Trump is not very popular

I suppose that’s obvious:

For Americans of nearly every race, gender, political persuasion and location, disdain for Donald Trump runs deep, saddling the Republican front-runner with unprecedented unpopularity as he tries to overcome recent campaign setbacks.

Seven in 10 people, including close to half of Republican voters, have an unfavorable view of Trump, according to a new Associated Press-GfK poll.

It’s an opinion shared by majorities of men and women; young and old; conservatives, moderates and liberals; and whites, Hispanics and blacks — a devastatingly broad indictment of the billionaire businessman.

Even in the South, a region where Trump has won GOP primaries decisively, close to 70 percent view him unfavorably. And among whites without a college education, one of Trump’s most loyal voting blocs, 55 percent have a negative opinion. . . .

A survey conducted by Gallup in January found Trump’s unfavorable rating, then at 60 percent in the their polling, was already at a record high level for any major party nominee in their organization’s polling since the 1990’s.

Candi Edie, a registered Republican from Arroyo Grande, California, is among those whose views on Trump have grown more negative.

“At first, I thought he was great. He was bringing out a lot of issues that weren’t ever said, they were taboo,” Edie said. Now the 64-year-old feels Trump’s early comments masked the fact that he’s “such a bigot.”

“I don’t know if he’s lost it or what,” she said. “He’s not acting presidential.”Trump’s unpopularity could provide an opening for Cruz, though he is loathed by many of his Senate colleagues and other party leaders. After a big win Tuesday in Wisconsin, Cruz is angling to overtake Trump at the July GOP convention. . . .

Andrew Glaves, a “hard core” Republican from Bothell, Washington, said he might have to side with Clinton if Trump becomes the nominee, even though she’s out of step with his views on gun rights, his top election issue.

“I’d be willing to take that as opposed to doing so much harm to the country’s reputation,” said Glaves, 29.

More than 60 percent of all registered voters and 31 percent of Republicans said they definitely would not vote for Trump in the general election.

So why keep repeating the obvious?  Because lots of articles keep trying to explain why Trump is so popular.  They cite trade, even though polls suggest that most Americans view trade as an opportunity, not a threat.  They cite de-industrialization, even though Trump’s best state was (high-tech) Massachusetts, and one of his worst was Wisconsin, which is America’s second most industrial state, after Indiana.  (This week, I’m proud to call myself a cheesehead.)

So if Trump is really unpopular, maybe there’s no reason to try to explain his popularity.  Maybe he’s just another Pat Buchanan, but getting 35% instead of 25%, because he is a TV celebrity.

Nor has he picked up strength as others have dropped out:

Screen Shot 2016-04-08 at 3.30.38 PM(The pink lines are territories.  Note to myself: When vacationing in the southern Pacific, stick to the Southern Mariana Islands.) In fairness, Trump’s expected to do very well in New York, and still has a 50% chance of getting the nomination, and a 12.7% chance of winning the White House. That’s more than any other man (although he’s not that far ahead of Sanders.)

Even so, Trump is really, really unpopular.  His success in politics can be explained in many ways, but there no evidence that we can learn anything about what policies the voters want by looking at his primary wins.

But what about the minority that do like Trump?  Surely we can learn something about their policy views?  Here’s Jonah Goldberg:

I often read the Twitter profiles of the Trump supporters who pester me. Sometimes I discover they’re phony “TrumpBots” created by some marketing firm. Sometimes I see that they’re members of the coprophagic phylum of white supremacists using Trump as a blocking tackle for their repugnant cause. But just as often, I see these people describing themselves as “classical liberals” or “constitutionalists” or “Goldwater Republicans,” and my heart weeps. There’s nothing classically liberal about Donald Trump. To the extent he’s a conservative at all, he’s a throwback to a time when a Herbert Hoover and Richard Nixon were “conservatives.” Nixon’s politics of resentment led to his impeachment. Hoover’s “best practices” gave us the Depression and Franklin Roosevelt (whose policies made the Depression Great).

Scott Alexander recently produced one of his routinely brilliant posts (not about Trump, BTW), explaining the strange phenomenon of tribalism:

My title for this post is also my preferred summary: the ideology is not the movement. Or, more jargonishly – the rallying flag is not the tribe. People are just trying to find a tribe for themselves and keep it intact. This often involves defending an ideology they might not be tempted to defend for any other reason. This doesn’t make them bad, and it may not even necessarily mean their tribe deserves to go extinct. I’m reluctant to say for sure whether I think it’s okay to maintain a tribe based on a faulty ideology, but I think it’s at least important to understand that these people are in a crappy situation with no good choices, and they deserve some pity.

Read the whole thing—you’ll learn a lot.  For instance, I finally understand the Sunni/Shia split.

PS.  I did a couple posts at Econlog.  Check out my post on the minimum wage; I’d be interested in feedback.  I also did a post on Sanders and trade, and Jonah Goldberg makes similar points, much more effectively:

Sanders says that he believes in “fair trade.” What he means is that we can’t be expected to do business with countries that pay their workers a lot less than we pay our workers. He suggested to the New York Daily News this week that we should have free trade only with countries that have the same wages and environmental policies as us, which is another way of saying we shouldn’t trade with poor countries.

In practical terms, Sanders wants to keep billions of (non-white) people poor — very poor. If America were a flea market, his policy would be akin to saying, “Poor people of color cannot sell their wares here, even if customers want to buy them.”

International trade, led by the United States, has resulted in the largest, fastest decrease in extreme poverty in human history. Roughly 700 million Chinese people alone have escaped extreme poverty since 1980, and most of that is attributable to China’s decision to embrace the market economy and international trade. Want to keep Africa as poor as possible? Throw up as many trade barriers as you can.

If China’s embrace of international trade was (in utilitarian terms) one of the best things that’s ever happened in human history, then enacting a Sanders/Trump trade policy might be one of the worst.  If you care about the welfare of the world’s poorest people, I implore you not to vote for either individual.

PPS.  The always interesting Robin Hanson had this to say:

Today a big chunk of the U.S. electorate feels neglected by a political establishment that they don’t especially respect, and is tempted to favor political bad boy Donald Trump. The main response of our many establishments, especially over the last few weeks, has been to constantly lecture everyone about how bad an idea this would be. Most of this lecturing, however, doesn’t seem to tell Trump supporters anything they don’t think they already know, and little of it acknowledges reasonable complaints regarding establishment neglect and incompetence.

By analogy with these other cases, the obvious conclusion is that all this tone-deaf sanctimonious lecturing will not actually help reduce interest in Trump, and may instead increase it. But surely an awful lot of our establishments must be smart enough to have figured this out. Yet the tsunami of lectures continues. Why?

My tone-deaf sanctimonious lecturing will continue, as I see it as a way of annoying Trump commenters.  I could pity them (as Scott Alexander recommends), but I’m doing them a favor by insulting them instead.  I pity the Trump supporters who aren’t smart enough to read blogs about monetary policy.  More importantly, I see my tone-deaf sanctimonious lecturing as a way of making Trump seem more toxic.  The goal is not to turn Trumpiacs away from him, but to stop others from being seduced.  So far this seems to have worked, as his popularity has topped out.  As long as 70% of Americans hate him, I don’t need to move to Australia.


Tags:

 
 
 

76 Responses to “Trump is not very popular”

  1. Gravatar of Lawrence D’Anna Lawrence D'Anna
    8. April 2016 at 14:03

    You’re right. You can’t explain Trump’s success in terms of Trump’s popularity. It’s not about people being excited about Trump. It’s about people absolutely hating the things Trump is against: the political “establishment”, the media, globalization, trade, immigration, Islam, and political correctness. Most of Trump support is about a rejection of some or all of those things, not an endorsement of Trump.

    I could never be a Trump supporter because I’m very much for for globalization and trade and immigration, and because he’s completely unqualified.

    But I’ve got to admit I love to see him being inappropriate, pissing off the media, pissing off Mitt Romney, and generally being hated by all the right people.

    Maybe if we’re really lucky he’ll lose to Hillary and then she’ll be impeached for emails.

  2. Gravatar of Chuck Chuck
    8. April 2016 at 14:06

    Don’t worry about Trump. He’s a good goy.

    http://www.jewishjournal.com/nation/article/from_aipac_to_trump_michael_glassners_journey

    http://www.jewishjournal.com/opinion/article/when_it_comes_to_jewish_ties_no_gop_candidate_trumps_trump

  3. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    8. April 2016 at 14:15

    When vacationing in the southern Pacific, stick to the Southern Mariana Islands

    The ‘southern Marianas’ is known as Guam, and it’s north of the equator.

  4. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    8. April 2016 at 14:17

    and because he’s completely unqualified.

    If you accepted the current incumbent, your standards re who’s ‘qualified’ are nonsense.

  5. Gravatar of H_WASSHOI (Maekawa Miku-nyan lover) H_WASSHOI (Maekawa Miku-nyan lover)
    8. April 2016 at 14:19

    My Hypermind position (Trump long) will be blown out.

  6. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    8. April 2016 at 15:25

    “Read the whole thing—you’ll learn a lot. For instance, I finally understand the Sunni/Shia split.”

    -I don’t. And I’ve read that post, too. Come on, Sumner. That post explained nothing about the Sunni-Shia split.

    Also, that graph is about right for Trump, but is too favorable to Cruz-Utah and Wyoming are anomalies. DC, Utah, and the Wyoming GOP convention aren’t really representative of America. Massachusetts and Florida are far more representative of the U.S.

    Of course Trump’s support isn’t bound to grow much as Cruz’s -Cruz is just now receiving the benefits of being in the Establishment Lane, while the media coverage of Trump was so incessant, everyone got to know all about him by December.

    “They cite trade, even though polls suggest that most Americans view trade as an opportunity, not a threat.”

    -Tell that to the Democrats at the Flint debate.

    “But just as often, I see these people describing themselves as “classical liberals” or “constitutionalists” or “Goldwater Republicans,” and my heart weeps. There’s nothing classically liberal about Donald Trump. To the extent he’s a conservative at all, he’s a throwback to a time when a Herbert Hoover and Richard Nixon were “conservatives.” Nixon’s politics of resentment led to his impeachment. Hoover’s “best practices” gave us the Depression and Franklin Roosevelt (whose policies made the Depression Great).”

    -Meaningless gibberish.

    Also, you renounce your previous semi-endorsement of Sanders?

    And what do you find appealing about Ted Cruz?

    I’ve also commented on some of your Econlog posts, with my comments being on this blog due to its more lax moderation. You still haven’t justified your dubious claim America would have industrialized faster without tariffs.

    “So far this seems to have worked, as his popularity has topped out.”

    -Wait ’till after the nomination and Summer Offensive before you say that.

    BTW, Detroit is not known for its college exam cheating scandals, either. Sacramento is.

  7. Gravatar of Benjamin Cole Benjamin Cole
    8. April 2016 at 15:33

    Trump nearly had the GOP nomination in the bag.

    He seems to have needlessly alienated yet another chunk of the US population in the last two weeks. That may just be pundit chatter, we will have to wait another primary or two.

    Cruz recently copied Trump’s outlook on trade and immigration.

    This new dynamic of energized voters on the issue of immigration will set up an interesting schism. The GOP establishment likes immigration, even illegal immigration, as a source of cheap labor and to tilt the playing field against employees.

    The GOP voters are having reservations.

    I think the GOP establishment will resolve the schism by ranting against illegal immigration, but not really doing anything about it.

  8. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    8. April 2016 at 15:49

    “I could pity them (as Scott Alexander recommends), but I’m doing them a favor by insulting them instead.”

    -Isn’t that what Trump does with his critics?

  9. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    8. April 2016 at 15:54

    Scott, you really worried a lot about voter turnout few posts ago.

    According to this logic you should be really thankful for Trump. Many of his fans are people that usually don’t vote at all. So the popularity amongst his fan base alone will increase voter turnout. Not to mention the significant hate towards Trump. He really is unpopular amongst so many other people. So this will increase voter turnout even more. Donald Trump – a blessing for democracy.

  10. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    8. April 2016 at 16:00

    Art, You said:

    “The ‘southern Marianas’ is known as Guam, and it’s north of the equator.”

    Do you have any friends?

    Harding, You said:

    “Also, you renounce your previous semi-endorsement of Sanders?”

    How can I renounce something I never did?

    You said:

    “Isn’t that what Trump does with his critics?”

    Are Muslims Trump’s critics? Is that why Trump insulted Muslims? How about Mexicans? Are they Trump’s critics?

  11. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    8. April 2016 at 16:02

    Christian, No, I’ve never done a post in my entire life where I “worried about voter turnout.” I couldn’t care less whether people turn out or not.

  12. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    8. April 2016 at 16:11

    “How can I renounce something I never did?”

    -Your supposed top priorities are best consistent with Sanders’s platform, and you’ve repeatedly said you’d prefer Sanders to Trump in the general election. That’s a semi-endorsement, if not an outright one. Come on, Sumner. Argue for a candidate, not against one or two.

    Also, I’ve noticed Cruz basically finished his rise to Chief Trump Competitor on March 5, when he almost won the Louisiana primary.

    “Are Muslims Trump’s critics? Is that why Trump insulted Muslims? How about Mexicans? Are they Trump’s critics?”

    -Trump says he loves the Mexicans and Muslims; he only proposed shutting down Muslim entry into the U.S. (with exceptions) and creating a Muslim registry (already exists) due to the threat of terror, and he only insulted the illegal Mexicans, not the majority of Mexicans in the U.S.

    Really, though, legal immigration is more dangerous to the U.S. than illegal. All the illegals should be deported, and immigration from the Latin countries should be tightly restricted.

    And I still see no justification of your dubious tariff claim.

  13. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    8. April 2016 at 16:13

    “I couldn’t care less whether people turn out or not.”

    -So why would you care about some old people not being able to vote?

  14. Gravatar of Britonomist Britonomist
    8. April 2016 at 16:19

    That’s a relief.

  15. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    8. April 2016 at 16:35


    I suspect this is an attempt by the GOP to drive down turnout among minorities.

    This sounded like a worry to me.

    In fact the whole post sounded worried.
    https://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=31594

    But I’m glad to hear that you weren’t worried at all and that you couldn’t care less.

  16. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    8. April 2016 at 16:52

    Harding, So if I prefer Stalin to Hitler, is that an endorsement? (And that’s known as an analogy, not a comparison of Trump to Hitler, FWIW)

    Christian, You seem to have a problem with reading comprehension.

  17. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    8. April 2016 at 17:01

    Do you have any friends?

    Yes, and not one of them does not compare favorably to you as a human being.

  18. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    8. April 2016 at 17:09

    “Harding, So if I prefer Stalin to Hitler, is that an endorsement?”

    -Well, yes, in that context. I’m sure everybody has an ideal politician in their mind who is not the candidate of their favored party, but they don’t endorse that ideal politician, because he can’t get any votes.

    “Christian, You seem to have a problem with reading comprehension.”

    -I haven’t seen any evidence of this on Christian’s part.

  19. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    8. April 2016 at 17:11


    You seem to have a problem with reading comprehension.

    It might well be that I don’t understand every nuance. Not so much because of lacking reading comprehension but more because English is not my mother tongue. But in this case it simply looks like hairsplitting from your side. No offense.

  20. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    8. April 2016 at 17:42

    I think most of the country will eventually end up supporting Mr. Trump, it is the only game in town. “It’s the economy, stupid”. The American people doesn’t really want another Democrat right now, Clinton has so much baggage that airlines apply excess baggage charges and Cruz just can’t win. Mr. Trump is a vulgarian and a bigot, but his heart is in the right place– Americans need more good jobs, much less immigration, fewer wars, less taxation and less drug abuse.
    And Newsmax is that site that finds a new weird cancer cure Obama doesn’t want you to know about every week.

  21. Gravatar of james elizondo james elizondo
    8. April 2016 at 18:00

    Full disclosure I’m voting for hillary but I see a few problems with your post. You say Trump is unpopular but what about in a relative sense? Didn’t obama approval rating just get barley above 50% recently? Isnt hillary one of most polarizing ppl of all time? By saying he’s not popular we risk overlooking the implications of his rise. for example, to me, Trump proves that racism is real on much bigger scale than we realized. I knew it was real but not to this extent. Also you miss other takeaways of trumps rise. Since 08 elite republicans have filled the heads of their followers with lies in order to achieve their agenda. People on welfare aren’t lazy and driving Cadillacs. the government didnt cause the financial crises by forcing loans to the poor. Obamacare isnt robbing your kids future. All these lies in the name to shrink the gov by cutting taxes. There’s a lot to learn from trumps rise and his followers

  22. Gravatar of james elizondo james elizondo
    8. April 2016 at 18:22

    i was expecting more from your minimum wage post. Your qualifiers to be a progressive are so off.

    “Proposition #1: Free trade with low wage countries like Mexico steals lots of jobs from American workers. There is no way a Mexican-American worker paid $7.25/hour in El Paso can compete with an actual Mexican worker making $3.50/hour in Cuidad Juarez. NAFTA led to a giant sucking sound of jobs flowing south across the Rio Grande.”

    Are describing an uninformed progressive? cuz an informed progressive would yes free trade amounts to net gains but we’re tired of the hand-waving that professionals like you do when it comes to distributional effects. We want attention on those effects and then think if something can be done.

    “Proposition #2: Free trade between Texas and California does not cost jobs. A Mexican-American worker making $15 hour in Fresno can easily compete with a Mexican-American worker making $7.25/hour in El Paso, because there are studies “proving” that lower minimum wages in one state do not steal jobs from neighboring states.”

    Fine uninformed progressives understate the costs of a min wage but at the same time avid defenders of the free market like yourself (no offense) overstate the costs. First of all the author kruger we provides the structure of your 2nd “proposition” is against 15 dollar wage. he advocates 12. But to the point where you overstate the costs of an increase of the min wage is by neglecting a reduction in turnover, more motivated and productive employees. Hey the min wage might even be a compliment to EITC not a substitute.

    Last by not least not only do you overestimate the cost of the min wage you overestimate the benefit of future free trade. The majority of gains of free trade have been cashed in. the present value of future free trade just isn’t as high as it used to be. If you overestimate the benefits of free trade then you overestimate the costs of protectionism just like the min wage.

  23. Gravatar of sourcreamus sourcreamus
    8. April 2016 at 18:33

    Trump has not been running as a politician but as an entertainer. A politician knows that it is easier to lose a vote than gain one so they say nothing that isn’t poll tested and try their best to stick to platitudes. This is effective even though it turns politics dull and makes for meaningless campaigns.
    Entertainers don’t need to have a majority, they just need a hardcore fanbase. Probably 80% of the country does not know who Bill Maher is or thinks he is an arrogant jerk but he has a couple of million people who watch his show so he has more money than he knows what to do with.
    Trump’s fans like his entertaining insults and the way he makes everyone mad. The most common reason I see for supporting him is if both parties in Washington hate him, he must be the best candidate.

    Trump has benefited from a group of candidates who were not well known at the beginning of the election. His dominance of free media deprived the rest of the field with the exposure they needed and killed most of the other campaigns before they even got started. Now that it is a three man race Trumps fan base will not be enough to win and he will lose on the second or third ballot at the convention.

  24. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    8. April 2016 at 19:57

    “Now that it is a three man race Trumps fan base will not be enough to win and he will lose on the second or third ballot at the convention.”

    -sourcreamus, I must disagree. If there is more than one ballot, there’s no way Trump wins. But Trump will manage to pull off a win on the first ballot by convincing some of the unbound delegates if he has a shortage of pledged ones. Of course, it all depends on the GOP vote in Cali.

  25. Gravatar of Lorenzo from Oz Lorenzo from Oz
    8. April 2016 at 21:10

    Nice graphs: Trump is indeed the weakest GOP frontrunner for decades.

    Trump has a core base of support that is a long way from a majority. But there does seem to be a significant group of alienated voters who feel sufficiently unrepresented that pushing the button for The Donald seems a good idea. If, as is increasingly likely, he doesn’t even manage to win the nomination and the US political system reacts by “nothing to see here anymore, move along”, that is going to leave that simmering unhappiness there to be harvested by someone else. And we cannot be sure that major shocks are not around the corner which could magnify the reach of those underlying concerns.

    A recent Pew survey suggests it is long term concerns about feeling that they (and worse their children) are significantly “locked out” that are driving much of the underlying concerns.
    http://www.people-press.org/files/2016/03/3-31-16-March-Political-release-1.pdf

    Moreover, to take one salient issue, there is a long history of working class concern about immigration. As Australia shows, it can be managed but you have to actively work at doing so. (And by managed, I don’t mean shouting at them that they are racist, xenophobic, etc: I mean structuring a policy that is coherent, justified in the public interest, is seen to give folk a say and does not shift the domestic balance between capital and labour in invidious ways.)

  26. Gravatar of Lorenzo from Oz Lorenzo from Oz
    8. April 2016 at 21:16

    The late Robert Fogel, in his “Without Consent or Contract”, argued plausibly that immigration pressures intensified the existing slavery political fissure in ways which helped lead to the Civil War. So, American history suggests this sort of thing matters.
    http://www.amazon.com/Without-Consent-Contract-American-Paperback/dp/0393312194

  27. Gravatar of Benjamin Cole Benjamin Cole
    8. April 2016 at 21:26

    Still consider this statement from Ted Cruz:

    “There’s no doubt Donald Trump has energized and excited a great many people. And I’m grateful to him for doing so. The issues that brought those voters into the political world, the need to secure our border, stop illegal immigration, stop the failed immigration policies that have driven down wages and taken away jobs from struggling Americans.The need for a common-sense trade policy that doesn’t continue to ship jobs overseas and force Americans to compete on an unfair playing field.”—Ted Cruz, interview, TIME magazine

    It does seem like the bombastic Trump is held to a higher standard (yes, I know, still at gutter-height) than Kasich or Cruz.

    Kasich has advocated a massive tax-financed building program, in the hundred of billions of dollars, for new and additional aircraft carrier strike forces. These are gigantic offensive weapons systems. Trump has actually advocated a reduction in the overseas US military footprint.

    Cruz mimics Trump on trade and immigration policy, with even less specifics, and seems to get a free pass.

    Are the pundits conflating a “sensible” public demeanor with substantive policies?

  28. Gravatar of Nathan Nathan
    9. April 2016 at 01:13

    If this primary has demonstrated anything, it’s the value of an Australian style electoral system. Preferential voting would have killed Trump stone dead from the start.

  29. Gravatar of Ben J Ben J
    9. April 2016 at 01:47

    Art you are one of the most disagreeable and angry people I’ve ever seen on this blog, and that’s saying something, since it attracts the maniac an caps. You should have a long nap and calm down – all this stress can’t be good for your ageing heart.

  30. Gravatar of Postkey Postkey
    9. April 2016 at 02:50

    “I pity the Trump supporters who aren’t smart enough to read blogs about monetary policy.”

    Maybe they read this article?

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/johntharvey/2011/05/14/money-growth-does-not-cause-inflation/4/#6e38191ef9f8

  31. Gravatar of W. Peden W. Peden
    9. April 2016 at 04:21

    Smooth as velcro, Postkey…

  32. Gravatar of Anand Anand
    9. April 2016 at 05:43

    I am responding here to the trade post.

    Let’s state the obvious: Sanders is not a free trader. Neither is anyone else. And in particular, neither is NAFTA or TPP or any other agreement. NAFTA is better thought of as an “investor-rights agreement”, rather than a “free-trade agreement”. Hence all the stuff about intellectual property rights etc.

    Also, for instance, around the time NAFTA was passed, Clinton dramatically increased “border security” in “Operation Gatekeeper”. This was based on the (correct) expectation that NAFTA would lead to a lot of immigration into the United States. If Mexicans are people, and labour markets are important, then NAFTA was not a free-trade agreement.

    Also, did NAFTA or any other trade agreement do much to weaken occupational licensing and other forms of protectionism for high-wage workers?

    We have to look at “really existing trade agreements”, rather than an abstract model. The fight is over how gains from trade are distributed.

    A point about China. The concern about China’s poor is rather silly. The US is not the only country in the world. If US puts up barriers to trade, trade will simply be diverted to low-tariff countries, wouldn’t it? Doesn’t unilateral trade liberalization benefit a country anyway?

    If the “world poor” are such a great concern, instead of a convenient prop, let the super-rich transfer some of the wealth to the poor in the US, so that the outcome is Pareto optimal. Until this is done, the policies will be viewed as class war, to use an unfashionable term.

  33. Gravatar of Major.Freedom Major.Freedom
    9. April 2016 at 06:21

    Sumner, why don’t you ask the kooky left wing blogs like moveon.org or thinkprogress.org to publish your political posts? It would make much more sense. Plus they would probably really enjoy them.

  34. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    9. April 2016 at 06:50

    Harding, OK, then I “endorse” Stalin and Sanders.

    Thiago, You said:

    “Mr. Trump is a vulgarian and a bigot, but his heart is in the right place– Americans need more good jobs, much less immigration, fewer wars, less taxation and less drug abuse.”

    Please tell me you don’t actually believe what Trump says. His personality is not that hard to figure out, is it?

    James, Trump’s negative are far worse than anyone else, including Hillary.

    You said:

    “Are describing an uninformed progressive? cuz an informed progressive would yes free trade amounts to net gains but we’re tired of the hand-waving that professionals like you do when it comes to distributional effects. We want attention on those effects and then think if something can be done.”

    I think you need to reread proposition #1. Because what you wrote, even if true, has no bearing on what I wrote. The question is simple, do progressives think trade with poor countries steals jobs, or don’t they. You completely missed the point.

    And there are still huge gains from trade out there for poor people in countries like Vietnam.

    Lorenzo, I recall in the 1992 election that Ross Perot polled as high as the mid-30s, before finishing with 19%, as a third party candidate. There have always been that block of disaffected voters. In 1968 and 1972 it was the George Wallace voters. Thus I don’t think the Trump phenomenon is about immigration, trade, etc.

    Ben, You are missing the point, it’s not about his positions on issues, it’s about what Trump is. What he represents. There are lots of problems with Cruz and Kasich and Hillary and Sanders, but they are not buffoons. Being President is not a joke; he has his finger on the nuclear trigger. It makes no sense to elect a madman.

    Nathan, Good point.

    Ben J, Art is the only guy I’ve encountered who corrects your geography on JOKES. He must be a lot of fun at parties.

    Anand, You said:

    “If the “world poor” are such a great concern, instead of a convenient prop”

    It’s becoming increasing clear that America’s progressives don’t care about the plight of the world’s poorest, or don’t even understand the problem. All they seem to care about is America’s working class, who are 10 times better off than third world peasants. All the moralizing from progressives is just self-righteousness to make them fell like they are superior to conservatives. (And while they say they care about blue collar workers, the policies they advocate favor government employees over blue collar workers.)

    Yes, the business executives also don’t care about the world’s poor, but at least they are proposing trade policies that would help rather than hurt those people.

  35. Gravatar of Patrick R. Sullivan Patrick R. Sullivan
    9. April 2016 at 07:16

    ‘There are lots of problems with Cruz and Kasich and Hillary and Sanders, but they are not buffoons.’

    Sanders IS a buffoon. Some of the things he says about banks and bankers have a very nasty pedigree, and that NY Post interview exposed Sanders self-unawareness on the issue.

  36. Gravatar of dw dw
    9. April 2016 at 08:40

    does it seem like that none of the candidates seems to have much liked?
    and i doubt seriously that executives are proposing any thing to help the poor any where, they are proposing some thing that makes it easier to make money or run their business, helping the poor is more of a pr spin to make them look better, nothing more. not really sure that helping the poor in one country doesnt hut hurt others. the economy isnt an infinite resource. so if we want to help othes, we also need to help those in our country who we hurt by our choice(s). which we dont ever do, thats what enrages those who are inevitably impacted by this

  37. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    9. April 2016 at 09:12

    “Being President is not a joke; he has his finger on the nuclear trigger. It makes no sense to elect a madman.”

    -Like Kasich, Cruz, or Hillary (all of whom have proposed much more stupid Russia and China policy moves than Trump, like arming the Ukrainians, and being much tougher than Trump on the South China Sea)? Kasich is the most hawkish guy on the stage, with Clinton (Libya) and Cruz (Iran) angling for second place.

    Come on, Sumner. Think substance, not style.

    You’re totally right on the progressives, though.

  38. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    9. April 2016 at 09:28

    Cruz doesn’t even have a foreign policy. His Cuba policy is off-the-wall. Relying on the Kurds, Jordan, and Egypt to defeat the IS is rhetorically convenient, but also impossible. Hillary has one, but it’s the same as Obama’s, which is evil. Sanders doesn’t really have a foreign policy, either, other than “muddle through”. He’s not going to get the U.S. into nuclear war, but he’s not going to get full peace with Iran, either (Clinton can do this, but will she?). Sanders is probably not going to defeat the Islamic State; he doesn’t know how.

    Trump’s foreign policy is well-known and pretty good:

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-foreign-policy-213546?paginate=false

  39. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    9. April 2016 at 10:59

    “Please tell me you don’t actually believe what Trump says. His personality is not that hard to figure out, is it?”
    He clearly craves fame, power, status, he may even crave more money (Clinton and former Brazilian president and current target of a federal police investigation) proved that former president speaking fees are awesome), but if the only way he can get them is helping poor Americans (and poor people everywhere– Americans can’t free themselves from Wall Strret without freeing all the world), what is the harm? He has good ideas, his stated goals are noble.

  40. Gravatar of james elizondo james elizondo
    9. April 2016 at 11:26

    Scott

    You said the question is simple. Do progressives believe that trade with poor countries steal jobs?

    Instead of using a strawman let’s use noah smith. I disagree with him when he says trade with poorer counties is dangerous. He goes too far. But progressives can still answer your question with “no” yet recognize the need to address the distributional effects. I don’t think your proposition 1 is a qualifier to see if you’re a progressive or not.

    Great trade with Vietnam will benefit their country greatly and help us to at the margin. You reiforced my point that the majority of gain from trade have been cashed in. So you overstate the benefits of free trade overstate the costs of protectionism just like overstating the costs of increases to the min wage

  41. Gravatar of james elizondo james elizondo
    9. April 2016 at 11:28

    I should say overstate the benefits of future free trade

  42. Gravatar of TallDave TallDave
    9. April 2016 at 11:33

    The Trump University Fightin’ Dumpster Fires are not the first political movement devoted to stupidity, but they certainly take the commitment the most seriously.

    See why we need a basic civics test? It would be so easy, just a few questions at the head of the ballot to make your vote count. The people who can’t identify the three branches of government can tell everyone they voted and we’ll give them a nice pat on the head.

    And best of all, Donald Trump won’t be able to vote for himself.

  43. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    9. April 2016 at 11:46

    @TallDave

    -Paradoxically, due to the disenfranchisement of Blacks and Mexicans, that might give Trump the election.

  44. Gravatar of Nathan Nathan
    9. April 2016 at 14:46

    Harding, here is Trumps’s substance:

    Torture more people, more violently.
    Deliberately target and kill non combatant women and children.
    Forcibly prevent Mexican-American citizens from sending money to their families.
    Encourage more countries to acquire nuclear weapons.
    Raise tariffs to 45%.
    Abortion, who even knows. Take a roulette wheel and spin to see what he’ll believe today.
    Engage in wars of plunder, taking the natural resources of subdued countries.

    The good news is that he would probably be bad at achieving his goals. His campaign shows that he flies by the seat of his pants and is bad at getting a large organisation to work together towards a common goal. Details like making sure his endorsed delegate candidates are actually on the ballot are too complicated for his campaign.

    Cruz on the other hand has demonstrated a remarkable level of organisational ability in the campaign. He would be very likely to outperform his polls in a general election and would likely be unusually capable at getting his agenda enacted as well.

  45. Gravatar of Lorenzo from Oz Lorenzo from Oz
    9. April 2016 at 16:51

    Nathan: “If this primary has demonstrated anything, it’s the value of an Australian style electoral system. Preferential voting would have killed Trump stone dead from the start.” Amen brother.

    Scott: up to a point. Healthy political systems cope with such insurgencies by responding to underlying concerns. Also, there is a wider surge of “angry votes” across the Western world, so I am not at all sure it is standard disaffection harvesting by a outsider candidate.

  46. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    9. April 2016 at 18:29

    Patrick, Sanders is a bit buffoonish (as is Cruz), but his main problem is that he has the wrong ideology. Trump’s in a different class from the others.

    I despise Hillary, but neither Hillary nor Kasich are buffoons.

    Thiago, You said:

    “He has good ideas”

    Please tell me how his plan to slash taxes on hedge fund billionaires will help “poor people”. Do you seriously think Trump has anything but contempt for poor people? They are “losers” aren’t they? Doesn’t Trump like winners?

    Nathan, You said:

    “here is Trumps’s substance:

    Torture more people, more violently.
    Deliberately target and kill non combatant women and children.
    Forcibly prevent Mexican-American citizens from sending money to their families.
    Encourage more countries to acquire nuclear weapons.
    Raise tariffs to 45%.
    Abortion, who even knows. Take a roulette wheel and spin to see what he’ll believe today.
    Engage in wars of plunder, taking the natural resources of subdued countries.”

    All true, but it’s much worse than this. His fiscal policy is utterly insane. He wants to boycott Apple for protecting our privacy. He doesn’t believe in private property rights for homeowners. He thinks the President should have the power to stop private companies from making investments in Mexico. He wants to expel 11 million people from America and devastate the economy. He thinks China needs to appreciate its currency–yes I said “appreciate”, not depreciate. He thinks someone needs to take out the leader of North Korea. He approves of Putin, which just invaded the Sudetenland, I mean the Crimea. He thinks the Chinese showed “strength” by crushing the 1989 “riot” in Tiananmen Square. He encourages his supporters to beat up people who disagree with them. He wants to ban Muslim immigrants.

    Those are just a few off the top of my head.

    Lorenzo, Good point about the other countries.

  47. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    9. April 2016 at 19:09

    “Do you seriously think Trump has anything but contempt for poor people?”

    -I got that vibe more from Romney.

    “devastate the economy.”

    -Nope.

    “He wants to boycott Apple for protecting our privacy.”

    -Same with Clinton, Kasich, Cruz.

    “He doesn’t believe in private property rights for homeowners.”

    -Same with all the other candidates.

    “He thinks the President should have the power to stop private companies from making investments in Mexico.”

    -OK, that’s unique.

    “He wants to expel 11 million people from America”

    -Same with the victor of Wisconsin.

    “and devastate the economy.”

    -You might be referring to Sanders.

    “He thinks China needs to appreciate its currency–yes I said “appreciate”, not depreciate.”

    -Is that unique, though? All the other candidate used protectionist rhetoric, although it’s clear Cruz is the most pro-trade.

    “He thinks someone needs to take out the leader of North Korea.”

    -I have long approved of this. But it must be done secretly. Trump, too, has claimed to understand the value of secrecy. And Kasich has actually proposed that Japan launch missiles at North Korea for its missile testing. Even Trump hasn’t proposed something this stupid.

    “He approves of Putin, which just invaded the Sudetenland, I mean the Crimea. He thinks the Chinese showed “strength” by crushing the 1989 “riot” in Tiananmen Square. He encourages his supporters to beat up people who disagree with them. He wants to ban Muslim immigrants.”

    -All very good. And it’s not “beat up people who disagree with them”, it’s “beat up trespassers”.

    Also, Krim has been Russia for two whole years.

  48. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    9. April 2016 at 19:35

    He wants to expel 11 million people from America and devastate the economy.

    He wants to enforce the immigration laws, which bothers academics who have tenure.

    The work of institution building necessary to build and interior immigration police and affiliated tribunals with sufficient manpower to reduce the net flow of those overstaying their visas to zero will take some time, so salami-slicing the extant stock of illegal immigrants is a long-term project. Ejecting the working illegal immigrant population would reduce the population of them employed to what it was in the dark days of 2012.

  49. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    9. April 2016 at 19:36

    “population of them employed to what it was in the dark days of 2012.”

    Correction: the total population of employed workers.

  50. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    9. April 2016 at 19:37

    -I got that vibe more from Romney.

    No. TallDave

  51. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    9. April 2016 at 19:43

    See why we need a basic civics test? It would be so easy, just a few questions at the head of the ballot to make your vote count. The people who can’t identify the three branches of government can tell everyone they voted and we’ll give them a nice pat on the head.

    The dimensions of the electorate have varied within a narrow band for four decades and were actually slightly larger during the immediate post-war era. There is more participation in presidential nominating contests, but that’s not a novelty either. Changes in the nominating process were implemented incrementally between 1950 and 1980.

  52. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    9. April 2016 at 19:46

    He doesn’t believe in private property rights for homeowners.

    No, he was exasperated with one rather peculiar woman who had turned down multiple seven-digit offers for her ratty boarding house. Her children eventually sold it when she was too infirm to live there or object anymore. Universal principles did not have much to do with it.

  53. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    9. April 2016 at 19:49

    Ben J, Art is the only guy I’ve encountered who corrects your geography on JOKES. He must be a lot of fun at parties.

    I know what a joke is, and I can tell them. You’re still learning.

  54. Gravatar of TallDave TallDave
    9. April 2016 at 20:30

    Scott — It’s even worse than that, though. Trump doesn’t just think the President should have the power to stop private companies from making investments in Mexico, he thinks Presidents have that power and furthermore he will exercise that power. And any other that turns out to be convenient to him, of course.

    That’s why so many prominent Republicans and conservatives will vote for Hillary over Donald. Hillary is corrupt, venal, vindictive, and leftwing, but she’s a political animal — we can survive her. Trump is an existential threat to the Republic because he’s so ignorant and disrespectful of the institutions of American democracy that he may well dissolve them in the acid of his bilious vainglory. These things happen all the time in other places — no other republic’s constitution has stood as long as ours — and the damage can be catastrophic.

  55. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    10. April 2016 at 05:30

    Art, You said:

    “I know what a joke is”

    Apparently not.

  56. Gravatar of Massimo Heitor Massimo Heitor
    10. April 2016 at 07:52

    “Trump proves that racism is real on much bigger scale than we realized.”

    @James Elizondo: Sumner says similar things. Obama strongly sympathizes with Louis Farrakhan, had a ~20 year deep relationship with Rev Jeremiah Wright, affiliated with other black nationalist groups and extremists, spent much of his career as a racial activist for blacks, he chose to move to Chicago as the heart of black America, he has a history of blaming every ill or misfortune of blacks on white racism. He actually writes that the reason blacks haven’t broadly found success in any business outside of government is racism and discrimination from whites. His presidency makes guilting whites and hammering at whites a regular talking point. Michelle Obama spits venom at whites at her public university speeches, and I even hear Mexican nationalist types that I know say quite matter of factly that Michelle Obama is a racially motivated black nationalist.

    What blows my mind is some of this crowd will see all of the Obama racism against whites, and they are just so used to it, that they tune it out. Sumner actually praises Obama’s character and demeanor when making racially motivated jabs. Yet Trump has a tiny, tiny fraction of this racism and it sets them wild.

  57. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    10. April 2016 at 09:32

    Apparently not.

    You’re just not funny. Ever.

  58. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    10. April 2016 at 09:38

    That’s why so many prominent Republicans and conservatives will vote for Hillary over Donald.

    They’ll be this year’s analogue to the Obamacons: a lower two-digit population of quondam officials and second-rate opinion journalists hustling for access, engaged in social climbing and social signalling, or catering to their liberal girlfriend. All of this had no reflection in vote totals. If you’re hankering for the illustrious company of Kenneth Duberstein, Kathleen Parker, and Charles Fried, you’re welcome to it.

  59. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    10. April 2016 at 09:52

    What blows my mind is some of this crowd will see all of the Obama racism against whites, and they are just so used to it, that they tune it out. Sumner actually praises Obama’s character and demeanor when making racially motivated jabs. Yet Trump has a tiny, tiny fraction of this racism and it sets them wild.

    Obama isn’t black bar in a narrowly phenotypic sense. (His wife had a respectable working class upbringing from which she’s alienated in various ways; it’s a reasonable guess that any racial shtick is artifact of attending schools for which she was a bad fit, selecting the wrong occupation, and having to come up with something to process the vocational frustrations and embarrassments she was experiencing).

    Neither are conventional black particularists. Obama was stomped flat by Bobby Rush when he tried to run for Congress; Rush knows his audience and BO did not (and likely still does not). Obama’s affiliation with Jeremiah Wright was the sort of thing you might expect from a dweeb who tried to learn about being black from Frank Marshall Davis and episodes of Soul Train. The overwhelming majority of blacks attend convention Baptist, AME, or Holiness congregations which are not in the business of peddling contrived Africanisant drivel. Oprah Winfrey joined and left Wright’s outfit in short order; it’s a reasonable inference that Winfrey, unlike BO, isn’t addled by status anxieities and isn’t thus easy meat for ill-mannnered hucksters.

    Here’s a suggestion. Obama’s not Stokely Carmichael. He’s the deputy dean of students and peddles the sort of racial blather you hear in contemporary higher education from knuckleheads with MEd. degrees. It doesn’t bother Sumner because it’s white noise in academe in this day and age and objecting marks you as Them and not Us.

  60. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    10. April 2016 at 10:50

    Watching Art Deco, the most humorless person on the internet, try to tell a joke would be a fantastic experience

  61. Gravatar of James elizondo James elizondo
    10. April 2016 at 13:02

    Massimo Heitor

    All your examples don’t compare the slightest bit to banning Muslims from entering the county. Trump slogan truly reads “make America white again.”

    Do me a favor and don’t send comments my way

  62. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    10. April 2016 at 16:03

    BTW, that graph is incredibly misleading: Trump got 4.7% of the vote more in North Carolina than in South Carolina. He got 8.1% of the vote more in Missouri than in Arkansas. Trump did have momentum as the other candidates dropped out, it was just weaker than Cruz’s.

  63. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    10. April 2016 at 16:13

    “Please tell me how his plan to slash taxes on hedge fund billionaires will help ‘poor people’.”
    The same way all previous Republican tax cuts for the rich did, I guess–I am not sure how it works, but do you want some mountains of links to free market economists welcoming those tax cuts as America’s salvation?
    The fact is, all candidates (except Sanders maybe, he may really want to make America into a hippie commune) must spoil the rich a little because, in American politics, he who pays the piper calls the tune (ask Clinton about Wall Street), but most of Trump’s ideas are very good. Immigration, the debt and the trade deficit must be mercilessly slashed. America must stop shipping jobs to China and must get its jobs back. Americans, as a nation, can’t be prosper by cutting one another’s hair and selling one another apps and currency swaps. America is ready to go back to work.

  64. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    10. April 2016 at 18:18

    Trump slogan truly reads “make America white again.”

    That’s a crappy little scam of yours, and nothing more.

  65. Gravatar of TallDave TallDave
    10. April 2016 at 19:40

    Art Deco
    10. April 2016 at 09:38
    That’s why so many prominent Republicans and conservatives will vote for Hillary over Donald.

    They’ll be this year’s analogue to the Obamacons: a lower two-digit population of quondam officials and second-rate opinion journalists hustling for access, engaged in social climbing and social signalling, or catering to their liberal girlfriend. All of this had no reflection in vote totals. If you’re hankering for the illustrious company of Kenneth Duberstein, Kathleen Parker, and Charles Fried, you’re welcome to it.

    Sure, it’s only the entire staff of National Review and the Weekly Standard and >90% of the GOP delegates and (if Trump is the nominee) every swing-state Republican and more than half the talk-radio spectrum.

    You’re not at all delusional.

  66. Gravatar of TallDave TallDave
    10. April 2016 at 19:42

    The same way all previous Republican tax cuts for the rich did,

    I guess you mean “not actually tax cuts for the rich,” then.

    That whole meme is ridiculous. It’s like arguing against leniency for criminals on the basis that we should show leniency to noncriminals instead.

  67. Gravatar of TallDave TallDave
    10. April 2016 at 19:46

    most of Trump’s ideas are very good.

    You are either not familiar with Trump’s actual ideas, or not very bright.

  68. Gravatar of TallDave TallDave
    10. April 2016 at 19:58

    For instance: “tighten immgigration” might or might not be a good policy. “Build a wall, make Mexico pay for it, deport all the illegals, then let them back in, increase H1Bs oops no decrease them, oh and btw I employed both legal and illegal immigrant labor and also my wife was an H1-B at the “model agency” I ran which appears to have violated immigration law” is just rank stupidity married to such a shameless con that it’s amazing even 35% of Republicans have fallen for it.

  69. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    11. April 2016 at 04:43

    “I guess you mean “not actually tax cuts for the rich,” then.”– Tall Dave
    If it helps you to sleep at night, by all means.
    “You are either not familiar with Trump’s actual ideas, or not very bright.”
    I grade politicians on a curve.

  70. Gravatar of TallDave TallDave
    11. April 2016 at 05:53

    Thiago — yes, factual accuracy helps me sleep at night. After all these “tax cuts for the rich” the bottom half pays 2% and the top 1% pay 37% of all income taxes. It is now literally impossible to give tax cuts to the bottom 43% because they don’t pay any income taxes. That is mostly the result of the “Bush tax cuts for the rich” which Obama repeatedly extended.

    Apparently your grading curve doesn’t evaluate whether the proposals make the slightest bit of sense, like “take their oil” and “nuclear proliferation for all!”

  71. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    11. April 2016 at 07:34

    “Apparently your grading curve doesn’t evaluate whether the proposals make the slightest bit of sense, like ‘take their oil’ and ‘nuclear proliferation for all!'”
    Clearly America’s bipartisan mainstream foreign policy is a great success, hence ISIS and the Taliban, your Saudi allies and your Pakistani allies, the ones you helped to butcher Indians and Bangladeshis (I wonder how they didn’t know bin Laden was there, the guy was not exactly short…).

    “the top 1% pay 37% of all income taxes.”
    Does it have anything to do with the top 1% having, you know, money? All of it, in fact. The bottom half’s share of American wealth is one-third of what it was when Mr. Bush Sr. took office in 1989. Americans have systematically been exploited and impoverished by a criminal enterprise posing as a government and now they are retaking their country and throwing the moneychangers out of the temple. Mr. Trump is leading the charge, and America will be better for this, that one man scorned and covered with scars still strove with his last ounce of courage.
    “After all these ‘tax cuts for the rich’ the bottom half pays 2%”
    “This statement, however, is obviously untrue since, if one cares to move one’s eyes slightly down the page at the Tax Policy Center web site, one will find that 73.1 percent of all tax units (in 2015) do pay either federal income taxes or federal payroll taxes. In other words, plenty of people who don’t pay the “income tax” pay taxes on income via the payroll tax. That income tax is assessed at a flat and regressive rate of more than 15 percent, once both worker and employer shares are included. (The employer share negatively impacts the employees’ wages, of course.) In 2014, payroll taxes combined for a total of 34 percent of all federal revenues in 2014, or one trillion dollars. (Those who don’t get a paycheck pay the aptly-named “self-employment tax” in its place.)”– https://mises.org/blog/myth-half-americans-dont-pay-federal-taxes
    How does it feel being an apologist for greedy opressors and preying on the weak?

  72. Gravatar of Massimo Heitor Massimo Heitor
    11. April 2016 at 08:25

    Art Deco, I am quite grateful for such a thoughtful, intelligent, and empathetic response. That is much more than I expected.

    I agree with most of your points. Clearly, Barack + Michelle Obama were never as outrageous or overtly militant as a Stokely Carmichael or even a Bobby Rush. And yes, that general flavor of anti-white racism is dominant particularly in academia and K-12 and just considered Overton window neutral in those circles. I realize my point of view and my objection to the defacto Academic racism model makes me a “Them” not “Us”.

    The Obamas have still taken it farther than typical left-wing academics. Barack centered his pre-president career around race. His support of Rev Wright and Farrakhan and other more militant black nationalists may have been dweebish, but they were quite intentional, calculated, and long term career moves. While I’m sure Michelle has had non racial frustrations and grievances in life, she’s chosen to channel them in such an overtly racist fashion, especially since she’s been given power.

    Trump hasn’t made a career of white nationalism. He hasn’t publicly idolized and supported more extreme white supremacists. Trump generally doesn’t overtly speak of race. Curtailing immigration and resisting the model of mass demographic replacement is racist, but in a far milder and more defensive and reactionary sense than Obama or left-wing anti-white racism.

    Art Deco, you are awesome.

  73. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    11. April 2016 at 18:54

    Msgkings, You said:

    “Watching Art Deco, the most humorless person on the internet, try to tell a joke would be a fantastic experience”

    I don’t consider myself funny, but if Art thought I was funny then I’d be certain that I was humorless.

  74. Gravatar of Amaury Amaury
    12. April 2016 at 04:53

    “International trade, led by the United States, has resulted in the largest, fastest decrease in extreme poverty in human history. Roughly 700 million Chinese people alone have escaped extreme poverty since 1980, and most of that is attributable to China’s decision to embrace the market economy and international trade. Want to keep Africa as poor as possible? Throw up as many trade barriers as you can.”

    Scott, last I heard there is no Oscars nor prizes for which country helps out the world’s poor. You are trying to bridge Enlightment/universalists ideals with the reality of nations/language/tribe etc.

  75. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    12. April 2016 at 07:39

    Amaury, Trade is good for everyone. And I’m not trying to bridge, I’m trying to destroy tribalist ideals in economics, and have people transfer them over to sports (just as the Europeans transferred tribalist notions from militarism to sports, after WWII).

  76. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    12. April 2016 at 10:09

    @ssumner: “I don’t consider myself funny, but if Art thought I was funny then I’d be certain that I was humorless.”

    All I know is his joke would include the words ‘rathskellar’, ‘polity’, ‘loci’, and ‘quondam’, and the punchline would be ‘put the bong down’

Leave a Reply