failures of your party.

      • Sure, as kids we sometimes think that we’d like to grow up and be president. Trump is closer to the people who voted for him than any politician that comes to mind.

      • Then you are freakin’ blind. This is the last thing he “needed”. You would say it is all about his ego, but that is true of every single person who ever runs for President. He had to believe that he could fix what is wrong in this country but to characterize it as a “need” as from some psychological deficiency is ridiculous.

      • You seem to believe that Trump has some capacity for altruism. Maybe on his best days.

      • Then try harder- your thought process is extremely defective.

      • He needed the glorification of his own ego. He needed to vindicate himself after Obama showed what a buffoon he was at that Correspondents’ Dinner. Also, he needed access to new capital after the banks declined to give him any more credit. Or is your question, does he like being President? If so, I think it’s obvious that he doesn’t.

      • Now Dave, how in the world did you literally get inside Donald Trump’s head,
        a la “Honey I Shrunk the Kids”? Or perhaps you went on a tour of the White House and snuck into his office, found his journal, and pilfered it?? Either way, impressive accomplishment!

      • Son, you’re in way over your head! “Better get while the gettings good!”

      • Exactly what everyone thinks of your post troll.

      • you falsely assume a cotradiction between Trump’s interests and our interests. you do that because you do not understand or care to understand what Middle America is all about. One thing for sure is that those you think are consistent with your interests likely have you brainwashed but they definitely do NOT have our interests at heart.

      • Why would anyone think that Obama cared about anything but himself?

      • Because of the more than quarter-million jobs his actions have made possible. That’s why.

      • Yes, saving 700-odd jobs in *Indiana* really lines Trump’s pockets. Brill, just brill.

      • Yeahhhh… Trump has lots of his own money sunk into WV coal mines and AC plants in Indiana. Boy, you sure told ME off.

    • Hahahaha. A churlish arguement made by churls for churls. The man acted crass because he knew it would galvanize the crass 35 percent and from there he only needed another 12 percent or so.

      • Could you please use the word “churl” some more? Then try some silly virtue signaling.

      • Virtue signaling, what’s that? A pale version of “Christian values” bible thumping?

      • Perhaps you should tailor your childish insults, at least in a general way, to the poster you purport to be responding to. Something tells me a poster calling himself “Altalena” is NOT likely to be a Christian Bible-thumper. But that simple deduction was well above your pay grade.

      • Oh you mean above the 242K I pulled in last year or the 271K I pulled in the year before? Sorry I don’t subscribe to your trivia. Seems like you are a Star Wars fan and not an Empire Strikes Back or Return of the Jedi fan. As for me, all the testaments are fiction. Have a nice day roaming the history channel, thinking somehow it makes u erudite and at a higher pay grade.

      • Yeah, damn them “college boys” with their “four-eyed book-l’arnin” and all!

        Drop the kiddie movies and read a book. Your vocabulary is as limited as your store of historical knowledge… truly amazing.

      • Yep, when I went to Ivy League school number one after scoring in the top 0.4% of the SAT’s, it was only so I could later go to Ivy League school number 2. Somehow, I actually ended up doing real work and not sitting around watching TV or bloviating with others on some narrow subject.

      • “Purile,” eh? Learn to spell, then learn to read. Now back to burger-flipping for you. Bye.

      • sorry. u are right. u come in second place only to microsoft word in spelling, something that gets u squat in 21st century. I’ll go back to my highly technical, high paying job. Hey, what did u score on the SAT armchair-sesquipedalman? Where did u go to school? What did u earn? Bet it was 242k. Burger flipping, hahaha. Love it, low-IQ, no-name-regional-college, destined-for-forty-thousand-a-year night manager at bowling ally little virtue-signaling-through-useless-facts snow flake. Go write that 8,000 word essay now and show us how smart u think u are.

    • I’d turn it around: If a candidate has spent his whole life defending ONLY his own interests,using all weapons at his command, why should the public think he will zealously defend their common interests? I can’t point to a single patriotic thing private citizen Donald Trump ever did in his life. Can you?

      • I have not the slightest doubt you’ve never heard of the Wollman Rink.

  • Trump: people believe him.

    Not exactly a bumper sticker but…it works.

  • Do I wish Trump “could” be a more gentlemanly president? Sure, who wouldn’t. On the other hand, am I glad at this point in history and at this point in the desperate fight to pull America back from the socialist precipice that he is capable and (as importantly) willing to fight as more than a gentlemanly president? Absolutely. Donald, counter punch ugly and counter punch often.

    The republican elites fight for government just as strongly as democrats; just a slightly different government. Like Trump or don’t like Trump, he is not fighting for any hyphenated American or for the government. He is only fighting for “Americans”.

  • Never discount the capacity of offended taste to induce the offended tasters to construct a “morality of aesthetics.” And by so doing becoming inbred, tasteless and finally a cult.

  • The last time America had a “non-gentleman” (not considering the Rapist clinton) President was that “Damn-Cowboy” Theodore Roosevelt. From the “Great White Fleet” to the Panama Canal (I’ll dig it with my own hands!”), TR was hated by the elitists, loved by the People, and Respected by foreigners. Mount Rushmore is not a bad place to end up.

    • I never understood why TR was on Mt Rushmore except that the sculptor like him. Nevertheless, Trump is not Teddy Roosevelt.

    • Teddy brought the “Progressive” wave with him.

      Mount Rushmore would’ve been better off without him.

    • Right – Teddy Roosevelt, the scion of old patrician lineage, product of elite education, inheritor of a private fortune, explicit believer in aristocratic leadership – was not a gentleman.

  • There’s a two-word description of Trump, his campaign, and his presidency: paradigm shift.

  • Given the reality of Leftiness – its vulgar language, its nudity, its public sex, its public defecation and vileness – how can anyone talk about coarseness in Donald Trump?

  • “Coarse Correction: The Real Significance of the 2016 Election”

    With all respect to the author, considering that President Trump’s greatest accomplishment to-date is the utter and complete disarray he’s thrown Democrats, Liberals, and other such Entitlement Monkeys into, to the point where they’re wee-wee’ing themselves constantly, the “Real Significance of the 2016 Election” is that detergent and washing machine manufacturers are making out like bandits!!!

  • The reality is that much of the mainstream media has now fully merged with the Democratic party, and their coverage of President Trump is consistently and relentlessly biased against him. Glad to see the President fighting back against a media that has basically reduced itself to anti-Trump hysteria.

  • The vilification of Trump would be even more emblematic if it didn’t exist. His detractors shout out his efficacy every day and Trump’s supporters are loving it. We need him to invade Canada quick. Our lefty leader is busy ensuring open borders, large government, more taxes, fewer jobs, and zero free speech. My white flag is at the ready.

  • Trump behaves like a third world dictator .
    Those guys have their supporters too

  • licking fat trump’s backside for 4 years will make for some really boring prose

    get a new job

  • A very good article. I also recommend watching the Dana Loesch video. Dana Loesch is great. She’s beautiful, smart and very articulate. I’d never heard of her until the leftists started condemning her NRA video and condemning her as a “White Supremacist!”. Big mistake on their part. They made her a star and once again demonstrated how crazy they are. They are by far their own worst enemies.
    http://youtu.be/9gWxneB1gvg

  • He did what MCain and Romeny wouldn’t do: He fought back. He knew that fear of displeasing the left, of appeasment would lead to the same result as 2008 & 2012. Repeating the same thing and expecting different results is one definition of insanity.

    • And I would like to add the example of George W. Bush, probably one of the most decent men ever to be elected president, whose presidency was crippled when he refused to fight back when called “baby-killer” and other vile names.

      • He was elected twice, and with a greater % of the vote than Trump. The 2nd time he got a majority of the popular vote. His presidency was not “crippled” by any stretch of the imagination.

      • Bush the First? A globalist who did no one any favors outside the inner circle. Perot was the best man running that year…

    • Ronald Reagan won twice, GHWB won once and GWB won twice. No Republican could have won in 2008 and Romney did about as well as anyone could have against a popular sitting president. To say that no one else could have won in 2016 against the 2nd most unpopular presidential candidate in history is utter nonsense.

      • 2008 was a different world than 2000/04. Apples/oranges. Maybe no R could have won in 2008, but it would have been nice to see one try. Ditto with 2012, Romney open mike’s his 47% remark and immediately goes into ApologizeCon 5.
        Republicans won’t win at the presidential level by being nice establishment nice guys trying to placate the press.

  • Contrary to the article, Obama’s father did not complete his PhD.

  • Appeasement, like prohibition and socialism, never works. President Trump’s decisions to take the fight to the corrupt MSM, the “political correctness police,” and the America-haters proves this every day. We the people prefer our President to be strong and unafraid of the jabbering liberal progressives that dominate the media and attempt to impose their thought police on us by telling us how we must believe, think, and feel. After 8 years of Barack Obama trying to appease the worlds bad guys, and decades of GOP politicians attempting to appease the liberal progressives, we are delighted to have a president with the courage to call things as they really are, rather than as certain special interest groups wish them to be.

    • Because, according to our constitution, the office, charge and responsibility of the president is to call things as they really are.

  • On the contrary, MANY of us realize that Watergate was EXACTLY that and it is the same playbook they are trying to use against Trump. Not going to happen again. But the “gentlemen” of the party, if we let them, would let it happen as they still would rather lose instead of get their hands dirty and call out the Democrat party for what it is/they are.

  • Pardon me, but what kind of “populist” manages to lose the popular vote by three million to a woman who is impossible to like, and squeaks into office based on the anti-democratic weighting of the electoral college? Please leave Lincoln out of it; Trump’s true 19th century predecessor was P.T. Barnum. This essay proves once again Barnum’s famous dictum: there’s one born every minute.

    • Not Barnum – the 19th-century political version of Barnum: Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte.

      • Nope, you both missed it but I give you points for a good attempted insult. The answer is Andrew Jackson.

      • The analogy to Jackson is cliche. Jackson wasn’t a gentleman born, but in his own and his neighbors’ eyes was a gentleman made. And he would certainly have despised Trump for a blaspheming, fast-talking, huckstering, city-slicker Dutchman.

    • Bill Clinton got 41% of the vote in 1992, yet not a single person said he was not legitimate. Trump gets 48% and for some reason he is illegitimate. Hypocrisy?

      • Speaking for myself, I do see Trump as legitimate — given the rules we follow in presidential elections. Unlike Bill C, however, he came in second in the popular vote. Loser?

      • “Bill Clinton got 41% of the vote in 1992”

        And won the popular vote by a margin of nearly 6 million. And it was 43%, in fact.

    • Want some cheese with that whine? Lets have nationwide voter I.D. cards with picture and credit card security features. Then we’ll see who REALLY wins the popular vote. Also, please explain your contention that the electoral college is weighed incorrectly. I need another good laugh this morning!

      • Suppose I advocate that in the next presidential election, my vote will count four times as much as yours, sound good? Then why is this OK? “The states with the fewest people per electoral vote, and therefore the highest “vote power,” are Wyoming, Vermont, and North Dakota. In Wyoming, there are 143,000 people for each of its three electoral votes. The states with the weakest votes are New York, Florida, and California. These states each have around 500,000 people for each electoral vote. In other words, one Wyoming voter has roughly the same vote power as four New York voters.” I do like your voter ID proposal, but it sounds a little like a big government power grab.

      • To paraphrase Sinclair, it is difficult to get a man to understand something when his political advantage depends upon his not understanding it.

      • You seem to be making an unwitting argument against Federalism. If much of the enormous power of the Federal government was ceded back to the States, it would make little difference who the POTUS is. The 500k Californians per EC vote could then do exactly as they see fit, same as the Wyomingites.

      • That’s an intriguing idea, although there is the potential for chaos and conflict — I don’t know what kind of weak confederation would enable 50 independent states to coordinate an effective mutual defense program, for example. Some sort of mega-NATO, maybe. In any case, rather than fragment the USA on July 3, I would prefer to see us move in the direction of choosing a national leader using a one-person, one-vote system. I recognize that neither change is likely to occur any time soon.

      • ” I don’t know what kind of weak confederation would enable 50
        independent states to coordinate an effective mutual defense program,
        for example.”

        This was laid out in 1791 in the 10th amendment. The Federal Government has since accumulated far more power than it was ever interned to have.

      • Yeah Rock, I know about the FairVote website too. What you say may be technically correct but it is still an ass backwards argument to use vis-a-vis the fairness of the Electoral College.

        When was the last time a presidential election was decided by any of the states you mentioned? Using your logic, I could say that there are only four counties in the entire United States that really matter in presidential elections. Ponder this:

        Here’s a little known tidbit that emphasizes how important voter fraud can really be. If not for 4 counties in America, Romney would have been elected president in 2012. That is not a typo! Of all the counties in the United States, 4 of them decided the 2012 presidential election. They were as

        follows:

        Cook County Illinois = Nothing much needs to be said here. Cook County includes Chicago, and is home to the most corrupt

        democratic machine in the country. Cook County has sent more politicians

        to state and federal penitentiaries, than it has to Washington D.C. In Chicago, Blacks and Hispanics have nearly a 2 to1population majority over Caucasians.

        Cuyahoga County Ohio = Cuyahoga County is home to Cleveland, another city totally controlled by the Democratic party.

        The county has only voted for a Republican president (barely) one time

        since 1960. Caucasians represent only 37% of the population in Cleveland. Barack Obama received more than 99% of the vote in more than 100 precincts in Cuyahoga County, Ohio on election day.

        Philadelphia

        County Pennsylvania = Philadelphia County’s largest city is its

        namesake. The county has voted for the Democrat in every presidential

        election since 1932. In 1972, it was the only county in the state to

        vote for George McGovern over Richard Nixon. Even Republican Senator

        Arlen Specter, a Philadelphia resident, did not receive one third of the

        Philadelphia vote in 2004. The county is almost evenly split
        demographically between Blacks and Caucasians. In 59 voting districts,
        Mitt Romney did not receive 1 single vote! Zilch! Nada! What is the odds
        of that?

        Miami-Dade County, Florida = Obviously, Miami is the
        largest city. 50.9% of the total population in the county is
        foreign-born, a percentage greater than that of any other county in the
        United States. 57.3% of the population is Hispanic or Latino. 20.3% is
        Black, (either of African-American or Caribbean descent) and 20.7% are
        Caucasian. That’s about all anyone needs to know in regard to this
        county, but it is not nearly as likely to vote Democratic as the
        previous three counties.

        So in conclusion, its pretty
        easy to see why the Democrats are against any form of voter I.D.,
        cleaning up invalid registrations or any type of voter reform that could
        affect their lop-sided advantages in Democrat controlled major
        U.S. cities. If anyone doesn’t think fraud exists in those cities,
        here’s a little tip. Denial is not a river in Egypt!

        So, by this logic, minorities controlled the 2012 election. Even though they only represent a very small percentage of the population. My logic is as skewed as yours, but you can see what happens when you start playing with numbers and electoral votes.

        People vote with their feet. When I was born, New York had 47 electoral votes. Now it has 29. What with all the people bailing out of states like NY, NJ, ILL, etc, it will be interesting to see how reapportionment stacks up after the 2020 census.

        Have a happy 4th!

      • James – Happy Independence Day to you as well! Your “tidbit” is very interesting. What’s the source? I do like the idea of reducing voter fraud (if it can be shown that it exists to any significant extent – I have yet to see evidence of that). However I don’t like the idea that I’d need to get a national government ID card, which seems a bit totalitarian. The electoral college was invented to give small population states more reason to join the US by weakening the ability of larger population states to boss them around – just the issue we are discussing today.

      • Sorry Rock, but I can’t provide a link for my tidbit. I read the article a long time ago, and used “cut and paste” to save it in my political file. Should have saved the web address as well. You can probably find the article if you want to spend enough time on Google. At any rate, I’m sure it came from what I consider a reliable source or I wouldn’t have saved it.

        As for voter fraud, I’d love to known exactly how much of a factor it is. You might like to Google the latest findings from the Pew Research Center on illegal immigrant voting. Its a very interesting report, and I’m sure you will agree that Pew is a highly respected entity.

        I lean Libertarian, so I know what you mean about the totalitarian feelings a national I.D. card conjures up. Having said that, I’m not buying all the voter suppression bullshit coming from the left. I think they’re petrified at what might come to light in a real investigation by the government .

        Yes, I know the reason why the Electoral College came into being. Its the same reason why we live in a Democratic Republic and and not a true democracy. The founding fathers wanted to make sure that a small majority couldn’t run roughshod over a large minority. Thank God for that, because there is no president Hillary!

      • James – It is a pleasure to converse with you, I mean it. We may not agree 100%, yet we do not immediately resort to insult. This exchange is restoring my faith in humanity. Can this be the internet in 2017? With respect, however, I must question your sources. I did google “four counties that decided the 2012 presidential election” before asking you about it. Result: nada. Now I have googled “Pew Research Center study on illegal immigrant voting.” Result: an item on a very sketchy website called The Underground Report that links to Pew but not to any specific study. Underground Report claims that a Pew study shows that 3.9 illegals voted, but the Pew site itself doesn’t make that claim or contain information on any such “study.” By the way, the Underground Report also features a scoop on Michelle Obama’s recent sex change operation. Is it at all possible you have been misled by fake news?

      • Hey Rock:
        Let me start by saying that I am a political junkie, but you probably already guessed that. 90% of the political articles I read are usually linked through RealPolitics.Com, which I think it is the
        best website on the Internet. They are highly respected and seldom offer
        links to “iffy” content.

        Having said that, I seldom fall victim
        to “fake news” and if I post a comment I’m generally very comfortable with the
        veracity of its content.

        I read articles from publications and
        websites that are considered both left and right, even though I
        sometimes gag and have to force myself to continue. LOL. A wise man
        should always know what his adversary is thinking, no?

        I spent a few minutes looking for the links to corroborate my posts but can’t locate the exact ones without wasting a lot of time. This link to the Politico election map will allow you to see the huge disparity in the counties I cited.

        You might also find this article interesting, even though it is from a conservative website.

        Thanks for the compliment. I also enjoy talking with an open-minded individual.

        Have a nice day!

      • James – Yes, I enjoy RCP, too, and I try to be careful not to fall for fake news, although it has become so plentiful that we’re all vulnerable to it. You seem honest and thoughtful, so I hope you won’t continue to claim that there is a Pew study that finds extensive voting by undocumented aliens. I can’t find evidence that any such Pew study exists. On the other hand, if you can show that they did such a study but have taken it off their website, you will have uncovered a real scandal! Again, it’s been a pleasure. I will sign off now – perhaps our cyber paths will cross again in the future.

      • Let’s require a short exam on American government and history as a prerequisite to the franchise, and then we’ll see who wins the popular vote.

    • One that gets over 5,000.000. Illegal votes from the democratic states that won’t release their voter rolls ( which are open to the public through FOIA) to the commission that is looking into voter fraud.
      If Democrats really said what they believed in, they would not win another national election

  • “using all weapons at his command”

    All legal weapons – or just all?

  • Wonderful article. Very well written and researched.

  • The Mainstream Media did their best to promote Donald Trump and win him the republican nomination over the other republican candiates. Then the Mainstream Media did their best to promote Hillary Clinton to become president. Well, the people said no to Hillary and yes to Donald. Now the Mainstream Media is all upset.

  • The Mainstream Media, aka “Fake News”, has failed at its job of protecting the American people from the corruption and abuse by our government. The MSM was given special privileges under the Constitution to hold our government accountable. Instead, the MSM has aligned itself with one side of our political equation and only holds the other side accountable.

  • Superb analysis. And you have to love the appeal to authority via Aristotelian common sense.

  • Heheeh, Mr. Masugi writes…

    “Besides demolishing the leading members of party establishments, Trump would redefine the Republican Party as the workers’ party…”

    How true. trump enriches his rich crony elites… and the rest of the proletarian’s ‘work’.

    Does Mr. Masugi think America under trump will become the new ‘Workers Paradise’?
    HB

  • Bottom line is Trump is doing what he said he would do while both Party Establishments cringe in fear. Republican Establishment members who promised repeal of OCare and lower taxes do nothing out of fear of losing the next election. Politicians aren’t supposed to be honest so they are at a loss to figure Trump out. Fortunately they will have 7 1/2 more years in which to figure him out.

  • “Republicans still haven’t learned the meaning of Watergate, which was far more a political crisis engineered by partisan Democrats than a constitutional crisis brought about by Nixon.” You were doing so well, and then had to throw in an apologia to Nixon. The Admin state may have been poised, but until Nixon committed a crime there was no way to stop him.

  • It’s way simpler. Trump won because Clinton and her supporters gave the win to Trump. Clinton spent the primary beating down Sanders and promoting Trump and Cruz through media friendships because her operatives believed she would lose to ANY of the others. She was a lousy candidate running a lousy campaign and pure hubris gave the win to someone even less popular than her.

  • I never see the stat I think was highly influential mentioned in the 2016 autopsy – 69% of Americans don’t have $1,000 in savings. 80% don’t have $5,000. 50% don’t have $400. When you are a car repair away from not making a home payment, I think it’s easy to believe the system isn’t working for you, and you have little to lose by blowing it up. It’s great to hear someone blame your problems on someone else, like Mexicans, and promise that he alone can fix it. Trump was able to form a coalition between the wealthy, who think they don’t need much in government services and drool over tax cuts and deregulation, and a significant segment of, as Trump himself called it, “the poorly educated”, and the alt-right and strident evangelicals who were able to overlook Trump’s character because he nominated Pence, who was one of them. HRC was trusting that the electorate was intelligent to see through 30 years of character assassination and the Trump con, but with Comey’s help, she was sorely mistaken.

    • The facts known about actions taken by Hillary Clinton while secretary of state surrounding the use of an unsecure private email server for conducting government business show that she violated 10 federal statutes. Several are national-security-related felonies, just three of which include: 1. disclosure of classified information (22 documents were Top Secret), 2. unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents, and 3. destruction of evidence (erasure of the hard drive and deletion of some 30,000 emails by Secretary Clinton) after a government investigation had commenced (Benghazi hearings began Oct. 10, 2012).

      The most plausible explanation for Hillary Clinton’s circumventing longstanding federal rules on secure communication — and for her insistence on implementing a private email server — was simply to conceal a conflict of interest in continuing a role in the Clinton Foundation while also serving as secretary of state. It is instructive that Secretary Clinton’s top aide, Huma Abedin, was simultaneously on payrolls of both the State Department and the Teneo Group, an influence-peddling consulting operation founded by a Clinton confidant. Additionally, a private email server would protect disclosure of fund-raising activities for Hillary Clinton’s anticipated run for president.

      • I get it. She had flaws. Put them on the scale with her competition. We have a weakness, in our country, IMHO, in comparing candidates to perfection, instead of to our alternatives. Is DJT using an unsecured cellphone for his morning tweets? White House won’t say. Did HRC ever convey our top secrets directly to Russians? Or at a public venue to the Chinese, as DJT has admitted to doing? We know of her potential conflicts and income because of her disclosures, so they can at least be evaluated. Where are 45’s returns? What about the Trump Foundation’s transgressoins? Trump U? What if Obama had fired Comey because of “the email thing” in summer 2016? How would we the GOP have reacted?

      • I’m not a fan of Trump but I do consider him vastly superior to anything on the hate whitey left. I’m amazed that anyone could vote for the democrats who sided with BLM against the police, were so supportive of illegals that they were pretty much signaling approval of open borders and who would have put another leftist on the Supreme Court which would have meant Court approval for any leftist equal outcomes social engineering projects the left wanted.

        I don’t believe America even still exists as a country. Time will tell what fate has in store for us.

      • Trump and the “hate whitey left” are not your only two choices.

  • All of the learned minds trying to assess the 2016 election fail to realize that it was a statistical anomaly in the state-by-state voting that made the difference. On election day there were 6 states that were too close to call, amounting to 94 electoral college votes. Probability of getting 5 heads on 6 coin tosses is about 7% – but that’s what happened. Clinton got one state, worth four votes, Trump got the other five tossups and 90 Electoral College Votes – and won by 74. It happened, but the significance of it is nonexistent.
    Period. End of report. All speculation is jejune, inane, a waste of time. No more to be said.

    • Yeah. You may want to go re-take that statistics class again. Pay close attention to the meaning of the word random. And, btw, even if it were random, 1) it’s gonna last 4 yrs, and 2) it’s better than winning the lottery to see schmucks like you try to pretend it doesn’t matter.

    • The real significance of 2016 is that it doesn’t happen at all without both major parties whooshing and missing since the end of the Cold War. A bunch of us figured out we had a once in a lifetime opportunity to deliver a negative message to the cabal of career politicians/bureaucrats/MSM. Enjoy those twitters :-)

    • Keep believing that and we can talk what issues you have In 2024

    • A “statistical anomaly”? Probability of getting 5 heads in 6 coin tosses is 6/64 or 9.4%, not 7%. That’s because there are 2^6 = 64 combinations of heads-tails in 6 flips and 6 of them will contain 5 heads (or 5 tails). So the probability is 6/64=9.4%.

      Something that happens almost 1 out of 10 times is not considered rare in statistical terms and is certainly not an “anomaly”, whatever that means.

      Hope there is a community college near you where you can brush up.

  • correct about Trump being a champion of American Identity, but a thoroughly incoherent analysis

  • If Democrats told the American Electorate what they truly believed in, they would not win another national election. ( that’s why they lie and move to left center). We now know this from Wikileaks’s which proves collusion with the media and libtards!

  • There are those among us, THIS old dinosaur included, who like the fact that the President of the United States is perfectly willing to say “f*ck you, loser”.

    So much more American than his predecessor roaming the world looking for another satrap to whom to bow or the one before that simply hoping they would use a little Vaseline.

    MAGA

  • Long article. Let me make it simple for you. Trump saved the Supreme Court for us and thus the 2nd Amendment.

  • The stupidity of conservadouches is the eighth wonder of the world.

    • Who is stupid? The Democrats threw away the House, the Senate, the presidency and more than 1000 legislative seats at the state level since Obama was elected. Democrats totally control only 6 states, while Republicans control 31. So, essentially you are calling the majority of Americans “stupid”.

      • The conservadouches stole those seats. They are very cunning when it comes to taking what doesn’t belong to them. But it won’t last. Conservadouches are limitlessly stupid, so stupid they can actually infect rational people with their stupidity, sometimes.

  • For many of us who supported Trump, this piece scans as correct: the country is in dire need of a new direction. Hopefully Trump has the cajones to get us there. In the midst of his cage match with the Deep State, I think progress is being made.

    • Already exists. It is 580 miles long along the southern border. It was passed through various various acts of Congress from 1994 to the present. That means it began in the Bill Clinton administration. In 2006 Hillary voted to extend the wall (Secure Fence ACT). Trump merely said he was going to extend it to cover the entire border.

      It is coming – count on it

  • I love President Trump. I just wish he’d cut back on the personal attacks on twitter.

    He’s got too many enemies… not worth the time responding to all of them.

    Just focus on your policies, Sir.

    We’ve got your back!

    MAGA!

    • What you have to realize is that it is difficult to get your policies enacted when you allow the leftist media to pummel you on the ground without responding. They hate Republicans and conservatives not because of what they do, but because they exist. “W” was nice to media and Democrats. They said he was selected, not elected. They said he entered Iraq for the oil . They tried to impeach him multiple times. Called him a war criminal. How did that work out?

      The difference is Trump knows who these people really are, despite their pretending to be legitimate journalists. They are Democrats and socialists doing whatever they can to help their party.

      So fight on , Mr President! The sad faces at CNN are worth a million bucks.

      • i understand your points…
        but consider this…
        in acting when one actor talks over another actor’s lines it’s called
        “stepping on your lines” — NOT GOOD!

        when trump’s tweets divert attention from his great policies–
        he “steps on his own lines” — NOT GOOD!

  • Don the Con in full gear.

    (1) Instead of engaging in policy and working hard, he is engaging in Twitter Boxing. South Korean president spends a whole day at the White House, meanwhile D0n the C0n is busy with Twitter-attacks, and changing the focus of the day on that, instead of policy,

    (2) Hundreds of key positions have gone unfilled. Sure, he is happy to blame the Democ-RATS. But in reality, there are several things at work: (i) he is not nominating fast enough, (ii) a lot of his nominees end up pulling out (e.g., not interested in divesting their business interests, or just don’t want to partake in the clown circus show), (iii) nominees or candidates who have up-ward paths in their career or business are just not interested in.

    Yea, sure, the FAKE CON-servatists will say that Donald Trump is trying to cut the “Deep State”. Fully false, because when top positions go unfilled, the career mid-level bureaucrats become responsible for high level decisions, thus increasing the influence of the “deep” “state” (whatever the heck that means),

    (3) Let’s Make America Golf Again. Career small-ball sports player is engaging in his favorite pass-time of golf. Before people chime in with “Oh, no, but he is working too”, just step back and think about it: if you brought your Monopoly board game to work, and played a few rounds in between my “work”, I am sure your boss too will think that you are working hard. Quit the bee-ess please.

    There are no REAL achievements yet.

    Nothing.

    Nada.

    No tax reform.

    No immigration reform.

    No trade reform.

    No nothing.

    Nada.

    Zip.

    Net. Nichego.

  • “Republicans have yet to recognize that their Machiavellian enemies in the bureaucracy, media, and politics brought about Nixon’s demise”. . .are you trying to be an historic revisionist? What bought about Nixon’s demise, was Richard Nixon!

  • Truly excellent analysis.

    Aristotle (Politics
    V.6) explains, “Oligarchies change most often in two most obvious ways.
    One occurs when they treat the multitude unjustly, for then any
    champion is sufficient, especially when it turns out that the leader
    comes from the oligarchy itself….”

    This is indeed what confused the bipartisan political establishment the most. They didn’t understand the extent of their mistreatment of the electorate. Subordinating their lives and their constitutional rights to the whims of connected cronies, illegal aliens and foreign interests, proved very surely to many that Trump wasn’t to be feared and they studied him with interest. When the establishment powers pounced, that sealed the vilified Trump as someone they could trust because he had all the right enemies!

    OP is also quite correct that charges of “Authoritarianism” and “Anti-Constitutionalism” fell flat when hurled at Trump by a gaggle of the most authoritarian and constitution hating people many Americans had ever encountered in their lives. So, no one believed them. Even the Christian Right, which establishment forces believed would answer Ted Cruz’s many overt signals to them, felt safer with Trump. The people who hated Trump openly and mocked him were the same ones who treated them with not only dislike, but barely disguised malice. Even the famous “P-grabbing” comment fell flat as a result and it is little wonder why.

    The greatest reason that Trump won has not been touched by anyone, but they chew around the edges when they mention “coarseness” as a pejorative. It wasn’t perceived as merely “coarse” but as human. In so doing, Trump revealed himself completely to them and lured his enemies into revealing themselves as well.. When they did, America took stock of them and found them to be little more than credentialed monsters in expensive clothes. They rejected them and their wisdom, and settled even more firmly on Trump. They trusted the man. So far that trust has been well placed.

    Great piece.. Bravo!

    • You can pretty much assume this is a complement by a non/knowledgeable bloviator.

  • We remember JFK’s Daisy ad, and Ted Kennedy’s Borking speech, and Hillary’s Deplorables, and BusHitler signs (encouraged by the DNC), and Comparisons of GOP candidates since 1976 to Hitler/Stalin/whatever tyrant is available, and the truly hateful rhetoric of the Left – now and forever.

    But DJT is ungentlemanly?

    Gimme a Break!

  • Thoughtful, sourced and scholarly. A voice of reason in a cacophony of drivel from what once passed as the 4th Estate.

Comments are closed.