Donald Trump: Crusher of Pussy

[Trigger warning:  Those who have good taste will want to skip right ahead to my latest post, or better yet yesterday’s Econlog post.]

Here’s what I don’t get.  People can clearly see what other people are like, when they are average people.  But when they are celebrities, it seems like people are unable to perceive even the most obvious character traits.  I recently banned my first commenter in 7 years, a crude and obnoxious guy named “Shmebulock, Crusher of Pussy”.  Almost all my other commenters, even Trump supporters, were glad to get rid of him.  So why can’t they see that Trump: Crusher of Pussy, is also a juvenile troll?  Here is Slate.com:

The idea that Donald Trump will reverse the “pussification” of America has been one commonly repeated by his supporters during the presidential campaign. Monday night at a rally in Manchester, New Hampshire, Trump made this theme literally explicit by calling Ted Cruz a pussy.

Here’s New York magazine quoting the remark, which involved Trump repeating something that an audience member was shouting while Trump complained that Cruz apparently isn’t aggressive enough about torture policy:

Screen Shot 2016-02-26 at 10.49.50 PM

Here he mocks Rubio for (like me) needing to drink water when he speaks.  In the grand scheme of things this doesn’t matter, nor does it matter that he routinely enjoys behaving like an 8th grade bully.

But again, why this double standard? Why are we all so contemptuous of Shmebulock: Crusher the Pussy, but not Trump: Crusher of Pussy? And it’s not just Trump.  I know people who defend Clinton’s sexual escapades, but are puritanical scolds when it comes to similar behavior by people in their social circle.  I just don’t get it.  I can understand why we wouldn’t want to hold politicians to a higher standard, but I really have trouble understanding why we insist on holding them to a lower standard.  Recall the old saying; Kill one man and you get executed, kill 100,000 and they put up statues to you (even in Washington DC.)  Throughout history, it’s always been this way.

I guess there are actually two questions here.  Why don’t Trump supporters see that he’s a jerk?  And why doesn’t it matter to those who do?  And don’t tell me they don’t care because they care more about stuff like “jobs”.  I’m pretty sure that if the politician in question were mocking them they would feel differently.  Suppose someone caught Trump backstage making fun of the (supposedly) low IQs of many of his supporters.  Would they say, “That doesn’t matter, all I care about is jobs?”

If Trump is elected President, there will eventually be statues of Trump erected in our nation’s capitol.  Take that any way you please.

Screen Shot 2016-02-27 at 10.36.08 AM

I never took a course in psych, so I can’t say what that white rock is supposed to symbolize.  But I am pretty sure it’s not a pussy.


Tags:

 
 
 

50 Responses to “Donald Trump: Crusher of Pussy”

  1. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    27. February 2016 at 08:38

    Politics is still not about policy, Exhibit 11.

  2. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    27. February 2016 at 09:02

    I’ll answer your questions:

    “Why don’t Trump supporters see that he’s a jerk?”

    -They see that he’s a jerk to those who cross him.

    “And why doesn’t it matter to those who do?”

    -Why should it? Obviously cruelly mocking the low IQ of many of his supporters would matter because it’s an affront to his own supporters; the ones he depends on to get elected. Here’s a hint: the purpose of having a political debate or rally is very different from that of having this comments section. Identical tactics are not appropriate for both of them.

  3. Gravatar of ess.err ess.err
    27. February 2016 at 09:11

    You really are enjoying that epithet too much.

  4. Gravatar of Ray Lopez Ray Lopez
    27. February 2016 at 09:17

    Ray Lopez supports E. Harding! Two jerks are better than none! This week’s Economist leader on Trump, which echoes Sumner is saying ‘he must be stopped’ – question, is this the worse they got? Then Trump for President! My comments in CAPS. Economist: “To recap, he has referred to Mexicans crossing the border as rapists [HYPERBOLE, AND SOME PROBABLY ARE RAPISTS LIKE THE CUBAN BOAT PEOPLE WERE]; called enthusiastically for the use of torture [TORTURE DOES NOT REALLY WORK, SO TRUMP IS MISTAKEN THOUGH HIS HEART IS IN THE RIGHT PLACE: AGAINST THE BAD GUYS]; hinted that Antonin Scalia, a Supreme Court justice, was murdered [NEWSWEEK: “The next morning, the Drudge Report pointed out that the judge was found with a pillow over his head” -if NOT MURDER, THEN SUICIDE? SCALIA FAMILY DID NOT APPROVE OF AN AUTOPSY, SO TRUMP’S SPECULATION, WHILE MAYBE UNSOUND IS NOT COMPLETELY WRONGHEADED]; proposed banning all Muslims from visiting America [IN SE ASIA, THERE ARE RESTAURANTS THAT SAY ‘no Muslims allowed here’ DUE TO THEIR PROPENSITY FOR EXTREME ACTION, AND YES I HAVE MUSLIM FRIENDS]; advocated killing the families of terrorists [AIDING AND ABETTING IS A CRIME, MAYBE NOT A CAPITAL OFFENSE BUT A CRIME NEVERTHELESS]; and repeated, approvingly, a damaging fiction that a century ago American soldiers in the Philippines dipped their ammunition in pigs’ blood before executing Muslim rebels [FICTION SAYS WHO?]. At a recent rally he said he would like to punch a protester in the face [UNDERSTANDABLE, AND ‘like’ IS NOT ACTING OUT HIS WISHES]. This is by no means an exhaustive list [SHOW ME WHAT YOU GOT THEN? IS THIS IT?].

  5. Gravatar of Ray Lopez Ray Lopez
    27. February 2016 at 09:28

    To answer Sumner on Trump’s water joke, keep in mind Rubio started it by saying Trump wets his pants. Tit-for-tat. Recall that Dukakis lost prestige to Bush during the presidential debates when he refused to get emotional about a stupid question posed as to what he would do if somebody raped his wife. Trump knows the power of reciprocity (tit-for-tat) and maintaining his image. Something BTW Sumner could learn, though I like Sumner for answering his commentators, something no other serious economist would dare do, for good reason, as sometimes you lose a debate, as Sumner often (?!) does.

  6. Gravatar of paul henri kadjo paul henri kadjo
    27. February 2016 at 09:32

    “Why don’t Trump supporters see that he’s a jerk???”

    Scott,It is simply because people just ignore the worst personality traits of people they agree with

  7. Gravatar of vak vak
    27. February 2016 at 09:37

    (FWIW: From continental EU): It appears Clinton is seen as sure winner in this election for months (years?) no matter what. Is it possible that many voters are not particularly into Trump but merely want to use him as vessel to register their discontent with this state of affair as loudly as possible?

  8. Gravatar of paul henri kadjo paul henri kadjo
    27. February 2016 at 09:45

    Vak indeed voters do that very often(in french elections especially).

    But the irony is that unlike france with marine le pen they will be throwing away a real chance to win the general election with marco rubio

  9. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    27. February 2016 at 09:54

    “Why don’t Trump supporters see that he’s a jerk?”
    It is like asking why people didn’t see that Hitler was a jerk (and worse) when he was campaigning for president in 1932 (he got a great votation and was only defeated by the incumbent, a Conservative war hero backed by the Social Democratic Party and everyone else who didn’t want Hitler to be president). A desperate populace can be persuaded to do anything.
    “And why doesn’t it matter to those who do?”
    Because he is their jerk.
    ” I’m pretty sure that if the politician in question were mocking them they would feel differently. Suppose someone caught Trump backstage making fun of the (supposedly) low IQs of many of his supporters.”
    Then he would not be their jerk anymore, I guess.

  10. Gravatar of BC BC
    27. February 2016 at 10:11

    “Suppose someone caught Trump backstage making fun of the (supposedly) low IQs of many of his supporters. Would they say, ‘That doesn’t matter, all I care about is jobs?'”

    Well, he did say directly to his supporters’ faces that if he shot someone on 5th Ave, his supporters would still vote for him. So, apparently, even directly insulting his supporters’ judgement doesn’t deter them.

    Trump’s support has been capped at about 35% of the Republican electorate. Probably, 15-25(ish) of that are people that support him *because* of his nativism and xenophobia. The remaining 10-15% are probably motivated by entertainment value or celebrity worship. Any large electorate will have these 10-20% minorities of “crazy” people. The difference this time is that they have not been swamped out by the mainstream because the mainstream has been split up among many different candidates.

    If Trump continues his successful run, then he will start to attract more support from “mainstream” Republicans. They will be motivated by much the same reason that mainstream Democrats don’t acknowledge that Hillary Clinton’s ethical shortcomings also disqualify her from public office: blind partisan loyalty and belief that anyone from the opposite party must be worse.

    Both parties have their deeply flawed candidates, Trump and Clinton, whose flaws are at the personal character level, independent of ideology and policy preferences. Both parties have their earnest, but far from center, ideological candidates in Cruz and Sanders. The difference is that there is still a Generic Mainstream candidate on the Republican side but no counterpart on the Democratic side. For some reason, the Generic Dems that ran (O’Malley, Webb, Chafee) garnered only negligible support, while many others (Biden, Cuomo, Kaine, Patrick, Warner, etc.) apparently decided (maybe prematurely) that they wouldn’t be able to challenge Clinton.

    Hopefully, the prospect of a Trump presidency, even if it doesn’t actually materialize, will cause everyone to recognize the imperative of reigning in Government’s powers, especially the President’s. Ironically, though, many of Trump’s most severe critics seem to be among the least bothered by the Imperial Presidency and Big Government. (Not referring to Scott here.)

  11. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    27. February 2016 at 10:16

    nativism and xenophobia

    These are nonsense terms.

  12. Gravatar of Lawrence D’Anna Lawrence D'Anna
    27. February 2016 at 10:18

    Trump supporters do see that he is a jerk, but he has then convinced that he’s a jerk who is on their side, and that makes all the difference.

  13. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    27. February 2016 at 10:19

    So why can’t they see that Trump: Crusher of Pussy, is also a juvenile troll?

    Because you do not run to somewhere without running from somewhere. (And that aside, you overvalue the sort of conversation that occurs among professors or on MacNeill-Lehrer or Charlie Rose).

  14. Gravatar of Chuck Chuck
    27. February 2016 at 10:34

    Don’t worry Scott. Your side rules the world (more or less). They’ll eventually get their way regardless of who gets to be teleprompter reader-in-chief.

  15. Gravatar of Ray Lopez Ray Lopez
    27. February 2016 at 10:35

    Sumner: “I never took a course in psych, so I can’t say what that white rock is supposed to symbolize. But I am pretty sure it’s not a pussy.” – wrong again. A horse is a phallic symbol, white is the color of purity. A rock is also called a “matrix” (“a mass of fine-grained rock in which gems, crystals, or fossils are embedded” -OED), but it derives from the Old English word for ‘womb’. So a white horse on a white matrix is nothing more than a virgin phallic consummating a virgin womb. It’s pretty straightforward, surprised Sumner missed it.

  16. Gravatar of Joe Joe
    27. February 2016 at 11:12

    Prof Sumner, I think you previously talked about tight money favoring the extremes. People are angry. They aren’t sure why. By my reckoning the Fed under Greenspan led us to believe our incomes would grow by 5% per year. That led us to take on a certain level of debt. Now that promise has been broken, so people are angry. And the angriest-sounding candidates are Trump and Sanders.

    Trump blames lower incomes on immigrants or trade (for working class whites, he has a bit of a point, hence they flock to him). Sanders blames bankers (again, this seems true because of the narrative we’ve been spoon fed on the 2008 crisis).

    Trump is also really good at defining negative memes of other politicians (Jeb is a stiff, Cruz is nasty, etc.). Because he’s so blunt, and his negative charactatures ring true, he sounds honest.

    Its hard to convince his supporters he is a demagogue, because demagogues are by definition persuasive.

    I’m hoping Rubio was able to out-Trump Trump by defining him (rightfully) as a con artist. But it’s probably too little too late.

    And I’m so bloody disappointed in Christie…

  17. Gravatar of Major.Freedom Major.Freedom
    27. February 2016 at 11:45

    Sumner, you do the EXACT same thing with Bernanke.

  18. Gravatar of SteveD SteveD
    27. February 2016 at 12:55

    People don’t care that Trump is an ass. Everything he does is for publicity. Name any other candidate that has had as much airtime as Trump, for free nonetheless.

    Many supporters like him because he is talking about real issues (immigration, free trade deals with China, etc.) and not abortion or gay marriage. If it weren’t for Trump they wouldn’t be discussing illegal immigration and trade with China. Instead they would be discussing wedge issues while keeping important issues out of the spotlight.

    Also, being an outsider who is self-funded, he has credibility that every other politician lacks. Is there any doubt that he doesn’t build some sort of wall?

  19. Gravatar of Carl Carl
    27. February 2016 at 14:17

    I’m not so sure Schmebulock had Ted Cruz in mind when he called himself a crusher of pussy.

  20. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    27. February 2016 at 15:14

    Thiago, You said:

    “A desperate populace can be persuaded to do anything.”

    The US economy is about as far removed from Germany 1932 as it is possible to be. Desperate over 4.9% unemployment, 1% inflation, low oil prices and the highest living standards the world has ever seen? Well then God help us if the US ever undergoes actual adversity. We’d pick someone worse than Hitler.

    BC, You said:

    “Ironically, though, many of Trump’s most severe critics seem to be among the least bothered by the Imperial Presidency and Big Government. (Not referring to Scott here.)”

    Very good point, which I try to make to my liberal friends.

    Ray, I’ll have to take your word for the pop psychology.

    Carl, I’m thinking of a joke here, but I don’t want to be fired from my job.

  21. Gravatar of Nick Rowe Nick Rowe
    27. February 2016 at 15:27

    Scott: “Why don’t Trump supporters see that he’s a jerk? And why doesn’t it matter to those who do?”

    It’s not that it doesn’t matter; it’s a plus. It’s “jerkboy game”. But “trigger warning” would be an understatement before you Google that phrase.

  22. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    27. February 2016 at 15:50

    Nick Rowe gets it. :-)

    I’d also add some Nietzsche to that analysis.

  23. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    27. February 2016 at 15:57

    Many supporters like him because he is talking about real issues (immigration, free trade deals with China, etc.) and not abortion or gay marriage.

    Abortion and homosexual pseudogamy are quite important topical questions. That they do not interest you personally is of no account (and your attitude does not speak well of you).

  24. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    27. February 2016 at 16:01

    Well then God help us if the US ever undergoes actual adversity. We’d pick someone worse than Hitler.

    Again, and like one of your other commenters, this is foolishly reductionist. Economic metrics are important, but they do not exhaust the measures of well being. They looked quite good in 1968, bar some excess inflation. It wasn’t a great time for public life, however.

    While we’re at it, we’ve been through actual adversity. No Hitlers. Near on the biggest dud to hit the Oval Office in the last 80-odd years was Lyndon Johnson, the issue of an era of political contentment.

  25. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    27. February 2016 at 16:03

    Your side rules the world (more or less).

    They’ve been overplaying their hand. Pass the popcorn while the EU implodes.

  26. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    27. February 2016 at 16:07

    Trump and Clinton, whose flaws are at the personal character level, independent of ideology and policy preferences. Both parties have their earnest, but far from center, ideological candidates in Cruz and Sanders. The difference is that there is still a Generic Mainstream candidate on the Republican side but no counterpart on the Democratic side.

    The ‘Generic Mainstream Candidates’ on the Republican side include Marco Rubio, the most ill-prepared candidate to run competitively for the Republican nomination in seven decades (and a slick liar when it suits him) and John Shiv-You Kasich. Away away away with both of these cretins.

  27. Gravatar of Bonnie Bonnie
    27. February 2016 at 16:33

    We’ve been discussing the likely root cause of the world as we knew it crumbling down around us like a slow motion train wreck on a massive scale here on this blog for years. So, I am a bit surprised that you’re surprised at what the world is coming to. But as a duly initiated member of the Bernanke Fed’s sacrifice ratio, I can say it’s a lot easier to make peace with it than one might think.

  28. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    27. February 2016 at 16:46

    “The US economy is about as far removed from Germany 1932 as it is possible to be. Desperate over 4.9% unemployment, 1% inflation, low oil prices and the highest living standards the world has ever seen? Well then God help us if the US ever undergoes actual adversity. We’d pick someone worse than Hitler.”

    Yet each and every American I remain in touch with (admittedly it is a small group) goes out of his way to point out how the middle class’ standards of living have stagnated for decades,how the debt is out of control and the social security deficit will crush the country, how they languish with their two wages households where their parents and gradparents thrived on one wage, how expensive college is, how the rich have captured all the economic growth but a few crumbs, how the good jobs are gone, how the achievement/earning gap has not been bridged yet and never will, how corrupt Corporate America is, how all politicians are in Wall Street’s deep pockets, how violent the country is, compared with the 50’s utopy, how Latinos ruin everything (present company excepted of course, they are very considerate people), how their children will have it worse than they had. There must be some truth to all that doom and gloom. Also, if the American press (or at least the sites I read in Brazil, from the NYT’s to the National Review’s) is any sign, the USA are going to hell in a handbasket and the only point worth discussing is who is responsible for this (Obama, W. Bush, Jeb!, China, Trump, Mexicans, Muslims, Feminists, Jews — it is not a coincidence Trump has blamed or mocked all of them). Maybe success has spoilt Americans, but they clearly think they have been left behind by their leaders and therefore a peasant rebellion is in order.It is not all for the worse, though. I surely would take Americans’ violent hatred for their leaders over our cynical detachment concerninig ours (Brazil’s) any day. Hatred can engender change, cynicism just engenders even more cynicism.

  29. Gravatar of Steve Steve
    27. February 2016 at 16:47

    There’s a decent chance Hillary will embezzle enough money in her first term that she (not Trump) will be the first self-funded billionaire to win the presidency…in 2020.

    That won’t stop her from garnering 90% of the black vote, 90% of the college professor vote, and 70% of the baby boomer woman vote.

    People vote their perceived interests.

  30. Gravatar of Benjamin Cole Benjamin Cole
    27. February 2016 at 16:49

    Trump is better than his GOP alternatives. Both Rubio and Cruz have repeatedly suggested that their campaigns are divinely inspired and underwritten. Cruz said the US should carpet bomb Syria, although I do not know why we would drop a lot of carpets on people. BTW, who is a homophobe: Cruz or Trump?

    The real question is why is the GOP establishment so dead-set against Trump. Trump has proposed large tax cuts for the wealthy. Such tax cuts might actually help the economy.

    Does the GOP establishment have a stake and continued large-scale illegal immigration? We want our cheap labor?

    Or is the GOP establishment afraid that Trump would actually be independent not beholden to the usual GOP interest groups and socialist-nationalism?

    Frankly, I wish the Democrats would have their own Donald Trump, someone from outside the party who isn’t afraid to speak his or her mind.

    You can bet that Hillary Clinton will continue to spend 1 trillion dollars a year on “national security.”

  31. Gravatar of Lorenzo from Oz Lorenzo from Oz
    27. February 2016 at 18:15

    Scott: you are a clear sighted, rational, policy wonk with lots of experience outside the US and a tenured job in an industry where transnationalism is taken utterly for granted. Of course you are completely immune to Trump’s appeal and focus, laser-like, on his negatives.

    While all demagogues have some specific-to-them characteristics, they only do so well when the wider circumstances give them that opportunity. The US is suffering economic frustration more than serious adversity but, for many folk, it is now long term economic frustration which they see extending to their kids. Add various cultural and social dislocations and a political establishment that has been great at promising but lousy at delivering, and there are lots of angry, frustrated and alienated voters.

    That is specific US (and Europe) contexts. Martin Gurri’s “The Revolt of the Public and the Crisis of Authority in the New Millennium” is an enlightening read on the wider information revolution context and the longer term pattern of massive increase in public distrust. Virginia Postrel has an excellent review here:
    http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-12-28/democracy-s-destabilizer-tmi

  32. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    27. February 2016 at 21:57

    BTW, funny pic:

    https://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/3271/2673/original.jpg

  33. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    28. February 2016 at 07:14

    Nick, You are probably right. When I think back to all the jerks I’ve met over the course of my life, I can picture most of them supporting Trump.

    Thiago, You said:

    “how violent the country is,”

    This is exactly what I’m talking about. Crime has recently fallen in half, to levels near the golden age of the 1950s. People are simple delusional. They are afraid to let their kids play outside. But not because of anything going on outside, but rather because they are paranoid. When I talk to people who have moved here from Europe and Asia, they can’t believe how overprotective American parents are.

    Ben, When you have a fascist running you don’t sit down and compare their views on monetary policy, you run like hell. Trump is completely unacceptable, even if his views are better than the other candidates on most issues. How could you even consider a candidate who wants to ban Muslim immigrants? Who doesn’t know if concentration camps are a bad idea? Who favors torture? Who wants to assassinate the family members of terrorists? Who likes Putin? Who is a protectionist? Who is opposed to freedom of the press?

    Lorenzo, That may all be true, but don’t make the “to know all is to forgive all” mistake. We could sit down and discuss all the reasons why millions of Germans voted for Hitler, and perhaps we could figure it all out. But that doesn’t excuse their votes in a moral sense.

  34. Gravatar of Effem Effem
    28. February 2016 at 08:44

    Sanders+Trump must be a “bubble.” Now that the elites have identified that, they should prick it.

  35. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    28. February 2016 at 09:10

    Crime has recently fallen in half, to levels near the golden age of the 1950s.

    No, homicide rates have fallen in half. General crime rates have fallen about 30%, to levels which were about normal ca. 1970.

    People are simple delusional. They are afraid to let their kids play outside.

    Oh, name five delusional people in your social circle refusing to let their children play outside. (If they’re afraid to let their children play unsupervised, the most likely cause would be the busybodies who call child protective for no good reason. See Lenore Skenazy on this issue. There’s a foreign born couple in Montgomery County, Md. who’ve received citations twice in recent months for allowing their children to play in local parks and take walks from the park to their residence. That’s not ordinary people doing this. That’s the mental health / social work apparat and their enablers in the general public and the legal system).

  36. Gravatar of jknarr jknarr
    28. February 2016 at 09:12

    Scott Adams had Trump right, and early. Interesting take.

    http://blog.dilbert.com/post/139541975641/the-trump-master-persuader-index-and-reading-list

  37. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    28. February 2016 at 09:47

    There’s nothing about Trump that is fascist, other than in the Hitler-ate-breakfast-so-did-Trump variety. Were most Americans in the 1880s fascists?

    “How could you even consider a candidate who wants to ban Muslim immigrants?”

    -I.e., going from allowing a tiny fraction of a percent of Muslims to immigrate to the United States to allowing none. That’s not really much of a change in the grand scheme of things.

    “Who doesn’t know if concentration camps are a bad idea?”

    -How do you know they’re a bad idea?

    “Who favors torture?”

    -Is being tortured by President Trump any worse than being killed via drone strike by President Obama?

    “Who wants to assassinate the family members of terrorists?”

    -An excellent idea.

    “Who likes Putin?”

    -Again, excellent. Certainly better than Rubio, who hates Putin.

    “Who is a protectionist?”

    -Clearly a minus. But, to get elected, a candidate has to promise his supporters goodies and work with the ignorance of the public, not against it. And aren’t you one of those who believe Trump is a hypocrite regarding this matter? If so, doesn’t that mean he’s insincere about it and you shouldn’t be afraid of it?

    “Who is opposed to freedom of the press?”

    -I don’t like British-style libel laws, either, but is there any chance Trump will get them passed?

    Again, for Scott Sumner, politics is not about policy. It’s about personality.

    @jknarr

    -The guy referenced by Nick Rowe had it more right, and earlier.

  38. Gravatar of Ricardo Ricardo
    28. February 2016 at 17:16

    You may have answered this already… But, if Trump wins the Presidency, would nominal GDP be higher or lower, ceteris paribus ?

  39. Gravatar of asdf asdf
    28. February 2016 at 18:51

    @ssumner

    “Crime has recently fallen in half, to levels near the golden age of the 1950s. People are simple delusional. They are afraid to let their kids play outside.”

    Your views on crime show such astounding ignorance its hard to comprehend.

    A quick Google search turns up this:

    http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

    These are just some highlights, note all of this is adjusted for population size 1960 vs 2014:

    Violent Crime: 160 -> 375
    Rape: 9.6 -> 26.4
    Aggravated Assault: 86 -> 232

    The only category of violent crime that hasn’t grown is murder, and as we all know that’s not because attempted murder went down but that medical technology kept more people alive.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1124155/
    “Murder rates would be up to five times higher than they are but for medical developments over the past 40 years.”

    As I noted in a comment, every time someone mentions the murder statistic I think about my doctor friend who is having the life and soul drained out of her fixing up NAM shooting and stabbing victims in the ER all day. BTW, you assholes flooded her hometown in Germany with a bunch of Arab trash, thanks for that too.

    And this is before the summer of Black Lives Matter. A phenomenon that erased decades of improved murder statistics in my city and brought it back to 90s crack epidemic levels. Considering the medical technology issue, that means its actually worse then back then.

    I won’t even get into how manipulated the reported crime stats are either, that is extremely well documented. It’s “body counts” in Vietnam all over again.

    Moreover, a large scale riot is 100 times worse then crime stats. A riot shows there is no law and no place in the city is safe. I won’t recount everything that happened in Ferguson and Baltimore this summer. How many riots were we having in the 1950s?

    That you actually believe that the #1 public safety issue is some of your bubble friends helicopter parenting is astounding. You are a walking caricature of the out of touch.

  40. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    28. February 2016 at 19:01

    I love the statue. Maybe he can also have the Washington Monument remodeled to look like his penis. That would go great with the “Crusher of Pussy” title. He could be our nation’s first recipient of the “Congressional Medal of Pussy Crushing” award he could create for himself.

  41. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    28. February 2016 at 20:55

    Your views on crime show such astounding ignorance its hard to comprehend.

    You mean his isn’t gulled by hucksters and conspirazoids?

  42. Gravatar of Lorenzo from Oz Lorenzo from Oz
    29. February 2016 at 00:18

    “We could sit down and discuss all the reasons why millions of Germans voted for Hitler, and perhaps we could figure it all out. But that doesn’t excuse their votes in a moral sense.”

    True. But it is still a good question–what caused that to seem a sensible choice to lots of voters? Why were so many votes up for grabs in that way?

    With Hitler, it is actually relatively straightforward: how bad was economic stress?, how threatening did the local Left seem? basically sorts interwar Europe into those countries with power-seizing Fascist/Nazi/Authoritarian Right outbreaks and those which did not. (Indeed, how threatening did the local Left seem to rural voters?–as they provided break-through mass bases–if one wants to be even more specific.)

    Evan Soltas has a couple of informative posts on Trump voters.
    http://esoltas.blogspot.com.au/2016/02/who-is-voting-for-trump.html?spref=fb

    Trump voters are low education & ideologically moderate. The sort of folk who have been economic losers from the migration shocks, trade shocks, IT shocks etc and who do not have a strong ideological framework to sort reality or to network policy pay offs. A loss of a sense of control (including having an effective say) seems to be much of what is going on. Trump provides a button to push that no one else apparently provided them.

  43. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    29. February 2016 at 19:48

    Art, You said:

    “No, homicide rates have fallen in half. General crime rates have fallen about 30%, to levels which were about normal ca. 1970.”

    Kids could play outside in 1970, indeed could roam all over town on their bicycles.

    Ricardo, Don’t know and don’t care.

    asdf, I love it when jerks don’t know what they are talking about. The non-murder data is widely mistrusted as crimes like rape and assault were reported at far lower rates in the old days. Rape had a much worse stigma, and wasn’t taken very seriously, especially if by someone you knew. Fist fights were not viewed as legal issues as often as today.

    You said:

    “The only category of violent crime that hasn’t grown is murder”.

    And that’s the only one viewed as being accurate, according to criminologists.

    I doubt the 5X higher stat you quoted. In any case, even if I was slightly off, crime is clearly falling rapidly, I think everyone agrees with that. There is utterly no reason for crime to suddenly become a big political problem in the US, when it was hardly discussed in the previous few elections, when crime rates were higher.

    Lorenzo, Interesting, that makes sense. What I don’t get is how he scores so well in the polls. In match-ups with Hillary he is winning most of the white vote. That’s scary.

  44. Gravatar of Lorenzo from Oz Lorenzo from Oz
    29. February 2016 at 21:16

    The Republican brand is pretty white, so Trump as nominee gets the “brand” vote. Add in economic insecurity, cultural dislocation and a feeling that no one is paying attention, and it is not so surprising.

    If there are significant concerns which mainstream media, academic, policy wonks, etc systematically ignore, downplay, dismiss, it creates great potential for “shock” results.

    And some of the “blame the Republicans for their past rhetoric” line is just self-exculcaption.

  45. Gravatar of asdf asdf
    2. March 2016 at 06:35

    So we’ve got tons of evidence of crime stats being under reported to make police departments and politicians look better, and you say the problem is crime stats are manipulated to make things looks worse.

    Is there are quantity or quality of study that would make you believe that crime is worse then the 1950s, or have you decided that a priori and simply won’t believe any contradictory evidence presented no matter what? Lay down the terms of what you would consider contrary evidence.

    I notice by the way your trying to change the goal posts from your original statement about 1950s America to something about white suburban life in the 1970s. An admission of defeat.

    I’m not sure what you don’t believe about medical technology reducing the ratio of attempted murder to successful murder. This is theoretically easy to understand, and there is a ton of evidence in its favor. What exactly don’t you believe about it?

    Crime is an issue for a few reasons:

    1) The mass rioting of last summer, which is nothing more then mass crime.

    2) Accompanying the mass rioting are returns to crime rates of the crack epidemic era in many major cities.

    3) The acknowledgement that all the promises of the past few decades about NAM assimilation into white norms, including criminal behavior, have been confirmed broken. Furthermore, that mass immigration of more NAMs, which will lead to a crime filled minority white future, is all the elite is offering. Expect to have NAM crime rates in a genetically NAM future.

    4) Couple with the increased influence of the NAM voter is the complete inability to whites and police to defend themselves without political witch hunts. People like you offer nothing but anarchy-tyranny to average whites.

    Simply put, people really believed a lot of what you were selling the last few decades. Through 2000 it almost even seemed to be working. However, economic events since 2000 have broken to narrative of the tide that lifts all boats. Meanwhile, none of the hopes people had on race and immigration have materialized. The rise of PC culture and Black Lives Matter radicals in the last year have proven peace can never be attained with NAMs, and the disaster unfolding with refugees in Europe has only added to the impression that the elite want to flood the west with violent foreign peasants whose sole goal is to vote for the establishment, provide state funded welfare scams for connected elites, and scare whites into submission while cratering their wages.

    There have been a lot of trends hurting whites over the last few decades, but all of them were sold under a certain narrative that it was all going to work out best in the end if you just play ball with respectable opinion. Recent events have put the rest the idea that the narrative was ever true or that things will work out if we go down this path. So its not just recent events, but what they revealed about the last several decades.

  46. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 13:45

    So we’ve got tons of evidence of crime stats being under reported

    In your imagination. I’m not interested in the lies you tell yourself.

  47. Gravatar of Floccina Floccina
    2. March 2016 at 18:53

    The Trump supporter I have talked to the most says the others are worse but more hypocritically hide it. Cruz did the dirty tricks on Carson. He says Kasich and Rubio are for bombing (as Obama is) ISIS civilian casualties are inevitable but people are upset over Trump’s talk or proposed Muslim immigration ban though he is less hawkish.

    Once again Gary Johnson will be the most qualified and best candidate. He at least was a successful Govenor. He is probably a better person too.

  48. Gravatar of Floccina Floccina
    2. March 2016 at 19:38

    Thiago Ribeiro has a good start add:

    We are healthier and yet people are starting to fear vaccinations!!!!

    Food is more available and better but they fear GMO’s, pesticides and herbicide residue on foods.

    AGW may be a problem in 20 or 30 years but though extreme weather events have not gotten more common, people sure believe that they have gotten much more common due to AGW.

    Blacks believe cops are hunting them. They claim to fear whites.

    Students are actually doing as good as ever but people are convinced the schools have gone bad.

    Etc.

  49. Gravatar of Some notes on the presidential election The GOP… | Theo Jones Some notes on the presidential election The GOP… | Theo Jones
    14. May 2016 at 20:22

    […] “Here’s what I don’t get. People can clearly see what other people are like, when they are… […]

  50. Gravatar of Skepticlawyer » The Donald is not a fascist; but the accusation itself brings dangers Skepticlawyer » The Donald is not a fascist; but the accusation itself brings dangers
    6. June 2016 at 15:19

    […] Moreover, the accusation of fascism now! has implications regarding causality one doubts those so eager to bandy it around have considered (or are even aware of). Some are currently invoking the rise of Adolf Hitler to power in Germany via electoral success as some sort of analogy to The Donald. Econblogger Scott Sumner commented: […]

Leave a Reply